Search

Examined cultural differences in preferences for conflict resolution styles using the dual-concern model with 103 college students in Mexico (collectivistic culture) and 91 college students in the United States (individualistic culture). Results suggest that independence of the self and interdependence of the self may be separate dimensions, rather than a continuum. (SLD)

Compared samples of college students (n=497) with mixed heritage and single heritage to determine whether bicultural socialization had positive or negative effects on personality, adjustment, and intergroup relations. Found no evidence of negative effects; positive effects were found for intergroup contact and attitudes, language facility, and enjoyment of culture of minority groups. (Author/ABL)

To purchase or authenticate to the full-text of this article, please visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.00569.x Byline: Walter G Stephan (1) Abstract: This article employs Allport's (1954) lens model of the causes of prejudice to analyze the articles in this issue of the Journal of Social Issues. The lens model specifies that historical, socio cultural, personality, and situational factors contribute to prejudice. The articles in this issue examine a number of variables at each of these levels of analysis, and many employ multilevel designs in which variables at more than one level are examined within the same study. Suggestions for future research on intergroup relations in Europe are offered including conducting more comparative and multilevel studies and creating comprehensive theories that integrate different levels of analysis. Some implications of the findings of these studies for intergroup relations programs are also discussed. Author Affiliation: (1)University of Hawaii Article note: (*) Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Walter G. Stephan, 2097 Aliali Place, Honolulu, HI 96821 [e-mail: gstepha@nmsu.edu].

This study examined affective, cognitive, and behavioral responses to members of a stigmatized group--homosexual men. Male participants were placed in a situation in which they anticipated interacting with a gray or a non-stigmatized conversation partner. The topic of the impending conversation was either potentially threatening or non-threatening. Participants in the gay conversation partner condition sat either farther away from the conversation partner (in the threat condition) or closer to the conversation partner (in the no-threat condition) than they did from non-stigmatized conversation partners. There were no differences in attitudes toward the conversation partner as a function of experimental condition. The results were interpreted in terms of predictions based on ambivalence-amplification theory, aversive racism theory, and the integrated threat theory.

To purchase or authenticate to the full-text of this article, please visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2006.00475.x Byline: Walter G. Stephan (1) Abstract: Editors' introduction: Walter Stephan's interest in intergroup relations grew from his early involvement in intercultural relations. He spent substantial time in Latin America as well as Vietnam during his college years. These experiences influenced his choice to study social psychology at the University of Minnesota. His first foray into intergroup relations came with his move to Austin, Texas, in 1971. A Court mandate ordered schools to be desegregated, and Stephan examined the effects of school desegregation there on students' self-esteem and intergroup attitudes. His field research on the effects of desegregation as well as classroom interventions to improve intergroup relations was complemented by his laboratory research on intergroup biases, intergroup threat, intergroup anxiety, and empathy. Stephan brings this lifetime of involvement in both basic and applied research, and deep concern for effective practice and humanistic philosophy, to his commentary. He opens the commentaries with an elucidation of the difficulties in, and benefits of, the central thrust of this volume: the researcher-practitioner collaboration. He paints portraits of practitioners, researchers, and practitioner-researchers, and classifies articles in this issue accordingly. He notes the difficulties among the various parties interested in improving intergroup relations, spanning from simple lack of knowledge to lack of contact to lack of meaningful ways to interact. However, potential benefits of collaboration are abundant for all parties, and Stephan proposes a number of ways in which such partnerships could be actualized. Author Affiliation: (1)New Mexico State University Article note: (*) Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Walter G. Stephan, 2097 Aliali Pl. Honolulu, HI 96821 [e-mail: wstephan@crl.nmsu.edu].

Two studies examine differences between Ecuadorians and Euro-Americans in levels of reverence for their mothers. Data collected from college students in Ecuador and the United States show that Ecuadorians display higher levels of mother reverence than Euro-Americans. Ecuadorians also score higher on measures of maternal power, similarity of mothers to the cultural ideal of women, and uncertainty avoidance. However, levels of independence are significantly higher in the Euro-American sample than in the Ecuadorian sample. High levels of maternal power, idealization of mothers, and interdependent self-construals are found to predict mother reverence in both cultures. The implications of these findings for interpersonal and intercultural relations are discussed. Keywords: mother; women; Ecuador; South America; Hispanic; culture; individualism; collectivism; gender; power; power distance; uncertainty avoidance; reverence; respect; devotion

This set of two studies employed the integrated threat theory to examine attitudes toward affirmative action (AA). The first study found that opposition to the policy of AA was predicted by realistic threats, symbolic threats, and personal relevance; while attitudes toward the beneficiaries of AA were predicted by three of the four threat variables (symbolic threats, intergroup anxiety, and negative stereotypes), and in-group identity. The second study replicated and expanded on the first study and found that the effects of several individual-difference variables (racism, anti-Black affect, and political conservatism) on opposition to AA were mediated by three of the threats in the integrated threat theory (realistic threats, symbolic threats, and negative stereotypes). The implications of the results are discussed.

WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT EDUCATION AND DIVERSITY, AND HOW DO WE KNOW IT? This two-part question guided the work of the Multicultural Education Consensus Panel, which included the eight [...]

Israeli Jewish and Arab experts within Israel have developed innovative intergroup relations programs, educational efforts designed to improve relations between Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs. Social scientists, educators, and practitioners on both sides of the Arab-Jewish conflict have dedicated themselves to lessening the hostility between these two groups within Israel through coexistence educational training. This issue presents theory, methods, and data from these coexistence educational programs. The introductory article presents a brief history of this conflict; the groups' differing perceptions regarding the dispute; some information about the role of culture, socioeconomic status, and ethnicity in the discord; and some of the social psychological processes that perpetuate and recreate the hostilities. Last, it provides a brief preface of this issue's articles.

Two studies examined people's beliefs about the relative disconfirmability of out-group and in-group stereotypes. In Study 1 (n = 56), Hispanics and White non-Hispanics judged the in-group and out-group stereotypes in terms of the ease with which they could be disconfirmed. The results indicated that strongly, ethnically identified participants believed the out-group stereotype to be more difficult to disconfirm than the in-group stereotype. The second study with 73 White participants examined their beliefs about the disconfirmability of the White and African American stereotypes. The results indicated that participants higher in prejudice believed the African American stereotype is more difficult to disconfirm than the White stereotype to a greater degree than participants lower in prejudice. The results suggest that disconfirmability beliefs comprise a distinct construct that may contribute to the difficulty of changing out-group stereotypes.

This study employed the integrated threat theory of intergroup attitudes to examine the attitudes of Black and White students toward the other racial group. This theory synthesizes previous research on the relationships of threats to intergroup attitudes. Structural equation modeling revealed that for both racial groups, realistic threats, symbolic threats, and intergroup anxiety predicted attitudes toward the other group. To varying degrees, the effects of negative contact, strength of ingroup identity, perceptions of intergroup conflict, perceived status inequality, and negative stereotyping on negative racial attitudes were mediated by the three threat variables. The model accounted for more variance in the negative attitudes of Whites toward Blacks than in the negative attitudes of Blacks toward Whites. The implications of these findings are discussed.

The research reported here examined whether misanthropic memory occurs for groups, that is, whether people best remember negative behaviors of group members that have been dispositionally attributed and positive behaviors that have been situationally attributed. Experiment 1 established a baseline, showing that behaviors that were not associated with attributions displayed an incongruity effect in which behaviors incongruent with prior expectancies were better recalled than were behaviors congruent with prior expectancies. In Experiment 2, attributions were associated with the behaviors used in Experiment 1, resulting in an attenuation of the incongruity effect and the emergence of a strong misanthropy effect. Experiment 3 indicated that misanthropic memory is only found for outgroups and not for ingroups. The implications of the findings for intergroup perception were discussed.

Three studies were conducted to measure the antecedents of women's attitudes toward men using the integrated threat model. Four types of threats were hypothesized to produce negative attitudes toward men: (1) realistic threat based on threats to women's political and economic power, (2) symbolic threat based on value differences, (3) intergroup anxiety experienced during social interaction with outgroup members, and (4) negative stereotypes of men. Negative contact was hypothesized to increase the perception of all four threats as well as to affect attitudes directly. The findings suggest that symbolic threat, intergroup anxiety, and negative contact are the strongest predictors of negative attitudes toward men. Contrary to expectation, realistic threat may not be important to women's attitudes toward men.

In this study, the integrated threat theory of prejudice was employed to examine Americans' and Mexicans' attitudes toward one another. According to the theory, four types of threat (realistic, symbolic, intergroup anxiety, and negative stereotypes) cause prejudice. These threats are thought to be caused in part by the amount and quality of intergroup contact. The results of two path analyses indicated that all four threats were significant predictors of attitudes in one sample or the other. Both the amount and quality of contact affected some types of threats. In particular, the quality of intergroup contact (voluntary, positive, individualized, and equal status) appears to play an important role in both intergroup anxiety and attitudes toward the other group.

In the present study, 4 variables (realistic threats, symbolic threats, intergroup anxiety, and negative stereotypes) were used to predict prejudice toward immigrants from Cuba, Mexico, and Asia in samples of students from states in the United States that are affected by immigration from these areas (Florida, New Mexico, and Hawaii, respectively). All 4 variables were significant (or marginally significant) predictors of attitudes toward these immigrant groups. Evidence is presented that the predictor variables are conceptually and empirically distinct. However; these variables do appear to be tied together by an underlying theme: They all concern threats to the in-group or its members. Some of the implications of the results for intergroup relations are discussed.

An integrated threat theory composed of four variables was used to predict attitudes toward immigrant groups in Spain and Israel. The four threats are symbolic threats based on value differences between groups; realistic threats to the power, resources, and well-being of the in-group; anxiety concerning social interaction with out-group members; and feelings of threat arising from negative stereotypes of the out-group. All four threats were significant predictors of attitudes toward one or more of the immigrant groups. It was predicted, and found, that intergroup anxiety and negative stereotypes were more powerful and consistent predictors of prejudicial attitudes toward immigrants than were realistic threats or symbolic threats. The implications of the theory for the causes and reduction of prejudice were discussed., Immigration has shaped the world in which we live. Throughout history, people have migrated from one part of the world to another, populating the earth and eventually creating the nation [...]

This study examined cultural differences in preferences for conflict resolution styles using the dual-concern model. It was found that students in a collectivistic culture (Mexico) preferred conflict resolution styles that [...]

Three experiments examined memory for behaviors associated with attributional information. A baseline established in Experiment 1, using behaviors unaccompanied by attributions, indicated that expectancy-inconsistent behaviors were better recalled than consistent ones. Experiment 2 linked these same behaviors to dispositional or situational attributions. After reconceptualizing the results, it was shown that negative dispositionally attributed behaviors and positive situationally attributed behaviors were best recalled, suggesting that there is a negativity bias in person memory for behaviors that are accompanied by attributions. Experiment 3, using a different procedure, served as a replication of this misanthropic memory effect and demonstrated that the effect was only slightly altered by reducing the processing time allocated for this task. The findings were discussed in terms of their implications for expectancy-driven information processing and also with regard to the types of impressions people may form from attributed behavioral information.

This study examined three hypotheses concerning differences between collectivistic and individualistic cultures using samples from Costa Rica and the United States. The first hypothesis was that people in individualistic cultures would express emotions affirming independent self-conceptions, whereas people in collectivistic cultures would express emotions affirming interdependent self-conceptions. The first part of this hypothesis was confirmed, but the second part was not. The second hypothesis was that people in collectivistic cultures would make a greater distinction in the degree to which they expressed emotions toward in-group and out-group members than would people in individualistic cultures. This hypothesis was not supported. The third hypothesis was that people in collectivistic cultures would feel less comfortable expressing negative emotions than people in individualistic cultures. The data provided strong support for this hypothesis. The results are discussed in terms of differences between these two cultures and their significance for intercultural communication and individualism-collectivism.

This study examined the hypothesis that emotional reactions to national groups would be associated with evaluative responses to the traits forming the stereotypes of these groups. A hierarchical regression analysis of American and Russian subjects' emotional reactions to Americans, Russians, and Iraqis supported this prediction in four of six cases. In addition, simultaneous regression analyses indicated that self-esteem, ethnocentrism, and authoritarianism were each a significant predictor in two of the six analyses, weakly supporting trends found in other research. In general, the personality traits were not as consistently or as strongly associated with emotional reactions to these groups as were the evaluative aspects of stereotypes. A network model of cognition and affect is used to interpret the findings of this and related studies and to address their implications for changing prejudice.

Two studies were designed to test hypotheses concerning self-disclosure during initial interactions with ingroup or outgroup strangers. Based on intergroup anxiety theory it was predicted that ingroup members would disclose less to outgroup strangers than to ingroup strangers. One study involved interaction with handicapped and nonhandicapped confederates and one involved interaction with Caucasian and Black confederates. It was found that on some dimensions there was less self-disclosure to outgroup than ingroup strangers during initial interactions. Additional data suggested that high levels of public self-awareness and perceived dissimilarity also reduced some aspects of self-disclosure.