Hilary B. Bergsieker

Stereotyping by Omission: Eliminate the Negative, Accentuate the Positive

Communicators, motivated by strategic self-presentation, selectively underreport negative content in describing their impressions of individuals and stereotypes of groups, particularly for targets whom they view ambivalently with respect to warmth and competence. Communicators avoid overtly inaccurate descriptions, preferring to omit negative information and emphasize positive information about mixed individual targets (Study 1). With more public audiences, communicators increasingly prefer negativity omission to complete accuracy (Study 2), a process driven by self-presentation concerns (Study 3) and moderated by bidimensional ambivalence. Similarly, in an extension of the Princeton Trilogy studies, reported stereotypes of ethnic and national outgroups systematically omitted negative dimensions over 75 years--as anti-prejudice norms intensified--while neutral and positive stereotype dimensions remained constant (Study 4). Multiple assessment methods confirm this stereotyping-by-omission phenomenon (Study 5). Implications of negativity omission for innuendo and stereotype stagnation are discussed.

From strangers to friends: The interpersonal process model of intimacy in developing interracial friendships:

We examine the processes involved in the development of interracial friendships. Using Reis and Shaver’s intimacy model, we explore the extent to which disclosure and perceived partner responsiveness influence intimacy levels in developing interracial and intraracial friendships. White and ethnic minority participants completed diary measures of self and partner disclosure and partner responsiveness every two weeks for 10 weeks about an in-group and an out-group person whom they thought they would befriend over time. The results revealed that perceived partner responsiveness mediated the relationships between both self and partner disclosure and intimacy in interracial and intraracial relationships. The implications of these results for intergroup relations are discussed.

Interracial friendship development and attributional biases

We demonstrated that a self—other attributional bias impedes interracial friendship development. Whites were given the opportunity to become friends with a White or Black participant. Whites indicated how interested they were in becoming friends and how concerned they were about being rejected as a friend. They also indicated how interested they thought the other person was in becoming friends and how concerned they thought the other person was about being rejected as friend. Results revealed that lower-prejudice Whites made divergent explanations for the self and other when the potential friend was Black, whereas higher-prejudice Whites did not. Prejudice level did not influence the type of explanations made when the potential friend was White. Implications for interracial friendship development are considered.

Cognitive costs of contemporary prejudice

Two studies examined the cognitive costs of blatant and subtle racial bias during interracial interactions. In Study 1, Black participants engaged in a 10-minute, face-to-face interaction with a White confederate who expressed attitudes and behaviors consistent with blatant, subtle, or no racial bias. Consistent with contemporary theories of modern racism, interacting with a subtly biased, compared with a blatantly biased, White partner impaired the cognitive functioning of Blacks. Study 2 revealed that Latino participants suffered similar cognitive impairments when exposed to a White partner who displayed subtle, compared with blatant, racial bias. The theoretical and practical implications for understanding the dynamics of interracial interactions in the context of contemporary bias are discussed.

Racial attitude (dis)similarity and liking in same-race minority interactions:

Two studies investigate the relationship between racial attitude (dis)similarity and interpersonal liking for racial minorities and Whites in same-race and cross-race pairs. In nationally representative and local samples, minorities report personally caring about racial issues more than Whites do (Pilot Study), which we theorize makes racial attitude divergence with ingroup members especially disruptive. Both established friendships (Study 1) and face-to-face interactions among strangers (Study 2) provided evidence for the dissimilarity-repulsion hypothesis in same-race interactions for minorities but not Whites. For minorities, disagreeing with a minority partner or friend about racial attitudes decreased their positivity toward that person. Because minorities typically report caring about race more than Whites, same-race friendships involving shared racial attitudes may be particularly critical sources of social support for them, particularly in predominately White contexts. Understanding challenges that arise in same-race interactions, not just cross-race interactions, can help create environments in which same-race minority friendships flourish.