Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2024-12
Taking a look in the virtual mirror: Implications of self-observation by White individuals during online intergroup exchanges for their own and their racialized partners’ experience
Concerns about being viewed negatively by outgroup members can have harmful implications for intergroup interaction. In line with the information search model, research suggests that trying to empathize with outgroup partners—by virtue of still involving taking outgroup members’ perspective—can lead right back to evaluative concerns. The present experiment (276 dyads) tested the model’s further prediction that—by virtue of still involving a focus on the self—stimuli that typically instantiate private self-awareness and prompt enhanced self-regulation also lead right back to evaluative concerns and their disruptive effects in interaction settings. Higher and lower prejudice White individuals (HPs and LPs) turned their self-view on or off during an online exchange with a partner with a marginalized racial background. Although there were some exceptions, results were generally consistent with predictions: Racialized individuals benefitted when HPs engaged in self-observation, but everyone was better off if LPs could not watch themselves.
AikenL. S.WestS. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage.
3.
ApfelbaumE.SommersS.NortonM. (2008). Seeing race and seeming racist? Evaluating strategic colorblindness in social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(4), 918–932. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0011990
4.
BailensonJ. N. (2021). Nonverbal overload: A theoretical argument for the causes of Zoom fatigue. Technology, Mind, and Behavior, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1037/tmb0000030
5.
BalogovaK.BrumbyD. (2022, June8–9). How do you Zoom? A survey study of how users configure video-conference tools for online meetings [Conference session]. CHIWORK 2022: 2022 Symposium on Human–Computer Interaction for Work, Durham, NH, United States. https://doi.org/10.1145/3533406.3533408
6.
BaumeisterR. F. (1984). Choking under pressure: Self-consciousness and paradoxical effects of incentives on skillful performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(3), 610–620. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.46.3.610
7.
BeilockS. L.CarrT. H.MacMahonC.StarkesJ. L. (2002). When paying attention becomes counterproductive: Impact of divided versus skill-focused attention on novice and experienced performance of sensorimotor skills. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8(1), 6–16. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.8.1.6
8.
BergsiekerH. B.SheltonJ. N.RichesonJ. A. (2010). To be liked versus respected: Divergent goals in interracial interactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(2), 248–264. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018474
9.
BinderJ.ZagefkaH.BrownR.FunkeF.KesslerT.MummendeyA.MaquilA.DemoulinS.LeyensJ.-P. (2009). Does contact reduce prejudice or does prejudice reduce contact? A longitudinal test of the contact hypothesis among majority and minority groups in three European countries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(4), 843–856. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013470
10.
BoothbyE. J.CooneyG.SandstromG. M.ClarkM. S. (2018). The liking gap in conversations: Do people like us more than we think?Psychological Science, 29(11), 1742–1756. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797618783714
11.
CarverC. S. (1975). Physical aggression as a function of objective self-awareness and attitudes toward punishment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 11(6), 510–519. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031%2875%2990002-5
12.
DuvalS.WicklundR. A. (1972). A theory of objective self awareness. Academic Press.
13.
FejfarM. C.HoyleR. H. (2000). Effect of private self-awareness on negative affect and self-referent attribution: A quantitative review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(2), 132–142. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0402_02
14.
FromingW. J.WalkerG. R.LopyanK. J. (1982). Public and private self-awareness: When personal attitudes conflict with societal expectations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18(5), 476–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031%2882%2990067-1
15.
GoslingS. D.RentfrowP. J.SwannW. B.Jr. (2003). A very brief measure of the Big Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(6), 504–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0092-6566(03)00046-1
16.
HayesA. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.
17.
HeathertonT. F.PolivyJ. (1991). Development and validation of a scale for measuring state self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(6), 895–910. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.6.895
18.
HoloienD. S.BergsiekerH. B.SheltonJ. N.AlegreJ. M. (2015). Do you really understand? Achieving accuracy in interracial relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(1), 76–92. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000003
19.
LaCosseJ.PlantE. A. (2020). Internal motivation to respond without prejudice fosters respectful responses in interracial interactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 119(5), 1037–1056. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000219
20.
LearyM. R.DownsD. L. (1995). Interpersonal functions of the self-esteem motive: The self-esteem system as a sociometer. In KernisM. H. (Ed.), Efficacy, agency, and self-esteem (pp. 123–144). Plenum Press.
21.
LearyM. R.HauptA. L.StrausserK. S.ChokelJ. T. (1998). Calibrating the sociometer: The relationship between interpersonal appraisals and the state self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1290–1299. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1290
22.
MacInnisC. C.Page-GouldE. (2015). How can intergroup interaction be bad if intergroup contact is good? Exploring and reconciling an apparent paradox in the science of intergroup relations. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(3), 307–327. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691614568482
23.
MacraeC. N.BodenhausenG. V.MilneA. B. (1998). Saying no to unwanted thoughts: Self-focus and the regulation of mental life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(3), 578–589. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.3.578
24.
McConahayJ. G.HardeeB. B.BattsV. (1981). Has racism declined? It depends on who’s asking and what is asked. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 25(4), 563–579. https://doi.org/10.1177/002200278102500401
25.
Mendoza-DentonR.DowneyG.PurdieV. J.DavisA.PietrzakJ. (2002). Sensitivity to status-based rejection: Implications for African American students’ college experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(4), 896–918. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.4.896
26.
MillessK. L.WoutD. A.MurphyM. C. (2022). Diversity or representation? Sufficient factors for Black Americans’ identity safety during interracial interactions. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 28(1), 103–111. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp000049
27.
MonteithM. J. (1996). Affective reactions to prejudice-related discrepant responses: The impact of standard salience. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(1), 48–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167296221005
28.
PedhazurE. J. (1982). Multiple regression in behavioral research. Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
29.
RosenbergM. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton University Press.
30.
SaguyT.DovidioJ. F.PrattoF. (2008). Beyond contact: Intergroup contact in the context of power relations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(3), 432–445. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167207311200
31.
SasakiS. J.VorauerJ. D. (2010). Contagious resource depletion and anxiety? Spreading effects of evaluative concern and impression formation in dyadic social interaction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(6), 1011–1016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2010.07.003
32.
SassenrathC.VorauerJ. D.HodgesS. D. (2022). The link between perspective-taking and prosociality—Not as universal as you might think. Current Opinion in Psychology, 44, 94–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.08.036
33.
ScheierM. F.CarverC. S.SchulzR.GlassD. C.KatzI. (1978). Sympathy, self-consciousness, and reactions to the stigmatized. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 8(3), 270–282. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1978.tb00782.x
34.
ShahJ. Y.FriedmanR.KruglanskiA. W. (2002). Forgetting all else: On the antecedents and consequences of goal shielding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1261–1280. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.6.1261
35.
SheltonJ. N.RichesonJ. A.VorauerJ. D. (2006). Threatened identities and interethnic interactions. In StroebeW.HewstoneM. (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 17, pp. 321–358). Psychology Press.
36.
SheltonJ. N.WestT. V.TrailT. E. (2010). Concerns about appearing prejudiced: Implications for anxiety during daily interracial interactions. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13(3), 329–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430209344869
37.
SinclairL.KundaZ. (1999). Reactions to a Black professional: Motivated inhibition and activation of conflicting stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(5), 885–904. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.5.885
38.
SohnS.ChungH. C.ParkN. (2019). Private self-awareness and aggression in computer-mediated communication: Abusive user comments on online news articles. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 35(13), 1160–1169. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1514822
39.
StillwellA.LoweryB. S. (2021). Gendered racial boundary maintenance: Social penalties for White women in interracial relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 121(3), 548–572. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000332
40.
VorauerJ. D. (2006). An information search model of evaluative concerns in intergroup interaction. Psychological Review, 113(4), 862–886. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.113.4.862
41.
VorauerJ. D. (2013). Getting past the self: Removing evaluative concerns as an obstacle to positive intergroup contact effects. In HodsonG.HewstoneM. (Eds.), Advances in intergroup contact (pp. 23–48). Psychology Press.
42.
VorauerJ. D. (2019). Empathy and concern with negative evaluation in intergroup relations: Implications for designing effective interventions. Cambridge University Press.
VorauerJ. D.KumhyrS. M. (2001). Is this about you or me? Self- versus other-directed judgments and feelings in response to intergroup interaction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(6), 706–719. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167201276006
45.
VorauerJ. D.MartensV.SasakiS. J. (2009). When trying to understand detracts from trying to behave: Effects of perspective taking in intergroup interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(4), 811–827. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013411
46.
VorauerJ. D.PetsnikC.QuesnelM. S. (2020). Who brings you up when you’re feeling down? Distinct implications of dispositional empathy versus situationally-prompted empathic mindsets for targets’ affective experience in face-to-face interpersonal interaction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 89, Article 103991. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2020.103991
47.
VorauerJ. D.SasakiS. J. (2009). Helpful only in the abstract? Ironic effects of empathy in intergroup interaction. Psychological Science, 20(2), 191–197. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02265.x
48.
VorauerJ. D.TurpieC. (2004). Relation of prejudice to choking versus shining under pressure in intergroup interaction: The disruptive effects of vigilance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(3), 384–399. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.3.384
49.
YaoM. Z.FlanaginA. J. (2006). A self-awareness approach to computer-mediated communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(3), 518–544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.10.008
50.
ZuckermanM.KernisM. H.GuarneraS. M.MurphyJ. F.RappoportL. (1983). The egocentric bias: Seeing oneself as cause and target of others’ behavior. Journal of Personality, 51(4), 621–630. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1983.tb00869.x
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.
