Attachment insecurity as a filter in the decoding and encoding of nonverbal behavior in close relationships

In this article, I have focused my comments on the possible associations between the cognitions related to different attachment styles, and the impact that those cognitions are likely to have on nonverbal encoding and decoding. I see attachment insecurity as acting as a filter, distorting both encoding and decoding processes. In terms of decoding, an insecure individual may appraise the situation as more threatening than it actually is, may see the attachment figure as more or less available than he or she actually is, and may make an inappropriate decision about the viability or desirability of seeking proximity to the attachment figure. Attachment insecurity is also likely to inhibit the distressed individual from expressing their distress in a way that is understood by the attachment figure and that increases the likelihood that the attachment figure will engage in supportive behavior.

Rumors denials as persuasive messages: Effects of personal relevance, source, and message characteristics

Denial is a commonly used strategy to rebut a false rumor. However, there is a dearth of empirical research on the effectiveness of denials in combating rumors. Treating denials as persuasive messages, we conducted 3 laboratory-based simulation studies testing the overall effectiveness of denials in reducing belief and anxiety associated with an e-mail virus rumor. Under the framework of the elaboration likelihood model, we also tested the effects of denial message quality and source credibility, and the moderating effects of personal relevance. Overall, the results provided some support for the effectiveness of denials with strong arguments and an anxiety-alleviating tone in reducing rumor-related belief and anxiety. The effects of denial wording and source credibility were visible for participants who perceived high personal relevance of the topic. Limitations of the current research and future research directions are discussed.

Attitude change and the public-private attitude distinction

In this paper, we highlight the importance of the distinction between public and private attitudes in research on attitude change. First, we clarify the definitions of public and private attitudes by locating the researcher as a potential source of influence. In a test of this definition, we compare participant reports of potentially embarrassing behaviour and the study's importance between participants responding when a researcher has potential access to their reports (public condition), and participants whose reports the researcher has no potential access to (private condition). Participants high in public self-focus or low in defensive self-presentation reported the study to be more important in the public condition than the private condition. Further, participants in the public condition reported less frequency of engaging in embarrassing behaviours than those in the private condition, an effect not moderated by individual differences. We conclude that the public-private distinction is an essential element in attitude change theory.

Speaking for others: The pros and cons of group advocates using collective language

We examined how rhetorical style affects evaluations of group advocates, and how these evaluations are moderated by group identification. University students were given a letter to the editor defending student welfare. The argument was either constructed using personal language ('I believe') or collective language ('we believe'). Furthermore, the letter was either attributed to an official advocate (president of the student union) or an unofficial advocate (a rank-and-file member of the student body). Consistent with the social identity perspective, participants who showed strong identification as a university student thought that the group would feel better represented by official advocates using collective rather than personal language. Low identifiers, however, did not rate the rhetorical styles differently on representativeness. Furthermore, low identifiers (but not high identifiers) rated official advocates as more likable and more effective when they used personal rather than collective language. The discussion focuses on the conflict low identifiers might feel between (a) needing to homogenize with other group members in order to maximize the influence and political effectiveness of their message at the collective level, and (b) protecting themselves against categorization threat.

Loyalty without Conformity: Tailoring Self-perception as a Means of Balancing Belonging and Differentiation

We argue that members of individualist cultures balance their desire to belong with their desire to be different by maintaining a self-image as being loyal but relatively immune to group influence. Consistent with this, in Study 1 there was a strong tendency for people to rate themselves as being more independent (i.e., less conformist) than other people in their college. College students also rated themselves as being highly loyal to the group, however no self - other discrepancies were found on this dimension. This is despite the fact that traits of loyalty were rated more positively than were traits of independence. Study 2 provided evidence that culture influences the pattern of self - other discrepancies. Whereas people from individualist countries self-enhance on independence dimensions, people from collectivist countries self-enhance on loyalty dimensions. Again, these effects could not be explained as being a function of how positive these traits were seen to be, suggesting a cultural explanation rather than a straight forward superiority bias explanation for the observed discrepancies in self - other ratings. Results are discussed in relation to the SCENT model.

When differences matter: Intergroup distinctiveness and the evaluation of impostors

The present study examined the effect of intergroup distinctiveness and group membership on evaluations of impostors. We predicted that ingroup members would be harsher than outgroup members on an impostor and that perceptions of intergroup distinctiveness would further moderate these evaluations. Specifically, we tested the social identity theory prediction that low intergroup distinctiveness would lead to greater derogation of the impostor (the 'reactive distinctiveness' hypothesis) against the self-categorization hypothesis that high intergroup distinctiveness would instigate more derogation of an impostor (the 'reflective distinctiveness' hypothesis). In this study, vegetarians (ingroup members) and meat eaters (outgroup members) were presented with a target claiming to be vegetarian, but caught indulging in a meat dish. We found that ingroup members derogated the impostor more and felt less pleased about discovering the impostor behaviour than did outgroup members. In line with the reflective distinctiveness hypothesis, the heightened derogation displayed by ingroup members only emerged when intergroup distinctiveness was high, an effect that was mediated by ratings of group identification. The discussion focuses on the different responses intergroup distinctiveness may evoke. Copyright (c) 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Perceptions of self and group in the context of a threatened national identity: A field study

Previous research indicates that people who are highly identified with their groups tend to remain committed to them under threat. This study examines the generalizability, of this effect to (a) a real-life context involving the perception that others view the ingroup (Australians) as intolerant of minorities and (b) various dimensions of social identification. The sample comprised 213 respondents to a random mail survey. Perceived threat was inversely related to self-stereotyping (i.e. perceptions of self-ingroup similarity), but only for individuals with weak subjective ties to other group members. Threat perceptions were also predictive of enhanced judgments of within-group variability on threat-relevant dimensions, particularly for individuals with weaker ingroup ties. Various strategies for coping with a threatened social identity are linked to different facets of social identification.

Perceptions of the intergroup structure and anti-Asian prejudice among white Australians

Subjective intergroup beliefs and authoritarianism were assessed in a field study (N=255) of White Australians' anti-Asian stereotyping and prejudice. A social identity analysis of intergroup prejudice was adopted, such that perceptions of the intergroup structure (instability, permeability, legitimacy and higher ingroup status) were proposed as predictors of higher prejudice (blatant and covert) and less favorable stereotyping. Consistent with the social identity approach, both independent and interacting roles for sociostructural predictors of Anti-Asian bias were observed, even after demographic and personality variables were controlled. For example, perceived legitimacy was associated with higher prejudice when White Australians' status position relative to Asian Australians was valued. Moreover, when participants evaluated Whites' position as unstable and high status or legitimate, perceptions of permeable intergroup boundaries were associated with anti-Asian bias. The present findings demonstrate status protection responses in advantaged group members in a field setting, lending weight to the contention that perceptions of sociostructural threat interact to predict outgroup derogation. Implications for theories of intergroup relations are discussed.

Cost-benefit analyses for your group and yourself: The rationality of decision-making in conflict

Two studies in the context of English-French relations in Québec suggest that individuals who strongly identify with a group derive the individual-level costs and benefits that drive expectancy-value processes (rational decision-making) from group-level costs and benefits. In Study 1, high identifiers linked group- and individual-level outcomes of conflict choices whereas low identifiers did not. Group-level expectancy-value processes, in Study 2, mediated the relationship between social identity and perceptions that collective action benefits the individual actor and between social identity and intentions to act. These findings suggest the rational underpinnings of identity-driven political behavior, a relationship sometimes obscured in intergroup theory that focuses on cognitive processes of self-stereotyping. But the results also challenge the view that individuals' cost-benefit analyses are independent of identity processes. The findings suggest the importance of modeling the relationship of group and individual levels of expectancy-value processes as both hierarchical and contingent on social identity processes

Normative influence and rational conflict decisions: Group norms and cost-benefit analyses for intergroup behavior

The present paper articulates a model in which ingroup and outgroup norms inform 'rational' decision-making (cost-benefit analysis) for conflict behaviors. Norms influence perceptions of the consequences of the behavior, and individuals may thus strategically conform to or violate norms in order to acquire benefits and avoid costs. Two studies demonstrate these processes in the context of conflict in Quebec. In the first study, Anglophones' perceptions of Francophone and Anglophone norms for pro-English behaviors predicted evaluations of the benefits and costs of the behaviors, and these cost-benefit evaluations in turn mediated the norm-intention links for both group norms. In the second study, a manipulated focus on supportive versus hostile ingroup and outgroup norms also predicted cost-benefit evaluations, which mediated the norm-intention relationships. The studies support a model of strategic conflict choices in which group norms inform, rather than suppress, rational expectancy value processes. Implications for theories of decision-making and normative influence are discussed.

Aboriginal self-determination in Australia - The effects of minority-majority frames and target universalism on majority collective guilt and compensation attitudes

In the context of Aboriginal-Anglo Australian relations, we tested the effect of framing (multiculturalism versus separatism) and majority group members' social values (universalism) on the persuasiveness of Aboriginal group rhetoric, majority collective guilt, attitudes toward compensation, and reparations for Aboriginals. As predicted, Anglo Australians who are low on universalism report more collective guilt when presented with a multiculturalist than a separatist Aboriginal frame, whereas those high on universalism report high levels of guilt independent of frame. The same pattern was predicted and found for the persuasiveness of the rhetoric and attitudes toward compensation. Our data suggest that (a) for individuals low in universalism, framing produces attitudes consonant with compensation because it produces collective guilt and (b) the reason that universalists are more in favor of compensation and reparation is because of high collective guilt. We discuss the strategic use of language to create power through the manipulation of collective guilt in political contexts.

When chivalry backfires: Benevolent sexism and attitudes toward Myra Hindley

Researchers have suggested that paternalistic attitudes may influence people's perceptions of female offenders. In the current study, we examined the role of benevolent and hostile sexism in people's perceptions of a specific female offender (Myra Hindley), who can be viewed as having violated traditional gender role assumptions. We observed that benevolent sexism (but not hostile sexism) was related to negative evaluations of Myra Hindley. In addition, mediation analyses suggest that the relationship between benevolent sexism and the negative evaluations of Myra Hindley was partially accounted for by participants' perceptions that Myra Hindley possessed traits that violated traditional gender role stereotypes. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Group-directed criticism in Indonesia: Role of message source and audience

Research in individualist cultures has shown that group members are more likely to agree with criticisms of their group when the criticisms are made by another ingroup member as opposed to an outgroup member (the intergroup sensitivity effect). However, evaluations of ingroup critics are often harsher when they take their comments to an outgroup audience. In light of research on facework and tolerance for dissent, it seems important to test whether these effects are generalizable to a collectivist culture. Indonesian Muslims (N = 191) received a criticism of their religion stemming either from another Muslim or a Christian, and published in either a Muslim or a Christian newspaper. Participants agreed with the comments more when they were made by an ingroup as opposed to an outgroup member. Furthermore, consistent with previous research in Australia, the effects of audience on agreement were moderated by levels of group identification. Results are discussed in relation to theory about the functional role internal critics can play in group life.

Predictors of cultural adjustment: Intergroup status relations and boundary permeability

We examined intergroup predictors of cultural adjustment among Asian international students in Australia. Sociostructural beliefs (status, legitimacy, and permeability) and initial adjustment were assessed (N = 113) at Time 1, and measures of adjustment were obtained (N = 80) at Time 2 eight weeks later. International students who perceived their cultural group to be relatively low in status experienced lower levels of psychological adjustment. Also, as expected, the effects of status were moderated by perceptions of both the permeability of intergroup boundaries and the legitimacy of the status differential. At high levels of legitimacy, perceptions of permeable group boundaries were associated with better psychological, sociocultural, and academic adjustment among international students perceiving their group to be low in status, but lower levels of adjustment among students who perceived their group to be high in status. At low levels of legitimacy, irrespective of group status position, perceived permeability was not related to adjustment.