How does contact valence and group salience affect outgroup attitudes in asynchronous computer mediated contact? Experiments on intergroup contact via social media posts.

IF 1.8 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Journal of Social Psychology Pub Date : 2024-11-13 DOI:10.1080/00224545.2024.2420036
Sramana Majumdar, Vedika Puri, Saransh Ahuja, Anasha Kannan Poyil, Archisha Wadhwa
{"title":"How does contact valence and group salience affect outgroup attitudes in asynchronous computer mediated contact? Experiments on intergroup contact via social media posts.","authors":"Sramana Majumdar, Vedika Puri, Saransh Ahuja, Anasha Kannan Poyil, Archisha Wadhwa","doi":"10.1080/00224545.2024.2420036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The prejudice reduction potential of face-to-face intergroup contact is widely established, but we know much less about computer-mediated intergroup contact (online contact) specifically via social media where interactions are less controlled and mostly asynchronous. Additionally, much of the work on online contact has focused on positive, controlled contact, neglecting the effect of negative contact. We examined the effects of mediated contact via online posts with differing valence (positive, negative, and neutral) in three experimental studies, in an imaginary scenario (Study 1: <i>N</i> = 120) and a real intergroup scenario with South and North Indians (Study 2: <i>N</i> = 296, Study 3: <i>N</i> = 336). Main effects of One way and factorial ANOVA showed that contact valence significantly affected outgroup attitudes in Study 1 & 2 but was not replicated in Study 3, where quality and quantity of past contact and status differences emerged as significant predictors of attitudes. Multiple mediation analysis revealed that intergroup anxiety and quality of contact explained changes in attitudes, which was less affected by valence and more by regional identity and history of contact. Findings are discussed in light of the possibilities and limitations of asynchronous mediated contact on social media.</p>","PeriodicalId":48205,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Social Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"1-22"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2024.2420036","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The prejudice reduction potential of face-to-face intergroup contact is widely established, but we know much less about computer-mediated intergroup contact (online contact) specifically via social media where interactions are less controlled and mostly asynchronous. Additionally, much of the work on online contact has focused on positive, controlled contact, neglecting the effect of negative contact. We examined the effects of mediated contact via online posts with differing valence (positive, negative, and neutral) in three experimental studies, in an imaginary scenario (Study 1: N = 120) and a real intergroup scenario with South and North Indians (Study 2: N = 296, Study 3: N = 336). Main effects of One way and factorial ANOVA showed that contact valence significantly affected outgroup attitudes in Study 1 & 2 but was not replicated in Study 3, where quality and quantity of past contact and status differences emerged as significant predictors of attitudes. Multiple mediation analysis revealed that intergroup anxiety and quality of contact explained changes in attitudes, which was less affected by valence and more by regional identity and history of contact. Findings are discussed in light of the possibilities and limitations of asynchronous mediated contact on social media.

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
在异步计算机媒介接触中,接触价值和群体显著性如何影响外群体态度?通过社交媒体帖子进行群体间接触的实验。
面对面的群体间接触具有减少偏见的潜力,这一点已得到广泛认可,但我们对以计算机为媒介的群体间接触(在线接触)的了解要少得多,特别是通过社交媒体进行的接触,因为在社交媒体上的互动较少受到控制,而且大多是异步的。此外,大部分关于在线接触的研究都集中于积极的、可控的接触,而忽视了消极接触的影响。我们在三项实验研究中,分别在假想场景(研究 1:N = 120)和南、北印度人的真实群际场景(研究 2:N = 296,研究 3:N = 336)中,考察了通过网上发帖进行不同情感(积极、消极和中性)的中介接触所产生的影响。单向方差分析和因子方差分析的主效应表明,在研究 1 和研究 2 中,接触情感显著影响了外群体的态度,但在研究 3 中却没有得到验证。多重中介分析表明,群体间焦虑和接触质量可以解释态度的变化,而情绪对态度的影响较小,地区认同和接触历史对态度的影响较大。本文从社交媒体上异步中介接触的可能性和局限性的角度对研究结果进行了讨论。
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
Journal of Social Psychology
Journal of Social Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: Since John Dewey and Carl Murchison founded it in 1929, The Journal of Social Psychology has published original empirical research in all areas of basic and applied social psychology. Most articles report laboratory or field research in core areas of social and organizational psychology including the self, attribution theory, attitudes, social influence, consumer behavior, decision making, groups and teams, sterotypes and discrimination, interpersonal attraction, prosocial behavior, aggression, organizational behavior, leadership, and cross-cultural studies. Academic experts review all articles to ensure that they meet high standards.
期刊最新文献
How does contact valence and group salience affect outgroup attitudes in asynchronous computer mediated contact? Experiments on intergroup contact via social media posts. Neurolinguistic Priming and Gender Stereotype Effects in the Ratings of Justice vs. Authority Moral Violations: Republicans and Democrats. Supervisor-subordinate fit need for autonomy and subordinate job crafting: a moderated mediation model. The nature of racial superhumanization bias. Letter labels and illusory correlation: infrequent letters bias reactions to the group.
×
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