Broad multi-facet threat scales capture stronger threat-attitude correlations than single-facet ones

Evidence

Finally, studies using W. G. Stephan and Stephan’s (2000) measures obtained higher correlations between realistic threat and negative outgroup attitudes than studies that used other measures. Although the scales used in some studies focused on a single aspect of realistic threat (e.g., economic threat), the measure developed by W. G. Stephan and colleagues taps a wider array of realistic threats and therefore may be more effective. — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes, 134

Categorization

• QUESTION: Methodological flag for the reader: instrument choice is a meaningful source of between-study variance to control when aggregating effect sizes.
• XREF: connects to: Integrating multiple threat types yields stronger models than testing each type separately. — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup…, 125; Experimentally manipulated realistic threat shows far weaker attitude effects than measured threat — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup…, 119; Four threat types explain 36 percent of variance in outgroup attitudes — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup…, 105

Broader Connections

• Four threat types explain 36 percent of variance in outgroup attitudes #exemplifies (0.78) — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes, 105
• Experimentally manipulated realistic threat shows far weaker attitude effects than measured threat #qualifies (0.72) — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes, 119