“You Little Creep”: Evidence of Blatant Dehumanization of Short Groups

Physical cues influence social judgments of others. For example, shorter individuals are evaluated less positively than taller individuals. Here, we demonstrate that height also impacts one of the most consequential intergroup judgments—attributions of humanity—and explore whether this effect is modulated by the tendency to value hierarchy maintenance. In Study 1, the shorter participants perceived a range of out-groups to be, the more they dehumanized them, and this tended to be particularly pronounced among those scoring high on social dominance orientation (SDO). In Study 2, participants dehumanized an out-group more when they were led to believe that it was relatively short. Finally, Study 3 applied a reverse correlation approach, demonstrating that participants in general, and especially those scoring high on SDO, represented shorter groups in ways less consistent with full humanity than they represented taller groups. Together, this research demonstrates that basic physical height cues shape the perceived humanity of out-groups

How groups react to disloyalty in the context of intergroup competition: Evaluations of group deserters and defectors

Groups strongly value loyalty, especially in the context of intergroup competition. However, research has yet to investigate how groups respond to members who leave the group or join a competing outgroup. Three studies investigated groups' reactions to defectors (Experiment 1) and deserting members (Experiments 2 and 3). Experiment 1 used a minimal group paradigm to demonstrate that defectors trigger a stronger derogation of ingroup deviants than outgroup deviants vis-à-vis normative members. Experiments 2 and 3 compared group members' responses to defection versus desertion from minimal and self-assigned groups, respectively. Experiment 3 also explored an explanation for the evaluations of disloyalty. Across studies, participants evaluated normative ingroup members more positively than defectors and deserters. Outgroup deserting and defecting members were evaluated similarly. Derogation of ingroup as compared to outgroup targets emerged only for defectors. In addition, Experiment 3 demonstrated that negativity toward the outgroup was related to stronger derogation of disloyal targets. Negative outgroup attitudes trigger stricter criteria for responding to disloyalty. Directions for future research are discussed

“I h 8 u”: Findings from a five-year study of text and e-mail bullying

Copyright @ 2010 British Educational Research Association. The final version of this article is available at the link below.This study charts reports of nasty or threatening text and e-mail messages received by students in academic years 7 and 8 (11-13 years of age) attending 13 secondary schools in the North of England between 2002-2006. Annual surveys were undertaken on behalf of the local education authority (LEA) to monitor bullying. Results indicated that, over five years, the number of pupils receiving one or more nasty or threatening text messages or e-mails increased significantly, particularly among girls. However, receipt of frequent nasty or threatening text and e-mail messages remained relatively stable. For boys, being a victim of direct-physical bullying was associated with receiving nasty or threatening text and e-mail messages; for girls it was being unpopular among peers. Boys received more hate-related messages and girls were primarily the victims of name-calling, Findings are discussed with respect to theoretical and policy developments, and recommendations for future research are offered

White Look-Alikes: Mainstream Culture Adoption Makes Immigrants "Look" Phenotypically White

White Americans generally equate "being American" with "being White." In six studies, we demonstrate that White Americans perceive immigrants who adopt American mainstream culture as racially White and, reciprocally, perceive White-looking immigrants as assimilating more. In Studies 1 and 2, participants visually represented immigrants who adopted U.S. culture by acculturating to mainstream American culture or by holding a common or dual identity as more phenotypically White and less stereotypic in appearance. In Studies 3 and 4, these processes explained why participants were less likely to racially profile immigrants but also regarded them as less qualified for integration support. In Study 5, participants perceived light skin to fit to high U.S. culture adoption and dark skin to low U.S. culture adoption. Finally, in Study 6, light-skinned immigrants were seen as less threatening because they were perceived as assimilating more. Immigrants’ acculturation orientation and appearance interact and shape how they are evaluated

Social Psychology and Neuroscience: Strange Bedfellows or a Healthy Marriage?

In this paper, we assess what neuroscience theory and method have contributed to the study of group processes and intergroup relations and what we see as potential future contributions to the discipline. We briefly review the historical relation between neuroscience and social psychology, identify issues that may limit the value of neuroscience to the study of group processes and relations, and then argue that social neuroscience indeed holds significant promise for understanding many key elements of group processes and intergroup relations. Both the potential problems and the potential benefits of bridging neuroscience and social psychology are considered in terms of theoretical considerations, empirical issues, and practical implications. We conclude that, although not all group phenomena may be reducible to neural activity and pathways, there are significant benefits to social psychology by having an even broader multidisciplinary orientation within social psychology, one that incorporates the complementary perspectives, techniques, and knowledge of neuroscience

Biographical Narratives of Encounter: The Significance of Mobility and Emplacement in Shaping Attitudes towards Difference

This paper is located within work in urban studies about the significance of contact with difference as a means for reducing prejudice and achieving social change. Recent approaches, influenced by theories of affect, have emphasised non-conscious everyday negotiations of difference in the city. In this paper it is argued that such approaches lose sight of the significance of the subject: of the reflective judgements of ‘others’ made by individuals; of our ability to make decisions around the control of our feelings and identifications; and of the significance of personal pasts and collective histories in shaping the ways we perceive and react to encounters. Rather, this paper uses a biographical approach focusing on interviewees’ narratives of encounter. Through its attention to processes of mobility and emplacement, it contributes to debates about when contact with difference matters by highlighting the importance of everyday social normativities in the production of moral dispositions

The Association of Cognitive Ability with Right-wing Ideological Attitudes and Prejudice: A Meta-analytic Review

The cognitive functioning of individuals with stronger endorsement of right-wing and prejudiced attitudes has elicited much scholarly interest. Whereas many studies investigated cognitive styles, less attention has been directed towards cognitive ability. Studies investigating the latter topic generally reveal lower cognitive ability to be associated with stronger endorsement of right-wing ideological attitudes and greater prejudice. However, this relationship has remained widely unrecognized in literature. The present meta-analyses revealed an average effect size of r =-.20 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) [-0.23, -0.17]; based on 67 studies, N=84 017] for the relationship between cognitive ability and right-wing ideological attitudes and an average effect size of r=-.19 (95% CI [-0.23, -0.16]; based on 23 studies, N=27 011) for the relationship between cognitive ability and prejudice. Effect sizes did not vary significantly across different cognitive abilities and sample characteristics. The effect strongly depended on the measure used for ideological attitudes and prejudice, with the strongest effect sizes for authoritarianism and ethnocentrism. We conclude that cognitive ability is an important factor in the genesis of ideological attitudes and prejudice and thus should become more central in theorizing and model building

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.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

The person-based nature of prejudice: Individual difference predictors of intergroup negativity

Person-based factors influence a range of meaningful life outcomes, including intergroup processes, and have long been implicated in explaining prejudice. In addition to demonstrating significant heritability, person-based factors are evident in expressions of generalised prejudice, a robust finding that some people (relative to others) consistently score higher in prejudice towards multiple outgroups. Our contemporary review includes personality factors, ideological orientations (e.g., authoritarianism), religiosity, anxiety, threat, disgust sensitivity, and cognitive abilities and styles. Meta-analytic syntheses demonstrate that such constructs consistently predict prejudice, often at the upper bounds of effect sizes observed in psychological research. We conclude that prejudice theories need to better integrate person- and situation-based factors, including their interaction, to capture the complexity of prejudice and inform intervention development