Wendy Berry Mendes UC San Francisco. Factors that undermine positive inter-racial interactions: Racial bias, vigilance, and affect contagion

Transcription

1 Wendy Berry Mendes UC San Francisco Factors that undermine positive inter-racial interactions: Racial bias, vigilance, and affect contagion

2 Racial disparities in health persist over time and across SES gradient

3 Life expectancy is lower for Black men than White men, and lower for Black women than White women CDC, 2009

4 For many diseases (e.g., diabetes) the SES gradient is steeper for Whites than minorities McKinlay, et al, 2012

5 Intergroup Structure Advantaged group members Ingroup bias Stereotypes of outgroups Prejudice (implicit/explicit) Negative emotions (pity, disgust, envy, fear) Identity (healthy=white) Aversive racism Dyadic processes Miscommunication Evaluative concerns Anxiety/Perceiver threat In-group advantage (ORE) Contagious affect Distrust When stereotypes are disconfirmed Disadvantaged group members Appraisals of system Parental socialization Legitimacy Stereotype threat Attributional ambiguity Vigilance Anger Perc d discrimination Perc d unfairness Racial health disparities Stress responses; Behaviors; Health care context Major, Mendes, & Dovidio, 2013

6 Overview Part I: Majority group members Implicit bias affects behavior and physiological responses Part II: Minority group members Perceive and/or experience disingenuous treatment ; distrust; vigilance Part III: The dyad Lack of shared understanding; affect contagion; miscommunication

7

8 Good Stress vs. Bad Stress Good stress Challenge Threat Bad stress

9 Good Stress vs. Bad Stress Challenge Threat Dilate Warm periphery Constrict Cold periphery Behaviorally: Better cognitive & physical performance More approach behavior Behaviorally: Worse performance More defeat, withdrawal, or freeze

10 Challenge and Threat States Benign Responses Challenge (Physiologically tough) Acute Stress Responses Malignant Responses Threat/Defeat (Physiologically weak) Sympathetic Adrenal Medullary (SAM) Appraisals: Resources exceed Demands Affect/Motivation: Pride/fight-flight/Anger Neuroendocrine: lower cortisol Higher DHEA (adrenal steroids) ANS reactivity: ventricle contractility Cardiac output Vasodilation (TPR) SAM and HPA Appraisals: Demands exceed Resources Affect/Motivation: Anxiety/Shame/freezing Neuroendocrine: greater cortisol; lower DHEA ANS reactivity: ventricle contractility Cardiac output Vasoconstriction (TPR) Recovery: Quick Cognitive: improved decision-making and performance Longer term outcomes: Higher CO is related to decelerated brain aging Recovery: Sluggish Cognitive: poorer memory; impaired performance Longer term outcomes: Increased vascular reactivity is related to early risk heart disease

11 Cardiac output was related to total brain volume and information processing speed Lower risks of Alzheimer s disease Framingham sample: N=1504 Mean age = ; 54% women Jefferson, et al (2010) Circulation

12 Part I: Majority group members: Neurobiological responses of intergroup anxiety Intergroup threat evidence: Majority group individuals tend to show more negative affect, threat, anxiety, and fear during interactions with minority group individuals (Blascovich; Major; Mendes; Mendoza-Denton; Olsson; Phelps; Shelton & Richeson; Vanman) White participants interacting with racial minorities show: increased blood pressure, less efficiency of their cardiac cycle, more tightening of vasculature, more corrugator activation, less anabolic hormones, more amygdalar activation, impaired executive control

13 Part I: Majority group members: Neurobiological responses of intergroup anxiety Intergroup threat evidence: Majority group individuals tend to show more negative affect, threat, anxiety, and fear during interactions with minority group individuals (Blascovich; Major; Mendes; Mendoza-Denton; Olsson; Phelps; Shelton & Richeson; Vanman) White participants interacting with racial minorities show: increased blood pressure, less efficiency of their cardiac cycle, more tightening of vasculature, more corrugator activation, less anabolic hormones, more amygdalar activation, impaired executive control Emotional reports and subjective responses are often inconsistent with physiological responses: Self-report ratings often show greater positive ratings of outgroup partners compared to ingroup partners and more expressed positive emotions.

14

15 Does implicit racial bias increase threat when interacting with outgroup members? Community sample and students: ages (M = 31.5) White participants (N= 78) completed a stressful laboratory task (TSST) White or Black evaluators Race implicit association test (IAT) 48 hours prior to the lab visit Cortisol and DHEAs (baseline, reactivity, & recovery) Pre-task appraisals (demands/resources=threat ratio) Coded videotapes for affect and behavior Mendes, Gray, Mendoza-Denton, Major, & Epel, Psych Sci, 2007 Gray, Mendes, & Denny-Brown, Psych Sci, 2008

16

17

18 Threat ratio (pre-speech) b = -.15 b =.30* (lower racial bias) IAT (higher racial bias) Mendes, et al., (2007) Psych Science

19 DHEAs after the speech task β = -.26* β =.13 (lower racial bias) IAT (higher racial bias)

20 Observers ratings of behavioral differences during the interaction Positive emotions Smiling p <.02 p <.002

21 Are outgroup members consciously aware that they are engaging in these positive behaviors? White Participants (N=68) Design: Subliminal (17ms) and Supraliminal Presentation (4000ms) of faces White and Black (happy) faces Measured facial EMG: zygomaticus major

22

23 Zygomaticus activity by presentation time and race (all happy faces)

24 White and African American females (N=64) interacted with White or African American female confederates Observers (N=3) coded the videotaped interactions for positive behavior displayed by the participants Smiles (frequency, intensity, duration) Nodding Happy Laughing Expressed positive behavior directed at the partner Liking Measured cardiovascular reactivity during a subsequent cooperative interaction

25 Participants F (1, 62) = 9.01, p <.004 Mendes & Koslov, 2013

26 Positive behavior Cardiovascular Threat p <.05

27 White participants expressed more positive behavior toward African American partners than towards White partners; African Americans do not show this effect The positivity effect seems to be above conscious awareness Participants who were the most racially biased showed the most positive behavior Question: If majority group perceivers 0vercorrect how do Africans Americans respond to these positive behaviors? Distrust/Discount

28 Attributional ambiguity theory (Crocker, et al., 1991) Discounted praise (Cohen, Steele & Ross, 1999) Positive feedback may be perceived as Whites clumsy attempt to not look prejudiced and as a result may be viewed as disingenuous which may increase feelings of distrust and vigilance Black patients are particularly dissatisfied with White physicians who are low in explicit bias but high in implicit bias, presumably because they detect mixed messages which undermines trust (Penner, et al, 2010)

29 Explicit Feedback during Intergroup Interactions 2 (Participant race: Black or White, N = 122) x 2 (Partner race: Black or White) x 2 (Feedback: Positive or Negative) Performance Non-verbal behavior/affect displays Cardiovascular reactivity Mendes, Major, McCoy, & Blascovich, JPSP, 2008

30 Manipulating Explicit Feedback Speech delivery task: Why I make a good co-worker Evaluator provides written feedback after watching the video Positive or Negative Completed a cooperative-task

31 Evaluation Feedback Form Evaluator: Subject B Performer: Subject A Number: Instructions: Please evaluate the performer, Subject A, using the scales provided below. 1. I would like to be in a small class with Subject A strongly neither agree strongly disagree nor disagree agree Positive Feedback 2. I would like to work closely at a job with Subject A strongly neither agree strongly disagree nor disagree agree 3. I would like to get to know Subject A better strongly neither agree strongly disagree nor disagree agree 4. I would enjoy being roommates with Subject A strongly neither agree strongly disagree nor disagree agree 5. I would like to be close friends with Subject A strongly neither agree strongly disagree nor disagree agree

32 Evaluation Feedback Form Evaluator: Subject B Performer: Subject A Number: Instructions: Please evaluate the performer, Subject A, using the scales provided below. 1. I would like to be in a small class with Subject A strongly neither agree strongly disagree nor disagree agree Negative Feedback 2. I would like to work closely at a job with Subject A strongly neither agree strongly disagree nor disagree agree 3. I would like to get to know Subject A better strongly neither agree strongly disagree nor disagree agree 4. I would enjoy being roommates with Subject A strongly neither agree strongly disagree nor disagree agree 5. I would like to be close friends with Subject A strongly neither agree strongly disagree nor disagree agree

33 In-group positive feedback

34 Out-group positive feedback

35 Number of words generated Performance from the Cooperative Task Positive Feedback 16 Partners 12 White Black 8 White Black Participants

36 Behavioral Coding: Positive Feedback Condition Vigilance Partners White Black White Participants Black

37 VC Cardiovascular Responses: Positive Feedback Condition Evaluators White Black White Black CO White Black TPR White Participants Black

38 Black participants responded to positive feedback from outgroup (White) partners with threat reactivity, poorer performance, greater attentional vigilance, and more negative affect If White and Black participants engage in meta-monitoring during intergroup interactions, can reducing the ability to engage in these strategies change the nature of the interaction?

39

40 ECG volts Channel 1 volts ECG volts Channel 1 volts Physiological covariation (concurrent) Partner A seconds Partner B seconds Physiological linkage (time-lagged) Partner A Partner B seconds seconds

41 Inter-racial Dyads

42 Participants and Dyad composition Recruited 246 participants (49% male; age 18-40) 165 White; 81 Black 123 Dyads 81 Cross-race; 42 Same-race Matched dyads Same-Sex; Student status (student or non-student); Age Manipulated cognitive resources Depleted cognitive resources prior to the interaction or not Counting task for five minutes: Depleted condition counts backwards from 16,972 in steps of 7 Control condition counts up from 16,972 in steps of 1

43 Partner Partner 1 1 Online Session Consent, Hookup, Baseline Cognitive Depletion Manip. Social Trust Task EMS & RS Rejection Sensitivity-race 3 Social Interaction Tasks Partner Partner 2 2 Online Session Consent, Hookup, Baseline Cognitive Depletion Manip. Social Trust Task

44 American Sign Language Tactile Finger-spelling Design Motivation: Exploit the lack of intimacy in most interracial interactions Measure: dyadic touch time Key Dependent Variable: Amount of time the pair spent touching C A T

45

46 Trust Game Design Motivation: measure trust and cooperation - $5 to each participant ( + Partner s? ) * 1.5 / 2 =?

47

48

49

50

51 ns p <.006

52 Total Touch-Time (s) b= 5.14* b = -6.79* Main effect: p <.05 Interaction: p <.03 Blacks Rejection Sensitivity

53 Physiological covariation: PEP

54 PEP reactivity Partner B β =.49* β =.38* PEP reactivity Partner A

55 White participant s PEP β = -.23 Black participant s PEP 3-way Interaction: t(217.11) = 3.19, p =.002

56 White participant s PEP β =.31* β = -.23 Black participant s PEP 3-way Interaction: t(217.11) = 3.19, p =.002

57 Why might covariation be good? Mutual take in the trust game $

58 Summary Depletion relative to control: Facilitated physiological covariation in intergroup interactions In general, physiological covariation predicted greater mutual trust Meta-monitoring processes take effort and control and may ironically undermine intergroup interactions by limiting genuine affect and behavior

59 Emotion, Health and Psychophysiology Lab Research assistants Sonia Alves, Sando Baysah, Claire Burgess, Annie Calvert, Olivia Card-Childers, Michael Coskren, Nick Coskren, Katherine Fritsch, Sarah Gordon, Jamal Gorrick, Justin Hall, Hannah Hausauer, Michael Ingram, William Keenan, Patrick Magnarelli, Katheryn McAuliff, Safiya Miller, Alterell Mills, Brian Na, Kalaya Okereke, Ravi Parikh, Callie Pinkas, Steve Rolecek, Marlow Rillera, Daniel Sack, Christopher Sanders, Kathryn Thurber Funding for these studies: National Institute of Heart, Lung & Blood National Institute of Aging In Collaboration with: Katrina Koslov Elizabeth Page-Gould Brenda Major Rudy Mendoza-Denton Heather Gray

60 Number of words correctly guessed during Taboo p <.004* *effect persists controlling for WAIS, sex and age