Acceptance of cultural differences can contribute to diversity. However, naïve realism—the conviction that one’s views are objective whereas others’ are biased—might hinder intercultural coexistence. We tested, in three experimental studies, whether a cognitive strategy based on raising awareness of the naïve realism, without any reference to culture and free of emotional involvement, can have a beneficial effect on cultural acceptance. Results revealed that participants showed more acceptance of cultural differences once they were aware of this bias (Study 1). The intervention had an indirect effect on acceptance via openness, especially for participants higher in prejudice (Study 2). Participants aware of this bias could not maintain an enhanced self-view, which mediated the effect of the manipulation on acceptance (Study 3). These findings suggest that strategies based on “cold” cognition, without an explicit emphasis on culture, might be beneficial for increasing the acceptance of cultural differences in an era of xenophobia.
BakkerA. B.Rodríguez-MuñozA.DerksD. (2012). La emergencia de la psicología de la salud ocupacional positiva [The emergence of positive occupational health psychology]. Psicothema, 24, 66–72.
2.
Bar-TalD.HameiriB.HalperinE. (2021). Paradoxical thinking as a paradigm of attitude change in the context of intractable conflict. In GawronskiB. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 63, pp. 129–187). Academic Press.
3.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.
4.
Elad-StrengerJ.SaguyT.HalperinE. (2019). Facilitating hope among the hopeless: The role of ideology and moral content in shaping reactions to internal criticism in the context of intractable conflict. Social Science Quarterly, 100, 2425–2444. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12690
FaulF.ErdfelderE.BuchnerA.LangA. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
7.
GohJ. X.HallJ. A.RosenthalR. (2016). Mini meta-analysis of your own studies: Some arguments on why and a primer on how. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10, 535–549. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12267
8.
HallM. P.RaimiK. T. (2018). Is belief superiority justified by superior knowledge?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 76, 290–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.03.001
9.
HalperinE.PliskinR.SaguyT.LibermanV.GrossJ. J. (2014). Emotion regulation and the cultivation of political tolerance: Searching for a new track for intervention. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 58, 1110–1138.
10.
HameiriB.NabetE.Bar-TalD.HalperinE. (2018). Paradoxical thinking as a conflict resolution intervention: Comparison to alternative interventions and examination of psychological mechanisms. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44, 122–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217736048
11.
HameiriB.PoratR.Bar-TalD.BielerA.HalperinE. (2014). Paradoxical thinking as a new avenue of intervention to promote peace. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111, 10996–11001. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1407055111
12.
HayesA. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
13.
HepperE. G.GramzowR. H.SedikidesC. (2010). Individual differences in self-enhancement and self-protection strategies: An integrative analysis. Journal of Personality, 78, 781–814. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00633.x
14.
Instituto Nacional de Estadística. (2020). Avance de la Estadística del Padrón Continuo a 1 de enero de 2020 [Advance of the continuous register statistics as of January 1, 2020]. https://www.ine.es/prensa/pad_2020_p.pdf
15.
KauffM.AsbrockF.ThörnerS.WagnerU. (2013). Side effects of multiculturalism: The interaction effect of a multicultural ideology and authoritarianism on prejudice and diversity beliefs. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 305–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212473160
16.
KlimeckiO. M.VétoisM.SanderD. (2020). The impact of empathy and perspective-taking instructions on proponents and opponents of immigration. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 7, 91. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00581-0
17.
KnowlesE. S.LinnJ. A. (Eds.). (2004). Resistance and persuasion. Lawrence Erlbaum.
18.
López-RodríguezL.CuadradoI.NavasM. (2013). Aplicación extendida del Modelo del Contenido de los Estereotipos (MCE) hacia tres grupos de inmigrantes en España [Extended application of the Stereotype Content Model (SCM) to three groups of immigrants in Spain]. Estudios de Psicología, 34, 197–208. https://doi.org/10.1174/021093913806751375
19.
McConahayJ. B. (1986). Modern racism, ambivalence, and the Modern Racism Scale. In DovidioJ. F.GaertnerS. L. (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination and racism (pp. 91–125). Academic Press.
20.
MoleroF.CuadradoI.NavasM. S. (2003). Las nuevas expresiones del prejuicio racial: Aspectos teóricos y empíricos [New expressions of racial prejudice: Theoretical and empirical aspects]. In MoralesJ. F.HuiciC. (Eds.), Estudios de Psicología Social [Studies of Social Psychology] (pp. 85–117). Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia.
21.
NavasM. S. (1998). Nuevos instrumentos de medida para el nuevo racismo [New measuring instruments for the new racism]. Revista de Psicologia Social, 13, 233–239. https://doi.org/10.1174/021347498760350731
22.
NasieM. S.Bar-TalD.PliskinR.NahhasE.HalperinE. (2014). Overcoming the barrier of narrative adherence in conflicts through awareness of the psychological bias of naïve realism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40, 1543–1556. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167214551153
23.
NavasM. S.CuadradoI.López-RodríguezL. (2012). Escala de Percepción de Amenaza Exogrupal (EPAE): fiabilidad y evidencias de validez [Reliability and validity evidence of the Out-Group Threat Perception Scale (OTPS)]. Psicothema, 24, 477–482.
24.
NavasM. S.PumaresP.SánchezJ.GarcíaM. C.RojasA. J.CuadradoI.AsensioM.FernándezJ. S. (2004). Estrategias y actitudes de aculturación: la perspectiva de los inmigrantes y de los autóctonos en Almería [Acculturation strategies and attitudes: The perspective of immigrants and natives in Almería]. Junta de Andalucía.
25.
PerryS. P.MurphyM. C.DovidioJ. F. (2015). Modern prejudice: Subtle, but unconscious? The role of bias awareness in Whites’ perceptions of personal and others’ biases. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 61, 64–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.06.007
26.
PettigrewT. F.MeertensR. W. (1995). Subtle and blatant prejudice in Western Europe. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 57–75. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420250106
Rios MorrisonK.PlautV. C.YbarraO. (2010). Predicting whether multiculturalism positively or negatively influences white Americans’ intergroup attitudes: The role of ethnic identification. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1648–1661. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167210386118
29.
RossL.LepperM.WardA. (2010). History of Social Psychology: Insights, challenges, and contributions to theory and application. In FiskeS. T.GilbertD. T.LindzeyG. (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (5th ed., pp. 3–50). John Wiley.
30.
RossL.WardA. (1996). Naive realism in everyday life: Implications for social conflict and misunderstanding. In ReedE. S.TurielE.BrownT. (Eds.), The Jean Piaget symposium series: Values and knowledge (pp. 103–135). Lawrence Erlbaum.
31.
SedikidesC.AlickeM. D. (2019). The five pillars of self-enhancement and self-protection. In RyanR. M. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of human motivation (2nd ed., pp. 307–319). Oxford University Press.
32.
TaioliE.BonassiS. (2003). Pooled analysis of epidemiological studies involving biological markers. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, 206(2), 109–115. https://doi.org/10.1078/1438-4639-00198
VorauerJ. D.SasakiS. J. (2011). In the worst rather than the best of times: Effects of salient intergroup ideology in threatening intergroup interactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 307–320. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023152
WangY. W.DavidsonM. M.YakushkoO. F.SavoyH. B.TanJ. A.BleierJ. K. (2003). The scale of ethnocultural empathy: Development, validation, and reliability. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50, 221–234. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.50.2.221.221
37.
ZmigrodL.RentfrowP.RobbinsT. (2018). Cognitive underpinnings of nationalistic ideology in the context of Brexit. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115, E4532–E4540. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1708960115
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
