How our ideological out-group shapes our emotional response to our shared socio-political reality

What shapes our emotional responses to socio-political events? Following the social identity approach, we suggest that individuals adjust their emotional responses to socio-political stimuli based on their ideological out-group's responses, in a manner that preserves the comparative and normative fit of ideological in-group-out-group categories. In Study 1 and Study 2 (pre-registered), Jewish-Israeli leftists and rightists were exposed to their ideological out-group's alleged emotional response to a stimulus associated with Israeli-Palestinian relations, which was either stereotypical (leftists expressing low anger and rightists expressing high anger) or non-stereotypical (leftists expressing high anger and rightists expressing low anger). Across studies, participants reported more positive affect towards their ideological out-group when its response to the stimulus was non-stereotypical versus stereotypical, yet their own response to the stimulus became more "extreme" (towards the low end of the anger scale for leftists, and towards the high end of the anger scale for rightists), shifting farther away from their ideological out-group norm. Our findings suggest that in highly polarized contexts, where "leftist" and "rightist" identities are largely defined in comparison to one another, the "positioning" of ideological groups relative to one another plays a role in shaping their responses to their shared socio-political reality.

Reduced loneliness mediates the effects of multiple group identifications on well-being

Membership of multiple groups and identification with those groups have been found to be positively related to individuals' health and well-being. The present research sought to replicate this finding in two large, representative samples. Moreover, we sought to extend previous work by shedding light on the mechanisms mediating the effects of multiple group membership on positive health outcomes. Specifically, we proposed that the links between multiple group membership and positive health outcomes are mediated by reduced feelings of loneliness. In Study 1, a two-wave survey of a German population, participants (N = 989) were asked about their identification with family, friends, neighbourhood, their country and humanity and 4 weeks later about feelings of loneliness, physical health and stress. As hypothesized, multiple identifications predicted lower stress. They were also associated with a marginal reduction in physical symptoms of poor health. Both relationships were mediated by the absence of loneliness. In Study 2, we conducted a cross-sectional survey of German participants (N = 1635), which also included a sixth target of identification (Europe). Results replicated findings from Study 1 and also found similar relations associated with smaller (family, friends and neighbourhood) versus larger (country, Europe and Humanity) foci of identification.

Emphasizing Similarities Between Politically Opposed Groups and Their Influence in Perceptions of the Political Opposition: Evidence From Five Experiments

Across five experiments (four pre-registered, N = 4,431), we investigate whether emphasizing similarities between Republicans and Democrats can improve intergroup relations between the two groups. Members of both groups who were presented with evidence emphasizing similarities rather than differences in the psychological attitudes of both parties reported greater inclusion of the political opposition in the self, greater belief that common ground can be reached for major social issues, and warmer feelings toward the opposition. Inclusion of the political outgroup in the self mediated the effect of the similarities condition on additional outcomes, relating to more positive and less threatening perceptions of political opposition members. These findings held even when compared with a baseline condition with no information presented to participants. We conclude that by emphasizing the study of group similarities and by disseminating research in a way that highlights similarities, researchers could reduce intergroup hostilities in the political domain.

Intergroup Dialogues in the Landscape of Digital Societies: How Does the Dialogical Self Affect Intercultural Relations in Online Contexts?

The effects of intergroup dialogues on intercultural relations in digital societies and the growing conflict, inflammatory and hate speech phenomena characterizing these environments are receiving increasing attention in socio-psychological studies. Based on Allport’s contact theory, scholars have shown that online intercultural contact reduces ethnic prejudice and discrimination, although it is not yet clear when and how this occurs. By analyzing the role of the Dialogical Self in online intercultural dialogues, we aim to understand how individuals position themselves and others at three levels of inclusiveness—personal, social, and human—and how this process is associated with attitudes towards the interlocutor, intergroup bias and prejudice, whilst also considering the inclusion of the Other in the Self and ethnic/racial identity. An experimental procedure was administered via the Qualtrics platform, and data were collected among 118 undergraduate Italian students through an anonymous questionnaire. From ANOVA and moderation analysis, it emerged that the social level of inclusiveness was positively associated with ethnic/racial identity and intergroup bias. Furthermore, the human level of inclusiveness was associated with the inclusion of the Other in the Self and ethnic/racial identity, and unexpectedly, also with intergroup bias. We conclude that when people interact online as “human beings”, the positive effect of online dialogue fails, hindering the differentiation processes necessary to define one’s own and the interlocutor’s identities. We discuss the effects of intercultural dialogue in the landscape of digital societies and the relevance of our findings for theory, research and practice.

Interprofessional teamwork: the role of professional identity and signature pedagogy - a mixed methods study

PURPOSE

One overlooked determinant of interprofessional teamwork is the mobilisation of professional identity. Taking a health or social care practitioner out of their professional silo and placing them in an interprofessional team setting will challenge their professional identity. The theory of signature pedagogy was used to investigate the challenges and what is needed to support practitioners to mobilise their professional identity to maximise teamwork.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

A cross-sectional mixed methods study was undertaken in the form of three focus groups, with members of health and social care teams in Wales, UK. Using nominal group technique, participants explored and ranked the challenges and benefits of mobilising their professional identity within an interprofessional setting.

FINDINGS

Findings on mobilising professional identity were found to be aligned closely with the three signature pedagogy apprenticeships of learning to think and to perform like others in their profession and to act with moral integrity. The biggest challenge facing practitioners was thinking like others in their profession while in an interprofessional team.

RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS

The focus of this study is health and social care teams within Wales, UK, which may limit the results to teams that have a similar representation of professionals.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Healthcare leaders should be aware of the opportunities to promote mobilisation of professional identity to maximise teamwork. For example, at induction, by introducing the different roles and shared responsibilities. Such practical implications do have consequences for policy as regards interprofessional team development and organisational commitments to adult learning and evaluation.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

This is the first study of professional identity of interprofessional healthcare and social professionals using signature pedagogy to gain a better understanding of teamwork.

Testing the motivational tradeoffs between pathogen avoidance and status acquisition

To reduce disease transmission through interpersonal contact, humans have evolved a behavioral immune system that facilitates identification and avoidance of pathogens. One behavioral strategy in response to pathogenic threat is the adoption of interpersonal reticence. However, reticence may impede status acquisition. This program of research tested whether activating pathogen-avoidant motives through priming fosters reticence related to status, namely disinterest in pursuing a group leadership position (Study 1) or disinterest in accepting a group leadership position bestowed onto them (Study 2). Individuals high in germ aversion were particularly interested in pursuing leadership as a form of status, with disease salience unexpectedly heightening status motives among those low in germ aversion. Furthermore, those high in perceived infectability reported reluctance for high-status positions, although disease salience heightened interest in accepting such positions. We contextualize findings by identifying dispositional and situational factors that foster individuals to invoke motivational tradeoffs.

The relation between ethnic classroom composition and adolescents’ ethnic pride

This study investigated how students’ ethnic pride was related to variation in ethnic composition between classrooms as well as within the same classroom over time. Predictions derived from optimal distinctiveness theory (ODT) were tested among 13- to 14-year-old ethnic majority and minority students ( N = 1,123). Lending support to ODT, a curvilinear relation between the share of same-ethnicity classmates and students’ ethnic pride was found in a cross-sectional analysis, with ethnic pride peaking in classrooms with approximately 50% same-ethnicity classmates. In line with ODT, longitudinal analyses revealed ethnic pride decreased for students who moved away from a share of 50% same-ethnicity classmates. Contrary to ODT, however, ethnic pride also decreased for students who moved closer to this point of optimal distinctiveness.

Is psychological membership in the classroom a function of standing out while fitting in? Implications for achievement motivation and emotions

Education researchers have consistently linked students' perceptions of "fitting in" at school with patterns of motivation and positive emotions. This study proposes that "standing out" is also helpful for producing these outcomes, and that standing out works in concert with perceptions of fitting in. In a sample of 702 high school students nested within 33 classrooms, principal components analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were each conducted on half of the sample. Results support the proposed structure of measures of standing out and fitting in. Multilevel latent profile analysis was then used to classify students into four profiles of standing out while fitting in (SOFI): Unfulfilled, Somewhat Fulfilled, Nearly Fulfilled, and Fulfilled. A multinomial logistic regression revealed that students of color and those on who paid free/reduced prices lunch were overrepresented in the Unfulfilled and Somewhat Fulfilled profiles. A multilevel path analysis was then performed to assess the direct and indirect associations of profile membership with measures of task value and achievement emotions. Relative to the other profiles, students in the Fulfilled SOFI Profile express greater psychological membership in their classrooms and, in turn, express higher valuing of academic material (i.e., intrinsic value, utility value, and attainment value) and more positive achievement emotions (i.e., more enjoyment and pride; less boredom, hopelessness, and shame). This investigation provides critical insights on the potential benefits of structuring academic learning environments to foster feelings of distinctiveness among adolescents; and has implications for cultivating identities and achievement motivation in academic settings.

Optimal Distinctiveness Signals Membership Trust

According to optimal distinctiveness theory, sufficiently small minority groups are associated with greater membership trust, even among members otherwise unknown, because the groups are seen as optimally distinctive. This article elaborates on the prediction’s motivational and cognitive processes and tests whether sufficiently small minorities (defined by relative size; for example, 20%) are associated with greater membership trust relative to mere minorities (45%), and whether such trust is a function of optimal distinctiveness. Two experiments, examining observers’ perceptions of minority and majority groups and using minimal groups and (in Experiment 2) a trust game, revealed greater membership trust in minorities than majorities. In Experiment 2, participants also preferred joining minorities over more powerful majorities. Both effects occurred only when minorities were 20% rather than 45%. In both studies, perceptions of optimal distinctiveness mediated effects. Discussion focuses on the value of relative size and optimal distinctiveness, and when membership trust manifests.

Psychological Functions of Subjective Norms

This article considers the social and psychological functions that norm-based thinking and behavior provide for the individual and the collectivity. We differentiate between two types of reference groups that provide norms: peer groups versus aspirational groups. We integrate functionalist accounts by distinguishing the functions served by the norms of different reference groups, different degrees of norm moralization, and different directions of responses to norm activation.