The unique effects of blatant dehumanization on attitudes and behavior towards Muslim refugees during the European ‘refugee crisis’ across four countries

Blatant dehumanization has recently been demonstrated to predict negative outgroup attitudes and behaviors. Here, we examined blatant dehumanization of Muslim refugees during the ‘Refugee Crisis’ among large samples in four European countries: the Czech Republic (N = 1307), Hungary (N = 502), Spain (N = 1049), and Greece (N = 934). Our results suggest that blatant dehumanization of Muslim refugees is (a) prevalent among Europeans, and (b) uniquely associated with anti‐refugee attitudes and behavior, beyond political ideology, prejudice, and—of particular relevance to the refugee crisis—empathy. We also find that blatant dehumanization of Muslim refugees is significantly higher and more strongly associated with intergroup behavior in the Eastern European countries (especially the Czech Republic) than in Spain and Greece. Examining a range of outgroup targets beyond refugees, our results further illustrate that blatant dehumanization is not purely an ethnocentric bias: while individuals across contexts feel warmer towards their group than all others, they rate several high‐status outgroups as equally or more fully ‘evolved and civilized’ than the ingroup. Our research extends theoretical understanding of blatant dehumanization, and suggests that blatant dehumanization plays an important and independent role in the rejection of Muslim refugees throughout Europe.     

We will hunt them down: How social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism fuel ethnic persecution of immigrants in fundamentally different ways

Despite the fact that SDO and RWA are correlated with one another and both predict support for ethnic persecution of immigrants, it is argued that this aggression is provoked for very different reasons. For authoritarians, outgroup aggression against immigrants should primarily be provoked by immigrant refusal to assimilate into the dominant culture because this violates ingroup conformity. In contrast, SDO should be associated with aggression against immigrants who do assimilate into the dominant culture because this blurs existing status boundaries between groups. Using samples of American and Swiss college students, the data were consistent with this status boundary enforcement hypothesis regarding social dominators and largely consistent with the ingroup conformity hypothesis regarding authoritarians. National and ethnic identification did not account for these results. The results further support the argument that outgroup prejudice and discrimination is most fruitfully seen as an interactive function of individual differences and situational constraints.     

Positive and negative intergroup contact and shared reality: Contact effects among host society and refugees

Two cross-sectional studies examined the relationship between positive and negative intergroup contact and shared reality from a majority and a minority group perspective and indirect effects via two types of intergroup threat (threat to identity for the majority, discrimination fear for the minority) and differential closeness. Research was conducted in the context of German–Syrian relations to contrast contact effects on shared reality among German host society members and Syrian refugees. Study 1 revealed unique and asymmetrical effects of valenced contact on shared reality and indirect effects via threat to identity and differential closeness (N = 226). In Study 2, positive contact among Syrian refugees (N = 121) increased shared reality via differential closeness. Negative contact showed no relation to shared reality, but mediation analyses indicated an indirect effect via discrimination fear. Differences between majority and minority contact effects on shared reality are discussed along with the studies’ limitations and implications.     

Religious and secular roads to justify wrongdoing: How values interact with culture in explaining moral disengagement attitudes

Using a person-culture interaction perspective, we explored how socialization through a secular versus a religiously orthodox educational system in Israel moderated the associations between personal values and moral disengagement attitudes. In Study 1 (N = 333), we found that among orthodox (but not secular) participants, conservation values were negatively and openness-to-change values were positively associated with moral disengagement. Self-transcendence values were negatively associated with moral disengagement in the whole sample. In Study 2 (N = 251), we focused on the dehumanization subscale of disengagement attitudes to examine the impact of values accessibility among secular and orthodox participants. Findings showed that among secular participants, universalism values inhibited dehumanization more than conservation values did. Conversely, among orthodox participants, conservation values inhibited dehumanization more than openness-to-change values.     

National identification and support for discriminatory policies: The mediating role of beliefs about laïcité in France

In France, laïcité is a legal principle enforcing State secularism. However, research indicates that Modern (vs. traditional) beliefs about laïcité (ML) help legitimate prejudice against minorities. From Social Identity Theory, we hypothesized that ML should be positively linked with national identification, stereotyping, prejudice and support for discrimination. Accordingly, we demonstrate that ML independently predicts support for discriminatory policies (Study 1a, N = 241) and Maghrebi IAT scores (Study 1b, N = 242). ML mediates the link between national identification and Generalized Prejudice (Study 2a, N = 215; Study 2d, N = 114) as well as Support for Discriminatory Policies (Study 2b, N = 250). Experimental corroboration of this mediation was provided (Study 2c, N = 100). An exploratory study showed that priming ML led to more support for discrimination through national identification (Study 3, N = 89). These results reveal the important intergroup regulation feature of ML beliefs in France.     

Right-wing adherence and objective numeracy as predictors of minority group size perceptions and size threat reactions

Racial, ethnic, religious, and sexual minority populations are growing rapidly in the West. We investigate predictors and consequences of threat responses to perceived minority group size, and perceptions of minority group size itself. Study 1 (N = 274) finds that right-wing adherence predicts greater size threat, whereas lower numerical ability predicts larger perceived group size (confirmed in Studies 2–3). Study 2 (Sample 1, N = 124; Sample 2, N = 263) finds that the relation between right-wing adherence and prejudice toward minorities exhibits an indirect effect via group size threat (but not perceived size), explaining 35–66% of this relation. Study 3 (N = 310) finds a comparable indirect effect explaining 27–40% of this relation, even after statistically controlling for indirect effects of realistic, symbolic, and terroristic threat. These findings provide novel insights into psychological processes surrounding perceived minority group size, identifying size threat as especially crucial in understanding intergroup relations.     

The role of threat,emotions, and prejudice in promoting collective action against immigrant groups

In two studies we assessed the role of distinctiveness threat, group‐based emotions (angst, fear, and anger), and prejudice on people's willingness to engage in collective action against immigrant groups. In Study 1 (N = 222) White British participants were either informed that in the next 40 years the proportion of immigrants in the UK is unlikely to change (control condition) or that there will be more immigrants than White British people living in Britain (threat condition). We obtained support for a sequential multiple mediator model in which threat predicted British people's willingness to engage in collective action via the emotions first and then prejudice. This finding was replicated in Study 2 with an Italian sample (N = 283). These results enhance understanding of when and why advantaged groups undertake collective action against disadvantaged groups by demonstrating that distinctiveness threats and emotions promote such actions.     

Living under threat: Mutual threat perception drives anti‐Muslim and anti‐Western hostility in the age of terrorism

This research demonstrates a common psychology of outgroup hostility driven by perceived intergroup threat among three groups and seven cultural contexts: non‐Muslim Westerners, Muslims in Western societies, and Muslims in the Middle East. In Study 1, symbolic, but not realistic and terroristic threats, predicted non‐Muslim Norwegians' intentions to join anti‐Islamic movements. In Study 2, symbolic and realistic, but not terroristic threat, predicted non‐Muslim Americans' willingness to persecute Muslims. In Studies 3 and 4, symbolic threat predicted support and behavioral intentions against the West among Swedish and Turkish Muslims. Finally, in Study 5, a comparison demonstrated that symbolic and realistic threats had the same effects on violent intentions among non‐Muslim and Muslim Danes, and Muslims in Afghanistan. Meta‐analysis showed that symbolic threat was most strongly associated with intergroup hostility. Across studies, participants with high religious group identification experienced higher levels of threat. Implications for intergroup research and prejudice reduction are discussed.     

The influence of perceived warmth and competence on realistic threat and willingness for intergroup contact

Unwillingness for contact with outgroup members is a form of prejudice. In two studies, we tested the proposition that perceived competence has an indirect effect on willingness for intergroup contact through its effect on realistic threat, and that perceived warmth moderates this relationship. In Study 1, Hong Kong students (N = 144) rated the perceived warmth and competence of an outgroup, Mainland Chinese students, as well as the extent to which they perceived the group as presenting a realistic threat, and willingness for contact with them. In Study 2 (N = 205), we attempted to manipulate the warmth (high vs. low) and competence (high vs. low) of an unfamiliar outgroup, and tested the effects on realistic threat and willingness for intergroup contact. In both studies, we found an interaction effect between warmth and competence in the prediction of realistic threat. When the outgroup was perceived as warm, competence was found to have a negative association with realistic threat (Study 1), whereas when the outgroup was perceived as lacking warmth, competence was found to have a positive association with realistic threat (Study 2). In both studies, perceived warmth moderated the indirect effect of perceived competence on willingness for intergroup contact. Implications for the role of warmth and competence stereotypes in threat perception and prejudice are discussed.     

Does witnessing gender discrimination predict women's collective action intentions for gender justice? Examining the moderating role of perceived female support

Previous research has indicated that witnessing gender discrimination may instigate women's participation in collective action for gender justice. However, relatively little is known about the role of perceived female support in motivating collective action among women who witness gender discrimination in public life. This study aims to analyse whether and when perceived support from feminist-minded women moderates the association between women's witnessing gender discrimination and their willingness to engage in collective action for gender justice. We argue that the association between witnessing gender discrimination and willingness to engage in collective action depends on the support women perceive from their female friends and family members. In studies of women in the U.S. (Study 1; N = 271) and Ukraine (Study 2; N = 256), witnessing gender discrimination predicted greater willingness to participate in collective action for gender justice, and this association was stronger when female support was perceived to be lower. Study 3 (N = 1,304) replicated the findings of Studies 1 and 2 with self-identified feminist women in Turkey. Our research offers novel insights regarding why perceived lack of female support may encourage women to engage in collective action for gender justice.     

Negative stereotypes as motivated justifications for moral exclusion

We investigated the connection between moral exclusion of outgroups and on the one hand, right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), and social dominance orientation (SDO) on the other. We assumed that both RWA and SDO would increase the tendency to place other groups out of the scope of justice. However, we also tested whether negative stereotypes about an outgroup’s threatening and norm-violating misbehavior would serve as a justification for moral exclusion. These assumptions were tested in connection with Roma, Jewish, and Muslim people as target groups in the Hungarian context (N = 441). In line with our hypotheses, we found that both RWA and SDO had an indirect effect on moral exclusion mediated by negative stereotypes about the particular target group. Our findings suggested that negative stereotypes were more important legitimizing factors for RWA than for SDO. Our results highlight the benefits of interpreting the process of moral exclusion as an outcome of motivated social cognition.     

Human values and ideological beliefs as predictors of attitudes toward immigrants across 20 countries: The country-level moderating role of threat

Immigration is a worldwide subject of interest, and studies about attitudes toward immigrants have been frequent due to immigration crises in different locations across the globe. We aimed at understanding individual-level effects of human values and ideological beliefs (Right-Wing Authoritarianism—RWA, and Social Dominance Orientation—SDO) on attitudes toward immigrants, and whether country-level variables (perception of Islamic fundamentalism as a threat, perception of immigrants as a threat, and international migrant stock) moderate these relations. With representative samples from 20 countries (N = 21,362; the Americas, Europe, Asia, and Oceania), and using Multilevel Bayesian regressions, results showed the negative effect of RWA, SDO, and existence values on attitudes toward immigrants, and the positive effects of suprapersonal and interactive values. Cross-level interactions indicated that the effects of RWA, SDO, and suprapersonal and existence values were intensified in countries with societally high levels of perceiving Islamic fundamentalism as a threat. International migrant stock served as a country-level moderator for the effects of SDO and RWA only. When country-level moderators were included simultaneously, Islamic fundamentalism as a threat was the most consistent moderator. Framing theory is offered as a plausible explanation of these results.     

How mask gap impacts discrimination and anxiety during COVID-19: A study on overseas Chinese during the first outbreak in 2020

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic brought unrelenting waves of xenophobia against people representing vulnerable populations, among them those identified as Asians or more specifically as Chinese. Although previous studies have found that some discriminatory actions against overseas Chinese were closely related to mask use during the pandemic, there is not much evidence that explicates what might be the social-cultural triggers or impact of self-other mask discrepancy. The current study aims to examine how a mask use gap impacts perceived discrimination and anxiety during the first outbreak of COVID-19, and how perceived discrimination mediates the mask gap–anxiety relationship. This was operationalized by developing a new “mask gap” variable to capture the incongruent mask use norms between Chines and others around them in the host country. Data were collected from a cross-sectional sample of Chinese (n = 745) residing in 21 countries from March to May 2020 during the first wave of the pandemic. Results showed the newly explicated “mask gap” variable was associated with a higher level of anxiety. In addition, perceived discrimination mediated the mask gap-anxiety relationship. These findings advance both theoretical and practical understandings of how incongruent social norms impact discrimination and mental health during health threat events like the COVID-19 pandemic. The results also suggest important implications for both societal responses and the mental health of sojourners or immigrants during pandemics.     

Relationships between right-wing authoritarianism, terrorism threat, and attitudes towards restrictions of civil rights: a comparison among four European countries

The present study tested the role of right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), terrorist threat, and sociopolitical 'climate' as predictors of support for governmental anti-terrorism policies and actions. Two dimensions of analysis were defined: the presence versus absence of al-Qaeda attacks, and adherence to surveillance versus anti-surveillance mainstream politics. In order to study the influence of these two contextual dimensions on the expression of attitudes, we selected four European countries that fall into these two dimensions--Poland, Belgium, Spain, and the UK. Results from our study provide support for the contention that attitudes towards restrictions of civil rights are related to RWA independently of the cultural context. Moreover, in the UK sample, we found that the threat of terrorism increases acceptance of limitations of civil liberties, but only among people who hold authoritarian beliefs. However, in Spain, the other country that experienced terrorist attacks, this moderation effect was not found which is interpreted in terms of differences in the sociopolitical climate in both countries. As predicted, we did not find such moderation effect in countries in which threat is relatively low (Poland and Belgium). The results are discussed with reference to the conceptual framework based on the importance of fear experiences, security-focused policies, as well as the specific cultural context in the study of reaction to terrorist threat.     

The role of intergroup disgust in predicting negative outgroup evaluations

We introduce intergroup disgust as an individual difference and contextual manipulation. As an individual difference, intergroup disgust sensitivity (ITG-DS) represents affect-laden revulsion toward social outgroups, incorporating beliefs in stigma transfer and social superiority. Study 1 (5 samples, N = 708) validates the ITG-DS scale. Higher ITG-DS scorers demonstrated greater general disgust sensitivity, disease concerns, authoritarian/conservative ideologies, and negative affect. Greater ITG-DS correlated with stronger outgroup threat perceptions and discrimination, and uniquely predicted negative outgroup attitudes beyond well-established prejudice-predictors. Intergroup disgust was experimentally manipulated in Study 2, exposing participants (n = 164) to a travel blog concerning contact with a disgust-evoking (vs. neutral) outgroup. Manipulated disgust generated negative outgroup evaluations through greater threat and anxiety. This mediation effect was moderated: Those higher (vs. lower) in ITG-DS did not experience stronger disgust, threat, or anxiety reactions, but demonstrated stronger translation of aversive reactions (especially outgroup threat) into negative attitudes. Theory development and treatment implications are considered.     

Right‐wing authoritarianism,social dominance orientation and prejudice against threatening and competitive ethnic groups

This research rests on the assumption that individual differences approaches to prejudice benefit from an integration of intergroup factors. Following Duckitt (2001), we assumed that two prominent individual differences variables, right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO), would differentially predict majority members' levels of ethnic prejudice depending on specific factors of the intergroup context: RWA as an index of motivational concerns about social cohesion, stability and security should drive prejudice against outgroups perceived as socially threatening, and SDO as an index of concerns about ingroup superiority and dominance should predict prejudice against outgroups perceived as potential competitors for power‐status. Across two studies (Ns = 82, 176), using between‐participants and within‐participants experimental designs, the effects of RWA on prejudice were particularly powerful when the outgroup was manipulated to be socially threatening, but the effects of SDO on prejudice appeared not to increase when the outgroup was manipulated to be competitive. In Study 2, presenting the outgroup as having low status also increased the effect of RWA, but not the effect of SDO. These results support the differential prediction assumption for RWA, but not for SDO. Implications for the conceptualisation of RWA and SDO are discussed. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Restricting the scope of justice to justify discrimination: The role played by justice perceptions in discrimination against immigrants

In this research, we have analysed the role played by the scope of justice and belief in a just world (BJW) in discrimination against immigrants. In Study 1 (n = 185), we found that the relationship between prejudice and discrimination is mediated by a restricted view of the scope of justice. In addition, the results also showed that this mediation is moderated by BJW insofar as the mediation occurred in participants with a high level of BJW but not in participants with a low level of BJW. Studies 2 and 3 experimentally tested our prediction that the legitimising role played by the scope of justice is guided by a justice motive such as BJW. In both studies, the results showed a greater degree of discrimination against immigrants when a restricted scope of justice was considered but only when the BJW was made salient. In sum, these results introduced an innovation into the literature on the legitimation of social inequalities by demonstrating the relevant role played by the justice perceptions in discrimination against immigrants. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Societal Threat to Safety,Compensatory Control,and Right‐Wing Authoritarianism

We analyzed directly and indirectly the relationships between societal threat to safety, perceived control, and the increase in right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA) in two studies. In Study 1 (national sample of the Italian population, N = 1,169), we performed a longitudinal analysis structured into three waves (January 2003, September 2004, and January 2005). A moderated regression analysis showed that RWA increased from 2003 to 2005 as a function of perceived societal threat to safety more among low‐ than among high RWA scorers. In experimental Study 2 (Italian university students, N = 131) a moderated mediation model showed loss of perceived control to mediate the relation between societal threat to safety and the increase in RWA, but among low authoritarians only. Limitations, implications, and possible developments of this research are discussed.     

The approach–avoidance dilemma at the heart of group-based support: Evidence that group identification increases willingness to seek support at the same time that identity-based support threat reduces it

Despite the benefits of shared group membership, group members often experience an approach–avoidance dilemma when seeking support. At the same time that group members’ willingness to seek support is increased by the positive implications of group identification (the approach hypothesis), it is reduced by negative implications, including the capacity for support to threaten their standing in the group (the avoidance hypothesis). As this dilemma predicts, we find evidence that as participants’ group identification increases, their willingness to seek support increases, but that this willingness is simultaneously reduced by increased identity-based support threat (Study 1, N = 125; Study 2, N = 161). Furthermore, manipulated support threat decreases willingness to seek support. In a team-based game (Study 3, N = 117), support threat is reduced when group norms encourage support-seeking, leading to increases in support-seeking behavior through increases in willingness to seek support, as predicted by the avoidance-reduction hypothesis. Implications for strategies to promote effective social support in intragroup contexts are discussed.     

The role of ingroup threat and conservative ideologies on prejudice against immigrants in two samples of Italian adults

This research investigated the relationship among perception of ingroup threats (realistic and symbolic), conservative ideologies (social dominance orientation [SDO] and right-wing authoritarianism [RWA]), and prejudice against immigrants. Data were collected with a cross-sectional design in two samples: non-student Italian adults (n = 223) and healthcare professionals (n = 679). Results were similar in both samples and indicated that symbolic and realistic threats, as well as SDO and RWA, positively and significantly predicted anti-immigrant prejudice. Moreover, the model considering SDO and RWA as mediators of threats’ effects on prejudice showed a better fit than the model in which ingroup threats mediated the effects of SDO and RWA on prejudice against immigrants. Accordingly, SDO and RWA partially mediated the effect of both symbolic and realistic threats, which maintained a significant effect on prejudice against immigrants, however.