Partisanship supersedes race: effects of discussant race and partisanship on Whites’ willingness to engage in race-specific conversations

IF 4.4 1区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION Human Communication Research Pub Date : 2023-12-19 DOI:10.1093/hcr/hqad055
Osei Appiah, William P Eveland, Christina M Henry
{"title":"Partisanship supersedes race: effects of discussant race and partisanship on Whites’ willingness to engage in race-specific conversations","authors":"Osei Appiah, William P Eveland, Christina M Henry","doi":"10.1093/hcr/hqad055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"White participants in the United States were asked to imagine having a hypothetical conversation about race-specific issues with either a White or Black discussant who was described as either a Republican or Democrat. Participants’ expectations of encountering negative outcomes during the conversation, and their intentions to avoid the conversation, were measured. The black sheep effect posits that harmful ingroup members are evaluated more negatively than comparable outgroup members because they threaten the ingroup’s social identity. Findings indicate discussants’ partisanship is more important than their race in guiding respondents’ expectations of and desire to engage in cross-group conversations. Whites expected more negative outcomes and intended to avoid conversations more when they imagined talking about race with White discussants from a different political party than they did Black discussants from a different party, Black discussants from the same party, or White discussants from the same party. Intergroup threat and social identity theories are discussed.","PeriodicalId":51377,"journal":{"name":"Human Communication Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Communication Research","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqad055","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

White participants in the United States were asked to imagine having a hypothetical conversation about race-specific issues with either a White or Black discussant who was described as either a Republican or Democrat. Participants’ expectations of encountering negative outcomes during the conversation, and their intentions to avoid the conversation, were measured. The black sheep effect posits that harmful ingroup members are evaluated more negatively than comparable outgroup members because they threaten the ingroup’s social identity. Findings indicate discussants’ partisanship is more important than their race in guiding respondents’ expectations of and desire to engage in cross-group conversations. Whites expected more negative outcomes and intended to avoid conversations more when they imagined talking about race with White discussants from a different political party than they did Black discussants from a different party, Black discussants from the same party, or White discussants from the same party. Intergroup threat and social identity theories are discussed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
党派高于种族:讨论者的种族和党派对白人参与种族对话意愿的影响
我们要求美国的白人参与者想象与一名白人或黑人讨论者就种族问题进行假设对话的情景,该讨论者被描述为共和党人或民主党人。参与者对在谈话过程中遇到负面结果的预期以及他们回避谈话的意图进行了测量。害群之马效应认为,有害的内群体成员会比可比的外群体成员受到更负面的评价,因为他们威胁到了内群体的社会认同。研究结果表明,在引导受访者对跨群体对话的预期和参与意愿方面,讨论者的党派倾向比其种族更为重要。与来自不同党派的黑人讨论者、来自同一党派的黑人讨论者或来自同一党派的白人讨论者相比,白人在想象与来自不同政党的白人讨论者谈论种族问题时,预期会有更多的负面结果,并打算避免谈话。本文讨论了群体间威胁和社会认同理论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
2.00%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: Human Communication Research is one of the official journals of the prestigious International Communication Association and concentrates on presenting the best empirical work in the area of human communication. It is a top-ranked communication studies journal and one of the top ten journals in the field of human communication. Major topic areas for the journal include language and social interaction, nonverbal communication, interpersonal communication, organizational communication and new technologies, mass communication, health communication, intercultural communication, and developmental issues in communication.
期刊最新文献
Supportive communication as a collective phenomenon: a dynamic systems account of emotional support provision and outcomes in online health communities The influence of threat and right-wing authoritarianism on the selection of online (dis)information—a conceptual replication and extension of Lavine et al. (2005) On the nature of influence: identifying and characterizing superdiffusers in seven countries Atoning vs. evading when caught transgressing: two multi-theory-based experiments investigating strategies for politicians responding to scandal A meta-analytical review of the relationship, antecedents, and consequences of information seeking and information scanning
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1