Outgroup Empathy Research Articles

The Longitudinal Relationship Between Youth Intergroup Contact and Social Cohesion Outcomes in Two Divided Societies

ABSTRACTIntergroup contact has long been established as a prejudice‐reduction tool in divided societies, with contact being particularly effective during adolescence. A large proportion of evidence, however, draws on cross‐sectional surveys or analytical approaches that do not distinguish between‐ and within‐person effects. In the present research, we address this by exploring the potential of intergroup contact longitudinally on social cohesion–related outcomes amongst youth (aged 14–19) in Belfast (Study 1, N = 231) and Bradford (Study 2, N = 159). Measures included intergroup contact, outgroup attitudes, intergroup anxiety, outgroup empathy and outgroup prosocial behaviour across three time points. Using random‐intercept cross‐lagged panel models, results demonstrate between‐person associations of contact with our outcomes, but limited within‐person changes. Our findings demonstrate the potential and limitations of intergroup contact for social cohesion–related outcomes for youth growing up in divided societies, pointing to the need for developmental‐focused future research.

How does pro-attitudinal information improve intergroup relations? Unraveling the underlying mechanism of American and Chinese people’s mutual attitudes

ABSTRACT Though media exposure research typically links pro-attitudinal information with ingroup favoritism and outgroup derogation, the empirical evidence to date is inconclusive. Can attitude-consistent media diminish prepositions and ease intergroup tensions? If so, what type of like-minded media content should ingroups be exposed to? Rather than approaching from the perspective of the morality dimension, which has been well-researched, this study took the US and China’s public attitudes toward each other as a case study, to examine the link between pro-attitudinal media exposure of outgroups’ “competency” dimension and attitudes toward outgroups. Results indicate that Americans and Chinese who were exposed to pro-attitudinal media stimulus depicting an outgroup’s lack of competency show more outgroup favoritism, and outgroup empathy mediates the media effects on outgroup attitudes. Theoretical underpinnings using social comparison, the underdog effect, and the pratfall effect are discussed, along with practical implications to improve intergroup relations, especially international relations, in the aftermath of COVID-19 when intergroup tensions may have been exacerbated.

White Americans' blame attributions and empathy towards Black victims of police violence: How pejorative stereotypes 'engulf the field'.

We examined the dynamics of minority-directed police violence by considering how our White participants' empathy for Black victims may be influenced by critical intragroup differences related to racial stereotyping. Although the role of stereotyping in reactions to Black Americans accused of crime is well-established, we explore the influence of pejorative Black stereotypes on reactions to Black victims of police violence. Specifically, we investigated the roles of individual differences in the endorsement of the Black criminal stereotype among White observers and manipulated the crime-unrelated stereotypicality (i.e. stereotypical, counterstereotypical) of Black victims of police violence. White US MTurk participants read about a White policeman shooting a Black man (Study 1, n = 140) or sexually assaulting a Black woman (Study 2, n = 166). Across both studies, strong stereotype endorsers reported relatively low empathy for stereotypical victims, mediated by greater blame towards those victims. This finding demonstrates the relevance of heretofore untested motivated reasoning processes in the outgroup empathy deficits literature. Weak stereotype endorsers showed relatively high empathy and low victim blame regardless of Black victim stereotypicality, indicating limited sensitivity to outgroup member suffering is not inevitable. We consider the practical implications of the findings for policing and for citizenship education.

Understanding Links between Pandemic-Related Racial Attitudes and Out-Group Prosocial Behaviors

The current study examined COVID-19 pandemic racial attitudes in out-group empathy and out-group prosocial behaviors. Participants included 467 young adults who completed measures of their racial attitudes during the pandemic, out-group perspective taking and empathic concern, and out-group prosocial behaviors. Results demonstrated that pandemic-related racial attitudes were significantly, positively associated with out-group perspective taking and out-group empathic concern, which both positively predicted multiple forms of out-group prosocial behaviors, including emotional, dire, compliant, and anonymous prosocial behaviors. These findings highlight the important role of perspective taking and empathic concern toward individuals outside one’s own ethnic group in explaining how racial attitudes during the pandemic were associated with helping behaviors. Discussion focuses on how color-conscious attitudes during an unprecedented U.S. pandemic crisis might be one avenue for promoting prosociality and harmony.

Social identification, identity integration and wellbeing in people who hear voices.

Hearing voices is associated with public stigma and this can influence readiness to identify as a voice hearer (VH) and psychological wellbeing. In this study, we investigated the relationships between a VH social identity, the integration of that identity with other important social identities and wellbeing. Cross-sectional study, with a subset of longitudinal data across three time points. People who self-identified as voice hearers completed questionnaires (VH social identity, identity integration, wellbeing and perceptions of in-group and out-group empathy) at three time points, spaced at 3-monthly intervals. The final sample comprised 182 participants at T1, 91 at T2 and 75 at T3. Hierarchical linear multiple regression analyses were used to test all hypotheses. The integration of a VH social identity was strongly associated with better psychological wellbeing at T1. Identity integration was also associated with static wellbeing scores at 6 months. Effects on wellbeing were not accounted for by either severity of voice-hearing or paranoia. Whilst perceptions of in-group empathy were associated with VH social identification, perceptions of outgroup empathy were important for identity integration. Integrating a VH social identity with other important identities into a coherent sense of self is important for wellbeing in voice hearers; perceived in-group and outgroup empathy are important in this process.

Intergroup contact and intended actions in support of disadvantaged groups: The role of affective processes and feelings of solidarity

Intergroup contact is a well-established basis of prejudice reduction. However, less is known about its potential to motivate people to act in support of disadvantaged groups. We investigated the associations of both positive and negative intergroup contact with action intentions for disadvantaged groups among members of ethnic majority groups from different intergroup contexts, including non-WEIRD samples. Furthermore, we tested the role of affective processes and feelings of solidarity as psychological processes explaining these associations. In three cross-sectional studies (total N = 962) from Greece, Thailand, and Turkey, positive and negative contact experiences were associated with, respectively, stronger and weaker intended actions. These associations were particularly pronounced for positive contact. Contact measures were also related to stronger intentions to donate and distribute money in favor of the disadvantaged group (Study 3). A three-wave longitudinal study conducted in the UK (Study 4, N = 603) confirmed the association for positive contact but not for negative contact. Feelings of solidarity emerged as the most consistent mediator, followed by outgroup empathy and, to a lesser extent, group-based anger. Together, these findings show that contact can be an important factor motivating advantaged group members to act in solidarity with disadvantaged groups, and highlight the mediating factors in this process.

Dangerous Speech: A Cross-Cultural Study of Dehumanization and Revenge

Abstract Dehumanization is routinely invoked in social science and law as the primary factor in explaining how propaganda encourages support for, or participation in, violence against targeted outgroups. Yet the primacy of dehumanization is increasingly challenged by the apparent influence of revenge on collective violence. This study examines critically how various propaganda influence audiences. Although previous research stresses the dangers of dehumanizing propaganda, a recently published study found that only revenge propaganda significantly lowered outgroup empathy. Given the importance of these findings for law and the behavioral sciences, this research augments that recent study with two additional samples that were culturally distinct from the prior findings, showing again that only revenge propaganda was significant. To explore this effect further, we also conducted a facial electromyography (fEMG) among a small set of participants, finding that revenge triggered significantly stronger negative emotions against outgroups than dehumanization.

Using performance art to promote intergroup prosociality by cultivating the belief that empathy is unlimited

Empathy is important for resolving intergroup conflicts. However, people often tend to feel less empathy toward people who do not belong to their social group (i.e., outgroup members). We propose that this tendency is due, in part, to the belief that empathy is a limited resource. To overcome this issue, we develop an intervention synthesizing psychology and art to increase the belief that empathy is unlimited. In six studies (n = 2118), we find that the more people believe empathy is limited, the less outgroup empathy they experience. Moreover, leading people to believe that empathy is unlimited increase outgroup empathy, leads to greater support for prosocial actions toward outgroup members, and encourages more empathic behaviors toward outgroup members in face-to-face intergroup interactions. These intervention effects are observed across various intergroup contexts involving different ethnic, national, religious, and political groups. Thus, changing beliefs about empathy may improve intergroup relations, and conveying this belief through art may promote social change.

Explaining Prejudicial Attitudes and Bias-Motivated Aggression in Belgium: a Comparison of Individual-Level Theoretical Models

Prejudice and bias-motivated aggression (BMA) are pervasive social problems. Scholars have tested numerous competing theoretical models to demonstrate the key predicates of prejudice and BMA, including intergroup contact, dual process (i.e., right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation), perceived injustice, peer socialization, and empathy. Yet, studies to date have not empirically examined the comparative strength of these theoretical perspectives to explain the correlates of (a) prejudice and (b) BMA. This study seeks to address this gap. Utilizing a sample of young 1,001 Belgian participants, this study explores the association between key constructs from different theoretical perspectives to better understand prejudice and BMA towards immigrant populations. Findings show that when accounting for all models of prejudice and BMA, the strongest predictors of prejudice emerge from the dual-process model, the empathy model (outgroup empathy), and the quality (not frequency) of intergroup contact. Yet, prejudice and exposure to peer outgroup hostility are the strongest predictors of BMA. We discuss the implications of our findings and suggest that drawing on criminological theories of prejudice and BMA can be integrated to provide a more nuanced understanding of the nature of prejudice and BMA than what is currently known. We conclude by highlighting some directions for future research on prejudice and BMA.

Belief in the Utility of Cross-Partisan Empathy Reduces Partisan Animosity and Facilitates Political Persuasion

In polarized political environments, partisans tend to deploy empathy parochially, furthering division. We propose that belief in the usefulness of cross-partisan empathy—striving to understand other people with whom one disagrees politically—promotes out-group empathy and has powerful ramifications for both intra- and interpersonal processes. Across four studies (total N = 4,748), we examined these predictions in online and college samples using surveys, social-network analysis, preregistered experiments, and natural-language processing. Believing that cross-partisan empathy is useful is associated with less partisan division and politically diverse friendship networks (Studies 1 and 2). When prompted to believe that empathy is a political resource—versus a political weakness—people become less affectively polarized (Study 3) and communicate in ways that decrease out-partisans’ animosity and attitudinal polarization (Study 4). These findings demonstrate that belief in cross-partisan empathy impacts not only individuals’ own attitudes and behaviors but also the attitudes of those they communicate with.

White People Problems? White Privilege Beliefs Predict Attitudes Toward Confederate Symbols

Building upon Intergroup Threat Theory and research on group-level empathy, we tested the relationship between White privilege beliefs and White Americans’ attitudes toward Confederate symbols. In three experiments, participants induced to think about White privilege exhibited more opposition to Confederate symbols, perceived less realistic threat to their group’s power/resources and symbolic threat to their group’s values/identity from the prospect of these symbols being removed, and (in Study 2) felt more empathetic toward racial/ethnic minorities who may view these symbols. Further, a meta-analytic path analysis across studies demonstrated that the effect of White privilege reminders on opposition to Confederate symbols was driven by reduced realistic and symbolic threat, as well as greater outgroup empathy.

Shared disadvantage as a determinant of the relationship between White Americans’ socioeconomic status and racial/ethnic prejudice

AbstractThe present studies examined the conditions under which low subjective socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with greater racial/ethnic prejudice among White Americans. Using theories of intergroup threat and inclusive victim consciousness, we predicted that describing racial/ethnic minorities as disadvantaged (vs. as competitive or in neutral terms) would increase empathy and reduce prejudice among White Americans who consider themselves low in SES. Study 1 provided correlational evidence that White Americans who perceived themselves as low‐SES (but not high‐SES) were less prejudiced against racial/ethnic minorities the more they perceived minorities as disadvantaged. In Study 2, portraying the target outgroup (Arab immigrants) as disadvantaged increased outgroup empathy, and in turn reduced prejudice, among participants induced to think of themselves as low‐SES. Study 3 conceptually replicated these results using a different outgroup (Mexican Americans) and a behavioral measure of prejudice. Implications for reducing prejudice among White Americans of different socioeconomic backgrounds are discussed.

“Sorry for Congo, Let’s Make Amends”: Belgians’ Ideological Worldviews Predict Attitudes Towards Apology and Reparation for its Colonial Past

In light of the recent steps Belgium has made towards reconciling with its colonial history in Congo (e.g., the King’s letter of regret, and the removal of some colonial statues), we examined how Belgians differ in their attitudes towards an official apology, towards (symbolic) reparations (e.g., renaming streets), and towards raising more awareness about the colonial past (e.g., more detailed information in educational books) as a function of their ideological worldviews. We hypothesized that authoritarianism and group dominance would negatively predict these outcome variables, while particularly universal-diverse orientation and egalitarianism would predict them positively. We further hypothesized that these relations would be mediated by relevant intergroup emotions (i.e., group-based guilt, shame, and anger, and especially outgroup empathy). Path model analyses on a sample of 258 Flemish-speaking students provided support for our predictions: (1) universal-diverse orientation was the strongest predictor of all intergroup emotions, (2) empathy—and to a lesser extent group-based anger—were the strongest direct predictors of attitudes towards apologizing, reparation, and awareness, and (3) empathy was the most important mediator explaining the associations of universal-diverse and egalitarian orientations with the outcomes. We discuss the implications of our findings for the current debate regarding reconciliation between groups with a history of colonialism.

Testing Snowden’s Hypothesis Does Mere Awareness Drive Opposition to Government Surveillance?

Abstract This study explores the antecedents of public support for government surveillance of the private electronic communications and internet browsing of American citizens. The National Security Agency whistleblower, Edward Snowden, famously hoped that uncovering surveillance by the state would create awareness of those practices that would be sufficient to induce public opposition. Other theories suggest that support for these policies might be driven by perceptions of terrorist threat or personal risk of surveillance. We suspect, however, that most citizens do not imagine their own privacy rights to be at risk due to government surveillance, but instead believe members of other groups will be targeted. Therefore, we hypothesize that empathy toward vulnerable outgroups should strongly dampen enthusiasm for surveillance, above and beyond awareness and personal concerns and interests. A nationally representative survey finds knowledge about government surveillance to be higher than many presume, but variation in knowledge or personal interests are largely uncorrelated with support. As hypothesized, empathy for outgroups strongly predicts opposition to these policies, above and beyond a host of other factors. Two experiments further corroborate the result: Outgroup empathy, not exposure to information about actual surveillance practices, boosts public opposition.

Teachers Foster Intergroup Empathy

This study examined a professional development program aimed at supporting Jewish civics teachers in their efforts to promote empathy among their students toward Israeli Arabs. Previous results indicated an increase in outgroup empathy among teachers who watched and reflected upon clips from a television sitcom. This article focuses on skills teachers developed and strategies they designed and implemented following their experience with empathy processes. Our findings underscore the educative potential of indirect mediated contact in segregated societies, and the importance of developing empathic processes among teachers before they embark on the challenge of supporting their students in such endeavors.

How Propaganda Works: Nationalism, Revenge and Empathy in Serbia

Abstract What is the relationship between war propaganda and nationalism, and what are the effects of each on support for, or participation in, violent acts? This is an important question for international criminal law and ongoing speech crime trials, where prosecutors and judges continue to assert that there is a clear causal link between war propaganda, nationalism, and mass violence. Although most legal judgments hinge on the criminal intent of propagandists, the question of whether and to what extent propaganda and nationalism interact to cause support for violence or participation remains unanswered. Our goal here is to contribute to research on propaganda and nationalism by bridging international criminal law and the behavioral and brain sciences. We develop an experiment conducted with Serbian participants that examines the effects of propaganda as identified in the latest international speech crime trial as causing mass violence, and thereby test hypotheses of expert witness Anthony Oberschall’s theory of mass manipulation. Using principal components analysis and Bayesian regression, we examine the effects of propaganda exposure and prior levels of nationalism as well as other demographics on support for violence, ingroup empathy, and outgroup empathy. Results show that while exposure to war propaganda does not increase justifications of violence, specific types of war propaganda increase ingroup empathy and decrease outgroup empathy. Further, although nationalism by itself is not significant for justifying violence, the interaction of increased nationalism and exposure to violent media is significant for altering group empathies. The implications of these findings are discussed with respect to international criminal law and the cognitive science of nationalism.

Parallel empathy and group attitudes in late childhood: The role of perceived peer group attitudes

ABSTRACT Although several studies have examined outgroup empathy, the link between trait empathy and outgroup attitudes has been underinvestigated. In the present study this link was investigated among two samples of ethnic Dutch preadolescents (N = 335, Mage = 10.83 years, SD = 0.94; 53% girls; N = 326; Mage = 10.53 years, SD = 1.03; 48% girls). It examined children’s parallel empathy in relation to their ethnic attitudes, and the moderating role of perceived peer norms. Results (partly) support the hypotheses that empathy is associated with more outgroup positivity and less ingroup bias (ingroup minus outgroup attitude). The negative link between empathy and outgroup bias was stronger when peers were perceived to be more biased against the outgroup.

Intention and empathy

ABSTRACT This essay challenges some assumptions of prevalent theories of empathy. The empathizer, according to these theories, must have an emotion or a representation that matches the recipient’s emotion or representation. I argue that these conditions fail to account for important cases, namely surrogate and out-group empathy. In the course of this argument, I isolate some conceptual difficulties in extant models of cognitive empathy. In place of the matching theories, I propose an indexical model that (1) distinguishes virtual from real self-reference and (2) replaces self–other distinctions with an epistemic condition. According to this account, empathy occurs when we index an intention to another person about whom we have the relevant knowledge or understanding.

Close or Distant Past? The Role of Temporal Distance in Responses to Intergroup Violence From Victim and Perpetrator Perspectives.

In two different intergroup contexts, three studies investigated the role of temporal distance in responses to intergroup violence from both victim and perpetrator perspectives. In the context of the conflict between Serbs and Bosniaks, Study 1 showed that whereas increased subjective temporal distance predicted less support for justice-restoring efforts and less outgroup empathy among the perpetrator group (Serbs), it predicted more conciliatory, pro-outgroup attitudes among the victim group (Bosniaks). Furthermore, Bosniaks perceived the war as temporally closer than did Serbs. In the context of the U.S.–Iran conflict, Study 2 provided a partial conceptual replication of Study 1 and demonstrated that ingroup glorification motivated more temporal distancing among perpetrators and less temporal distancing among victims. Study 3 further established the causal effects of temporal distance on intergroup outcomes, and that these effects were moderated by glorification. Implications for post-conflict peacebuilding are discussed.

Essentialist beliefs affect children's outgroup empathy, attitudes and prosocial behaviours in a setting of intergroup conflict.

Empathy for salient outgroups can promote positive intergroup attitudes and prosocial behaviours. Less is known about which factors may promote empathy, particularly among children, in contexts of intergroup conflict. Empathy may depend on underlying cognitions, such as social essentialist beliefs, that is, believing that certain social categories have an underlying essence that causes members to share observable and non-observable properties. This study explored the influence of essentialist beliefs about ethno-religious categories on outgroup-directed empathy, attitudes and prosocial behaviours of children living in Northern Ireland (N=88; M=7.09, SD=1.47 years old). Bootstrapped chain mediation found that lower essentialist beliefs predicted greater outgroup-directed empathy, which was positively related to outgroup attitudes, which in turn, predicted more outgroup prosocial behaviours. The findings highlight the importance of essentialist beliefs as an underlying factor promoting empathy, with links to prosocial behaviours in settings of intergroup conflict. The intervention implications are discussed.