European Journal of Social Psychology

Hewstone, Miles; Jaspars, Jos

doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2420120101pmid: N/A

Studied the effect of group discussion and racial group membership on attributions concerning the causes of racial discrimination. Twenty‐ four Black (mostly West Indian) and 24 White adolescents (age 16‐19) were assigned in pairs to each cell of a 2 (Race of subject: Black/White) × 2 (Discussion/No Discussion) ‘mixed’ design. Each subject read four items exemplifying types of racial discrimination and attributed each to negative dispositions of Black people and/or discrimination by White authority figures (‘the system’). Subjects in the Discussion condition spent two minutes discussing each item prior to making their judgements. Ratings of ingroup and outgroup on eight attitudinal dimensions were also elicited, followed by a social distance measure. Multivariate analyses of variance revealed effects for racial group membership (p < 0.05) and group discussion (p < 0.05) on attributions. Further examination of the data by means of discriminant analyses indicated which items differentiate between the groups. Data based on the attitudinal ratings were also subjected to multivariate analyses and point to the positive group‐image of the Black respondents and a lack of intergroup discrimination by the White subjects; the social distance scores of the latter subjects are, however, higher. Results are discussed in terms of the literature on group polarization and intergroup differentiation.

Lalljee, Mansur; Watson, Margaret; White, Peter

doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2420120102pmid: N/A

The study investigated the effect of the expectancies a perceiver holds about the occurrence of a particular behaviour and his or her familiarity with the situation in which the behaviour occurs, for the way in which an event is explained. Subjects were presented with brief descriptions of hypothetical events which varied in terms of the familiarity of the situation. Dependent variables included ratings of causality to personal and situational causes as well as open‐ended explanations which were content analysed to distinguish between four different types of person and four different types of situation elements. The results showed that explanations for unexpected behaviour are more complex than for expected behaviour; that if the situation is familiar to the subject, unexpected behaviour is explained by introducing more person elements while if it is unfamiliar, unexpected behaviour is explained by introducing more situation elements; and that the distribution of different types of person and situation elements is affected by familiarity and expectancy.

Hormuth, Stefan E.

doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2420120103pmid: N/A

Self awareness theory proposes that behavioural and cognitive changes following self‐ focused attention result from a comparison between a salient behavioural or cognitive aspect of the person and a relevant internal standard of correctness. Generalized drive has been offered as an alternative interpretation not requiring the assumption of a mediating cognitive process. The notion was tested that an internal standard of correctness, and not response dominance, guides behaviour following self‐focused attention. The internal standard used, originality, was to be contrary to dominance. Subjects high or low on this standard were assigned to either a self‐awareness, an arousal, or a control condition. First, response dominance was clearly established on a paired associates task. Then subjects' own associations to the stimulus words were obtained. In the self awareness condition, the originality of responses corresponded to internal standards. Responses in the arousal condition were not as predicted, but could be interpreted through the presumption that the particular operationalization of arousal raised not only drive level but also provided self‐related stimuli. The data imply that internal standards of correctness and not response dominance influence the behaviour of those whose attention is self focused.

Fincham, Frank

doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2420120104pmid: N/A

The present study investigated (i) the relationship between blame and perceived causality; (ii) the effect of the nature of causes on causal inference. Seventy‐two persons from three age groups (5, 9 years and adults) responded to behavioural events which varied in outcome intensity, the nature of the cause (internal/external) and its presence (present/absent). The latter two factors had a marked effect on attributed blame and inferred causes as an age × nature × presence of cause interaction was found in both cases. However, inferred causes were not systematically related to attributed blame. Outcome severity led to more extreme blame ratings in all groups but only affected the causal scheme used by adults. The results are discussed in terms of over‐attribution to persons and a more precise criterion for the use of the multiple sufficient cause scheme is evaluated.

Sanders, Glenn S.

doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2420120105pmid: N/A

Investigated the effects of comparisons with similar and dissimilar performances on estimates of relative ability. Male and female undergraduates (n = 162) took a test of analogy‐making ability, and received veridical feedback about their own performance and manipulated feedback about the scores of other college students. Supporting Festinger's similarity hypothesis, variations within a range of small discrepancies between self and others' scores produced significant changes in ability estimates, while variations within a range of large discrepancies had no significant impact. This pattern of results only held for discrepancies relative to the modal score of others, and not relative to their highest or lowest scores. There were also indications that subjects with average performances were less influenced by the comparison feedback than were subjects with low or high scores. The discussion focused on the similarities and contrasts between seeking comparison information versus being influenced by it.

Beattie, Geoffrey W.; Agahi, Cyrus; Spencer, Christopher

doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2420120106pmid: N/A

Studied how level of education and degree of contact with target groups affect stereotypes held by different occupational groups in post‐revolutionary Iran. Male university lecturers, taxi drivers and factory workers from Isfahan—25 of each—rated target groups (Americans, English, Arabs, Iranians) on 22 seven‐point trait scales. Fifteen subjects rated trait favourability. Results were analysed descriptively and by Spearman rank correlations of trait ratings across targets and trait assignments across subject groups. Stereotypes of Americans tend to be high in clarity and favourable across all three occupational groups (particularly ‘progressive’ and ‘industrious’), with the English somewhat less so. In contrast, Arabs are viewed highly unfavourable (‘lazy’, ‘happy‐go‐lucky’, ‘not industrious’). Autostereotypes are less consistent; the lecturers—educated in the West—are most unfavourable. It was concluded that low education and little personal contact lead to more extreme hetero‐stereotype, the reverse being true for (negative) autostereotype. Also, it seems that saturated media coverage does not necessarily have much effect on social stereotypes.

Maass, Anne; Clark, Russell D.; Haberkorn, Gerald

doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2420120107pmid: N/A

Investigated how either perceived competency or self‐interest‐and Zeitgeist affect minority influence, or: how Moscovici's theory does apply to actual social minorities. The self‐interest notion predicts that ‘single’ minorities (deviating only in terms of beliefs) are more influential than ‘double’ minorities (deviating also in category membership) while the competency notion predicts the reverse. Further, either minority is expected to be influential only when the Zeitgeist is in favour of the minority position. In a 2 (pro/anti Zeitgeist) × 3 (single/double minority/control) factorial design, 120 conservative male American undergraduates discussed in groups of six‐including two either male (single minority) or female (double minority) consistently liberal con federates‐one of two issues: abortion (pro‐) or death penalty (anti‐ Zeitgeist). The results support the self‐interest notion: double minorities are perceived as having a stronger self‐interest and exerted less influence than single minorities. The Zeitgeist hypothesis is confirmed, too. The underlying attributional processes and the ecological validity of previous studies are discussed.

Doise, Willem

doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2420120108pmid: N/A