This research examined the influence of Black-White income inequality on negative interracial psychological outcomes and the role of perceived interracial competition as a mediational mechanism. The research utilized three different designs across three preregistered experiments to assess the proposed processes. Study 1 (N = 846) used a measurement-of-mediation design and found that participants assigned to the high racial income gap condition reported more perceived interracial competition, discrimination, avoidance, and anxiety relative to those in the low racial income gap condition. Effects were mediated by increased perceptions of interracial competition. Studies 2a (n = 827) and 2b (n = 841) used an experimental-causal-chain design and replicated the effect of the racial income gap condition on increased perceptions of interracial competition (Study 2a) and showed that participants in the high perceived interracial competition condition-the manipulated mechanism-exhibited greater perceived discrimination, anxiety, and mistrust relative to those in the low perceived interracial competition condition (Study 2b). Study 3 (N = 1,583) diversified the sample by recruiting similar numbers of Black (n = 796) and White (n = 787) participants and used a moderation-of-process design by simultaneously manipulating the racial income gap and perceived interracial competition. Competition moderated effects: Inequality effects were stronger for those in the high competition condition. Implications for theory development are discussed. Public Significance StatementWhen Black and White people in the United States are led to believe that they live in a ZIP-code where White people make more than Black people on average (i.e., large racial income gap), their perceptions of discrimination, avoidance, anxiety, and mistrust between these groups increase. This relationship is in part due to heightened perceptions of Black-White competition; the belief that Black and White people are competing with one another.

Background and Objectives: Social interactions involving personal disclosures are ubiquitous in social life and have important relational implications. A large body of research has documented positive outcomes from fruitful social interactions with amicable individuals, but less is known about how self-disclosing interactions with inimical interaction partners impacts individuals. Design and Methods: Participants engaged in an immersive social interaction task with a confederate (thought to be another participant) trained to behave amicably (Fast Friends) or inimically (Fast Foes). Cardiovascular responses were measured during the interaction and behavioral displays coded. Participants also reported on their subjective experiences of the interaction. Results: Participants assigned to interact in the Fast Foes condition reported more negative affect and threat appraisals, displayed more negative behaviors (i.e., agitation and anxiety), and exhibited physiological threat responses (and lower cardiac output in particular) compared to participants assigned to the Fast Friends condition. Conclusions: The novel paradigm demonstrates differential stress and affective outcomes between positive and negative self-disclosure situations across multiple channels, providing a more nuanced understanding of the processes associated with disclosing information about the self in social contexts.