In the first half of the project’s timeline, we conducted several experimental and correlational studies that tested some of our main hypotheses regarding the formation of negative attitudes towards outgroups and minority groups. In some of these studies, participants formed impressions of artificial alien groups or real groups, while we manipulated the order in which these groups were encountered, whether they were minority or majority groups, whether they were ingroups or outgroups, and whether the groups’ distinct attributes were positive or negative. The studies confirmed that people form impressions about novel (i.e. later-encountered) groups primarily based on their distinct attributes. When distinct group attributes were negative, participants’ evaluations, memory content, and stereotypes of novel groups were negatively biased. This suggests that outgroups and minorities are often seen more negatively because, in most contexts, people encounter these groups only after they have encountered ingroups and majorities. In another line of studies, we manipulated the number of groups that participants formed impressions about and confirmed that when the social environment comprises a larger number of groups, people’s impressions of these groups become more negative. In a large cross-country study, we collected stereotypes that people hold toward majority and minority groups and confirmed that stereotypes towards minorities are indeed more negative than stereotypes toward majorities.
We have also begun working on several novel research questions related to our CEC project. In these projects, we collaborate with several researchers inside and outside the EU. One project further examines how interpersonal trust is influenced by the number of groups in the social environment. Our studies have found that a larger number of (minimal) groups increases intergroup bias with regard to the perceived trustworthiness of group members. Another line of research has found that attitudes towards social groups are more strongly influenced by individual experiences with group members than by aggregated descriptions of the positivity or negativity of group members' behavior (e.g. news reporting). These findings provide another cognitive-ecological explanation for why people often hold more positive attitudes towards groups they encounter on a daily basis (e.g. ingorups and majorites), and why descriptive interventions that label minorities and outgroups as positive, are often ineffective.
