Search

In der Kläranlage Irschenberg wird gegenwärtig der Bau eines Bodenfilters mit Aktivkohleanteil geplant. Dieser kann sich für derartige Anlagen als eine sinnvolle Alternative zu den bisher bekannten Technologien einer vierten Reinigungsstufe erweisen.

Statistics is not the subject most psychology students are feverishly looking forward to. Fears and doubts about its relevance are quite common. This is especially pronounced at our institution, a large distance-teaching university with highly heterogeneous students. We recognized three clusters of students that might need special support: (1) students with fear of statistics, (2) students whose school time was a long time ago, (3) students who already failed the statistics exam. We gave those students the opportunity to participate in small, supervised groups to discuss learning strategies, problems, or fears. Students who did not participate served as a control group. We exploratively evaluated which kind of students were interested, and if the groups affected attitudes towards statistics, general self-efficacy, and exam-related variables. Interest and activity in the groups were low. No unique effect of participation in the groups on attitudes and grades were observable. Students stated that the groups did not help them to deal with the course. If these results prove stable in further studies with an improved design, one might conclude that setting up such small groups is not worth the effort.

In our current globalised, multicultural world, understanding antecedents of reciprocal interactions between native people and people of immigrant background is a major issue, because intergroup contact plays a crucial role in building inclusive societies. In this vein, using daily diary data, we examined the relation between the number of daily positive and negative interactions of White British majority (N = 744) and Asian British minority people (N = 582) with members of the respective outgroup, with RWA, SDO, perceived ingroup norms, neighbourhood diversity and contextual deprivation. Results showed that for the majority group, ingroup norms in favour of intergroup contact were positively associated with positive intergroup encounters, whereas Right Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) was positively associated with negative intergroup contact. Neighbourhood diversity was positively associated with positive and negative intergroup encounters. Moreover, RWA moderated the relationship between neighbourhood diversity and both positive and negative contact of White British people. For the minority group, ingroup norms were positively associated with positive intergroup contact, and the relationship between ingroup norms and negative contact was moderated by SDO. Overall, different factors affect positive and negative intergroup contact of majority and minority groups. We discuss the implications of the findings for future research and interventions.

The formation and shock history of ureilite meteorites, a relatively abundant type of primitive achondrites, has been debated for decades. For this purpose, the characterization of carbon phases can provide further information on diamond and graphite formation in ureilites, shedding light on the origin and history of this meteorite group. In this work, we present X-ray diffraction and micro-Raman spectroscopy analyses performed on diamond and graphite occurring in the ureilite Yamato 74123 (Y-74123). The results show that nano- and microdiamonds coexist with nanographite aggregates. This, together with the shock-deformation features observed in olivine, such as mosaicism and planar fractures, suggest that diamond grains formed by a shock event (≥15 GPa) on the ureilitic parent body (UPB). Our results on Y-74123 are consistent with those obtained on the NWA 7983 ureilite and further support the hypothesis that the simultaneous formation of nano- and microdiamonds with the assistance of a Fe-Ni melt catalysis may be related to the heterogeneous propagation and local scattering of the shock wave. Graphite geothermometry revealed an average recorded temperature (Tmax) of 1314 °C (±120 °C) in agreement with previously estimated crystallization temperatures reported for graphite in Almahata Sitta ureilite.

This research was partly supported by a senior postdoctoral research grant from the Research Foundation—Flanders (FWO) awarded to Jasper VanAssche (FWO.3E0.2021.0085.01) under the supervision of Arne Roets. Data collection for the South African studies was supported by the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity, for which the authors thank Steve Vertovec. This research was also funded by grants from the NORFACE ERA NET Plus Migration in Europe program, TheLeverhulme Trust, and the Central Community Relations Unit. Intergroup contact provides a reliable means of reducing prejudice. Yet, critics suggested that its efficacy is undermined, even eliminated, under certain conditions. Specifically, contact may be ineffective in the face of threat, especially to (historically) advantaged groups, and discrimination, experienced especially by (historically) disadvantaged groups. We considered perceived intergroup threat and perceived discrimination as potential moderators of the effect of contact on prejudice. Two meta-analyses of correlational data from 34 studies (totaling 63,945 respondents-drawn from 67 subsamples across 19 countries) showed that contact was associated with decreased prejudice and increased out-group positivity, in cross-sectional and longitudinal designs, among advantaged and disadvantaged group members, and in both Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) and non-WEIRD contexts. Both perceived threat and perceived discrimination moderated the contact-attitude association, but in an unanticipated direction. Indeed, contact's beneficial effects were at least as strong among individuals high (r = .19) as among individuals low (r = .18) in perceived threat. Similarly, the effects of contact were at least as strong among those high (r = .23) as among those low (r = .20) in perceived discrimination. We conclude that contact is effective for promoting tolerant societies because it is effective even among subpopulations where achieving that goal might be most challenging. Postprint

The occurrence of shock-induced diamonds in ureilite meteorites is common and is used to constrain the history of the ureilite parent bodies. We have investigated a fragment of the Kenna ureilite by micro-X-ray diffraction, micro-Raman spectroscopy and scanning electron microscopy to characterize its carbon phases. In addition to olivine and pigeonite, within the carbon-bearing areas, we identified microdiamonds (up to about 10 μm in size), nanographite and magnetite. The shock features observed in the silicate minerals and the presence of microdiamonds and nanographite indicate that Kenna underwent a shock event with a peak pressure of at least 15 GPa. Temperatures estimated using a graphite geothermometer are close to 1180 °C. Thus, Kenna is a medium-shocked ureilite, yet it contains microdiamonds, which are typically found in highly shocked carbon-bearing meteorites, instead of the more common nanodiamonds. This can be explained by a relatively long shock event duration (in the order of 4–5 s) and/or by the catalytic effect of Fe-Ni alloys known to favour the crystallization of diamonds. For the first time in a ureilite, carletonmooreite with formula Ni3Si and grain size near 4–7 nm, was found. The presence of nanocrystalline carletonmooreite provides further evidence to support the hypothesis of the catalytic involvement of Fe-Ni bearing phases into the growth process of diamond from graphite during shock events in the ureilite parent body, enabling the formation of micrometer-sized diamond crystals.

Intergroup contact is an established pathway to improve intergroup relations. Research has long focused on mainly positive intergroup contact and its capability to improve intergroup relations. Yet, if members of different groups meet, they will not only make positive, but possibly also negative intergroup contact experiences. Recent research considering both positive as well as negative intergroup contact has raised concerns about potentially stronger effects of negative compared to positive contact. These new insights and the increasing awareness of potentially detrimental effects of contact could lead to doubts about whether it is always sensible to bring individuals from different groups together. Our article first updates the latest review on joint effects of positive and negative intergroup contact. We find that there is no clear tendency for either positive or negative intergroup contact to yield stronger effects on intergroup relations, and we portray factors that might influence these effects. Such factors—for example an individual's prior experiences—could play a crucial role in defining the relevance of negative contact in everyday settings. We continue by answering calls to increase a more qualitative understanding of what kinds of experiences are seen to be intergroup contact, and where intergroup contact in everyday life is experienced from a lay understanding, with new qualitative data from British White and British Asian individuals. Our results demonstrate that positive as well as negative contact is often rather casual and happens in public spaces and at work. Interventions explicitly addressing these spaces may help to reach more people. We also demonstrate that positive contact is much more frequent than negative contact. This finding is confirmed in the third section, which reviews the relative frequency of positive and negative intergroup contact. Last but not least, we discuss the implications of our review for practitioners and researchers alike.

Compared to the impressive amount of research on consequences of intergroup contact, relatively little work has been devoted to predictors of intergroup contact. Although opportunities for intergroup contact are constantly growing in modern diverse societies, these contact opportunities are not necessarily exploited. In the present review article, we describe current research on predictors of intergroup contact and drivers of contact seeking on a micro‐, meso‐, and macro‐level. We provide an overview of predictors, while focusing on recent research that is especially relevant for designing interventions and planning social policies aiming at increasing contact between different groups in varied societies. On the micro‐level, we discuss relational self‐expansion motives and confidence in contact as predictors of intergroup contact. On the meso‐level, we focus on the role of intragroup processes and historical intergroup conflicts in facilitating contact. On the macro‐level, we reflect on changing societal norms as a potential tool to increase the frequency intergroup contact. By focusing on the applied value of research findings, discussing diverse predictors, and applying a multilevel approach, we also address recent criticisms of the intergroup contact literature and demonstrate the generative nature of contemporary research in this area.

Additional co-authors: Ivan Ropovik, Balazs Aczel, Lena F. Aeschbach, Luca Andrighetto, Jack D. Arnal, Holly Arrow, Peter Babincak, Bence E. Bakos, Gabriel Banik, Ernest Baskin, Radomir Belopavlovic, Michael H. Bernstein, Michal Bialek, Nicholas G. Bloxsom, Bojana Bodroža, Diane B. V. Bonfiglio, Leanne Boucher, Florian Bruhlmann, Claudia C. Brumbaugh, Erica Casini, Yiling Chen, Carlo Chiorri, William J. Chopik, Oliver Christ, Antonia M. Ciunci, Heather M. Claypool, Sean Coary, Marija V. Cˇolic, W. Matthew Collins, Paul G. Curran, Chris R. Day, Anna Dreber, John E. Edlund, Filipe Falcao, Anna Fedor, Lily Feinberg, Ian R. Ferguson, Maire Ford, Michael C. Frank, Emily Fryberger, Alexander Garinther, Katarzyna Gawryluk, Kayla Ashbaugh, Mauro Giacomantonio, Steffen R. Giessner, Jon E. Grahe, Rosanna E. Guadagno, Ewa Halasa, Rias A. Hilliard, Joachim Huffmeier, Sean Hughes, Katarzyna Idzikowska, Michael Inzlicht, Alan Jern, William Jimenez-Leal, Magnus Johannesson, Jennifer A. Joy-Gaba, Mathias Kauff, Danielle J. Kellier, Grecia Kessinger, Mallory C. Kidwell, Amanda M. Kimbrough, Josiah P. J. King, Vanessa S. Kolb, Sabina Kolodziej, Marton Kovacs, Karolina Krasuska, Sue Kraus, Lacy E. Krueger, Katarzyna Kuchno, Caio Ambrosio Lage, Eleanor V. Langford, Carmel A. Levitan, Tiago Jesse Souza de Lima, Hause Lin, Samuel Lins, Jia E. Loy, Dylan Manfredi, Łukasz Markiewicz, Madhavi Menon, Brett Mercier, Mitchell Metzger, Venus Meyet, Jeremy K. Miller, Andres Montealegre, Don A. Moore, Rafal Muda, Gideon Nave, Austin Lee Nichols, Sarah A. Novak, Christian Nunnally, Ana Orlic, Anna Palinkas, Angelo Panno, Kimberly P. Parks, Ivana Pedovic, Emilian Pekala, Matthew R. Penner, Sebastiaan Pessers, Boban Petrovic, Thomas Pfeiffer, Damian Pienkosz, Emanuele Preti, Danka Puric, Tiago Ramos, Jonathan Ravid, Timothy S. Razza, Katrin Rentzsch, Juliette Richetin, Sean C. Rife, Anna Dalla Rosa, Kaylis Hase Rudy, Janos Salamon, Blair Saunders, Przemyslaw Sawicki, Kathleen Schmidt, Kurt Schuepfer, Thomas Schultze, Stefan Schulz-Hardt, Astrid Schutz, Ani N. Shabazian, Rachel L. Shubella, Adam Siegel, Ruben Silva, Barbara Sioma, Lauren Skorb, Luana Elayne Cunha de Souza, Sara Steegen, L. A. R. Stein, R. Weylin Sternglanz, Darko Stojilovic, Daniel Storage, Gavin Brent Sullivan, Barnabas Szaszi, Peter Szecsi, Orsolya Szoke, Attila Szuts, Manuela Thomae, Natasha D. Tidwell, Carly Tocco, Ann-Kathrin Torka, Francis Tuerlinckx, Wolf Vanpaemel, Leigh Ann Vaughn, Michelangelo Vianello, Domenico Viganola, Maria Vlachou, Ryan J. Walker, Sophia C. Weissgerber, Aaron L. Wichman, Bradford J. Wiggins, Daniel Wolf, Michael J. Wood, David Zealley, Iris Žeželj, Mark Zrubka, and Brian A. Nosek

As part of the Many Labs 5 project, we ran a replication of van Dijk, van Kleef, Steinel, and van Beest’s (2008) study examining the effect of emotions in negotiations. They reported that when the consequences of rejection were low, subjects offered fewer chips to angry bargaining partners than to happy partners. We ran this replication under three protocols: the protocol used in the Reproducibility Project: Psychology, a revised protocol, and an online protocol. The effect averaged one ninth the size of the originally reported effect and was significant only for the revised protocol. However, the difference between the original and revised protocols was not significant.

We challenge the common interpretation of targets’ immediate confrontation in reaction todiscrimination as self-serving behavior and propose different underlying motivations for this phenomenon. In five online scenario studies (Noverall = 1,447), we demonstrate across different samples and contexts that targets indicate a distinct pursuit of the following self-reported confrontation goals: individual-benefit (e.g., perpetrator apologizes); group-benefit (e.g., prejudice reduction); and distancing (e.g., demonstrating that one is different from typical group members). Furthermore, meaningful associations of the pursuits of individual-benefitting goals and group- benefitting goals with group identification, disidentification, and further collective action intentions indicate that they represent different confrontation motivations: Individual-benefitting confrontation serves to cope with the individual mistreatment of discrimination, whereas group- benefitting confrontation represents a form of collective action. Distancing goals were associated with disidentification and—unexpectedly—group identification. Our results show that the phenomenon of confrontation in reaction to discrimination can be the result of different underlying psychological processes.

Immigration has been a prominent political issue for decades, but particularly so with rising national populism. To understand current anti-immigration opinion, we turn to the concept of relative deprivation, which, we argue, is fundamentally about entitlement and is at the heart of popular backlash against immigration. Examining the United Kingdom context, we predicted that immigration attitudes would be contingent on immigrant group status, with immigrants from low-status or poorer countries (Poland, India) more likely to be perceived as encroaching on the majority group’s entitlements than those from high-status or richer countries (Germany, Australia). We further proposed moral devaluation (dehumanization and distrust) as a novel mechanism (over and above prejudice) underlying the conditional effects of relative deprivation on support for formal (anti-immigration policies) and informal (hate crime) means of immigrant exclusion. A pilot study (n = 245) and cross-sectional survey (n = 490) results supported our main prediction that status matters: participants felt more deprived relative to low- than high-status immigrants, and this predicted stronger support for anti-immigration policies both directly and through higher distrust (but not dehumanization). This research highlights the need to unpack the generic ‘immigrant’ category and study anti-immigration sentiment in terms of group status and moral devaluation. Postprint