As dietary choices have become closely tied to ethical, environmental, and identity-related concerns in recent years, decisions about whether to consume or avoid meat have become an increasingly polarizing topic in public discourse. Meat consumption behavior has been typically examined through individual-level frameworks emphasizing personal preferences and motivations, yet dietary practices also serve as meaningful social identities and markers of broader ideological and moral positions, creating conflictual intergroup dynamics. In this commentary, we argue that the increasing polarization between veg*ns (vegan and vegetarian, inclusively) and meat-eaters could be investigated through an explicit intergroup lens. First, we highlight three dominant intergroup frameworks applied to this context and how they explain the relevant groups’ perceptions: social identity, intergroup threat, and morality. We then discuss underexplored intergroup processes such as status and power relations, collective action dynamics, multiple identities and identity complexity. Finally, we suggest possible group-level strategies for the reduction of polarization, which may ultimately facilitate broader societal shifts towards more sustainable food choices. By conceptualizing meat consumption and avoidance as socially embedded intergroup processes rather than merely individual choices, we seek to advance theory and stimulate future research at the intersection of intergroup relations, dietary behavior, and societal change.

Drawing on an intergroup contact framework, we investigated the effectiveness of a new human-robot interaction (HRI) procedure—human-robot (fast) friendship (HRF). HRF is a self-disclosure-based interaction between a human participant and a robot, designed to improve attitudes towards social robots and non-contacted secondary human outgroups (e.g., vegetarians, refugees, and individuals with disabilities). Study 1 tested HRF with a humanoid robot among university students (N = 103), and demonstrated HRF to directly and indirectly improve attitudes towards social robots through greater trust and positive emotions (sympathy and respect). HRF was also indirectly associated with more positive attitudes towards some secondary outgroups. Study 2 replicated the same procedure in a community sample (N = 148); participants in the HRF condition showed more positive attitudes towards social robots through increased trust and in turn sympathy, compared to both baseline (no contact) and mere exposure (being in the same room with the robot) conditions. In Study 2, we also observed indirect effects on attitudes towards some human outgroups through increased robot sympathy. Findings highlight the importance of friendship potential in HRI effectiveness and point to the potentially broader consequences of HRF in reducing generalized prejudice in humans.

Through two experimental studies (pre-test/post-test/follow-up with control), we tested reciprocal gifting as an indirect contact strategy that could improve Turkish native children's attitudes towards their Syrian refugee peers in the highly prejudicial immigration context of Türkiye. In Study 1 (N = 144), children who were led to believe that they exchanged gifts with their Syrian peers showed more positive outgroup attitudes in the post-test (unlike children in the control group), while there were no significant changes in negative attitudes or social closeness. In Study 2 (N = 207), we implemented an enhanced procedure whereby children created personalized and symbolic gifts, making the reciprocal gifting experience more engaging. Although this revised approach improved positive attitudes and social closeness, negative attitudes remained unchanged, and all outcomes returned to baseline levels at the follow-up stage (approximately 40 days later) in both studies, overall providing evidence for the short-term positive effects of the reciprocal gifting strategy. We discussed the importance of implementing creative strategies in hostile school environments.

Intergroup contact has been promoted as a powerful means to improve intergroup relations, but causal evidence for the effectiveness of contact in affecting outgroup attitudes is scare. One important and increasingly used approach to estimate causal effects in contact research relies on naturalistic longitudinal survey data. However, causal inference based on longitudinal data depends strongly on the control of (un)observed confounders. The cross-lagged panel model (CLPM), commonly used in contact research, is an analytical model that has been criticised for biasing causal inference by insufficiently accounting for unobserved confounders, and advanced statistical models have been proposed, including the full-forward (FF-CLPM) and random-intercept CLPM (RI-CLPM). To explore the extent of potential bias between the three models introduced by the varying level of control for unobserved confounders, we investigated the robustness of longitudinal positive and negative contact-attitude effects in a systematic re-analysis using 31 datasets from 21 published studies (N = 33,348). Using internal meta-analysis, we found substantial discrepancies between the models: While the CLPM provided significant longitudinal effects of both positive and negative intergroup contact on outgroup attitudes, analytical models that more strongly controlled for the effects of unobserved confounders found no such longitudinal evidence (FF-CLPM and RI-CLPM), but substantial between-person correlations which cannot be causally interpreted (RI-CLPM). Thus, the potential of intergroup contact to longitudinally affect outgroup attitudes in naturalistic survey data remains questionable. We discuss theoretical and methodological implications of these results and outline potential routes for future research to develop a more robust and informative longitudinal (contact) research.

Through a pre-registered correlational study (N = 540, 273 vegetarians and 267 vegan), we aimed at integrating the social psychological construct of collective narcissism —the belief that the ingroup is superior, but insufficiently recognized by others—into the study of vegan/vegetarian (veg*n) identities. We investigated (a) dietary motivations associated with collective narcissism and (b) how collective narcissism was related to intergroup (attitudes towards meat-eaters, collective action and behavioral tendencies), and individual (life satisfaction) outcomes among veg*ns. Contrary to our expectations, prosocially-motivated individuals and particularly vegetarians reported higher levels of collective narcissism compared to morally-motivated individuals, and vegans. As expected, veg*n collective narcissism predicted greater hostility towards meat-eaters (more negative attitudes and behavioral tendencies), as well as greater motivation to engage in both normative and non-normative collective action, whereas a non-narcissistic ingroup positivity (i.e., ingroup satisfaction) was associated with relatively more productive outcomes such as reduced negative outgroup behavioral tendencies and reduced non-normative collective action motivation. Unlike our initial suggestion, however, both collective narcissism and ingroup satisfaction contributed positively to life satisfaction, indicating the potential of collective narcissism to function as a coping mechanism among this group. These findings extend the construct of collective narcissism to a moralized lifestyle minority group and provide a nuanced account of how different forms of ingroup positivity may shape intergroup hostility, activism, and well-being among veg*ns.

Despite increasing awareness and advocacy for meat-restricted diets, overall progress toward meat reduction remains limited. To better understand such resistance, we examined whether perceiving vegans as a cultural threat (threat to traditional meat-eating practices) or moral threat (threat to the ingroup's moral image) affects meat-eaters' willingness to change their meat consumption, both directly and indirectly through positive and negative stereotyping of vegans. Across three studies conducted in Türkiye and the UK (one correlational and two pre-registered experiments manipulating threat; Total N = 1325), we found that threat related to veganism predicted lower intentions to restrict meat consumption, both directly and indirectly via stereotyping processes. While cultural and moral threats were conceptually distinct and showed differential associations in correlational analyses, experimental manipulations appeared to elicit a more general sense of symbolic threat. Nevertheless, across both experimental studies, perceiving vegans as a threat decreased positive stereotyping and increased negative stereotyping, which in turn related to lower intentions to reduce meat consumption. We discussed how threat-based evaluation of vegans and the associated stereotyping could create barriers to more sustainable reductions in meat consumption.

Intergroup contact theory posits that a positive encounter with a member of another social group (i.e., outgroup) can improve the individual's attitudes toward the entire outgroup [3] and even non-contacted outgroups [34]. The current study applies the human-robot friendship (HRF) procedure [5] to children in early (N = 68) and middle childhood (N = 60), to investigate how a brief, positive contact with a social robot affects their perceptions of robots and other human outgroups. The HRF procedure indeed improved attitudes toward social robots in both age groups. However, the attitude improvement did not extend to non-contacted secondary outgroups and even showed a reverse pattern among young children. This study is among the first developmental research to experimentally demonstrate the relation between interaction with a robot and attitudes toward robots.

The coronavirus pandemic posed a major challenge to mental health. Existing evidence shows that COVID-19 is related to poor emotional well-being, particularly among women. However, most work on the subject uses single-country samples, limiting the ability to generalize the disparity or explain it as a function of societal variables. The present study investigates the expression of positive and negative emotions during the pandemic as a function of gender and across 24 countries (N = 49,637). Strong gender differences emerged across countries, with women reporting more negative emotions (anxious, depressed, nervous, exhausted) and less positive emotions (calm, content, relaxed, energetic) than men. The gender gap in positive emotions was significantly wider in countries higher in individualism and narrower in countries higher in power distance. For instance, differences in emotions were larger in Western countries high in individualism, such as the USA, the UK, Italy, and France, and smaller in countries with higher collectivism and power distance, such as China, Malaysia, and South Korea, with a few exceptions like Japan and Brazil. These gender differences across countries were not explained by country-level gender inequalities indicators (GGGI and GII). Interestingly, the national severity of the pandemic, an epidemiological factor, reduced gender differences in positive emotions. These results underscore the importance of considering cultural and national factors when assessing gender differences in well-being.

Intergroup meta-attitude inaccuracy-the extent to which perceptions of outgroup views towards the ingroup diverge from what outgroup members actually think-fuels intergroup hostility, yet research on its precursors is scarce. Through four correlational studies, we examined whether and how intergroup contact predicts meta-attitude (in)accuracy in three conflict contexts: Black-White British in the United Kingdom (UK), Turks-Kurds in Turkey, and Catholics-Protestants in Northern Ireland. Regardless of context or status, all groups perceived themselves to be evaluated more negatively by the outgroup than they really were. Positive contact predicted increased meta-attitude accuracy (through increased shared reality) which was, in turn, associated with more positive outgroup attitudes. The role of negative contact and affective mediators (such as intergroup anxiety and fear) was not consistent and depended on group and context. The use of positive intergroup contact as a potential rectifier of overestimated negative meta-attitudes in conflict contexts is discussed.

This study explores the potential use of the video rating method commonly used in the social psychology literature (e.g., [9]) in evaluating the quality of human-robot interaction (HRI). Eight independent observers watched 42 video recordings of a participant interacting with a humanoid robot in a "fast-friendship" task and rated the warmth of each interaction. Based on the average of the eight ratings, the interactions were classified into "high" and "low" warmth. Participants who had high-warm interactions reported feeling more positive intergroup emotions (sympathy and excitement) and stronger approach intentions toward robots, indicating that the warmth score accurately captured the quality of the interaction. This work presents a simple yet reliable method to incorporate factors to evaluate intergroup attitudes and suggests potential applications of interpersonal research methods in HRI.

Overcoming the COVID-19 pandemic, which resulted in great loss of life worldwide and shook the global economy, required individuals' willingness and ability to behave prosocially. To contribute to the understanding of predictors of prosociality, we used multilevel models to test three previously established pathways to prosocial behavior, which we call the “broaden and build”, compensation, and incapacity pathways. We also tested whether these three paths are mediated by general well-being, and moderated by collective disempowerment, i.e., individuals’ belief that external societal forces have made it harder for people like them to function effectively. Participants from 39 countries (N = 59987) were surveyed on their willingness to engage in prosocial behaviors in the context of the pandemic. The “broaden and build” pathway was supported: positive affect was associated with willingness to engage in prosocial behavior via higher well-being. Two (in)capacity paths were also supported: financial strain and negative affect were both negatively associated with prosociality via lower well-being. A compensation pathway was also observed: Controlling for lower well-being, negative affect was associated with greater prosociality. Finally, differences in disempowerment moderated the affective pathways: higher disempowerment strengthened the positive association of positive affect with prosociality via well-being, and buffered the negative affect incapacity path.

Background: Perceiving that society disregards grief after pregnancy loss (disenfranchised grief) elevates bereaved parents' psychological burden.Objective: In this research, we aimed to compare the disenfranchisement of pregnancy loss with four other loss types considering the bereaved's gender.Method: We collected data from Turkish participants (N = 1,280) using a 5 (loss type) x 2 (gender) between-subjects design with randomly assigned vignettes. Participants reported their expected grief and behavioural tendencies toward the bereaved. We conducted MANOVA and ANOVA analyses.Results: Results revealed that participants expected higher grief for pregnancy loss than two other disenfranchised grief types (former colleague's death, grandfather's diagnosis with Alzheimer's). Expected grief for pregnancy loss was higher than or similar to the level for the best friend's loss across examinations but lower than the level for the one-year-old child's loss. Behaviour tendencies were alike across vignettes, and their results did not paint a coherent picture. Findings did not differ by the bereaved's gender.Conclusion: Pregnancy loss might be less disenfranchised than bereaved parents perceive it, and parents' perceptions could be targeted in therapeutic interventions. We investigated whether pregnancy loss is more disenfranchised by society than four other loss types considering the bereaved's gender.We collected data from a large sample in Turkey.Pregnancy loss might be less disenfranchised than argued in the literature. Antecedentes: Percibir que la sociedad marginaliza el duelo luego de la p & eacute;rdida del embarazo (duelo marginalizado) incrementa la carga psicol & oacute;gica de los padres en duelo.Objetivo: En esta investigaci & oacute;n, el objetivo fue el comparar la marginalizaci & oacute;n de la p & eacute;rdida del embarazo con otros cuatro tipos de p & eacute;rdida considerando el g & eacute;nero de los deudos.M & eacute;todos: Se recolect & oacute; informaci & oacute;n de participantes turcos (N = 1.280) empleando un dise & ntilde;o de 5 (tipo de p & eacute;rdida) x 2 (g & eacute;nero) entre los participantes con una asignaci & oacute;n aleatoria a vi & ntilde;etas cl & iacute;nicas. Los participantes respondieron sobre su expectativa sobre el duelo y tendencias de conducta frente a los deudos de las vi & ntilde;etas cl & iacute;nicas. Se realizaron an & aacute;lisis de MANOVA y ANOVA.Resultados: Los resultados mostraron que los participantes esperaban niveles m & aacute;s altos de duelo para los casos de p & eacute;rdidas del embarazo que para otros dos tipos de duelo marginalizado (fallecimiento de un colega del trabajo; diagn & oacute;stico de la enfermedad de Alzheimer a un abuelo). La expectativa del duelo por p & eacute;rdida del embarazo fue igual o m & aacute;s alta que para la p & eacute;rdida de un mejor amigo en todos los an & aacute;lisis, pero fue menor que para la p & eacute;rdida de un hijo de un a & ntilde;o. Las tendencias de conducta fueron similares en todas las vi & ntilde;etas cl & iacute;nicas, y sus resultados no fueron coherentes. No hubo diferencia en los hallazgos seg & uacute;n g & eacute;nero.Conclusi & oacute;n: La p & eacute;rdida del embarazo podr & iacute;a ser menos marginalizada que lo que perciben los padres en duelo, y las percepciones de los padres en duelo podr & iacute;an ser un objetivo de las intervenciones terap & eacute;uticas.

The current study investigated meat-reducers' (vegan, vegetarian, and flexitarian) dietary identities using an identity process approach. Drawing on identity development theories, we aimed to (i) classify meat-reducers from the United Kingdom and United States (N = 375) based on their level of identity exploration and commitment, and (ii) examine the effect of dietary identity status on diet and group-based behaviours. Findings demonstrated evidence for three identity clusters: achieved (high exploration and high commitment), foreclosed (lower exploration and higher commitment), and diffused (low exploration and low commitment) meat-reducers. Vegans were more likely to display an achieved dietary identity, whereas the majority of flexitarians indicated a diffused identity. More importantly, identity status had significant effects on all outcome measures, with achieved meat-reducers reporting greatest dietary strictness, greatest centrality and private regard, but lowest public regard, as well as most negative attitudes towards meat-eaters and greatest activism. We discuss how investigating dietary identities with a 'process framework' may point to a more inclusive view of social identities among people who follow a plant-based diet.

Virus mitigation behavior has been and still is a powerful means to fight the COVID-19 pandemic irrespective of the availability of pharmaceutical means (e.g., vaccines). We drew on health behavior theories to predict health-protective (coping-specific) responses and hope (coping non-specific response) from health-related cognitions (vulnerability, severity, self-assessed knowledge, efficacy). In an extension of this model, we proposed orientation to internal (problem-focused coping) and external (country capability) coping resources as antecedents of health protection and hope; health-related cognitions were assumed as mediators of this link. We tested these predictions in a large multi-national multi-wave study with a cross-sectional panel at T1 (Baseline, March-April 2020; N = 57,631 in 113 countries) and a panel subsample at two later time points, T2 (November 2020; N = 3097) and T3 (April 2021; N = 2628). Multilevel models showed that health-related cognitions predicted health-protective responses and hope. Problem-focused coping was mainly linked to health-protective behaviors (T1-T3), whereas country capability was mainly linked to hope (T1-T3). These relationships were partially mediated by health-related cognitions. We conceptually replicated predictions of health behavior theories within a real health threat, further suggesting how different coping resources are associated with qualitatively distinct outcomes. Both patterns were consistent across countries and time.

The current study investigated how contact experiences may be associated with attitudes towards the ingroup and the outgroup using a three-wave longitudinal study. We assessed Turkish native children's contact with Syrian refugees (N = 487, Mage = 10.60, SDage = 0.90) and explored relationships between initial contact and later ingroup and outgroup attitudes testing alternative mediation models. We also examined whether negative contact with outgroup members may directly or indirectly predict more positive ingroup attitudes. Findings demonstrated that positive contact was associated with both reduced ingroup positivity and increased outgroup positivity over time. However, unlike the traditionally suggested mediational pathway in contact-deprovincialization literature, initial positive contact (T1) was associated with less positive ingroup attitudes (T3) through more positive outgroup attitudes at T2. There was no evidence for the role of negative intergroup contact on ingroup or outgroup attitudes. Findings are discussed within the broader scope of contact theory and the recently growing deprovincialization literature. Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement.

Through two correlational studies, we investigated how national group members' contact with refugees (Turkey, N = 315) and immigrants (UK, N = 384) is associated with a more deprovincialized view of the world through secure versus defensive national group evaluation (i.e., ingroup satisfaction and collective narcissism, respectively). We expected that when both forms of ingroup evaluation are considered, contact-deprovincialization path would be mediated only through lower collective narcissism, but not necessarily through lower ingroup satisfaction. Findings demonstrated that in both contexts, only collective narcissism consistently and strongly mediated the links between intergroup contact (quality) and both cultural and group deprovincialization. Contact was also associated with lower ingroup satisfaction, but less strongly and only in the Turkish context. The importance of distinguishing between secure and defensive forms of ingroup evaluation when studying the deprovincializing role of intergroup contact is highlighted.

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic saw a shift toward a more traditional division of labor–one where women took greater responsibility for household tasks and childcare than men. We tested whether this regressive shift was more acutely perceived and experienced by women in countries with greater gender equality. Cross-cultural longitudinal survey data for women and men (N = 10,238) was collected weekly during the first few months of the pandemic. Multilevel modelling analyses, based on seven waves of data collection, indicated that a regressive shift was broadly perceived but not uniformly felt. Women and men alike perceived a shift toward a more traditional division of household labor during the first few weeks of the pandemic. However, this perception only undermined women’s satisfaction with their personal relationships and subjective mental health if they lived in countries with higher levels of economic gender equality. Among women in countries with lower levels of economic gender equality, the perceived shift predicted higher relationship satisfaction and mental health. There were no such effects among men. Taken together, our results suggest that subjective perceptions of disempowerment, and the gender role norms that underpin them, should be considered when examining the gendered impact of global crisis.

Contact between group members enhances intergroup perceptions and attitudes. In a world where people spend more time online, people also engage in digital intergroup contact (mainly through social networking services). The potential outcomes of digital contact, particularly in relation to social well-being, are yet to be fully explored. Using a correlational design, the current research ( N = 398) tested quantity and quality of both digital and face-to-face intergroup (specifically, interethnic) contact as simultaneous predictors of diversity ideology, social self-efficacy, self-expansion, and loneliness. Results indicated that when tested as simultaneous predictors, only quantity and quality of face-to-face contact predicted more positive diversity ideology, greater self-expansion, and less loneliness. Quality of face-to-face contact also moderated the role of digital contact quality on diversity ideology and self-expansion. The association between different modes of intergroup contact and individual outcomes beyond prejudice is discussed in light of recent developments in contact literature.

The notion of tolerance is widely embraced in plural contexts, but little is known about how majority members interpret the toleration of minorities. With four studies, we investigated majority group members' interpretations of a minority toleration situation (compared to full acceptance and discrimination situations) as a function of outgroup threat. Study 1 (N = 214) showed that higher perception of threat from Syrian refugees was associated with Turkish natives' stronger likelihood of interpreting a refugee toleration situation as 'acceptance'. Studies 2 (N = 161, threatening context: Syrian refugees-Turkish natives) and 3 (N = 206, non-threatening context: homosexuals-liberal heterosexual students) demonstrated that toleration was interpreted more as a form of acceptance in a high-threat context, whereas it was perceived more like discrimination in the non-threatening context. Experimental Study 4 (N = 150, pre-registered, Muslims-Christians in the UK) indicated that increasing outgroup threat led to higher legitimization of toleration, which, in turn, related to lower support of minority rights. It is concluded that outgroup threat affects how people interpret the way in which minorities are treated, which has implications for initiatives and policies that try to stimulate tolerance towards minority groups.