Behavioral scientists routinely publish broad claims about human psychology and behavior in the world's top journals based on samples drawn entirely from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) societies. Researchers - often implicitly - assume that either there is little variation across human populations, or that these "standard subjects" are as representative of the species as any other population. Are these assumptions justified? Here, our review of the comparative database from across the behavioral sciences suggests both that there is substantial variability in experimental results across populations and that WEIRD subjects are particularly unusual compared with the rest of the species - frequent outliers. The domains reviewed include visual perception, fairness, cooperation, spatial reasoning, categorization and inferential induction, moral reasoning, reasoning styles, self-concepts and related motivations, and the heritability of IQ. The findings suggest that members of WEIRD societies, including young children, are among the least representative populations one could find for generalizing about humans. Many of these findings involve domains that are associated with fundamental aspects of psychology, motivation, and behavior - hence, there are no obvious a priori grounds for claiming that a particular behavioral phenomenon is universal based on sampling from a single subpopulation. Overall, these empirical patterns suggests that we need to be less cavalier in addressing questions of human nature on the basis of data drawn from this particularly thin, and rather unusual, slice of humanity. We close by proposing ways to structurally re-organize the behavioral sciences to best tackle these challenges.

/pdf/the-weirdest-people-in-the-world-480wr4m3kb.pdf

The WEIRDest People in the World

Social behavior is ordinarily treated as being under conscious (if not always thoughtful) control. However, considerable evidence now supports the view that social behavior often operates in an implicit or unconscious fashion. The identifying feature of implicit cognition is that past experience influences judgment in a fashion not introspectively known by the actor. The present conclusion--that attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes have important implicit modes of operation--extends both the construct validity and predictive usefulness of these major theoretical constructs of social psychology. Methodologically, this review calls for increased use of indirect measures--which are imperative in studies of implicit cognition. The theorized ordinariness of implicit stereotyping is consistent with recent findings of discrimination by people who explicitly disavow prejudice. The finding that implicit cognitive effects are often reduced by focusing judges' attention on their judgment task provides a basis for evaluating applications (such as affirmative action) aimed at reducing such unintended discrimination.

/pdf/implicit-social-cognition-attitudes-self-esteem-and-2j32pp6h9o.pdf

Implicit Social Cognition: Attitudes, Self-Esteem, and Stereotypes.

Attachment--and loss.

Allport specified four conditions for optimal intergroup contact: equal group status within the situation, common goals, intergroup cooperation and authority support. Varied research supports the hypothesis, but four problems remain. 1. A selection bias limits cross-sectional studies, since prejudiced people avoid intergroup contact. Yet research finds that the positive effects of cross-group friendship are larger than those of the bias. 2. Writers overburden the hypothesis with facilitating, but not essential, conditions. 3. The hypothesis fails to address process. The chapter proposes four processes: learning about the outgroup, changed behavior, affective ties, and ingroup reappraisal. 4. The hypothesis does not specify how the effects generalize to other situations, the outgroup or uninvolved outgroups. Acting sequentially, three strategies enhance generalizationodecategorization, salient categorization, and recategorization. Finally, both individual differences and societal norms shape intergroup contact effects. The chapter outlines a longitudinal intergroup contact theory. It distinguishes between essential and facilitating factors, and emphasizes different outcomes for different stages of contact.

http://majorsmatter.net/race/Readings/Pettigrew%201998.pdf

Intergroup contact theory

Mfost of social psychology's theories of the self fail to take into account the significance of social identification in the definition of self. Social identities are self-definitions that are more inclusive than the individuated self-concept of most American psychology. A model of optimal distinctiveness is proposed in which social identity is viewed as a reconciliation of opposing needs for assimilation and differentiation from others. According to this model, individuals avoid self-construals that are either too personalized or too inclusive and instead define themselves in terms of distinctive category memberships. Social identity and group loyalty are hypothesized to be strongest for those self-categorizations that simultaneously provide for a sense of belonging and a sense of distinctiveness. Results from an initial laboratory experiment support the prediction that depersonalization and group size interact as determinants of the strength of social identification.

The Social Self: On Being the Same and Different at the Same Time

Introduction Research Methods in Cultural Context Cognitive Social Psychology Social Influence Social Relations Cultural Contact and Social Psychology

Social Psychology in Cross-Cultural Perspective

The connection between heritage language instruction and self-esteem was investigated. Participants were Inuit, White, and mixed-heritage (Inuit-White) children living in a subarctic community. Testing occurred before and after their 1st year in a heritage language or a 2nd language program. Children from all 3 groups who were educated in their heritage language showed a substantial increase in their personal self-esteem, whereas Inuit and mixed-heritage children educated in a 2nd language did not. Among the Inuit, Inuttitut instruction was associated with positive regard for the ingroup, whereas English or French instruction was associated with preference for the White outgroup. The present findings support claims that early heritage language education can have a positive effect on the personal and collective self-esteem of minority language students—a benefit not provided by 2nd language instruction. In the present study, we investigated the differential effects of early education in the heritage language versus early immersion in a second language on the child's personal and collective self-esteem. The question of language of instruction has been the center of considerable public and academic debate. Traditional thinking held that early entry into English language education would speed the minority language student's transition into the majority culture and improve his or her chances of competing in the mainstream society. In many cases, zealous supporters of this assimilationist perspective set out to replace the student's heritage languages with the dominant language. Some of the clearest and most dramatic examples of this can be found in North America's history of educating Native American and Cana

/pdf/identity-and-the-language-of-the-classroom-investigating-the-4e65w989s2.pdf

Identity and the language of the classroom: Investigating the impact of heritage versus second language instruction on personal and collective self-esteem.

The actions of advantaged group activists (sometimes called “allies”) are admirable, and they likely make meaningful contributions to the movements they support. However, a nuanced understanding of the role of advantaged group allies must also consider the potential challenges of their participation. Both in their everyday lives and during their activist work, advantaged group allies are especially likely to have direct contact with disadvantaged group members. This article considers when such contact may harm rather than help resistance movements by disadvantaged groups. We also suggest that to avoid these undermining effects, advantaged group allies must effectively communicate support for social change, understand the implications of their own privilege, offer autonomy-oriented support, and resist the urge to increase their own feelings of inclusion by co-opting relevant marginalized social identities.

/pdf/acting-in-solidarity-cross-group-contact-between-3nz7xtoyso.pdf

Acting in Solidarity: Cross‐Group Contact between Disadvantaged Group Members and Advantaged Group Allies

Strategic Collective Action: Social Psychology and Social Change

Previous research shows that positive contact with members of advantaged groups can undermine collective action among the disadvantaged. The present work provides the first experimental evidence of this effect and introduces a moderator which highlights the fundamental role of communication about perceptions of the legitimacy of intergroup inequality. Study 1 (N = 267) focused on the lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgendered community's struggle for same-sex marriage in California. In Study 2 (N = 81), cross-group contact was initiated between members of two universities that differ in social status. Results revealed that positive cross-group contact undermined public collective action among the disadvantaged when the advantaged-group partner described their group's advantaged position as legitimate or when they did not communicate their feelings about intergroup inequality (leaving them ambiguous). In contrast, when the advantaged-group partner clearly described the intergroup inequality as illegitimate, cross-group contact did not undermine participation in public collective action.

Stephen C. Wright

Papers

Social Psychology in Cross-Cultural Perspective

Identity and the language of the classroom: Investigating the impact of heritage versus second language instruction on personal and collective self-esteem.

Acting in Solidarity: Cross‐Group Contact between Disadvantaged Group Members and Advantaged Group Allies

Strategic Collective Action: Social Psychology and Social Change

Friend or Ally Whether Cross-Group Contact Undermines Collective Action Depends on What Advantaged Group Members Say (or Don’t Say)