Search

We propose a theoretical framework for when and why members of dominant groups experience threat and express intolerant attitudes in response to social change. Scholarship on symbolic threat suggests that the detection of intergroup differences in values and norms is sufficient to elicit negative intergroup attitudes. Building on this theory, we argue that the experience of threat is actually shaped by prospective beliefs about difference (i.e., expectations of whether outgroups will assimilate to ingroup norms over time or not). Across two studies and two accompanying pilots, we show how outgroup assimilation expectation shapes dominant groups' experiences of threat, specifically as it relates to their ability to define the norms of their superordinate category (prototypicality threat). We observe that members of dominant groups are surprisingly tolerant of both social change and intergroup difference in the present, so long as they expect outgroup assimilation in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

National discourse about immigration in the United States has become increasingly unwelcoming. In two studies, we examine whether regional‐level (state) information about welcoming (vs. unwelcoming) immigrant policies in the context of either stable or increasing rate of immigration can influence intergroup relations in receiving communities. Among Whites (Study 1), welcoming policy proposals elicited more positive attitudes toward immigrants generally and toward Latinos, the ethnic group most closely associated with immigration in the United States, but only when rate of immigration is constant. In contrast, among Latinos (Study 2), an unwelcoming reception led to more positive attitudes toward immigrants (legal and undocumented) but again only when rate of immigration is constant. Asians' attitudes (Study 2) toward immigrants were not affected by contextual information about immigration. Together, these findings suggest that local conditions can affect community members' attitudes toward immigrants and toward specific ethnic groups associated with immigration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two studies tested the prediction that men in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, & Math; students in Study 1; professionals in Study 2), who believed that initiatives to increase women's representation in these fields were effective would experience prototypicality threat (men's concern that they would no longer be the gender group that best represents what it means to be a member of the STEM community). Among those who believed it is legitimate for men to represent STEM, men's prototypicality threat mediated the relationship between perceptions that more women were entering their field and resistance toward this change (i.e., opposing women in STEM initiatives, wanting women to conform to the field's traditional norms, and expressing exclusionary intentions toward women peers). The opposite pattern was observed among those who rejected the idea that men's claim to represent STEM was legitimate. This work highlights how diversity initiatives in STEM, if successful, can be undermined by triggering prototypicality threat among men. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent research points toward the utility of the pluralist (multicultural) model as a viable alternative to the traditional assimilation model of cultural integration. In this study, we extend this work by evaluating when and to what extent feelings that members of a common group respect and value one's ethnic group membership (subgroup respect) shape social engagement and well-being. We do so in the context of a survey of students at a diverse, public high school. Subgroup respect was linked to more positive evaluations of both school authorities and students from ethnic outgroups as well as to lower levels of school disengagement. Consistent with past research, these relationships held only among ethnic minority groups (African Americans, Asian Americans, and Latinos) but not among Whites. Findings about the relationship between subgroup respect and indicators of well-being were more mixed, with the relationship most evident among Asians Americans and Latinos and especially on indicators of physical health. Implications for understanding the consequences of pluralism are discussed in light of the observed ethnic group differences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we focus on a key psychological principle underlying pluralism, subgroup respect, defined as feelings that one's subgroup is recognized, accepted, and valued by members of a common group (e.g. Americans' respect for various ethnic subgroups). Analyzing survey data collected from a large and diverse sample of respondents in two US cities (Oakland, California, and Los Angeles; N = 1,229), we found that subgroup respect was linked to more positive evaluations of America and its ethnic groups, but only among African Americans and Latinos. Among Whites, personal respect (i.e. how Americans feel about the individual) was a better predictor of the assessed attitudes (affect toward Americans, distrust of the justice system, and ingroup favoritism) than subgroup respect. Advocates of pluralism suggest that acknowledgment and regard for valued subgroup identifies will have a unifying effect on the social system. The data here, while generally consistent with this perspective, suggests, however, that the unifying influence of subgroup respect is limited to members of ethnic minority groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]