Collette P. Eccleston

Attributions to Discrimination and Self-Esteem: The Role of Group Identification and Appraisals

This study tested the hypothesis that appraisals of discrimination (i.e. its perceived severity, global aspects, stability, and uncontrollability) mediate the relationship between attributions to discrimination and personal self-esteem. It also tested three models of how ethnic group identification is related to discrimination attributions, discrimination appraisals, and personal self-esteem. In a cross-sectional study of 160 Latino-American students, group identification was positively related to attributing ambiguous negative events to discrimination. Discrimination attributions were related to appraising discrimination as more global and severe. These latter appraisals, in turn, were related to lower self-esteem. No direct relationships were observed between self-esteem and either group identification or discrimination attributions. Results illustrate the importance of appraisals in understanding the relationship between perceived discrimination and self-esteem.

Medical student bias and care recommendations for an obese versus non-obese virtual patient.

Objective:This study examined the independent effect of a patients weight on medical students’ attitudes, beliefs and interpersonal behavior toward the patient, in addition to the clinical recommendations they make for her care.Design:A total of 76 clinical-level medical students were randomly assigned to interact with a digital, virtual female patient who was visibly either obese or non-obese.Methods:Interactions with the patient took place in an immersive virtual (virtual reality) clinical environment that allowed standardization of all patient behaviors and characteristics except for weight. Visual contact behavior was automatically recorded during the interaction. Afterward, participants filled out a battery of self-report questionnaires.Results:Analyses revealed more negative stereotyping, less anticipated patient adherence, worse perceived health, more responsibility attributed for potentially weight-related presenting complaints and less visual contact directed toward the obese version of a virtual patient than the non-obese version of the patient. In contrast, there was no clear evidence of bias in clinical recommendations made for the patients care.Conclusion:Biases in attitudes, beliefs and interpersonal behavior have important implications because they can influence the tone of clinical encounters and rapport in the patient–provider relationship, which can have important downstream consequences. Gaining a clear understanding of the nature and source of weight bias in the clinical encounter is an important first step toward the development of strategies to address it.

Impact of Genetic Causal Information on Medical Students’ Clinical Encounters with an Obese Virtual Patient: Health Promotion and Social Stigma

BackgroundHealth care providers will increasingly encounter information about the genetics of obesity as genetics research progresses.PurposeThis study explores whether information about the genetics of obesity reduces medical student stigmatization of obese patients, and how it affects rates of health behavior-related referral.MethodsOne hundred and ten third and fourth year medical students were randomly assigned to read about genetic or behavioral mechanisms of obesity, or a control topic. Students interacted with an obese virtual patient in a virtual clinic and completed a battery of measures.ResultsRates of most health behavior screening recommendations (weight loss, exercise, and diet consultations) were lower among participants exposed to genetic causal information than control. The genetic causal information group exhibited less negative stereotyping of the patient than control, F(1,105) = 5.00, p = 0.028, but did not differ in anticipated patient adherence, F(1,105) = 3.18, p = 0.077.ConclusionsInformation highlighting genetic contributions to obesity may lead to both positive and negative outcomes. Communication about the genetics of obesity should discuss the multi-factorial and non-deterministic nature of genetic risk.

Ironic Effects of Invoking Common Ingroup Identity

Establishing a common ingroup identity (CII) can reduce intergroup bias. Appeals to CII made by an outgroup member could, however, increase negative intergroup outcomes if perceivers believe that the speaker defines the superordinate group differently than they do. Study 1 demonstrated that people believe that Democrats and Republicans have different conceptions of the superordinate group “Americans.” In Study 2, persuasive appeals invoking CII made by outgroup members were unsuccessful; moreover, differences in shared conceptions of American identity negatively impacted the appeals success, but only if the speaker invoked CII. These studies describe a theoretical and practical boundary condition on CII as an approach to reducing intergroup bias.

Shifts in justice beliefs induced by Hurricane Katrina: The impact of claims of racism

This study utilized the context of Hurricane Katrina to examine changes in justice beliefs. We suggest that racism claims being embedded within an emotionally involving context and covered by the mainstream media facilitated openness to the idea that the American social system is not entirely just. We hypothesized that exposure to images of the disaster and racism explanations would lead Whites who initially perceived the American social system as just to shift their beliefs. Furthermore, lower justice beliefs after exposure to disaster images would be associated with greater perceptions of similarity with victims and less preference for the racial ingroup. Results were consistent with these hypotheses. Thus, under some circumstances, disconfirming evidence can produce belief change.

System-justifying ideologies and academic outcomes among first-year Latino college students.

The present study examines the relationship between system-justifying ideologies and academic outcomes among 78 first-year Latino college students (21 men, 57 women, mean age = 18.1 years) attending a moderately selective West Coast university. Endorsement of system-justifying ideologies was negatively associated with grade point average (GPA); however it was positively associated with feelings of belonging at the university. In addition, system-justifying ideologies were negatively associated with perceptions of personal discrimination. In contrast, ethnic identity centrality was unrelated to GPA, feelings of belonging, and perceptions of personal discrimination once the relationship between system-justifying ideologies and these outcomes was statistically taken into account. The results of the present study suggest that endorsement of system-justifying ideologies may be a double-edged sword for Latino college students, involving trade-offs between academic success and feelings of belonging.

Ignoring biased feedback: Membership in a stigmatized group as a moderator of mnemic neglect.

ABSTRACT A personal history of being the target of biased negative evaluation may lead individuals to habitually divert attention from negative feedback when it is possible to do so. Two studies tested for the first time the hypothesis that people belonging to a stigmatized group (Black students on a predominantly White campus) will, relative to non-stigmatized people, be more likely to engage in mnemic neglect—that is, they will reveal a greater tendency to insulate themselves from the effects of negative self-relevant feedback by means of motivated forgetting. The results of Study 1 supported that hypothesis. In Study 2, priming the concept of egalitarianism reduced the tendency of Black participants to engage in higher levels of mnemic neglect, consistent with the idea that the higher observed levels of mnemic neglect among stigmatized individuals derives from expecting biased, discriminatory responses from other people.

Nonverbal Expressions of Status and System Legitimacy An Interactive Influence on Race Bias

A voluminous literature has examined how primates respond to nonverbal expressions of status, such as taking the high ground, expanding one’s posture, and tilting one’s head. We extend this research to human intergroup processes in general and interracial processes in particular. Perceivers may be sensitive to whether racial group status is reflected in group members’ nonverbal expressions of status. We hypothesized that people who support the current status hierarchy would prefer racial groups whose members exhibit status-appropriate nonverbal behavior over racial groups whose members do not exhibit such behavior. People who reject the status quo should exhibit the opposite pattern. These hypotheses were supported in three studies using self-report (Study 1) and reaction time (Studies 2 and 3) measures of racial bias and two different status cues (vertical position and head tilt). For perceivers who supported the status quo, high-status cues (in comparison with low-status cues) increased preferences for White people over Black people. For perceivers who rejected the status quo, the opposite pattern was observed.