RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: There is growing evidence of intergroup hostility between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, a process of polarization that threatens to derail population health efforts. This study explores the moral underpinnings of intergroup antipathy between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. DESIGN: A cross-sectional design was employed to investigate the associations between the view of vaccination as a social contract or individual choice, perceived vulnerability to disease, perceptions of outgroup morality, feelings of warmth, and experiences of schadenfreude. METHODS: Data were extracted from an online, quantitative survey of 233 vaccinated and 237 unvaccinated participants collected between June and July 2022. RESULTS: Results revealed that vaccinated people had stronger negative attitudes towards unvaccinated people than vice versa. In line with hypotheses, the extent to which vaccinated people saw vaccination as a social contract was significantly associated with perceiving unvaccinated people as immoral. For unvaccinated people, seeing vaccination as an individual choice (the opposite of a social contract) was significantly associated with perceiving vaccinated people as immoral. Among both groups, viewing the other as immoral was associated with feeling significantly less warmth towards the opposing vaccination group, and more schadenfreude in the face of an outgroup member's suffering. Participants' perceived vulnerability to disease played a relatively small role in explaining polarization between vaccinated and unvaccinated people. CONCLUSIONS: This research builds on previous studies by identifying moral mechanisms associated with intergroup antipathy in the vaccine debate.

RESUMEN

Introduction: Preparing host-society children for contact with refugees coming into their classes poses a new and important challenge for countries with little prior experience in integration. Imagined contact is a prejudice-reduction intervention that can be particularly useful in this context. However, its long-term effects and potential age-related variations in its efficacy among primary school children remain understudied. Methods: This study investigated the short-term and long-term effects of an imagined contact school intervention on the change in attitudes and contact intentions of 1,544 children aged 7-15. Of these, 827 participated in a four-session-long intervention delivered by their teachers within their regular classes, while 717 served as a comparison group. Short-term effects were assessed approximately one week after the last intervention session, with long-term effects evaluated around two and a half months later. Results: Our findings indicate that the imagined contact intervention instigates positive changes in intergroup attitudes and contact intentions in both the short term and long term, but only for the children in the lower grades of primary school. Discussion: While the durability of these effects among younger participants holds promise for future use of imagined contact in schools, we also scrutinize potential developmental and methodological explanations of the absence of expected intervention effects among older children.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Previous research indicated that social categorization increased intergroup attitude. The current study extended research on social categorization by adopting the multiple personality categorization concept to explore whether it would alter intergroup attitudes toward Muslims and Buddhists. PARTICIPANTS AND PROCEDURE: Study 1 examined multiple personality category perceptions among Buddhist and Muslim students living in the troubled southern provinces. Participants were 382 Thai Buddhist and Muslims students of mean age 20.15 years (SD = 1.01). They took the multiple personality categorization perception scale on outgroup perceived personality. Study 2 evaluated a mediated social identity complexity and a moderated personal value in association between multiple personality categorization and intergroup attitudes. Participants were 150 Thai Buddhists and Muslim students of mean age 20.31 years (SD = 0.94). They took the scales of multiple personality categorization: short version, intergroup attitudes, social identity complexity, and personal values. Descriptive statistics, independent t-tests and SEM were used to test hypotheses. RESULTS STUDY 1: Ten shared traits were identified (creative, smart, objective, talented, generous, kind, curious, resourceful, serious, skeptical) by both groups. This brought up awareness of similarity in shared personalities. Study 2: Multiple personality categorization and personal values were linked positively with intergroup attitudes. Personal values affected the links between multiple personality categorization and intergroup attitudes. However, social identity complexity as a mediator was nonsignificant. CONCLUSIONS: Muslim and Buddhist students were stimulated to explore their similarity in personality traits. Educators and policy makers may use the findings on personal values and multiple personality categorization to plan long-term sustainable cooperation between Buddhists and Muslims.

RESUMEN

A mixed-methods approach was used to analyze the social representations of four ethnic minorities in southern Spain. Following a between-subjects design, Spanish participants (n = 532) were assigned to evaluate either Romanian Roma, Spanish Roma, Moroccan, or Romanian non-Roma people, with a free-association task and scales of stereotypes, emotions, and behavioral tendencies. Results showed that Romanian Roma was the most devalued target, eliciting the worst representation and attitudes. The content analysis revealed that participants described minorities mainly in terms of social exclusion, culture, appearance, personality, opportunity seeking, stigmatization, and personalization/equality, with social exclusion being a key category associated with worst attitudes.

RESUMEN

This paper examines the impact of different types of national and European identity-glorification and attachment-on attitudes toward diverse outgroups, centering on the role of cosmopolitan orientation as a mediator. In Study 1 (N = 342), both national and European attachments positively correlated with cosmopolitan orientation, subsequently influencing attitudes toward non-Western international students. Notably, national and European glorification also significantly impacted attitudes but in a negative manner, with their effects mediated through cosmopolitan orientation. The results of Study 2 (N = 346) were more nuanced: European attachment positively correlated with cosmopolitan orientation, which in turn had a positive indirect effect on attitudes toward Middle Eastern and Asian people living in Hungary. However, it was only national glorification, not national attachment, that exhibited a significant negative indirect effect through cosmopolitan orientation on these attitudes. These findings illuminate the multifaceted ways in which distinct forms of identity, filtered through the lens of cosmopolitan orientation, shape attitudes toward outgroups. They underscore the potential of cosmopolitan orientation in promoting inclusivity and suggest avenues for future research to further understand and enhance intergroup relations.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Research in the past decade has demonstrated the potential of virtual reality perspective-taking (VRPT) to reduce bias against salient outgroups. In the perspective-taking literature, both affective and cognitive mechanisms have been theorized and identified as plausible pathways to prejudice reduction. Few studies have systematically compared affective and cognitive mediators, especially in relation to virtual reality, a medium posited to produce visceral, affective experiences. The present study seeks to extend current research on VRPT's mechanisms by comparing empathy (affective) and situational attributions (cognitive) as dual mediators influencing intergroup attitudes (affective) and stereotypes (cognitive). In a between-subjects experiment, 84 participants were randomly assigned to embody a VR ingroup or outgroup waiting staff at a local food establishment, interacting with an impolite ingroup customer. Results indicated that participants in the outgroup VRPT condition reported significantly more positive attitudes and stereotypes towards outgroup members than those in the ingroup VRPT condition. For both attitudes and stereotypes, empathy significantly mediated the effect of VRPT, but situational attributions did not. Findings from this research provide support for affect as a key component of virtual experiences and how they shape intergroup perceptions. Implications and directions for further research are discussed.

RESUMEN

International students studying and living in a foreign context often complain about difficulties establishing friendships with host nationals. This study investigates host country nationals' (HCNs) willingness to develop intercultural friendships with international students who are sojourning in China by exploring the effects of face-to-face and online intergroup contact, HCNs' attitudes, intercultural communication competence (ICC), and perceived intergroup threats. Survey data from 469 HCNs indicate that (a) face-to-face and online contact are indirectly and positively related to their willingness to form intercultural friendships, (b) face-to-face contact can moderate the relationships of online contact with HCNs' intergroup attitudes and perceived intergroup threats, and (c) both ICC and intergroup attitudes can positively predict friendship formation whereas perceived intergroup threats act as a negative predictor. The implications of our findings for future research and practice are presented.

RESUMEN

Introduction: Our main aim is to understand to what extent Bedouins, internally displaced Palestinians (refugees) and majority-group members (non-refugees, non-Bedouins, settled) in the West Bank prioritize COVID-19 booster shots for their own group over other groups. Methods: We conducted a survey experiment (face-to-face) among 678 Palestinians living in the West Bank. Participants randomly received a description of an older man (Bedouin, refugee, settled) and were asked to indicate to what extent this person should be prioritized for the booster shot. Respondents belonging to a minority saw the profile of an in-group member or a majority-group member, whereas majority-group members would see the profile of an in-group or one out-group member (Bedouin, Palestinian refugee). Results: We found slightly higher in-group preferences for Palestinian refugees when it came to vaccination, whereas majority-group members were less inclined to support a prioritization of Palestinian refugees but equally prioritized their group and Bedouins. For Bedouins, we did not find strong in-group preferences. Discussion: Our study reveals the salience of group boundaries during the COVID-19 pandemic with potentially adverse effects on the health care of minorities.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Cognitive balance theory posits that a drive for cognitively consistent thoughts modulates interpersonal relations. We extended cognitive balance theory to intergroup relations and tested it in a real-life setting where intergroup relations are under strain: Northern Ireland in the wake of the UK's withdrawal from the EU. We predicted that when the groups of Irish people and British people in Northern Ireland are perceived as more compatible, intergroup bias would be lower than when groups are perceived as less compatible. We collected data of residents of Northern Ireland before the UK's official withdrawal from the EU (N = 604) and after (N = 350). As hypothesized, attitudes towards British people positively related to attitudes towards Irish people when participants perceived the groups as more compatible. We found the opposite relationship at low levels of perceived compatibility. Exploratory cross-lagged panel analyses did not show that these effects occurred longitudinally, suggesting that cognitive balance does not drive judgements over time possibly because people are less likely to notice inconsistent responses across different time points. The present research demonstrates that intergroup attitudes assessed at a certain point in time follow cognitive balance principles.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The present research examines the potential that support for efforts aimed at mitigating systemic racism might have beneficial consequences related to vaccination attitudes (e.g., vaccine willingness). Specifically, the present research examines the hypothesis that Black Lives Matter (BLM) support is related to reduced vaccine hesitancy, and that prosocial intergroup attitudes are a theoretical mechanism. It tests these predictions across social group lines. Study 1 examined state-level indicators tied to BLM protests and discourse (i.e., Google searches, news reports) and COVID-19 vaccine attitudes among US adult racial/ethnic minority (N = 81,868) and White (N = 223,353) respondents. Then, Study 2 investigated, respondent-level, BLM support (measured at time 1) and general vaccine attitudes (measured at time 2) among US adult racial/ethnic minority (N = 1,756) and White (N = 4,994) respondents. It tested a theoretical process model that included prosocial intergroup attitudes as a mediator. Study 3 tested a replication of the theoretical mediation model using a different sample of US adult racial/ethnic minority (N = 2,931) and White (N = 6,904) respondents. Across studies and social groups (i.e., racial/ethnic minority and White respondents), as well as controlling for demographic and structural covariates, BLM support and state-level indicators were found to be related to lower vaccine hesitancy. And, Studies 2-3 provided some evidence that prosocial intergroup attitudes are a theoretical mechanism; the studies provided evidence of partial mediation. Holistically, the findings have the potential to advance understandings of how support and discourse related to BLM and/or other anti-racism efforts can be associated with positive public health outcomes such as reductions in vaccine hesitancy.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Respect has been found to play a crucial role in human relationships including intergroup relations. Its presence has a significant positive influence in shaping the character of all relationship interactions. In intractable violent conflicts, there is almost no space for gestures of respect between adversarial parties, and the prevailing phenomenon is a mutual disrespect that fuels the conflict. This study examines a novel and challenging intervention that aims to induce in laboratory experiments, for the first time, perceptions of respect from adversary group members in the context of intractable intergroup conflict. In addition, this research examines the effect of perceived respect from the adversary on attitudes and perceptions towards the adversary group and the conflict. In three experimental studies (N = 1261) in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, we manipulated expressions of respect from the Palestinian adversary group members and presented them to Jewish Israelis. Results revealed that, a group involved in a prolonged violent conflict may perceive respect from its adversary outgroup, and the perceived respect from the adversary in turn predicts improvement in attitudes and perceptions towards the adversary group and the conflict. These findings underline the important role of respect in intergroup conflict and its role in mitigating the conflict.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Intergroup bias has been a pervasive phenomenon throughout human history, but its psychological underpinnings are still the subject of debate. The present work tests whether intergroup attitudes and behaviors are motivated by ingroup positivity, outgroup negativity, or both, across the first few years of life. In two studies (total N = 128), children were introduced to an ingroup doll and an outgroup doll, and interacted with each one independently in a resource allocation task. Toddlers showed both ingroup positivity and outgroup negativity (Study 1). Preschoolers shifted from this pattern, showing positivity and avoiding negativity toward both ingroup and outgroup members (Study 2). Together, these studies suggest that outgroup negativity plays a stronger role in motivating early intergroup bias than previously thought.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Despite growing diversity, many individuals do not support it, posing a challenge to the successful functioning of societies, institutions, and organizations. We investigated the role of the selective exposure bias on diversity beliefs. In a large-scale nationally representative Spanish sample (N = 2,297), we conducted a time-lagged experiment with two time points 5 months apart in which we offered participants a monetary incentive to (allegedly) read attitude contradictory versus conforming information about societal support for refugees. The selective exposure bias asymmetrically predicted future diversity beliefs. Among individuals with a positive intergroup orientation, the selective exposure bias did not predict future diversity beliefs. However, among individuals with a negative intergroup orientation, the selective exposure bias predicted lower pro-diversity beliefs over time, over and above initial pro-diversity beliefs and ideological dispositions. These findings suggest that the absence of pro-diversity beliefs partly originates from a cognitive bias, holding critical implications for policymakers seeking to improve intergroup relations.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Well-known predictors of prejudice toward Muslims include social dominance and authoritarianism. However, a gap exists for variables reflecting a rejection or mitigation of ideological motivations associated with prejudice toward Muslims. We examined if quiet ego was related to positive attitudes toward Muslims, and whether this could be explained by lower levels of authoritarianism, social dominance, and the motivation to express prejudice. We explored this possibility across two studies of adults in the United States (N = 376; N = 519). In Study 1, regression results showed quiet ego was directly associated with positive attitudes toward Muslims. Study 2 utilized path analyses and found that the direct relationship between quiet ego and positive attitudes toward Muslims was explained by associations between quiet ego and lower endorsement of authoritarianism, social dominance, and the internal motivation to express prejudice toward Muslims. Moreover, these associations held when accounting for several correlates of intergroup attitudes.

RESUMEN

Empathic competences might help adolescents navigate current multicultural societies by supporting harmonious intergroup relations. Yet it is unclear how each component of empathy (empathic concern and perspective-taking) is associated with different dimensions (affective, cognitive, behavioral) of ethnic prejudice. The current study aims to fill this gap. A total of 259 Italian adolescents (Mage = 15.60, 87.6% female) completed online questionnaires at three time points (i.e., April, May, and October 2021). The results of cross-lagged models indicated that empathic concern was directly and indirectly associated with reduced affective, cognitive, and behavioral ethnic prejudice, while perspective-taking was linked to increases in cognitive and one facet of behavioral (i.e., lower contact willingness) prejudice. Furthermore, the prevalence of affect over cognition was found, with the affective component of both empathic competences (i.e., empathic concern) and ethnic prejudice exerting the strongest influence on the cognitive ones.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

To determine whether children will exclude or punish a peer who creates an unfair advantage in an intergroup team context, four-to ten-year-old participants (N = 120, Mage = 6.87) were assigned a team membership and evaluated unintentional and intentional unfair advantages created by a character. Children were more likely to endorse punishment and exclusion responses when reasoning about an opponent than a teammate. This difference between groups was not observed when in-group and out-group members reasoned about punishing a character who intentionally created an unfair advantage. Older children were less likely to endorse exclusion than younger participants. Further, older children and in-group members utilized punishment more frequently than exclusion. Taken together this demonstrates that the group identity and the age of the child influences the ways in which children endorse responses to transgressions. These findings increase our understanding regarding children's conceptions of fairness responses to transgressions in intergroup contexts.

RESUMEN

Strong interpersonal bonds between group members have been found to either increase intergroup antipathy or improve intergroup attitudes, depending on the intergroup situation. However, the question of whether close ties with fellow group members can contribute positively and negatively to intergroup attitudes at the same time remains unexplored. We explore this question in the context of a national group taking the example of Finns' acculturation attitudes toward immigrants. One adolescent sample (N = 401) and one adult student sample (N = 285) completed surveys assessing these factors. Across both studies, strong interpersonal bonds with fellow nationals showed a negative effect on acculturation attitudes toward immigrants via an increase in blind patriotism. At the same time, interpersonal bonds also had a direct and positive effect on attitudes toward contact with Finns and (among younger respondents only) attitudes toward cultural maintenance. Our results indicate that the strength of interpersonal bonds with fellow nationals has simultaneous and opposing associations with acculturation attitudes via a combination of direct and indirect pathways. Based on these results we argue that groups can be simultaneously both caring and moral communities.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Unfair advantages can be created either intentionally (e.g., cheating) or unintentionally (e.g., unintended benefit). Little is known regarding how children evaluate different types of advantages in situations where group identity and group membership are made salient. To investigate how children's group identity influences their evaluations and attribution of intentions in intergroup contexts, children were presented with three hypothetical advantages (unintentionally unfair, intentionally unfair, and fair) in a competitive context created by either an in-group member or an out-group member. Children (N = 120) were 4-6 years of age (n = 59; Mage = 5.29 years) and 7-10 years of age (n = 61; Mage = 8.34 years), including 64 girls and 56 boys. Participants were 67% European American, 18% African American, 11% Asian American, and 4% Hispanic. All participants were assigned to one of two teams in a contest in order to create an in-group/out-group manipulation prior to their evaluation of the actions. Out-group members viewed unintentional unfair and fair advantages as less acceptable than in-group members, but in-group and out-group members were equally negative in their assessment of an intentional transgression. When reasoning about unintentional and intentional unfair advantages, older children referenced the intentions of the advantage creator to justify their decisions more than younger children, whereas younger children reasoned about the impact of the behavior on their team more than older children. These novel findings shed light on developmental and social factors influencing children's understanding of fairness and intentionality in everyday contexts.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Recent research on group attitudes in members of disadvantaged groups has provided evidence that group evaluations closely align with societal stigma, reflecting outgroup favoritism in members of those groups that are most strongly stigmatized. While outgroup favoritism is clearly evident among some groups, there is still debate about the psychological mechanisms underlying outgroup favoritism. The current research focuses on a less intensively examined aspect of outgroup favoritism, namely the use of status-legitimizing group stereotypes. We present data from members of four disadvantaged groups (i.e., persons who self-categorize as gay or lesbian, n = 205; Black or African American, n = 209; overweight n = 200, or are aged 60-75 years n = 205), who reported the perceived status of their ingroup and a comparison majority outgroup and provided explanations for their status perceptions. Contrary to assumptions from System Justification Theory, participants rarely explained perceived group status differences with group stereotypes, whereas they frequently explained ingroup disadvantage with perceived stigmatization and/or systemic reasons. Further exploratory analyses indicated that participants' status explanations were related to measures of intergroup attitudes, ideological beliefs, stigma consciousness, and experienced discrimination. Our results highlight the need to develop a better understanding whether, under what circumstances, and with which consequences members of disadvantaged groups use group stereotypes as attributions of ingroup status and status differences.