Priming Guilt, Priming Control: Priming Guilt, Priming Control: Anticipating Self-Conscious Anticipating Self-Conscious Emotions Can Reduce Overt Emotions Can Reduce Overt PrejudicePrejudice

Roger Giner-SorollaRoger Giner-Sorolla

Pablo Espinosa

Presentation at SESP 2006,

Philadelphia, PA

Research funding:Research funding:

UK ESRC grantUK ESRC grantRES-000-22-0004RES-000-22-0004

Guilt and other self-conscious Guilt and other self-conscious emotions – good or bad for emotions – good or bad for intergroup relations?intergroup relations?

3 approaches3 approaches Feelings of “collective guilt” for past or present Feelings of “collective guilt” for past or present

situation of discriminationsituation of discrimination

Vicarious feelings about specific acts of othersVicarious feelings about specific acts of others

Personal responsibility and self-control of acts Personal responsibility and self-control of acts of discrimination / expressions of prejudiceof discrimination / expressions of prejudice

Guilt feelings help Guilt feelings help prejudice reduction?prejudice reduction?

Compunction feelings, as well as behavioral Compunction feelings, as well as behavioral inhibition and compensation, aroused by inhibition and compensation, aroused by reminders of one’s own prejudice (reminders of one’s own prejudice (Fazio & Fazio & Hilden, 2001; Monteith, 1993, 1996; Monteith & Hilden, 2001; Monteith, 1993, 1996; Monteith & Voils, 1998; Monteith, Voils, & Ashburn Nardo, Voils, 1998; Monteith, Voils, & Ashburn Nardo, 2001; Monteith, Ashburn Nardo, Voils, & 2001; Monteith, Ashburn Nardo, Voils, & Czopp, 2002; Son Hing, Li & Zanna, 2002)Czopp, 2002; Son Hing, Li & Zanna, 2002)

Mediational role of compunction not so clearMediational role of compunction not so clear

Emotion concepts vs. Emotion concepts vs. emotional feelingsemotional feelings

Two different things (Robinson & Clore, 2002; Two different things (Robinson & Clore, 2002; Innes-Ker & Niedenthal, 2002)Innes-Ker & Niedenthal, 2002)

How do they matter to self-control?How do they matter to self-control?

Freud: Freud: Civilization and its DiscontentsCivilization and its Discontents (1930) – (1930) – guilt is more effective when anticipated (i.e., as guilt is more effective when anticipated (i.e., as concept); also, Frank (1988)concept); also, Frank (1988)

Anticipated feelingsAnticipated feelings Explicit thought about feelings after (vs. Explicit thought about feelings after (vs.

before) breaking self-control in health before) breaking self-control in health domains leads to greater self-control domains leads to greater self-control

Abraham & Sheeran, 2003; Caffray & Abraham & Sheeran, 2003; Caffray & Schneider, 2000; Richard, de Vries & van Schneider, 2000; Richard, de Vries & van der Pligt, 1998; Richard, van der Pligt & der Pligt, 1998; Richard, van der Pligt & de Vries, 1996de Vries, 1996

Anticipated compunctionAnticipated compunction In “grim necessity” dilemmas, high self-In “grim necessity” dilemmas, high self-

control associated with higher control associated with higher accessibility of self-conscious affect accessibility of self-conscious affect associations (Giner-Sorolla, 2001)associations (Giner-Sorolla, 2001)

Implicit priming of compunction words Implicit priming of compunction words leads to greater self-control among leads to greater self-control among dieters (Giner-Sorolla, 2001)dieters (Giner-Sorolla, 2001)

Impicit priming of control Impicit priming of control motivesmotives

Araya, Akrami, Ekehammar, & Hedlund (2002)Araya, Akrami, Ekehammar, & Hedlund (2002)

Scrambled sentence priming of regulation Scrambled sentence priming of regulation words such as “control” and “restrain” reduces words such as “control” and “restrain” reduces negative stereotype salience, only if prejudice negative stereotype salience, only if prejudice is made salientis made salient

Moskowitz, Salomon & Taylor (2000): priming Moskowitz, Salomon & Taylor (2000): priming chronic egalitarian goals increases stereotype chronic egalitarian goals increases stereotype controlcontrol

The present studyThe present study SubliminallySubliminally prime compunction related words prime compunction related words

in addition to regulation words and neutral in addition to regulation words and neutral wordswords

Test prejudice via responses to overt Test prejudice via responses to overt stereotypical statementsstereotypical statements

Compunction should have same effect as Compunction should have same effect as regulation, reducing prejudiceregulation, reducing prejudice

MethodMethod 120 White British participants; Blacks as 120 White British participants; Blacks as

the target groupthe target group

Complete version of Modern Racism Complete version of Modern Racism questionnaire beforehand (as in Araya et questionnaire beforehand (as in Araya et al., 2002, to activate outgroup concept)al., 2002, to activate outgroup concept)

ManipulationManipulation Parafoveally primed with words in “word Parafoveally primed with words in “word

recognition” task, 16 ms with mask afterrecognition” task, 16 ms with mask after

Either neutral words (“cheese”), Either neutral words (“cheese”), regulation words (“control”), or regulation words (“control”), or compunction words (“guilt”, “shame”, compunction words (“guilt”, “shame”, “regret”)“regret”)

MeasuresMeasures Nonspecific stereotype activation: Srull & Wyer Nonspecific stereotype activation: Srull & Wyer

(1978) “Donald” task with stereotypic adjectives(1978) “Donald” task with stereotypic adjectives

Explicitly expressed prejudice: stereotypes Explicitly expressed prejudice: stereotypes about British Blacks from Lepore & Brown about British Blacks from Lepore & Brown (1997), both positive (e.g. ATHLETIC) and (1997), both positive (e.g. ATHLETIC) and negative (e.g. UNINTELLIGENT), as well as negative (e.g. UNINTELLIGENT), as well as non-stereotypic negative words (e.g., CLUMSY) non-stereotypic negative words (e.g., CLUMSY) and factual traits (e.g. BROWN-EYED); and factual traits (e.g. BROWN-EYED); participants endorse as more typical of Blacks participants endorse as more typical of Blacks than Whitesthan Whites

AfterwardsAfterwards Plant & Devine (1998) IMS-EMS scalesPlant & Devine (1998) IMS-EMS scales

EMS example: “If I acted prejudiced toward EMS example: “If I acted prejudiced toward Blacks I would be concerned that others would Blacks I would be concerned that others would be angry with me” be angry with me”

IMS example: “I am personally motivated by IMS example: “I am personally motivated by my beliefs to be non-prejudiced toward Blacks”. my beliefs to be non-prejudiced toward Blacks”.

Implicit stereotypic traitsImplicit stereotypic traits

No effects of priming on generalized No effects of priming on generalized “Donald” story negative stereotypic trait “Donald” story negative stereotypic trait activation activation

Donald story showed expected effect from Donald story showed expected effect from prior expression of attitudes toward prior expression of attitudes toward Blacks (Blacks (rr with racism = .22, p < .05; with racism = .22, p < .05; nonST negative r = -.07)nonST negative r = -.07)

Overt stereotype Overt stereotype endorsementendorsement

Effects of both priming conditions found on Effects of both priming conditions found on yes/no endorsement of negative stereotypical yes/no endorsement of negative stereotypical beliefs about Blacks, interacting with prejudice beliefs about Blacks, interacting with prejudice level (19% yes overall) – people with high level (19% yes overall) – people with high modern racism most affectedmodern racism most affected

No such effects on unrelated negative terms (all No such effects on unrelated negative terms (all p > .40).p > .40).

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

lo racism high racism

z st

ereo

type

end

orse

men

t

neutral

regulate

Racism main beta = .60, p < .001; interaction beta = .-19, p < .05

Regulation priming’s effect on negative stereotype endorsement

Racism main beta = .55, p < .001; interaction beta = -.26, p < .01

Compunction priming’s effect on negative stereotype endorsement

-0.8-0.6-0.4-0.2

00.20.40.60.8

1

lo racism high racism

z st

ereo

type

end

orse

men

t

neutral

compunction

Effects on positive Effects on positive stereotype endorsement?stereotype endorsement?

In both manipulation contrasts, marginally In both manipulation contrasts, marginally significant relation with modern racism (high significant relation with modern racism (high racism = high positive stereotyping; zero order racism = high positive stereotyping; zero order rr = .15 , = .15 , p p = .096) = .096)

No interaction of manipulations with racism; No interaction of manipulations with racism; regulate contrast shows weak main effect, beta regulate contrast shows weak main effect, beta = .21, p = .06, such that regulation priming = .21, p = .06, such that regulation priming promotes less positive stereotypingpromotes less positive stereotyping

Effects on post-measure of Effects on post-measure of external and internal external and internal prejudice control motivesprejudice control motives Manipulations tended to reduce high Manipulations tended to reduce high

prejudice individuals’ subjective prejudice individuals’ subjective motivation, as opposed to neutral group motivation, as opposed to neutral group and other research (high prej. = more and other research (high prej. = more external, low prej. = more internal)external, low prej. = more internal)

Racism main beta = .24, p < .05; interaction beta -.25, p < .05

No effect on internal motivation

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

lo racism high racism

z ex

tern

al m

otiv

atio

n to

con

trol

neutral

regulate

Regulation priming’s effect on subjective external motivation

Racism main beta = .27, p < .05; interaction beta = -.21, p = .059

Compunction priming’s effect on subjective external motivation

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

lo racism high racism

z ex

tern

al m

otiv

atio

n to

con

trol

neutral

compunction

Racism main beta = -.49, p < .05; interaction beta = -.27, p < .01

Compunction priming’s effect on subjective internal motivation

-1-0.8-0.6-0.4-0.2

00.20.40.60.8

lo racism high racism

z in

tern

al m

otiv

atio

n to

con

trol

neutral

compunction

ConclusionsConclusions

Priming regulatory and compunction concepts didn’t Priming regulatory and compunction concepts didn’t affect mere stereotype activation, but did reduce explicit affect mere stereotype activation, but did reduce explicit negative stereotype endorsementnegative stereotype endorsement

The most prejudiced were the most affected, possibly The most prejudiced were the most affected, possibly because they had the most room to change on the yes-because they had the most room to change on the yes-no measureno measure

Contrast with other results of our studies in which Contrast with other results of our studies in which people told they are prejudiced feel more compunction, people told they are prejudiced feel more compunction, change their behavior (e.g., give more money to change their behavior (e.g., give more money to minority oriented groups), but felt compunction has minority oriented groups), but felt compunction has nothing to do with behavior change.nothing to do with behavior change.