An essentialism perspective on intercultural processes

Abstract

Essentialist theories are the beliefs that there are immutable essences underlying observed differences between social groups (e.g. racial group, cultural group). This paper reviews the intergroup dynamics and intrapersonal processes associated with essentialism. It also explores the interplay between the two. By explicating the intricate relationship between these psychological processes, the current paper aims to advance our understanding of intergroup relations and identify their implications for the study of multiculturalism. We posit that although the commonly observed negative intergroup outcomes, such as prejudices and biases, can be the byproducts of basic cognitive processes associated with essentialist theories, the social power dynamics in a given society also play important roles in shaping the relationships between essentialism and intergroup outcomes. We then discuss the implications of this understanding to our increasingly multicultural world.

Defining ourselves: Exploring our leader and activist identities as Asian American women doctoral students.

“…Implicit in these dialogues is also reflection on ways that norms and expectations specific to being Asian American women have shaped our definitions for leadership and activism, our interpretations of experiences and memories, and the ways we connect those experiences to our current endeavors. Lowe (1991), among others, highlights the “heterogeneity, hybridity, [and] multiplicity” of the experiences of Asian American women (e.g., Chao & Kung, 2015; Watkins, Ho, & Butler, 2017), which we consider in our context as Asian American women graduate students.…”

Contrasting Lay Theories of Polyculturalism and Multiculturalism

“…This belief, which is referred to as the genetic lay theory of race or essentialist theory of race, assumes that race is a fixed biological construct that has consequences on the traits, abilities, and internal dispositions of the individuals who belong to the race (Chao, Hong, & Chiu, 2013; No et al, 2008). This lay theory, which is also extended to essentializing cultural groups (Chao & Kung, 2015; Haslam, Bastian, Bain, & Kashima, 2006; Tsukamoto, Holland, Haslam, Karasawa, & Kashima, 2015), is rooted in the work on psychological essentialism (Medin, 1989), genetic determinism (Keller, 2005), and entity theory of psychological traits (Hong et al, 2003) that highlight assumptions people have about similarities in physical properties as a basis to make conclusions about the nature or essence of people or groups. These essences are assumed to be fixed and not subject to change.…”

Mixed reactions to multicultural (vs. Colorblind) diversity approach signals: A lay theories of culture perspective.

“…It also extends our knowledge that a multicultural approach does not equally heighten a sense of intergroup divide in all people. Although the literature thus far has suggested that a fixed cultural mindset is associated with negative outcomes across situations (e.g., more prejudice; Chao & Kung, 2015), our theorizing adds a more nuanced understanding by highlighting the contingency that the negative impact of a fixed cultural mindset depends on the context (e.g., whether a multicultural approach is signaled).…”

“…The majority of past research on mindsets suggests that a fixed mindset results in negative consequences (e.g., fixed mindset of intelligence reduced task motivation; fixed mindset of personality decreased supervisors’ recognition of employees’ performance improvement; Heslin et al, 2005; Robins & Pals, 2002). Most research on lay theories of culture more specifically also suggests that a fixed cultural mindset is associated with negative social consequences (e.g., more prejudice and stereotyping; Chao & Kung, 2015). Extending these traditions, our theory offers a more nuanced view that a fixed cultural mindset does not always lead to negative consequences.…”