European Journal of Social Psychology最新文献

Various theories on intergroup bias predict that stereotypes about minorities are more negative than those about majorities. Although there is clear evidence that specific minorities are often subject to negative stereotypes, a systematic test of the relationship between group size and stereotype valence across various social groups is lacking. We conducted a multinational study across seven Western European countries to examine this relationship. We retrieved objective data on group sizes for 196 political, social, religious, ethnic and sexual orientation groups and assessed people's stereotypes about these groups. With 19,958 stereotype ratings from 1397 individuals (∼200 per country), our findings reveal that stereotypes about minorities are indeed more negative. This pattern persisted when controlling for respondents’ group membership and several robustness checks (e.g., which country is studied). Our study provides a systematic test of a central claim in stereotype research within WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich and Democratic) countries.

To better understand what facilitates reconciliation after violent conflict, we examined the relevance of intergroup contact, conflict appraisals and emotions for reconciliation in post-conflict Colombia. The first study with Colombian students (N₁ = 260) was run shortly after the peace treaty with the Colombian Revolutionary Armed Forces (FARC), one of the biggest rebel groups in Colombia, was signed. The second study with members of the Colombian community (N₂ = 346) was conducted 4 years after the peace treaty. We assessed the frequency of positive and negative direct and indirect contact experiences, conflict appraisals, intergroup emotions and reconciliation attitudes with a mixed-method approach combining open and closed questions. Conflict appraisals and emotions did not mediate the association between intergroup contact and attitudes towards reconciliation. Instead, intergroup contact and conflict appraisals represented different sources of reconciliation, which can be targeted by interventions.

Research warns of a tokenistic combination of two colonial ideologies that recognises Indigenous culture as part of the nation's identity (low symbolic exclusion) yet denies the relevance of colonisation to contemporary inequities (high historical negation). Because symbolic exclusion and historical negation respectively reinforce symbolic and material inequalities, this Moral Credentialer profile may mask intolerance with superficial support for equality. Using latent profile analysis, we investigate the presence of this asymmetric response pattern among a nationwide random sample of Pākehā (New Zealand Europeans; N = 13,877) and Māori (N = 2004). As expected, we identify heterogeneity among both ethnic groups, yet find a Moral Credentialer profile (high historical negation and low symbolic exclusion) among only Pākehā. Sociopolitical attitudes predicted profile membership, which, in turn, predicted bicultural political attitudes. Results thus corroborate a tokenistic subgroup of settler colonisers who endorse less costly forms of symbolic equality whilst upholding material inequities.

This research, comprising three experiments with a total of 1718 population-representative participants, investigates the strategies Muslim organizations can utilize to sustain trust and positive perceptions in the direct aftermath of terrorist attacks. It evaluates the effectiveness of different crisis communication strategies as outlined by the Situational Crisis Communication Theory. Additionally, it examines the effects of a positive pre-crisis reputation, statement framing and the publishing source on attitudes towards Muslim organizations, Muslims in general and Islam. Three experiments with several reference groups were conducted. Multivariate analyses underscore the critical importance of active crisis communication in cultivating positive attitudes and trust in Muslim organizations. Across experiments, the findings indicate that the act of issuing a statement itself holds more substantial influence than the specific crisis response strategy employed. In addition, the source of publication played a notable role in shaping perceptions; statements released through personal channels resulted in more positive reactions compared to statements released by a public source.

In this article, we discuss how social identity theory (SIT) and self-categorization theory (SCT) may apply to mechanisms of social identification and self-categorization among individuals with multiple identities within a single social domain. We focus on individuals with mixed racial–ethnic backgrounds, which provide unique flexibility for their racial–ethnic identities. In line with SCT, we suggest that their racial–ethnic self-categorization is guided by perceptions of similarity with multiple racial–ethnic categories and that these are influenced by contextual factors, such as the frame of reference. Drawing on SIT, optimal distinctiveness theory and uncertainty reduction theory, we suggest that situationally significant motives may determine Mixed individuals’ levels of identification with different racial–ethnic groups. By integrating predictions from these theories with empirical evidence on Mixed individuals’ experiences, we provide a first step to building a comprehensive theoretical framework and outlining a future research program for understanding the dynamic social identification processes of these individuals.

The monological belief system model suggests that—for at least a subset of people—developing a belief in one conspiracy theory will cause them to be more likely to believe in others. This model has been influential in the literature, but its core causal hypothesis has never been credibly tested. We therefore tested it in two longitudinal studies. Study 1 used a sample from New Zealand and Australia (N = 498), with 7 monthly waves. Study 2 (preregistered) used a sample from New Zealand, Australia and the United Kingdom (N = 978), with 13 monthly waves. We applied random intercept cross-lagged panel models, permitting a credible causal identification strategy, albeit we cannot rule out time-varying confounds. We find that increased belief in a conspiracy theory at one wave did (on average) predict increased belief in other conspiracies at the next wave, although the estimated coefficients were small.