Category and stereotype activation revisited

In Study 1 (N= 230), we found that the participants' explicit prejudice was not related to their knowledge of cultural stereotypes of immigrants in Sweden, and that they associated the social category immigrants with the same national/ethnic categories. In Study 2 (N= 88), employing the category and stereotype words obtained in Study 1 as primes, we examined whether participants with varying degrees of explicit prejudice differed in their automatic stereotyping and implicit prejudice when primed with category or stereotypical words. In accord with our hypothesis, and contrary to previous findings, the results showed that people's explicit prejudice did not affect their automatic stereotyping and implicit prejudice, neither in the category nor stereotype priming condition. Study 3 (N= 62), employing category priming using facial photographs of Swedes and immigrants as primes, showed that participants' implicit prejudice was not moderated by their explicit prejudice. The outcome is discussed in relation to the distinction between category and stereotype priming and in terms of the associative strength between a social category and its related stereotypes.     

Relatively Socially Acceptable Prejudice Within and Between Societies

Two studies investigated the relative social acceptability of certain prejudices within a society (Study 1) and between societies (Study 2), using (less) internal motivation to control prejudice as an indicator of social acceptability. In Study 1, White British participants reported less internal motivation to control prejudice against people with schizophrenia than against Black people. In Study 2, Jamaican participants reported less internal motivation to control anti‐homosexual prejudice than did either British participants or American participants. Other differences in motivation to control prejudice were smaller, absent, or at odds with this difference, indicating that differences in motivation to control anti‐homosexual prejudice were not solely due to cultural differences concerning motivation to control prejudice in general. Results are discussed in terms of novel findings, relevance to the literature and possible future research. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Categorization and communication in the face of prejudice: when describing perceptions changes what is perceived

In the face of prejudice against an ingroup, common ground for communication exists when people use similar social categories to understand the situation. Three studies tested the hypothesis that describing perceptions of prejudice can fundamentally change those perceptions because communicators account for the common ground in line with conversational norms. When women (Study 1), African Americans (Study 2), and Americans (Study 3) simply thought about suspected prejudice against their ingroup, categorization guided their perceptions: Participants assimilated their views of the prejudiced event toward the perceptions of ingroup members but contrasted away from the perceptions of outgroup members. Conversely, when participants described their perceptions, they contrasted away from the given category information and actually arrived at the opposite perceptions as those who merely thought about the prejudiced event. Study 3 identified an important qualification of these effects by showing that they were obtained only when participants could assume their audience was familiar with the common ground. Implications are discussed for understanding the role of communication in facilitating and inhibiting collective action about prejudice.     

Intergroup Contact and Prejudice Against People With Schizophrenia

There is a growing awareness that responses to mental health disorders differ according to the label. Still, research on contact and prejudice against people with mental health disorders has generally focused on the broader label, “mental illness,” as though various disorders were interchangeable. The present research specifically investigated the relationship between intergroup contact and avoidance of people with schizophrenia—a particularly stigmatized and challenging group—as well as mediators of that relationship. In Study 1, 78 students completed measures of their prior contact with and prejudice against people with schizophrenia. Prior contact predicted less desired avoidance of people with schizophrenia, and this relationship was mediated by more favorable attitudes. Study 2 (N = 122) replicated the results of Study 1, and also found that less fear and less intergroup anxiety mediated the relationship between contact and avoidance. This suggests that contact may effectively reduce prejudice, even against this highly stigmatized group.     

The Role of Christianity and Islam in Explaining Prejudice against Asylum Seekers: Evidence from Malaysia

ABSTRACT

Prejudicial attitudes toward asylum seekers are prevalent, and an emerging body of literature has revealed that this is partly driven by religious affiliation. The population of Malaysia is multireligious, making it a fruitful location for testing religion-based prejudice hypotheses. Thus, across 2 studies we tested the roles of Christianity and Islam in explicit and implicit prejudices against asylum seekers in the Malaysian context. In Study 1 (n = 97), we present evidence that there are religion-based differences in prejudice against asylum seekers; specifically, Muslims reported higher levels of (classical) explicit prejudice toward asylum seekers than Christians (there were no differences in conditional or implicit prejudices). In Study 2 (n = 117), we tested the hypothesis that these religion-based differences are qualified by the religion of the asylum seeker. In this study, we used a framing paradigm to experimentally manipulate the religion of the asylum-seeking targets. The results revealed an out-group exacerbation effect; that is, participants reported higher levels of prejudice toward asylum seekers who had a different religion from their own. For classical explicit prejudice, the effect was strongest from Muslims toward Christian asylum seekers. Conversely, for implicit prejudice, the reverse was true: The effect was strongest from Christians toward Muslim asylum seekers. These findings are discussed in terms of the political and social circumstances in Malaysia, but we interpret these findings as evidence that explicit and implicit attitudes toward asylum seekers are driven by a complex pattern of religion-based intergroup biases.     

Responses to interracial interactions over time

The current work tested and expanded on Plant and Devine's (2003) model of the antecedents and implications of interracial anxiety by examining people's experiences with interracial interactions at two time points. Study 1 explored non-Black people's responses to interactions with Black people and Study 2 explored Black people's responses to interactions with White people. Non-Black participants' expectancies about coming across as biased in interracial interactions and Black participants' expectancies about White people's bias predicted their interracial anxiety and whether they had positive interactions with outgroup members during the 2 weeks between assessments. Across both studies, interracial anxiety predicted the desire to avoid interactions with outgroup members. In addition, participants who were personally motivated to respond without prejudice reported more positive expectancies. The findings are discussed in terms of the implications for understanding the course and quality of interracial interactions.     

The Receiver's Dilemma: Impressions Formed in Response to Impression Management

Two studies examined the extent to which individuals' racial attitudes are influenced more by interdependent others' attitudes than people with whom they do not mutually depend. Study 1 demonstrated that participants significantly changed their racial attitudes when they received disagreement feedback from an ingroup friend, whereas there was no change in attitudes when participants received disagreement feedback from an ingroup stranger, agreement feedback, or no feedback. Furthermore, feelings of interdependence mediated the relationship between feedback from a friend versus stranger and changes in racial attitudes. In Study 2, we manipulated interdependence and found that interdependent partners altered their racial attitudes after receiving disagreement information, whereas independent partners did not. The importance of interdependent others' attitudes in reducing prejudice is discussed.     

The effect of self-affirmation on sexual prejudice

In three experiments, we explored the impact of a self-affirmation treatment on sexual prejudice (i.e., negative attitudes toward gays and lesbians). Studies 1 and 2 found that participants who were affirmed by valuing relationships with family and friends were significantly more prejudiced than participants who were affirmed by valuing other self-relevant characteristics. Relative to a non-affirmed control, the family/friends affirmation did not actually increase prejudice; however, other affirmations decreased bias. Study 3 replicated the finding that prejudice was higher among participants who affirmed to family/friends compared to those who affirmed to other values, and showed a mediator of the effect: the endorsement of traditional family values. That is, affirming to family/friends was associated with support for family values, which was positively associated with prejudice. These findings add to a growing body of evidence demonstrating the potential for self-affirmation to reduce bias, but establish that the type of value affirmed is an important consideration. Specifically, familial-based affirmations may undermine reduction of sexual prejudice because they remind individuals of values that many people see as being in conflict with expressing tolerant attitudes toward gays and lesbians.     

行为免疫系统对个体就医行为倾向的影响

研究首次考察了行为免疫系统与个体就医行为倾向的关系。3个研究一致显示：行为免疫系统特质性激活水平较高的个体更容易对就医持消极态度和延迟就医; 情境性激活行为免疫系统会使得个体更不愿意就医和更倾向于延迟就医; 且行为免疫系统激活对就医态度和就医延迟倾向的影响以对就医感染风险的感知为中介。这支持了进化失配假说, 提示行为免疫系统对现代医学可能缺乏进化的适应性, 并为理解现代人类就医行为提供了新的理论视角。     

A new threat in the air: Macroeconomic threat increases prejudice against Asian Americans

Macroeconomic conditions have long been suspected of increasing hostility toward ethnic outgroups. Integrating prior work on macroeconomic threat with recent threat-based models of prejudice, the current work employs an experimental approach to examine the implications of economic threat for prejudice toward ethnic outgroups. In Study 1, participants primed with an economic threat (relative to a non-economic threat and neutral topic) reported more prejudice against Asian Americans, an ethnic group whose stereotype implies a threat to scarce employment opportunities. In addition, economic threat led to a heightened state of anxiety, which mediated the influence of economic threat on prejudice against Asian Americans. Study 2 replicated and extended these findings by demonstrating that economic threat heightened prejudice against Asian Americans, but not Black Americans, an ethnic group whose stereotype does not imply a threat to economic resources. These findings are discussed in terms of their implications for understanding the role of macroeconomic conditions in potentiating antisocial responses to particular outgroups.     

Impact of perceived consensus on stereotypes about obese people: a new approach for reducing bias.

In 3 experiments, the authors tested the effect of perceived social consensus on attitudes toward obese people. Participants completed self-report measures of attitudes toward obese people prior to and after manipulated consensus feedback depicting attitudes of others. In Study 1 (N=60), participants decreased negative and increased positive stereotypes after learning that others held more favorable attitudes toward obese people. In Study 2 (N=55), participants improved attitudes when they learned about favorable attitudes of obese people from an in-group versus an out-group source. In Study 3 (N=200), a consensus approach was compared with other stigma reduction methods. Social consensus feedback influenced participants' attitudes and beliefs about causes of obesity. Providing information about the uncontrollable causes of obesity and supposed scientific prevalence of traits also improved attitudes.     

Opening closed minds: the combined effects of intergroup contact and need for closure on prejudice

Five studies tested whether need for closure (NFC) moderates the relation between intergroup contact and prejudice toward immigrants. The results consistently showed that intergroup contact was more strongly associated with reduced levels of prejudice among people high in NFC compared to people low in NFC. Studies 1 (N = 138 students) and 2 (N = 294 adults) demonstrated this moderator effect on subtle, modern, and blatant racism. Study 2 also replicated the moderator effect for extended contact. An experimental field study (Study 3; N = 60 students) provided evidence of the causal direction of the moderator effect. Finally, Studies 4 (N = 125 students) and 5 (N = 135 adults) identified intergroup anxiety as the mediator through which the moderator effect influences modern and blatant racism as well as hostile tendencies toward immigrants. The role of motivated cognition in the relation between intergroup contact and prejudice is discussed.     

Disconfirming intergroup evaluations: asymmetric effects for in-groups and out-groups

The authors examined whether a fundamental bias in the way people process information has implications for efforts to improve intergroup relations. The authors exposed participants to information about their own social category and a different social category that was either positive or negative in connotation. To examine what effect this information would have on participants' attitudes toward their own group and the other group, the authors measured both explicit and implicit evaluations before and after exposure. The findings suggest that, at a preconscious level, exposure to negative information affects participants' attitudes toward their own group, but that positive information has a negligible impact on attitudes toward other groups. The authors found an opposite pattern for explicit (conscious) evaluations. These asymmetries are consistent with cognitive and motivational theory on intergroup relations and may have important implications for efforts to reduce prejudice.     

‘We were here first,so we determine the rules of the game’: Autochthony and prejudice towards out‐groups

This paper identifies autochthony—the belief that a place belongs to its original inhabitants and that they are therefore more entitled—as a relevant new determinant of out‐group prejudice. We hypothesized that autochthony uniquely predicts prejudice towards migrant groups and that it mediates the relationship between national identification and prejudice. The mediation process was anticipated to be especially strong for people who perceive out‐group encroachment, that is, those who feel that immigrants are ‘getting out of place’. These hypotheses were tested in two studies using nationally representative samples of native Dutch participants. In Study 1 (N = 793), we showed that autochthony is an empirically distinct construct and that it is a unique predictor of prejudice. Furthermore, higher national identifiers expressed stronger claims of autochthony, and these claims were in turn associated with more negative feelings towards migrant groups. Study 2 (N = 466) showed support for a moderated mediation model: Beliefs in autochthony were only related to prejudice for participants who perceived out‐group encroachment. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Searching for certainty: Religious beliefs and intolerance toward value-violating groups

Religiosity has been consistently linked to prejudice toward a variety of outgroups. This article proposes that this is the case only when religiosity reflects a specific aspect of seeking guidance and security in daily practices and complex sociocultural norms. Outgroups that challenge the epistemic certainty that belief in God provides are rejected in an effort to protect this certainty. The results from two studies found that uncertainty avoidance was related to belief in God and this belief mediated the relationship between uncertainty avoidance and intolerance within the context of general human rights (Study 1), and the derogation of value-violating groups (e.g., homosexuals or followers of other religions) but not of groups that pose no threat to religious values (old or poor people) (Study 2). The interpretative dimension of religiosity (i.e., the way in which people process religious content) is not connected to security seeking, as reflected in the lack of a correlation with uncertainty avoidance and with different prejudice measures. The results are discussed in relation to past research on religiosity and prejudice, and suggest that for people who avoid uncertainty, only those types of religious beliefs that provide a sense of certainty are linked with intolerance toward value-violating groups.     

Relationships between gender self-esteem,sexual prejudice,and trans prejudice in cisgender heterosexual college students

Our understanding of sexual prejudice, or prejudice against gay men, lesbian women, bisexual people, and other sexual minorities, has improved substantially over the last few decades. Less is known about the factors that predict trans prejudice, or prejudice against trans people. Using the framework of social identity theory, we examined the relationship between gender self-esteem, sexual prejudice toward gay men and lesbian women, and trans prejudice in a sample of 391 self-identified cisgender heterosexual students from a Midwestern university in the United States. Compared to women, men reported more sexual prejudice, trans prejudice, more prejudice toward gay men than lesbian women, and more violence toward, teasing of, and discomfort around trans women than trans men. Whereas both men and women reported more teasing of trans women than of trans men, men reported more discomfort around trans women and women reported more discomfort around trans men. Gender self-esteem significantly predicted sexual prejudice and trans prejudice in men but not women. Consistent with other research, our results indicate that men's sexual prejudice and trans prejudice may be motivated by similar factors, whereas the predictors of women's prejudice may be more specific to the type of prejudice.     

Reconstruing intolerance: abstract thinking reduces conservatives' prejudice against nonnormative groups

Myrdal (1944) described the "American dilemma" as the conflict between abstract national values ("liberty and justice for all") and more concrete, everyday prejudices. We leveraged construal-level theory to empirically test Myrdal's proposition that construal level (abstract vs. concrete) can influence prejudice. We measured individual differences in construal level (Study 1) and manipulated construal level (Studies 2 and 3); across these three studies, we found that adopting an abstract mind-set heightened conservatives' tolerance for groups that are perceived as deviating from Judeo-Christian values (gay men, lesbians, Muslims, and atheists). Among participants who adopted a concrete mind-set, conservatives were less tolerant of these nonnormative groups than liberals were, but political orientation did not have a reliable effect on tolerance among participants who adopted an abstract mind-set. Attitudes toward racial out-groups and dominant groups (e.g., Whites, Christians) were unaffected by construal level. In Study 3, we found that the effect of abstract thinking on prejudice was mediated by an increase in concerns about fairness.     

Self-esteem and affect as information

This research tests whether people with high self-esteem are more informed by their emotions than are people with low self-esteem. In Study 1, participants listened to a series of disturbing baby cries, rated how much distress these cries conveyed, and reported their own emotional reactions to the cries. As predicted, the relation between participants' emotional reactions and their cry ratings was strongest at higher levels of self-esteem. In Study 2, self-esteem again determined how strongly participants' own emotional reactions influenced their baby cry ratings, even though esteem was measured weeks before the experiment and even after controlling for social desirability. Study 3 manipulated self-regard and showed that the correlation between participants' emotional reactions and their cry ratings was strong for high-regard participants, moderate for control participants, and weak for low-regard participants. These results suggest that self-esteem serves to validate the informational value of feelings.     

What's in a Name? The Effects of the Labels “Fat” Versus “Overweight” on Weight Bias1

This research examined the effects of the labels “fat” vs. “overweight” in the expression of weight bias, with the prediction that the label “fat” biases individuals to respond more negatively than does the label “overweight.” In Study 1, participants' attitudes toward people labeled as fat were less favorable than were their attitudes toward people labeled as overweight. In Studies 2 and 3, although participants chose similar‐sized figures to depict fat and overweight targets, weight stereotypes and weight attitudes were more negative toward people labeled as fat than those labeled as overweight. In addition, the endorsement of weight stereotypes mediated the biasing effect of the “fat” label on weight prejudice. Implications of this work for prejudice researchers and for public attitudes are discussed.