Does threat trigger prosociality? The relation between basic individual values, threat appraisals, and prosocial helping intentions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Prosociality is often considered as quintessential in coping with the threats of health emergencies. As previous research has suggested, prosocial behaviors are shaped by both dispositional factors and situational cues about the helping situation. In the present research, we investigated whether "bonding" types of prosociality, helping directed towards close others within one's social network, and "bridging" types of prosociality, helping directed towards vulnerable people across group boundaries, are predicted by basic individual values and threat appraisals concerning COVID-19. During the pandemic, we conducted a cross-sectional study in the US and India (Ntotal = 954), using the Schwartz value inventory and a multifaceted measure of threat assessment to predict prosocial helping intentions. After controlling for other value and threat facets, self-transcendence values and threat for vulnerable groups uniquely predicted both bonding and bridging types of prosociality. Furthermore, threat for vulnerable groups partially mediated the effect of self-transcendence on prosocial helping intentions: People who endorsed self-transcendent values were particularly concerned by the effect of the pandemic on vulnerable groups, and thus willing to engage in prosocial behaviours to help those in need. Our findings support the idea that prosociality is stimulated by empathic concerns towards others in need and underline the importance for future research to consider the broad spectrum of threats appraised by people during health emergencies. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-023-04829-1.

Intergroup contact is reliably associated with reduced prejudice, even in the face of group threat and discrimination.

Intergroup contact provides a reliable means of reducing prejudice. Yet, critics suggested that its efficacy is undermined, even eliminated, under certain conditions. Specifically, contact may be ineffective in the face of threat, especially to (historically) advantaged groups, and discrimination, experienced especially by (historically) disadvantaged groups. We considered perceived intergroup threat and perceived discrimination as potential moderators of the effect of contact on prejudice. Two meta-analyses of correlational data from 34 studies (totaling 63,945 respondents-drawn from 67 subsamples across 19 countries) showed that contact was associated with decreased prejudice and increased out-group positivity, in cross-sectional and longitudinal designs, among advantaged and disadvantaged group members, and in both Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) and non-WEIRD contexts. Both perceived threat and perceived discrimination moderated the contact-attitude association, but in an unanticipated direction. Indeed, contact's beneficial effects were at least as strong among individuals high (r = .19) as among individuals low (r = .18) in perceived threat. Similarly, the effects of contact were at least as strong among those high (r = .23) as among those low (r = .20) in perceived discrimination. We conclude that contact is effective for promoting tolerant societies because it is effective even among subpopulations where achieving that goal might be most challenging. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Can Identity Buffer Against the Detrimental Effects of Threat? The Case of the Qatar Blockade.

In 2017, the blockade of Qatar Gulf states caused a plethora of effects on the country. This paper sought to examine the resulting threat effects of this blockade in terms of lowered self-esteem and well-being, and the potential buffering effects of an overarching identity. Using self-report questionnaire data from Qatari secondary school students (N = 1,410), multiple moderated mediation models investigated the predictive effects of youngsters' perceived threat, via self-esteem, on their well-being, and the mitigating roles herein of, respectively, national, Gulf region, and Arab identity. Perceived threat was indeed related to lower well-being via lower self-esteem, and this relationship was equally strong for those low and high in social identity. In terms of the three facets of identity, the overarching Gulf identity seems the most predictive, and it even (marginally significantly) buffers the negative relationship between threat and reduced self-esteem.

Trust is in the eye of the beholder: How perceptions of local diversity and segregation shape social cohesion.

A more nuanced understanding of the complex relationship between ethnic diversity and social cohesion is needed. Ever since Robert Putnam (2007) has put forward the highly contested constrict claim holding that diversity is related to less trust and more social withdrawing, hundreds of follow-up studies across the globe have been conducted. In the present contribution, we investigated the association between diversity and "hunkering down" in the Netherlands, hereby taking into account the role of segregation. Indeed, Uslaner (2012) pointed to local segregation as the true motor of the so-called diversity effects on intergroup relations in general, and trust in others in particular. We did not only investigate objective indicators of diversity and segregation, but also added an "eye of the beholder" perspective by probing into the subjective perceptions of these variables. Specifically, in a stratified community sample of 680 Dutch ethnic-cultural majority members (52% male, mean age 51), we assessed the additive and interactive effects of four variables (objective diversity, perceived diversity, objective segregation, and perceived segregation) at the municipal level in the prediction of three outcomes (generalized trust, ingroup trust, and outgroup trust). The results revealed three interesting patterns. First, neither of the objective indicators of diversity and segregation, nor their interaction effect significantly predicted any type of trust. Second, higher perceptions of diversity and higher perceptions of segregation were negatively associated with outgroup trust (but not with generalized and ingroup trust). Third, and most importantly, there was a significant interaction effect between perceived diversity and perceived segregation, indicating that simultaneous perceptions of high levels of diversity and high levels of segregation were related to the lowest levels of trust in other ethnic-cultural groups. These findings shed a more nuanced light on the diversity debate, showing that perceptions of segregation shape diversity effects. In sum, the present study shows that perceived rather than objective indicators of diversity and segregation matter, and that both diversity and segregation should be taken into account when it comes to social cohesion in general, and trust in particular.

No man is an island: Psychological underpinnings of prosociality in the midst of the COVID-19 outbreak.

In response to the COVID-19 outbreak, sustainable forms of collective resilience help societies coping cohesively with unprecedented challenges. In our empirical contribution, we framed collective resilience and cohesion in terms of prosociality. A study carried out in the midst of the COVID-19 outbreak in the UK (N = 399) articulated basic individual values, ideological orientations (i.e., authoritarianism and social dominance orientation), and core political values in a comprehensive framework to predict bonding and bridging forms of prosocial intentions, and prosocial behaviors directed towards vulnerable groups. According to our findings, people whose worldview incorporates collective and collaborative principles cared more about others' welfare. Jointly, self-transcendence, equality, and accepting immigrants predicted more prosociality, whereas social dominance orientation predicted less prosociality. Over and beyond all other predictors, self-transcendence uniquely predicted prosocial intentions and behaviors alike. To conclude, we suggest interventions to promote and sustain prosociality among people motivated by a larger array of life goals and worldviews.

Utilitarianism in minimal-group decision making is less common than equality-based morality, mostly harm-oriented, and rarely impartial.

In the study of utilitarian morality, the sacrificial dilemma paradigm has been the dominant approach for years. However, to address some of the most pressing issues in the current research literature, the present studies adopt an alternative approach by using a minimal group paradigm in which participants have to make decisions about the allocation of resources. This approach allows not only to pit utilitarianism against equality-based morality, but also to study these modes of morality for both harm and benefit, and to directly address the role of group identity affecting the (im)partial nature of 'utilitarian' (i.e., outcome maximizing) decisions. In our experiments, across four different samples (total N = 946), we demonstrate that although participants generally prefer equality-based allocations over maximizing distributions, outcome maximizing choices become more prevalent when they served to minimize harm compared to maximizing benefit. Furthermore, reducing the objective value of the equal distribution outcomes further prompts participants to adopt a more utilitarian approach in situations involving harm, but has little effect in situations where benefits have to be distributed. Finally, the introduction of (minimal) group identity consistently demonstrates that decisions that maximize the overall outcome are more likely if they also serve the ingroup compared to when they rather serve the outgroup. We discuss how these findings have meaningful implications that may be especially relevant for recent movements that advocate a utilitarian approach to charity, and for our understanding of (im)partiality in lay people's 'utilitarian' decision making.

To punish or to assist? Divergent reactions to ingroup and outgroup members disobeying social distancing.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, societies face the formidable challenge of developing sustainable forms of sociability-cumsocial-distancing - enduring social life while containing the virus and preventing new outbreaks. Accordant public policies often balance between retributive (punishment-based) and assistance (solidarity-based) measures to foster responsible behaviour. Yet, the uncontrolled spreading of the disease has divided public opinion about which measures are best suited, and it has made salient group disparities in behaviour, potentially straining intergroup relations, elevating heated emotions, and undercutting coordinated international responses. In a 2 × 2 between-subjects experiment, British citizens (N = 377) read about national in-group or outgroup members (categorical differentiation), who were either conforming to or deviating from the corona regulations (normative differentiation). Participants then reported moral emotions towards the target national group and indicated support for public policies. In general, support for assistance policies outweighed support for retributive measures. Second, however, norm deviation was associated with less positive and more negative moral emotions, the latter category further relating to more punitiveness and less assistance support. Finally, respondents who read about norm-violating outgroup members especially reported support for retributive measures, indicating that people might use norm deviation to justify outgroup derogation. We discuss implications for policymakers and formulate future research avenues.

Ethnic Diversity, Ideological Climates, and Intergroup Relations: A Person × Context Approach.

Intergroup relations represent one of the most difficult and complex knots which we are confronted with in contemporary society. Given that intergroup dynamics permeate all spheres of our daily social lives, it seems vital to systematically investigate how to best predict and explain when, why, and for whom intergroup relations symbolize conflict rather than harmony. This critical review evaluates how the societal context in which individuals live shapes how their personal social-ideological views, their values, norms and beliefs, are associated with their intergroup and related attitudes. Such an approach not only examines psychological/individual and sociological/contextual levels of analysis simultaneously, it also assesses how both work together (i.e., interact) in influencing intergroup relations across various domains of life. In sum, I found that adopting a person × context interaction approach yields interesting and more profound insights in individuals' attitudes towards ethnicity-, gender, and age-based outgroups, their specifisc expressions of ethnic prejudice (e.g., outgroup negativity, outgroup threat, intergroup contact, and trust within and between ethnic-cultural groups), and even their political attitudes, political party support, neighborhood attitudes and moving intentions.

Can education change the world? Education amplifies differences in liberalization values and innovation between developed and developing countries.

The present study investigated the relationship between level of education and liberalization values in large, representative samples administered in 96 countries around the world (total N = 139,991). These countries show meaningful variation in terms of the Human Development Index (HDI), ranging from very poor, developing countries to prosperous, developed countries. We found evidence of cross-level interactions, consistently showing that individuals' level of education was associated with an increase in their liberalization values in higher HDI societies, whereas this relationship was curbed in lower HDI countries. This enhanced liberalization mindset of individuals in high HDI countries, in turn, was related to better scores on national indices of innovation. We conclude that this 'education amplification effect' widens the gap between lower and higher HDI countries in terms of liberalized mentality and economic growth potential. Policy implications for how low HDI countries can counter this gap are discussed.

The Diversity Challenge for High and Low Authoritarians: Multilevel and Longitudinal Effects Through Intergroup Contact and Threat.

The current studies integrate different frameworks on the positive and negative consequences of ethnic diversity for intergroup relations. Using a nationally stratified sample of Dutch majority members ( N = 680) from 50 cities in the Netherlands, Study 1 demonstrated that objective diversity was indirectly related to prejudice and to generalized, ingroup, and outgroup trust, through more positive and more negative contact. These indirect effects tended to be stronger for high versus low authoritarians. Furthermore, perceived diversity was indirectly related to less trust and greater prejudice, via more negative contact and threat. Again, these associations were more pronounced among high authoritarians. Study 2, using a representative sample of German majority members ( N = 412) nested within 237 districts, replicated the cross-sectional results regarding objective diversity and prejudice. In addition, longitudinal analyses indicated that objective diversity predicted more positive and more negative contact 2 years later, though only among moderate and high authoritarians.

Are the benefits of autonomy satisfaction and the costs of autonomy frustration dependent on individuals' autonomy strength?

OBJECTIVE: From a self-determination theory perspective, individuals are assumed to benefit and suffer from, respectively, the satisfaction and frustration of the psychological need for autonomy, even if they score low on autonomy strength. Yet, previous studies on need strength are scarce, operationalized need strength differently, and produced inconsistent findings. METHOD: In two studies among 224 South African adults (Mage = 24.13, SD = 4.25; 54.0% male) and 156 Belgian prisoners (Mage = 38.60, SD = 11.68; 88.5% male), we investigated the moderating role of autonomy valuation and desire in the relations of autonomy satisfaction and frustration with a variety of well-being and ill-being indicators. RESULTS: Study 1 provided some evidence for the moderating role of mostly explicit autonomy desire (rather than explicit autonomy valuation). In Study 2, neither explicit nor implicit autonomy desire played a consistent moderating role. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, these findings are congruent with a moderate (albeit not with a strong) interpretation of the universality claim made within self-determination theory, provide initial evidence for a differentiation between deficit-based and growth-oriented interpersonal differences in need strength, and indicate that the potential moderating role of need strength deserves continued attention before any firm conclusions can be drawn.

Positive Neighborhood Norms Buffer Ethnic Diversity Effects on Neighborhood Dissatisfaction, Perceived Neighborhood Disadvantage, and Moving Intentions.

Positive neighborhood norms, such as strong local networks, are critical to people's satisfaction with, perceived disadvantage of, and intentions to stay in their neighborhood. At the same time, local ethnic diversity is said to be detrimental for these community outcomes. Integrating both frameworks, we tested whether the negative consequences of diversity occur even when perceived social norms are positive. Study 1 ( N = 1,760 German adults) showed that perceptions of positive neighborhood norms buffered against the effects of perceived diversity on moving intentions via neighborhood satisfaction and perceived neighborhood disadvantage. Study 2 ( N = 993 Dutch adults) replicated and extended this moderated mediation model using other characteristics of diversity (i.e., objective and estimated minority proportions). Multilevel analyses again revealed consistent buffering effects of positive neighborhood norms. Our findings are discussed in light of the ongoing public and political debate concerning diversity and social and communal life.

When the Heat Is On: The Effect of Temperature on Voter Behavior in Presidential Elections.

Hot temperatures lead to heightened arousal. According to excitation transfer theory, arousal can increase both antisocial and prosocial behavior, depending on the context. Although many studies have shown that hot temperatures can increase antisocial behavior, very few studies have investigated the relationship between temperature and prosocial behavior. One important prosocial behavior is voting. We analyzed state-level data from the United States presidential elections (N = 761). Consistent with excitation transfer theory, which proposes that heat-induced arousal can transfer to other activities and strengthen those activities, changes in temperature and voter turnout were positively related. Moreover, a positive change in temperature was related to a positive change in votes for the incumbent party. These findings add to the literature on the importance of non-ideological and non-rational factors that influence voting behavior.

Intergroup Reconciliation between Flemings and Walloons: The Predictive Value of Cognitive Style, Authoritarian Ideology, and Intergroup Emotions.

Testifying to the gap in fundamental research on positive intergroup outcomes, we investigated reconciliation attitudes in a non-violent intergroup context (i.e., the linguistic conflict in Belgium). By incorporating both important predictors of negative outgroup attitudes (i.e., individual differences in rigid cognitive styles and authoritarian ideologies), and important predictors of reconciliation (i.e., intergroup emotions), we aimed to contribute to a more comprehensive theoretical framework for the analysis of intergroup relations. We recruited one Flemish (N = 310) and one Walloon (N = 365) undergraduate students sample to test the proposed model. Structural equation analyses with maximum likelihood estimation were conducted using the Lavaan package. In both samples, similar patterns were found. More in particular, the need for cognitive closure appeared to be the basic predictor of right-wing attitudes (i.e., right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation) and essentialist thinking, which were then associated with less outgroup empathy and trust, and more outgroup anger. Furthermore, outgroup trust and empathy were positively related to reconciliation. Interestingly, some differences between the Flemish and Walloon sample were found, such as the direct effects of need for closure and social dominance orientation in the first sample, and the non-significant effects of essentialism in the latter sample. Considering the ongoing public and political debate about the linguistic conflict in Belgium, these findings shed a new light on how individual differences relate to specific outgroup emotions, and how these are associated with important intergroup outcomes in the face of intergroup conflict.