Familiarity Bias: Examining a Cognitive-Affective Mechanism Underlying Ideological Support for the Status Quo

It is well established that people like familiarity over novelty. Because that which is most familiar is frequently indicative of the way things are, favoring familiarity should create a psychological advantage for the status quo. In two studies, I tested the hypothesis that familiarity bias—susceptibility to the mere-exposure effect whereby attitude objects receive increasingly favorable evaluations due to repeated sensory experience—is foundational to ideological support for the status quo. In Study 1, individual variation in familiarity bias predicted greater Right-Wing Authoritarianism. Existential threat was experimentally manipulated via the salience of international terrorism in Study 2, but was unsuccessful due to a major terrorist attack against Brussels, Belgium during data collection. The present research offers mixed support for a link between familiarity bias and ideological support for the status quo. Further tests are necessary to determine if and how susceptibility to the mere-exposure effect is related to and right-wing ideology and motivations to manage threat and uncertainty

Power Evokes Reluctance for Group-Relevant Advocacy Among Marginalized Groups

Marginalized groups face difficulties voicing their interests. They are perceived as more self-interested, biased, and excessive for advocacy relative to majority groups. While such accusations are intimidating in their own right, powerful members of marginalized groups may be especially sensitive to reprisals in response to advocacy. The present research highlights the ironic role of power on group-relevant advocacy among marginalized groups; identity-based pressures dissuade advocacy because it is personally costly. An Internet study and one lab study examined the effect of high and low power primes on women\u27s self-reported and actual willingness for group-relevant advocacy. Data support my hypothesis that psychological power evokes reluctance for group-relevant advocacy among marginalized women. Powerful women (but not men) reported less advocacy willingness and avoided opportunities to pursue advocacy when it was relevant to their gender group. These findings speak to the impediment of Social progress, considering power within the context of identity threats

Social Media Responses To Self-Concept Threats

Several studies demonstrate that individuals carry out observable behaviors in order to achieve positive self-concepts. These behaviors can be related to engagements with social media. Thus, two studies tested whether the sharing of self-relevant symbols on user-heavy social media platforms is an engagement used to achieve positive self-concepts. In these studies, participants viewed resumes (Study 1) or Linkedin profiles (Study 2) intended to threaten their self-definition and then considered their own accomplishments in comparison. They were then asked to rate and choose one article, either relevant or irrelevant to their self-definition, to hypothetically share on their own social media page based on attractiveness. In Study 1, a high threat to participants’ self-definition led them to report goal-irrelevant articles as less attractive to share on social media. In Study 2, the data displayed varied results for relevant and irrelevant social media sharing, depending on the stimulus type. Participants\u27 self-definition goals moderated the effect in Study 2. Discrepancies in study findings are discussed in the context of the self-evaluation maintenance and symbolic self-completion theory

Reducing Implicit Racial Preferences: II Intervention Effectiveness Across Time

Implicit preferences are malleable, but does that change last? We tested 9 interventions (8 real and 1 sham) to reduce implicit racial preferences over time. In 2 studies with a total of 6,321 participants, all 9 interventions immediately reduced implicit preferences. However, none were effective after a delay of several hours to several days. We also found that these interventions did not change explicit racial preferences and were not reliably moderated by motivations to respond without prejudice. Short-term malleability in implicit preferences does not necessarily lead to long-term change, raising new questions about the flexibility and stability of implicit preferences. (PsycINFO Database Recor