Support for Social Change Among Members of Advantaged Groups: The Role of a Dual Identity Representation and Accepting Intergroup Contact

This preregistered research analyzed survey data from ethnic and religious advantaged groups in 12 countries ( N = 2,304) to examine the interplay between two determinants of support for social change toward intergroup equality. Drawing on the needs-based model and the common-ingroup identity model, we hypothesized that the experience of accepting intergroup contact and the endorsement of a dual identity representation of intergroup relations would be associated with greater support for equality. Furthermore, integrating the logic of both models, we tested the novel hypothesis that the positive effect of accepting contact on support for equality would be stronger under a high (vs. low) dual identity representation. While the predicted main effects received empirical support, we found no evidence for the expected interaction. These findings suggest that interventions to foster support for social change among advantaged group members can promote accepting contact and a dual identity representation independently of each other

Individual differences in system justification predict power and morality-related needs in advantaged and disadvantaged groups in response to group disparity

Guided by the needs-based model, we explored how individual differences in system justification predict group members’ needs in response to information about group-based disparities. Across two studies (N = 819), we found that among disadvantaged-group members (LGBTIQ* individuals/women) system justification was negatively related to need for power. Among advantaged-group members ([cis-]heterosexuals/men), system justification was negatively related to motivation to restore their ingroup’s moral essence (i.e., moral shame and wish that the ingroup would act more morally) but positively related to motivation to restore their ingroup’s moral image (i.e., need for positive moral image and expectation that the outgroup should acknowledge the ingroup’s morality). These results theoretically extend the needs-based model by offering a more nuanced picture of morality-related needs. Further, they underline the importance of considering individual differences in system justification for understanding advantaged- and disadvantaged-group members’ responses to social inequality

Need satisfaction in intergroup contact:A multinational study of pathways toward social change

none43siFinanziamenti esterni a vari co-autoriWhat role does intergroup contact play in promoting support for social change toward greater social equality? Drawing on the needs-based model of reconciliation, we theorized that when inequality between groups is perceived as illegitimate, disadvantaged group members will experience a need for empowerment and advantaged group members a need for acceptance. When intergroup contact satisfies each group's needs, it should result in more mutual support for social change. Using four sets of survey data collected through the Zurich Intergroup Project in 23 countries, we tested several preregistered predictions, derived from the above reasoning, across a large variety of operationalizations. Two studies of disadvantaged groups (Ns = 689 ethnic minority members in Study 1 and 3,382 sexual/gender minorities in Study 2) support the hypothesis that, after accounting for the effects of intergroup contact and perceived illegitimacy, satisfying the need for empowerment (but not acceptance) during contact is positively related to support for social change. Two studies with advantaged groups (Ns = 2,937 ethnic majority members in Study 3 and 4,203 cis-heterosexual individuals in Study 4) showed that, after accounting for illegitimacy and intergroup contact, satisfying the need for acceptance (but also empowerment) is positively related to support for social change. Overall, findings suggest that intergroup contact is compatible with efforts to promote social change when group-specific needs are met. Thus, to encourage support for social change among both disadvantaged and advantaged group members, it is essential that, besides promoting mutual acceptance, intergroup contact interventions also give voice to and empower members of disadvantaged groups.mixedHässler, Tabea; Ullrich, Johannes; Sebben, Simone; Shnabel, Nurit; Bernardino, Michelle; Valdenegro, Daniel; Van Laar, Colette; González, Roberto; Visintin, Emilio Paolo; Tropp, Linda R; Ditlmann, Ruth K; Abrams, Dominic; Aydin, Anna Lisa; Pereira, Adrienne; Selvanathan, Hema Preya; von Zimmermann, Jorina; Lantos, Nóra Anna; Sainz, Mario; Glenz, Andreas; Kende, Anna; Oberpfalzerová, Hana; Bilewicz, Michal; Branković, Marija; Noor, Masi; Pasek, Michael H; Wright, Stephen C; Žeželj, Iris; Kuzawinska, Olga; Maloku, Edona; Otten, Sabine; Gul, Pelin; Bareket, Orly; Corkalo Biruski, Dinka; Mugnol-Ugarte, Luiza; Osin, Evgeny; Baiocco, Roberto; Cook, Jonathan E; Dawood, Maneeza; Droogendyk, Lisa; Loyo, Angélica Herrera; Jelić, Margareta; Kelmendi, Kaltrina; Pistella, JessicaHässler, Tabea; Ullrich, Johannes; Sebben, Simone; Shnabel, Nurit; Bernardino, Michelle; Valdenegro, Daniel; Van Laar, Colette; González, Roberto; Visintin, Emilio Paolo; Tropp, Linda R; Ditlmann, Ruth K; Abrams, Dominic; Aydin, Anna Lisa; Pereira, Adrienne; Selvanathan, Hema Preya; von Zimmermann, Jorina; Lantos, Nóra Anna; Sainz, Mario; Glenz, Andreas; Kende, Anna; Oberpfalzerová, Hana; Bilewicz, Michal; Branković, Marija; Noor, Masi; Pasek, Michael H; Wright, Stephen C; Žeželj, Iris; Kuzawinska, Olga; Maloku, Edona; Otten, Sabine; Gul, Pelin; Bareket, Orly; Corkalo Biruski, Dinka; Mugnol-Ugarte, Luiza; Osin, Evgeny; Baiocco, Roberto; Cook, Jonathan E; Dawood, Maneeza; Droogendyk, Lisa; Loyo, Angélica Herrera; Jelić, Margareta; Kelmendi, Kaltrina; Pistella, Jessic

A large-scale test of the link between intergroup contact and support for social change

Guided by the early findings of social scientists, practitioners have long advocated for greater contact between groups to reduce prejudice and increase social cohesion. Recent work, however, suggests that intergroup contact can undermine support for social change towards greater equality, especially among disadvantaged group members. Using a large and heterogeneous dataset (12,997 individuals from 69 countries), we demonstrate that intergroup contact and support for social change towards greater equality are positively associated among members of advantaged groups (ethnic majorities and cis-heterosexuals) but negatively associated among disadvantaged groups (ethnic minorities and sexual and gender minorities). Specification-curve analysis revealed important variation in the size—and at times, direction—of correlations, depending on how contact and support for social change were measured. This allowed us to identify one type of support for change—willingness to work in solidarity— that is positively associated with intergroup contact among both advantaged and disadvantaged group members

Gender Gap in Parental Leave Intentions: Evidence from 37 Countries

Despite global commitments and efforts, a gender-based division of paid and unpaid work persists. To identify how psychological factors, national policies, and the broader sociocultural context contribute to this inequality, we assessed parental-leave intentions in young adults (18–30 years old) planning to have children (N = 13,942; 8,880 identified as women; 5,062 identified as men) across 37 countries that varied in parental-leave policies and societal gender equality. In all countries, women intended to take longer leave than men. National parental-leave policies and women’s political representation partially explained cross-national variations in the gender gap. Gender gaps in leave intentions were paradoxically larger in countries with more gender-egalitarian parental-leave policies (i.e., longer leave available to both fathers and mothers). Interestingly, this cross-national variation in the gender gap was driven by cross-national variations in women’s (rather than men’s) leave intentions. Financially generous leave and gender-egalitarian policies (linked to men’s higher uptake in prior research) were not associated with leave intentions in men. Rather, men’s leave intentions were related to their individual gender attitudes. Leave intentions were inversely related to career ambitions. The potential for existing policies to foster gender equality in paid and unpaid work is discussed

Gender Gap in Parental Leave Intentions: Evidence from 37 Countries

Despite global commitments and efforts, a gender-based division of paid and unpaid work persists. To identify how psychological factors, national policies, and the broader sociocultural context contribute to this inequality, we assessed parental-leave intentions in young adults (18–30 years old) planning to have children (N = 13,942; 8,880 identified as women; 5,062 identified as men) across 37 countries that varied in parental-leave policies and societal gender equality. In all countries, women intended to take longer leave than men. National parental-leave policies and women’s political representation partially explained cross-national variations in the gender gap. Gender gaps in leave intentions were paradoxically larger in countries with more gender-egalitarian parental-leave policies (i.e., longer leave available to both fathers and mothers). Interestingly, this cross-national variation in the gender gap was driven by cross-national variations in women’s (rather than men’s) leave intentions. Financially generous leave and gender-egalitarian policies (linked to men’s higher uptake in prior research) were not associated with leave intentions in men. Rather, men’s leave intentions were related to their individual gender attitudes. Leave intentions were inversely related to career ambitions. The potential for existing policies to foster gender equality in paid and unpaid work is discussed.Gender Gap in Parental Leave Intentions: Evidence from 37 CountriespublishedVersio

Swiss LGBTIQ+ Panel - 2020 Summary Report

This is a summary report of the 2020 survey of the Swiss LGBTIQ+ Panel. The Swiss LGBTIQ+ Panel, a longitudinal study assessing the situation of LGBTIQ+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, intersex, and queer) individuals in Switzerland in an annual manner, is led by Léïla Eisner and Tabea Hässler. Each annual survey covers emerging topics in the Swiss context (e.g., legalization of same-sex marriage), personal experiences of LGBTIQ+ individuals (e.g., support, discrimination, coming out, experiences in the school context) as well as action to change the situation in Switzerland. We believe that the insights of the Swiss LGBTIQ+ Panel have high practical relevance for LGBTIQ+ and cis-heterosexual individuals, people in the educational context, LGBTIQ+ and other non-profit organizations, practitioners, and policymakers aiming at promoting the health and integration of LGBTIQ+ individuals

National LGBTIQ+ Survey 2019: Summary Report

This document is the summary report of the main findings of the Swiss LGBTIQ+ survey 2019. The authors contributed equally to the work