The present study tested how intergroup threat (high versus low) and social identity as a Muslim (salient versus non-salient) affected belief in conspiracy theories. Data among Indonesian Muslim students (N = 139) from this study demonstrated that intergroup threat and social identity salience interacted to influence belief in conspiracy theories. High intergroup threat triggered greater belief in conspiracy theories than low intergroup threat, more prominently in the condition in which participants' Muslim identity was made salient. Collective angst also proved to mediate the effect of intergroup threat on the belief. However, in line with the prediction, evidence of this mediation effect of collective angst was only on the salient social identity condition. Discussions on these research findings build on both theoretical and practical implications. RESUMENEl presente estudio examinó cómo la amenaza intergrupal (alta versus baja) y la identidad social como musulmán (saliente versus no saliente), afecta la creencia en teorías de conspiración. Los datos entre los estudiantes Musulmanes de Indonesia en este estudio, (N = 139) mostraron que la amenaza intergrupal y la saliencia de la identidad social, interactúan para influenciar creencias en teorías de conspiración. La amenaza intergrupal alta produjo mayor creencia en teorías de conspiración en comparación con la amenaza intergrupal baja, esta condición se presentó de manera más prominente en los participantes en donde la identidad musulmana se hizo saliente. La angustia colectiva también contribuyo a mediar el efecto de la amenaza intergrupal en la creencia; no obstante, de acuerdo con la predicción, la evidencia de este efecto de mediación de la angustia colectiva fue sólo con la condición de identidad social saliente. Las discusiones sobre estos resultados de la investigación se basan en dos implicaciones teóricas y prácticas. El efecto de la amenaza intergrupal y la identidad social saliente en la creencia en teorías de conspiración sobre el terrorismo en Indonesia: la angustia colectiva como un mediador Indonesia: la angustia colectiva como un mediador.
This current research was to give new insight into group-based variables that frame belief in conspiracy about terrorism in Indonesia. Results (N = 201) showed that social identification with Moslem was positively related to out-group derogation to the Western people and to the belief that these people have conspired to instigate terrorism in Indonesia. We also demonstrated that, in line with prediction, the effect of social identification on out-group derogation and belief in conspiracy theory held only when participants perceived the Western people as highly threatening Islamic identity. This perceived intergroup threat also structured the mediation role of out-group derogation. More specifically, we hypothesized and found that out-group derogation mediated the effect of social identification on belief in the conspiracy theory, only when Moslem participants perceived the Western people as highly threatening their Islamic identity. We discussed these findings in terms of theoretical and practical implications.
Humans are social animals, but not everyone will be mindful of others to the same extent. Individual differences have been found, but would social mindfulness also be shaped by one’s location in the world? Expecting cross-national differences to exist, we examined if and how social mindfulness differs across countries. At little to no material cost, social mindfulness typically entails small acts of attention or kindness. Even though fairly common, such low-cost cooperation has received little empirical attention. Measuring social mindfulness across 31 samples from industrialized countries and regions (n = 8,354), we found considerable variation. Among selected country-level variables, greater social mindfulness was most strongly associated with countries’ better general performance on environmental protection. Together, our findings contribute to the literature on prosociality by targeting the kind of everyday cooperation that is more focused on communicating benevolence than on providing material benefits.
An important part of our daily lives is characterized with helping interactions, which not only take place in interpersonal context but also in intergroup context. Helping interactions in intergroup context typically occur in which people belonging to certain social category (ingroup) are willing to help others belonging to different social category (outgroup).This research aims to examine, firstly, how outgroup helping and empathy are affected by outgroup status and perspective-taking. Secondly, this research is to test the role of empathy in mediating the effect of outgroup status and perspective-taking on outgroup helping. The results are in line with all hypotheses specified in demonstrating that both lower outgroup status than higher outgroup status and strong perspective-taking than weak perspective-taking elicited higher degree of empathy and outgroup helping. We also predicted and found that empathy mediated the effect of outgroup status and perspective-taking on outgroup helping. Theoretical and practical implications of these research findings are discussed.
We examined how the perception that separatist groups threaten the majority's moral identity impacts the latter group's support for reconciliation in separatist conflict. Two studies were conducted in Indonesia, where separatist conflict is rife. Javanese students (representing the nonseparatist majority) responded surveys regarding separatist conflicts in Aceh (Study 1, N = 679) or West Papua (Study 2, N = 500). As expected, perceived threat to the majority's moral identity increased this particular group's reconciliatory attitudes (Study 1), emotions, and behaviours (Study 2), through increased compensatory needs for social acceptance and restoration of moral image. These findings underline the importance of moral identity dynamics in separatist conflict. Moreover, they reveal that the majority, despite its dominant position, can experience morality threat from separatist groups which can foster positive attitudes towards the reconciliation process.
Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S1838990214000118How to cite this article: Ali Mashuri and Esti Zaduqisti (2014). We believe in your conspiracy if we distrust you: the role of intergroup distrust in structuring the effect of Islamic identication, competitive victimhood, and group incompatibility on belief in a conspiracy This study examined how distrust towards an out-group believed to be an actor of a conspiracy theory moderates the role of Islamic identification, group incompatibility and competitive victimhood in explaining belief in said conspiracy. The contextual background we used to verify this idea is the belief in a conspiracy theory among Indonesian Muslims about the involvement of Western countries behind terrorism in Indonesia. More precisely, we found only among Muslim participants with high distrust towards Western people that Islamic identification and group incompatibility positively predicted the perception that Muslims, more than other religious groups, are the victim of the Western people and the belief in a theory that these people have conspired to create terrorism in Indonesia. We also hypothesized and found that competitive victimhood significantly mediated the effects of Islamic identification and group incompatibility on the belief in a conspiracy theory. However, in line with the prediction, these mediation roles of victimhood were obtained only among participants with high distrust. We discussed these findings with reference to theoretical and practical implications.
Emphasizing a common group identity is often suggested as a way to promote between-group helping. But recently, researchers have identified a set of strategic motives for helping other groups, including the desire to present the own group as warm and generous. When the motive for helping is strategic, a salient common identity should reduce the willingness to help another group, because the help no longer communicates a quality of the ingroup (only of the common group). The authors tested this hypothesis in two experiments, in which they assessed beliefs about helping (Study 1) and actual helping through behavioral observation (Study 2). The results fully supported the predictions, demonstrating that a common identity is not a universal tool for the promotion of prosocial behavior. The studies also illustrate the strategic nature of between-group helping, in which acts that appear prosocial on the surface are in fact intended to enhance the ingroup's image.
In the current study, we investigate factors that facilitate or otherwise obstruct reparations of a perpetrating group (i.e. Muslims) to a victim group (i.e. Christians). The study (N = 200) reveals that among Muslim participants, the role of dual Abrahamic categorization in positively predicting reparation attitude towards Christians was mediated by the first group's prosocial emotions of empathy and collective guilt towards the latter group. In addition, relative Muslim prototypicality negatively predicted dual Abrahamic categorization and each of the two prosocial emotions. Empathy and collective guilt in turn mediated the role of relative ingroup prototypicality in negatively predicting reparation attitude. Moreover, as hypothesized, we found that the roles of empathy and collective guilt in predicting reparation intention, as manifested in participants' willingness to engage in collective action on behalf of the victim group, were not significant on their own, but were mediated by reparation attitude. These findings shed light on the importance of the relationship between the perpetrating group's shared identity with the victim group, reduced ingroup focus and its support for making reparations to the victim group. Theoretical implications, study limitations and practical strategies highlighting how to decrease relative Muslim prototypicality are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.