Bicultural identity orientations have rarely been examined in relation to both perceived discrimination and psychological distress. Furthermore, these constructs have usually been studied in isolation, but their intersection is essential for understanding intercultural relations in multicultural societies. Using cross-sectional data from 1,143 Canadian undergraduate students from immigrant families, this study explored the relationship between perceived discrimination and psychological distress, and how bicultural identity orientations might mediate this relationship. The structural equation modeling results indicated that perceived discrimination was associated with higher levels of psychological distress and hybrid, monocultural, alternating, and conflicted orientations, but lower levels of complementary orientation. Alternating and conflicted orientations were related to higher psychological distress, whereas the other orientations were not. Alternating and conflicted orientations mediated the relationship between perceived discrimination and psychological distress, whereas the other orientations did not. The findings are discussed in light of theories on identity integration, rejection–identification, and acculturation.
Despite the importance of cultural difference perceptions in intergroup relations, prior work has paid insufficient attention to the intersection between intergroup contact, perceived cultural distance, and policy support. Using cross‐sectional data from a community sample of 210 Turkish citizens, this study examined whether perceived cultural distance would mediate the link between intergroup contact and support for Syrian refugee rights. The results showed that perceived cultural distance mediated the relationship between contact quality, but not contact quantity, and support for refugee rights. This mediated relationship was further moderated by political orientation, such that perceived cultural distance mediated the role of contact quality in support for refugee rights only among participants with a leftist (vs. rightist) orientation. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings were discussed, along with a reflection on future research directions. Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement.
This initiative examined systematically the extent to which a large set of archival research findings generalizes across contexts. We repeated the key analyses for 29 original strategic management effects in the same context (direct reproduction) as well as in 52 novel time periods and geographies; 45% of the reproductions returned results matching the original reports together with 55% of tests in different spans of years and 40% of tests in novel geographies. Some original findings were associated with multiple new tests. Reproducibility was the best predictor of generalizability—for the findings that proved directly reproducible, 84% emerged in other available time periods and 57% emerged in other geographies. Overall, only limited empirical evidence emerged for context sensitivity. In a forecasting survey, independent scientists were able to anticipate which effects would find support in tests in new samples.
Abstract. Imagined contact has been argued to reduce prejudice. Although extant research supports this argument, replication attempts have been unsuccessful. To resolve conflicting evidence from previous studies, this study examined the effect of imagined contact on explicit and implicit prejudice against Kurds and Syrians in Turkey. Using data from 335 Turkish undergraduate students, the moderating role of ethnic and national identification in the imagined contact effect was tested. Results indicated that imagined contact did not reduce prejudice, and in-group identification did not have a moderating effect, even after controlling for actual contact. These findings call for a theoretical refinement to the imagined contact hypothesis and emphasize the need for further research to advance our understanding of when imagined contact works.
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.