Intergroup anxiety uniquely drives group-protective behaviors that general anxiety does not

Evidence

Intergroup anxiety (aroused as a direct result of the intergroup context) may elicit groupprotecting behaviors and group-serving attributions, whereas general anxiety (if it is correctly attributed to non-intergroup sources) may not have such consequences. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 1847

Intergroup anxiety (aroused as a direct result of the intergroup context) may elicit groupprotecting behaviors and group-serving attributions, whereas general anxiety (if it is correctly attributed to non-intergroup sources) may not have such consequences. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 1847

One potentially fruitful trajectory of research concerns the nature of anxiety in intergroup contexts. Specifically, we think that researchers should examine intergroup anxiety versus general anxiety. Intergroup anxiety (aroused as a direct result of the intergroup context) may elicit groupprotecting behaviors and group-serving attributions, whereas general anxiety (if it is correctly attributed to non-intergroup sources) may not have such consequences. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 1847

Categorization

• DEFINE: Distinguishes intergroup anxiety as a construct from general anxiety, tied to the attribution source of the arousal.
• DEEPTHINKING: The claim that attributing anxiety to the right source determines whether it produces group-serving bias is a dense, nuanced mechanism worth sitting with.
• QUESTION: Worth chasing: do these two anxiety types measured separately actually predict contact outcomes differently? The chapter itself flags this as an open empirical question.
• corroborated: 3 independent passages support this claim — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 1847; , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 1847