Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of Prejudice_ Fifty Years after Allport

38 published claims from this book.

• A small priming effect can still matter if widely applied over time
• A small religious-priming prejudice effect can still matter cumulatively when widespread.
• Buddhist primes may reduce prejudice rather than increase it
• Buddhist priming lowers prejudice but not uniformly across targets
• Conservative values partly mediate the link between religiosity and racism
• Correlational data cannot establish whether religion causes prejudice.
• Correlational meta-analyses cannot establish causal links between religion and prejudice.
• Eastern religious primes reduce prejudice more than Western ones do
• Evangelical Christian faith now promotes rather than restrains racial prejudice
• Extrinsic religiosity correlates with racism through social conformity, not personal values.
• Intense Christian faith now correlates with rather than reduces racial prejudice
• Meta-analytic inclusion relied on self-relevant theistic primes to activate in-group identity.
• Prejudice may drive people toward religion, not only vice versa
• Prior religion-prejudice meta-analyses were purely correlational and each studied one target group.
• Publication bias is unlikely to fully explain the religious priming effect.
• Publication-status differences in priming effects disappear once correlated design variables are controlled.
• Religion fosters prejudice via intergroup bias, meaning-making threat, and authoritarianism.
• Religion fuels prejudice against value-violating groups but restrains prejudice against racial groups.
• Religion simultaneously enables both prosocial conduct and prejudice.
• Religiosity-prejudice links are correlational, not established as causal
• Religious cues affect nonreligious people as well because secular cultures preserve their meanings.
• Religious primes influence even nonreligious people through mere cultural knowledge
• Religious primes vary in depth of awareness and mechanism of effect
• Religious priming affects nonreligious people too because secular worldviews retain religion’s legacy
• Religious priming causally increases prejudice toward LGBT people and atheists
• Religious priming effects appear only in published, not unpublished, studies
• Religious priming elevates prejudice against LGBT people and atheists beyond other targets.
• Religious priming increases prejudice more outside the United States than within it.
• Religious priming method does not meaningfully alter prejudice outcomes
• Religious priming produces real but small and sometimes unreliable effects
• Religious priming transfers prejudice most strongly toward LGBT and atheist targets
• Religious priming’s apparent prejudice effect exists only in published studies.
• Religiously motivated prosociality targets in-groups and racism targets outgroups
• The file drawer would need 558 null studies to overturn the priming effect.
• The publication effect on priming prejudice results vanishes once confounding moderators are controlled
• The studies lack power to test cross-category moderation by target group.
• Theistic religious primes activate in-group identity while nontheistic ones activate universalism.
• Type of religious prime may not moderate prejudice outcomes