Guided by communication accommodation theory, the current study examined the effects of accent stereotyping on native English speakers’ (N = 243) perceptions of and willingness to communicate with the nonnative speaker and willingness to accommodate to Hispanic/Latino Americans in general. Accent stereotyping was manipulated through two experimental conditions: presence or absence of an explicit and negative stereotype in a written paragraph. After reading the paragraph, participants listened to a recording of an English speaker with a moderate, native-Spanish accent. Using PROCESS, results revealed participants in the stereotype condition rated the speaker as less socially attractive than the control condition, indicating accent stereotyping negatively affected perceptions of social attractiveness of the moderately accented speaker. Additionally, results indicated significant indirect effects of negative accent stereotyping on willingness to communicate with the speaker and willingness to accommodate to Hispanic/Latino out-group members sequentially through perceived social attractiveness and communication anxiety.
AndersonS.DownsS. D.FaucetteK.GriffinJ.KingT.WoolstenhulmeS. (2007). How accents affect perception of intelligence, physical attractiveness, and trustworthiness of Middle-Eastern-, Latin-American-, British-, and Standard-American-English-accented speakers. Intuition: BYU Undergraduate Journal of Psychology, 3, 5-11.
2.
DragojevicM. (2016). Language attitudes as intergroup terrain. In GilesH.MaassA. (Eds.), Advances in intergroup communication (pp. 51-66). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
3.
DragojevicM.GasiorekJ.GilesH. (2016). Communication accommodation theory. In BergerC. R.RoloffM. L. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of interpersonal communication (pp. 176-196). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
4.
DragojevicM.GilesH. (2016). I don’t like you because you’re hard to understand: The role of processing fluency in the language attitudes process. Human Communication Research, 42, 396-420.
5.
DragojevicM.GilesH.WatsonB. M. (2013). Language ideologies and language attitudes: A foundational framework. In GilesH.WatsonB. (Eds.), The social meaning of language, dialect and accent (pp. 1-25). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
6.
FiedlerK.SchmidJ. (2003). How language contributes to persistence of stereotypes as well as other, more general, intergroup issues. In BrownR.GaertnerS. (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Intergroup processes (pp. 262-280). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
7.
GaertnerS. L.DovidioJ. F. (2000). Reducing intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
8.
GaertnerS. L.RustM. C.DovidioJ. F.BachmanB. A.AnastasioP. A. (1994). The contact hypothesis: The role of a common ingroup identity on reducing intergroup bias. Small Group Research, 25, 224-249.
9.
GalloisC.GilesH.JonesE.CargileA. C.OtaH. (1995). Accommodating intercultural encounters: Elaborations and extensions. In WisemanR. L. (Ed.), Intercultural communication theory (pp. 15-147). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10.
GarrettP. (2010). Attitudes to language. Cambridge, England: University Press.
11.
GasiorekJ. (2016). The “dark side” of CAT. In GilesH. (Ed.), Communication accommodation theory: Negotiating personal relationships and social identities across contexts (pp. 85-104). Cambridge, England: University Press.
12.
GilesH. (1970). Evaluative reactions to accents. Educational Review, 22, 211-227.
13.
GilesH. (1973). Communicative effectiveness as a function of accented speech. Speech Monographs, 40, 330-331.
14.
GilesH. (2016). (Ed.). Communication accommodation theory: Negotiating personal relationships and social identities across contexts. Cambridge, England: University Press.
15.
GilesH.BonillaD.SpeerR. B. (2012). Acculturating intergroup vitalities, accommodation and contact. In JacksonJ. (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of language and intercultural communication (pp. 244-259). New York, NY: Routledge.
16.
GilesH.WilsonP.ConwayA. (1981). Accent and lexical diversity as determinants of impression formation and perceived employment suitability. Language Sciences, 3, 91-103.
17.
GluszekA.DovidioJ. F. (2010). The way they speak: A social psychological perspective on the stigma of nonnative accents in communication. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14, 214-237.
18.
HammerM. R.WisemanR. L.RasmussenJ. L.BruschkeJ. C. (1998). A test of anxiety/uncertainty management theory: The intercultural adaptation context. Communication Quarterly, 46, 309-326.
19.
HansenK.DovidioJ. F. (2016). Social dominance orientation, nonnative accents, and hiring recommendations. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 22, 544-551. doi:10.1037/cdp0000101
20.
HarwoodJ.VinczeL. (2012). Undermining stereotypes of linguistic groups through mediated intergroup contact. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 31, 157-175.
21.
HayesA. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
22.
HoggM. A. (2006). Social identity theory. In BurkeP. J. (Ed.), Contemporary social psychological theories (pp. 111-136). Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press.
23.
HoggM. A.ReidS. A. (2006). Social identity, self-categorization, and the communication of group norms. Communication Theory, 16, 7-30.
24.
ImamuraM.RubleR.ZhangY. B. (2016). English proficiency, identity, anxiety, and intergroup attitudes: US Americans’ perceptions of Chinese. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 45, 526-539.
25.
ImamuraM.ZhangY. B. (2014). Functions of the common ingroup identity model and acculturation strategies in intercultural communication: American host nationals’ communication with Chinese international students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 43, 227-238.
26.
ImamuraM.ZhangY. B.HarwoodJ. (2011). Japanese sojourners’ attitudes toward Americans: Exploring the influences of communication accommodation, linguistic competence, and relational solidarity in intergroup contact. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 21, 115-132.
27.
ImamuraM.ZhangY. B.ShimC. (2012). US host nationals’ attitudes toward Japanese: The role of communication and relational solidarity in the intergroup contact hypothesis. Asian Journal of Communication, 22, 584-600.
JonesE.GalloisC.CallanV.BarkerM. (1999). Strategies of accommodation: Development of a coding system for conversational interaction. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18, 123-151.
30.
LeeC.GilesH. (2008, May). Attraction in context: How contextual differences in personal and social attraction effect communication accommodation behavior. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Communication Association, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
31.
Lev-AriS.KeysarB. (2010). Why don’t we believe non-native speakers? The influence of accent on credibility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 1093-1096.
32.
Lippi-GreenR. (2012). English with an accent: Language, ideology, and discrimination in the United States. New York, NY: Routledge.
33.
LlamasC.WattD.JohnsonD. E. (2009). Linguistic accommodation and the salience of national identity markers in a border town. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 28, 381-407.
34.
MangeJ.LepastourelN.GeorgetP. (2009). Is your language a social clue? Lexical markers and social identity. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 28, 364-380.
35.
McKay-SemmlerK.KimY. Y. (2014). Cross-cultural adaptation of Hispanic youth: A study of communication patterns, functional fitness, and psychological health. Communication Monographs, 81, 133-156.
36.
OperarioD.FiskeS. T. (2003). Stereotypes: Content, structures, processes, and context. In BrownR.GaertnerS. (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Intergroup processes (pp. 2-44). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
PiskeT.MacKayI. R. A.FlegeJ. A. (2001). Factors affecting degree of foreign accent in an L2: A review. Journal of Phonetics, 29, 191-215.
39.
RubleR. A.ZhangY. B. (2011). Stereotypes of Chinese international students held by American students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 37, 202-211.
40.
RubleR. A.ZhangY. B. (2012). The impact of stereotypes on American students’ willingness to communicate with Chinese international students. Bulletin of the Association of College Unions International, 80, 30-34.
41.
ScovelT. (2000). A critical review of the critical period research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 20, 213-223.
42.
StephanW. G.StephanC. W.GudykunstW. B. (1999). Anxiety in intergroup relations: A comparison of anxiety/uncertainty management theory and integrated threat theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23, 613-628.
VonkR.Olde-MonnikhofM. (1998). Gender subgroups: Intergroup bias within the sexes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 37-47.
46.
WangZ.ArndtA.SinghS.BiernatM. (2009). The impact of accent stereotypes on service outcomes and its boundary conditions. NA-Advances in Consumer Research, 36, 940-941.
47.
ZhangY. B.GilesH. (in press). Communication accommodation theory. In KimY. (Ed.), International encyclopedia of intercultural communication. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
