Expressing prejudiced speech can both escalate and cathartically release hostility

Evidence

Allport also considered two other aspects of antilocutions – their potential effects on the perpetrator and how others could intervene. Regarding the former issue, the propositions that antilocutions precipitate subsequent hostile prejudice, exclusion, and violence towards the target outgroup suggest that they facilitate further expressions of antipathy. However, Allport also considered the possible cathartic role of the use of antilocutions. He explained that the explosion of feeling that occurs during an act of antilocution “has a quasi-curative effect. It temporarily relieves the tension and may prepare the individual for a change of attitude” (1954/1979, p. 460). Thus, Allport seemed to recognize a paradox in the use of antilocutions: On the one hand, the use of antilocutions may promote subsequent hostile prejudice. On the other hand, the use of antilocutions may serve as a “safety valve” which prevents subsequent hostile prejudice. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 1264

Categorization

• QUESTION: The cathartic ‘safety valve’ hypothesis is empirically contested and unresolved — worth chasing which side has better evidence today.