Allophilia

Last updated

In sociology, allophilia is having a positive attitude towards outgroup members. The outgroup members can be anyone who possesses characteristics that are different from one's own, such as people of different races, religions, cultures, etc. It is a framework for understanding effective intergroup leadership and is conceptualized as a measurable state of mind with tangible consequences. [1] [2]

Contents

Terminology

The term allophilia was coined by Harvard professor Todd Pittinsky in 2006, after he was unable to find an antonym for prejudice in any dictionary. [3] [ disputed discuss ] The term derived from Greek words meaning "liking or love of the other". [4]

Statistical factors

  1. affection,
  2. comfort,
  3. engagement,
  4. enthusiasm,
  5. kinship.

The allophilia scale measures each of these factors. [5] [6] It has been adapted and validated to other languages such as Italian and Spanish, also to various settings, such as to measure positive attitude toward people with dementia, younger and older adults. [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Allophilia scale Allophilia Scale.svg
Allophilia scale

Prejudice and positive intergroup relations

The typical remedy for prejudice is to bring conflicting groups into a state of tolerance. However, tolerance is not the logical antithesis of prejudice, but rather is the midpoint between negative feelings and positive feelings toward others. Allophilia enhancement should serve as complement to prejudice reduction. [12] [13] [14]

Allophilia predicts positive relationships with outgroup members. For instance, a study in Spain shows that students having higher allophilia had lower social distance toward people with obesity. [15] Besides, positive experience with outgroup members may increase allophilia, as it is shown in a longitudinal study of a cook's tour in Vietnam. In that study, the participants, who were Americans, reported positive feelings toward Vietnamese mirroring Allophilia facets in nearly 10 years after the event. [16]

In one study, symhedonia (experiencing empathic joy) has been shown to be more closely associated with allophilia, while sympathy (experiencing empathic sorrow) has been shown to be more strongly associated with prejudice. [12]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Prejudice</span> Attitudes based on preconceived categories

Prejudice can be an affective feeling towards a person based on their perceived group membership. The word is often used to refer to a preconceived evaluation or classification of another person based on that person's perceived personal characteristics, such as political affiliation, sex, gender, gender identity, beliefs, values, social class, age, disability, religion, sexuality, race, ethnicity, language, nationality, culture, complexion, beauty, height, body weight, occupation, wealth, education, criminality, sport-team affiliation, music tastes or other perceived characteristics.

Social dominance orientation (SDO) is a personality trait measuring an individual's support for social hierarchy and the extent to which they desire their in-group be superior to out-groups. SDO is conceptualized under social dominance theory as a measure of individual differences in levels of group-based discrimination; that is, it is a measure of an individual's preference for hierarchy within any social system and the domination over lower-status groups. It is a predisposition toward anti-egalitarianism within and between groups.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">In-group and out-group</span> Sociological notions

In social psychology and sociology, an in-group is a social group to which a person psychologically identifies as being a member. By contrast, an out-group is a social group with which an individual does not identify. People may for example identify with their peer group, family, community, sports team, political party, gender, sexual orientation, religion, or nation. It has been found that the psychological membership of social groups and categories is associated with a wide variety of phenomena.

In psychology and other social sciences, the contact hypothesis suggests that intergroup contact under appropriate conditions can effectively reduce prejudice between majority and minority group members. Following WWII and the desegregation of the military and other public institutions, policymakers and social scientists had turned an eye towards the policy implications of interracial contact. Of them, social psychologist Gordon Allport united early research in this vein under intergroup contact theory.

Social dominance theory (SDT) is a social psychological theory of intergroup relations that examines the caste-like features of group-based social hierarchies, and how these hierarchies remain stable and perpetuate themselves. According to the theory, group-based inequalities are maintained through three primary mechanisms: institutional discrimination, aggregated individual discrimination, and behavioral asymmetry. The theory proposes that widely shared cultural ideologies provide the moral and intellectual justification for these intergroup behaviors by serving to make privilege normal. For data collection and validation of predictions, the social dominance orientation (SDO) scale was composed to measure acceptance of and desire for group-based social hierarchy, which was assessed through two factors: support for group-based dominance and generalized opposition to equality, regardless of the ingroup's position in the power structure.

Realistic conflict theory (RCT), also known as realistic group conflict theory (RGCT), is a social psychological model of intergroup conflict. The theory explains how intergroup hostility can arise as a result of conflicting goals and competition over limited resources, and it also offers an explanation for the feelings of prejudice and discrimination toward the outgroup that accompany the intergroup hostility. Groups may be in competition for a real or perceived scarcity of resources such as money, political power, military protection, or social status.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stereotype</span> Generalized but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing

In social psychology, a stereotype is a generalized belief about a particular category of people. It is an expectation that people might have about every person of a particular group. The type of expectation can vary; it can be, for example, an expectation about the group's personality, preferences, appearance or ability. Stereotypes are often overgeneralized, inaccurate, and resistant to new information. A stereotype does not necessarily need to be a negative assumption. They may be positive, neutral, or negative.

Ambivalent prejudice is a social psychological theory that states that, when people become aware that they have conflicting beliefs about an outgroup, they experience an unpleasant mental feeling generally referred to as cognitive dissonance. These feelings are brought about because the individual on one hand believes in humanitarian virtues such as helping those in need, but on the other hand also believes in individualistic virtues such as working hard to improve one's life.

In social psychology, collective narcissism is the tendency to exaggerate the positive image and importance of a group to which one belongs. The group may be defined by ideology, race, political beliefs/stance, religion, sexual orientation, social class, language, nationality, employment status, education level, cultural values, or any other ingroup. While the classic definition of narcissism focuses on the individual, collective narcissism extends this concept to similar excessively high opinions of a person's social group, and suggests that a group can function as a narcissistic entity.

An implicit bias or implicit stereotype is the pre-reflective attribution of particular qualities by an individual to a member of some social out group.

The imagined contact hypothesis is an extension of the contact hypothesis, a theoretical proposition centred on the psychology of prejudice and prejudice reduction. It was originally developed by Richard J. Crisp and Rhiannon N. Turner and proposes that the mental simulation, or imagining, of a positive social interaction with an outgroup member can lead to increased positive attitudes, greater desire for social contact, and improved group dynamics. Empirical evidence supporting the imagined contact hypothesis demonstrates its effectiveness at improving explicit and implicit attitudes towards and intergroup relations with a wide variety of stigmatized groups including religious minorities, the mentally ill, ethnic minorities, sexual minorities, and obese individuals. Researchers have identified a number of factors that influence the effectiveness of the imagined contact hypothesis including vividness of the imagery and how typical the imagined outgroup individual is. While some researchers question the effectiveness of the imagined contact hypothesis, empirical evidence does suggest it is effective at improving attitudes towards outgroups.

Intergroup anxiety is the social phenomenon identified by Walter and Cookie Stephan in 1985 that describes the ambiguous feelings of discomfort or anxiety when interacting with members of other groups. Such emotions also constitute intergroup anxiety when one is merely anticipating interaction with members of an outgroup. Expectations that interactions with foreign members of outgroups will result in an aversive experience is believed to be the cause of intergroup anxiety, with an affected individual being anxious or unsure about a number of issues. Methods of reducing intergroup anxiety and stress including facilitating positive intergroup contact.

There is a great deal of research on the factors that lead to the formation of prejudiced attitudes and beliefs. There is also a lot of research on the consequences of holding prejudiced beliefs and being the target of such beliefs. It is true that advances have been made in understanding the nature of prejudice. A consensus on how to end prejudice has yet to be established, but there are a number of scientifically examined strategies that have been developed in attempt to solve this social issue.

Integrated threat theory (ITT), also known as intergroup threat theory, is a theory in psychology and sociology which attempts to describe the components of perceived threat that lead to prejudice between social groups. The theory applies to any social group that may feel threatened in some way, whether or not that social group is a majority or minority group in their society. This theory deals with perceived threat rather than actual threat. Perceived threat includes all of the threats that members of group believe they are experiencing, regardless of whether those threats actually exist. For example, people may feel their economic well-being is threatened by an outgroup stealing their jobs even if, in reality, the outgroup has no effect on their job opportunities. Still, their perception that their job security is under threat can increase their levels of prejudice against the outgroup. Thus, even false alarms about threat still have "real consequence" for prejudice between groups.

Intergroup relations refers to interactions between individuals in different social groups, and to interactions taking place between the groups themselves collectively. It has long been a subject of research in social psychology, political psychology, and organizational behavior.

In social psychology, a metastereotype is a stereotype that members of one group have about the way in which they are stereotypically viewed by members of another group. In other words, it is a stereotype about a stereotype. They have been shown to have adverse effects on individuals that hold them, including on their levels of anxiety in interracial conversations. Meta-stereotypes held by African Americans regarding the stereotypes White Americans have about them have been found to be largely both negative and accurate. People portray meta-stereotypes of their ingroup more positively when talking to a member of an outgroup than to a fellow member of their ingroup.

Diversity ideology refers to individual beliefs regarding the nature of intergroup relations and how to improve them in culturally diverse societies. A large amount of scientific literature in social psychology studies diversity ideologies as prejudice reduction strategies, most commonly in the context of racial groups and interracial interactions. In research studies on the effects of diversity ideology, social psychologists have either examined endorsement of a diversity ideology as individual difference or used situational priming designs to activate the mindset of a particular diversity ideology. It is consistently shown that diversity ideologies influence how individuals perceive, judge and treat cultural outgroup members. Different diversity ideologies are associated with distinct effects on intergroup relations, such as stereotyping and prejudice, intergroup equality, and intergroup interactions from the perspectives of both majority and minority group members. Beyond intergroup consequences, diversity ideology also has implications on individual outcomes, such as whether people are open to cultural fusion and foreign ideas, which in turn predict creativity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Reconciliation education</span> Comparison of ones nature

Reconciliation education is a teaching-learning framework for improving participants' attitudes toward other groups of people, developed in Australia by Adam Heaton.

An empathy gap, sometimes referred to as an empathy bias, is a breakdown or reduction in empathy where it might otherwise be expected to occur. Empathy gaps may occur due to a failure in the process of empathizing or as a consequence of stable personality characteristics, and may reflect either a lack of ability or motivation to empathize.

In psychology and media studies, the parasocial contact hypothesis is that positive portrayals of minority groups in mass media can reduce prejudice in a manner similar to that predicted by the contact hypothesis in social psychology.

References

  1. Todd Pittinsky. "Allophilia—a new framework for understanding effective intergroup leadership". Center for Public Leadership, Harvard Kennedy School . Archived from the original on 20 June 2013. Retrieved 18 June 2013.
  2. "Positive prejudice: Really loving your neighbour". The Economist . 15 March 2007. Retrieved 18 June 2013.
  3. Ashley Pettus (January 2006). "Otherly Love: The Law of Dissimilars". Harvard Magazine . Retrieved 18 June 2013.
  4. Pittinsky, Todd L. (2010). "A two-dimensional model of intergroup leadership: The case of national diversity". American Psychologist. 65 (3): 194–200. doi:10.1037/a0017329. PMID   20350018.
  5. Sheema Khan (28 February 2013). "Allophilia: Beyond tolerance lies true respect". The Globe and Mail . Retrieved 18 June 2013.
  6. Pittinsky, T. L.; Rosenthal, S. A.; Montoya, R. M. (2011). "Measuring positive attitudes toward outgroups: Development and validation of the Allophilia Scale". In Tropp, L. R.; Mallett, R. K. (eds.). Moving beyond prejudice reduction: Pathways to positive intergroup relations. American Psychological Association. pp. 41–60. doi:10.1037/12319-002. ISBN   978-1-4338-0928-6.
  7. Alfieri, Sara; Marta, Elena (2011). "Positive attitudes towards the outgroup: adaptation and validation of the allophilia scale" (PDF). TPM. 18 (2): 99–116. hdl:10807/13381.
  8. Alfieri, S.; Marta, E. (2011). "Positive attitudes toward the outgroup: adaptation and validation of the Allophilia scale". Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology. 18: 99–116.
  9. Magallares, Alejandro; Morales, Jose Francisco (31 March 2017). "Spanish adaptation of the Allophilia Scale". Anales de Psicología. 33 (2): 283–291. doi: 10.6018/analesps.33.2.242021 .
  10. Kinney, Jennifer M; Yamashita, Takashi; Brown, J Scott (17 February 2016). "Measuring positive attitudes toward persons with dementia: A validation of the Allophilia scale". Dementia. 16 (8): 1045–1060. doi:10.1177/1471301216633247. PMID   26892304. S2CID   25179675.
  11. Wagner, Lisa S.; Luger, Tana M. (20 December 2016). "Assessing positive attitudes toward older and younger adults". Educational Gerontology. 43 (3): 147–165. doi:10.1080/03601277.2016.1272890. S2CID   152164924.
  12. 1 2 Pittinsky, Todd L.; Montoya, R. Matthew (2009). "Sympathy e symhedonia nelle relazioni intergruppi. Dispiacere empatico e gioia empatica in rapporto a pregiudizio e allofilia" [Sympathy and symhedonia in intergroup relations: The relationship of empathic sorrow and empathic joy to prejudice and allophilia]. Psicologia Sociale (in Italian). 4 (3): 347–364. doi:10.1482/30689.
  13. Pittinsky, Todd L. (June 2009). "Allophilia: Moving beyond Tolerance in the Classroom". Childhood Education. 85 (4): 212–215. doi:10.1080/00094056.2009.10523083. S2CID   145106950.
  14. Pittinsky, Todd L. (January 2009). "Look Both Ways". Phi Delta Kappan. 90 (5): 363–364. doi:10.1177/003172170909000511. S2CID   143888645.
  15. Magallares, Alejandro (2 May 2017). "Predictors of Social Distance Toward People with Obesity: The Role of Allophilia". International Review of Social Psychology. 30 (1): 102–110. doi: 10.5334/irsp.110 .
  16. Livert, David (September 2016). "A Cook's Tour Abroad: Long-Term Effects of Intergroup Contact on Positive Outgroup Attitudes". Journal of Social Issues. 72 (3): 524–547. doi:10.1111/josi.12180.