The Social Exclusion and Sexual Objectification among males, ages 18-30 years old in Kosovo

This study aims: Higher levels of gender-based rejection sensitivity would be related to higher tendencies to objectify women, i.e., with higher tendencies to perceive women as lacking of human mental states and uniquely human emotions. In turn, verifying whether such enhanced tendency to perceive women as objects would increase men’s tendencies to accept the myth rape acceptance. More specifically, a correlation analysis showed that: The rejection sensitivity index did not correlate with any outcome variable; The tendency to objectify women did not correlate with myth rape acceptance; Hurt proneness or anxiety in close relationships was positively correlated with the tendency to perceive women as human beings (rather than objects) and to attribute them human emotions or human mental states. Interestingly, these latter relations clearly emerged among male participants currently involved in romantic relationships; Instead, a onesample t-test showed that the levels of myth rape acceptance were moderately high

Inclusive social norms and nationals' positive intergroup orientations toward refugees: The moderating role of initial prejudice and intergroup contact

Research on the interplay between inclusive norms and intergroup contact on improving intergroup orientations has yielded conflicting results, suggesting either that an experience of personal contact is necessary to have a positive effect of inclusive norms or that such personal experience is not always necessary. To clarify this issue, across four studies ( N = 835), we investigated the influence of inclusive norms on positive intergroup orientations as a function of personal experiences of intergroup contact. Study 1 demonstrated that inclusive norms are more strongly correlated with experiences of personal contact with outgroups with whom opportunities of contact are more (i.e., immigrants) than less (i.e., refugees) frequent. Study 2 provided experimental evidence for this finding showing that inclusive norms increase prejudiced nationals’ willingness to engage in future contact with immigrants but not with refugees, suggesting that conformity to inclusive norms depends on varying contact opportunities with the outgroups. Studies 3 and 4 confirmed that prejudiced nationals conformed to inclusive norms specifically when experienced positive contact with a refugee (experimentally induced with the imagined contact paradigm), compared with no contact (Study 3) or negative contact (Study 4). We discuss the implications of these findings for research on intergroup contact, social influence, and intergroup relations.</p

Dehumanization of outgroup members and cross-group interactions

Subtle and blatant dehumanization exacerbates negative intergroup relations while intergroup contact ameliorates them. An emerging body of research has started to examine the link between intergroup contact and dehumanization as a potential method for promoting harmony and social cohesion between different social groups. In this article, we examine how direct and indirect contact strategies can reduce both subtle and blatant dehumanization and how humanization can increase willingness for contact with outgroup members. This suggests a range of ways in which exploring contact and dehumanization might contribute to improved intergroup relations. Last, we explore how enhanced empathy, trust, prejudice, and inclusive norms toward outgroups, along with lower anxiety, explain the link between contact and dehumanization

Sexual violence and traumatic identity change: evidence of collective post-traumatic growth

Recent research indicates that social identities play a crucial role in the connection between adversity, post-traumatic stress, and overall psychological well-being. Understanding of how trauma influences collective dimensions of the self, positively or negatively, is limited. This study focuses on analysing publicly accessible narratives of four women who chose to waive their anonymity after the conviction of the men who had attacked and sexually assaulted them in Ireland. Thematic analysis highlighted two themes that signal (i) collective dimensions to this personal trauma, (ii) attempts to reconstruct social identities in the aftermath of trauma. Women presented their experiences as having the potential to amplify positive connections with others despite the wider embedded sociocultural understanding of sexual assault. These changes were associated with redefinition of social identities. Discussion highlights the potential for personal and intimate trauma to result in positive social identity change; a phenomenon that we label collective post-traumatic growth

(Mis)understanding out-group pro-social behaviors

This dissertation investigates the ways people perceive prosocial behaviors when enacted by an outgroup (vs. ingroup) member. Specifically, it focuses on the moderating and/or influential role of several personal and social factors that might shape such perception. To further elaborate the overall aim of this dissertation, I suggest that those in need, or those who observe an ingroup member in need, attribute less empathic concern, altruistic motives, and are less willing to accept offers of help from an outgroup than an ingroup member. However, this effect will appear mostly when people are highly prejudiced, when the intergroup interaction takes place in the ingroup context, or when they are exposed to an exclusive or intolerant ingroup norm or to a suspicious intergroup apology (i.e., an institutional apology). Likewise, I suggest that people in need undermine an outgroup member's assistance when they harbor a previous understanding that outgroup members have dehumanized them as a group. In addition, this dissertation explores the underlying mechanisms concerning these investigated effects. Drawing from previous literature and empirical findings in the domains of intergroup help and contact, I suggest that attributions of empathic and/or altruistic motives, perceived helper's capacity to assist, normative and personal perceptions about intergroup interactions, perceived outgroup humanity have the means to explain why, for example, people are less likely to accept outgroup help. These predictions have been tested through 17 experiments fully explained in the dissertation and 4 others briefly mentioned in its notes. Overall, the main findings are discussed in light of intergroup expectations, social identity, prosocial intergroup behaviors, and intergroup contact

How meta-humanization leads to conciliatory attitudes but not intergroup negotiation:The mediating roles of attribution of secondary emotions and blatant dehumanization

Relations between groups are particularly sensitive in post-conflict societies where tensions persist, and reconciliation remains unlikely. The present research investigated whether believing or learning that an outgroup humanizes the ingroup (i.e., meta-humanization) enhances conciliatory attitudes and intergroup negotiations. In three studies conducted in the post-conflict context of Kosovo (N = 1,407), we investigated whether meta-humanization, in comparison to meta-dehumanization (i.e., the belief that outgroups dehumanize the ingroup) or a control condition wherein no information related to (de)humanization is provided, impacts various intergroup outcomes through the attribution of secondary emotions (i.e., the tendency to deny outgroups the capability to experience human emotions) and blatant dehumanization (i.e., the tendency to overtly or explicitly regard outgroup members as being less than fully human). Using correlational data, Study 1 revealed that blatant dehumanization, but not the attribution of secondary emotions, mediated the effect of meta-humanization on conciliatory attitudes, including support for the outgroup, openness to future contact, and feelings of peace with outgroup members. However, this pattern did not extend to intergroup negotiation, as none of the indirect effects through both the attribution of secondary emotions and blatant dehumanization were significant. Using experimental data, Study 2 demonstrated that participants in the meta-humanization condition exhibited lower levels of blatant dehumanization towards the outgroup, increased support for the outgroup, greater openness to intergroup contact, and reported feeling more at peace with outgroup members compared to those in both the meta-dehumanization and control conditions. However, participants in the meta-dehumanization and control conditions showed greater support for intergroup negotiation than those in the meta-humanization condition. Moreover, Study 2 indicated that blatant dehumanization, rather than the attribution of secondary emotions, mediated the effect of meta-humanization on all these outcomes—except for intergroup negotiations. Finally, Study 3 replicated the findings observed in Study 2 regarding the effect of meta-humanization (vs. meta-dehumanization and control) on conciliatory attitudes and intergroup negotiation while controlling for meta-prejudice. Furthermore, Study 3 revealed that both blatant dehumanization and the attribution of secondary emotions mediated the effects of meta-humanization on all these outcomes. In sum, this set of studies shows that meta-humanization promotes reconciliation, especially via reduced blatant dehumanization, but these beneficial effects do not extend to support for intergroup negotiation

Improving intergroup relation through humanization:The moderating role of negative direct contact and the mediating role of intergroup affect

Research on the interplay between negative direct intergroup contact frequency and outgroup humanization in intergroup relations is limited. Thus, across two different intergroup settings (i.e., Switzerland and Kosovo; N = 435), we examined individuals' positive behavioural intentions towards outgroup members (i.e., immigrants in Study 1 and the Roma in Study 2) as a function of both negative direct intergroup contact and humanizing information versus positive but not humanizing information (both studies) and control/no information (Study 2). Results show that information portraying outgroup members in a humanizing light (versus positive and/or control with no information) decreased anxiety (in both studies) and increased empathy (Study 2), which then related to more positive behavioural intentions among people who reported high versus low levels of negative direct contact with outgroup members. In this article, we discuss the theoretical and practical implications of our findings concerning intergroup relations.</p

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on individuals and their intra- and intergroup relations

In this chapter, we address how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted people on an individual level as well as affected their intra- and intergroup relationships. At the individual level, many people have suffered from anxiety, depression, and inadequate sleep during the pandemic, the prolonged nature of which has also made them feel lonely and isolated. However, simultaneously feeling connected to their in-group members during the pandemic has made them feel as if their well-being has improved. Added to that, their (dis)trust of national institutions has influenced their willingness to comply with measures to mitigate COVID-19. Furthermore, in-group normativity (e.g., information about in-group members’ compliance with health advice) brought people together and encouraged them to believe fewer conspiracy theories about COVID-19. However, in relation to out-group members, the pandemic has resulted in individuals’ heightened prejudice, dehumanization, distrust, and negative affect