The Psychology of Prejudice: Ingroup Love and Outgroup Hate?

Allport (1954) recognized that attachment to one's ingroups does not necessarily require hostility toward outgroups. Yet the prevailing approach to the study of ethnocentrism, ingroup bias, and prejudice presumes that ingroup love and outgroup hate are reciprocally related. Findings from both cross-cultural research and laboratory experiments support the alternative view that ingroup identification is independent of negative attitudes toward outgroups and that much ingroup bias and intergroup discrimination is motivated by preferential treatment of ingroup members rather than direct hostility toward outgroup members. Thus to understand the roots of prejudice and discrimination requires first of all a better understanding of the functions that ingroup formation and identification serve for human beings. This article reviews research and theory on the motivations for maintenance of ingroup boundaries and the implications of ingroup boundary protection for intergroup relations, conflict, and conflict prevention.     

Imagining contact reduces prejudice in preschool children

We examined the effectiveness of an imagery‐based strategy designed to reduce prejudice in preschoolers in Italy. Three studies involving different target groups (disabled children, Black children) were conducted within Italian preschools. Children (4–6 years) were asked to imagine and draw meeting an outgroup member (Studies 1 and 2) or to imagine writing a letter to an outgroup member (Study 3). Results revealed that preschoolers in the experimental condition, relative to a control group, reported less intergroup bias in the form of contact intentions and resource allocation as well as greater behavioral inclusiveness; effects were mediated by improved intergroup attitudes. Our findings are important in understanding ways that promote positive intergroup relations in ways that align with the interests of young children.     

Horizontal Hostility; Relations Between Similar Minority Groups

Two studies were conducted to examine the relations between similar minority groups. We predicted that minority group members would show horizontal hostility, a form of prejudice, against members of a similar, but more mainstream, minority group. The results of both studies confirmed this hypothesis. In Study 1, members of 3 Jewish congregations (reform, conservative, orthodox) showed prejudice against a member of a similar but slightly more secular congregation. In Study 2, members of a college varsity soccer team showed prejudice against junior varsity players. We conclude by suggesting that horizontal hostility is the result of social changes since Allport (1954) wrote The Nature of Prejudice. Members of minority groups value their minority social identity, even when the group is stigmatized. The positive value of minority social identity causes group members to look down on members of similar, more mainstream groups.     

Assimilation and discriminatory perceptions and experiences: The case of Hispanics in the United States

This paper examines the relationship between assimilation and discriminatory practices encountered by Hispanic-Americans. Theories of intergroup relations have typically assumed that as members of minority ethnic groups assimilate to a dominant group, they perceive and experience lower degrees of discrimination directed against them. In reviewing theories of majority–minority relations, we have called this the “assimilationist” model. This view has been opposed by some scholars who argue that as minority ethnics assimilate and become more knowledgeable of the larger society, they perceive and experience higher levels of discrimination against them and their group. We have termed this the “conflict model” of interethnic relations. Using data from the 2002 National Survey of Latinos, conducted by the Pew Hispanic Center, we test opposing hypotheses based on these two models. Our findings, while exploratory, largely support the assimilationist model, with a few contradictory results. We discuss these findings and their implications for understanding the current situation of Hispanics in the United States.     

A Social Psychology of National and International Group Relations

This concluding article provides a framework for a social psychological analysis of intergroup conflict and conflict resolution. The framework highlights the individual and intergroup factors that shape the nature of perceptions of intergroup relations and group representations, and describes how these perceptions lead to cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses toward groups. Included in the framework are the metatheoretical, theoretical, and practical contributions of the articles in this issue toward understanding intergroup relations. The potential and responsibility of social psychologists to move beyond the laboratory to applied national and international issues is also discussed.     

Collective Action in Modern Times: How Modern Expressions of Prejudice Prevent Collective Action

This contribution addresses modern forms of group-based discrimination, and examines how these impact upon the likelihood that people engage in collective action. Based on a review of the relevant literature, we predict that modern expressions of prejudice are less likely to be perceived as indicating group-based disadvantage and hence elicit less anger, protest, and collective action than old-fashioned prejudice. We present three studies to offer empirical support for this prediction. In Study 1 ( N = 116), female participants were led to believe that the general public endorses either old-fashioned or modern sexist views. In Study 2 ( N = 44) and 3 ( N = 37) female participants were exposed to a student supervisor who allegedly held either old-fashioned or modern sexist views. Results of all three studies indicate that modern sexism is less likely to be perceived as a form of discrimination, and as a result elicits less anger at the source and less support for collective action (Study 1), intentions to protest (Study 2), and collective protest behavior (Study 3) than old-fashioned sexism. In discussing the results of this research, we connect to current insights on antecedents of collective action, and identify conclusions from our analysis that are relevant for societal and organizational policy making.     

Intergroup Contact, Forgiveness, and Experience of "The Troubles" in Northern Ireland

Two studies used random sample surveys to test the "contact hypothesis" on intergroup attitudes of Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland. In Study 1, archival data from two different surveys in 1989 ( N = 310 Catholics, 422 Protestants) and 1991 ( N = 319 Catholics, 478 Protestants) showed that contact was positively related to attitudes toward denominational mixing. Study 2 ( N = 391 Catholics, 647 Protestants) explored predictors of intergroup forgiveness, and also showed that intergroup contact was positively related to outgroup attitudes, perspective-taking, and trust (even among those who had a worse experience of sectarian conflict). These studies indicate that research in peace psychology can provide a deeper understanding of the conflict in Northern Ireland and, in due course, contribute to its resolution.     

Introduction to the Issue

Gordon Willard Allport was born more than 100 years ago on November 11, 1897. In honor of the centennial of his birth, this issue of the Journal presents a collection of articles on the social psychology of prejudice and intergroup relations—the field that Allport pioneered with his classic 1954 book, The Nature of Prejudice. The articles provide insights into both perpetrators and targets of prejudice and the conflict that often takes place between members of different societal groups. In the tradition of Gordon Allport, these articles demonstrate that it is possible for social science to make theoretical, empirical, and practical contributions to the understanding and resolution of social problems. This introductory article high-lights Allport's contributions to the social psychology of prejudice and intergroup relations. Overviews of the articles in this issue are also provided, and the recurring theoretical and methodological approaches are considered.     

The Role of Empathy in Improving Intergroup Relations

This article analyzes the role that empathy can play in improving intergroup relations. Three types of empathy are defined: cognitive empathy and twotypes of emotional empathy, reactive and parallel. Research indicating that empathy causes prosocial behavior is reviewed, along with studies indicating that training can be used to increase levels of empathic skills. Intergroup relations programs that employ empathy are also reviewed. Studies of the effects of empathizing with outgroup members on prejudice are discussed, andseveral processes by which empathy may mediate changes in prejudice are presented (e.g., reducing perceived dissimilarity and anxiety concerning the outgroup) and cognitive dissonance. The ways in which empathy can be introduced into intergroup relations programs are discussed, along with a series of recommendations for its implementation.     

Valuing Diversity and Interest in Intergroup Contact

The present research examines ways in which valuing diversity relates to interest in intergroup contact among members of minority and majority status groups. Using open-ended responses, Study 1 reveals that ethnic minority group members are less likely to perceive that diversity is valued than ethnic majority group members, yet those who perceive that diversity is valued tend to express greater interest in intergroup contact. Surveys of Black and White respondents (Study 2) and ethnic minority and majority respondents (Study 3) indicate similar trends. Moreover, these studies consistently show that valuing diversity uniquely predicts interest in intergroup contact among majority group members, whereas perceiving that outgroup members value diversity predicts interest in intergroup contact among minority group members. Implications of these findings for understanding the role of diversity in intergroup relations, and reformulating aspects of intergroup contact theory, are discussed.     

Religion, Meaning, and Prejudice

Links between religion and prejudice have been interpreted to suggest that religion can both reduce and exacerbate prejudice. Here, the analysis of religion as a meaning system illuminates how religion can affect intergroup attitudes. Traditional psychological perspectives on religion and prejudice are summarized, followed by a discussion of religion and prejudice in cross-cultural and cross-religious contexts, involving varying target groups. Next, we explore possible explanatory mechanisms by proposing how four levels of meaning associated with religion—cognitive, motivational, societal, and intergroup—may both promote and attenuate prejudice. Finally, additional factors that might facilitate the paradoxical coexistence of religious egalitarian intentions with prejudiced attitudes are considered, and we speculate about the potential for religious groups to reduce prejudice within their adherents.     

Interethnic Ideology, Intergroup Perceptions, and Cultural Orientation

We examined endorsement of multicultural, assimilation, and colorblind ideologies, including their relations to stereotyping and in-group bias, among community samples of Latinos and non-Latino Whites. Participants also completed measures of their orientations to Latino and non-Latino White cultures. Analyses indicated that participants endorsed multiculturalism more strongly than colorblindness and colorblindness more strongly than assimilation. Although Latinos endorsed multiculturalism more strongly than did Whites, ratings of colorblindness and assimilation did not differ. Both groups exhibited in-group bias and out-group homogeneity. However, multiculturalism was associated with lower in-group bias. Further, Latinos who more strongly endorsed multiculturalism perceived less within group variability (i.e., had stronger stereotypes), whereas the reverse was true for Whites. Finally, analyses of cultural orientation measures indicated that ethnicity is not synonymous with cultural orientation; Latinos were equally oriented to Latino and White cultures, overall, and Latino and White American orientations were unrelated.     

Theoretical, Empirical, and Practical Approaches to Intergroup Conflict

The study of intergroup relations has long been an interest of social scientists, particularly members of The Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues. The articles in this issue offer a wide variety of theoretical, empirical, and practical approaches to understanding and resolving national and international group conflict. This introductory article summarizes the original social psychological work that laid the foundation for contemporary thinking on intergroup relations, and presents an overview of each of the contributions in this issue. Also discussed are applications of social psychology to real-world intergroup conflicts.     

More than Two Decades of Changing Ethnic Attitudes in the Netherlands

This article uses data from three studies to examine changing reactions toward ethnic minority groups in the Netherlands (1979–2002). Using realistic conflict theory, Study 1 focuses on support for discrimination of immigrant groups in general. The findings indicate that this support is more widespread in times of high levels of immigration, when the unemployment level has recently risen strongly, and among cohorts that grew to maturity in times of large immigration waves or high unemployment rates. Studies 2 and 3 focus on changing feelings toward different ethnic out-groups in an ideological context (2001–2004) marked by a shift from multiculturalism toward assimilation. Study 2 showed that the shift toward assimilation negatively affected Dutch participants' feelings toward Islamic outgroups, but not to other minority groups. Study 3 used an experimental design, and the results showed that ethnic attitudes are more negative in an assimilation compared to a multicultural context. It is concluded that the structural and ideological social context is important for understanding people's changing reactions .     

Looking Back as We Look Ahead: Integrating Research, Theory, and Practice on Intergroup Relations

This article looks back at the origins of intergroup relations in social psychology just over 50 years ago. Pioneers in the field—Robin Williams, Gordon Allport, and Kurt Lewin—were all deeply concerned with integrating social science and social action. We seek to re-center this mutuality of research and practice, and to expand the focus of intergroup relations from prejudice reduction to social inclusion. The articles in this issue document cutting-edge research, theory, and practice, and make substantive contributions to the future of intergroup relations. A unique feature of this issue is a set of commentaries by prominent scholars and practitioners in the fields of intergroup relations and education. Walter Stephan, James Banks, Thomas Pettigrew, and Patricia Gurin each reflect on the collection of articles through the lens of their own personal and professional biographies to help define the intersections of research, theory, and practice on intergroup relations.     

Breaking Barriers, Crossing Borders, Building Bridges: Communication Processes in Intergroup Dialogues

Research in intergroup contact and intergroup education is increasingly focused on the psychological and pedagogical processes to explain the impact of interventions on desired outcomes. This emerging scholarship has enriched our understanding about what types of interventions are effective or not and how these interventions impact outcomes of prejudice reduction and social inclusion. In the present study, a new theoretical dimension of processes operating in intergroup contact and education is investigated: communication processes. Factor analyses of communication processes within an intergroup encounter, using data from a pretest/posttest design with a diverse group of students ( n = 211), revealed four factors: (1) appreciating difference, (2) engaging self, (3) critical self-reflection, and (4) alliance building. Furthermore, path analysis shows that these communication processes fully mediate the impact of intergroup dialogue on bridging differences. The communication processes illuminate a deeper understanding of what happens within the context of intergroup encounters and provide a link between pedagogical strategies and psychological processes.     

Viewing Intergroup Relations in Europe through Allport's Lens Model of Prejudice

This article employs Allport's (1954) lens model of the causes of prejudice to analyze the articles in this issue of the Journal of Social Issues . The lens model specifies that historical, socio cultural, personality, and situational factors contribute to prejudice. The articles in this issue examine a number of variables at each of these levels of analysis, and many employ multilevel designs in which variables at more than one level are examined within the same study. Suggestions for future research on intergroup relations in Europe are offered including conducting more comparative and multilevel studies and creating comprehensive theories that integrate different levels of analysis. Some implications of the findings of these studies for intergroup relations programs are also discussed.     

Language, Power, and Intergroup Relations

Language is a communication medium for turning a power base into influence. But more than that, the creation of power and its maintenance or change can also occur in and through language. In the present article, we discuss some of the dynamic links between language and power to underscore their relevance to the study of intergroup relations. In particular we address the means by which low-power groups might achieve power, and how those who are in high-power positions might retain and subvert acts of power. In doing this, we counterpose our discussion with research that addresses these same issues from a static and individualistic approach to power. Our central argument is that the latter work lacks theoretical facility for describing and understanding the aforementioned dynamic processes of power, and moreover, that its application may unwittingly serve to reify and cement existing control relationships.     

Empathy to action: Child and adolescent out‐group attitudes and prosocial behaviors in a setting of intergroup conflict

The paper explored how to promote constructive intergroup relations among children and young people in a context of protracted conflict. Across two studies, the Empathy–Attitudes–Action model was examined in middle childhood and adolescence. More specifically, we tested the relations among dispositional empathy, out‐group attitudes, and prosocial behaviors for youth born after the peace agreement in Northern Ireland. In one correlational (Study 1: N = 132; 6–11 years old: M = 8.42 years, SD = 1.23) and one longitudinal design (Study 2: N = 466; 14–15 years old), bootstrapped mediation analyses revealed that empathy was associated with more positive attitudes toward the conflict‐related out‐group, which in turn, was related to higher out‐group prosocial behaviors, both self‐report and concrete actions. Given that out‐group prosocial acts in a setting of intergroup conflict may serve as the antecedents for peacebuilding among children and adolescents, this study has intervention implications.     

Learning about Difference, Learning with Others, Learning to Transgress

Emerging work in intergroup contact has vitalized a focus on processes affecting the impact of interventions on outcomes. We theorized that intergroup learning—learning about other groups, educating others about one's own groups, intention to bridge intergroup differences, and reflecting on one's own group—mediates the effect of a combined enlightenment-encounter curricular intervention on assessments of importance and confidence in taking action to reduce prejudice and promote diversity. Results from a pretest/posttest design with a diverse group of undergraduate social welfare majors (n = 175) show (a) increased motivation for intergroup learning, and importance of taking action, and confidence in doing so, and (b) intergroup learning partially or fully mediates the impact of enlightenment and/or encounter on taking action .