The Influence of the Expression of Subtle and Blatant Sexual Prejudice on Personal Prejudice and Identification With the Expresser

When Potential Allies and Targets Do (and Do Not) Confront Anti-Asian Prejudice: Reactions to Blatant and Subtle Prejudice During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Anti-Asian xenophobia has exploded during the COVID-19 pandemic, after U.S. political leaders promoted anti-Asian rhetoric from its start. Confronting prejudice interrupts future perpetration of such prejudice, but confronting prejudice can only occur to the extent actions are first attributed to prejudice. Bystanders may attribute less prejudice to speech about the "Chinese Virus" than to more blatant stereotype expression, for example, and therefore be less vehement in their confrontations. Across two studies, we examined the impact of anti-Asian prejudice type (blatant, subtle, or no prejudice) and bystander race/ethnicity (White or Asian American/Pacific Islander [AAPI]), on prejudice attribution, willingness to confront, actual confrontation, and confrontation vehemence. In the context of a hiring manager justifying rejection of a Chinese applicant, we predicted that blatant prejudice would be detected and confronted most willingly, and subtle prejudice more willingly than no prejudice, and that prejudice detection would mediate the relationship between prejudice type and willingness to confront. Further, we expected AAPI bystanders to detect anti-Asian prejudice more readily than White bystanders, but to confront at lower rates, with actual confrontations being more vehement following blatant (relative to subtle or no) prejudice. Analyses were conducted using SPSS 27 and the PROCESS v4.1 macro, controlling for potential confounds such as political orientation and individual-level prejudice (expressed or perceived). Results of both studies (n = 142 [Study 1], n = 274 [Study 2]) supported hypotheses, except in Study 1 bystanders exposed to subtle prejudice were no more willing to confront than no-prejudice controls. Results of exploratory analyses indicated that attribution to prejudice was the primary obstacle to confrontation following subtle prejudice, whereas action taking was the primary obstacle following blatant prejudice. This research underscores the need for interventions to increase detection of all forms of anti-Asian prejudice and to provide would-be confronters with effective confrontation tools.

Assessing the Effects of a Real-Life Contact Intervention on Prejudice Toward LGBT People

Prejudice against sexual and gender minorities (e.g., LGBT people) is quite prevalent and is harmful. We examined an existing-and often-used-contact intervention in pre-existing groups in an educational setting and assessed its effectiveness in reducing different forms of LGBT negativity. We focused particularly on modern LGBT negativity: a relatively subtle form of prejudice, involving ambivalence, denial, and/or the belief that there is too much attention for LGBT prejudice. We used a mixed design in which condition (experimental vs. control group) was the between-participants factor, which was randomized at the group level, and time (pretest vs. posttest vs. follow-up) was the within-participants factor (N = 117). Interventions were video recorded and the behavior of LGBT educators and participants was coded. Participants responded positively to the intervention, especially to the LGBT educator's "coming-out story." Exploratory analysis of the video data indicated that the perceived effectiveness of the intervention was higher in groups where participants were more engaged, although caution is necessary in interpreting this finding. The most important measure indicated that modern LGBT negativity decreased in the intervention groups directly after the intervention, but returned to baseline levels one week later. However, in the control condition, modern LGBT negativity had increased over time. Taken together, this suggests that an actual reduction in modern LGBT negativity was short-lived (i.e., the intervention effect disappeared within 7 days).

The Negative Implications of Being Tolerated: Tolerance From the Target's Perspective

Intergroup toleration is a requirement for living with diversity and actively promoted by local, national, and international bodies. However, although psychological researchers have extensively considered the implications of being discriminated, little is known about the psychological consequences of being tolerated. In this article, we argue that beyond the freedoms implied by tolerance, being “merely” tolerated also implies social identity threats that compromise specific psychological needs (belongingness, esteem, control, certainty). We further consider the psychological consequences of being tolerated at the personal, interpersonal, and intergroup levels and consider factors that may moderate the impact of being tolerated for minority outcomes. Taken together, this work provides the first theoretical argument and overview of what it means to be tolerated by considering the negative implications of toleration in diverse nations.