The role of normative influence in highly strained intergroup relations: The case of the Roma in Central Europe.

KOKY, Roman a Sylvie GRAF. The role of normative influence in highly strained intergroup relations: The case of the Roma in Central Europe. In 4th Inernational Conference on Research in Psychology, Oxford. 2024.

Základní údaje

• Originální název: The role of normative influence in highly strained intergroup relations: The case of the Roma in Central Europe.
• Autoři: KOKY, Roman a Sylvie GRAF.
• Vydání: 4th Inernational Conference on Research in Psychology, Oxford, 2024.

Další údaje

• Typ výsledku: Prezentace na konferencích
• Stát vydavatele: Velká Británie a Severní Irsko
• Utajení: není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství
• Klíčová slova anglicky: normative influence; intergroup contact; prejudic;, injunctive norms; descriptive norms
• Příznaky: Mezinárodní význam, Recenzováno

Anotace

Positive intergroup contact is an effective strategy for improving intergroup relations. However, in many societies, the opportunities for direct contact are limited due to segregation and historically rooted tensions. Moreover, contact with outgroup members isn't always positive. In the case of missing opportunities for direct contact, indirect intergroup contact–contact that does not require a face-to-face interaction–can alter prejudice. Indirect intergroup contact–such as information about intergroup contact from other ingroup members–communicates social norms in that it informs about usual intergroup behavior (i.e., a descriptive norm) and desirable intergroup behavior (i.e, an injunctive norm). Using an experimental design, we tested the effect of positive and negative descriptive norms regarding contact with outgroup members (i.e., information about strongly/slightly increasing contact, information about strongly/slightly decreasing contact with the Roma, and control; 5 conditions) on Czech majority prejudice (N = 679) against the Roma. Our study showed that negative descriptive norms, operationalized as information about strongly decreasing frequency of contact with the Roma, led to more pronounced majority’s prejudice against the Roma, as compared to positive descriptive social norms (i.e., information about strongly increasing frequency of contact) that did not differ from the control condition (i.e., no information). Our results suggest that negative descriptive norms–the increasing hesitance to take up contact with outgroup members–may guide the majority’s reactions toward stigmatized minorities rather than positive descriptive norms–the increasing contact of fellow ingroup members with the stigmatized minority. We discuss practical implications of our research.

Anotace anglicky

Positive intergroup contact is an effective strategy for improving intergroup relations. However, in many societies, the opportunities for direct contact are limited due to segregation and historically rooted tensions. Moreover, contact with outgroup members isn't always positive. In the case of missing opportunities for direct contact, indirect intergroup contact–contact that does not require a face-to-face interaction–can alter prejudice. Indirect intergroup contact–such as information about intergroup contact from other ingroup members–communicates social norms in that it informs about usual intergroup behavior (i.e., a descriptive norm) and desirable intergroup behavior (i.e, an injunctive norm). Using an experimental design, we tested the effect of positive and negative descriptive norms regarding contact with outgroup members (i.e., information about strongly/slightly increasing contact, information about strongly/slightly decreasing contact with the Roma, and control; 5 conditions) on Czech majority prejudice (N = 679) against the Roma. Our study showed that negative descriptive norms, operationalized as information about strongly decreasing frequency of contact with the Roma, led to more pronounced majority’s prejudice against the Roma, as compared to positive descriptive social norms (i.e., information about strongly increasing frequency of contact) that did not differ from the control condition (i.e., no information). Our results suggest that negative descriptive norms–the increasing hesitance to take up contact with outgroup members–may guide the majority’s reactions toward stigmatized minorities rather than positive descriptive norms–the increasing contact of fellow ingroup members with the stigmatized minority. We discuss practical implications of our research.