Pandemic and prejudice: Revisiting Bogardus’s social distance concept in a time of COVID-19

IF 2.3 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Ellen Shi, M. Platow, D. Bar-Tal, M. Augoustinos, R. Spears, D. Van Rooy
{"title":"Pandemic and prejudice: Revisiting Bogardus’s social distance concept in a time of COVID-19","authors":"Ellen Shi, M. Platow, D. Bar-Tal, M. Augoustinos, R. Spears, D. Van Rooy","doi":"10.1177/13684302221133715","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study examined when the realistic threat of COVID-19 leads to prejudicial social distancing. American participants reported social distancing preferences from Chinese or Italian people (out-group target) after viewing increasing or decreasing COVID-19 case numbers (threat level) in China or Italy (threat relevance). On the Bogardus Social Distance Scale, there was support for a disease avoidance hypothesis: greater social distancing preferences were expressed under higher than under lower relevant threats. Responses on a bespoke COVID-19 Social Distance Scale, however, supported an a priori prejudice hypothesis: greater social distancing preferences were expressed toward a Chinese than toward an Italian out-group. Moreover, responses on a separate bespoke Modern Social Distance Scale supported a complex prejudice hypothesis: greater social distancing preferences were expressed toward Chinese than toward Italian out-groups under higher than under lower threat, regardless of threat relevance. These findings suggest that the threat of COVID-19 may enable prejudice expression accompanied by the rationale of disease avoidance.","PeriodicalId":48099,"journal":{"name":"Group Processes & Intergroup Relations","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Group Processes & Intergroup Relations","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302221133715","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study examined when the realistic threat of COVID-19 leads to prejudicial social distancing. American participants reported social distancing preferences from Chinese or Italian people (out-group target) after viewing increasing or decreasing COVID-19 case numbers (threat level) in China or Italy (threat relevance). On the Bogardus Social Distance Scale, there was support for a disease avoidance hypothesis: greater social distancing preferences were expressed under higher than under lower relevant threats. Responses on a bespoke COVID-19 Social Distance Scale, however, supported an a priori prejudice hypothesis: greater social distancing preferences were expressed toward a Chinese than toward an Italian out-group. Moreover, responses on a separate bespoke Modern Social Distance Scale supported a complex prejudice hypothesis: greater social distancing preferences were expressed toward Chinese than toward Italian out-groups under higher than under lower threat, regardless of threat relevance. These findings suggest that the threat of COVID-19 may enable prejudice expression accompanied by the rationale of disease avoidance.
流行病与偏见:在新冠肺炎疫情背景下重新审视鲍加杜斯的社会距离概念
这项研究调查了COVID-19的现实威胁何时导致偏见的社会距离。美国参与者在看到中国或意大利的COVID-19病例数(威胁级别)增加或减少(威胁相关性)后报告了与中国或意大利人(外群体目标)保持社交距离的偏好。在Bogardus社会距离量表上,疾病避免假说得到了支持:在高相关威胁下比低相关威胁下表现出更大的社会距离偏好。然而,在定制的COVID-19社会距离量表上的反应支持了一个先验偏见假设:与意大利外群体相比,中国人表现出更大的社会距离偏好。此外,在单独定制的现代社会距离量表上的反应支持一个复杂偏见假设:无论威胁相关性如何,在高威胁比低威胁下,对中国人的社会距离偏好大于对意大利外群体的社会距离偏好。这些发现表明,COVID-19的威胁可能会导致偏见表达,同时伴有疾病回避的理由。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
4.50%
发文量
76
期刊介绍: Group Processes & Intergroup Relations is a scientific social psychology journal dedicated to research on social psychological processes within and between groups. It provides a forum for and is aimed at researchers and students in social psychology and related disciples (e.g., organizational and management sciences, political science, sociology, language and communication, cross cultural psychology, international relations) that have a scientific interest in the social psychology of human groups. The journal has an extensive editorial team that includes many if not most of the leading scholars in social psychology of group processes and intergroup relations from around the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信