Pluralistic ignorance

Abstract: Four studies examined the relation between college students' own attitudes toward alcohol use and their estimates of the attitudes of their peers. All studies found widespread evidence of pluralistic ignorance: Students believed that they were more uncomfortable with campus alcohol practices than was the average student. Study 2 demonstrated this perceived self-other difference also with respect to one's friends. Study 3 traced attitudes toward drinking over the course of a semester and found gender differences in response to perceived deviance: Male students shifted their attitudes over time in the direction of what they mistakenly believed to be the norm, whereas female students showed no such attitude change. Study 4 found that students' perceived deviance correlated with various measures of campus alienation, even though that deviance was illusory. The implications of these results for general issues of norm estimation and responses to perceived deviance are discussed.

Abstract: The present work examined the relationship between people’s own interpretations of why they avoid intergroup contact and their interpretations of why out-groups avoid intergroup contact. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrate that Whites and Blacks would like to have more contact with the out-group but believe the out-group does not want to have contact with them. Studies 3–5 show that Whites and Blacks make divergent explanations about their own and their potential out-group partner’s failure to initiate contact. Specifically, individuals explained their own inaction in terms of their fear of being rejected because of their race but attributed the out-group members’ inaction to their lack of interest. Study 6 examined the behavioral consequences of this self– other bias. Finally, Study 7 applied theoretical work on the extended contact hypothesis to explore a means to reduce this self– other bias. The implications of these studies for improving intergroup interactions are discussed. Research on intergroup contact has a rich history in social psychology, with scholars devoting considerable effort to investigating factors that facilitate smooth intergroup interactions. Much of this work has considered the relationship between dominant group members’ beliefs about minority groups and their experiences during intergroup encounters (e.g., Dovidio, Kawakami, & Gaertner, 2002; Richeson & Shelton, 2003; for reviews, see Fiske, 1998; Mackie & Smith, 1998; Pettigrew, 1998). More recently, researchers have begun to take the view from the other side of the interaction by examining minority group members’ perspectives on intergroup encounters (for reviews, see Crocker, Major, & Steele, 1998; Major, Quinton, & McCoy, 2002). One disturbing finding from the majority of this research is that whenever possible, both dominant and minority group members avoid interacting with out-group members. The purpose of the present research was to explore individuals’ construals for their own and out-group members’ avoidance of intergroup contact. We argue that people fail to recognize that out-group members’ avoidance of intergroup contact reflects the same interpersonal concerns as their own. Further, we argue that this attributional bias has important implications for initiating future intergroup interactions as well as for the perpetuation of negative intergroup relations.

Abstract: This study examines how a social psychological bias referred to as pluralistic ignorance may occur in corporate boards and how this bias could contribute to strategic persistence in response to rel...