Cara C. MacInnis

Intergroup bias toward “Group X”: Evidence of prejudice, dehumanization, avoidance, and discrimination against asexuals

Although biases against homosexuals (and bisexuals) are well established, potential biases against a largely unrecognized sexual minority group, asexuals, has remained uninvestigated. In two studies (university student and community samples) we examined the extent to which those not desiring sexual activity are viewed negatively by heterosexuals. We provide the first empirical evidence of intergroup bias against asexuals (the so-called “Group X”), a social target evaluated more negatively, viewed as less human, and less valued as contact partners, relative to heterosexuals and other sexual minorities. Heterosexuals were also willing to discriminate against asexuals (matching discrimination against homosexuals). Potential confounds (e.g., bias against singles or unfamiliar groups) were ruled out as explanations. We suggest that the boundaries of theorizing about sexual minority prejudice be broadened to incorporate this new target group at this critical period, when interest in and recognition of asexuality is scientifically and culturally expanding.

Do American States with More Religious or Conservative Populations Search More for Sexual Content on Google

In America, religiosity and conservatism are generally associated with opposition to non-traditional sexual behavior, but prominent political scandals and recent research suggest a paradoxical private attraction to sexual content on the political and religious right. We examined associations between state-level religiosity/conservatism and anonymized interest in searching for sexual content online using Google Trends (which calculates within-state search volumes for search terms). Across two separate years, and controlling for demographic variables, we observed moderate-to-large positive associations between: (1) greater proportions of state-level religiosity and general web searching for sexual content and (2) greater proportions of state-level conservatism and image-specific searching for sex. These findings were interpreted in terms of the paradoxical hypothesis that a greater preponderance of right-leaning ideologies is associated with greater preoccupation with sexual content in private internet activity. Alternative explanations (e.g., that opposition to non-traditional sex in right-leaning states leads liberals to rely on private internet sexual activity) are discussed, as are limitations to inference posed by aggregate data more generally.

How Can Intergroup Interaction Be Bad If Intergroup Contact Is Good? Exploring and Reconciling an Apparent Paradox in the Science of Intergroup Relations

The outcomes of social interactions among members of different groups (e.g., racial groups, political groups, sexual orientation groups) have long been of interest to psychologists. Two related literatures on the topic have emerged—the intergroup interaction literature and the intergroup contact literature—in which divergent conclusions have been reported. Intergroup interaction is typically found to have negative effects tied to intergroup bias, producing heightened stress, intergroup anxiety, or outgroup avoidance, whereas intergroup contact is typically found to have positive effects tied to intergroup bias, predicting lower intergroup anxiety and lower prejudice. We examine these paradoxical findings, proposing that researchers contributing to the two literatures are examining different levels of the same phenomenon and that methodological differences can account for the divide between the literatures. Further, we introduce a mathematical model by which the findings of the two literatures can be reconciled. We believe that adopting this model will streamline thinking in the field and will generate integrative new research in which investigators examine how a person’s experiences with diversity unfold.

It ain’t easy eating greens: Evidence of bias toward vegetarians and vegans from both source and target

Vegetarianism and veganism are increasingly prevalent in Western countries, yet anecdotal expressions of negativity toward vegetarians and vegans are common. We empirically tested whether bias exists toward vegetarians and vegans. In Study 1 omnivores evaluated vegetarians and vegans equivalently or more negatively than several common prejudice target groups (e.g., Blacks). Bias was heightened among those higher in right-wing ideologies, explained by heightened perceptions of vegetarian/vegan threat. Vegans (vs. vegetarians) and male (vs. female) vegetarians/vegans were evaluated more negatively overall. In Study 2 omnivores evaluated vegetarians and vegans more negatively than several nutritional outgroups (e.g., gluten intolerants) and evaluated vegan/vegetarians motivated by animal rights or environmental concerns (vs. health) especially negatively. In Study 3, vegetarians and especially vegans reported experiencing negativity stemming from their diets. Empirically documenting antivegetarian/vegan bias adds to a growing literature finding bias toward benign yet social norm-challenging others.

Surfing for Sexual Sin: Relations Between Religiousness and Viewing Sexual Content Online

ABSTRACT Religious individuals in America have concerns about pornography addiction among the religious. Whereas positive associations between religiosity and online pornography use exist at the state level, associations between religiosity and online pornography consumption at the individual level are typically negative. We examined (1) reactions to, (2) perceptions of, and (3) self-report based relations between religiousness and viewing sexual content online among adult web users. Those higher in religiosity or religious fundamentalism responded more negatively to, and were less willing to accept, scientific findings demonstrating positive associations between state-level religiousness and increased viewing of sexual content online. More religious individuals were more likely to believe that moral values, race, and finances (not religion) impact the extent to which sexual content is viewed online. More religious individuals also held more negative beliefs about viewing sexual content online and perceived such viewing as more problematic than other prominent social issues (e.g., racism, gun violence). Finally, those higher in religiousness reported less viewing of sexual content online overall. Among a subset of individuals relatively high in religiosity or religious fundamentalism who reported viewing sexual content online, religiosity was associated with feeling negatively about this behavior and a self-reported motive of monitoring societys immorality.

The development of online cross-group relationships among university students Benefits of earlier (vs. later) disclosure of stigmatized group membership

With our social lives increasingly experienced online, it is critical to understand online relationship development. The current study examined the outcomes of disclosing stigmatized group membership (i.e., being gay or lesbian) earlier (vs. later) in a developing online relationship. Heterosexuals (n = 214) engaged in an experimentally controlled closeness-inducing online interaction with an ostensible partner, learning that he/she was gay/lesbian either before (i.e., earlier) or after (i.e., later) the interaction. Earlier (vs. later) discovery led to a subjectively more positive contact experience, which predicted heightened bond with the partner, itself predicting more positive attitudes toward the partner. Outcomes were uninfluenced by pretest biases and authoritarianism, suggesting the general benefits of disclosing gay/lesbian identity earlier (vs. later) in online relationships.

`Where the rubber hits the road’ en route to inter-group harmony: Examining contact intentions and contact behaviour under meta-stereotype threat

Although inter-group contact reduces prejudice, intra-group contact is most typically preferred. Understanding factors contributing to out-group avoidance, therefore, is imperative. Unlike previous correlational studies, other-stereotype (out-group is biased) and meta-stereotype (out-group sees ones in-group as biased) information was manipulated in an inter-group contact setting, at the personal (you/partner) or group (in-group/out-group) level. Whites under threat generally indicated positive expectations and intentions to approach Black interaction partners. However, at the behavioural level, personal meta-stereotype manipulations (your partner thinks you are biased) generated out-group avoidance several times stronger than in the other threat conditions. Implications for the development of prejudice interventions are discussed within an aversive racism framework.

Why are heterosexual men (vs. women) particularly prejudiced toward gay men? A social dominance theory explanation

A social dominance explanation of the well-established sex difference in anti-gay male prejudice, whereby heterosexual men (vs. women) are more negative toward gay men, is proposed. We test a mediation model whereby respondent sex (male vs. female) predicts prejudice toward gay men indirectly through social dominance orientation and sexism (itself predicted by social dominance orientation (SDO). The model is also considered for anti-lesbian prejudice. Across three samples the model is supported, with the relation between participant sex and anti-gay male prejudice mediated (explained). The model was not consistently supported for anti-lesbian prejudice. Implications are discussed.

Is Homophobia Associated with an Implicit Same-Sex Attraction?

Some theorists propose that homophobia stems from underlying same-sex attraction. A few studies have tested this hypothesis, yet without a clear measure of implicit sexual attraction, producing mixed results. For the first time, we test this attraction-based account of homophobia among both men and women using an implicit measure of sexual attraction. No evidence of an attraction-based account of homophobia emerged. Instead, implicit same-sex attraction was related to positive evaluations of gay men and lesbians among female participants. Even in targeted analyses examining the relation between implicit same-sex attraction and homosexual evaluations among only those theoretically most likely to demonstrate an attraction-based homophobic effect, implicit same-sex attraction was not associated with evaluations of homosexuals or was associated with more positive evaluations of homosexuals. In addition, explicit same-sex attraction was related to positive evaluations of gay men and lesbians for male participants. These results are more in keeping with the attitude-similarity effect (i.e., people like, rather than dislike, similar others).

Expecting racial outgroups to view “us” as biased: A social projection explanation of Whites’ bias meta-stereotypes

Meta-stereotypes, the stereotypes believed to be held about one’s ingroup by an outgroup, represent barriers to positive intergroup contact. Little is known, however, about factors accounting for meta-stereotypes. Although previous researchers have speculated on conceptual overlap between social projection (perceiving one’s personal attitudes to be commonly held) and meta-stereotypes, these constructs are typically studied separately. We propose the notion that meta-stereotypes can be explained by social projection processes. We examined Whites’ “bias meta-stereotypes” (perceptions that Blacks consider Whites biased) across two studies. Participants projected personal biases onto both their ingroup (Whites) and outgroup (Blacks); in turn, both ingroup and outgroup bias perceptions uniquely predicted bias meta-stereotypes. Overall, the positive relation between personal bias perceptions and bias meta-stereotypes was fully mediated (i.e., explained) by heightened perceptions of ingroup (White) and outgroup (Black) bias. Overall, there is considerable value in integrating basic social projection within intergroup domains, particularly with regard to meta-stereotyping.