Miscommunications surrounding efforts to reach out across group boundaries

Two studies examined the communication of friendship interest within versus across group boundaries in relatively intimate exchanges. The main hypothesis was that so long as reasonable levels of friendship interest were in place, individuals would be more apt to exaggerate the clarity of their overtures (i.e., to exhibit a signal amplification bias) in intergroup as compared to within-group interaction. In line with predictions, this pattern was evident for lower-prejudice individuals, who were equally interested in ingroup and outgroup members as potential friends, but not for higher-prejudice individuals, who were relatively disinterested in cross-group friendship and instead tended to underestimate the friendship interest they conveyed to outgroup members. In contrast with the implications of past research centering on trait impressions and impersonal exchanges, both of these effects appeared to be driven by heightened feelings of transparency in intergroup as compared to within-group interaction.     

Ignoring Versus Exploring Differences Between Groups: Effects of Salient Color‐Blindness and Multiculturalism on Intergroup Attitudes and Behavior

Multiculturalism and color‐blindness represent distinct, and in many ways conflicting, approaches to intergroup relations. We provide a review of the research and theory guiding use of these ideologies as prejudice reduction strategies: Is it best for individuals to ignore category memberships and focus on fundamental human qualities that everyone shares, as color‐blindness would suggest? Or should people adhere to multicultural ideals, recognizing and indeed celebrating differences between groups? After describing these ideologies and their respective theoretical underpinnings, we examine their effects on attitudes, perceptions, and intergroup interaction behavior. We emphasize in particular the link from color‐blindness to self‐focus and prevention orientation and from multiculturalism to an other‐focused learning orientation. Although color‐blindness can have positive effects in the short term, the efforts that it prompts to inhibit and suppress negative responses can be taxing and difficult to sustain. Multiculturalism triggers more positive intergroup attitudes and behavior in nonconflictual circumstances, but has the opposite effect in threatening situations. Nonetheless, because it leads to a focus on learning about others in intergroup situations multiculturalism has the virtue of generally fostering greater attention and responsiveness to outgroup members.     

How Low Can You(r Power) Go? It Depends on Whether You are Male or Female

Three online experiments were conducted to determine whether gender differences in feelings of power are most evident in objectively lower or higher power situations (total n?=?1360; Studies 1 and 2: 238 and 771 U.S. MTurk respondents respectively; Study 3: 351 Canadian university students). We focused on evaluating whether men’s and women’s responses were in line with a cushioning account, whereby the higher power generally accorded to men as a group essentially serves as a back-up power source for men in lower power positions. We also evaluated support for a ceiling account, whereby women’s feelings of power are limited in higher power positions. Results were consistent with the cushioning account: Men reported feeling more powerful than women did when imagining or recalling occupying a lower power position and in a control baseline, but no gender difference was evident under higher power conditions. Results further revealed that women’s feelings of power were more variable across lower versus higher power positions than were men’s and indicated that women’s feelings of power are quite responsive to situationally afforded high power when it is available. Overall our findings suggest that occupying a higher power role eradicates gender differences in feelings of power that are otherwise evident and thus has an equalizing effect.

     

I thought we could be friends, but ...: systematic miscommunication and defensive distancing as obstacles to cross-group friendship formation

This study examined the precursors and consequences of systematic miscommunications regarding relationship interest during intergroup interaction. Pairs of previously unacquainted same-sex students (White-White, White-Chinese, or Chinese-Chinese) engaged in a relatively intimate controlled interaction. White participants who had had little prior contact with Chinese persons were more apt to exhibit a signal-amplification bias (i.e., to perceive that their overtures had conveyed more interest than was actually the case) in intergroup as compared with intragroup exchanges. In contrast, White participants with high levels of prior contact with Chinese persons and Chinese participants did not show enhanced signal amplification in intergroup relative to intragroup exchanges. These results support our hypothesis that lack of intergroup contact experience sets the stage for miscommunications regarding friendship interest. White participants' tendency to feel that they had initially communicated more interest in being friends than their Chinese partner mediated a downward shift in their actual friendship interest over time, suggesting that signal amplification triggers defensive distancing and ultimately lowers the likelihood of cross-group friendship formation.     

Feeling Transparent: On Metaperceptions and Miscommunications

Individuals’ metaperceptions regarding how another person views them tend to be egocentrically biased by their own private self‐knowledge: They overestimate the extent to which their traits, feelings, and intentions are ‘transparent’, perceiving more congruence between their inner self and the other person's impressions than actually exists. In the present article, we examine the factors, such as self‐awareness and feelings of closeness, that increase individuals’ propensity to exaggerate their transparency to others. We also examine the interpersonal consequences of transparency overestimation and the related signal amplification bias, considering how they can reduce the likelihood of relationship formation, derail the seeking and provision of social support in ongoing relationships, and more generally lead to relational conflict. Lastly, we discuss the interventions available to reduce these biases.     

Meta-stereotype activation: evidence from indirect measures for specific evaluative concerns experienced by members of dominant groups in intergroup interaction

Six experiments demonstrated that dominant group members readily frame intergroup interaction in terms of how they themselves are evaluated. The authors used indirect measures of meta-stereotype activation to assess dominant group members' inclination to spontaneously consider an out-group member's (ostensible) stereotypic expectations about them. The necessary conditions for meta-stereotype activation were rather minimal, but the potential for evaluation by an out-group member--as opposed to mere exposure to the person--was required. Individual differences involving the importance accorded to social evaluation (public self-consciousness and personal importance of racial attitudes) were associated with meta-stereotype activation, whereas racial attitudes were not. Two studies in which evaluative orientation was manipulated directly demonstrated a link between thinking in terms of how one is viewed and the activation and application of meta-stereotypes.     

Disruptive effects of vigilance on dominant group members' treatment of outgroup members: choking versus shining under pressure

Three studies examined the hypothesis that evaluative concerns exert a disruptive effect on intimacy-building behaviors exhibited by dominant group members in intergroup interaction. The authors predicted that although evaluative concerns would lead individuals with a negative baseline response to outgroup members to shine (i.e., to exhibit warmer, more friendly behavior), such concerns would have a contrary, choking, effect on individuals with a more positive baseline response. Results were generally consistent with these hypotheses across 3 different operationalizations of evaluative concerns and regardless of whether individuals' orientation toward outgroup members was assessed in terms of prejudiced racial attitudes or racial ingroup identification. Implications for lower status group members' experience of intergroup interaction and for the prejudice-reduction process are considered.     

Threatened identities and interethnic interactions

This chapter adopts a social identity threat perspective to examine dynamics of interethnic interactions. We first review relevant literature regarding the conditions under which both White and ethnic minority individuals are likely to experience social identity threat within the specific context of interethnic interactions. We focus on the threat of being perceived as stereotypical of one's ethnic group, considering situation- and person-level factors that trigger the experience of such threat during interethnic interactions. Next, we offer a framework for understanding how individuals cope with social identity threat during interethnic interactions, proposing three main classes of responses: avoidance, outgroup devaluation/derogation, and behaviour modulation/regulation. We review factors that are likely to influence the adoption of one of these responses, and then consider potential implications that each type of response may have for individuals' experiences during interactions, the development of interethnic friendships, and the attenuation of prejudice.     

Contagious resource depletion and anxiety? Spreading effects of evaluative concern and impression formation in dyadic social interaction

Two studies examined how adopting an impression formation or evaluative concern mindset affects individuals' own and their interaction partner's experience of potentially stressful social exchanges, such as first meeting situations and interethnic interaction. Our main hypothesis was that adopting an impression formation mindset would, by diverting individuals' focus away from themselves and toward others, reduce both their own and their partner's cognitive resource depletion and negative affect. Consistent with predictions, positive effects of impression formation were evident and were “contagious” in that they were evident across individuals who received the mindset instructions and their partners, who were unaware of the manipulation. The positive effects of impression formation instructions were generally evident both in comparison to evaluative concern instructions, which provided similar structure, and in comparison to no instructions at all. Thus, adopting an impression formation mindset seems an effective strategy for minimizing negative outcomes experienced in stressful social interactions.     

An information search model of evaluative concerns in intergroup interaction

In an information search model, evaluative concerns during intergroup interaction are conceptualized as a joint function of uncertainty regarding and importance attached to out-group members' views of oneself. High uncertainty generally fosters evaluative concerns during intergroup exchanges. Importance depends on whether out-group members' evaluations are perceived as diagnostic of one's social standing and outcomes. Perceived diagnosticity can arise from the out-group's control over resources (contingency) and/or ability to provide accurate assessments (expertise) and is a function of the relative status of one's group and the perceived legitimacy of the group status difference. Evaluative concerns trigger information search efforts and forms of uncertainty reduction that have a variety of negative downstream effects. Implications for efforts to improve intergroup relations are discussed.