Towards tolerance: Representations of superordinate categories and perceived ingroup prototypicality

Teaching interprofessional collaboration among future healthcare professionals

Healthcare has become more complex in recent years. Such complexity can best be addressed by interprofessional teams. We argue that to ensure successful communication and cooperation in interprofessional teams, it is important to establish interprofessional education in health-related study programs. More precisely, we argue that students in health-related programs need to develop interprofessional competencies and a common language, experience interprofessional contact, build inclusive identities and establish beliefs in the benefit of interprofessional diversity. We give examples how these goals can be implemented in interprofessional education. We also discuss challenges and future avenues for respective research healthcare professionals.

Unpacking all-inclusive superordinate categories: Comparing correlates and consequences of global citizenship and human identities

Previous research suggests that all-inclusive superordinate categories, such as “citizens of the world” and “humans,” may represent different socio-psychological realities. Yet it remains unclear whether the use of different categories may account for different psychological processes and attitudinal or behavioral outcomes. Two studies extended previous research by comparing how these categories are cognitively represented, and their impact on intergroup helping from host communities toward migrants. In a correlational study, 168 nationals from 25 countries perceived the group of migrants as more prototypical of the superordinate category “citizens of the world” than their national group (relative outgroup prototypicality), whereas no differences in prototypicality occurred for the category “humans.” Identification with “citizens of the world” was positively associated with a disposition to oppose helping migrants and to offer dependency-oriented help. However, identification with “humans” was positively associated with helping in general, and with offering dependency- and autonomy-oriented help; and negatively associated with opposition to helping. The experimental study manipulated the salience of “citizens of the world” vs. “humans” vs. control category, among 224 nationals from 36 countries. Results showed that the salience of “humans” (vs. “citizens of the world”) triggered higher entitativity and essentialist perceptions, and dual-identity representations. No differences due to salience were found for representations of relative ingroup prototypicality or helping responses. Overall, these findings suggest that the interchangeable use of different labels is problematic, considering these might activate different representations, and thus, are likely to lead, in some circumstances, to different attitudinal or behavioral outcomes.

Motivating Collective Action in Diverse Groups: Person of Color Identity, Prototypicality Perceptions, and Environmental Attitudes

People of color (PoC) face common threats as marginalized ethno-racial groups, yet it remains unclear what drives a diverse range of people to collectively mobilize. Relative to White Americans, PoC are disproportionately endangered by environmental pollution. We suggest that when facing common threats, such as environmental injustice, making salient PoC-Identity (PoC-ID)—a superordinate category encompassing non-White groups—may motivate its members to collectively act. In a study with nationally representative samples of Black, Latinx, and Asian Americans ( N = 1,866), we found that higher levels of PoC-ID predicted attitudes and behavioral intentions to confront environmental injustices, which were mediated by anger about environmental injustices and efficacy as PoC. Although PoC-ID consistently explained Black Americans’ attitudes and behavioral intentions, its influence among Latinx and Asian Americans was moderated by self-perceived prototypicality as PoC. We discuss how these findings advance understanding of the psychological mechanisms of coalition-building among marginalized groups.

Ingroup Projection in American Politics: An Obstacle to Bipartisanship

One potential obstacle to cooperation between political parties is ingroup projection, the tendency for members of subgroups to define superordinate groups based on characteristics of their own ingroups. In five studies spanning 11 years and three presidential administrations, we demonstrated that ingroup projection can be an obstacle that prevents bipartisanship between Republicans and Democrats. Study 1 showed that Americans perceived political ingroups as more prototypical of Americans than outgroups and that the degree of mismatch between the outgroup and the superordinate group was associated with ingroup bias. Studies 2–5 demonstrated that perceiving the outgroup as poorly fitting the prototype of the superordinate group predicted opposition to bipartisan cooperation and a lower likelihood of having engaged in bipartisan behavior (Studies 4 and 5). These studies provide evidence for ingroup projection among American political parties and suggest that it contributes to political polarization.

The socio-psychological predictors of support for post-truth collective action

Politics in the current era are replete with unreliable media stories which lack evidence, sometimes disparagingly dubbed "fake news". A survey on a sample of Muslims in Indonesia (N = 518) in this work found that participants' endorsement of collective action in of support issues with little to no empirical evidence (i.e., post-truth collective action) increased as a function of their belief in fake news and prejudice against the outgroup (i.e., non-Muslims). Belief in fake news stemmed from participants' generic and specific conspiratorial thinking, whereas prejudice was positively predicted by relative Muslim prototypicality, denoting how much Muslims in Indonesia view that their group is more representative than non-Muslims of the superordinate Indonesian identity that encompasses both groups. Additionally, our findings revealed that generic conspiratorial thinking and relative Muslim prototypicality were positively predicted by collective narcissism, which in turn spurred participants' support for collective action by augmenting belief in fake news.

Welcome to Be Like Us: Expectations of Outgroup Assimilation Shape Dominant Group Resistance to Diversity

We propose a theoretical framework for when and why members of dominant groups experience threat and express intolerant attitudes in response to social change. Scholarship on symbolic threat suggests that the detection of intergroup differences in values and norms is sufficient to elicit negative intergroup attitudes. Building on this theory, we argue that the experience of threat is actually shaped by prospective beliefs about difference (i.e., expectations of whether outgroups will assimilate to ingroup norms over time or not). Across two studies and two accompanying pilots, we show how outgroup assimilation expectation shapes dominant groups' experiences of threat, specifically as it relates to their ability to define the norms of their superordinate category (prototypicality threat). We observe that members of dominant groups are surprisingly tolerant of both social change and intergroup difference in the present, so long as they expect outgroup assimilation in the future.

Beyond the façade of generosity-Regional stereotypes within the same national culture influence prosocial behaviors

We analyzed prosocial behaviors in a field experiment (N = 307) conducted in an urban context (Timisoara, Banat region, Romania), starting from a classical Cross-Cultural Psychology research organized in UK and Iran by Collet & O’Shea in 1976. If the evoked study is focused on comparing prosocial behaviors in two very different national cultures (UK vs. Iran), we compared helping strangers strategies within the same national culture in relation to the regional identities of the help-seeking subjects. A behavioral scenario was created by asking naïve participants to offer support and give directions to a place even if they did not know its whereabouts. Drawing on social identity theory, it was tested whether regional belonging of the help-seeker (in-group vs. out-group) predicts the availability of help-givers for offering help, their availability for giving wrong directions, as well as their emotional expressiveness. Results are interpreted within the perspective of social distance between groups and show that the more distant regional identities are perceived to be, the less generous help-givers are, both in terms of their decision to help and to give wrong directions, as well as in their expressed emotions.

Science by social media: Attitudes towards climate change are mediated by perceived social consensus

Internet blogs have become an important platform for the discussion of many scientific issues, including climate change. Blogs, and in particular the comment sections of blogs, also play a major role in the dissemination of contrarian positions that question mainstream climate science. The effect of this content on people's attitudes is not fully understood. In particular, it is unknown how the interaction between the content of blog posts and blog comments affects readers' attitudes. We report an experiment that orthogonally varied those two variables using blog posts and comments that either did, or did not, support the scientific consensus on climate change. We find that beliefs are partially shaped by readers' perception of how widely an opinion expressed in a blog post appears to be shared by other readers. The perceived social consensus among readers, in turn, is determined by whether blog comments endorse or reject the contents of a post. When comments reject the content, perceived reader consensus is lower than when comments endorse the content. The results underscore the importance of perceived social consensus on opinion formation.

When good for business is not good enough: Effects of pro-diversity beliefs and instrumentality of diversity on intergroup attitudes

Instrumentality-based pro-diversity beliefs (i.e., beliefs that diverse groups outperform homogenous groups in terms of group functioning) have been shown to improve intergroup attitudes. However, such valuing of diversity due to its expected instrumentality holds the risk that outgroups may be devalued in situations when diversity ends up being detrimental to group functioning. Across four experiments, we studied the interplay between instrumentality-based pro-diversity beliefs, actual instrumentality of ethnic diversity, and outgroup attitudes. Our results do not reveal a robust interaction effect between instrumentality-based pro-diversity beliefs and actual instrumentality of diverse groups. Some evidence, however, supports the assumption that instrumentality-based pro-diversity beliefs yielded a weaker positive or even a negative effect on ethnic outgroup attitudes when ethnic diversity was perceived as non-instrumental (i.e., when diversity was perceived as having a negative impact on group functioning). Theoretical contributions, practical implications, and directions for future research are discussed.

Normative Power Europe as an Ingroup Projection? The EU’s Response to the Arab Uprising

This paper aims to understand the social-psychological dimension of the Normative Power Europe discourse using ingroup projection as a discursive/cognitive practice of othering. It takes issue with most poststructuralist studies that conduct analyses of Normative Power Europe based on the dependence of identity on difference through the discursive tendency to construct reality by opposites. Ingroup projection is based both on the need for differentiation to obtain positive distinctiveness and on the natural tendency for categorization processes by which groups share a common higher-order category. In this way, groups tend to project (ingroup projection) their traits and distinctive values onto this higher-order category to legitimate intergroup status differences. The EU’s response to the Arab uprisings serves as an empirical test for this argument, insofar as the uprisings implied a cognitive change of the EU’s “other” in the construction of the Mediterranean. Through ingroup projection, the EU (ingroup) differentiates itself from this new Arab Mediterranean other (outgroup) and projects EU’s idealized identity onto the Mediterranean region (higher-order category) to legitimate its new policies after the uprising.

Temporal fluctuations in context ethnic diversity over three decades predict implicit national inclusion of Asian Americans

The present research examined whether temporal fluctuations in context ethnic diversity account for current levels of implicit ethnic-American associations. Temporal fluctuations in ethnic diversity at the metropolitan level were assessed using data from four decennial U.S. censuses (1980–2010) and distinguishing three dimensions of context ethnic diversity (minority representation, variety, and integration). Project Implicit data (2011–2017) indexed the extent to which American identity was implicitly associated with European Americans over Asian Americans (i.e., American = White associations). Data were analyzed using multilevel modeling ( N = 152,011, nested within 226 metropolitan areas). Steeper increases in the proportion of Asian Americans were related to weaker implicit (but stronger explicit) American = White associations. Increases in ethnic integration accounted for stronger implicit American = White associations when integration fluctuations reflected accelerating rather than decelerating trends. These results suggest that current levels of implicit ethnic-national associations are linked to complex patterns of ethnic diversity fluctuations.

Ethnic diversity matters: Putting implicit associations between weapons and ethnicity in context

Weapons are implicitly associated with Black Americans. We examined the extent to which this implicit stereotype fluctuates as a function of the ethnic diversity of contexts. Across 351 U.S. metropolitan areas, we tested whether three distinct indicators of ethnic diversity predicted implicit associations between the concept of “weapons” (vs. “harmless objects”) and Black Americans vs. White Americans. As predicted, implicit Black–weapon stereotypes were weaker in areas characterized by the presence of multiple ethnic groups (variety) and greater dispersion of ethnic groups at the neighborhood level (integration). Additionally, the negative association between integration and implicit stereotypes was strongest when minority representation was low compared to high. Considering multiple dimensions of ethnic diversity proved useful to document reliable relations between implicit associations and characteristics of local contexts.

One world in diversity – A social-psychological intervention to foster international collective action intention

Although effective interventions to increase international collective action for human rights are highly desirable, the validation of theory-based interventions and their transfer to this practical field is still scarce. We investigated whether collective action intention can be improved by using a diversity intervention technique rooted in social psychology. The intervention builds on the ingroup projection model, postulating that negative intergroup relations are based on the perception of ingroups as more typical of a common superordinate group than outgroups (i.e., relative prototypicality). Thereby, the (quasi-)experimental study tested the ingroup projection model’s theoretical assumptions in the context of Model United Nations (MUN) conferences. We hypothesized that the diversity intervention leads to a higher perceived diversity within the superordinate group (the United Nations, UN) as well as identification with the superordinate group (UN). Furthermore, we hypothesized an indirect effect of the intervention on collective action intention mediated by perception of diversity of, and identification with, the superordinate group. In comparison to the control group (n = 45), those participants who received the diversity workshop intervention (n = 55) perceived less relative prototypicality and more diversity of the UN. In addition, we provide evidence of a serial mediation: Compared to the control group, the diversity workshop group perceived the UN as relatively more diverse, facilitating identification with the UN. In turn, this was associated with a stronger intention to act collectively. This study shows the importance of including psychological theories in the field of international relations.

When does activating diversity alleviate, when does it increase intergroup bias? An ingroup projection perspective

The question how intergroup bias can be alleviated is of much theoretical and practical interest. Whereas diversity training and the multiculturalism ideology are two approaches prominent in practice, most theoretical models on reducing intergroup bias are based on social-identity theory and self-categorization theory. This social-identity perspective assumes that similar processes lead to intergroup bias in very different intergroup contexts if people identify with the respective social groups. A recent prominent model based on these theories is the ingroup-projection model. As this model assumes, an ingroup’s norms and standards are applied to outgroups included in a common superordinate category (this is called ingroup projection). Intergroup bias results because the outgroup fulfils these norms and standards less than the ingroup. Importantly, if the diversity of the superordinate category is induced as the norm, ingroup projection and thus intergroup bias should be reduced. The present research delineates and tests how general this process is. We propose that ingroup prototypicality is not only an outcome variable, as the ingroup-projection model originally assumes, but can also be an important moderator. We hypothesize that for members considering their ingroup highly prototypical (“pars pro toto”, large majorities), the superordinate group’s diversity may question their ingroup’s position and thus elicit threat and intergroup bias. In contrast, for members who consider their group as less prototypical (one among several, or “una inter pares” groups), activating diversity should, as originally assumed in the ingroup-projection model, reduce intergroup bias. Three experiments (total N = 345) supported these predictions in the contexts of groups defined by gender or nationality. Taken together, the ingroup-projection model can explain under which conditions activating superordinate-category diversity induces tolerance, and when it may backfire. We discuss in how far the ingroup-projection model can integrate conflicting findings on the multiculturalism ideology.

A Majority Group’s Perspective-taking Towards a Minority Group

This research investigates the impact of perspective-taking on a majority group’s support for government action to help a minority group. Data among a sample of Indonesian Muslims ( N = 380), representing a religious majority group in Indonesia, showed that perspective-taking was a strong positive predictor of Muslims’ support for government action to help Christian minority. Relative Muslim prototypicality vis-à-vis Christians depressed perspective-taking. Contrariwise, inclusive victimhood reflecting a perception that Muslims are equally afflicted relative to Christians in intergroup conflicts, involving both groups, promoted perspective-taking. Relative Muslim prototypicality was augmented by the extent to which this majority group glorified Islam and was motivated to protect Islamic power. However, inclusive victimhood instead attenuated relative Muslim prototypicality. These findings suggest the importance of enhancing inclusive victimhood, given its impact in promoting perspective-taking which is beneficial to the majority’s support for minority helping.

Rethinking the Link Between Categorization and Prejudice Within the Social Cognition Perspective

For the past 40 years, social psychological research on stereotyping and prejudice in the United States has been dominated by the social cognition perspective, which has emphasized the important role of basic categorization processes in intergroup dynamics. An inadvertent consequence of this approach has been a disproportionate focus on social categorization as a causal factor in intergroup animosity and, accordingly, an emphasis on approaches that minimize category distinctions as the solution to intergroup conflict. Though recognizing the crucial function of categorization, we question existing support for the hypothesis that the perception of strong group differences necessarily results in greater intergroup bias. Given that it is neither feasible nor ultimately desirable to imagine that social categories can be eliminated, we suggest that a more useful approach is one that promotes intergroup harmony even while recognizing and valuing the distinctions that define our social world.

Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes: A Meta-Analytic Review

This article examines the relationship between intergroup threat and negative outgroup attitudes. We first qualitatively review the intergroup threat literature, describing the shift from competing theories toward more integrated approaches, such as the integrated threat theory (ITT; W. G. Stephan & Stephan, 2000). The types of threats discussed include: realistic threat, symbolic threat, intergroup anxiety, negative stereotypes, group esteem threat, and distinctiveness threat. We then conducted a quantitative meta-analysis examining the relationships between various intergroup threats and outgroup attitudes. The meta-analysis, involving 95 samples, revealed that 5 different threat types had a positive relationship with negative outgroup attitudes. Additionally, outgroup status moderated some of these relationships. Implications and future directions are considered.

A Dual Group Processes Model of Individual Differences in Prejudice

The study of right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) as predictors of prejudice has represented an attempt to explain group dynamics in terms of individual traits. In contrast, I argue that the individual tendencies that predict prejudice are actually a product of group dynamics. This article critiques personality approaches, focusing primarily on authoritarianism and secondarily on social dominance, and defends a model that explains the 2 variables in terms of discrete group processes. According to the Dual Group Processes model, SDO reflects category differentiation, which involves the evaluation of individuals on the basis of their category membership. RWA reflects normative differentiation, which involves the evaluation of ingroup members on the basis of their prototypicality. Authoritarian aggression—whether against ethnic minorities or other targets—is conceptualized as an intragroup phenomenon, involving the rejection of perceived antinorm deviants who threaten the longevity or legitimacy of social norms.

Continuing and Changing Group Identities: The Effects of Merging on Social Identification and Ingroup Bias

A social identity approach to the investigation of group-based reactions to a merger is outlined, in which a merger is analyzed in terms of the continuation or change of the pre-merger group identity. In two experiments, the relationship between pre-merger identification, post-merger identification, and ingroup bias was investigated using a minimal group paradigm. Results from both studies showed that the perceived continuation of the premerger group identity in the post-merger group strengthened the positive relationship between pre-merger identification and identification with the superordinate post-merger group. Moreover, perceived continuation strengthened, rather than reduced, ingroup bias at the subordinate level of the merged groups. Some theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

The Ingroup as Pars Pro Toto: Projection From the Ingroup Onto the Inclusive Category as a Precursor to Social Discrimination

In an approach to intergroup discrimination and tolerance, it is assumed that the outgroup’s difference from the ingroup is evaluated with reference to the prototype of the higher-order category that includes both groups. Two correlational studies yielded evidence that (a) group members tend to perceive their ingroup as relatively prototypical for the inclusive category (projection), (b) members highly identified with both ingroup and inclusive category (dual identity) tend to project most, and (c) relative prototypicality is related to negative attitudes toward the outgroup. The latter relation was further specified in Study 3, manipulating the valence of the inclusive category. Projection was related to more negative attitudes toward the outgroup when the inclusive category was primed positively but to more positive attitudes when it was primed negatively. The meaning of dual identities for intergroup relations is discussed.

Considering Multiple Criteria for Social Categorization Can Reduce Intergroup Bias

Two experiments tested the notion that considering multiple criteria for social categorization can reduce intergroup bias. In both experiments, participants were required to consider alternative ways in which people could be classified, other than an initially salient intergroup dichotomy. In Experiment 1, the authors found that generating alternative social classifications that were unrelated to an initial target dichotomy reduced intergroup bias compared to a control condition. In Experiment 2, this effect was replicated and the authors found that unrelated, but not related, categorizations were necessary to reduce bias. This article adds support to the view that increasing categorical complexity is a useful tool in bias reduction. These findings are discussed in the context of a developing model of multiple categorization effects.

Estereótipos sociais do idoso para diferentes grupos etários

RESUMO O objetivo deste estudo foi identificar estereótipos de idosos para diferentes grupos etários. Foram realizados oito grupos focais com cinco integrantes cada. Foram utilizadas 12 fotografias de pessoas e 70 cartões com adjetivos atribuídos ao idoso. Os participantes (40) foram divididos por sexo e grupo etário. Destes, 30 relataram contato diário com idosos. Para os idosos, idade foi o principal critério de categorização, seguido de etnia. Para os outros grupos, o principal critério foi sexo, seguido de idade. Em média, cada grupo constituiu três categorias, todos evidenciaram a idade como critério utilizado. Categorias consensuais emergiram sobre "idosos": culto, depressivo, ranzinza, positivo e negativo. O efeito de homogeneidade do out-group ocorreu na maioria dos grupos, mas o favoritismo intergrupal não aconteceu.

Framing the EU as Common Project vs. Common Heritage: Effects on Attitudes Towards the EU Deepening and Widening

The present study investigated the effects of framing the European Union (EU) as a common project vs. a common heritage on participants' attitude towards EU integration (Experiment 1) and EU enlargement (Experiment 2). An additional aim was exploring whether the different frames affected the strength of identification with the EU, and if the framing effect on attitudes was mediated by participants' identification with the EU and/or by their message evaluation (Experiment 3). Results showed that a common project-based frame was more effective than a common heritage-based frame in promoting positive attitude toward EU integration and enlargement, as well as participants' identification with the EU, which mediated the framing effect on both attitudes; the mediation of participants' message evaluation was not significant. The procedure of the last experiment was replicated on a British sample (Experiment 4), showing a similar pattern of results.

An Integrative Model of Social Identification: Self-Stereotyping and Self-Anchoring as Two Cognitive Pathways

Social identification denotes individuals' psychological bond with their ingroup. It is an indispensable construct in research on intragroup and intergroup dynamics. Today's understanding of social identification is firmly grounded in self-stereotyping principles (i.e., assimilation to the ingroup prototype). However, we argue for a more integrative approach to understand social identification, including a more prominent role for the personal self. We present the Integrative Model of Social Identification (IMSI) and postulate that there are two cognitive pathways to self-group overlap that can simultaneously yet distinctly explain social identification: self-stereotyping and self-anchoring (i.e., projection of personal self onto ingroup). We review different theoretical and methodological approaches to both processes and integrate them into one model. Subsequently, we empirically demonstrate the positive relationship between self-stereotyping, self-anchoring, and identification in various group contexts and individuals. In sum, our model highlights the dynamic interplay of personal and social self as cornerstones of social identification.

Shades of American Identity: Implicit Relations between Ethnic and National Identities

The issue of ethnic diversity and national identity in an immigrant nation such as the USA is a recurrent topic of debate. We review and integrate research examining the extent to which the American identity is implicitly granted or denied to members of different ethnic groups. Consistently, European Americans are implicitly conceived of as being more American than African, Asian, Latino, and even Native Americans. This implicit American = White effect emerges when explicit knowledge or perceptions point in the opposite direction. The propensity to deny the American identity to members of ethnic minorities is particularly pronounced when targets (individuals or groups) are construed through the lenses of ethnic identities. Implicit ethnic-national associations fluctuate as a function of perceivers' ethnic identity and political orientation, but also contextual or situational factors. The tendency to equate being American with being White accounts for the strength of national identification (among European Americans) and behavioral responses including hiring recommendations and voting intentions. The robust propensity to deny the American identity to ethnic minority groups reflects an exclusionary national identity.

The multicultural jigsaw puzzle: category indispensability and acceptance of immigrants' cultural rights

This research introduces and examines the relatively novel concept of category indispensability. It is examined whether the perception of subgroup indispensability for the identity of a superordinate category is associated with majority members' acceptance of minority rights. We investigated the role of perceived national category indispensability of immigrants for native's acceptances of immigrants' expressive cultural rights. The general hypothesis tested is that higher perceived category indispensability of immigrant groups is associated with higher acceptance. Results from four studies provide support for this hypothesis among native Dutch participants living in the Netherlands. Furthermore, the relationship was found to be mediated by a sense of common dual belonging and by deprovincialization beliefs.

No Longer “All-American”? Whites’ Defensive Reactions to Their Numerical Decline

We suggest that Whites’ declining share of the U.S. population threatens their status as the most prototypical ethnic group in America. This prototypicality threat should lead to growing resistance toward diversity, motivated by the desire to reassert Whites’ standing as prototypical Americans. In Study 1, how dramatically Whites perceived their share of the population to decline predicted support for cultural assimilation, mediated by prototypicality threat (controlling for realistic and symbolic threat). This relationship held only among Whites who felt that ethnic groups differ in their prototypicality, not among those who saw all groups representing America equally. Study 2 experimentally manipulated exposure to demographic projections such that Whites who saw their group shrinking showed weaker diversity endorsement relative to those who believed their share to be stable, again mediated by prototypicality threat. These findings reveal Whites’ threatened prototypicality as a novel, emerging source of resistance toward diversity in 21st-century America.

Cognitive Components of Ingroup Projection

This research investigated whether relative ingroup prototypicality (i.e., the tendency to perceive one’s own ingroup as more prototypical of a superordinate category than the outgroup) can result from a prototype-based versus exemplar-based mental representation of social categories, rather than from ingroup membership per se as previously suggested by the ingroup projection model. Experiments 1 and 2 showed that a prototype-based group was perceived as more prototypical of a superordinate category than an exemplar-based group supporting the hypothesis that an intergroup context is not necessary for biased prototypicality judgments. Experiment 3 introduced an intergroup context in a minimal-group-like paradigm. The findings demonstrated that both the kind of cognitive representation and motivational processes contribute to biased prototypicality judgments in intergroup settings.

National Identification and Collective Emotions as Predictors of Pro-Social Attitudes Toward Islamic Minority Groups in Indonesia

The present study examined the role of Indonesian Moslem majority’s national identification, collective emotions of pride and guilt in predicting their support in helping members of Islamic minority and their perceived inclusion towards this group. Data from this study (N= 182) demonstrated that, in line with our prediction, support for minority helping significantly predicted perceived inclusion. We also hypothesized and found that collective pride and collective guilt directly predicted the minority helping. Finally, national identification had significant direct effects on both collective pride and collective guilt. These findings shed light on the importance of collective emotions and national identification in giving rise to pro-social attitudes of Indonesian Moslem majority towards members of Islamic minority. Implications of the research findings were discussed with reference to theories of group-based emotion and intergroup helping, and to practical strategies Indonesian government can apply to recognize Islamic minorities.