This research investigated whether ingroup norm moderates the effect of positive or prosocial interactions on the understanding of intergroup prosocial behaviors. Among four experiments in three different cultural samples (U.S. Americans, Kosovan Serbs, and Kosovan Albanians; N = 808), results showed that participants attributed fewer prosocial motives and reported less willingness to accept help when the helper was an outgroup than an ingroup member. However, these effects were weaker or nonsignificant in the tolerant norm condition, as compared to the intolerant norm or control conditions. In addition, participants were more willing to interact with the outgroup (vs. ingroup) helper in the tolerant norm condition, as compared to the intolerant norm or control conditions. Finally, normative expectations, the attribution of prosocial motives to the helper, and the anticipated quality of the interaction with the helper sequentially explained the observed effects. The theoretical and practical implications of these results for intergroup help and intergroup contact literature are discussed.
AbramsD. (2011). Wherein lies children’s intergroup bias? Egocentrism, social understanding, and social projection. Child Development, 82, 1579–1593. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01617.x
2.
AllportG. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley.
3.
AndrighettoG.GriecoD.TummoliniL. (2015). Perceived legitimacy of normative expectations motivates compliance with social norms when nobody is watching. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01413
4.
AjzenI.FishbeinM. (1973). Attitudinal and normative variables as predictors of specific behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27, 41–57. doi.org/10.1037/h0034440
5.
Bar-TalD. (2007a). Living with the conflict: Socio-psychological analysis of the Israeli-Jewish society. Carmel.
6.
Bar-TalD. (2007b). Sociopsychological foundations of intractable conflicts. American Behavioral Scientist, 50, 1430–1453. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764207302462
7.
BatsonC. (1991). The altruism question: Toward a social-psychological answer. Psychology Press.
8.
BorincaI.Falomir-PichastorJ. M.AndrighettoL. (2020). “How can you help me if you are not from here?” Helper’s familiarity with the context shapes interpretations of prosocial intergroup behaviors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 87, Article 103944. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2019.103944
9.
BorincaI.Falomir-PichastorJ. M.AndrighettoL.DuranteF. (2020). Outgroup prejudice and perceptions of prosocial intergroup behaviors. European Journal of Social Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2712
10.
CialdiniR. B.RenoR. R.KallgrenC. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 1015–1026. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.58.6.1015
11.
CrandallC. S.StangorC. (2005). Conformity and Prejudice. In DovidioJ. F.GlickP.RudmanL. A. (Eds.), On the nature of prejudice: Fifty years after Allport (pp.295–309). Black well Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470773963.ch18
12.
CrandallC. S.EshlemanA. (2003). A justification–suppression model of the expression and experience of prejudice. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 414–446. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.414
13.
CrandallC. S.EshlemanA.O’BrienL. (2002). Social norms and the expression and suppression of prejudice: The struggle for internalization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 359–378. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.82.3.359
14.
DeeganM. P.HehmanE.GaertnerS. L.DovidioJ. F. (2015). Positive expectations encourage generalization from a positive intergroup interaction to outgroup attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41, 52–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167214556240
15.
De Tezanos-PintoP.BrattC.BrownR. (2010). What will the others think? In-group norms as a mediator of the effects of intergroup contact. British Journal of Social Psychology, 49, 507–523. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466609X471020
16.
DovidioJ. F.KawakamiK.GaertnerS. L. (2002). Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 62–68. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.1.62
17.
Falomir-PichastorJ. M.ChatardA.SelimbegovicL.KonanP. N. D.MugnyG. (2013). Conformity and counter-conformity to anti-discrimination norms: The moderating effect of attitude toward foreigners and perceived in-group threat. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43, E206–E215. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12024
18.
Falomir-PichastorJ. M.Muñoz-RojasD.InvernizziF.MugnyG. (2004). Perceived in-group threat as a factor moderating the influence of in-group norms on discrimination against foreigners. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 135–153. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.189
19.
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.10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
20.
FinlayK. A.StephanW. G. (2000). Improving intergroup relations: The effects of empathy on racial attitudes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 1720–1737. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02464.x
FoddyM.PlatowM. J.YamagishiT. (2009). Group-based trust in strangers: The role of stereotypes and expectations. Psychological Science, 20, 419–422. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02312.x
23.
GómezA.TroppL. R.FernándezS. (2011). When extended contact opens the door to future contact: Testing the effects of extended contact on attitudes and intergroup expectancies in majority and minority groups. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 14, 161–173. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430210391119
24.
GómezA.TroppL. R.VázquezA.VociA.HewstoneM. (2018). Depersonalized extended contact and injunctive norms about cross-group friendship impact intergroup orientations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 76, 356–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.02.010
25.
HalabiS.NadlerA.DovidioJ. F. (2011). Reactions to receiving assumptive help: The moderating effects of group membership and perceived need for help. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41, 2793–2815. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00859.x
26.
HastingsP. D.Zahn-WaxlerC.RobinsonJ.UsherB.BridgesD. (2000). The development of concern for others in children with behavior problems. Developmental Psychology, 36, 531–546. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.36.5.531
27.
HayesA. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. Guilford Press.
28.
HewstoneM. E.BrownR. E. (1986). Contact and conflict in intergroup encounters. Basil Blackwell.
29.
JettenJ.PostmesT.McAuliffeB. J. (2002). “We’re all individuals”: Group norms of individualism and collectivism, levels of identification and identity threat. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 189–207. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.65
KendeA.TroppL.LantosN. A. (2017). Testing a contact intervention based on intergroup friendship between Roma and non-Roma Hungarians: Reducing bias through institutional support in a non-supportive societal context. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 47, 47–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12422
33.
MallettR. K.WilsonT. D.GilbertD. T. (2008). Expect the unexpected: Failure to anticipate similarities leads to an intergroup forecasting error. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 265–277. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.2.94.2.265
34.
MaunderR. D.DayS. C.WhiteF. A. (2019). The benefit of contact for prejudice-prone individuals: The type of stigmatized outgroup matters. The Journal of Social Psychology, 160, 92–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2019.1601608
35.
MerinoS. M. (2013). Contact with gays and lesbians and same-sex marriage support: The moderating role of social context. Social Science Research, 42, 1156–1166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2013.02.004
MullenB.HuL. T. (1989). Perceptions of ingroup and outgroup variability: A meta-analytic integration. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 10, 233–252. https://doi:org/10.1207/s15324834basp1003_3
38.
NadlerA.HalabiS.Harapz-GorodeiskyG.Ben-DavidY. (2010). Helping relations as status relations. In MikulincerM.ShaverP. R. (Eds.), Prosocial motives, emotions, and behavior: The better angels of our nature (pp. 181–200). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/12061-010
OttoP. E.BolleF. (2011). Multiple facets of altruism and their influence on blood donation. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 40, 558–563. doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2011.04.010
41.
PaoliniS.HewstoneM.CairnsE.VociA. (2004). Effects of direct and indirect cross-group friendships on judgments of Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland: The mediating role of an anxiety-reduction mechanism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 770–786. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167203262848
42.
ParkJ. H.SchallerM. (2005). Does attitude similarity serve as a heuristic cue for kinship? Evidence of an implicit cognitive association. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 158–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.08.013
43.
PettigrewT. F.ChristO.WagnerU.StellmacherJ. (2007). Direct and indirect intergroup contact effects on prejudice: A normative interpretation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 31, 411–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2006.11.003
44.
PettigrewT. F.TroppL. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751–783. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751
45.
PettigrewT. F.TroppL. R. (2008). How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Meta-analytic tests of three mediators. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 922–934. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.504
46.
PettigrewT. F.TroppL. R.WagnerU.ChristO. (2011). Recent advances in intergroup contact theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 35, 271–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2011.03.001
47.
RamiahA. A.SchmidK.HewstoneM.FloeC. (2015). Why are all the White (Asian) kids sitting together in the cafeteria? Resegregation and the role of intergroup attributions and norms. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54, 100–124. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12064
48.
SechristG. B.StangorC. (2007). When are intergroup attitudes based on perceived consensus information? The role of group familiarity. Social Influence, 2, 211–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510701459068
49.
SheltonJ. N.RichesonJ. A. (2005). Intergroup contact and pluralistic ignorance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 91–107. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.1.91
50.
SimmonsJ. P.NelsonL. D.SimonsohnU. (2013, January17–19). Life after p-hacking [Paper presentation]. Meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, New Orleans, LA, United States. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2205186
51.
TarrantM.DazeleyS.CottomT. (2009). Social categorization and empathy for outgroup members. British Journal of Social Psychology, 48, 427–446. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466608X373589
TroppL. R.HawiD. R.O’BrienT. C.GheorghiuM.ZetesA.ButzD. A. (2017). Intergroup contact and the potential for post-conflict reconciliation: Studies in Northern Ireland and South Africa. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 23, 239–249. https://doi.org/10.1037/pac0000236
54.
TroppL. R.O’BrienT. C.MigachevaK. (2014). How peer norms of inclusion and exclusion predict children’s interest in cross-ethnic friendships. Journal of Social Issues, 70, 151–166. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12052
55.
TroppL. R.PrenovostM. A. (2008). The role of intergroup contact in predicting children’s interethnic attitudes: Evidence from meta-analytic and field studies. In LevyS. R.KillenM. (Eds.), Intergroup attitudes and relations in childhood through adulthood (pp. 236–248). Oxford University Press.
56.
TurnerR.HewstoneM.VociA.VonofakouC. (2008). A test of the extended intergroup contact hypothesis: The mediating role of intergroup anxiety, perceived ingroup and outgroup norms, and inclusion of the outgroup in the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 843–860. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0011434
57.
TurnerJ. C.HoggM. A.OakesP. J.ReicherS. D.WetherellM. S. (1987). Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-categorization Theory. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
58.
VezzaliL.StathiS.GiovanniniD.CapozzaD.VisintinE. P. (2015). “And the best essay is. . .”: Extended contact and cross-group friendships at school. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54, 601–615. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12110
59.
VisintinE. P.GreenE. G.Falomir-PichastorJ. M.BerentJ. (2019). Intergroup contact moderates the influence of social norms on prejudice. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430219839485
60.
VociA.HewstoneM. (2003). Intergroup contact and prejudice toward immigrants in Italy: The mediational role of anxiety and the moderational role of group salience. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 6, 37–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430203006001011
61.
WaheedM.SchuckA.NeijensP.de VreeseC., et al. (2015). The effects of news frames and political speech sources on political attitudes: The 18 Group Processes & Intergroup Relations moderating role of values. Communications, 40, 147–169. https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2015-0001
62.
WhiteF. A.TurnerR. N.VerrelliS.HarveyL. J.HannaJ. R. (2019). Improving intergroup relations between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland via E-contact. European Journal of Social Psychology, 49, 429–438. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2515
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.
