Neural alignment during outgroup intervention predicts future change of affect towards outgroup.

While social psychology studies have shown that paradoxical thinking intervention has a moderating effect on negative attitudes toward members from rival social groups (i.e. outgroup), the neural underpinnings of the intervention have not been studied. Here, we investigate this by examining neural alignment across individuals at different phases during the intervention regarding Covid-19 vaccine-supporters' attitudes against vaccine-opposers. We raise two questions: Whether neural alignment varies during the intervention, and whether it predicts a change in outgroup attitudes measured via a survey 2 days after the intervention and compared to baseline. We test the neural alignment using magnetoencephalography-recorded neural oscillations and multiset canonical correlation analysis. We find a build-up of neural alignment which emerges at the final phase of the paradoxical thinking intervention in the precuneus-a hub of mentalizing; there was no such effect in the control conditions. In parallel, we find a behavioral build-up of dissent to the interventional stimuli. These neural and behavioral patterns predict a prosocial future change in affect and actions toward the outgroup. Together, these findings reveal a new operational pattern of mentalizing on the outgroup, which can change the way individuals may feel and behave toward members of that outgroup.

The contributions of positive outgroup and negative ingroup evaluation to implicit bias favoring outgroups.

People sometimes prefer groups to which they do not belong (outgroups) over their own groups (ingroups). Many long-standing theoretical perspectives assume that this outgroup favorability bias primarily reflects negative ingroup evaluations rather than positive outgroup evaluations. To examine the contributions of negative ingroup versus positive outgroup evaluations to outgroup bias, we examined participants' data (total n > 879,000) from Implicit Association Tests [A. G. Greenwald, D. E. McGhee, J. L. K. Schwartz, J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 74, 1464-1480 (1998)] measuring intergroup attitudes across four social domains in exploratory and preregistered confirmatory analyses. Process modeling [F. R. Conrey, J. W. Sherman, B. Gawronski, K. Hugenberg, C. J. Groom, J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 89, 469-487 (2005)] was applied to the responses of participants who demonstrated implicit outgroup bias to separately estimate the contributions of negative ingroup and positive outgroup evaluations. The outgroup biases of lower-status group members (i.e., Asian, Black, gay and lesbian, and older people) consistently reflected greater contributions of positive outgroup evaluations than negative ingroup evaluations. In contrast, the outgroup biases of higher-status group members (i.e., White, straight, and younger people) reflected a more varied pattern of evaluations. We replicated this pattern of results using explicitly measured intergroup evaluations. Taking these data together, the present research demonstrates a positive-negative asymmetry effect of outgroup bias, primarily among members of lower-status groups.

The Formation of Negative Attitudes Toward Novel Groups.

People perceive out-groups, minorities, and novel groups more negatively than in-groups, majorities, and familiar groups. Previous research has argued that such intergroup biases may be caused by the order in which people typically encounter social groups. Groups that are relatively novel to perceivers (e.g., out-groups, minorities) are primarily associated with distinct attributes that differentiate them from familiar groups. Because distinct attributes are typically negative, attitudes toward novel groups are negatively biased. Five experiments (N = 2,615 adults) confirmed the generalizability of the novel groups' disadvantage to different aspects of attitude formation (i.e., evaluations, memory, stereotyping), to cases with more than two groups, and to cases in which groups were majority/minority or in-groups/out-groups. Our findings revealed a remarkably robust influence of learning order in the formation of group attitudes, and they imply that people often perceive novel groups more negatively than they actually are.

Immune response and intergroup bias: Vaccine-induced increases in cytokine activity are associated with worse evaluations of resume for Latina job applicant.

Situational factors can increase people's vulnerability to intergroup bias, including prejudicial attitudes, negative stereotyping, and discrimination. We proposed that increases in inflammatory activity that coincide with acute illness may represent a hitherto unstudied situational factor that increases intergroup bias. The current study experimentally manipulated increases in inflammatory activity by administering the seasonal influenza vaccine or a saline placebo. We quantified inflammatory activity by assessing change in salivary pro-inflammatory cytokines and assessed intergroup bias using a resume evaluation task and self-reported ethnocentrism. Primary analyses focused on a subsample of 117 participants who provided high quality data; robustness analyses included various permutations of lower quality participants. Findings revealed that changes in the cytokine interleukin-1ß (IL-1ß) in response to the vaccine were associated with greater intergroup bias. Among participants who received the vaccine, IL-1ß change was negatively associated with evaluation of a Latina (but not a White woman) applicant's competency and recommended starting salary. Moreover, IL-1ß change was positively associated with ethnocentrism. Overall, results provide support for the hypothesis that acute illness, via the mechanistic role of inflammatory cytokines, affects social cognition in ways that can increase intergroup bias.

Do Adolescents Intervene in Intergroup Bias-based Bullying? Bystander Judgments and Responses to Intergroup Bias-based Bullying of Refugees.

This study examined 587 Turkish adolescents' (Mage = 13.14, SD = 1.61) judgments and bystander responses towards hypothetical intragroup interpersonal (Turkish victim) and intergroup bias-based (Syrian refugee victim) bullying. Intergroup factors and social-cognitive skills were assessed as predictors. Findings revealed that adolescents were less likely to see bullying as acceptable and less likely to explicitly support the bully in intragroup interpersonal bullying compared to intergroup bias-based bullying. Further, adolescents with higher theory of mind and empathy were more likely to evaluate intergroup bias-based bullying as less acceptable and more likely to challenge the bully. Adolescents' prejudice and discrimination towards refugees were predictors of bystander judgments and responses to intergroup bias-based bullying. This study provides implications for anti-bullying intervention programs.

Procedural (in)justice in children: Children choose procedures that favor their ingroup.

Research has shown that both ingroup bias and concern for procedural justice emerge early in development; however, these concerns can conflict. We investigated whether 6- to 8-year-old children are more influenced by procedural justice versus ingroup favoritism in a resource allocation task. In our first study, children played a novel spinner game in which they chose among fair, ingroup favoring, and outgroup favoring procedures to decide whether a resource would go to an unfamiliar ingroup or outgroup recipient. We found that 6- to 8-year-olds overall chose ingroup favoring procedures. However, this tendency decreased with age; whereas younger children were more likely to select procedures that were advantageous to their ingroup, older children (7- and 8-year-olds) mostly chose fair procedures. Our second study investigated the motivations underpinning children's choices by testing whether children's fair procedure choices were in part driven by a desire to appear fair. Here we varied whether children made procedure choices in public, allowing them to manage their reputation, versus in private, where reputational concerns should not guide their choices. We found that from 6 to 8 years of age children chose ingroup favoring procedures and that this tendency was slightly stronger when choosing in private. Taken together, our research suggests that ingroup favoritism often trumps procedural justice in resource allocation tasks, especially for younger children and especially when reputation is not in play.

Credibility assessments of alibi accounts: the role of cultural intergroup bias.

Research has shown that judges and jurors are influenced by suspect ethnicity and that they might discriminate against out-group suspects in making decisions. This study examined the tendency to favor in-group members, as predicted by social identity theory, in assessing alibi credibility. Forty Israeli-Jewish and 40 Israeli-Arab participants assessed the credibility of an alibi statement provided by a suspect who was either Israeli-Jewish or Israeli-Arab. Findings show that participants were more likely to believe the alibi when it was provided by an in-group suspect than by an out-group suspect, supporting intergroup bias in alibi credibility assessments. Practical and theoretical implications are discussed.

Blurred boundaries between us and them: Do young children affiliate with outgroup members with shared preferences?

Children tend to assume that their ingroup members are more likely to share their preferences than outgroup members, but group membership and shared preferences need not be congruent in reality. The current study investigated 76 3- to 6-year-old children's baseline intergroup attitudes in a minimal group context and their subsequent attitudes after being informed that either (a) their ingroup, but not their outgroup, shared their preferences or (b) their outgroup, but not their ingroup, shared their preferences. Cues about shared preferences affected children's intergroup biases to some extent, such that children tended to like their outgroup more and to allocate resources fairly among their ingroup and outgroup when they learned that their outgroup shared their preferences. However, intergroup biases were robust in some measures, such that children reported high ingroup liking and demonstrated ingroup favoritism in behavioral attribution regardless of whether they learned that their ingroup or outgroup shared their preferences. Children were also administered measures tapping into cognitive flexibility, but there was no coherent evidence that children's cognitive flexibility was related to their initial intergroup attitudes or their subsequent intergroup attitudes after learning that their ingroup or outgroup shared their preferences. The current study demonstrates a nuanced picture of intergroup biases, such that these biases might not be entirely entrenched but can nonetheless be robust in the face of conflicting cues about group membership and shared preferences. Furthermore, the importance of investigating intergroup biases at the individual level, rather than only at the group level, is discussed.

Do demand characteristics contribute to minimal ingroup preferences?

"Minimal group" paradigms investigate social preferences arising from mere group membership. We asked whether demand characteristics contribute to children's apparent minimal group bias in a preregistered experiment (N = 160). In a group condition, we attempted to replicate findings of bias following assignment to minimal groups. A second closely matched no-group condition retained potential demand characteristics while removing group assignment. Parallel bias in the no-group condition would suggest that demand characteristics contribute to findings of apparent ingroup bias. Three main findings emerged. First, in the group condition, ingroup preference emerged in one of three bias measures only. Second, this preference emerged even though participants evaluated ingroup/outgroup photos varying in race/ethnicity between trials. Third, the measure that yielded ingroup preferences in the group condition produced no parallel bias in the no-group condition, consistent with the view that mere membership in a group, not experimental demand, leads to minimal ingroup preferences.

Does parochial cooperation exist in childhood and adolescence? A meta-analysis.

Although previous meta-analytic evidence supports the existence of parochialism in cooperation among adults, the extent to which children and adolescents are more willing to incur a personal cost to benefit ingroups, compared to outgroups, is not yet clear. We provide the first meta-analysis on the existence and magnitude of parochialism in cooperation among pre-adults. Based on 20 experimental economics studies (k = 69, N = 5268, age = 3-19, 12 countries, published 2008-2019), a multilevel meta-analytic model revealed a small overall effect size indicating that children and adolescents were more cooperative towards ingroups (d = 0.22, 95% CI [0.07, 0.38]). A series of single-moderator analyses tested for the following conditions: participant age and sex; game type ([mini-]dictator game, prisoner's dilemma, public goods dilemma, trust game, ultimatum game); outcome interdependence; membership manipulation (between- vs. within-subjects); group type (natural vs. experimental); reward type (monetary vs. non-monetary); and country of the participant. Parochial cooperation did not vary with participants' age. Parochialism was larger in non-interdependent (dictator-type) compared to interdependent (bargaining and social dilemma) games. There were no moderating effects of group type, membership manipulation or reward type. To provide more data on how parochialism develops, primary studies should report age ranges more precisely and use more restricted age groups.

Role of the right temporoparietal junction in intergroup bias in trust decisions.

Intergroup bias, which is the tendency to behave more positively toward an in-group member than toward an out-group member, is pervasive in real life. In particular, intergroup bias in trust decisions substantially influences multiple areas of life and thus better understanding of this tendency can provide significant insights into human social behavior. Although previous functional magnetic resonance imaging studies showed the involvement of the right temporoparietal junction (TPJ) in intergroup trust bias, a causal relationship between the two has rarely been explored. By combining repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and a newly developed trust game task, we investigated the causal role of the right TPJ in intergroup bias in trust decisions. In the trust game task, the counterpart's group membership (in-group or out-group) and reciprocity were manipulated. We applied either neuronavigated inhibitory continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) or sham stimulation over the right TPJ before performing the trust game task in healthy volunteers. After the sham stimulation, the participants' degrees of investments with in-group members were significantly higher than those with out-group members. However, after cTBS to the right TPJ, this difference was not observed. The current results extend previous findings by showing that the causal roles of the right TPJ can be observed in intergroup bias in trust decisions. Our findings add to our understanding of the mechanisms of human social behavior.

Shaping children's racial bias through interpersonal movement.

The early emergence of racial biases points to the urgent need to understand how interpersonal experiences might shape them. We examined whether interpersonal movement shapes racial biases among 4- to 6-year-old Chinese children who had no prior contact with Black people. In Experiment 1 (N = 134), children played a musical game, moving either in or out of synchrony with a Chinese or Black adult. In Experiment 2 (N = 30), children were merely exposed to a Black adult. Across the two experiments, we found that synchronous movement increased children's feeling of social closeness toward their movement partner to a greater extent than asynchronous movement regardless of the partner's race. After moving in or out of synchrony with the Chinese adult, synchrony selectively increased children's explicit positive pro-own-race bias. However, after moving in or out of synchrony with the Black adult, both movement styles reduced explicit anti-other-race bias. Experiment 2 ruled out mere exposure to an other-race person as a driving factor for these effects. Our results suggest that musical engagement may be a promising intervention for reducing negative intergroup biases.

Clocking the social mind by identifying mental processes in the IAT with electrical neuroimaging.

Why do people take longer to associate the word "love" with outgroup words (incongruent condition) than with ingroup words (congruent condition)? Despite the widespread use of the implicit association test (IAT), it has remained unclear whether this IAT effect is due to additional mental processes in the incongruent condition, or due to longer duration of the same processes. Here, we addressed this previously insoluble issue by assessing the spatiotemporal evolution of brain electrical activity in 83 participants. From stimulus presentation until response production, we identified seven processes. Crucially, all seven processes occurred in the same temporal sequence in both conditions, but participants needed more time to perform one early occurring process (perceptual processing) and one late occurring process (implementing cognitive control to select the motor response) in the incongruent compared with the congruent condition. We also found that the latter process contributed to individual differences in implicit bias. These results advance understanding of the neural mechanics of response time differences in the IAT: They speak against theories that explain the IAT effect as due to additional processes in the incongruent condition and speak in favor of theories that assume a longer duration of specific processes in the incongruent condition. More broadly, our data analysis approach illustrates the potential of electrical neuroimaging to illuminate the temporal organization of mental processes involved in social cognition.

Perceiving mixed valence emotions reduces intergroup dehumanisation.

To deny others' humanity is one of the most heinous forms of intergroup prejudice. Given evidence that perceiving various forms of complexity in outgroup members reduces intergroup prejudice, we investigated across three experiments whether the novel dimension of emotional complexity, or outgroup members' joint experience of mixed-valence emotions, would also reduce their dehumanisation. Experiment 1 found that perceiving fictitious aliens' experience of the same primary emotions (e.g. sadness) presented in mixed vs. non-mixed valence pairs led to reduced prejudice via attenuated dehumanisation, i.e. attribution of uniquely human emotions. Experiment 2 confirmed these results, using an unfamiliar real-world group as an outgroup target. Experiment 3 used a familiar outgroup and found generally similar effects, reducing social distance through reduced dehumanisation. These processes suggest that an alternate route to reduced dehumanising of outgroups might involve presenting mixed valence emotions.

When Novel Rituals Lead to Intergroup Bias: Evidence From Economic Games and Neurophysiology.

Long-established rituals in preexisting cultural groups have been linked to the cultural evolution of group cooperation. We tested the prediction that novel rituals-arbitrary hand and body gestures enacted in a stereotypical and repeated fashion-can inculcate intergroup bias in newly formed groups. In four experiments, participants practiced novel rituals at home for 1 week (Experiments 1, 2, and 4) or once in the lab (Experiment 3) and were divided into minimal in-groups and out-groups. Our results offer mixed support for the hypothesis that novel rituals promote intergroup bias. Specifically, we found a modest effect for daily repeated rituals but a null effect for rituals enacted only once. These results suggest that novel rituals can inculcate bias, but only when certain features are present: Rituals must be sufficiently elaborate and repeated to lead to bias. Taken together, our results offer modest support that novel rituals can promote intergroup bias.

How we think they see us? Valence and difficulty of retrieval as moderators of the effect of meta-stereotype activation on intergroup orientations.

Previous research indicates that meta-stereotypes are predominantly negative. However, the valence of the meta-stereotypes may not be the only factor accounting for the detrimental effects associated with their activation. In addition to valence, we propose that the subjective difficulty of retrieving the meta-stereotype might critically determine whether its activation deteriorates intergroup orientations. An experimental study showed that the effect of the meta-stereotype activation on the desire to interact with outgroup members was moderated by the interaction between the valence of the meta-stereotype and its difficulty of retrieval. In particular, the activation of a positive meta-stereotype deteriorated intergroup orientations when the difficulty of retrieval was high as compared with a condition in which the difficulty of retrieval was low. In sharp contrast, the activation of a negative meta-stereotype worsened intergroup orientations when the difficulty of retrieval was low as compared with a condition in which the difficulty of retrieval was high.

Neuroanatomy of intergroup bias: A white matter microstructure study of individual differences.

Intergroup bias-the tendency to behave more positively toward an ingroup member than an outgroup member-is a powerful social force, for good and ill. Although it is widely demonstrated, intergroup bias is not universal, as it is characterized by significant individual differences. Recently, attention has begun to turn to whether neuroanatomy might explain these individual differences in intergroup bias. However, no research to date has examined whether white matter microstructure could help determine differences in behavior toward ingroup and outgroup members. In the current research, we examine intergroup bias with the third-party punishment paradigm and white matter integrity and connectivity strength as determined by diffusion tensor imaging (DTI). We found that both increased white matter integrity at the right temporal-parietal junction (TPJ) and connectivity strength between the right TPJ and the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (DMPFC) were associated with increased impartiality in the third-party punishment paradigm, i.e., reduced intergroup bias. Further, consistent with the role that these brain regions play in the mentalizing network, we found that these effects were mediated by mentalizing processes. Participants with greater white matter integrity at the right TPJ and connectivity strength between the right TPJ and the DMPFC employed mentalizing processes more equally for ingroup and outgroup members, and this non-biased use of mentalizing was associated with increased impartiality. The current results help shed light on the mechanisms of bias and, potentially, on interventions that promote impartiality over intergroup bias.

Advances in examining preferences for similarity in seating: Revisiting the aggregation index.

Past research finds that people prefer to sit next to others who are similar to them in a variety of dimensions such as race, sex, and physical appearance. This preference for similarity in seating arrangements is called aggregation and is most commonly measured with the aggregation index (Campbell, Kruskal, & Wallace, Sociometry 29, 1-15, 1966). The aggregation index compares the observed dissimilarity in seating with the amount of dissimilarity that would be expected if seats were chosen randomly. However, the current closed-form equations for this method limit the ease, flexibility, and inferences that researchers have. This paper presents a new approach for studying aggregation that uses bootstrapped resampling of the seating environment to estimate the aggregation index parameters. This method, compiled as an executable program, SocialAggregation, reads a seating chart matrix provided by the researcher and automatically computes the observed number of dissimilar adjacencies, and simulates random seating preferences. The current method's estimates not only converge with those of the original method, but it also handles a wider variety of situations and also allows for more precise hypothesis testing by directly modeling the distribution of the seating arrangements. Developing a better measure of aggregation opens new possibilities for understanding intergroup biases, and allows researchers to examine aggregation more efficiently.

Can group membership modulate the social abilities of autistic people? An intergroup bias in smile perception.

Autistic adults struggle to reliably differentiate genuine and posed smiles. Intergroup bias is a promising factor that may modulate smile discrimination performance, which has been shown in neurotypical adults, and which could highlight ways to make social interactions easier. However, it is not clear whether this bias also exists in autistic people. Thus, the current study aimed to investigate this in autism using a minimal group paradigm. Seventy-five autistic and sixty-one non-autistic adults viewed videos of people making genuine or posed smiles and were informed (falsely) that some of the actors were from an in-group and others were from an out-group. The ability to identify smile authenticity of in-group and out-group members and group identification were assessed. Our results revealed that both groups seemed equally susceptible to ingroup favouritism, rating ingroup members as more genuine, but autistic adults also generally rated smiles as less genuine and were less likely to identify with ingroup members. Autistic adults showed reduced sensitivity to the different smile types but the absence of an intergroup bias in smile discrimination in both groups seems to indicate that membership can only modulate social judgements but not social abilities. These findings suggest a reconsideration of past findings that might have misrepresented the social judgements of autistic people through introducing an outgroup disadvantage, but also a need for tailored support for autistic social differences that emphasizes similarity and inclusion between diverse people.

Attribution of undesirable character traits, rather than trait-based dehumanization, predicts punishment decisions.

Previous work has reported that the extent to which participants dehumanized criminals by denying them uniquely human character traits such as refinement, rationality and morality predicted the severity of the punishment endorsed for them. We revisit this influential finding across six highly powered and pre-registered studies. First, we conceptually replicate the effect reported in previous work, demonstrating that our method is sensitive to detecting relationships between trait-based dehumanization and punishment should they occur. We then investigate whether the apparent relationship between trait-based dehumanization and punishment is driven by the desirability of the traits incorporated into the stimulus set, their perceived humanness, or both. To do this, we asked participants to rate the extent to which criminals possessed uniquely human traits that were either socially desirable (e.g. cultured and civilized) or socially undesirable (e.g. arrogant and bitter). Correlational and experimental evidence converge on the conclusion that apparent evidence for the relationship between trait-based dehumanization and punishment is better explained by the extent to which participants attribute socially desirable attributes to criminals rather than the extent to which they attribute uniquely human attributes. These studies cast doubt on the hypothesized causal relationship between trait-based dehumanization and harm, at least in this context.