Ingroup vitality and intergroup attitudes in a linguistic minority

Abstract

In this study we argue that predictions of the impact of group status, status stability and status legitimacy on intergroup attitudes can be refined using the subjective perceptions of various dimensions of ingroup vitality. We tested the main and moderating effects of perceived present, future and the legitimacy of present ingroup vitality and perceived discrimination on intergroup attitudes in a nation-wide probability sample (N= 1,411) of Swedish-speaking Finns, controlling for ingroup identification. We found that those who perceived the legitimacy of present ingroup vitality to be low had more negative intergroup attitudes than those who perceived the legitimacy to be high. Perceived present and future ingroup vitality had no main effects on the dependent variable. Instead, perceived future ingroup vitality moderated the effect of perceived discrimination on intergroup attitudes. In addition, the perceived legitimacy of present ingroup vitality mediated the effect of perceived present ingroup vitality on intergroup attitudes.

From Cultural Discordance to Support for Collective Action

“…These results point to the central role of ethnic identification among minority group members. With no consent given by the majority group for the maintenance of minority cultural heritage, the perception of high cultural discordance can be experienced by members of culturally non-dominant groups as a threat to a crucial part of their self-concept (Mähönen et al, 2010), as well as a threat to ethno-linguistic vitality and continuity (Liebkind, Jasinskaja-Lahti, & Teräsaho, 2007). Perceiving an identity threat translates, through declined outgroup trust, into greater support for actions that reduce the threat, including empowering one's ethnic group.…”

The impact of inter-ethnic discordance on subjective vitality perceptions

“…The most important finding was that the effect of SEV on intergroup attitudes and perceived discrimination disappeared when perceptions of legitimacy and future vitality were introduced into the model. The model revealed significant intercorrelations between the perception of illegitimacy and discrimination, a sad future for the in-group, and negative intergroup attitudes (Liebkind, Jasinskaja-Lahti, and Teräsaho 2007).…”

“…Liebkind, Jasinskaja-Lahti, and Teräsaho (2007) hypothesised that the perceived illegitimacy of present low vitality and perceptions of future high vitality are related to more negative intergroup attitudes, and that perceived discrimination is related to negative intergroup attitudes among those who perceive low SEV. Next, we will provide an overview of the main findings of these studies, concentrating on the relationships of SEV to other factors measuring intergroup attitudes and behaviour.…”

“…It contained sections on subjective vitality, ethnic identification, competency and use of the subordinate group language, the interpersonal network of linguistic contacts, and the perception of educational and media support for the subordinate language. Liebkind, Jasinskaja-Lahti, and Teräsaho (2007) combined six measures to assess the relationship between subjective vitality and intergroup attitudes in the Swedish-Finnish intergroup setting in Finland. Their questionnaire included a Beliefs in Ethnolinguistic Vitality Questionnaire (BEVQ; Allard and Landry 1994), and sections for perceived future in-group vitality, perceived legitimacy of present in-group vitality, perceived discrimination, in-group identification and intergroup attitudes.…”

Acculturation and Cultural Preferences of Second-Generation Iranians in Australia

“…Regardless of which side institutes the segregationist approach, studies (Dion, Dion, & Pak, 1992;Fozdar, Wilding, & Hawkins, 2009;Liebkind, Jasinskaja-Lahti, & Teräsaho, 2007;Liu, 2007) have shown an association between prejudicial attitudes and acculturation outcomes. They also show that host community members' orientation towards a particular immigrant group may change from integrationist to exclusionist as more of the same group arrive in the host nation.…”