A threatening opportunity: The prospect of conversations about race-related experiences between Black and White friends.

Similarities are foundational to building and maintaining friendships, but for cross-race friends, differences in experiences related to race are also inevitable. Little is known about how friends approach talking about race-related experiences. We suggest that these conversations are a threatening opportunity. Across five studies, we show that they can enhance closeness and intergroup learning among Black and White friends but that these benefits can be accompanied, and sometimes prevented by identity threat. In Study 1, Black (N = 57) and White (N = 59) adults anticipated both benefits and risks of such conversations, though more benefits than risks. In Study 2A (N = 143) and Study 2B (N = 149), Black participants reported less willingness to disclose race-related experiences to extant White friends than Black friends and anticipated feeling less comfortable doing so, controlling for closeness. However, they also desired to be understood by Black and White friends equally. In Study 3 (N = 147) and Study 4 (N = 172), White participants also felt less comfortable when an imagined Black friend disclosed race-related versus nonrace-related experiences to them. However, they felt closer to their friend after the race-related disclosure. Additionally, they felt more comfortable hearing about race-related experiences from a friend than through a third party and they reported learning more when the race-related experience was a friend's than a stranger's. Taken together, the studies highlight the benefits as well as the risks of conversations about race for cross-race friends and the need for future studies that track real-time conversations and test strategies to help friends engage in these conversations productively. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

God as a White man: A psychological barrier to conceptualizing Black people and women as leadership worthy.

[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported online in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology on May 21 2020 (see record 2020-36018-001). In the article, the phrase Mixed Effects in the table title for Tables 1-3 and Tables 6-8 is incorrect. The corrected phrase should appear instead as Fixed Effects. All versions of this article have been corrected.] In the United States, God is commonly conceptualized as the omnipotent and omniscient entity that created the universe, and as a White man. We questioned whether the extent to which God is conceptualized as a White man predicts the extent to which White men are perceived as particularly fit for leadership. We found support for this across 7 studies. In Study 1, we created 2 measures to examine the extent to which U.S. Christians conceptualized God as a White man, and in Study 2 we found that, controlling for multiple covariates (e.g., racist and sexist attitudes, religiosity, political attitudes), responses on these measures predicted perceiving White male job candidates as particularly fit for leadership, among both Black and White, male and female, Christians. In Study 3, we found that U.S. Christian children, both White and racial minority, conceptualized God as more White than Black (and more male than female), which predicted perceiving White people as particularly boss-like. We next found evidence to suggest that this phenomenon is rooted in broader intuitions that extend beyond Christianity. That is, in a novel context with novel groups and a novel god, U.S. Christian adults (Studies 4 and 6), atheist adults (Study 5), and agnostic preschoolers (Study 7), used a god's identity to infer which groups were best fit for leadership. Collectively, our data reveal a clear and consistent pattern: Attributing a social identity to God predicts perceiving individuals who share that identity as more fit for leadership. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Children's Intergroup Relations and Attitudes.

The existence of warm, intimate, supportive, and egalitarian relationships between members of differing social outgroups is likely, at the societal level, to facilitate cooperation and cohesion, and at the individual level, to promote positive social, educational, and occupational outcomes. The developmental pathway from intergroup contact to intergroup attitudes as it operates among children is not, however, well understood. In our chapter, we review and integrate selected social and developmental science related to intergroup relations and attitudes with the goal of proposing a conceptual model of the pathway from intergroup contact to positive intergroup attitudes among youth.