Lay perceptions of modern prejudice toward “White” and “Asian” people: It matters who said it, whom it's about, and who's judging

Gender-based in-group social influence can lead women to view a hostile sexist attitude as less prejudiced and more true

Social influence processes by which women come to judge a hostile sexist attitude as relatively true and unprejudiced were examined. Based upon status characteristics theory, women's judgments were expected to be more strongly influenced by a man's than a woman's interpretation of the sexist attitude as true or prejudiced. Based upon self-categorization theory, women's judgments were expected to be more strongly influenced by a woman's than a man's interpretation. Support was primarily observed for the self-categorization theory prediction. This effect, however, was initially suppressed by participants' acceptance of the legitimacy of gender status differences. A post-hoc mediational analysis revealed two pathways by which in-group social influence affected women's acceptance the relative veracity of negative claims about their own group: a direct path from shared in-group membership with the influencing agent, and an indirect path through their acceptance of the legitimacy of gender status differences. The research highlights how women's endorsement of sexist views can have the capacity to minimize other women's challenges of these views as prejudice.

Pandemic and prejudice: Revisiting Bogardus’s social distance concept in a time of COVID-19

This study examined when the realistic threat of COVID-19 leads to prejudicial social distancing. American participants reported social distancing preferences from Chinese or Italian people (out-group target) after viewing increasing or decreasing COVID-19 case numbers (threat level) in China or Italy (threat relevance). On the Bogardus Social Distance Scale, there was support for a disease avoidance hypothesis: greater social distancing preferences were expressed under higher than under lower relevant threats. Responses on a bespoke COVID-19 Social Distance Scale, however, supported an a priori prejudice hypothesis: greater social distancing preferences were expressed toward a Chinese than toward an Italian out-group. Moreover, responses on a separate bespoke Modern Social Distance Scale supported a complex prejudice hypothesis: greater social distancing preferences were expressed toward Chinese than toward Italian out-groups under higher than under lower threat, regardless of threat relevance. These findings suggest that the threat of COVID-19 may enable prejudice expression accompanied by the rationale of disease avoidance.