Is sociality driven by the costs of dispersal or the benefits of philopatry? A role for kin-discrimination mechanisms.

The role of ecological constraints in promoting sociality is currently much debated. Using a direct-fitness approach, we show this role to depend on the kin-discrimination mechanisms underlying social interactions. Altruism cannot evolve under spatially based discrimination, unless ecological constraints prevent complete dispersal. Increasing constraints enhances both the proportion of philopatric (and thereby altruistic) individuals and the level of altruistic investments conceded in pairwise interactions. Familiarity-based discrimination, by contrast, allows philopatry and altruism to evolve at significant levels even in the absence of ecological constraints. Increasing constraints further enhances the proportion of philopatric (and thereby altruistic) individuals but not the level of altruism conceded. Ecological constraints are thus more likely to affect social evolution in species in which restricted cognitive abilities, large group size, and/or limited period of associative learning force investments to be made on the basis of spatial cues.

Relations intergroupes : attribution à la discrimination et perception d'hostilité chez autrui

Résumé: La thèse que nous présentons s'intéresse aux phénomènes d'attribution d'intentions hostiles. Dodge (1980) observe que les individus agressifs ont tendance, en situation ambiguë, à sur-attribuer des intentions hostiles à leurs pairs, ce qui induit des réponses agressives. Pour l'auteur, l'attribution d'intentions hostiles est un médiateur entre certaines caractéristiques personnelles (l'agressivité) des individus, et le type de réponses qu'ils apportent aux situations. Cependant, les informations concernant l'appartenance groupale des "pairs" ne sont jamais prises en compte dans leurs études. Si ce processus est perméable à l'influence des normes et croyances (Bègue et Muller, 2006), aucune étude ne met en évidence quel serait l'impact d'informations groupales sur l'élaboration des réponses aux situations, dans le cadre de ce modèle. L'objectif de cette thèse est de montrer que l'attribution d'intentions hostiles peut être envisagée comme un processus agissant également à un niveau intergroupes et donc prenant en compte des informations groupales sur les individus. En s'inspirant du modèle de Dodge, nous avons émis l'hypothèse que les logiques intergroupes intervenaient dans l'interprétation des intentions des acteurs impliqués dans les interactions, afin de produire une réponse adaptée aux logiques intergroupes. Afin de tester cette hypothèse, nous avons suivi trois axes de recherches: Dans le premier de ces axes, nous avons introduit, dans le paradigme de Dodge, des informations .sur l'appartenance groupale des protagonistes de l'interaction (endogroupe vs exogroupe). Nous avons montré que le type de situation (ambiguë vs hostile) est moins important que l'information groupale dans la production d'une réponse à la situation (Étude 1). En outre, nous avons mis en évidence des processus différents selon la position des individus dans leur groupe (Étude 2). Dans le second axe, nous avons montré que si les différences de statut entre groupes n'influençaient pas directement le modèle de Dodge, elles interagissaient avec l'appartenance groupale et la clarté de la situation au niveau de l'attribution d'intentions hostiles (étude 3) et des intentions comportementales (Ettide 4). Dans le troisième et deriúer axe, nous avons introduit l'attribution d'intentions hostiles dans un processus de dévalorisation d'une cible expliquant un échec par la discrimination (Kaiser et Miller, 2001; 2003). Nous avons alors montré que l'attribution d'intentions hostiles médiatisait le lien entre l'attribution mobilisée pour expliquer l'événement et l'évaluation de la cible (Étude 5), et que ce type d'attribution était spécifique, aux intentions comportementales agressives (Études 6). Nous avons alors conclu sur la dimension sociale de l'attribution d'intentions hostiles et sur le fait qu'il s'agissait d'un élément permettant la construction d'une représentation des interactions sociales. Abstract The present thesis focuses on the phenomena of hostile intents attribution. Dodge (1980) observes that in ambiguous situations, aggressive people tend to over attribute hostile intents to others. This attribution leads them to respond aggressively. According to the author, hostile intents attribution mediates the link between some personal characteristics (aggressiveness for example) of individuals and their responses to the situation. However information related to participants group membership is always neglected in these studies. Begue and Muller (2006) showed that some beliefs could moderate the interaction between aggressiveness and hostile intents attribution on behaviors, but no study exhibited evidence of a similar effect with social information. The aim of this thesis is to show that hostile intents attribution needs to be considered at an intergroup level by taking into account people's group ineinbership. Based on the Dodge model, we formulated the hypothesis that intergroup strategies had an impact on actors' intents interpretations which in return should lead to different but adapted reactions to the situation. To test this hypothesis, three lines of research were developed. In the first line, we introduced, in the Dodge's paradigm, some information about the participants group membership (ingroup vs outgroup). We showed that when elaborating a response to a specific situation its nature (ambiguous vs hostile) had less impact than group membership information (Study 1). In addition, we highlighted some different processes according to the position of individuals in their group (Study 2). In the second line, we showed that if the differences between groups status didn't influence the Dodge model, they interacted with group membership and situation nature to influence hostile intents attribution (Study 3) and behaviors intents (Study 4). In the last line of research, we introduced hostile intents attribution within the process of derogation of a target explaining its failure by discrimination (Kaiser and Miller, 2001; 2003). We showed that hostile intents attribution mediated the link between the attibution mobilized to explain the failure and the derogation of the target (Study 5), and that this attribution type was specifically linked to aggressive behavior intents (Study 6). We finally concluded that hostile intents attribution imply an important social dimension which needs to be taken into account because involved in the construction of a representation of social interactions.

Associations between perceived discrimination and health status among frequent Emergency Department users

Objective: Frequent Emergency Department (ED) users are vulnerable individuals and discrimination is usually associated with increased vulnerability. The aim of this study was to investigate frequent ED users' perceptions of discrimination and to test whether they were associated with increased vulnerability. Methods: In total, 250 adult frequent ED users were interviewed in Lausanne University Hospital. From a previously published questionnaire, we assessed 15 dichotomous sources of perceived discrimination. Vulnerability was assessed using health status: objective health status (evaluation by a healthcare practitioner including somatic, mental health, behavioral, and social issues - dichotomous variables) and subjective health status [self-evaluation including health-related quality of life (WHOQOL) and quality of life (EUROQOL) - mean-scores]. We computed the prevalence rates of perceived discrimination and tested associations between perceived discrimination and health status (Fischer's exact tests, Mann-Whitney U-tests)

The skill paradox: Explaining and reducing employment discrimination against skilled immigrants

Using a social identity theory approach, we theorized that recruiters might be particularly biased against skilled immigrant applicants. We refer to this phenomenon as a skill paradox, according to which immigrants are more likely to be targets of employment discrimination the more skilled they are. Furthermore, building on the common ingroup identity model, we proposed that this paradox can be resolved through human resource management (HRM) strategies that promote inclusive hiring practices (e.g., by emphasizing fit with a diverse clientele). The results from a laboratory experiment were consistent with our predictions: Local recruiters preferred skilled local applicants over skilled immigrant applicants, but only when these applicants were qualified for a specific job. This bias against qualified and skilled immigrant applicants was attenuated when fit with a diverse clientele was emphasized, but not when fit with a homogeneous clientele was emphasized or when the hiring strategy was not explained. We discuss the implications of our findings for research on employment discrimination against skilled immigrants, including the role of inclusiveness for reducing discriminatory biases.