Jacques Berent

Social psychological factors of post-mortem organ donation: a theoretical review of determinants and promotion strategies

A recurrent observation in the field of organ donation is that organ demand exceeds supply. Organ donation promotion is therefore required in order to diminish this gap. In this article, we focus on post-mortem organ donation and review psychosocial literature contributing to identify firstly, the determinants of donation, and secondly, the factors likely to increase the efficiency of donation promotion campaigns. Finally, we discuss the theoretical implications of our review and advance promising avenues for future research.

Egalitarianism and Sexual Prejudice: the Role of Ingroup Distinctiveness Motives

The present research examined the hypothesis that heterosexual mens motivation to differentiate their ingroup from gay men moderates the link between egalitarianism and sexual prejudice. In two experiments conducted in Switzerland (N = 74) and Ecuador (N = 104), we assessed heterosexual mens endorsement of egalitarian values and experimentally manipulated scientific evidence supporting or refuting the existence of biological differences between heterosexual and gay men (the biological theory). The main dependent variable was attitude towards homosexuality. As predicted, the interaction between egalitarianism and the biological theory was significant in both experiments, t(67) = 3.18, p = .002, ηp 2 = .13, and t(100) = 2.26, p = .026, ηp 2 = .04, respectively. Egalitarianism increased positive attitudes towards homosexuality only when science supported the existence of biological differences between heterosexual and gay men. We discuss the relevance of this finding to intergroup relations.

The side effect of egalitarian norms: Reactive group distinctiveness, biological essentialism, and sexual prejudice

In the context of sexual prejudice, in which group distinctiveness motivation is particularly strong for men, three studies tested the hypothesis that egalitarian norms can intensify reactive distinctiveness motives, and then paradoxically increase intergroup differentiation and prejudice. Depending on the studies, the egalitarian norm was experimentally manipulated or induced and kept constant. Group distinctiveness was manipulated through scientific support for the theory that a person’s sexual orientation is determined by biological factors in terms of the extant biological differences (high distinctiveness) versus biological similarities (low distinctiveness) between heterosexual and gay people. Egalitarian norms increased men’s (but not women’s) intergroup differentiation (Study 1) and prejudice (Study 2) when group distinctiveness was low (as compared to high). This pattern was specific to men with high gender self-esteem, and appeared when the biological theory was framed in terms of intergroup differences rather than the uncontrollability of sexual orientation (Study 3).

Motivation to Maintain a Nonprejudiced Identity

In the context of nationals’ attitudes toward immigrants, three studies investigated the moderating role of normative context and justification for prejudice on licensing effects. Justification for prejudice was either assessed (Studies 1 and 2) or experimentally induced (Study 3). The normative context (egalitarian vs. discriminatory) and the possibility to obtain (or not) credentials as a nonprejudiced person were manipulated in all studies. A licensing effect (i.e., greater prejudice in the credentials as compared to the no-credentials conditions) was observed only in the egalitarian norm condition when justification for prejudice was high. Thus, credentials appear to provide a way for establishing a normative self-image as nonprejudiced when justification for prejudice is high, which reduces conformity to an egalitarian norm.

Collective Apologies Moderate the Effects of Justice Concerns on Support for Collective Punishment

Following an offense, various justice concerns arise, and people might support the punishment of the offender’s entire group to restore a sense of justice (even if the other group members are innocent). We hypothesized that support for collective punishment might increase along one’s justice concerns, and that such effect can be hindered by the group’s collective apologies. In three studies, third-party observers were presented with various cases of aggression and we measured (Study 1) or manipulated (Studies 2 and 3) their justice concerns. In all studies, the presence (vs. absence) of collective apologies was additionally manipulated. The results confirmed our hypothesis thereby increasing our knowledge of both the determinants of collective punishment and the potential effects of collective apologies.