Barriers to Multiculturalism: Ingroup Favoritism and Outgroup Hostility are Independently Associated with Policy Opposition

Abstract

Bias in favor of the ingroup is a key determinant of discrimination, and is thought to be largely independent of, and qualitatively distinct from, outgroup hostility. One key difference, according to Realistic Conflict Theory, is that ingroup preferences become more closely associated with discrimination when intergroup threat is salient. The current study presents a direct comparison of the level of association of ingroup favoritism and outgroup hostility with opposition to multiculturalism policies in New Zealand. With both predictors operationalized as affect ratings of warmth and anger across separate models, ingroup favoritism and outgroup hostility were independently associated with European New Zealanders' (N = 10,869) opposition to both resourcespecific and symbolic policies. Furthermore, ingroup favoritism was more strongly associated with opposition to resource-specific policies which represent high realistic threat (compared with symbolic policies). In contrast, outgroup hostility was more consistently associated with both policy domains.

Attitudes towards climate migrants in Aotearoa New Zealand: the roles of climate change beliefs and immigration attitudes

“…Overall, respondents from this cross-sectional, opt-in study were positive towards immigrants in general and climate migrants specifically, including when accounting for differences in sample demographics. This positivity reflects previous findings about Aotearoa NZers' openness to cultural diversity (Perry et al 2018;Sibley and Ward 2013). However, people believed that immigrants more than climate migrants made positive contributions to society, even accounting for sample characteristics and different levels of belief in climate change (cf.…”

Preference for hierarchy is associated with reduced empathy and increased counter-empathy towards others, especially out-group targets

“…Apathy is not a particularly potent motivator of behavior, except perhaps neglect (Cuddy et al, 2008;Vachon, Lynam, & Johnson, 2014). Given that (i) intergroup conflict is often beset with overt antipathy and (ii) decreased positive affect and increased negative affect towards out-groups can be independent predictors of attitudinal outcomes (Perry, Priest, Paradies, Barlow, & Sibley, 2018), our findings suggest the importance of studying both empathic as well as counter-empathic emotions in groups.…”

The role of religious fundamentalism and tightness-looseness in promoting collective narcissism and extreme group behavior.

“…Altemeyer (2003), for example, found that RF correlates with religious ethnocentrism (i.e., a tendency to make “ingroup vs. outgroup” judgment based on religious affiliations) and prejudice. Part of the explanation for this is that religious fundamentalists are strongly identified with their religious group (Saroglou, 2016; Ysseldyk, Matheson, & Anisman, 2010), and as proposed by social identity theory, strong ingroup identification can lead to both ingroup favoritism and intergroup discrimination (Perry, Priest, Paradies, Barlow, & Sibley, 2018; Tajfel, 1981; Tajfel & Turner, 1979).…”