Feeling like a group after a natural disaster: Common ingroup identity and relations with outgroup victims among majority and minority young children

Abstract

We conducted a field study to test whether the common ingroup identity model (Gaertner & Dovidio, 2000, reducing intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press) could be a useful tool to improve intergroup relations in the aftermath of a natural disaster. Participants were majority (Italian) and minority (immigrant) elementary school children (N = 517) living in the area struck by powerful earthquakes in May 2012. Results revealed that, among majority children, the perceived external threat represented by the earthquake was associated with greater perceptions of belonging to a common ingroup including both ingroup and outgroup. In turn, heightened one-group perceptions were associated with greater willingness to meet and help outgroup victims, both directly and indirectly via more positive outgroup attitudes. Among immigrant children, perceived disaster threat was not associated with any of the dependent variables; one-group perceptions were positively associated with outgroup attitudes, helping and contact intentions towards outgroup victims. Thus, one-group perceptions after a natural disaster may promote more positive and supporting relations between the majority and the minority group. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of the findings.

Intergroup fears and concerns among minority and majority groups: Implications for contact and attitudes

“…The distinction between Italians and immigrants was made based on indications by the schools and by taking into account the family background of students (i.e., both Italian parents for Italian participants; both foreign parents for immigrant participants). This distinction is commonly used in research considering data collected in Italy, especially concerning data from both majority and minority groups (e.g., Vezzali, Cadamuro, Versari, Giovannini, & Trifiletti, 2015; Visintin, Voci, Pagotto, & Hewstone, 2017).…”

Out‐group threats and distress as antecedents of common in‐group identity among majority and minority group members in the aftermath of a natural disaster

“…Also, while trying to reduce post‐traumatic stress symptoms in the population, practitioners can “make use” of them to enhance awareness that other survivors are affected by the very same symptoms and that the community as a whole is involved in the disaster. Increased one‐group perceptions should in turn be one predictor of reduced intergroup conflict among both majority and minority members (Gaertner & Dovidio, ), also in the aftermath of a natural disaster (Andrighetto et al, ) and when children are involved (Vezzali et al, ).…”

The Influence of Suffering, Social Class, and Social Power on Prosociality: An Empirical Review

“…These individuals were also more likely to report beter social well-being and were less likely to withdraw socially in the aftermath of disasters. Along the same lines of research as Kaniasty and Norris [15], Vezzali and colleagues [16] studied children who were afected by two major earthquakes. They found that symptoms of postraumatic stress were positively associated with a tendency to help other survivors and to build social bonds, possibly as a coping mechanism.…”

“…That is, those who sufered may often choose to provide social or informational support instead of tangible material support. Moreover, the driving force behind such preferences for prosociality may not be driven by empathy but instead by other mechanisms such as self-other similarity or communal orientation [16,20].…”