Taking the "Threat" Out of "Threatened"

Speaking of differences: Researchers at two very different universities (the University of Oklahoma and the University of Jyväskylä in Finland) worked together on a social psychology research study in 2011. They aimed to find out what kind of prejudice, if any, American Christians hold toward American Muslims.

The study

The 281 participants, all self-identifying as Christians, were asked in paper surveys how often they interact with people who are Muslim, to what degree they agree or disagree with statements about the negative economic impact of a larger Muslim-American population, how much they think the identity of American society will be changed by the presence of Muslims, and to what extent they associate Muslims and words from a list of negative descriptors.

The results, published in 2013, found that people who said they more often associated with Muslims were less likely than those who don't to hold prejudice toward Muslims (though they might still stereotype).

What it means

If prejudice is based on threat, it makes sense that prejudice could be diminished by diminishing feelings of threat. Indeed, the study's authors mention conflict mediation in their report's implications section, implying that conflicts can be more easily resolved if all sides fully understand one another.

This is part of the reason the Muslim Student Association is hosting at Ball State University is holding Islamic Awareness Week with events such as the screening of the film Inside Islam: What a Billion Muslims Really Think. The hope is that uncertain or possibly prejudiced students will, over the course of the week, learn about the commonalities they share with members of the Islamic faith. Then they'll be less likely to harbor negative sentiments or attack it in the future.

A Call to Action

Of course, there's a difference between dislike and prejudice. Even those social psychologists who most strongly believe the integrated threat theory of prejudice will state that removing all the reasons a person might feel threatened by a group will not always remove the prejudice they had toward that group.

An example is kids and vegetables: Tommy might have had an aversion to brussels sprouts before he ever tried them thanks to a cartoon teaching him they're undesirable. That's like a person holding negative feelings toward Muslims because of TV footage of suicide bombers.

Tommy might feel threatened by worries of discomfort and future illness as he sits down at a table where brussels sprouts are served to him. That's like the intergroup anxiety students might feel when approaching an information table at a university to learn about hijab.

Whether Tommy likes the brussels sprouts or not will depend as much on his ability to let go of preconceived notions as it will his tastebuds. The same is true with the students who attend events at Ball State's Islamic Awareness Week. How much a student with prejudice toward Muslims learns to like members of the Islamic faith will depend not only on whether he interacts with Muslims, but on his attitude toward those interactions and the quality of them.

This example points out that learning to interact with those who threaten us may be difficult. That's the intergroup anxiety of Stephan's theory doing its part.

However, just as eating vegetables is essential for they body's health, getting to know people who are different is essential for anyone who wants to be a productive and meaningful member of an increasingly international society. It may just be time to grimace, open wide, and try.