On the Psychological Function of Nationalistic “Whitelash”

Abstract

A noticeable feature of the political discourse accompanying the rise of nationalism in white‐majority countries is that white people fare worse than other ethnic groups in their societies. However, it is unclear based on the extant literature why group‐based relative deprivation (GRD) would correlate with majority‐group nationalism. Here, we propose that the psychological function of nationalism for majority‐group members lies in its ability to assuage the negative feelings arising from GRD. Accordingly, in a New Zealand national probability sample (N = 15,607), we found that GRD among whites was negatively associated with well‐being. However, we also found an opposing indirect association mediated by nationalism. GRD was associated with higher nationalism, which was in turn associated with higher well‐being. These findings suggest that endorsing beliefs about national superiority is one way a nation’s dominant ethnic group can cope with the negative psychological consequences of perceiving that their group is deprived.

System Justification and Perceptions of Group-Based Discrimination: Investigating the Temporal Order of the Ideologically Motivated Minimization (or Exaggeration) of Discrimination Across Low- and High-Status Groups

“…In this sense, because disputes over racial discrimination are perceived as a zero-sum "game" by Whites (Norton & Sommers, 2011), systemjustifying members of the advantaged group may engage in competitive victimhood by claiming reverse discrimination, thereby buttressing their position within the status hierarchy and reinforcing the status quo (see Noor et al, 2012). Because maintaining the status quo furthers the group interests of the advantaged, system-justifying beliefs may reflect an identity compensation strategy for the advantaged (see Sengupta et al, 2019).…”

“…For example, from an attributional approach (e.g., Olson & Hafer, 2001), system-justifying beliefs should reduce perceptions of unfairness by minimizing external attributions of negative and unfavorable outcomes (see also Weiner et al, 2011). Also, status-specific processes including positive group distinctiveness or social dominance among the advantaged (and attributions of self-blame among the disadvantaged) should be investigated (see Sengupta et al, 2019). Such research could help to uncover the myriad ways in which SJ serves the interests of the advantaged, yet undermines the interests of the disadvantaged.…”

Nationalism as collective narcissism

“…This can be the case even if the group is not objectively disadvantaged. For example, national collective narcissism was higher among those Americans who perceived they are being worse off than immigrants (Marchlewska et al, 2018; see also Sengupta, Osborne, & Sibley, 2019).…”

Leveraging rhetorical style to reduce the existential threat of inclusive messaging

“…The present research offers a novel context through which to view research on the way people react to demographic changes and exposure to information conveying increasing diversity. Recall that negative reactions to these implicate zero-sum beliefs, perceived group-based deprivation, and conservative ideology, and these may be especially strong among White Americans (Craig & Richeson, 2017;See Craig, Rucker, & Richeson, 2018;Wilkins et al, 2018;Wilkins et al, 2017;Van Assche, Roets, Van Hiel, & Dhont, 2019;Sengupta, Osborne, & Sibley, 2019). The findings reported here offer that there are existential and motivational constructs that may hold similar relevance to these processes.…”

“…For instance, a recent review of the literature suggests that rather than leading to shifts in attitudes, exposure to diversity simply aggravates existing negative intergroup attitudes among those who endorse right-wing views (see Van Assche, Roets, Van Hiel, & Dhont, 2019). Building on these findings, Sengupta, Osborne, and Sibley (2019) showed that feelings of group-based relative deprivation (which often result from zero-sum beliefs and perceptions of increasing diversity) contribute to nationalistic ideology, which in turn, predicts higher subjective well-being. Further, experimental research shows that exposure to diversity information causes people to endorse more conservative ideology (Craig & Richeson, 2014), and promotes group-based conventionalism (Dieckmann, Steffens, & Methener, 2018;often implicated in right-wing views, Feldman, 2003).…”