Effects of Disease Threat and Attitude Similarity on Willingness to Help: The Mediating Role of Disgust

The current research tested the hypothesis that an increase in perceived disease vulnerability would create more feelings of disgust and a reduced willingness to help persons with dissimilar attitudes. To test these hypotheses, two studies were performed. In the first study, 173 university undergraduates indicated their willingness to help a target person who held similar or dissimilar attitudes. Then the participants’ feelings of disgust about helping, and perceived vulnerability to disease were measured. In the second study, 127 university undergraduates read materials designed to make a disease threat or a non-disease threat salient then indicated their willingness to help a target person with similar or dissimilar attitudes. As predicted a concern about disease and attitude similarity interacted to influence willingness to help and this effect was mediated by feelings of disgust.

Ambivalence and interpersonal liking: The expression of ambivalence as social validation of attitudinal conflict

Literature on attitude similarity suggests that sharing similar attitudes enhances interpersonal liking, but it remains unanswered whether this effect also holds for ambivalent attitudes. In the present research, we shed light on the role attitudinal ambivalence plays in interpersonal liking. Specifically, we examine whether people express ambivalence strategically to generate a positive or negative social image, and whether this is dependent on the attitudinal ambivalence of their perceiver. We test two alternative hypotheses. In line with the attitude-similarity effect, people should express ambivalence towards ambivalent others to enhance interpersonal liking, as sharing ambivalence might socially validate the latter’s experience of attitudinal conflict. On the other hand, people might express more univalence, as ambivalence may drive ambivalent others towards the resolution of their attitudinal conflict and univalent stances could help to achieve that goal. In two studies (N = 449, 149), people expressed similar attitudes to those of their perceivers, even when the latter experienced attitudinal conflict (Study 1 and 2). Moreover, they composed an essay, the message of which validated their perceiver’s attitudinal conflict (Study 2). In line with these results, we further observe that the more people experienced their ambivalence as conflicting, the more they liked others who similarly experienced attitudinal conflict (Study 1). These findings suggest that the expression of ambivalence can have important interpersonal functions, as it might lead to an enhanced social image when interacting with those coping with attitudinal conflict.

Preference, opportunity, and choice: A multilevel analysis of diverse friendship formation

Diverse friendships offer many benefits for individuals and for intergroup relations, yet similarity is a powerful predictor of attraction and relationship formation. The current study examined how beliefs about the value of diversity relate to friendship choices. Naturally occurring dyads ( N = 552) were recruited from 10 college campus and community samples varying in size and racial heterogeneity. A questionnaire assessed dyad members’ beliefs about the value of diversity (valuing diversity), 10 social and political attitudes, and 4 social identity categories (race/ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, nationality). Multilevel models were estimated to examine dyad-level valuing diversity, community size, and community racial heterogeneity as predictors of diverse friendships. Valuing diversity was a significant predictor of diverse friendships; valuing diversity increased the likelihood that dyad members were diverse in race, religion, and sexual orientation but not in nationality or attitudes. The effect of valuing diversity varied according to community size and racial heterogeneity. Valuing diversity increased the likelihood of racially diverse friendships more in communities high compared to low in racial heterogeneity, and increased religiously diverse friendships more in smaller compared to larger communities. Valuing diversity was associated with greater attitude similarity in larger communities but was unrelated to attitude similarity in smaller communities.