Pathogen threat and intergroup prejudice using the minimal group paradigm: Evidence from a registered report

Abstract

Infection by parasites, bacteria, and other microorganisms has been a powerful selection pressure faced by humans and other species. Consequently, avoiding pathogens has played an important role in human evolution and continues to play a role in contemporary social psychological processes. The current research tested the hypothesis that pathogen avoidance promotes intergroup prejudice. Whereas previous tests relied on existing cultural groups, which can conflate outgroup status with pre-existing group stereotypes about disease or geographic variability in pathogen prevalence, the current experiments assessed intergroup bias using a minimal group paradigm. Based on preliminary evidence (Study 1, N = 207, undergraduate students) that experimentally priming pathogen avoidance motivation promoted negativity toward a minimal outgroup, we conducted a Registered Report (Study 2, N = 1339 online participants) to replicate and extend those findings. Our primary hypothesis was that an experimental manipulation of pathogen threat (relative to two control conditions) would produce greater intergroup prejudice (negativity toward the nominal outgroup relative to the nominal ingroup). This hypothesis was not supported in the larger, registered second study. Exploratory analyses provided some evidence for interactions between experimental priming of pathogen threat and individual differences in pathogen disgust, but the interactive pattern differed across the two experiments. Findings call into question the hypothesis that, in the absence of cultural stereotypes, situationally activated pathogen avoidance promotes intergroup prejudice.