The role of legitimizing the social hierarchy in the impact of status on perceived assertiveness and competence.

The present research aimed to examine how perceivers' system-justifying beliefs moderate the way they evaluate high- versus low-status targets on assertiveness and competence. In three experimental studies, we manipulated a target's hierarchical position within his company's organization. Participants rated the target on traits reflecting assertiveness and competence. Their system-justifying beliefs were assessed in an ostensibly unrelated study. Results consistently showed that participants inferred assertiveness from the target's hierarchical position regardless of system justification, whereas the relationship between social status and competence was consistently moderated by system-justifying beliefs: only participants high in system justification ascribed more competence to the high-status target than to the low-status target. These findings are in line with the hypothesis suggesting that inferring competence from high-status positions could rely on the tendency to justify social inequalities, whereas inferring assertiveness would not.

A brief diversity training: Raising awareness of ingroup privilege to improve attitudes towards disadvantaged outgroups.

Diversity training is a popular strategy to reduce prejudice within educational settings. However, in practice, diversity training rarely relies on social-psychological theory, and research on its effectiveness in real-world settings is scarce. Previous research regarding diversity training has particularly neglected an important theoretical concept: privilege as the counterpart of discrimination. Therefore, we developed a diversity training aiming to increase awareness of ingroup privilege, using an intersectional approach to teach participants the complex interaction between privilege and oppression. We randomly allocated students of educational science (N = 112) to a repeated-measures (pre-test, post-test, follow-up) control-group design. Compared with the control group, training participants showed a significant increase in awareness of ingroup privilege 1 week after the training, whereas there was no change in awareness of discrimination. Furthermore, increased awareness of ingroup privilege 1 week after the training mediated improved outgroup attitudes (i.e., more positive outgroup feelings towards immigrants and refugees, reduced subtle prejudice towards immigrants and reduced homonegativity) 2 weeks after the training.

When does activating diversity alleviate, when does it increase intergroup bias? An ingroup projection perspective.

The question how intergroup bias can be alleviated is of much theoretical and practical interest. Whereas diversity training and the multiculturalism ideology are two approaches prominent in practice, most theoretical models on reducing intergroup bias are based on social-identity theory and self-categorization theory. This social-identity perspective assumes that similar processes lead to intergroup bias in very different intergroup contexts if people identify with the respective social groups. A recent prominent model based on these theories is the ingroup-projection model. As this model assumes, an ingroup's norms and standards are applied to outgroups included in a common superordinate category (this is called ingroup projection). Intergroup bias results because the outgroup fulfils these norms and standards less than the ingroup. Importantly, if the diversity of the superordinate category is induced as the norm, ingroup projection and thus intergroup bias should be reduced. The present research delineates and tests how general this process is. We propose that ingroup prototypicality is not only an outcome variable, as the ingroup-projection model originally assumes, but can also be an important moderator. We hypothesize that for members considering their ingroup highly prototypical ("pars pro toto", large majorities), the superordinate group's diversity may question their ingroup's position and thus elicit threat and intergroup bias. In contrast, for members who consider their group as less prototypical (one among several, or "una inter pares" groups), activating diversity should, as originally assumed in the ingroup-projection model, reduce intergroup bias. Three experiments (total N = 345) supported these predictions in the contexts of groups defined by gender or nationality. Taken together, the ingroup-projection model can explain under which conditions activating superordinate-category diversity induces tolerance, and when it may backfire. We discuss in how far the ingroup-projection model can integrate conflicting findings on the multiculturalism ideology.