No abstract

Drawing on theories of intergroup prejudice and decision making, the authors examined how much participants valued lives of conationals and enemy civilians. Using decisions made under risk, Experiment 1 showed that Americans valued Iraqi and American lives equally when outcomes for those nations did not compete but valued American lives more under outcome competition. Experiments 2 and 3 extended this finding by illustrating ethnocentric valuation even when large numbers of lives were at stake: The number of lives at stake mattered less for enemy civilians than it did for conational combatants. Experiment 4 provided additional evidence of this ethnocentric indifference to magnitude, regardless of combatant status of the conationals' lives. In all experiments, individual difference measures associated with prejudice (e.g., group identification and prejudice, empathy, social dominance orientation, social attitudes) corresponded to ethnocentric valuation measured in decisions. Results demonstrate that categorization, competitive context, and individual propensities for prejudice influence how much one values lives.

No abstract

The present research examined the relation between in-group identification and the use of social identity- enhancing strategies for dealing with the discomfort associated with inconsistency between personal beliefs and in-group behavior (intragroup dissonance). Consistent with the hypothesis that social identity-enhancing strategies would be more effective at reducing intragroup dissonance for those highly identified with the in-group, Experiment 1 demonstrated that level of group identification moderated the effectiveness of group affirmation for reducing psychological discomfort associated with intragroup dissonance, but not the effectiveness of self-affirmation. In Experiment 2, which manipulated level of group identification, participants in a high-identification condition, relative to those in a low-identification condition, were more likely to choose to reduce intragroup dissonance with a strategy that enhanced social identity (i.e., out-group derogation) over a strategy less effective at social identity enhancement (i.e., activism to change the behavior of the group). Implications for intergroup relations are discussed.

The information–motivation–behavioral skills (IMB) model has been shown reliably to predict and change a number of behaviors (Fisher & Fisher, 2000). In light of low voter turnout among young adults, the present research examines the utility of the IMB model to predict voting behavior among this population. The predictive validity of the IMB model for voting behavior was tested, as well as its unique contribution to explaining voting behavior, over and above the theory of reasoned action (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980) and the theory of planned behavior (Ajzen, 1985). As expected, the variables specified by the IMB model uniquely predicted intention to vote (Study 1) and voting behavior (Study 2), over and above the 2 other models.

No abstract

No abstract

Do previous intergroup contact experiences predispose a person to be more inclined to help outgroup members? The present work explores whether the quality of one's contact experiences with an outgroup is associated with outgroup helping. Across two studies, we examine the relation between intergroup contact (quantity and quality of contact), empathy (Study 1 and Study 2), anxiety (Study 2), and helping intentions across a variety of dimensions and behaviors (Study 1 and Study 2), as well as level of commitment to helping outgroup members (Study 2). Across both studies, quality, more than quantity, contact was associated with increases in outgroup helping intentions, which was explained (i.e., mediated) by empathy. In addition, quality contact was also associated with increased commitment to help an outgroup, which was also explained by empathy. Implications for intergroup helping and emotions are discussed.