Perceptions of intergroup bias : the roles of social projection and meta-stereotypes

Underlying intergroup perceptions include processes of social projection (perceiving personal traitslbeliefs in others, see Krueger 1998) and meta-stereotyping (thinking about other groups' perceptions of one's own group, see Vorauer et aI., 1998). Two studies were conducted to investigate social projection and meta-stereotypes in the domain of White-Black racial relations. Study 1, a correlational study, examined the social projection of prejudice and 'prejudiced' meta-stereotypes among Whites. Results revealed that (a) Whites socially projected their intergroup attitudes onto other Whites (and Blacks) [i.e., Whites higher in prejudice against Blacks believed a large percentage of Whites (Blacks) are prejudiced against Blacks (Whites), whereas Whites low in prejudice believed a smaller percentage of Whites (Blacks) are prejudiced]; (b) Whites held the meta:..stereotype that their group (Whites) is viewed by Blacks to be prejudiced; and (c) prejudiced meta-stereotypes may be formed through the social projection of intergroup attitudes (result of path-model tests). Further, several correlates of social projection and meta-stereotypes were identified, including the finding that feeling negatively stereotyped by an outgroup predicted outgroup avoidance through heightened intergroup anxiety. Study 2 replicated and extended these findings, investigating the social projection of ingroup favouritism and meta- and other-stereotypes about ingroup favouritism. These processes were examined experimentally using an anticipated intergroup contact paradigm. The goal was to understand the experimental conditions under which people would display the strongest social projection of intergroup attitudes, and when experimentally induced meta-stereotypes (vs. other-stereotypes; beliefs about the group 11 preferences of one's outgroup) would be most damaging to intergroup contact. White participants were randomly assigned to one of six conditions and received (alleged) feedback from a previously completed computer-based test. Depending on condition, this information suggested that: (a) the participant favoured Whites over Blacks; (b) previous White participants favoured Whites over Blacks; (c) the participant's Black partner favoured Blacks over Whites; (d) previous Black participants favoured Blacks over Whites; (e) the participant's Black partner viewed the participant to favour Whites over Blacks; or (£) Black participants previously participating viewed Whites to favour Whites over Blacks. In a defensive reaction, Whites exhibited enhanced social projection of personal intergroup attitudes onto their ingroup under experimental manipulations characterized by self-concept threat (i.e., when the computer revealed that the participant favoured the ingroup or was viewed to favour the ingroup). Manipulated meta- and otherstereotype information that introduced intergroup contact threat, on the other hand, each exerted a strong negative impact on intergroup contact expectations (e.g., anxiety). Personal meta-stereotype manipulations (i.e., when the participant was informed that her/ his partner thinks s/he favours the ingroup) exerted an especially negative impact on intergroup behaviour, evidenced by increased avoidance of the upcoming interracial interaction. In contrast, personal self-stereotype manipulations (i.e., computer revealed that one favoured the ingroup) ironically improved upcoming intergroup contact expectations and intentions, likely due to an attempt to reduce the discomfort of holding negative intergroup attitudes. Implications and directions for future research are considered.

Electrophysiological constituents of the P100 and N170 ERP complex: De-constructing of face processing using independent component analysis and robust estimation.

The initial timing of face-specific effects in event-related potentials (ERPs) is a point of contention in face processing research. Although effects during the time of the N170 are robust in the literature, inconsistent effects during the time of the P100 challenge the interpretation of the N170 as being the initial face-specific ERP effect. The interpretation of the early P100 effects are often attributed to low-level differences between face stimuli and a host of other image categories. Research using sophisticated controls for low-level stimulus characteristics (Rousselet, Husk, Bennett, & Sekuler, 2008) report robust face effects starting at around 130 ms following stimulus onset. The present study examines the independent components (ICs) of the P100 and N170 complex in the context of a minimally controlled low-level stimulus set and a clear P100 effect for faces versus houses at the scalp. Results indicate that four ICs account for the ERPs to faces and houses in the first 200ms following stimulus onset. The IC that accounts for the majority of the scalp N170 (icNla) begins dissociating stimulus conditions at approximately 130 ms, closely replicating the scalp results of Rousselet et al. (2008). The scalp effects at the time of the P100 are accounted for by two constituent ICs (icP1a and icP1b). The IC that projects the greatest voltage at the scalp during the P100 (icP1a) shows a face-minus-house effect over the period of the P100 that is less robust than the N 170 effect of icN 1 a when measured as the average of single subject differential activation robustness. The second constituent process of the P100 (icP1b), although projecting a smaller voltage to the scalp than icP1a, shows a more robust effect for the face-minus-house contrast starting prior to 100 ms following stimulus onset. Further, the effect expressed by icP1 b takes the form of a larger negative projection to medial occipital sites for houses over faces partially canceling the larger projection of icP1a, thereby enhancing the face positivity at this time. These findings have three main implications for ERP research on face processing: First, the ICs that constitute the face-minus-house P100 effect are independent from the ICs that constitute the N170 effect. This suggests that the P100 effect and the N170 effect are anatomically independent. Second, the timing of the N170 effect can be recovered from scalp ERPs that have spatio-temporally overlapping effects possibly associated with low-level stimulus characteristics. This unmixing of the EEG signals may reduce the need for highly constrained stimulus sets, a characteristic that is not always desirable for a topic that is highly coupled to ecological validity. Third, by unmixing the constituent processes of the EEG signals new analysis strategies are made available. In particular the exploration of the relationship between cortical processes over the period of the P100 and N170 ERP complex (and beyond) may provide previously unaccessible answers to questions such as: Is the face effect a special relationship between low-level and high-level processes along the visual stream?