平等规范减少了对移民的偏见,但仅限于保守派

IF 2.7 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology Pub Date : 2024-07-03 DOI:10.1002/casp.2836
Feiteng Long, Ruthie Pliskin, Daan Scheepers
{"title":"平等规范减少了对移民的偏见,但仅限于保守派","authors":"Feiteng Long,&nbsp;Ruthie Pliskin,&nbsp;Daan Scheepers","doi":"10.1002/casp.2836","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>People are sensitive to norms, but under what conditions promoting anti-prejudice norms reduce prejudice remains unclear. Three studies among Dutch participants (total <i>N</i> = 700) examined the effects of (in)equality norms on prejudice towards migrants. To gain greater clarity, we also examined how potential boundary conditions—namely economic and social ideologies—moderate this relationship. A norm of equality was measured (Study 1) or manipulated (Studies 2a and 2b). In Study 1, a perceived norm of equality predicted lower prejudice towards migrants, operationalised as cold feelings, social distance, and perceived outgroup threat, through the increased personal endorsement of equality, particularly among (economic) rightists. In two experiments (Studies 2a and 2b), as well as in a joint analysis of both studies, we found that inducing an equality norm (vs. not) mitigated prejudice towards migrants, but only among (social) rightists. These findings highlight the positive role of social norms promoting equality in combating prejudice and the importance of considering boundary conditions for this role, such as ideology. We discuss the implications for theory and practice regarding prejudice (reduction). Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement.</p>","PeriodicalId":47850,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology","volume":"34 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/casp.2836","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Norms of equality reduce prejudice towards migrants, but only among conservatives\",\"authors\":\"Feiteng Long,&nbsp;Ruthie Pliskin,&nbsp;Daan Scheepers\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/casp.2836\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>People are sensitive to norms, but under what conditions promoting anti-prejudice norms reduce prejudice remains unclear. Three studies among Dutch participants (total <i>N</i> = 700) examined the effects of (in)equality norms on prejudice towards migrants. To gain greater clarity, we also examined how potential boundary conditions—namely economic and social ideologies—moderate this relationship. A norm of equality was measured (Study 1) or manipulated (Studies 2a and 2b). In Study 1, a perceived norm of equality predicted lower prejudice towards migrants, operationalised as cold feelings, social distance, and perceived outgroup threat, through the increased personal endorsement of equality, particularly among (economic) rightists. In two experiments (Studies 2a and 2b), as well as in a joint analysis of both studies, we found that inducing an equality norm (vs. not) mitigated prejudice towards migrants, but only among (social) rightists. These findings highlight the positive role of social norms promoting equality in combating prejudice and the importance of considering boundary conditions for this role, such as ideology. We discuss the implications for theory and practice regarding prejudice (reduction). Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47850,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology\",\"volume\":\"34 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/casp.2836\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/casp.2836\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/casp.2836","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人们对规范很敏感,但在什么条件下促进反偏见规范会减少偏见仍不清楚。三项针对荷兰参与者(总人数=700)的研究考察了(不)平等规范对移民偏见的影响。为了更加清晰,我们还研究了潜在的边界条件--即经济和社会意识形态--是如何调节这种关系的。我们对平等准则进行了测量(研究 1)或操纵(研究 2a 和 2b)。在研究 1 中,通过增加个人对平等的认可,尤其是(经济)右翼分子对平等的认可,感知到的平等规范预示着对移民的偏见会降低,具体表现为冷漠感、社会距离和感知到的外群体威胁。在两项实验(研究 2a 和 2b)以及两项研究的联合分析中,我们发现,诱导平等规范(与不诱导平等规范)减轻了对移民的偏见,但仅限于(社会)右派。这些发现强调了促进平等的社会规范在消除偏见方面的积极作用,以及考虑这一作用的边界条件(如意识形态)的重要性。我们讨论了偏见(减少)对理论和实践的影响。请参阅 "补充材料 "部分,查看本文的 "社区与社会影响声明"。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Norms of equality reduce prejudice towards migrants, but only among conservatives

People are sensitive to norms, but under what conditions promoting anti-prejudice norms reduce prejudice remains unclear. Three studies among Dutch participants (total N = 700) examined the effects of (in)equality norms on prejudice towards migrants. To gain greater clarity, we also examined how potential boundary conditions—namely economic and social ideologies—moderate this relationship. A norm of equality was measured (Study 1) or manipulated (Studies 2a and 2b). In Study 1, a perceived norm of equality predicted lower prejudice towards migrants, operationalised as cold feelings, social distance, and perceived outgroup threat, through the increased personal endorsement of equality, particularly among (economic) rightists. In two experiments (Studies 2a and 2b), as well as in a joint analysis of both studies, we found that inducing an equality norm (vs. not) mitigated prejudice towards migrants, but only among (social) rightists. These findings highlight the positive role of social norms promoting equality in combating prejudice and the importance of considering boundary conditions for this role, such as ideology. We discuss the implications for theory and practice regarding prejudice (reduction). Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
7.40%
发文量
69
期刊介绍: The Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology publishes papers regarding social behaviour in relation to community problems and strengths. The journal is international in scope, reflecting the common concerns of scholars and community practitioners in Europe and worldwide.
期刊最新文献
Positive During COVID-19: Women Academics' Strategies for Flourishing During a Pandemic Unveiling the Relationships Between Household Labor and Maternal Well-Being The Political Glass Cliff: When Ethnic, Racial and Immigration Minority Participants Choose Minority Candidates for Hard-To-Win Seats “I Would Not Change [My] Sibling for the World, Maybe the World Can Change for My Sibling”: The Experiences of Adult Siblings of People With Developmental Disabilities Exploring Secondary Transfer Generalisation Effects From Black and Gay Contact: The Role of Humanisation
×
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