Higher Identifiers Research Articles

Receptivity to dating and marriage across the religious divide in Northern Ireland: The role of intergroup contact

AbstractIntergroup contact has long been recognized as an important factor in promoting positive intergroup attitudes. However, in operationalizing intergroup attitudes, previous studies have rarely investigated attitudes toward one of the most intimate forms of contact, romantic relationships. In this study (N = 176), we expand the intergroup contact literature to examine the association between intergroup contact and, arguably, a litmus test of intergroup attitudes: receptivity to intergroup romance. We do so in Northern Ireland, a context that is historically and presently characterized by sectarian division and tension between Catholics and Protestants. Our findings reveal that intergroup contact is positively associated with receptivity to both dating and marrying an outgroup member. These associations are mediated by ingroup norms toward outgroup romances. General outgroup attitudes were also found to be positively associated with contact but, in contrast to romantic attitudes, this association was shown, for the first time, to be simultaneously mediated by ingroup norms, anxiety, empathy, and trust. In addition, strength of ingroup identification played a moderating role, with a stronger positive relationship between contact and both romantic and general outgroup attitudes among higher identifiers. The findings highlight the importance of examining attitudes toward intergroup romantic relationships, as well as understanding the different mediating and moderating mechanisms which may account for how contact influences general attitudes and romantic attitudes. In the wake of the UK vote to leave the European Union, they also serve as an important reminder of how intergroup contact can be effective in promoting peace in Northern Ireland.

How a Tolerant Past Affects the Present

Three studies, conducted in The Netherlands, examined the relationship between a tolerant representation of national history and the acceptance of Muslim expressive rights. Following self-categorization theory, it was hypothesized that historical tolerance would be associated with greater acceptance of Muslim expressive rights, especially for natives who strongly identify with their national in-group. Furthermore, it was predicted that the positive effect of representations of historical tolerance on higher identifiers' acceptance could be explained by reduced perceptions of identity incompatibility. The results of Study 1 confirmed the first hypothesis, and the results of Study 2 and Study 3 supported the second hypothesis. These findings underline the importance of historical representations of the nation for understanding current reactions toward immigrants. Importantly, the results show that a tolerant representation of national history can elevate acceptance of immigrants, especially among natives who feel a relatively strong sense of belonging to their nation.

The past as a determinant of the present: Historical continuity, collective angst, and opposition to immigration

AbstractWe propose that the perceived continuity between a group's past and present can be a psychological resource that provides confidence in the group's future vitality, thereby reducing the need to preserve identity. In two studies, English participants were told that there was continuity or discontinuity between England's past and present. Both studies showed that higher identifiers (but not lower identifiers) experienced more collective angst (i.e., concern for the group's future) and were more opposed to immigration when English history was presented as discontinuous compared with continuous. Importantly, collective angst mediated the effect of the historical continuity manipulation on opposition to immigration. We conclude that, particularly among those higher in group identification, perceived discontinuity of the group's past can undermine the perceived vitality of the future, thereby increasing the need to preserve current collective identity. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The crowd as a psychological cue to in-group support for collective action against collective disadvantage

Collective action against collective disadvantage is an important socio-psychological phenomenon that represents a powerful pathway to social change. One key conclusion from the psychological literature on collective action is that a strong subjective sense of social identity is almost a necessity for disadvantaged group members to become motivated to undertake collective action against collective disadvantage. We propose, however, that even those individuals who may not identify strongly with their group might engage in collective action when they are in a crowd. This is because one core feature of the crowd, the physical co-presence of in-group members, conveys a psychological cue to in-group support for collective action against collective disadvantage. This is particularly relevant for lower identifiers, because, unlike higher identifiers, they do not view themselves as similar to other group members and thus do not expect in-group support. As a consequence, expectations of in-group support and therefore interest in collective action should increase for lower identifiers when they are in a crowd. We tested this idea in a psychological experiment in which higher and lower identifiers with a disadvantaged group were randomly assigned to a physical co-presence or control condition. Results showed indeed that the physical co-presence of in-group members increased only lower identifiers' expectations of in-group support and their interest in collective action against collective disadvantage. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these results.

Mobilizing opposition towards Muslim immigrants: National identification and the representation of national history

This research, conducted in the Netherlands, investigates whether people who do not feel strongly committed to their national in-group (i.e., lower identifiers) can be mobilized against expressive rights of Muslim immigrants when specific historical representations of the nation are made salient. Three experimental studies were conducted to examine whether a national identity presented as rooted in Christianity results in comparable levels of opposition towards Muslim expressive rights for lower and higher identifiers. Results in all three studies show that higher identifiers were more likely to oppose Muslim rights than lower identifiers when a tolerant or neutral historical national identity was salient. Yet, no differences in levels of opposition between lower and higher identifiers were observed in the Christian condition. These findings underline the importance of historical representations of the nation to understand the relationship between national identification and opposition to ethnic out-groups.

Voluntary and involuntary immigrants and adolescents’ endorsement of multiculturalism

Abstract This research examined whether the way in which migrants are defined has implications for majority group adolescents’ evaluation of maintenance of the heritage culture. Using an experimental questionnaire design, the findings demonstrate that when migrants are considered to have left their country on a voluntary basis, endorsement of cultural maintenance is lower than when migration is perceived to be involuntary. This was found to be the case when voluntary immigrants were contrasted with immigrants that have been recruited as labor migrants by the host society (Study 1, N = 843), and when voluntary immigrants were contrasted with immigrants that are forced to leave their country of origin (Study 2, N = 108). Furthermore, Study 2 found similar effects for emigrants. In both studies, national identification was negatively related to support for cultural maintenance. In addition, higher identifiers were more strongly in favor of allowing involuntary emigrants to maintain their own culture than lower identifiers. The implications of this research are discussed.

Why Do Men and Women Challenge Gender Discrimination in the Workplace? The Role of Group Status and In‐group Identification in Predicting Pathways to Collective Action

Group status and group identification were hypothesized to moderate the predictors of collective action to challenge gender discrimination against women. Higher identifiers were expected to respond to the inequality through the lens of their in‐group's interests. Among highly identified women, collective action was predicted by appraisals of illegitimacy and feelings of anger, suggesting that they felt a sense of solidarity with the victims and experienced the justice violation as personally relevant. In contrast, higher identification with the high‐status group should reflect more investment in the advantaged in‐group, relative to the interests of the victimized out‐group members. Thus, among highly identified men, collective action intentions were predicted by perceiving the inequality as pervasive (i.e., not limited to a few cases) and feelings of sympathy for victims. This suggests that highly identified men did not experience the inequality as self‐relevant until they saw it as too widespread to be ignored. In contrast, men and women with lower gender group identification demonstrated more similar pathways to collective action, where sympathy was the main predictor. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

How Perspective-Taking Helps and Hinders Group-Based Guilt as a Function of Group Identification

In two studies we hypothesized that outgroup perspective-taking promotes group-based guilt among weakly identified perpetrator group members, but hinders it among higher identifiers. In Study 1, native Dutch participants ( N = 153) confronted their group's past mistreatment of outgroups, while perspective-taking was manipulated. This manipulation significantly increased guilt among lower identifiers, but decreased guilt among higher identifiers. In addition, guilt predicted positively participants' support for reparation. In Study 2 ( N = 217), we replicated this interaction and elaborated on its underlying processes. As predicted, perspective-taking positively predicted feelings of compassion for outgroup members, as well as the perceived responsibility of the ingroup for the harm inflicted. Path analyses indicated the dual role of compassion: it predicted guilt positively among lower identifiers, but negatively among higher identifiers. The double-edged potential of perspective-taking for improving relations between groups that have a history on conflict is discussed.

Protecting Threatened Identity: Sticking with the Group by Emphasizing Ingroup Heterogeneity

In two studies (Ns=163, 164), the authors tested the prediction that perceptions of group variability can steer and guide the way that loyalty is expressed in times of identity threat. In both studies, participants were classified as lower or higher identifiers on the basis of their scores on a group identification measure, and manipulations involved group variability perceptions (homogeneous ingroup vs. heterogeneous ingroup) and threat to the ingroup. Higher identifiers presented with a homogeneous ingroup perceived more ingroup homogeneity under threat than when there was no threat. In contrast, higher identifiers who perceived the ingroup initially as heterogeneous perceived more ingroup heterogeneity under threat than in no threat conditions. Lower identifiers perceived more ingroup heterogeneity under threat (vs. no threat) irrespective of manipulated group variability perceptions. Discussion focuses on different ways that group loyalty can be expressed in times of identity threat.