Search

Social role theory posits that binary gender gaps in agency and communion should be larger in less egalitarian countries, reflecting these countries’ more pronounced sex-based power divisions. Conversely, evolutionary and self-construal theorists suggest that gender gaps in agency and communion should be larger in more egalitarian countries, reflecting the greater autonomy support and flexible self-construction processes present in these countries. Using data from 62 countries (N = 28,640), we examine binary gender gaps in agentic and communal self-views as a function of country-level objective gender equality (the Global Gender Gap Index) and subjective distributions of social power (the Power Distance Index). Findings show that in more egalitarian countries, gender gaps in agency are smaller and gender gaps in communality are larger. These patterns are driven primarily by cross-country differences in men’s self-views and by the Power Distance Index (PDI) more robustly than the Global Gender Gap Index (GGGI). We consider possible causes and implications of these findings., National Science Centre, Poland 2017/26/M/HS6/00360, United States Department of Health & Human Services, National Institutes of Health (NIH) - USA, NIH National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) RL5GM118963, Universidad Nacional de Educacion a Distancia, Spain RTI2018-093550-B-I00, Grant Agency of the Czech Republic 20-01214S, Institute of Psychology, Czech Academy of Sciences RVO: 68081740, UK Research & Innovation (UKRI), Economic & Social Research Council (ESRC) ES/S00274X/1 MCIN/AEI PID2019-111549GB-I00, European Research Council (ERC) European Commission ERC-2016-COG 725128, Swedish Research Council Swedish Research Council for Health Working Life & Welfare (Forte) 2017-00414, University of Brasilia 04/2019

Past research is limited by a focus on intimacy in positive intergroup contact. This study tested whether intergroup intimacy counteracts or amplifies the detrimental effects of negative intergroup contact on outgroup attitudes. Participants from five Central European countries ( N = 1,276) described their intergroup contact with, and attitudes towards, citizens from neighboring nations. We coded the contact descriptions for presence (vs. absence) of intimacy (intimate, casual, or formal relationships) and contact valence (negative, positive, or ambivalent). The results indicated that those who reported negative contact in the context of intimate relationships displayed more positive outgroup attitudes than those who reported negative contact in the context of nonintimate relationships. This protective function of intimacy extended to instances of ambivalent contact. Our findings speak of the additive value of intimacy and positivity for intergroup relations; they underscore the benefits of intimacy as part of not only positive but also negative intergroup contact.

In a study on national stereotypes in central Europe—composed of Austria, the Czech Republic, Germany, Poland and Slovakia—2241 participants rated their autostereotype (a typical representative of their own country) and heterostereotypes (typical representatives of the other countries) by using National Character Survey (NCS). Existing data from 17377 participants including self–reports or observer ratings on Revised NEO Personality Inventory and NCS were compared with the national autostereotypes and heterostereotypes. Although national autostereotypes converged with personality traits of real people in Poland and an adult subsample in the Czech Republic, national heterostereotypes did not correspond to personality traits of real people in any of the studied countries. National stereotypes were shared within as well as across countries. In heterostereotypes, raters from similar cultural backgrounds speaking similar languages agreed better as compared with raters from more distant cultures. Target country played a role in agreement of raters from different countries, showed in the highest convergence between autostereotypes and heterostereotypes of a typical German. Sharing of national stereotypes is influenced by political and economic significance of the target country. Although national autostereotypes clearly differentiated between typical representatives of central European countries, the comparison of personality profiles of their inhabitants showed remarkable resemblance. Copyright © 2013 European Association of Personality Psychology.

Three studies examined the effect of nouns and adjectives for designations of nationality on intergroup bias. In Study 1, participants ( N = 237) evaluated group artifacts whose authors’ nationality was labeled with nouns or adjectives. Use of nouns enhanced in-group favoritism, manifested as a preference of the in-group artifact. Study 2 ( N = 431) tested the effect of nouns and adjectives on attitudes toward the in-group and out-group focusing on the moderating role of in-group identification. Use of nouns led to a stronger relative preference of the in-group, pronounced especially in low identified group members. Study 3 ( N = 979) examined the effect of nouns and adjectives in a more applied survey setting. Intergroup bias concerning material restitution for confiscated property was stronger when the ethnicity of the former owners was labeled with nouns. The article emphasizes that subtle variation in language use has a consistent impact on intergroup evaluation.