Personality and Attitudinal Predictors of Support of Proposition 187—California's Anti-Illegal Immigrant Initiative1

Right-wing authoritarianism, stereotypes about illegal immigrants relative to legal immigrants (and nonimmigrants), and collective self-esteem were investigated as predictors of attitude toward California's Proposition 187—the 1994 initiative making illegal immigrants ineligible for public services. Among both Latinos (n= 92) and Caucasians (n= 79), right-wing authoritarianism and negative stereotypes about illegal immigrants predicted Proposition 187 support and reported vote. For Latinos, low collective self-esteem and high levels of acculturation predicted support and vote in favor of Proposition 187. In contrast, high collective self-esteem among Caucasians was related to Proposition 187 support and vote. The results suggest that 3 perspectives on prejudice—personality, cognitive, and cultural—contribute to the understanding of attitudinal and behavioral support of Proposition 187.     

A preliminary report on a new measure: Internalization of the Model Minority Myth Measure (IM-4) and its psychological correlates among Asian American college students

This investigation is a preliminary report on a new measure of internalization of the model minority myth. In 3 studies, there was evidence for the validation of the 15-item Internalization of the Model Minority Myth Measure (IM-4), with 2 subscales. The Model Minority Myth of Achievement Orientation referred to the myth of Asian Americans' greater success than other racial minority groups associated with their stronger work ethics, perseverance, and drives to succeed. The Model Minority Myth of Unrestricted Mobility referred to the myth of Asian Americans' greater success than other racial minority groups associated with their stronger belief in fairness of treatment and lack of perceived racism or barriers at school or work. The 2-subscale structure of the IM-4 was supported by a combination of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, with support of discriminant, convergent, and incremental validity, as well as internal reliability and stability over 2 weeks. The IM-4 is a new measure that taps into a uniquely racialized experience of Asian Americans with research and clinical implications.     

The context of intergroup belief cross wherein minority members maintain consistency: Belief minority and majority in a categorical in‐group and out‐group1

Abstract: The present study investigated the social conditions required for minority members to preserve their attitudinal and behavioral consistency in an intergroup context. In the experiment, intergroup belief crosses wherein a belief minority (or majority) in a categorical in‐group was reversed as a majority (or minority) in an out‐group were manipulated. It was hypothesized that individuals supported by the majority in the categorical in‐group would preserve their attitudes and behavioral intentions even though they were a minority in the categorical out‐group. The results supported the hypothesis. Specifically, members of a majority in the categorical in‐group had more consistent behavioral intentions and less attitude changes although they were located as a minority in the out‐group. In contrast, members of a minority within the in‐group preserved consistency on the basis of support from the majority in the out‐group. The theoretical implications of these results are discussed with reference to future research.     

Romaphobia Among Serbian Adolescents: The Role of National In‐group Attitudes and Perceived Threat

This study employed the integrated threat theory to examine Serbian adolescents' attitudes towards the Roma. The sample consisted of 687 secondary school students (mean age 17), of whom 53% were females. In a survey‐based study, we assessed adolescents' national in‐group attitudes (i.e., nationalism), their feelings toward the Roma, and their perception of economic and symbolic threat. Findings suggest that perceived threat to either real resources or worldviews of the dominant group was related to more negative attitudes towards the Roma minority. Further, Romaphobia was positively related to adolescents' nationalism and this relationship was partially mediated by perceived economic and symbolic threat. The theoretical and educational implications are discussed.     

Political distinctiveness: An identity optimising approach

According to Optimal Distinctiveness Theory and Self-Categorization Theory possible self-definition as a member of contextually moderately distinctive social categories should be more central to identity than association with very general or with highly unique social categories. Data from a large scale cohort survey of 4156 18–21-year-olds were analysed to test this hypothesis. Respondents self-reported political affiliations were classified according to the social popularity (size and support) accorded each party The data are consistent with the hypothesis that minority political parties should provide more central and important bases of social identity Supporters of minority parties showed greatest commitment, perceived their parties to be more representative of themselves, and were less likely to simply conform to parental political views. Minority supporters were also significantly more likely to discuss politics with their friends. Additional data from Scotland confirmed that identification with Scotland was more strongly associated with support for the Scottish Nationalist Party than with support for other minority or majority parties. These data provide convergent evidence that minority parties may attract members through their capacity to provide a meaningful social identity.     

Effects of in-group and out-group support on behavioral consistency: The majority and minority in the context of an intergroup belief cross

Abstract:   The present study investigated the social determinants required to stimulate consistency in minority members' attitudes and behavior. The experiment was designed to examine the consistency of individuals in the context of an intergroup belief cross wherein the majority belief (or minority) in a categorical in-group shifted to the minority (or majority) in the out-group. The results indicated that the members of a majority within an in-group consistently preserved their behavioral intentions and beliefs even though they were positioned as a minority within an out-group. That is, the minority members in the whole intergroup context maintained consistency diachronically as a result of support from the majority of their in-group. The theoretical implications on the consistency of minority members, such as whistle-blowers in companies, are discussed.     

Inclusive victim consciousness predicts minority group members’ support for refugees and immigrants

What motivates minority group members to support other minorities, rather than compete for resources? We tested whether inclusive victim consciousness —i.e., perceived similarities between the ingroup's and outgroups’ collective victimization—predicts support for other minority groups; and whether personal and family experiences of group‐based victimization moderate these effects. Study 1 was conducted among members of historically oppressed groups in India. As hypothesized, inclusive victim consciousness predicted support for refugees. Personal experiences of group‐based victimization moderated this effect. Conceptually replicating these findings, in Study 2 (among Vietnamese Americans, mostly second‐generation immigrants) inclusive victim consciousness predicted less hostility toward other refugees and immigrants, and greater perceived responsibility to help victims of collective violence. This effect was moderated by family experiences of victimization.     

Racial Differences in Beliefs About the Effectiveness and Necessity of Mental Health Treatment

Members of racial/ethnic minority groups are less likely than Caucasians to access mental health services despite recent evidence of more favorable attitudes regarding treatment effectiveness. The present study explored this discrepancy by examining racial differences in beliefs about how the natural course and seriousness of mental illnesses relate to perceived treatment effectiveness. The analysis is based on a nationally representative sample of 583 Caucasian and 82 African American participants in a vignette experiment about people living with mental illness. While African Americans were more likely than Caucasians to believe that mental health professionals could help individuals with schizophrenia and major depression, they were also more likely to believe mental health problems would improve on their own. This belief was unrelated to beliefs about treatment effectiveness. These findings suggest that a belief in treatment effectiveness may not increase service utilization among African Americans who are more likely to believe treatment is unnecessary.     

Social disadvantage and the self-regulatory function of justice beliefs

Five studies support the hypothesis that beliefs in societal fairness offer a self-regulatory benefit for members of socially disadvantaged groups. Specifically, members of disadvantaged groups are more likely than members of advantaged groups to calibrate their pursuit of long-term goals to their beliefs about societal fairness. In Study 1, low socioeconomic status (SES) undergraduate students who believed more strongly in societal fairness showed greater intentions to persist in the face of poor performance on a midterm examination. In Study 2, low SES participants who believed more strongly in fairness reported more willingness to invest time and effort to achieve desirable career outcomes. In Study 3, ethnic minority participants exposed to a manipulation suggesting that fairness conditions in their country were improving reported more willingness to invest resources in pursuit of long-term goals, relative to ethnic minority participants in a control condition. Study 4 replicated Study 3 using an implicit priming procedure, demonstrating that perceptions of the personal relevance of societal fairness mediate these effects. Across these 4 studies, no link between fairness beliefs and self-regulation emerged for members of advantaged (high SES, ethnic majority) groups. Study 5 contributed evidence from the World Values Survey and a representative sample (Inglehart, Basa?ez, Diez-Medrano, Halman, & Luijkx, 2004). Respondents reported more motivation to work hard to the extent that they believed that rewards were distributed fairly; this effect emerged more strongly for members of lower SES groups than for members of higher SES groups, as indicated by both self-identified social class and ethnicity.     

Accuracy in perceptions of consensus: Differential tendencies of people with majority and minority positions

When people are interested in how common one or more of their attributes is in a reference population, they must often generate their own comparison information based on a limited sample of acquaintances and experiences. Subjects in the present research were asked to describe themselves in terms of a variety of attributes, and were also asked to estimate the percentage of other college students who would indicate possession of each attribute. For each attribute, subjects were assigned a majority or minority status, depending on whether the majority of the population did or did not share their attribute. The principle findings were (1) the majority subjects generated more accurate comparison information than did the minority; (2) the majority subjects were better than chance and better than minority subjects in distinguishing between attributes for which there was high versus moderate consensus; and (3) the minority subjects tended to overestimate the consensus for their attributes, while the majority subjects tended to err in the direction of underestimation of their Consensus. The discussion focused on possible causes of these tendencies, and on research implications involving attributional biases and intergroup conflict.     

The dilemma of primary prevention in mental health services: Rationalize the status quo or bite the hand that feeds you

That primary prevention has been ‘inappropriately marginalised’ is seen to be an inevitable outcome of reliance on government support. Policy makers and service providers can never be expected to give prevention a higher priority than direct service. Preventionists have developed two strategies for doing their work. One, based on the logical positivist ideal, seeks specific causal models for specific disorders. This sort of prevention research, while it will always remain less well funded than direct services, tends not to challenge the status quo belief in individual responsibility, or the acceptable methods of mainstream science, and thus will tend to be more acceptable than other forms of prevention research and services. An alternative, based on a social constructivist paradigm engages in social action research through collaboration with a variety of grass roots organizations and people outside the mainstream of power. This latter approach, brings to preventionists ideas from feminists, ethnic minority leaders, neighborhood organizers, and self and mutual help group leaders. It is a sensible way to use the resources available to those professionals interested in social change oriented prevention.     

The Belief in Majority Determination of Group Decision Outcomes

We proposed and tested a linear model for predicting perceivers' beliefs about the magnitude of popular support for group decision outcomes. Experiment 1 showed that the model performed well when it predicted perceived majority support for group outcomes but poorly when it predicted a belief in minority support. Subjects, in other words, displayed a clear bias toward perceiving group decision outcomes as having been determined by the majority of group members. In Experiment 2, subjects were asked shortly after the November 1992 presidential election to indicate the percentage of the popular vote received on election day by Bill Clinton, George Bush, and Ross Perot. The results showed that Clinton, who actually received less than majority voter support (43%0), was perceived to have attracted majority support (51.8%). Moreover, 7 months after the election, perceived majority support for Clinton on election day grew stronger (to 56.8%) whereas perceived voter support for Bush and Perot declined. These data illustrate a pervasive belief in majority determination of group decision outcomes.     

Dual identity,in‐group projection,and out‐group feelings among ethnic minority groups

This study extends research on dual identity and in‐group projection by considering category prototypicality and indispensability, and by focusing on ethnic minority members and their attitudes towards the native majority and minority out‐groups. Among a sample of 491 participants of the three largest immigrant‐origin groups in the Netherlands, it was found that the minority in‐group was seen as relatively more prototypical and relatively more indispensable for the national category in comparison with minority out‐groups, but not in comparison with the native majority. In support of the in‐group projection model, stronger dual identity was associated with higher relative in‐group prototypicality and relative in‐group indispensability in comparison with the majority and, via both these relative perceptions, to a less positive attitude towards the native Dutch. In addition and in support of the common in‐group identity model, dual identity was associated with more positive minority out‐group feelings via higher minority out‐group prototypicality and indispensability. It is concluded that dual identity can have both positive and negative consequences for intergroup relations depending on perceived (relative) prototypicality and indispensability, and depending on whether the out‐group is the majority or other minorities.     

Differences Between Minority,Majority, and Unanimous Group Members in the Communication of Information

This article integrates research on minority influence and information sampling in groups. The traditional information‐sampling paradigm implies that the discussion bias for common over unique information affects all types of groups universally. We proposed an alternative in which information sampling depends on the composition of opinions. We proposed that groups with a minority opinion may focus more on unique information and that a minority opinion may lead majority members to consider more preference‐inconsistent information. In a study that tested how minority, majority, and unanimous group members differ in their discussion of information, results lent no support for the alternative conception of information sampling. However, when the minority prevailed, minority members repeated significantly more common information than when the majority prevailed.     

The Symbolic Racism 2000 Scale

The concept of symbolic racism was originally proposed 30 years ago. Much research has been done and the society itself has changed, yet many of the original items measuring symbolic racism remain in use. The primary objective of this paper is to present and evaluate an updated scale of symbolic racism. The scale proves to be reliable and internally coherent. It has discriminant validity, being distinctively different from both older forms of racial attitudes and political conservatism, although with a base in both. It has predictive validity, explaining whites' racial policy preferences considerably better than do traditional racial attitudes or political predispositions. Evidence is presented of its usefulness for both college student and general adult population samples, as well as for minority populations. Data using this scale contradict several critiques of the symbolic racism construct (most of which are speculative rather than based on new data) concerning the consistency of its conceptualization and measurement, the coherence of the symbolic racism belief system, possible artifacts in its influence over whites' racial policy preferences (due to content overlap between the measures of independent and dependent variables), and its differentiation from nonracial conservatism and old-fashioned racism.     

Dual identities in intergroup contact: Group status and size moderate the generalization of positive attitude change

To explore the effects of various categorization strategies on intergroup bias within and beyond a contact situation, two experiments were conducted involving groups of different size and/or status that worked together on a cooperative task. Three categorization strategies (decategorization, recategorization, and dual identity) were compared, and bias was measured through symbolic reward allocations to people who were and were not actually encountered. In Experiment 1 (N = 129), we varied group size (minority or majority) and found that it affected bias within the contact situation—minority groups were more biased than majority groups. All of the categorization strategies limited bias and they did so equally well. Outside the contact situation, however, only the recategorization and dual identity strategies limited bias. In Experiment 2 (N = 156), we varied both group status (low or high) and group size. Both of these variables affected bias within the contact situation—high status groups were more biased than low status groups, and minority groups were again more biased than majority groups. Once again, all three categorization strategies limited bias and they did so equally well. Outside the contact situation, however, an interaction among the independent variables was observed. For minority groups, only the dual identity strategy limited bias, but none of the categorization strategies limited bias for majority groups.     

Evaluating the multiple proposition strategy

Contextualism about many expressions faces a common objection: in some discourses it appears that there is no single interpretation which can explain how a speaker is justified in making her assertion and how a hearer with different information or standards is justified in negatively evaluating what the speaker said. According to the Multiple Proposition Strategy, contextualists may attempt to explain these competing features pragmatically in terms of different propositions in play. In this paper I argue against the Multiple Proposition Strategy, first focusing on epistemic modals and then generalising the results to other expressions. I show how when purportedly contextualist terms are embedded in belief reports, we get similar problems but that the Multiple Proposition Strategy does not provide a satisfactory explanation of such cases. I suggest, therefore, that we reject the Multiple Proposition Strategy in favour of a theory that explains the unembedded and embedded cases in similar ways.     

Attitudes of Southern Women: Selected Group Comparisons

Questionnaire data from 100 white women in a Southern city were examined to learn whether women belonging to groups that focus on social change or business and professional concerns were less traditional in their attitudes and behavior patterns than women who affiliate with groups that share common religious beliefs or similar socioeconomic status and whose stated purpose has a social orientation. Women belonging to the first category of groups were more likely than the other women to combine employment with marriage and children, to have help from husbands with household duties, and to support the Equal Rights Amendment.     

After 9/11 at Ground Zero: The Anxiety-Buffering Effects of Worldview Support on the First Anniversary of 9/11

A field experiment adjacent to the former World Trade Center in New York City on the anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks examined the prediction of terror management theory (TMT; Greenberg, Pyszcznyski, & Solomon, 1986) that individuals validate their cultural beliefs when exposed to subtle rather than overt death reminders. Participants (N = 410) who were exposed to a subtle reminder of 9/11 perceived more social consensus for their belief than those who were exposed to an overt one. Consistent with TMT, the pattern was especially strong for participants with the minority belief. The effect abated once the anniversary ended. The implications of this research and future directions are discussed.     

Parent Perspectives of Support Received from Physicians and/or Genetic Counselors Following a Decision to Continue a Pregnancy with a Prenatal Diagnosis of Trisomy 13/18

Families that choose to continue a pregnancy with a prenatal diagnosis of Trisomy 13/18 are a minority that present unique challenges for those in charge of their care. This study investigated the extent to which these patients felt supported by their healthcare providers, and any differences in the perceived level of support experienced by those working with a physician versus those working with a genetic counselor. Two online support groups, SOFT and Hope for Trisomy, distributed an online survey to their members. Means, standard deviations and chi-square analysis were calculated to describe their responses. One-hundred fourteen surveys were included in the final analysis. Respondents were more likely to agree that genetic counselors provided unbiased information in a way that they understood, compared to physicians. Review of qualitative responses found that portrayal of Trisomy 13/18 by healthcare providers used directive language when describing the lethality, morbidity and burden of the condition. Language included terms such as “incompatible with life” and comments on burden to other family members. Healthcare providers can assist families that receive a prenatal diagnosis of Trisomy 13 or 18 by providing up-to-date written resources and connecting them with support groups for parents who have received a similar diagnosis. Our study found that involving genetic counselors in the prenatal care of these patients is likely beneficial.