Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Measuring intergroup ideologies: positive and negative aspects of emphasizing versus looking beyond group differences.
Pers Soc Psychol Bull 2015; 41(12):1646-64PS

Abstract

Research on interethnic relations has focused on two ideologies, asking whether it is best to de-emphasize social-category differences (colorblind) or emphasize and celebrate differences (multicultural). We argue each of these can manifest with negative outgroup evaluations: Assimilationism demands that subordinate groups adopt dominant group norms to minimize group distinctions; segregationism holds that groups should occupy separate spheres. Parallel versions can be identified for intergender relations. Scales to measure all four ideologies are developed both for ethnicity (Studies 1 and 2) and gender (Studies 3 and 4). Results demonstrate that the ideologies can be reliably measured, that the hypothesized four-factor models are superior to alternative models with fewer factors, and that the ideologies relate as predicted to the importance ascribed to group distinctions, subordinate group evaluations, and solution preferences for intergroup conflict scenarios. We argue that this fourfold model can help clarify theory and measurement, allowing a more nuanced assessment of ideological attitudes.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Social Cognition Center Cologne, University of Cologne, Germany Adam.Hahn@uni-koeln.de.University of Colorado Boulder, USA.University of Colorado Boulder, USA.University of Colorado Boulder, USA.

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Language

eng

PubMed ID

26453053

Citation

Hahn, Adam, et al. "Measuring Intergroup Ideologies: Positive and Negative Aspects of Emphasizing Versus Looking Beyond Group Differences." Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, vol. 41, no. 12, 2015, pp. 1646-64.
Hahn A, Banchefsky S, Park B, et al. Measuring intergroup ideologies: positive and negative aspects of emphasizing versus looking beyond group differences. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2015;41(12):1646-64.
Hahn, A., Banchefsky, S., Park, B., & Judd, C. M. (2015). Measuring intergroup ideologies: positive and negative aspects of emphasizing versus looking beyond group differences. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(12), pp. 1646-64. doi:10.1177/0146167215607351.
Hahn A, et al. Measuring Intergroup Ideologies: Positive and Negative Aspects of Emphasizing Versus Looking Beyond Group Differences. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2015;41(12):1646-64. PubMed PMID: 26453053.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Measuring intergroup ideologies: positive and negative aspects of emphasizing versus looking beyond group differences. AU - Hahn,Adam, AU - Banchefsky,Sarah, AU - Park,Bernadette, AU - Judd,Charles M, Y1 - 2015/10/09/ PY - 2015/05/06/received PY - 2015/08/30/accepted PY - 2015/10/11/entrez PY - 2015/10/11/pubmed PY - 2016/7/28/medline KW - colorblind KW - gender aware KW - gender blind KW - intergroup ideology KW - multicultural SP - 1646 EP - 64 JF - Personality & social psychology bulletin JO - Pers Soc Psychol Bull VL - 41 IS - 12 N2 - Research on interethnic relations has focused on two ideologies, asking whether it is best to de-emphasize social-category differences (colorblind) or emphasize and celebrate differences (multicultural). We argue each of these can manifest with negative outgroup evaluations: Assimilationism demands that subordinate groups adopt dominant group norms to minimize group distinctions; segregationism holds that groups should occupy separate spheres. Parallel versions can be identified for intergender relations. Scales to measure all four ideologies are developed both for ethnicity (Studies 1 and 2) and gender (Studies 3 and 4). Results demonstrate that the ideologies can be reliably measured, that the hypothesized four-factor models are superior to alternative models with fewer factors, and that the ideologies relate as predicted to the importance ascribed to group distinctions, subordinate group evaluations, and solution preferences for intergroup conflict scenarios. We argue that this fourfold model can help clarify theory and measurement, allowing a more nuanced assessment of ideological attitudes. SN - 1552-7433 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/26453053/Measuring_intergroup_ideologies:_positive_and_negative_aspects_of_emphasizing_versus_looking_beyond_group_differences_ L2 - http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0146167215607351?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub=pubmed DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -