Can immigrants’ names determine whether they receive help or not? Drawing on a partial in-group membership framework, we adapted intergroup versions of moral dilemmas (a trilogy of transportation accidents) to test how Anglicizing ethnic names affects intergroup decision-making in hypothetical life-and-death situations. Study 1 showed that White American participants were equally likely to help White and Asian immigrants with Anglicized names but were less likely to help Asian immigrants with original ethnic names. The same effect emerged in Study 2 but only among male White American participants. In Study 3, White pro-assimilationists were more likely to help White than Arab immigrants (with either Anglicized or original ethnic names), but White pro-multiculturalists were more likely to help Arab immigrants with Anglicized names than White targets. The results suggest that name Anglicization as a cultural assimilation practice may reduce intergroup bias, but the precise pattern of effects is context-dependent.
AkramiN.EkehammarB.ArayaT. (2000). Classical and modern racial prejudice: A study of attitudes toward immigrants in Sweden. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 521–532.
2.
BaumanC. W.McGrawA. P.BartelsD. M.WarrenC. (2014). Revisiting external validity: Concerns about trolley problems and other sacrificial dilemmas in moral psychology. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 8, 536–554.
3.
BrewerM. B. (1979). In-group bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 307–324.
4.
CrispR. J.HewstoneM.RubinM. (2001). Does multiple categorization reduce intergroup bias?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 76–89.
5.
CrispR. J.TurnerR. N. (2011). Cognitive adaptation to the experience of social and cultural diversity. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 242–266.
6.
CrispR. J.WalshJ.HewstoneM. (2006). Crossed categorization in common ingroup contexts. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 1204–1218.
7.
DeschampsJ. C.DoiseW. (1978). Crossed category memberships in intergroup relations. In TajfelH. (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 141–158). London, England: Academic Press.
8.
FiskeS. T.CuddyA. J.GlickP.XuJ. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902.
9.
FootP. (1967). The problem of abortion and the doctrine of the double effect. Oxford Review, 5, 1–7.
10.
GerhardsJ.HansS. (2009). From Hasan to Herbert: Name-giving patterns of immigrant parents between acculturation and ethnic maintenance. American Journal of Sociology, 114, 1102–1128.
11.
GreeneJ. D.SommervilleR. B.NystromL. E.DarleyJ. M.CohenJ. D. (2001). An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science, 293, 2105–2108.
12.
GreeneJ. D.CushmanF. A.StewartL. E.LowenbergK.NystromL. E.CohenJ. D. (2009). Pushing moral buttons: The interaction between personal force and intention in moral judgment. Cognition, 111, 364–371.
13.
HitlanR. T.CarrilloK.ZárateM. A.AikmanS. N. (2007). Attitudes toward immigrant groups and the September 11 terrorist attacks. Peace and Conflict, 13, 135–152.
JostJ. (2001). Outgroup favoritism and the theory of system justification: An experimental paradigm for investigating the effects of socio-economic success on stereotype content. In MoskowitzG. (Ed.), Cognitive social psychology: The Princeton symposium on the legacy and future of social cognition (pp. 89–102). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Press.
16.
KangS. K.DeCellesK. A.TilcsikA.JunS. (2016). Whitened resumes: Race and self-presentation in the labor market. Administrative Science Quarterly, 61, 469–502.
17.
KhanS. R. (2014). Post 9/11: The impact of stigma for Muslim Americans. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 20, 580–582.
18.
KoenigsM.YoungL.AdolphsR.TranelD.CushmanF.HauserM.DamasioA. (2007). Damage to the prefrontal cortex increases utilitarian moral judgements. Nature, 446, 908–911.
19.
LeeT. L.FiskeS. T. (2006). Not an outgroup, not yet an ingroup: Immigrants in the stereotype content model. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30, 751–768.
20.
LevinS.MatthewsM.GuimondS.SidaniusJ.PrattoF.KteilyN.DoverT. (2012). Assimilation, multiculturalism, and colorblindness: Mediated and moderated relationships between social dominance orientation and prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 207–212.
21.
MillerS. L.ManerJ. K.BeckerD. V. (2010). Self-protective biases in group categorization: Threat cues shape the psychological boundary between “us” and “them.”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 62–77.
22.
NavarreteC. D.McDonaldM. M.MolinaL. E.SidaniusJ. (2010). Prejudice at the nexus of race and gender: An outgroup male target hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 933–945.
23.
OswaldD. L. (2005). Understanding anti-Arab reactions post-9/11: The role of threats, social categories, and personal ideologies. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35, 1775–1799.
24.
PetrinovichL.O’neillP.JorgensenM. (1993). An empirical study of moral intuitions: Toward an evolutionary ethics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 467–478.
25.
ReynaC.DobriaO.WetherellG. (2014). The complexity and ambivalence of immigration attitudes: Ambivalent stereotypes predict conflicting attitudes toward immigration policies. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 19, 342–356.
26.
RueckertL.NaybarN. (2008). Gender differences in empathy: The role of the right hemisphere. Brain and Cognition, 67, 162–167.
27.
SwannW. B.JrGómezÁ.DovidioJ. F.HartS.JettenJ. (2010). Dying and killing for one’s group: Identity fusion moderates responses to intergroup versions of the trolley problem. Psychological Science, 21, 1176–1183.
28.
TajfelH.TurnerC. J. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In WorchelS.AustinW. G. (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago, IL: Nelson Hall.
29.
TurnerJ. C. (1985). Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior. In LawlerE. J. (Ed.), Advances in group process: Theory and research (Vol. 2, pp. 77–122). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
30.
UradaD.StenstromD. M.MillerN. (2007). Crossed categorization beyond the two-group model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 649–664.
31.
UrbanL. M.MillerN. (1998). A theoretical analysis of crossed categorization effects: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 894–908.
32.
VazireS. (2016). Editorial. Social Psychological & Personality Science, 7, 3–7.
33.
VerkuytenM. (2005). Ethnic group identification and group evaluation among minority and majority groups: Testing the multiculturalism hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 121–138.
34.
WatkinsS. C.LondonA. S. (1994). Personal names and cultural change: A study of the naming patterns of Italians and Jews in the United States in 1910. Social Science History, 18, 169–209.
35.
WolskoC.ParkB.JuddC. M. (2006). Considering the Tower of Babel: Correlates of assimilation and multiculturalism among ethnic minority and majority groups in the United States. Social Justice Research, 19, 277–306.
36.
ZhaoX.BiernatM. (2017). “Welcome to the US” but “change your name”? Adopting Anglo names and discrimination. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 70, 59–68.
37.
ZhaoX.BiernatM. (2018). “I have two names, Xian and Alex”: Psychological correlates of adopting Anglo names by Chinese students. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49, 587–601.
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.
