Damned if you do,damned if you don’t: Effects of empathy and responsibility in Muslim leaders’ mediated responses to extremist attacks

ABSTRACT

Muslim American leaders are often called upon to publicly respond to violent attacks carried out by Muslim extremists. Yet it is unclear what types of responses are most likely to satisfy non-Muslim Americans and ultimately improve attitudes toward Muslim Americans as a group. In three experiments, we examined how expressions of empathy and responsibility within Muslim leaders’ mediated responses to extremism affect response satisfaction. We did so immediately after real terrorism incidents carried out internationally (Study 1) and domestically (Study 2), as well as within a controlled fictional incident (Study 3). Across studies, expressing (vs. not expressing) empathy decreased the perception that the issued statement was motivated by external pressure, which was associated with (a) increased response satisfaction and trust in Muslim Americans and (b) decreased perceptions that Muslim Americans were collectively responsible for the incident. In contrast, accepting (vs. denying) responsibility increased the perception that the response was issued out of a sense of collective guilt, which, in Study 3, led to (a) decreased response satisfaction and trust in Muslims and (b) increased Muslim collective responsibility. These findings illustrate the perilous task facing group leaders who use the media to publicly respond to actions of extremist ingroup members.     

Developmental Contributions to Emotional Awareness

The Levels of Emotional Awareness Scale (LEAS) has received considerable support as a reliable and valid measure of individual differences in emotional awareness (EA) since the original report involving 40 participants (Lane, Quinlan, Schwartz, Walker, &; Zeitlin, 1990 Lane, R., Quinlan, D., Schwartz, G., Walker, P., &; Zeitlin, S. (1990). The Levels of Emotional Awareness Scale: A cognitive-developmental measure of emotion. Journal of Personality Assessment, 55, 124–134. doi:10.1080/00223891.1990.9674052[Taylor &; Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). However, the hypothesized developmental nature of EA (conceptualized as a cognitive skill) has thus far only been examined in that 1 early study. Here we report multiple regression analyses on the entire sample of 94 participants who completed the LEAS as part of that original study, as well as the same developmental and affective measures used in the original report. We first observed that different developmental measures, including the Object Relations Inventory and the Sentence Completion Test of Ego Development, accounted for unique portions of the variance in LEAS scores. We also observed that higher LEAS scores were associated with greater within-category variance in the self-reported positive and guilt- and shame-related emotions people reported experiencing on a typical day. Based on these findings, we introduce a 3-dimensional cognitive-developmental framework that LEAS scores plausibly track, including (a) the transition from focusing on external/physical to internal/psychological characteristics, (b) greater conceptual complexity, and (c) self–other differentiation. We then discuss the implications of this framework for understanding the nature of EA and for future research.