The interplay between objective and subjective ethno-cultural diversity in predicting intergroup relations

Abstract

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.

Ethnic diversity, poverty and social trust in Germany: Evidence from a behavioral measure of trust

“…We unfortunately lack data on interethnic friendships and acquaintances for the participants in the trust game to take into account such variation in intergroup contact. Second, some scholars have pointed out that the effect of ethnic diversity on intergroup relations may not be linear but instead depend on a number of factors, such as the perceived diversity level [ 66 ]. For example, in Finland, research has found that majority group members in contexts with moderate levels of objective diversity but subjective perceptions of high levels of diversity will report greater negative outgroup trust than Finnish majority members in low- or high-diversity context [ 66 ].…”

“…Second, some scholars have pointed out that the effect of ethnic diversity on intergroup relations may not be linear but instead depend on a number of factors, such as the perceived diversity level [ 66 ]. For example, in Finland, research has found that majority group members in contexts with moderate levels of objective diversity but subjective perceptions of high levels of diversity will report greater negative outgroup trust than Finnish majority members in low- or high-diversity context [ 66 ]. We acknowledge that subjective perceptions are important but, unfortunately, such measures are also unavailable in the GSOEP data and we therefore rely on a measure of objective ethnic diversity as our contextual measure.…”

Do We Stand Together? The Role of Perceived Personal and Group Threats in Predicting the Majority’s (Un)willingness to Confront Injustice on Behalf of a Minority

“…Yet, such discrepancy is visible regardless of the status of the group within the society, and there is a small but growing body of research showing that personal-group discrepancy in discrimination applies to both underprivileged and privileged groups (Postmes et al, 1999). Similarly, Celikkol et al (2017) found that Finnish majority group members in Finland perceived higher levels of group discrimination than personal discrimination.…”

“…Another concern among national majorities related to immigration is increased feelings of being a target of the minority’s prejudice and subsequent insecurity ( Kluegel and Bobo, 2001 ; Norton and Sommers, 2011 ). There is research showing that also advantaged national majority groups report ethnic discrimination and that it is associated with their negative attitudes toward immigrants and immigration (e.g., Celikkol et al, 2017 ). According to Grigoryev et al (2020) , particularly those majority group members who have a negative outlook on the social world by perceiving it as dangerous and competitive (cf.…”

“…The distinction between personal and group perspectives has also been made within relative deprivation theory ( Runciman, 1966 ) that distinguishes fraternalistic (group) deprivation from egoistic (personal) deprivation and suggests that these two types of deprivation may lead to distinct consequences (see Guimond and Dubé-Simard, 1983 ; Dube and Guimond, 1986 ). It has been argued that group-level (but not personal-level) comparisons are a predictor of social behavior (see Walker and Pettigrew, 1984 ) and prejudice (see Pettigrew et al, 2008 ; Celikkol et al, 2017 ). Furthermore, previous research suggests that an individual may have a positive view of his/her own living conditions, wellbeing, and lifestyle while having a negative view of the situation in the country in general ( Whitman, 1998 ).…”