Threat Rejection Fuels Political Dehumanization

Americans disagree about many things, including what threats are most pressing. We suggest people morally condemn and dehumanize opponents when they are perceived as rejecting the existence or severity of important perceived threats. We explore perceived "threat rejection" across five studies (N = 2,404) both in the real-world COVID-19 pandemic and in novel contexts. Americans morally condemned and dehumanized policy opponents when they seemed to reject realistic group threats (e.g., threat to the physical health or resources of the group). Believing opponents rejected symbolic group threats (e.g., to collective identity) was not reliably linked to condemnation and dehumanization. Importantly, the political dehumanization caused by perceived threat rejection can be soothed with a "threat acknowledgement" intervention

Them, Us, and I: How Group Contexts Influence Basic Psychological Needs

Here, we integrate two influential psychological theories: social-identity theory and self-determination theory. Whereas social-identity theory considers how social identities impact the self, self-determination theory elucidates the psychological necessity of feeling related, competent, and autonomous. In this article, we outline and provide justification for a unified theoretical framework that considers how perceptions of personal relatedness, competence, and autonomy are influenced by perceptions that one’s social group is related, competent, and autonomous

Allowing the victim to draw a line in history: Intergroup apology effectiveness as a function of collective autonomy support

We tested whether intergroup apology effectiveness increases when the apology is collective autonomy supportive (i.e., victimized group members are told they have the choice to accept or reject the apology). In Experiment 1, university students who received a collective autonomy supportive (compared to a collective autonomy unsupportive or basic) apology for derogatory remarks made by a rival university perceived the apology as more empathic. This, in turn, heightened intergroup forgiveness. Experiment 2 replicated and extended this effect in the context of the friendly fire killing of Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan by the United States. Canadians in the collective autonomy supportive condition felt more empowered and were less critical of the apology. Sequential mediation analyses revealed that collective autonomy support had an indirect effect on intergroup forgiveness through empowerment and empathic support of the apology. Findings suggest the apology-forgiveness link strengthens when the victimized group's collective autonomy is explicitly acknowledged

The good, the bad and the central of group identification: Evidence of a U-shaped quadratic relation between in-group affect and identity centrality

The present research investigates the interrelation between two widely studied dimensions of social group identity—in-group affect and centrality. Specifically, we test the validity of a quadratic curvilinear relation between in-group affect and identity centrality. We propose that group members who feel either decidedly positive affect or decidedly negative affect towards their group are more likely to feel that their identity is a central component of their self-concept relative to group members with neutral affect. We find evidence for a quadratic relation between in-group affect and identity centrality with respect to people's cultural identity (N = 512), ethnic identity (N = 462), religious identity (N = 61, N = 384) and racial identity (N = 3600, N = 2400). Theoretical and practical implications for the measurement and conceptualization of group identification are discussed. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd