Traditional prejudice remains outside of the WEIRD world

Children's judgments on the acceptability of prejudice

By middle childhood, children become aware that discriminatory behavior is unacceptable; however, the development of their anti-prejudice sentiments is largely unknown. Across two studies, 333 Australian 5- to 10-year-olds (51% female, majority White) were asked how acceptable they thought it was to have prejudicial sentiments toward 25 different targets. Children responded privately through a novel digital paradigm designed to minimize social-desirability biases. With age, children were more likely to display anti-prejudice sentiments toward targets who are prosocial, vulnerable, and of minority race and linguistic backgrounds. In contrast, they judged prejudice as "okay" for targets who are antisocial and negatively regarded in society. These findings suggest that children's perceptions of prejudice become increasingly nuanced and adult-like across the primary school years.

Conversational Silencing of Racism in Psychological Science: Toward Decolonization in Practice

This article addresses a paradox between self-perceptions of psychology as a liberal, progressive, antiracist discipline and profession and the persistent criticisms of racism and calls for decolonization. It builds on the criticisms of epistemic exclusion and White centering, arguing that White supremacy is maintained by "conversational silencing" in which the focus on doing good psychology systematically draws attention away from the realities of racism and the operation of power. The process is illustrated by investigations of disciplinary discourse around non-Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic psychology and on stereotyping, racism, and prejudice reduction, which constitute the vanguard of liberal scholarship in the discipline. This progressive scholarship nurtures "White ignorance," an absence of belief about systemic racism that psychology plays a part in upholding.

The contributions of positive outgroup and negative ingroup evaluation to implicit bias favoring outgroups

People sometimes prefer groups to which they do not belong (outgroups) over their own groups (ingroups). Many long-standing theoretical perspectives assume that this outgroup favorability bias primarily reflects negative ingroup evaluations rather than positive outgroup evaluations. To examine the contributions of negative ingroup versus positive outgroup evaluations to outgroup bias, we examined participants' data (total n > 879,000) from Implicit Association Tests [A. G. Greenwald, D. E. McGhee, J. L. K. Schwartz, J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 74, 1464-1480 (1998)] measuring intergroup attitudes across four social domains in exploratory and preregistered confirmatory analyses. Process modeling [F. R. Conrey, J. W. Sherman, B. Gawronski, K. Hugenberg, C. J. Groom, J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 89, 469-487 (2005)] was applied to the responses of participants who demonstrated implicit outgroup bias to separately estimate the contributions of negative ingroup and positive outgroup evaluations. The outgroup biases of lower-status group members (i.e., Asian, Black, gay and lesbian, and older people) consistently reflected greater contributions of positive outgroup evaluations than negative ingroup evaluations. In contrast, the outgroup biases of higher-status group members (i.e., White, straight, and younger people) reflected a more varied pattern of evaluations. We replicated this pattern of results using explicitly measured intergroup evaluations. Taking these data together, the present research demonstrates a positive-negative asymmetry effect of outgroup bias, primarily among members of lower-status groups.

The Impact of Response Instruction and Target Group on the BIAS Map

Response instructions—inviting participants to respond from a certain perspective—can significantly influence the performance and construct validity of psychological measures. Stereotype Content Model (SCM) and then the BIAS map (“behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes”) were originally developed as universal measures of shared cultural stereotypes—participants’ perceptions of what most of the people in a society think about the target group—and their related social-structural antecedents, emotions and behavioral tendencies. Yet a number of studies have adopted a different response instruction focusing on individual stereotypes—what the participants personally think about the target group. So far, there is little evidence to suggest how these two different response instructions (individual vs. shared cultural perspective) might influence the performance of the BIAS map, especially when applied to target groups that elicit different normative and social desirability concerns. To provide novel evidence, we conducted an experiment with a representative sample of ethnic Slovaks (N = 1269). In a 2 × 2 factorial design, we found response instruction (individual vs. shared cultural perspective) and target group [stigmatized ethnic minority (the Roma) vs. non-stigmatized ethnic minority (the Hungarians)] had significant effects on the BIAS map and their interaction had significant effects on the social structure and behavioral tendencies (but not on stereotypes and emotions) scales. Exploratory analysis also points to partial influence on the mediation hypothesis underlying the BIAS map and minor effects on its scale properties. Our evidence suggests that the difference between individual stereotypes and shared cultural stereotypes partially depends on the target group in question and that they should be treated as two potentially separate constructs.

Biased, Therefore Unhappy: Disentangling the Collectivism-Happiness Relationship Globally

A relationship between individualism and happiness has been observed in many studies, with collectivist cultures having lower indices of happiness. It is often argued that this effect arises because people in individualist countries have greater independence and more freedom to pursue personal goals. It appears, however, that the association is much more complex than this as many collectivist countries suffer from more basic problems, such as social conflicts, discrimination, and prejudice. We hypothesized that global differences in happiness could be the result of ingroup bias and its consequences, rather than of collectivism itself. To test our hypotheses, we applied a country-level design, where a country is considered a unit of analysis. We found that individualism predicted various aspects of a country’s aggregated level of happiness, but was only a marginal predictor of happiness when ingroup favoritism and group-focused enmity were controlled for. We discuss the implications of these findings from evolutionary and social psychological perspectives.

Prejudice Reduction and Collective Action: A Conflict or Confluence of Interests?

There is a growing body of research findings suggesting that prejudice reduction strategies can have unintended negative consequences, particularly by helping to stabilize systems of inequality. In light of these findings, a handful of scholars have suggested that the field be guided less by the prejudice reduction tradition, so as to focus more on collective action. While agreeing with the recent critiques of prejudice reduction, I argue that in more robustly embracing a collective action approach we should be careful not to abandon the notion of perceptualism that colored original thinking on prejudice reduction, lest we artificially narrow the scope of social psychological research and unintentionally ignore communities that do not fit well within current thinking in the collective action tradition.