Dr Diana Cheso

Decisions to give and receive help are often influenced by group memberships, social identities, and intergroup relations. Two studies were conducted to test how perceived political relations between countries are related to willingness to accept offers of intergroup help. Respondents in two low-income countries, the Philippines (N = 289) and Pakistan (N = 275), indicated their willingness to accept (or not) Covid-19 vaccine donations from two higher-status countries (China and the United States) during the Covid pandemic. Results showed that the perceived motivation of the outgroup nation for providing help was associated with rejection or acceptance of help, mediated by emotional reactions to the help. A perception that outgroup nations donate vaccines to demonstrate and assert their superiority and power, that they donate vaccines to keep the outgroup dependent on the ingroup, and a perception that they donate vaccines out of self-interest, were all associated with rejection of vaccine donations. A perception that donations by the outgroup are motivated by genuine concern for the ingroup was associated with acceptance of help. Findings confirm that political intergroup relations are related to attitudes about whether the ingroup nation should accept intergroup help or not. Theoretical and applied implications are discussed.

Over the last few years there has been an increase in anti-trans rhetoric and violence towards transgender individuals, the consequences of which continue to adversely affect transgender people's lives. Given these societal ramifications, it is crucial to explore how transprejudice (prejudice against transgender people) might be ameliorated. Research within social psychology has repeatedly shown intergroup contact to reduce various forms of outgroup prejudice, but little extant research has tested this association for prejudice related to transgender identity. We conducted three cross-sectional studies which tested the relation between contact (quantity and quality) with transgender people, trans-related knowledge (i.e., participants' self-reported level of knowledge about experiences of transgender people), and transprejudice (cognitive and affective). Across the three studies, we found that contact quantity and contact quality significantly mediated the negative relationship between knowledge and transprejudice (although contact quality was a more consistent mediator). Those with more trans-related knowledge had more frequent and better-quality contact with trans people, and in turn showed less prejudice towards transgender people. We found less consistent support for an alternative mediation model with prior knowledge mediating the contact to transprejudice link. These findings demonstrate the importance of the role of both knowledge about and contact with transgender people as a means of transprejudice reduction, with wide-reaching implications for creating environments that are diverse, equitable, and inclusive.

Although people can categorize others' sexual orientation (e.g., gay/lesbian vs. straight) from their facial appearance, not everyone defines their sexual orientation categorically. Indeed, many individuals within the same sexual orientation category experience different degrees of own- and other-gender attraction. Moving beyond sexual orientation categories, we found that perceivers' judgments of individuals' sexual attraction correlated with those individuals' self-reported degrees of attraction to women and men. Similar to past work on sexual orientation categories, facial affect cued sexual attraction in men whereas gender typicality cued sexual attraction in women. Moreover, asking participants to categorize the targets as 'not straight' versus 'straight' revealed a linear pattern distinct from the discrete category thresholds typical of other social groups (e.g., race). Facial appearance thus reveals nuances in sexual attraction that support sexual orientation categorizations. These findings refine understanding of social categorization more broadly.

Terror Management Theory has shown that mortality salience can increase outgroup stereotyping and dislike of people who are different. We examined heterosexual participant reactions to profiles of homosexual and heterosexual men after mortality salience utilizing need for closure (NFC) as a moderating variable. We also examined the role of death-thought accessibility (DTA) in these effects. Among those with high NFC, mortality salience increased stereotyping and preference for the heterosexual individual. This effect only occurred when participants examined the profiles before completing the DTA measure. Control participants showed parallel reactions to the mortality salience condition when completing the DTA measure first. We found no reliable effects of mortality salience increasing DTA, and defensiveness decreasing DTA. The current findings demonstrate how two different death reminders can affect reactions to homosexual men among those in high NFC. Potential reasons for the lack of support for DTA in these effects are discussed.