Preference, Opportunity and Choice: A Multilevel Analysis of Diverse Friendship Formation

Diverse friendships offer many benefits for individuals and for intergroup relations, yet similarity is a powerful predictor of attraction and relationship formation. The current study examined how beliefs about the value of diversity relate to friendship choices. Naturally occurring dyads (N=552) were recruited from ten college campus and community samples varying in size and racial heterogeneity. A questionnaire assessed dyad members’ beliefs about the value of diversity (valuing diversity), ten social and political attitudes, and four social identity categories (race/ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, nationality). Multilevel models were estimated to examine dyad-level valuing diversity, community size and community racial heterogeneity as predictors of diverse friendships. Valuing diversity was a significant predictor of diverse friendships; valuing diversity increased the likelihood that dyad members were diverse in race, religion, and sexual orientation but not in nationality or attitudes. The effect of valuing diversity varied according to community size and racial heterogeneity. Valuing diversity increased the likelihood of racially diverse friendships more in communities high compared to low in racial heterogeneity, and increased religiously diverse friendships more in smaller compared to larger communities. Valuing diversity was associated with greater attitude similarity in larger communities but was unrelated to attitude similarity in smaller communities

Feelings Tell Us Friend or Foe: Threat as Justification for Prejudice

Knowing how we feel about a group is enough to influence whether we perceive the group as threatening or non-threatening. Some theories assume that threat causes prejudice, such as integrated threat theory (ITT; Stephan & Renfro, 2002; Stephan & Stephan, 2000) and other cognitively-oriented models of prejudice. An affective primacy perspective (Crandall et al., 2011; Pryor et al., 1999; Zajonc, 1980) instead suggests that prejudice can cause perception of threat. Four experiments tested the hypothesis that prejudice causes heightened perception of threat, using affective conditioning to create negative (Expts. 1-3) or emotionally specific (disgust-provoking or fear-provoking; Expt. 4) affective associations with unfamiliar social groups. When a group was associated with negative affect, its members were stereotyped as more threatening and less warm (but no less competent) compared to when it was associated with positive affect (Expts. 1, 3). Conditioned prejudice increased perception of threat (Expts. 2 and 4), and caused a consistent pattern of behavioral response tendencies (Expts. 3 and 4). Groups associated with negative affect were more likely to be aggressed against, and less likely to be approached. The effect of conditioning was statistically reliable for judgments of warmth and threat, but not for judgments of competence (Expts. 1-3). Disgust conditioning increased perception of symbolic threat and realistic threat, and increased aggressive response tendencies (Expt. 4). The effect of disgust on aggressive behaviors was mediated by symbolic threat, and the effect of disgust on avoidance and approach behaviors was mediated by realistic threat. Together, the findings demonstrate that prejudice can cause perception of threat, which undermines the favored interpretation of the correlational basis of cognitively-oriented theories such as ITT. Correlational data in support of cognitively-oriented theories is consistent with both directional paths--threat can cause prejudice, and prejudice can cause perception of threat. Experiments are necessary to distinguish between threat's role as a cause for prejudice and threat's role as a justification of prejudice

Threat as Justification of Prejudice

When people feel prejudice toward a group, they can justify their prejudice by perceiving the group as threatening. Three experiments tested the hypothesis that prejudice causes threat perception, using affective conditioning to create new prejudice toward unfamiliar groups. The experimentally created prejudice increased threat perception (Expts. 1-3), except when threat information was inconsistent with conditioned affect (Expt. 3). Consistency of affect and threat information is necessary in order for threat to be a plausible justification of prejudice. Mere prejudice can cause perception of threat in the absence of information about the group; this finding suggests threats are not necessarily inherent to the characteristics of the group. Threat perception can be used as a way to explain the experience of prejudice, rather than forming the source of the prejudice itself

The Opposite of Backlash: High-SDO People Show Enhanced Tolerance When Gay People Pose Little Threat

We tested how perceived threat to group position affects the relationship between beliefs about the acceptability of social inequality—as measured by social dominance orientation (SDO)—and discrimination. We hypothesized that high-SDO heterosexuals would respond with increased discrimination when they perceived status gains for gays. In a pilot study, we found that SDO correlated with gay prejudice and with perceiving gays to be gaining status. In an experiment, we manipulated the perceived status of gays and measured SDO, traditional values and money donated to anti-gay causes. SDO was correlated with more anti-gay donations, except when gays were perceived to be low in status; then people high in SDO discriminated less, making fewer anti-gay donations in the Low compared to the Gain and Control status conditions. By contrast, traditional values were correlated with more anti-gay donations in all conditions, and the correlation was especially strong in the Low status condition

The Opposite of Backlash: High-SDO People Show Enhanced Tolerance When Gay People Pose Little Threat

We tested how perceived threat to group position affects the relationship between beliefs about the acceptability of social inequality—as measured by social dominance orientation (SDO)—and discrimination. We hypothesized that high-SDO heterosexuals would respond with increased discrimination when they perceived status gains for gays. In a pilot study, we found that SDO correlated with gay prejudice and with perceiving gays to be gaining status. In an experiment, we manipulated the perceived status of gays and measured SDO, traditional values and money donated to anti-gay causes. SDO was correlated with more anti-gay donations, except when gays were perceived to be low in status; then people high in SDO discriminated less, making fewer anti-gay donations in the Low compared to the Gain and Control status conditions. By contrast, traditional values were correlated with more anti-gay donations in all conditions, and the correlation was especially strong in the Low status condition

Eye movements when looking at potential friends and romantic partners

Eye movements of 105 heterosexual undergraduate students (36 males) were monitored while viewing photographs of men and women identified as a potential mate or a potential friend. Results showed that people looked at the head and chest more when assessing potential mates and looked at the legs and feet more when assessing potential friends. Single people looked at the photographs longer and more frequently than coupled people, especially when evaluating potential mates. In addition, eye gaze was a valid indicator of relationship interest. For women, looking at the head corresponded to greater interest in friendship, whereas for men looking at the head corresponded to less interest in friendship. These findings show that relational goals and gender may affect the way people scan their environment and search for relevant information in line with their goals

Fostering Diverse Friendships: The Role of Beliefs about the Value of Diversity

Encouraging dialogue between people of differing social backgrounds and beliefs can reduce prejudice and lead to greater appreciation of diversity, which in turn fosters attitudinally diverse friendships. We investigated how beliefs about the value of diversity relate to attitudinal diversity within relationship dyads. In a field study of naturally occurring relationship pairs in two neighborhoods of Boston (N = 89 dyads), participants completed measures of diversity beliefs and sociopolitical attitudes. People placed higher value on diversity in the Jamaica Plain neighborhood compared to people in the North End neighborhood, and relationship pairs were more attitudinally diverse in Jamaica Plain than in the North End. Attitudinal diversity within pairs was predicted by how highly the pair jointly valued diversity. Further, pairs’ greater valuing of diversity in Jamaica Plain mediated the effect of neighborhood on attitude diversity. These findings suggest that individual differences in appreciation for diversity are meaningful predictors of diverse relationships

Culture and Mobility Determine the Importance of Similarity in Friendship

We test whether the ability to start friendships—and end them—determines what we look for in friends. We hypothesized that individual differences in beliefs about relationship choice would translate into differences in similarity of relationship partners. To test the constructs across their spectrum, we sampled both American and Korean relationships (N=1,603). Study 1 field-sampled naturally-occurring relationship pairs in the USA and Korea; independent self-construal was positively correlated with relational mobility and similarity within relationship pairs. Using the entire data set, relational mobility was positively correlated with similarity, but the two were negatively correlated within nations. Study 2 identified two components of relational mobility, Entry and Exit. Easy entry to relationships correlated with high importance of similarity; easy exit from relationships correlated with low importance of similarity. An experiment (Study 3) manipulating both ease of entry to and exit from friendship found the belief that people are relatively free to end an unsatisfying friendship reduced the importance of similarity for friendship selection

Nonverbal Communication of Similarity via the Torso: It’s in the Bag

The human body plays a central role in nonverbal communication, conveying attitudes, personality, and values during social interactions. Three experiments in a large, open classroom setting investigated whether the visibility of torso-located cues affects nonverbal communication of similarity. In Expts. 1 and 2, half the participants wore a black plastic bag over their torso. Participants interacted with an unacquainted same-sex individual selected from a large class who was also wearing (or also not wearing) a bag. Expt. 3 added a clear bag condition, in which visual torso cues were not obscured. Across experiments, black bag-wearing participants selected partners who were less similar to them on attitudes, behaviors, and personality compared to the bag-less—and clear bag—participants. Nonverbal cues in the torso communicate information about similarity of attitudes, behavior, and personality; the center of the body plays a surprisingly central role in early-stage person perception and attraction

Similarity in Relationships as Niche Construction: Choice, Stability, and Influence within Dyads in a Free Choice Environment

A series of field studies focused on the role of similarity as niche construction in friendships. Using a free-range dyad harvest method, we collected 11 independent samples with 1,523 interacting pairs, and compared dyad members’ personality traits, attitudes, values, recreational activities, and alcohol and drug use. Within-dyad similarity was statistically significant on 86% of variables measured. To determine whether similarity was primarily due to niche construction (i.e., selection) or social influence, we tested whether similarity increased as closeness, intimacy, discussion, length of relationship, and importance of the attitude increased. There were no effects on similarity of closeness, relationship length, or discussion of the attitude. There were quite modest effects of intimacy, and a reliable effect of the shared importance of the attitude. Because relationship length, intimacy, closeness, and discussion can all serve as markers of opportunity for, or potency of social influence, these data are consistent with the “niche construction” account of similarity. In two follow-up controlled longitudinal field studies, participants interacted with people they did not know from their large lecture classes, and at a later time completed a survey of attitudes, values, and personality traits. Interacting pairs were not more similar than chance, but for the 23% of dyads that interacted beyond the first meeting, there was significant similarity within dyad members. These two lines of inquiry converge to suggest that similarity is mainly due to niche construction, and is most important in the early stages of a relationship; its importance to further relationship development wanes