Why group apologies succeed and fail: intergroup forgiveness and the role of primary and secondary emotions

It is widely assumed that official apologies for historical transgressions can lay the groundwork for intergroup forgiveness, but evidence for a causal relationship between intergroup apologies and forgiveness is limited. Drawing on the infrahumanization literature, we argue that a possible reason for the muted effectiveness of apologies is that people diminish the extent to which they see outgroup members as able to experience complex, uniquely human emotions (e.g., remorse). In Study 1, Canadians forgave Afghanis for a friendly-fire incident to the extent that they perceived Afghanis as capable of experiencing uniquely human emotions (i.e., secondary emotions such as anguish) but not nonuniquely human emotions (i.e., primary emotions such as fear). Intergroup forgiveness was reduced when transgressor groups expressed secondary emotions rather than primary emotions in their apology (Studies 2a and 2b), an effect that was mediated by trust in the genuineness of the apology (Study 2b). Indeed, an apology expressing secondary emotions aroused no more forgiveness than a no-apology control (Study 3) and less forgiveness than an apology with no emotion (Study 4). Consistent with an infrahumanization perspective, effects of primary versus secondary emotional expression did not emerge when the apology was offered for an ingroup transgression (Study 3) or when an outgroup apology was delivered through an ingroup proxy (Study 4). Also consistent with predictions, these effects were demonstrated only by those who tended to deny uniquely human qualities to the outgroup (Study 5). Implications for intergroup apologies and movement toward reconciliation are discussed.     

Disappointment expression evokes collective guilt and collective action in intergroup conflict: the moderating role of legitimacy perceptions

Research on intergroup emotions has largely focused on the experience of emotions and surprisingly little attention has been given to the expression of emotions. Drawing on the social-functional approach to emotions, we argue that in the context of intergroup conflicts, outgroup members’ expression of disappointment with one’s ingroup induces the complementary emotion of collective guilt and correspondingly a collective action protesting ingroup actions against the outgroup. In Study 1 conducted immediately after the 2014 Gaza war, Jewish-Israeli participants received information about outgroup’s (Palestinians) expression of emotions (disappointment, fear, or none). As predicted, outgroup’s expression of disappointment increased collective guilt and willingness to participate in collective action, but only among those who saw the intergroup situation as illegitimate. Moreover, collective guilt mediated the relationship between disappointment expression and collective action, moderated, again, by legitimacy perception. In Study 2, we replicated these results in the context of racial tension between Black and White Americans in the US. We discuss the theoretical and applied implications of the findings.     

Ethnic minorities' racial attitudes and contact experiences with white people

In this article, the authors examine the relationship between ethnic minorities' racial attitudes and their intergroup contact experiences with White people. In Studies 1 and 2, the authors demonstrate that the more negative the racial attitudes held by ethnic minorities, the less positive their interactions are with White friends and roommates. With a daily report methodology, Study 2 revealed that ethnic minorities' racial attitudes predicted the decline in the quality of their intergroup contact experiences over a 3-week period. In Study 3, the authors examined a possible mechanism underlying the relationship between racial attitudes and intergroup contact, as well as the influence of ethnic minorities' racial attitudes on White participants' experiences in intergroup contact settings. The authors discuss the findings in terms of the importance of examining ethnic minorities' attitudes in research on intergroup relations.     

Numerical representation and cross-cut role assignments: Majority members’ responses under cooperative interaction

This research investigates why cross-cutting role assignments, compared to those that converge, may worsen the intergroup attitudes of numerical majorities. Study 1 manipulated the numerical representation of groups and role assignments in a cooperative setting. As predicted, when the cross-cut role condition included the reintroduction of the numerical imbalance, the intergroup attitudes of majorities were more favorable than when the cross-cut condition did not reintroduce this discrepancy. Also, Study 1 showed that the intergroup attitudes of the majority were more positive when roles converged. Study 2 compared a convergent condition to one with converging roles that also reduced the salience of the majority’s numerical advantage. The results for this convergent-reduced-salience condition mimicked that of the cross-cut condition, revealing less positive majority attitudes. In both studies, results suggest that the processes of ingroup identification and relative ingroup homogeneity may mediate the effect of role assignments on ingroup bias. The findings are discussed in terms of the implications for cooperative interventions designed to improve intergroup attitudes.     

Expecting to be the target of prejudice: implications for interethnic interactions

Two studies investigated the implications of ethnic minorities' prejudice expectations for their affective and behavioral outcomes during interethnic interactions. In both studies, the more ethnic minorities expected Whites to be prejudiced, the more negative experiences they had during interethnic interactions. This finding held true for chronic prejudice expectations in a diary study of college roommates (Study 1) and for situationally induced prejudice expectations in a laboratory interaction (Study 2). In Study 2, the authors extended this work to examine the relationship between ethnic minorities' prejudice expectancies and their White partners' psychological experience during interethnic interactions. Consistent with predictions, the more ethnic minorities expected Whites to be prejudiced, the more their White partners had positive experiences during interethnic interactions. These divergent experiences of ethnic minorities and Whites have important implications for the psychological success of interactions between members of these groups.     

Acknowledging the skeletons in our closet: the effect of group affirmation on collective guilt, collective shame, and reparatory attitudes

Just as with threats to personal identity, people defend against social identity threats. In the context of intergroup injustice, such defensiveness undercuts collective guilt and its prosocial consequences. The current research examines whether group affirmation allows perpetrator groups to disarm threat without undermining guilt. In Study 1, men accepted greater guilt for gender inequality after affirming the ingroup. Given the distinction between collective guilt and collective shame, Studies 2-4 assessed both emotions and revealed that Canadians accepted greater guilt and shame over the mistreatment of Aboriginals following group affirmation. In Study 3, group affirmation also moderated the relation of each emotion with reparatory attitudes. When controlling for each other, collective shame predicted compensation in a nonaffirmation control condition whereas guilt predicted compensation once identity threat had been disarmed by group affirmation. In Study 4, the effect of group affirmation on the collective emotions was mediated by defensive appraisals of the injustice.     

Advantaged group's emotional reactions to intergroup inequality: the dynamics of pride, guilt, and sympathy

Three studies establish intergroup inequality to investigate how it is emotionally experienced by the advantaged. Studies 1 and 2 examine psychology students' emotional experience of their unequal job situation with worse-off pedagogy students. When inequality is ingroup focused and legitimate, participants experience more pride. However, when inequality is ingroup focused and illegitimate, participants experience more guilt. Sympathy is increased when inequality is outgroup focused and illegitimate. These emotions have particular effects on behavioral tendencies. In Study 2 group-based pride predicts greater ingroup favoritism in a resource distribution task, whereas group-based sympathy predicts less ingroup favoritism. Study 3 replicates these findings in the context of students' willingness to let young immigrants take part in a university sport. Pride predicts less willingness to let immigrants take part whereas sympathy predicts greater willingness. Guilt is a weak predictor of behavioral tendencies in all studies. This shows the specificity of emotions experienced about intergroup inequality.     

The loyal member effect: on the preference for ingroup members who engage in exclusive relations with the ingroup

The goal of this article was to investigate an indirect form of intergroup differentiation in children in the context of racial attitudes: the preference for ingroup members who interact positively with other ingroup members rather than with outgroup members. Study 1 confirmed this general hypothesis with preschool and 1st-grade children, demonstrating that respondents preferred the ingroup member who played only with other ingroup members, evaluated this child more positively, and felt more similar to him or her. Studies 2 and 3 tested the boundary conditions of the phenomenon. Study 4 analyzed developmental changes demonstrating that the effect is no longer observed among 9- to 11-year-old children. Overall, these studies suggest that engaging in positive interactions with the outgroup might have its costs in terms of a relative devaluation and rejection by one's peers. Results are discussed by stressing the importance of intragroup processes for the regulation of intergroup relations among very young children.     

Dominant group members in intergroup interaction: safety or vulnerability in numbers?

An experiment examined how low- and high-prejudice dominant group members' (LPs' and HPs') reactions to intergroup contact were affected by whether they were accompanied by fellow ingroup members who exhibited prejudice-relevant behavior. Participants answered questions alone or in a group and then estimated how they were viewed by an observer who was an ingroup or an outgroup member. HPs believed that they were viewed more negatively by an outgroup member in the individual than the group condition. LPs showed the opposite effect, which led them to evaluate the outgroup member more negatively in the group condition. All participants in the group condition expected an outgroup member to exaggerate their similarity to the other ingroup members present, and LPs evaluated the other ingroup members more negatively when the observer was an outgroup member. The results suggest that intergroup attitudes guide the types of intergroup contact situations that are experienced most positively.     

Expect the unexpected: failure to anticipate similarities leads to an intergroup forecasting error

People often expect interactions with outgroup members to go poorly, but little research examines the accuracy of these expectations, reasons why expectations might be negatively biased, and ways to bring expectations in line with experiences. The authors found that intergroup interactions were more positive than people expected them to be (Pilot Study, Study 1). One reason for this intergroup forecasting error is that people focus on their dissimilarities with outgroup members (Study 1). When the authors focused White participants' attention on the ways they were similar to a Black participant, their intergroup expectations changed to match their positive experiences (Studies 2 & 3). Regardless of focus, Whites expected to have pleasant intragroup interactions, and they were accurate (Study 4).     

When under threat,we all look the same: Distinctiveness threat induces ingroup homogeneity in face memory

The current research investigated the well-established outgroup homogeneity effect in face memory (worse recognition for outgroup faces than ingroup faces). Because past research has shown that group distinctiveness threat can enhance ingroup homogeneity, of interest in the current research was whether distinctiveness threat affects face recognition. Across two studies, we found that threatening White American participants’ ethnic distinctiveness led to a reduction in same-race face recognition. In other words, distinctiveness threat created ingroup homogeneity in face memory. In both studies, distinctiveness threat led Whites’ same-race recognition to drop to cross-race levels. Implications were discussed in terms of how the structure of intergroup relations may drive intergroup differences in face memory.     

Evidence for the regulatory function of intergroup emotion: Emotional consequences of implemented or impeded intergroup action tendencies

If intergroup emotions are functional, successfully implementing an emotion-linked behavioral tendency should discharge the emotion, whereas impeding the behavioral tendency should intensify the emotion. We investigated the emotional consequences of satisfying or thwarting emotionally induced intergroup behavioral intentions. Study 1 showed that if an attack on the ingroup produced anger, retaliation increased satisfaction, but if an attack produced fear, retaliation increased fear and guilt. Study 2 showed that outgroup-directed anger instigated via group insult dissipated when the ingroup successfully responded, but was exacerbated by an unsuccessful response. Responding in an emotionally appropriate way was satisfying, but ingroup failure to respond elicited anger directed at the ingroup. Study 3 showed that intergroup guilt following aggression was diminished when the ingroup made reparations, but was exacerbated when the ingroup aggressed again. Satisfying behavioral intentions associated with intergroup emotions fulfills a regulatory function.     

Ethnicity in America and feeling "American"

Ethnic group acculturation remains a concern in the United States today. In the present study, the authors explored the extent to which members of three ethnic groups (White American women, African American women, and Cuban American women) perceived themselves to be "American," how much each group felt that its members were perceived as being American by White Americans, and how these perceptions related to beliefs about their own group's economic and social status. The results showed that African Americans felt American but felt that they were not perceived as such by White Americans. African Americans also reported feeling economically and socially excluded. In contrast, Cuban Americans reported neither feeling they were American nor believing they were perceived as such by White Americans, but feelings of inclusion increased with length of residence. Implications of these results for the common ingroup identity model are discussed.     

White selves: conceptualizing and measuring a dominant-group identity

This article addresses the nature and measurement of White racial identity. White identification is conceptualized as an automatic association between the self and the White ingroup; this association is fostered through social exposure to non-Whites and serves to link self- and ingroup evaluations. Four studies validated a measure of White identification against criteria derived from this model. In Study 1, the White Identity Centrality Implicit Association Test (WICIAT) predicted response latencies in a task gauging self-ingroup merging. In Study 2, the WICIAT correlated with census data tapping exposure to non-Whites. In Studies 3 and 4, the WICIAT predicted phenomena associated with the linking of self- and ingroup evaluations: identity-related biases in intergroup categorization (Study 3) and self-evaluative emotional reactions to ingroup transgressions (Study 4). Together, the findings shed light on the antecedents and consequences of White identity, an often-neglected individual difference construct.     

Intergroup time bias and racialized social relations

Within the framework of intergroup relations, the authors analyzed the time people spent evaluating ingroup and outgroup members. They hypothesized that White participants take longer to evaluate White targets than Black targets. In four experiments, White participants were slower to form impressions of White than of Black people; that is, they showed an intergroup time bias (ITB). In Study 1 (N = 60), the ITB correlated with implicit prejudice and homogeneity. Study 2 (N = 60) showed that the ITB was independent of the type of trait in question (nonstereotypical vs. stereotypical). Study 3 (N = 100) demonstrated that ITB correlates with racism measured 3 months beforehand, is independent of motivation to control prejudice, and is not an epiphenomenon of homogeneity. In Study 4 (N = 40) participants not only showed the ITB in a racialized social context but also displayed it following a minimal group manipulation.     

When Harry met Meghan (got married,had a baby,and “Megxited”): Intergroup anxiety,ingroup norms,and racialized categorization as predictors of receptivity to interracial romances

Despite being frequently met with disapproval, interracial romantic relationships have the potential to transform intergroup relations through marriage and children. However, relatively little is known about the receptivity to these important intergroup relationships. Capitalizing on three historical events involving a world-famous interracial couple, Prince Harry and Meghan, we expand the intergroup relations literature by longitudinally and cross-sectionally examining White Briton's perceptions and receptivity to interracial romances. Study 1 (N = 585) showed that intergroup anxiety around the couple's wedding was longitudinally associated with less receptivity to interracial dating and less favorable intergroup attitudes a month later, even when controlling for strong autoregressive paths. Study 2 (N = 402), conducted around the birth of the couple's son (Archie), found that intergroup anxiety (negatively) and favorable ingroup norms (positively) were longitudinally associated with receptivity to intergroup romances and favorable intergroup attitudes a month later in statistically conservative tests. Study 3 (N = 507), conducted at the time of the so-called “Megxit,” cross-sectionally found that media exposure to Meghan was positively associated with favorable ingroup norms which was, again, related to positive intergroup outcomes. However, these associations were suppressed by the perception that Meghan had tainted the Royal Family which was, in turn, negatively associated with the intergroup outcomes. Moderation analyses across the studies revealed these associations were often stronger for those who categorized the biracial Royals as more Black (vs. White). Together, the novel research highlights the often-complex perceptions and longitudinal predictors of interracial romances and does so in historic social contexts.     

Ingroup vitality and intergroup attitudes in a linguistic minority

In this study we argue that predictions of the impact of group status, status stability and status legitimacy on intergroup attitudes can be refined using the subjective perceptions of various dimensions of ingroup vitality. We tested the main and moderating effects of perceived present, future and the legitimacy of present ingroup vitality and perceived discrimination on intergroup attitudes in a nation-wide probability sample (N= 1,411) of Swedish-speaking Finns, controlling for ingroup identification. We found that those who perceived the legitimacy of present ingroup vitality to be low had more negative intergroup attitudes than those who perceived the legitimacy to be high. Perceived present and future ingroup vitality had no main effects on the dependent variable. Instead, perceived future ingroup vitality moderated the effect of perceived discrimination on intergroup attitudes. In addition, the perceived legitimacy of present ingroup vitality mediated the effect of perceived present ingroup vitality on intergroup attitudes.     

Ethnocentrism in dating preferences for an American sample: The ingroup bias in social context

Heterosexual dating partner preferences were examined in a multi-ethnic context. Four groups at UCLA were studied: Asian Americans, African Americans, Latino Americans, and Euro Americans. Participants completed surveys asking them to rate a ‘typical/hypothetical’ opposite-sex member for each of the four ethnic groups on physical attractiveness, similarity, social network approval, status, and desirability as a dating/marriage partner; social identification with the ethnic ingroup was also assessed. Members of all four ethnic groups demonstrated some degree of ethnocentrism on most measures (especially partner preferences) by rating opposite-sex members of their own group higher than outgroup members rated them; however, Asians and Latinos rated opposite-sex Whites as more physically attractive than typical members of their own group, and Latinos and Blacks rated Whites and Asians as higher status. Overall, Whites received more favourable ratings than any of the three minority groups. Regression analyses indicated that social network approval (by far), similarity, and physical attractiveness were (in that order) the most powerful predictors of ethnocentrism in partner preferences. Avenues of integration and interpretation between theories of inter-personal attraction and intergroup relations were considered, including the dimensionality of ingroup favouritism, and the need for stronger consideration of social influence in theories of intergroup relations.     

Sympathy for the Devil: Evidence That Reminding Whites of Their Mortality Promotes More Favorable Reactions to White Racists

Terror management research has often shown that after reminders of mortality, people show greater investment in and support for groups to which they belong. The question for the present research was whether or not this would extend to Euro American investment in their identification as White. Although it seemed unlikely that White participants would directly exhibit increased identification as Whites, we hypothesized that mortality salience would increase sympathy for other Whites who expressed racial pride or favoritism toward Whites. In support of the hypothesis, a White person expressing pride in his race was viewed by White participants as particularly racist relative to a Black person who does so in Study 1, but was deemed less racist after White participants were reminded of their own mortality in Study 2. Similarly, in Study 3, White participants rated an explicitly racist White employer as less racist when they were reminded beforehand of their own mortality. The results were discussed in terms of implications for affiliation with racist ideologies and terror management defenses.     

Implicit ingroup metafavoritism: subtle preference for ingroup members displaying ingroup bias

The current article investigated how individuals evaluate ingroup members displaying either ingroup bias or egalitarian intergroup behaviors. The hypotheses predicted that on explicit responses a preference for the egalitarian ingroup member would emerge; in contrast, on more spontaneous and uncontrolled responses, a preference for the ingroup favoritist would result. Across four studies these hypotheses were confirmed for both minimal groups (Studies 1 and 2) and ethnic groups (Studies 3 and 4). Despite a verbal preference for those who behaved in an egalitarian way, an implicit ingroup metafavoritism was found. Overall, results indicated the presence of dual attitudes in the perception of ingroup members and the strict interconnection between intergroup behaviors and intragroup perception.