Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe present studies focussed on how blame attributions for an existing problem and decisions to help those negatively impacted by it are affected by group membership and social identity considerations. This was investigated in the context of the COVID‐19 pandemic, asking British nationals about their attributions regarding the pandemic in terms of culpability of the British national ingroup and the Chinese, a national outgroup to the participants. Willingness to help those negatively impacted by the pandemic was also assessed, separately for help offered to ingroup and outgroup members. It was hypothesized that blame attributions and helping decisions would be driven by identity concerns, such that outgroup blame would be stronger than ingroup blame, that ingroup help would be offered more willingly than outgroup help, and that these effects would be especially pronounced for those strongly identified with their national ingroup. Support for the predictions were found in an exploratory online survey of British nationals (N = 250), and in a preregistered second study (N = 250). Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.

This contribution summarizes the literature on the psychology of charitable donations to victims of disasters and other unfortunate circumstances. Four distinct research areas are reviewed. We begin with the literature on donations in general, and then move to the literature on donations to disaster victims specifically, which is what most of our own research has focused on. We then review the literature on intergroup prosociality, because many donations occur in some kind of intergroup context. We then cover some of the main insights from the literature on generic prosocial processes, which has generated insights that are generalizable to donations and have applied implications. Finally, we summarize some of the main recommendations for eliciting donations which can be generated from these literatures. An emphasis is placed on the translation of academic knowledge into practical steps which practitioners might find useful.

Introduction -- Putting the 'Intergroup' into Research on Helping -- Putting the 'Helping' into Intergroup Relations Research -- Intergroup Helping -- References -- Contents -- Contributors -- Part I: Intergroup Helping as Subtle Discrimination -- Chapter 1: Helping Behaviour and Subtle Discrimination -- Intergroup Relations: Social Categorisation, Identity and Dominance -- Social Cognition and Categorisation -- Social Identity -- Social Dominance -- Intergroup Relations: Summary -- Intergroup Bias and Helping Behaviour -- Social Categorisation, Cooperation and Helping -- Intergroup Helping as Consequence of Subtle Racism -- Intergroup Helping as Tool for Subtle Bias -- Summary, Implications and Future Directions -- References -- Chapter 2: Benevolent Sexism and Cross-Gender Helping: A Subtle Reinforcement of Existing Gender Relations -- The Motivations and Strategic Aims of Intergroup Helping: The Perspective of the IHSR Model -- Interdependence Between Men and Women and the Ideology of Benevolent Sexism -- Benevolent Sexism as a Form of Subtle Bias -- Benevolent Sexism and Engagement in Dependency-Oriented Cross-Gender Helping Relations -- Support for Empowering Versus Non-Empowering Policies Intended to Help Women -- Conclusions, Future Directions, and Implications for Social Change -- Implications for Social Change -- References -- Chapter 3: Is Saying "No" to a Request a Subtle Form of Discrimination Against Lesbians and Gay Men? A Fresh Look at Old Findings -- Introduction -- Sexual Prejudice and Gay-Straight Intergroup Relations -- Helping Behaviour as a Reflection of Community Attitudes Towards Social Groups -- Social Identity and Self-Categorisation: Helping Behaviour as Expression of Ingroup Identification? -- Helping Behaviour as Interpersonal and Intergroup Behaviour

The aim of this volume is to provide an overview of psychological research on intergroup helping, arguing for intergroup helping as a research area in and of itself. Historically, research on intergroup relations has largely focused on negative intergroup interactions, such as prejudice or discrimination. This, and the fact that most of the research on helping has focused on individuals, meant that helping between (members of) different groups was largely overlooked. However, over the last decade, a small but growing group of researchers has started to investigate intergroup helping as a social act occurring between and amongst groups. The contributions of these expert researchers, which are summarised in this volume, make the case that intergroup helping should be studied as a phenomenon in and of itself, not as a mere expression of positive intergroup attitudes. To advance this argument, the first section covers traditional research approaches in which the willingness to help other groups is construed as a form of discrimination. Then, the second section looks at the reasons why people may be motivated to help other groups. Finally, the last section explores intergroup helping in a wide range of real world settings, such as help for disaster victims or refugees/migrants. These contributions suggest that intergroup relations can be truly positive. Thus, Intergroup Helping informs researchers from fields as diverse as positive psychology, conflict resolution, fundraising, migration, and intergroup relations about the current state of affairs of research on intergroup helping, and sets out an agenda for further exploration. Tapping into the current trend towards positive psychology, it moves away from the traditional view within intergroup relations research of the group as a 'source of trouble', with the ultimate goal of promoting real positive behaviour that breaches intergroup divides.

Contradictory evidence can be found in the literature about whether ingroup identification and perceived relative deprivation are positively or negatively related. Indeed, theoretical arguments can be made for both effects. It was proposed that the contradictory findings can be explained by considering a hitherto unstudied moderator: the extent to which deprivation is attributed to the ingroup. It was hypothesized that identification would only have a negative impact on deprivation, and that deprivation would only have a negative impact on identification, if ingroup attributions are high. To test this, we experimentally manipulated attributions to the ingroup among British student participants (N = 189), who were asked about their perceived deprivation vis-à-vis German students, yielding support for the hypotheses.