Religious Complexity and Intergroup Bias

Sharp, Carissa; LaBouff, Jordan P.

doi:10.1080/10508619.2019.1635856

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Dehumanization, perceived threat posed by immigrants [ 26 ], and value dissimilarity further predicts anti-immigrant sentiment [ 45 ]. Religious complexity and social identity complexity are also important constructs to consider when attempting to predict intergroup bias [ 46 • ].…”

Section: Specific Targets Of Prejudicementioning

confidence: 99%

Dimensions of religiousness and their connection to racial, ethnic, and atheist prejudices

Rowatt

Al‐Kire

2021

Current Opinion in Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article we review the most recent empirical research about the psychology of religion and intergroup prejudices based on race/ethnicity or religious identification. We highlight how social identity fusion, intergroup emotions, perceived value-conflict and threat, and system-justification contribute to degrees of prejudice. We also review connections between religiosity and attitudes toward specific cultural groups (e.g., immigrants, atheists, and religious minority groups). Finally, we conclude with a few recommendations for ongoing research in this area, such as interdisciplinary and person-centered approaches.

show abstract

Section: Specific Targets Of Prejudicementioning

confidence: 99%

Dimensions of religiousness and their connection to racial, ethnic, and atheist prejudices

Rowatt

Al‐Kire

2021

Current Opinion in Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The word bias is commonly used to describe when a target is judged or treated differently depending on their religious affiliation or other group membership (e.g., Hunter, 2001;Scheepers et al, 2006;Sharp et al, 2020). In this thesis, I will use the word bias only when a participant has made a clear mistake (as in paper 1) and not when a participant merely treats or judges someone differently based on their religious belief (as in papers 2 and 3).…”

Section: Perceptions and Biasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptions of and behaviour toward religious people and atheists in Sweden and the USA

Hallin

2024

Linköping Studies in Behavioural Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Religiosity has been present in societies throughout history and several theories hold that religion serves to foster trust and a sense of community within the religious ingroup. In many societies today, it is not uncommon to lack religious beliefs and religion is no longer a natural part of everyday life. The studies included in this thesis investigated how religious groups perceive each other or how generous they are to each other, both in the more secular Sweden and in the more religious USA.Paper 1 examined Swedes' perceptions of atheists and religious people. Specifically, how often they associated atheists or religious people with extreme immoral behaviour by making a conjunction error. Previous studies using the same methodological paradigm have found that more people associate atheists, rather than religious people, with immoral behaviour. We found no significant association between target (atheist or religious person) and conjunction errors, indicating that Swedes do not associate immoral behaviour with atheists to a greater degree than they associate immoral behaviour with religious people. We compared the results to those presented in a previous study and found that the Swedish participants in our study made significantly fewer conjunction errors when the target was an atheist than a sample from the USA. They also made significantly more conjunction errors when the target was a religious person than a Finnish sample and the American sample. The results suggests that anti-atheist bias is lower in Sweden compared to the USA, but anti-religious bias is higher than in both Finland and the USA. However, it is also possible that the type of sample used affected the resultswe recruited participants from social media while the other two samples were solely or mainly student samples. The study shows that the clear anti-atheist bias found in similar studies is not universal.Paper 2 investigated Christians' and atheists' perceptions of Christian, Muslim, and atheist job applicants in four studies, two with Swedish samples (studies 1 and 3) and two with samples from the USA (studies 2 and 4). Participants rated the perceived competence and likeability of a target applicant (Christian, Muslim, or atheist) and a control applicant (with no information about religious affiliation). In the last two studies, participants also specified if they would have hired the target or control applicant. Participants generally rated the control applicant as being more competent (USA) and more likeable (Sweden iv and USA) than the target applicant. Both Christian and atheist participants rated targets with the same religious affiliation higher in likeability than targets from one or both religious outgroups in two of the studies. The only significant difference in competence ratings between the targets were in study 3, where Christians rated Muslims as less competent than Christians. However, Christians' likeability ratings in study 3 did not differ between targets. More atheists in study 3 hired the control applicant than the Chris...

show abstract

Religious Complexity and Intergroup Bias

Cited by 2 publications

References 64 publications

Dimensions of religiousness and their connection to racial, ethnic, and atheist prejudices

Dimensions of religiousness and their connection to racial, ethnic, and atheist prejudices

Perceptions of and behaviour toward religious people and atheists in Sweden and the USA

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About