Intergroup bias reduction: What makes our interventions effective?
Конференцијски прилог (Објављена верзија)
Метаподаци
Приказ свих података о документуАпстракт
Recent line of experiments that aim to reduce intergroup bias has explored the role of groups
with dual identity - i.e. whether these groups can serve as a gateway between the two
conflicted groups their two identities represent. For example, Bosniaks from Sandžak can be portrayed as a gateway group, i.e. strongly identified with both Bosniak ethnic group and
Serbian national group. This was shown to reduce Serbs’ prejudice towards Bosniaks in
general. The prerequisite to reducing bias is making participants endorse the idea that
members of the gateway group have dual identity. This can be done in two ways: (1) minority
perspective – portraying minority members as experiencing strong dual identification or (2)
majority perspective – describing that ingroup (IG) members mostly perceive the gateway
group as dually identified. In the first case, the key component of the intervention is gateway
group members’ experience; in the second, it is a descriptive social norm that the IG s...ets. We
contrasted the two interventions in a single design and tested if they were equally effective in
inducing the perception of the dual identity. We also examined if participants’ political
orientation moderated their effectiveness. Participants (N = 123, ethnic Serbs) first indicated
their political orientation (left-right; 11-point scale). Then they were randomly exposed to
one of the interventions: (1) Dual identity experience or (2) Dual identity as a descriptive
norm. Finally, they indicated how strong they found the gateway group identified with (a)
Serbs and (b) Bosniaks on the 100-point scale. We calculated the dual identity score that
ranged 0-100. GLM analysis revealed that the Dual identity experience intervention was
more effective in inducing DI (M = 61.3, SD = 18.7) than the norm-based one (M = 57.2, SD
= 22.9), F(1,117) = 7.10, p = .009, ηp2 = .06. While the main effect of political orientation
was not significant (F(2,117) = 2.83, p = .063), intervention type * political orientation
interaction was (F(2,117) = 4.01, p = .021, ηp2 = .06). More precisely, the Dual identity
experience intervention was equally effective across all levels of political orientation, while
the norm-based one was ineffective for the conservatives. We showed that the two types of
intervention might not be equally effective in inducing the idea of dual identity and that their
potential to reduce intergroup bias should be further examined. Further, it seems that
individual differences moderate their effectiveness. These findings should be taken into
account when applying interventions in a wider social context.
Кључне речи:
dual identity / intergroup bias / experimental interventionИзвор:
Book of abstracts, XXVIII Scientific Conference “Empirical Studies in Psychology”, Belgrade, 2022, 128-129Издавач:
- Institut za psihologiju i Laboratorija za eksperimentalnu psihologiju
Финансирање / пројекти:
- 451-03-9/2021-14
Институција/група
Psihologija / PsychologyTY - CONF AU - Ninković, Milica AU - Žeželj, Iris PY - 2022 UR - http://reff.f.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/4633 AB - Recent line of experiments that aim to reduce intergroup bias has explored the role of groups with dual identity - i.e. whether these groups can serve as a gateway between the two conflicted groups their two identities represent. For example, Bosniaks from Sandžak can be portrayed as a gateway group, i.e. strongly identified with both Bosniak ethnic group and Serbian national group. This was shown to reduce Serbs’ prejudice towards Bosniaks in general. The prerequisite to reducing bias is making participants endorse the idea that members of the gateway group have dual identity. This can be done in two ways: (1) minority perspective – portraying minority members as experiencing strong dual identification or (2) majority perspective – describing that ingroup (IG) members mostly perceive the gateway group as dually identified. In the first case, the key component of the intervention is gateway group members’ experience; in the second, it is a descriptive social norm that the IG sets. We contrasted the two interventions in a single design and tested if they were equally effective in inducing the perception of the dual identity. We also examined if participants’ political orientation moderated their effectiveness. Participants (N = 123, ethnic Serbs) first indicated their political orientation (left-right; 11-point scale). Then they were randomly exposed to one of the interventions: (1) Dual identity experience or (2) Dual identity as a descriptive norm. Finally, they indicated how strong they found the gateway group identified with (a) Serbs and (b) Bosniaks on the 100-point scale. We calculated the dual identity score that ranged 0-100. GLM analysis revealed that the Dual identity experience intervention was more effective in inducing DI (M = 61.3, SD = 18.7) than the norm-based one (M = 57.2, SD = 22.9), F(1,117) = 7.10, p = .009, ηp2 = .06. While the main effect of political orientation was not significant (F(2,117) = 2.83, p = .063), intervention type * political orientation interaction was (F(2,117) = 4.01, p = .021, ηp2 = .06). More precisely, the Dual identity experience intervention was equally effective across all levels of political orientation, while the norm-based one was ineffective for the conservatives. We showed that the two types of intervention might not be equally effective in inducing the idea of dual identity and that their potential to reduce intergroup bias should be further examined. Further, it seems that individual differences moderate their effectiveness. These findings should be taken into account when applying interventions in a wider social context. PB - Institut za psihologiju i Laboratorija za eksperimentalnu psihologiju C3 - Book of abstracts, XXVIII Scientific Conference “Empirical Studies in Psychology”, Belgrade T1 - Intergroup bias reduction: What makes our interventions effective? EP - 129 SP - 128 UR - https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_4633 ER -
@conference{ author = "Ninković, Milica and Žeželj, Iris", year = "2022", abstract = "Recent line of experiments that aim to reduce intergroup bias has explored the role of groups with dual identity - i.e. whether these groups can serve as a gateway between the two conflicted groups their two identities represent. For example, Bosniaks from Sandžak can be portrayed as a gateway group, i.e. strongly identified with both Bosniak ethnic group and Serbian national group. This was shown to reduce Serbs’ prejudice towards Bosniaks in general. The prerequisite to reducing bias is making participants endorse the idea that members of the gateway group have dual identity. This can be done in two ways: (1) minority perspective – portraying minority members as experiencing strong dual identification or (2) majority perspective – describing that ingroup (IG) members mostly perceive the gateway group as dually identified. In the first case, the key component of the intervention is gateway group members’ experience; in the second, it is a descriptive social norm that the IG sets. We contrasted the two interventions in a single design and tested if they were equally effective in inducing the perception of the dual identity. We also examined if participants’ political orientation moderated their effectiveness. Participants (N = 123, ethnic Serbs) first indicated their political orientation (left-right; 11-point scale). Then they were randomly exposed to one of the interventions: (1) Dual identity experience or (2) Dual identity as a descriptive norm. Finally, they indicated how strong they found the gateway group identified with (a) Serbs and (b) Bosniaks on the 100-point scale. We calculated the dual identity score that ranged 0-100. GLM analysis revealed that the Dual identity experience intervention was more effective in inducing DI (M = 61.3, SD = 18.7) than the norm-based one (M = 57.2, SD = 22.9), F(1,117) = 7.10, p = .009, ηp2 = .06. While the main effect of political orientation was not significant (F(2,117) = 2.83, p = .063), intervention type * political orientation interaction was (F(2,117) = 4.01, p = .021, ηp2 = .06). More precisely, the Dual identity experience intervention was equally effective across all levels of political orientation, while the norm-based one was ineffective for the conservatives. We showed that the two types of intervention might not be equally effective in inducing the idea of dual identity and that their potential to reduce intergroup bias should be further examined. Further, it seems that individual differences moderate their effectiveness. These findings should be taken into account when applying interventions in a wider social context.", publisher = "Institut za psihologiju i Laboratorija za eksperimentalnu psihologiju", journal = "Book of abstracts, XXVIII Scientific Conference “Empirical Studies in Psychology”, Belgrade", title = "Intergroup bias reduction: What makes our interventions effective?", pages = "129-128", url = "https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_4633" }
Ninković, M.,& Žeželj, I.. (2022). Intergroup bias reduction: What makes our interventions effective?. in Book of abstracts, XXVIII Scientific Conference “Empirical Studies in Psychology”, Belgrade Institut za psihologiju i Laboratorija za eksperimentalnu psihologiju., 128-129. https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_4633
Ninković M, Žeželj I. Intergroup bias reduction: What makes our interventions effective?. in Book of abstracts, XXVIII Scientific Conference “Empirical Studies in Psychology”, Belgrade. 2022;:128-129. https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_4633 .
Ninković, Milica, Žeželj, Iris, "Intergroup bias reduction: What makes our interventions effective?" in Book of abstracts, XXVIII Scientific Conference “Empirical Studies in Psychology”, Belgrade (2022):128-129, https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_4633 .