Over recent years, immigrants have been met with unjust prejudiced behavior instead of warm welcome. However, not all citizens of a nation endorse such behavior, instead they try to oppose it through ...social mobilization. In the context of an ongoing situation where the national flag is used as a prejudiced means to exclude immigrants, individuals who felt attached with all members of the nation felt significantly more shame for the unjust than individuals who glorify their nation. Consequently, attached identifiers expressed a significantly greater motivation than glorified identifiers to start thinking about social mobilization to reclaim the meaning of the flag as a symbol of inclusion, not exclusion. The current study contributes to the growing debate on how immigrants are received, and it helps explain how national identification and feelings such as shame motivate individuals to start thinking about objecting to prejudicial flag displays.
A small body of research has investigated the relationship between an immoral disposition and schadenfreude. Less work has investigated the relationship between immoral behavior and schadenfreude. ...The aim of the present study was to separate out dispositional and behavioral attributions by both manipulation and measurement and thereby to investigate individual pathways to schadenfreude. Participants (Study 1:
N
= 281, Study 2:
N
= 271) were presented with a scenario that described a single immoral act or multiple immoral acts. The latter resulted in greater attributions to dispositional immorality. Importantly, dispositional immorality attributions were found to predict schadenfreude, but behavioral immorality attributions had no independent effect on schadenfreude. The pathways to schadenfreude were partly mediated by condemning emotions directed at the person but not by condemning emotions directed at the behavior. These findings expand our understanding of the psychological processes that underlie schadenfreude.
In the context of collective apologies, we investigate whether offenders’ claim to have taken the victims’ perspective enhances victims’ conciliation. We argue this depends on whether offenders ...acknowledge emotions in victims that match victims’ emotional experience. In Studies 1 and 2 (Ns = 152 and 171), using scenarios, we experimentally manipulated offenders’ claim and the qualitative or quantitative match of acknowledged emotions. When acknowledged emotions matched victims’ experience, claimed perceptive‐taking increased conciliatory victim responses; but when emotions did not match, the offenders’ claim reduced conciliatory victim responses. In Study 3 (N = 138), African‐Americans were presented with the U.S. government's apology for slavery. We manipulated the perspective‐taking claim and measured the similarity of the emotion profile expressed in the apology to that experienced by African‐Americans over their enslavement. With greater mismatch, the perspective‐taking claim backfired, reducing conciliatory responses. Correct acknowledgment of emotions is key for victims perceiving perspective‐taking and responding conciliatorily.
Perspective-taking is often used to reduce prejudice towards disadvantaged or stigmatized outgroups. We took a different tack and tested the idea that the instruction to take another's perspective ...may induce reactance and (therefore) non-compliance amongst those who are prejudiced (i.e., those who glorify their national ingroup). Two studies showed that, amongst Australian glorifiers, the mere instruction to take the perspective of an asylum seeker elicited non-compliance. Study 1 (N = 117) and Study 2 (N = 330) demonstrated that glorifiers perceived asylum seekers as a realistic threat to Australian interests, indirectly promoting non-compliance with the perspective-taking instruction through prejudice against asylum seekers and psychological reactance against the perspective-taking instruction. Both studies indicated that, when instructed to take the perspective of an asylum seeker, reactance led glorifiers to respond from their own perspective. Study 2 also provides an experimental test of hypotheses by manipulating glorification. The findings highlight (1) that perspective-taking can elicit active resistance amongst those who glorify their national group and (2) the role of mode of identification as a point of origin in understanding the division in public attitudes towards refugees.
•Glorifiers show reactance when instructed to take the perspective of asylum seekers.•Reactance explains the negative link between perceived realistic threat and task compliance.•Reactance led glorifiers to respond from their own perspective, enhancing non-compliance.•Without task instruction 40% of the glorifiers did engage in perspective-taking.
In recent years, ethnic minorities have experienced an increase in acts of exclusion. In two studies, we demonstrated how ingroup members' felt shame about such immoral behavior explained their ...desire to pro‐socially object to this immorality by distancing from the perpetrating ingroup and by wanting to support the affected minorities. We showed how the desire to pro‐socially object varies as a function of national identification. As expected, nationally attached identifiers' felt shame for the immoral behavior was linked with greater willingness to pro‐socially object to it. The opposite pattern was found for nationally glorifying identifiers. In the second study, we found that anger directed at the ingroup partially explained the relationship between group‐based shame and the pro‐social desire to object. The results contribute to the literature on shame and pro‐social motivations by showing that distancing from the perpetrating ingroup can be considered as a pro‐social strategy rather than a defensive one.
The authors investigated the effects of perspective taking on opinions about reparations for victims of historical harm. In two studies, they showed that when non-Indigenous Australians took an ...Indigenous Australian perspective, this increased perceived entitlement to, and decreased anger toward, monetary compensation. Moreover, perceived entitlement mediated the relationship between anger about monetary compensation and perspective taking. Study 2 demonstrated the mutual influence of emotions and perceived entitlement. In particular, self-image shame rather than group-based guilt or anger predicted support for reparation when an Indigenous Australian perspective was adopted. The results suggest that taking the perspective of people who have experienced harm from one’s own group can bolster a commitment to positive social change in relation to a pressing social issue.
Participants (Study 1:
N
= 138, Study 2:
N
= 153) responded to a video in which a person suffered a mishap. The studies manipulated whether or not the person was responsible for the mishap and the ...degree to which the consequences were subsequently found to be serious. Results of Study 1 showed reduction in schadenfreude and more compassion for the victim in the serious condition due to appraisals that it was immoral to laugh about the misfortune. The stronger these appraisals and the stronger the initial schadenfreude, the stronger were moral emotions (guilt, shame, and regret) about initially expressed schadenfreude. Moral emotions and compassion fostered prosocial behavior. Study 2 extended these results by showing that seriousness of the consequences acted as a moderator for most of these findings with significant effects occurring in the serious condition only. Most reduction in schadenfreude occurred when the consequences were serious and when the person was less responsible for the misfortune. The studies extend past research by investigating schadenfreude and other emotions in a context that does not involve social comparison and where participants reflected on their initial expressions of schadenfreude.
In the context of bullying in a nursing workplace, we test the argument that an offender's perspective‐taking promotes victim conciliation, mediated by perceived perspective‐taking, that is, the ...extent to which the victim perceives the offender as taking their perspective. Perceived perspective‐taking facilitates the attribution of moral emotions (remorse, etc.) to the offender, thereby promoting conciliatory victim responses. However, perceived perspective‐taking would be qualified by the extent to which the severity of consequences expressed in the offender's perspective‐taking matches or surpasses the severity for the victim. In Studies 1 and 2 (Ns = 141 and 122, respectively), victims indicated greater trust and/or forgiveness when the offender had taken the victim's perspective. This was sequentially mediated by perceived perspective‐taking and victim's inference that the offender had felt moral emotions. As predicted, in Study 2 (but not Study 1), severity of consequences qualified victims' perceived perspective‐taking. Study 3 (N = 138) examined three potential mechanisms for the moderation by severity. Victims attributed greater perspective‐taking to the offender when the consequences were less severe than voiced by the offender, suggesting victims' appreciation of the offender's generous appraisal. Attributions of perspective‐taking and of moral emotions to the offender may play an important role in reconciliation processes.
Key outcome: To the extent that victims perceive the offender as taking their perspective (perceived perspective‐taking), they infer that the offender feels more moral emotions, prompting victims to be more conciliatory. Perceived perspective‐taking benefits from the offender over‐stating the consequences to the victim.
Although it is well-established that interpersonal apologies promote forgiveness, the apology–forgiveness link at the intergroup level is more tenuous. A possible reason for this tenuous relationship ...is that many intergroup apologies focus on the offender group’s feelings about the transgression as opposed to the victimized group’s suffering. In this spirit, we manipulated focus of a collective apology in two experiments. Consistent with predictions, a victim-focused apology (relative to offender-focused apology) heightened perceptions of offender group remorse, perceived empathy of the offender group, and trust in the offender. In turn, perceptions of remorse, empathy, and trust uniquely increased intergroup forgiveness. Results have implications for facilitating restorative effects between groups in situations of social injustice.
Flag‐displays can be used within national groups to communicate majority supremacy over ethnic minorities. In two studies set in an Australian context (N = 88 and N = 102), we explain how mode of ...national identification (glorifying identifiers versus attached identifiers) differently predicts support for multicultural values and national flag‐displays. In line with the hypotheses, we found that attached identifiers were more supportive of multicultural values and national flag‐displays by ethnic minorities than glorifying identifiers. In contrast, glorifying identifiers supported flag‐displays by the majority more than did the attached identifiers. Study 2 demonstrates that glorifying identifiers’ use of the national flag is explicitly meant to exclude other groups. As expected, support for multicultural values and endorsement of the flag as an exclusion tool helped to explain the relationship between identification and flag‐displays. As such, results revealed the attitudes behind a novel form of prejudice that is currently on the rise.
PDF
