No abstract

In this study, we investigated how perceived ethnic discrimination is related to attitudes towards the national majority group and willingness to confront injustice to promote the social standing of a minority group. We examined this relationship via two mediating factors; national (dis)identification from and out-group (dis)trust of the national majority group. The Rejection-Disidentification Model (RDIM) was refined, first, to account for willingness to confront injustice as a consequence of perceived rejection, and second, intergroup (dis)trust was examined as an additional mediating mechanism that can explain attitudinal and behavioural reactions to perceived rejection simultaneously with national disidentification. The model was tested in a comparative survey data of Russian-speaking minority in Estonia (N = 482), Finland (N = 254), and Norway (N = 219). In all three countries, the more Russian-speakers identified as Russians and the more they perceived ethnic discrimination, the more negative were their attitudes toward the national majority groups and the more willing they were to engage in action to confront group-based injustice. Whereas disidentification from and distrust of national majority group accounted for the discrimination-attitude link to a large extent, both factors had demobilizing effects on willingness to confront injustice, making Russian-speaking immigrants more passive but hostile. The findings are discussed in relation to the risks involved in politicization of immigrants struggling with perceived inequalities.

(2016) Nation-level moderators of the extent to which self-efficacy and relationship harmony predict students' depression and life satisfaction: evidence from ten

Hypotheses are tested that ways of handling anger and their consequences will differ in student samples drawn from dignity cultures (UK and Finland), honor cultures (Turkey and Pakistan) and face cultures (Hong Kong and China). In line with our hypotheses, holding anger in and controlling anger correlate positively in face cultures but not in other samples, whereas holding anger in and letting anger out correlate positively in honor cultures but not in other samples. Furthermore, holding anger in and letting anger out are more strongly predictive of high depression and low life satisfaction in honor cultures than in other samples. The results provide support for the cross-cultural validity of Spielberger's (1999) anger expression inventory and for the proposition that differences in ways of handling anger can be understood in terms of contrasting cultural contexts. Research into emotion has emphasized the importance of distinguishing separate components in the experience, labeling and expression of different emotions (Lazarus, 1991). This perspective has proved fruitful in the cross-cultural analysis of primary appraisals; the circumstances that lead one to assign specific labels to aroused emotions (Scherer, 1987;Scherer & Brosch, 2008). As well as cultural differences in primary appraisals, there may also be cultural differences in how one handles an emotion once it has been identified, known as secondary appraisals. This paper contributes to the understanding of secondary appraisals by focusing specifically on cultural variations associated with three ways of coping with the emotion of anger; namely holding it in, controlling it, and letting it out directly. We investigate whether the interrelationship between the use of each of these coping styles is representative of known types of cultural difference. We then test hypotheses associating measures of well-being with these three anger coping styles. While doing so, we move beyond simple contrasts between individualistic and collectivistic cultures by sampling exemplars of differing types of collectivism. Cross-cultural Studies of the Experience of AngerComparative studies have indicated that the circumstances that elicit different types of emotions may be relatively similar across cultures, although there may be some tendency for the cultural context to predispose one to label emotions in culturally appropriate ways (Scherer, 1997;Scherer & Brosch, 2008). Cultures may vary more in the frequency of the circumstances that elicit specific types of emotion, 4 and in the secondary appraisals involving whether and how they are then expressed and perceived by other members of that cultural group.In terms of the experience of anger, the preference for harmony in East Asian cultures might lead to an expectation that anger would be more frequently experienced and expressed in individualistic cultures than in collectivistic cultures.However, Scherer, Wallbott, Matsumoto, and Kudoh (1988) found that Japanese students could recall more recent anger experiences tha...

This nation-wide probability sample survey study among Finnish majority group members (N = 335) focused on the interactive effects of objective and subjective ethno-cultural diversity on three indicators of intergroup relations: outgroup attitudes, perceived group and personal discrimination, and outgroup trust. Complementing previous research that has mostly examined a linear relationship between cultural diversity and intergroup relations, special attention was given to moderate diversity contexts, which are claimed to pose different challenges to intergroup dynamics than high and low diversity contexts. It was hypothesized that majority group members who live in contexts characterized by moderate levels of objective diversity but subjectively perceive high levels of diversity will report more negative outgroup attitudes, lower levels of outgroup trust and higher levels of discrimination, as compared to those living in low-or high-diversity contexts. The hypothesis was confirmed for perceived group discrimination and outgroup trust. The results highlight the need to acknowledge possible non-linear relationships between diversity and intergroup relations.