Cultural Tightness-Looseness and Individual Differences in Non-Normativeness Predict Stigmatization of Out-Groups: A Multilevel Cross-Cultural Study.

Although a large body of research has focused on the determinants of stigma, multilevel approaches that can identify both micro- and macro-level influences are rarely employed. We adopted a multilevel perspective with data from 174,325 participants from 80 countries in two waves-Wave 5 (Study 1) and Wave 6 (Study 2) of the World Values Survey. We examined how country-level normative tightness-looseness and individual-level non-normativeness relate to stigma toward racial and ethnic out-groups and groups deviating from social standards. Preregistered analyses showed that for both waves individuals in normatively tighter (vs. looser) societies exhibited more stigma generally. Also, for both waves, individuals higher in non-normativeness demonstrated a greater level of stigma toward members of immigrant, racial, or ethnic out-groups while exhibiting a lower level of stigma toward groups deviating from social standards. The current work thus reveals how characteristics of both individuals and culture jointly affect stigma.

People's beliefs about pronouns reflect both the language they speak and their ideologies.

Pronouns often convey information about a person's social identity (e.g., gender). Consequently, pronouns have become a focal point in academic and public debates about whether pronouns should be changed to be more inclusive, such as for people whose identities do not fit current pronoun conventions (e.g., gender nonbinary individuals). Here, we make an empirical contribution to these debates by investigating which social identities lay speakers think that pronouns should encode (if any) and why. Across four studies, participants were asked to evaluate different types of real and hypothetical pronouns, including binary gender pronouns, race pronouns, and identity-neutral pronouns. We sampled speakers of two languages with different pronoun systems: English (N = 1,120) and Turkish (N = 260). English pronouns commonly denote binary gender (e.g., "he" for men), whereas Turkish pronouns are identity-neutral (e.g., "o" for anyone). Participants' reasoning about pronouns reflected both a familiarity preference (i.e., participants preferred the pronoun type used in their language) and-critically-participants' social ideologies. In both language contexts, participants' ideological beliefs that social groups are inherently distinct (essentialism) and should be hierarchal (social dominance orientation) predicted relatively greater endorsement of binary gender pronouns and race pronouns. A preregistered experimental study with an English-speaking sample showed that the relationship between ideology and pronoun endorsement is causal: Ideologies shape attitudes toward pronouns. Together, the present research contributes to linguistic and psychological theories concerning how people reason about language and informs policy-relevant questions about whether and how to implement language changes for social purposes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Ingroup love, outgroup hate, and the gateway group effect: Comparing the direct and indirect impact of dual versus single identification.

Decades of research in social identity have shown that people instinctively hold positive attitudes towards ingroup members and negative attitudes towards outgroup members. However, it remains unclear how people respond to individuals explicitly identified with both one's ingroup and outgroup. We propose that when people are exposed to dual-identified individuals and groups (e.g., Muslim-Americans explicitly identifying with both their Muslim and American identities), intergroup attitudes will improve, driven more by the ingroup component (American), despite the presence of the outgroup component (Muslim). Moreover, we suggest exposure to dual-identification can also improve attitudes toward the broader outgroup (Muslims more generally), a phenomenon called the gateway-group effect. To test these hypotheses, we created a new measure of dual-identification and conducted three studies involving both Muslim-Americans and Mexican-Americans. Results confirmed that exposure to explicitly dual-identified groups improved attitudes towards the dual-identified group (e.g., Mexican-Americans) as well as toward the respective outgroup (e.g., Mexicans).

No laughing matter: Latinas' high quality of conversations relate to behavioral laughter.

Latinx in the United States have greater life expectancy than other groups, in spite of their socioeconomic and psychosocial disadvantage. This phenomenon has been described as the Latinx health paradox. This investigation observed the interplay of cultural processes and social networks to shed light on this paradox. Latina (N = 26) and White-European (N = 24) mothers wore a digital recorder as they went about their daily lives. Four conversation styles were characterized from the recordings to measure the mothers' quality of their conversations (small talk and substantive conversations) within different social networks (with the father vs. other adults). As a positive indicator of well-being, laughter was assessed during the conversations. Results demonstrated that Latina mothers tend to laugh more than White-European mothers; and that this relation is mediated by substantive conversations with others. This suggests that Latinas' cultural processes afford meaningful conversations, which relates to more behavioral laughter, a process that may have positive implications on well-being.

You go before me, please: Behavioral politeness and interdependent self as markers of Simpatía in Latinas.

OBJECTIVES: Previous research has documented that Latinos/as value the cultural script Simpatía, a tendency to be kind, polite, and focus on others. No previous study has been able to capture the behavioral markers of Simpatía in a naturalistic environment. METHOD: Behavioral cross-sectional audio data were collected on the daily interactions between Latina and White European mothers with their partners and other adults using a digital audio recorder across 4 days. A mixed-methods approach was used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Latinas exhibited increased behavioral Simpatía when talking to other adults compared to White European counterparts. Additionally, Latina mothers chose as a main character of their conversations other people rather than themselves. Conversely, White European mothers chose themselves as a main character of their conversations instead of other people. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that core features of Simpatía (kindness and focus on others) can be found at the behavioral level in the environment that Latina mothers face on a daily basis. Implications for the cultural self and future research are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Media coverage of "wise" interventions can reduce concern for the disadvantaged.

Recent articulation of the "wise" approach to psychological intervention has drawn attention to the way small, seemingly trivial social psychological interventions can exert powerful, long-term effects. These interventions have been used to address such wide-ranging social issues as the racial achievement gap, environmental conservation, and the promotion of safer sex. Although there certainly are good reasons to seek easier as opposed to harder solutions to social problems, we examine a potentially undesirable effect that can result from common media portrayals of wise interventions. By emphasizing the ease with which interventions help address complex social problems, media reports might decrease sympathy for the individuals assisted by such efforts. Three studies provide evidence for this, showing that media coverage of wise interventions designed to address academic and health disparities increased endorsement of the view that the disadvantaged can solve their problems on their own, and the tendency to blame such individuals for their circumstances. Effects were strongest for interventions targeted at members of a historically disadvantaged group (African Americans as opposed to college students) and when the coverage was read by conservatives as opposed to liberals. Attempts to undermine this effect by introducing cautious language had mixed success. (PsycINFO Database Record