Search

Abstract: Past research indicates that being religious is frequently motivated by the need to avoid uncertainty and associated with prejudice against value‐violating groups. The present research clarifies these previous findings and shows for the first time a causal link between a sense of uncertainty and group attitudes through religiosity and the perception of the target group's mindset. Study 1 demonstrates that belief in God is associated with uncertainty avoidance and increases prejudice against value‐violating groups, but simultaneously increases positive attitudes towards value‐consistent groups. Study 2 demonstrates experimentally that a sense of uncertainty shapes intergroup attitudes when the relationship is mediated through the belief in God and the perception that a target group actually violated perceivers' values. The results corroborate and broaden previous findings on religiosity, ambiguity avoidance, and prejudice and, for the first time, show a causal link between a sense of uncertainty and attitudes towards value‐violating and value‐consistent groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two experiments examined the impact of anonymity and accountability on the expression of group-mediated attitude-behaviour consistency. In Study 1, low and high identifiers (N = 106) were exposed to an attitude-congruent norm and provided information about their intentions under anonymous and in-group accountable conditions. In Study 2, salience of identity was manipulated, and participants (N = 185) were exposed to either an attitude-congruent or an attitude-incongruent norm, and provided information on their intentions and behaviour under anonymous and in-group accountable conditions. In both studies, accountability elicited group-normative attitudes and behaviour among individuals for whom the group was not a salient basis for self-definition. When the group was a salient basis for self-definition, the expression of attitude-consistent intentions and behaviour was greater in anonymous conditions. It is suggested that strategic effects, such as those that occur in the presence of an in-group audience, influence displays of group-normative attitude–behaviour consistency. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An impostor is defined as somebody who publicly lays claim to an identity while simultaneously disguising their failure to fulfill key criteria for group membership. The current study aimed to identify why minority group members feel negatively toward impostors. In two experiments, gay participants evaluated a person who claimed to be either gay or straight. In half of the conditions the target's claims for identity were consistent with their behavior, and in the other half the target's claims for identity were inconsistent with their behavior (impostors). Participants perceived a straight target that claimed to be gay to be doing more damage to the group than a consistent straight target. This effect was mediated by ratings of the extent to which the target was threatening the distinctiveness of gay identity. Furthermore, a gay target who claimed to be straight was seen to be less likeable and was seen to be doing more damage to the group than a consistent gay target, effects that were mediated by the extent to which the target was perceived to feel shame about their group identity. Implications of the results for our understanding of impostorism are discussed. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Integrated Threat Theory (ITT) (Stephan & Stephan, 1993, 1996) describes four types of threats as mediators in the relation between antecedent factors (previous intergroup conflict, intergroup contact, status inequalities, in-group identification, knowledge about the out-group, and intergroup contact) and prejudice. The four mediating types of threats, which influence prejudice according to ITT are: intergroup anxiety, negative stereotyping, realistic and symbolic threats. In this study, the ITT model was tested using structural equation modeling on data collected in sample of 187 Dutch employees. Two alternative explanatory models are proposed in which, first intergroup anxiety and then negative stereotyping mediate the relation between the other ITT threats and prejudice. The data show a good fit with the model in which negative stereotypes are considered as mediator variable. The implications of these findings for ITT are discussed in the context of recent theoretical developments in the study of stereotypes and prejudice. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study, participants were instructed to correct for the influence of a trait priming task on their judgments of ambiguous information. The time at which correction was instigated (preinformation or postinformation) determined whether contrastive correction effects were found solely on information-related ratings (preinformation conditions) or on both information-related and information-unrelated ratings (postinformation conditions). Assimilative trait priming effects were found when no correction instructions were given. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An experiment examined the effects of role ambiguity and relative group status in an intergroup situation where a superordinate goal was salient. One-hundred-and- fifty-six subjects in groups of three undertook a cooperative task under conditions where the groups' roles were clearly Different, Similar, or not allocated (Control). In addition, the groups' perceived competence at the task was either equally High, equally Low, or unequal. Financial rewards were contingent on successful completion of the joint task. Two contrasting hypotheses were derived from Social Identity Theory: one (H1) predicted most favourable intergroup attitudes in the Control condition where lack of any clear differentiation in group roles might facilitate a superordinate identification. In contrast, (H2) predicted least favourable attitudes in this condition on tile grounds that groups lacked a distinctive identity. Support for the second hypothesis was found since friendliness towards the outgroup decreased with increasing role ambiguity. The status variable also had consistent effects. As predicted, mutual evaluations fended to reflect the consensually agreed status differences: least bias being shown towards high status outgroups, most kv high status in groups. Task performance was also affected by role ambiguity. Judges' ratings of the group products were found to be more favourable as role ambiguity increased, in contrast to the friendliness data. Tire implications of these findings for Social Identity Theory, the Contact Hypothesis, and theories of group performance are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Attributional ambiguity is a strategy used to avoid having to attribute potentially negative performance on a task to ability, if the outcome of a task is attributable to ability, if no external cause for failure is available, and if a person is aware that the out conic is attributable to the self, ambiguity can be created with regard to the causation of the outcome. Heightened attribution of an outcome to self as results from self-focused attention, was expected to produce less effort when external causes for potential failure were explicitly removed. In a 2×2 experiment, a positive mood was induced that was then either suggested or excluded as a plausible explanation for potential failure on a task said to be indicative of general intellectual ability. Subjects for whom self- awareness was experimentally induced, and for whom an external attribution of failure was explicitly removed, put significantly less effort info the task. Self-focus, however, has also been shown to enhance task performance. An indirect measure showed increased readiness to perform in direct contrast to the obtained lower self-reports of effort. The range of generalizability and application of attribute ambiguity is discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The predictions of four social psychological theories of the relationship between cognitive style and conservatism—the theory of the authoritarian personality, extremism theory, context theory, and value pluralism theory—are examined in two empirical studies. Unlike previous research, these studies employ a measure of ambiguity tolerance, the Attitudinal Ambiguity Tolerance scale, which can assess cross-content variability in cognitive style. The results of the two studies conflict with the expectations of all four theories. In particular, only certain aspects of conservatism were related to ambiguity tolerance toward a particular content domain; and massive variability was evident in the shape of the relationship between ambiguity tolerance and conservatism across different content domains of ambiguity tolerance. The results are discussed in terms of value conflict which arises from endorsing conservative beliefs in a liberal institutional context. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An experiment on the comprehension of, and memory for, texts of varying degrees of plausibility is reported. Previous studies on conservatives' art preferences (concerning poetry and music) showed that they favored works of art that were conventional and relatively simple; this was explained in terms of conservatives' generalized intolerance of ambiguity. The present study sought to extend the previous research by examining conservatives' and non-conservatives' memory of and preferences for texts of varying plausibility. When plausibility is disrupted, texts recount strange, unexpected and ambiguous sequences of actions and events. It was found that conservative subjects' memory for texts of varying plausibility was similar to that of non-conservatives when overall recall is considered, but there was a greater tendency for conservatives to import inferences (novel propositions which had not been present in the original text) into their recall protocols and to distort their recall (although the latter effect is only marginally significant). They also showed much stronger preferences for plausible over implausible texts compared to non-conservatives. These results accord well with the previous findings on art preferences, and were explained in terms of the conservatives seeking to avoid or minimize ambiguity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of European Journal of Social Psychology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of European Journal of Social Psychology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of European Journal of Social Psychology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

When several items of information are combined to give an overall judgment, it is usually found that some kinds of item are given greater weighs than others. This study examines the relations between three criteria which fudges may use in deciding how to apportion these weights. The criteria of evaluative direction and extremity have often been studied within impression formation, while demonstrations of the influence of ambiguity have produced unclear findings. Simple models of the combination of these three criteria are shown to be inadequate and a more complex account is suggested. A study is reported in which divergence between the criteria of extremity and ambiguity results in a generally greaser bias to negative. This effect is related to other studies of the influence of inconsistency, and a range adjustment model of the judgment process is extended to take it into account. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Component ratings in impression formation vary with context Ratings on personality trait adjectives within the context of other traits are displaced toward the context. According to the meaning-change hypothesis, trait adjectives have no fixed meaning, rather a range of possible meanings. That meaning is selected which best fits the context in which it is embedded. If the meaning-change formulation was valid, the greater the connotative variability of test traits the greater the effects of context.