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.     

Efficacy of a cognitive-behavioural therapy administered by videoconference for generalized anxiety disorder

IntroductionDelivering psychotherapy by videoconference could considerably extend the accessibility of empirically validated treatments.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), administered via videoconference.MethodFive participants with a primary diagnosis of GAD took part in an experimental multiple baseline case study protocol. The efficacy of the treatment was evaluated using a semi-structured interview, self-report questionnaires, and daily self-monitoring diaries.ResultsThe results demonstrate that overall, participants’ conditions were improved following treatment and they no longer met the diagnostic criteria for GAD in the short-term. Participants’ conditions improved clinically and statistically at each follow-up point, achieving a greater global level of functioning at post-test, as well as at 3-month and 12-month follow-up.ConclusionClinical implications of this new treatment modality and directions for future research are discussed.     

Paranoia predicts out-group prejudice: preliminary experimental data

This article examines the relationships between exposure to terrorism news and state social paranoia, death anxiety and Islamophobia. In two experiments we show that, contrary to previous research in this area, the terrorism news condition did not significantly increase state social paranoia, death anxiety and prejudice towards Muslims, but that paranoid thinking was the sole predictor of Islamophobia. Trait paranoia is associated with both poor well-being and with negative perceptions of Muslim competitive players – a form of inter-relational prejudice. Results indicated that the frequency of paranoid thoughts mediates the relationship between death anxiety and anti-Muslim prejudice and trait paranoia is the main predictor of the negative perceptions of a Muslim competing player. This study elucidates new pathways to understanding terror management theory, by including paranoia as a type of thinking that predisposes individuals to be suspicious of salient out-groups.     

Including Both Voices: A New Bidirectional Framework for Understanding and Improving Intergroup Relations

Methods: If successful intergroup harmony is to be achieved between two groups, then both groups' voices must be heard. Despite this, 60 years of social psychological “intergroup” prejudice research has tended to adopt a solely majority‐centric perspective, with the majority group portrayed as the active agent of prejudice, and the minority group as passive targets. Objective: This paper critically reviews relevant literature, highlighting this unidirectional imbalance, and proposes a new, two‐stage bidirectional framework, where we encourage researchers and educators to first understand how minority and majority groups' intergroup attitudes and emotions impact intergroup dynamics, before tailoring and implementing contact and recategorisation strategies to improve intergroup relations, nationally and internationally. Conclusion: We argue that the interactive nature of the intergroup dynamic needs to be better understood, and each group's voice heard, before prejudice can be effectively reduced. Lastly, we describe an Australian study, the Dual Identity and Electronic‐contact (DIEC) programme, that has been conducted and has successfully applied this bidirectional framework.     

On the statistical and theoretical basis of signal detection theory and extensions: Unequal variance, random coefficient, and mixture models

Basic results for conditional means and variances, as well as distributional results, are used to clarify the similarities and differences between various extensions of signal detection theory (SDT). It is shown that a previously presented motivation for the unequal variance SDT model (varying strength) actually leads to a related, yet distinct, model. The distinction has implications for other extensions of SDT, such as models with criteria that vary over trials. It is shown that a mixture extension of SDT is also consistent with unequal variances, but provides a different interpretation of the results; mixture SDT also offers a way to unify results found across several types of studies.     

Extending Contact Across Generations: Comparison of Direct and Ancestral Intergroup Contact Effects on Current Attitudes Toward Outgroup Members

There is a growing body of evidence that intergroup relations are affected not only by direct contact with outgroup members, but also by extended contact: the mere knowledge that an ingroup member has a positive relationship with an outgroup. The present article focuses on the transgenerationally transmitted effects of contact, namely the impact of knowledge about ancestors’ contact with outgroup members on descendants’ attitudes toward the outgroup. A correlational study in the Polish–Ukrainian borderland region (N = 288) shows that ancestral intergroup contact – independently from direct intergroup contact – plays a crucial role in the process of improving intergroup attitudes. The mediating mechanisms of perceived similarity of the outgroup to the self and of perspective taking are discussed. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Why does ingroup essentialism increase prejudice against minority members?

A study with British participants (N = 90) tested a potential mediator of the effect of essentialist beliefs about the national ingroup on prejudice against immigrants. Essentialist beliefs were defined as beliefs in genetic determinism, a basic assumption that group membership is “written in the blood” and that the groups’ boundaries and characteristics are determined by genetic and/or biological factors. Essentialist beliefs were expected to play an important role in the formation of prejudice. They were predicted to be associated with a reduction in the perceived possibility of immigrants’ adopting the mainstream culture. Further, it was expected that essentialist beliefs would be positively associated with perceptions of intergroup threat, which in turn would be associated with a stronger demand for immigrants adopting the mainstream culture. Taken together, essentialist beliefs were predicted to be associated with a greater discrepancy between the demand for and perceived feasibility of culture adoption. This discrepancy was hypothesized to mediate the effect of essentialist beliefs on prejudice against immigrants. Structural equation modeling analysis and mediation analysis supported the hypotheses, showing that essentialism attributed to the national ingroup results in people demanding something seemingly impossible from immigrants, and that this situation in which immigrants have little chance of fulfilling majority members’ expectations results in prejudice against them. Thus, results show that perceptions of the ingroup are associated with attitudes to the outgroup, and they outline an explanatory mechanism for the positive correlation between essentialism and prejudice which has been found in previous research. Theoretical and applied implications are discussed.     

‘Tell me what I want to hear’: Motivated recall and attributions in media regarding asylum seekers

Within Australia, divisive debates regarding the processing of asylum seekers have delivered increasing polarisation rather than convergence on an evidence‐based, humane approach. In order to investigate the role of motivated reasoning (the idea that our judgment is based on our motivations) with respect to attributions of warmth and competence, 186 participants indicated the extent to which they accepted false beliefs regarding asylum seekers. They read an article rebutting such false beliefs and then reported their attitudes towards the author and the extent to which the author possessed warmth and competence traits. They then reported whether they agreed with the information in the article before completing a test of recall. Participants who disagreed with the article recalled less accurate information and rated authors significantly lower on warmth and competence. These findings suggest that motivated reasoning plays an important role in the way stereotypes are applied and in the way information is processed.