Perceived threat, not actual threat, drives exclusionary attitudes

Evidence

Intergroup threat theory is a social psychological theory in that is it primarily concerned with perceptions of threat. Perceived threats have real consequences, regardless of whether or not the perceptions of threat are accurate. Thus, intergroup threat theory is not as concerned with the actual threat posed by outgroups (e.g., rising rates of unemployment or immigration) as it is the degree to which threats to the ingroup are perceived to exist. To illustrate this point, consider a survey study on attitudes toward immigrants in Germany, conducted by Semyonov, Raijman, Tov, and Schmidt (2004). This study examined four variables: 1) the actual proportion of immigrants in counties across Germany, 2) the respondents’ perceptions of the proportion of immigrants in their counties, 3) the respondents’ perceptions of the threats posed by immigrants, and 4) the respondents’ exclusionary attitudes toward immigrants. It was found that the actual proportion of immigrants in the respondents’ localities did not predict exclusionary attitudes toward immigrants. Instead, the perceived proportion of immigrants predicted both perceived threats and exclusionary attitudes. — Walter G. Stephan, Oscar Ybarra, Kimberly Rios Morrison, Intergroup Threat Theory, 5

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the correction literature - perceptions of crime/immigration not matching statistics echoes work on status threat and political attitudes like Mutz’s findings. — connects to: Status-threat alleviation should cancel the shift-conservatism effect, isolating threat as the mediator. — Maureen A. Craig and Jennifer A. Richeson, On the Precipice of a…, 46; 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; the MOC “The Enemy-Making Machine: How Ourselves, the True, and Every Other Are Built from War”
• ADDENDUM: Relates to the Complaints About Immodesty piece’s theme of perception-driven moral panics, though that piece is about signaling rather than threat.

Related

• Experimentally manipulated realistic threat shows far weaker attitude effects than measured threat (similarity 0.82)
• Perceived group threat tracks real-world politics more than psychological insecurity (similarity 0.81)
• Threat effects on attitudes are stronger for low-status than high-status outgroups (similarity 0.80)
• Perceived threat amplifies both in-group favoritism and out-group hostility (similarity 0.80)
• Perceived outgroup threats damage intergroup relations even without hostility (similarity 0.80)
• Four threat types explain 36 percent of variance in outgroup attitudes (similarity 0.79)
• Intergroup threat and negative outgroup attitudes relate bidirectionally, not one-way. (similarity 0.79)
• Different intergroup threats trigger distinct emotions and behavioral responses. (similarity 0.79)
• Threat-driven cognitive biases facilitate and justify intergroup violence (similarity 0.79)
• Negative stereotypes cause threat rather than being a distinct threat type themselves. (similarity 0.78)
• Perceived security threat is the single strongest predictor of out-group intolerance. (similarity 0.78)