Tolerance by surprise: evidence for a generalized reduction in prejudice and increased egalitarianism through novel category combination

Does personality categorization affect intergroup attitudes via moderation of personal values and social identity complexity mediation?

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.

Flexible minds make more moderate views: Subtractive counterfactuals mitigate strong views about immigrants’ trustworthiness

Public discourse on immigration has seemed to polarize over recent years—with some people strongly trusting, but others strongly distrusting immigrants. We examined whether a cognitive strategy could mitigate these biased outgroup judgments. Given that subtractive counterfactual thoughts (“If only I had not done X. . .”) facilitate cognitive flexibility and especially a relational processing style, we hypothesized that these thoughts (vs. additive counterfactuals “If only I had done X. . .” and no counterfactuals) would weaken the relationship between people’s political orientation and the perceived trustworthiness of immigrants. In five experiments (two preregistered; total N = 1,189), we found that inducing subtractive (but not additive) counterfactuals—either via rhetorical questions in a political speech or via mindset priming—had the predicted debiasing effect. Taken together, subtle means such as using subtractive counterfactual questions in political communication seem to be a promising way to reduce biased outgroup judgments in heated public debates.

Associations Between Openness Facets, Prejudice, and Tolerance: A Scoping Review With Meta-Analysis

The personality factor of openness to experience, which encompasses curiosity, imagination, and a desire for new experiences, has been associated negatively with prejudice and positively with the closely related value of tolerance. While these relationships have been reviewed at the factor level, there has been no review of research at the lower facet level. This review aims to uncover the relationships between the facets of openness and the constructs of prejudice and tolerance. We conducted a preregistered scoping review with meta-analysis following the recommended guidelines from Joanna Briggs Institute. A total of 2,349 articles were reviewed, with 16 primary research articles (or 17 studies) meeting the criteria for inclusion. Aggregated effect sizes via random-effect meta-analysis revealed that all revised neuroticism-extraversion-openness personality inventory (NEO-PI-R) and international personality item pool (IPIP)-based facets of openness significantly predicted prejudice and tolerance. Out of the three measures [i.e., NEO-PI-R, IPIP-NEO, and honesty-humility, emotionality, extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness to experience personality inventory (HEXACO-PI), and the facets of openness examined], the NEO-PI-R facet of value was most strongly associated with prejudice. In contrast, the NEO-PI-R facet of aesthetics was the facet most strongly associated with tolerance. However, these results should be treated as preliminary in light of the small number of meta-analyzed studies and more primary research studies are needed to confirm the trends found in this review. This review represents the first step in the systematic investigation of the link between the facets of openness and components of prejudice and tolerance and contributes toward explaining prejudice and tolerance.

Conjuring up creativity: the effect of performing magic tricks on divergent thinking

Research suggests that learning to perform magic tricks can promote both physical and psychological wellbeing. The current study extended this work by examining the impact of learning magic tricks on divergent thinking. A group of 10- to 11-year-old children completed Guilford’s Alternate Uses Test both before and after participating in either a magic-based, or art-based, activity. As predicted, compared to the art-based activity, the magic-based activity resulted in a significantly greater increase in both AUT Fluency and AUT Originality scores. Rosenberg’s Self-Esteem Scale and Dweck’s Implicit Theories of Intelligence Scale for Children was also completed after each activity, and participants’ self-esteem scores were higher after the art-based activity than the magic-based activity. In an exploratory aspect of the study, the AUT was re-administered to both groups three weeks later, and yielded no significant differences. The practical and theoretical implications of these findings are discussed, along with recommendations for future research.

Flexing the Extremes: Increasing Cognitive Flexibility With a Paradoxical Leading Questions Intervention

Since the increase in numbers of refugees worldwide, the acceptance of refugees in host countries is a highly contested topic. Negative attitudes towards refugees pose a challenge to both integration efforts and social cohesion. So-called paradoxical interventions help mitigating such extreme attitudes, but little is known about the cognitive processes elicited by these interventions. This research investigated whether a paradoxical leading-questions intervention targeting anti-refugee attitudes increases cognitive flexibility, especially among those with anti-refugee attitudes. Results of two preregistered experiments with general-population samples (N= 306) provide evidence that participants with anti-refugee attitudes showed higher cognitive flexibility in the paradoxical condition compared to control conditions. Thereby, this research proposes a cognitive foundation for the benefits of paradoxical interventions in intergroup contexts and suggests novel indications as to why these interventions are effective. We discuss the potential of paradoxical interventions for other important socially contested contexts, such as vaccination and climate change.

Counter-narratives for the prevention of violent radicalisation: A systematic review of targeted interventions

Background

In the field of terrorism research, the violent radicalisation of individuals towards perpetrating acts of terror has been the subject of academic enquiry for some time. One core focus by social scientists has been the role of narratives in this process. Narratives have the ability to present a socially constructed version of reality which serves the interest of the narrator(s). In the context of terrorism, by depicting violence as a viable antidote to individual vulnerabilities, the narratives purported for propagandistic purposes have the potential to thwart perceptions of instrumentality (a key characteristic of violent radicalisation). In order to prevent this from happening, researchers and counter-terrorism practitioners have increasingly sought to explore the potential for counter-narratives; targeted interventions that challenge the rationalisation(s) of violence purported in dominant narratives which, in turn, reconstructs the story. However, there is overwhelming consensus in both government and academic spheres that the concept of the counter-narrative is underdeveloped and, to date, there has been no synthesis of its effectiveness at targeting violent radicalisation-related outcomes.

Objectives

The objective of this review was to provide a synthesis of the effectiveness of counter-narratives in reducing the risk of violent radicalisation.

Search Methods

After a scoping exercise, the literature was identified through four search stages, including key-word searches of 12 databases, hand searches of reference lists of conceptual papers or books on the topic of counter-narratives, as well as direct contact with experts and professional agencies in the field.

Selection Criteria

Studies adopting an experimental or quasiexperimental design where at least one of the independent variables involved comparing a counter-narrative to a control (or comparison exposure) were included in the review.

Data Collection and Analysis

Accounting for duplicates, a total of 2,063 records were identified across two searches. Nineteen studies across 15 publications met the inclusion criteria. These studies were largely of moderate quality and 12 used randomised control trial designs with varying types of controls. The publication years ranged from 2000 to 2018, with the majority of studies published after 2015. The studies represented a range of geographical locations, but the region most heavily represented was North America. In most cases, the dominant narrative(s) "to-be-countered" comprised of hostile social constructions of an adversary or "out-group". The majority of studies challenged these dominant narratives through the use of stereotype-challenging, prosocial, or moral "exemplars". Other techniques included the use of alternative accounts, inoculation and persuasion.

Results

In terms of risk factors for violent radicalisation, there was some disparity on intervention effectiveness. Overall, when pooling all outcomes, the intervention showed a small effect. However, the observed effects varied across different risk factors. Certain approaches (such as counter-stereotypical exemplars) were effective at targeting realistic threat perceptions, in-group favouritism and out-group hostility. However, there was no clear reduction in symbolic threat perceptions or implicit bias. Finally, there was a sparse yet discouraging evidence on the effectiveness of counter-narrative interventions at targeting primary outcomes related to violent radicalisation, such as intent to act violently.

Authors' Conclusions

The review contributes to existing literature on violent radicalisation-prevention, highlighting the care and complexity needed to design and evaluate narrative-based interventions which directly counter existing, dominant narratives. The authors note the challenges of conducting high-quality research in the area, but nonetheless encourage researchers to strive for experimental rigour within these confines.

Heroes against homophobia: does elevation uniquely block homophobia by inhibiting disgust?

Homophobia has decreased in past decades, but gut-level disgust towards gay men lingers. It has been suggested that disgust can be reduced by inducing its proposed opposite emotion, elevation. Research suggests elevation might reduce homophobia, but only general elevation (not elevation evoked by gay people) and general attitudes (rather than disgust) have been studied. Nor has elevation's effect on homophobia been differentiated from effects of related emotions, such as admiration or surprise. We pretested a series of news stories featuring either a gay man or a man of unspecified sexuality that were intended to distinctly elicit elevation, admiration, or surprise. We pre-registered the prediction that an elevation-inducing story would reduce negative attitudes by reducing disgust. In Study 1 (N = 593), participants who read elevation-inducing stories did not express more positive attitudes or less disgust towards gay men than those who read stories inducing admiration or surprise. The admiration stories elicited similar or lower levels of disgust than the elevation stories. Study 2 (N = 588), replicated the findings of Study 1 with improved stimuli and measures. Both studies suggest that elevation may not uniquely reduce homophobia, as elevation and admiration have similar effects on this prejudice.

Diversity may help the uninterested: Evidence that exposure to counter-stereotypes promotes cognitive reflection for people low (but not high) in need for cognition

Previous theorizing and research has linked exposure to counter-stereotypical diversity (e.g., an Oxford-educated bricklayer) to enhanced cognitive performance and creativity. However, it is unclear whether people’s motivation to cognitively engage with the counter-stereotypical information (i.e., need for cognition [NFC]) influences this effect. Across three experiments ( N = 887) we found consistent support for the idea that exposure to counter-stereotypes (CSTs) promotes cognitive reflection for people low in NFC ( d+ = .34). In contrast, people high in NFC showed decreased cognitive reflection after being exposed to CSTs ( d+ = −.18), although the evidence for the latter effect was weak. These findings suggest that exposure to CSTs can promote cognitive reflection unless people have a strong desire to understand and predict outcomes and events, in which case exposure to CSTs may backfire. Taken together, we conclude that motivation to engage in cognitive activity may be an important consideration for research and interventions involving social and cultural diversity.

Intergroup Contact as an Agent of Cognitive Liberalization

Intergroup contact is widely recognized as one of the most validated methods of improving attitudes toward out-groups. Yet what is intergroup contact "good for" beyond this function? To answer this question we take a panoramic view of the literature, beginning with the recognition that contact is multifaceted in both form (e.g., face-to-face, indirect, simulated) and outcome (e.g., attitudes, cognition, behavior). Taking this highly inclusive view of what contact is and what contact does suggests that it plays a fundamental role in the shaping of human cognition. An increasingly diverse body of research demonstrates that contact exerts a generalizing reaction across target out-groups, making respondents less inward looking and more open to experiences. Contact shapes ideology regarding how the world ought to operate (i.e., ideologies about social hierarchy or regulation); over time, it can promote new ways of problem-solving, enhance cognitive flexibility, and foster creativity. For these reasons, we believe that contact is a key liberalizing agent that shapes human cognition and experience; consequently, contact theory should now share the stage with other prominent theories (e.g., cognitive dissonance) that speak to a broader understanding of human nature.

The Diversifying Experience Model: Taking a Broader Conceptual View of the Multiculturalism–Creativity Link

We examine the multiculturalism–creativity link from the perspective of diversifying experiences research. Multicultural experiences can be construed as diversifying experiences—highly unusual and unexpected events or situations (e.g., unusual educational experiences, early life adversity) that push individuals outside the frameworks of their ordinary everyday lives, forcing them to embrace new and uncommon ideas. Our review identifies a range of diversifying experiences (e.g., multicultural exposure, unexpected adversity, violations of expectations) that have been found to influence creativity. We introduce the Diversifying Experience Model (DEM), where we argue for a curvilinear relationship between diversifying experiences and creativity, whereby creativity improves as a result of moderate (but not low or high) levels of diversifying experiences. We also propose adaptive personal resources as the key moderator, and threat and challenge appraisals as the key mediators of the diversifying experience–creativity relation. When adaptive resources are high, moderate diversifying experiences are appraised primarily as a challenge, facilitating creativity, whereas when adaptive resources are low, moderate diversifying experiences are appraised primarily as a threat, derailing creativity. This broad and parsimonious theoretical framework can help clarify and expand research on when and why various diversifying experiences (including multicultural experiences) facilitate creativity.

Paradoxical Thinking as a Conflict-Resolution Intervention: Comparison to Alternative Interventions and Examination of Psychological Mechanisms

Conflict-resolution interventions based on the paradoxical thinking principles, that is, expressing amplified, exaggerated, or even absurd ideas that are congruent with the held conflict-supporting societal beliefs, have been shown to be an effective avenue of intervention, especially among individuals who are adamant in their views. However, the question as to why these interventions have been effective has remained unanswered. In the present research, we have examined possible underlying psychological mechanisms, focusing on identity threat, surprise, and general disagreement. In a small-scale lab study and a large-scale longitudinal study, we compared paradoxical thinking interventions with traditional interventions based on providing inconsistent information. The paradoxical thinking interventions led rightists to show more unfreezing of held conflict-supporting beliefs and openness to alternative information, whereas the inconsistency-based interventions tended to be more effective with the centrist participants. Both studies provide evidence that the effects were driven by identity threat, surprise, and lower levels of disagreement.

Perceived Prejudice and the Mental Health of Chinese Ethnic Minority College Students: The Chain Mediating Effect of Ethnic Identity and Hope

As a multinational country incorporating 56 officially recognized ethnic groups, China is concerned with the mental health of members of minority ethnic groups, with an increasing focus on supporting Chinese ethnic minority college students. Nevertheless, in daily life, members of minority ethnic groups in China often perceive prejudice, which may in turn negatively influence their mental health, with respect to relative levels of ethnic identity and hope. To examine the mediating effects of ethnic identity and hope on the relationship between perceived prejudice and the mental health of Chinese ethnic minority college students, 665 students (18-26 years old; 207 males, 458 females; the proportion of participants is 95.38%) from nine colleges in the Guangxi Zhuang autonomous region and Yunnan and Guizhou provinces of China took part in our study, each completing adapted versions of a perceived prejudice scale, a multiethnic identity measure, an adult dispositional hope scale, and a general health questionnaire. Analysis of the results reveals that perceived prejudice negatively influences mental health through both ethnic identity and hope in Chinese ethnic minority college students. The total mediation effect was 54.9%. Perceived prejudice was found to negatively predict ethnic identity and hope, suggesting that perceived prejudice brings about a negative reconstruction of ethnic identity and hope mechanisms within the study's Chinese cultural context. The relationship between perceived prejudice and mental health was fully mediated by hope and the chain of ethnic identity and hope. Ethnic identity partially mediated the relationship between perceived prejudice and hope. The relationship between perceived prejudice and mental health mediated by ethnic identity was not significant, which suggests that the rejection-identification model cannot be applied to Chinese ethnic minority college students. This paper concludes by considering the limitations of our study and discussing the implications of its results for researchers and practitioners.

Bridges or Barriers? Conceptualization of the Role of Multiple Identity Gateway Groups in Intergroup Relations

The modern era of globalization has been accompanied by a massive growth in interconnections between groups, and has led to the sharing of multiple identities by individuals and groups. Following these developments, research has focused on the issue of multiple identities, and has shed important light on how individuals who hold these complex forms of identity feel and behave, and on the reactions they elicit from members of other groups. However, the potential of groups with such multiple identities (e.g., biracials, immigrants, etc.) to affect the intergroup relations between the groups that represent the respective sources of the different identities (e.g., Blacks and Whites, country of origin and country of residence, etc.) has not been examined to date. Accordingly, in this paper, we first systematically explore the potential of groups in which people identify with multiple social categories, or groups that are perceived as such by others, to play a role in intergroup dynamics. Next, we offer a theoretical framework outlining what functions groups of people with shared multiple identities may serve (as bridges or barriers) by proposing how their presence may facilitate or deteriorate intergroup relations. Finally, we present recent empirical research examining how groups of people with shared multiple identities can act as gateways and bridge the cleft between two separate groups that represent the respective sources of their different identities, and discuss the theoretical and practical implications for the field of intergroup relations.

Encouraging majority support for immigrant access to health services: Multiple categorization and social identity complexity as antecedents of health equality

Health disparities between groups remain even after accounting for established causes such as structural and economic factors. The present research tested, for the first time, whether multiple social categorization processes can explain enhanced support for immigrant health (measured by respondents’ behavioral intention to support immigrants’ vaccination against A H1N1 disease by cutting regional public funds). Moreover, the mediating role of individualization and the moderating role of social identity complexity were tested. Findings showed that multiple versus single categorization of immigrants lead to support their right to health and confirmed the moderated mediation hypothesis. The potential in developing this sort of social cognitive intervention to address health disparities is discussed.

Women’s adaptation to STEM domains promotes resilience and a lesser reliance on heuristic thinking

Experiences that compel people to challenge social stereotypes can promote enhanced cognitive flexibility on a range of judgmental domains. Women in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) fields are chronically exposed to such experiences and may therefore also demonstrate these benefits. Two studies examined the differential effects of counterstereotypical experiences on women from STEM and non-STEM fields. Results showed that imagining or recollecting these experiences led women from STEM fields to exhibit a lesser reliance on heuristic thinking compared to women from non-STEM fields, and this difference was mediated by self-perceived resilience to the negative impact of gender stereotyping. Implications for psychologists’ and educators’ understanding of the relationship between counterstereotypical experiences and heuristic thinking are discussed.

Grolar Bears, Social Class, and Policy Relevance: Extraordinary Agendas for the Emerging 21st Century

This Agenda article first considers whether social psychology is in the best or worst of times and suggests that we are instead in extraordinary times, given exciting agendas and potential policy relevance, if we are careful. The article illustrates with two current research agendas-the hybrid vigor of multiple categories and the psychology of social class-that could inform policy. The essay then reflects on how we know when our work is indeed ready for the public arena. Regarding hybrids: World immigration, social media, and global businesses are increasing. How will this complicate people's stereotypes of each other? One agenda could build on the existing social and behavioral science of people as social hybrids, emerging with a framework to synthesize existing work and guide future research that better reflects our changing world. Policy implications already emerge from our current knowledge of hybrids. Regarding the social psychology of social class: We do not know enough yet to give advice, except to suggest questioning some common stereotypes, e.g., about the economic behavior of lower-income people. Before the budding social psychology of class can be ready for policy export, the research results need replication, validation, and generality. Overall, principles of exportable policy insights include peer-reviewed standards, honest brokering, nonpartisan advice, and respectful, trustworthy communication. Social psychology can take advantage of its extraordinary times to be innovative and useful.

Some extended psychological benefits of challenging social stereotypes: Decreased dehumanization and a reduced reliance on heuristic thinking

One way to promote equality is to encourage people to generate counterstereotypic role models. In two experiments, we demonstrate that such interventions have much broader benefits than previously thought—reducing a reliance on heuristic thinking and decreasing tendencies to dehumanize outgroups. In Experiment 1, participants who thought about a gender counterstereotype (e.g., a female mechanic) demonstrated a generalized decrease in dehumanization towards a range of unrelated target groups (including asylum seekers and the homeless). In Experiment 2 we replicated these findings using alternative targets and measures of dehumanization. Furthermore, we found the effect was mediated by a reduced reliance on heuristic thinking. The findings suggest educational initiatives that aim to challenge social stereotypes may not only have societal benefits (generalized tolerance), but also tangible benefits for individuals (enhanced cognitive flexibility).

Equality Hypocrisy, Inconsistency, and Prejudice: The Unequal Application of the Universal Human Right to Equality

In Western culture, there appears to be widespread endorsement of Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (which stresses equality and freedom). But do people really apply their equality values equally, or are their principles and application systematically discrepant, resulting in equality hypocrisy? The present study, conducted with a representative national sample of adults in the United Kingdom (N = 2,895), provides the first societal test of whether people apply their value of "equality for all" similarly across multiple types of status minority (women, disabled people, people aged over 70, Blacks, Muslims, and gay people). Drawing on theories of intergroup relations and stereotyping we examined, relation to each of these groups, respondents' judgments of how important it is to satisfy their particular wishes, whether there should be greater or reduced equality of employment opportunities, and feelings of social distance. The data revealed a clear gap between general equality values and responses to these specific measures. Respondents prioritized equality more for "paternalized" groups (targets of benevolent prejudice: women, disabled, over 70) than others (Black people, Muslims, and homosexual people), demonstrating significant inconsistency. Respondents who valued equality more, or who expressed higher internal or external motivation to control prejudice, showed greater consistency in applying equality. However, even respondents who valued equality highly showed significant divergence in their responses to paternalized versus nonpaternalized groups, revealing a degree of hypocrisy. Implications for strategies to promote equality and challenge prejudice are discussed.

How Dual-Identity Processes Foster Creativity

We propose a theoretical model explaining when and why possessing 2 inconsistent social identities can foster superior creativity. The framework describes how during cultural adaptation individuals (a) alternate their identities across contexts, (b) integrate elements of their distinct (i.e., remote and uncorrelated) identities, and, having formed cognitive and emotional links with the new group, (c) broaden their self-definition. We explain how these processes of cultural adaptation map onto 3 fundamental creative processes: (a) an ability to quickly and effortlessly switch between cognitive strategies and semantic categories, (b) an apparent ease in integrating distant and conflicting ideas, and finally, (c) the widening of one's creative idea base. Our model explains how the challenges involved in managing complex self-definitions enhance creativity, and increase potential for novel problem solutions. Understanding this dynamic brings a new perspective to debates on the value of diversity.

Whether Social Schema Violations Help or Hurt Creativity Depends on Need for Structure

Although people and events that disconfirm observers’ expectancies can increase their creativity, sometimes such social schema violations increase observers’ rigidity of thought and undermine creative cognition. Here we examined whether individual differences in the extent to which people prefer structure and predictability determine whether social schema violations facilitate or hamper creativity. Participants in Study 1 formed impressions of a schema-inconsistent female mechanic (vs. a schema-consistent male mechanic). Following schema-inconsistent rather than -consistent information, participants low (high) in need for structure showed better (impeded) creative performance. Participants in Study 2 memorized a series of images in which individuals were placed on a schema-inconsistent (vs. consistent) background (e.g., an Eskimo on the desert vs. on a snowy landscape). Following schema-inconsistent imagery, participants low (high) in need for structure increased (decreased) divergent thinking.