Presenter(s): Kate Haynes
Faculty Mentor(s): Sara Hodges & Kathryn Denning
Poster 98
Session: Social Sciences & Humanities
Perspective taking is often regarded as a tool to improve social relations, but it can sometimes “backfire,” leading to negative outcomes (e.g., increased stereotyping). Most past research has examined the effect of instructing people to perspective take (or not) on various outcomes, but not what people consider when taking another person’s perspective. To better understand what causes this “backfiring,” we asked participants to write about the typical day of an out-group target (i.e., someone who supported the opposing candidate in the 2016 US Presidential Election) and then answer questions about social outcomes in relation to the target (e.g., how much they liked the target, willingness to engage in conversation with the target, and validity of the target’s position). Participants’ narratives were coded for the point of view (PoV) they were written in (first-person vs. third-person), degree of stereotyping present in the narrative, and overall valence (positive to negative) of content. Separate multiple regressions will be conducted using point of view, stereotyping, and valence, as well as a three-way interaction between all three variables, to predict social relations outcomes (liking, willingness to engage, and positive validity). First-person PoV, less stereotyping, and more positive valence are hypothesized to predict more positive social outcomes. However, an interaction is predicted such that first- person PoV will be associated with more negative social outcomes when degree of stereotyping is greater. Understanding when perspective taking brings people closer together – and when it does not – may help bridge current divides between political parties and other contentious groups.