The successful integration of ethnic minorities is largely contingent on establishing positive relations between minority and majority groups. Drawing on the common ingroup identity model, we argue that for minority youth, intergroup contact (e.g., friendship) with majority youth predicts more positive attitudes toward the majority group because it may foster a stronger common-ingroup identity. Using three-wave panel data from the Children of Immigrants Longitudinal Survey in Four European Countries ( N = 5,447), we found support for our hypothesis: intergroup contact predicted more positive attitudes toward the majority groups over time, due to an increase in common-ingroup identification. Findings suggest that intergroup friendships may play a key role in immigrant youth integration, precisely through facilitating a sense of belonging to a shared identity with the majority group.
Across three studies, we investigated how honor norms are associated with leadership prototypes. An archival, national-level study and an individual-level correlational study both linked honor norms to tough, reputation-conscious leadership and preferences for male leaders. A pre-registered quasi-experiment refined our understanding of these associations. Participants “designed” an ideal leader in either the presence or absence of intergroup conflict and results again showed that honor endorsement predicted preferences for certain leader characteristics (e.g., tough, protective) and for male leaders. High intergroup conflict increased both preferences across all participants, regardless of their level of honor endorsement, and the main effects of both honor and conflict on male leader favorability ratings were partially mediated by preferences for honor-congruent leader characteristics. Together, these studies suggest that honor functions as a cultural logic that informs leadership prototypes, shaping collective perceptions of idealized power and influence.
Reading a positive story about an outgroup reduces prejudice, but can writing a story about the outgroup have similar effects? Three experiments examined whether and how writing a fictional story about an outgroup character can improve writers’ perceptions of the outgroup. Study 1 ( N = 727) showed that narrative writing increased warmth and competence perceptions of the character, regardless of whether writers described cooperating directly with the character, as characters themselves, to complete a positive task or wrote the story from the character’s perspective. Higher perceived warmth, but not competence, was associated with lower intergroup anxiety and stronger empathy toward the outgroup, which in turn predicted perceived dangerousness. Two follow-up experiments sought to replicate these findings using a different character (Study 2; N = 287) and a comparison with nonnarrative persuasive writing (Study 3; N = 343). The findings contribute to theories addressing the intersection of intergroup contact, creative writing, and narrative communication.
Gender discrimination remains a major obstacle to workplace equality. While various factors contribute to this issue, organizational structures that reinforce hierarchical, male-dominated cultures may indicate that gender discrimination is widespread and normative. This research examines how vertical pay gaps—the wage gap between top earners and other employees—are used by employees as cues for organizational norms, which in turn shape perceptions and expectations of workplace gender discrimination. Study 1 ( N = 410, cross-sectional) shows that women report higher levels of perceived gender discrimination in organizations with greater pay inequality. In Studies 2a and 2b ( N total = 711, preregistered experiments), we manipulate vertical pay gap and confirm its impact on discrimination expectations. Importantly, this effect is mediated by the perception that unequal organizations foster a masculine workplace climate, reinforcing norms such as dominance, competition, and strength. These findings demonstrate that economic inequality fosters an organizational climate that disadvantages women. Reducing pay disparities through wage caps may promote a more inclusive work climate.
Mounting evidence shows that shared identity among people of color (PoC) heightens inter-minority solidarity, which yields downstream support for pro-Black (affirmative action), pro-Latino (undocumented immigration), and pro-Asian (high-skill immigration) policies. Previous research detects this mediation pattern in one-shot experiments. This paper evaluates solidarity’s downstream consequences in real-life politics by leveraging longitudinal data spanning the 2024 US presidential campaign. By reformulating solidarity as a developmental process, we reassess its influence in a unique three-wave panel of Asian, Black, Latino, and Multiracial adults ( N = 3,402). We found that across groups, shared PoC identity (Wave 1) significantly increased inter-minority solidarity (Wave 2), which then boosted support for pro-Black and pro-Latino policies—but not pro-Asian policy (Wave 3). This pathway is robust to controls for potential confounds. We also found support for our hypothesized causal direction from PoC identity to PoC solidarity to support for pro-PoC policies (versus a reverse pattern).
