Ecological and cultural factors underlying the global distribution of prejudice

Abstract

Prejudiced attitudes and political nationalism vary widely around the world, but there has been little research on what predicts this variation. Here we examine the ecological and cultural factors underlying the worldwide distribution of prejudice. We suggest that cultures grow more prejudiced when they tighten cultural norms in response to destabilizing ecological threats. A set of seven archival analyses, surveys, and experiments (∑ N = 3,986,402) find that nations, American states, and pre-industrial societies with tighter cultural norms show the most prejudice based on skin color, religion, nationality, and sexuality, and that tightness predicts why prejudice is often highest in areas of the world with histories of ecological threat. People’s support for cultural tightness also mediates the link between perceived ecological threat and intentions to vote for nationalist politicians. Results replicate when controlling for economic development, inequality, conservatism, residential mobility, and shared cultural heritage. These findings offer a cultural evolutionary perspective on prejudice, with implications for immigration, intercultural conflict, and radicalization.

Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response

“…The experience of fear and threat has ramifications not only for how people think about themselves, but also how they feel about and react to others-in particular, out-groups. For instance, being threatened with disease is often associated with higher levels of ethnocentrism 22 ; greater fear and perceived threat are associated with greater intolerance and punitive attitudes toward out-groups [23][24][25] . Highlighting group boundaries can undermine empathy with those who are socially distant 26,27 and increase dehumanization 28 or punishment 29 .…”

Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response

“…The experience of fear and threat has ramifications not only for how people think about themselves, but also how they feel about and react to others--in particular, outgroups. For instance, being threatened with disease is often associated with higher levels of ethnocentrism 22 ; greater fear and perceived threat are associated with greater intolerance and punitiveness toward out-groups [23][24][25] . Highlighting group boundaries can undermine empathy with those who are socially distant 26,27 and increase dehumanization 28 or punishment 29 .…”

The pandemic exposes human nature: 10 evolutionary insights

“…Accordingly, groups require stronger norms and punishment of deviance to survive under high threat (78). Indeed, experimentally priming humans with collective threat leads to an increase in desired tightness-either from God or government (79,80).…”

“…Tightness is associated with more monitoring, synchrony, and self-control, which is critical for coordinating in the face of threat (83). Yet tightness is also associated with higher ethnocentrism and lower tolerance of people from stigmatized groups (80), as well as lower creativity (84). Finding ways to maximize both openness and order-that is, to be "culturally ambidextrous"-is a key challenge for human societies now and in the future.…”