Language abstraction, Intergroup Bias and National Essentialism
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Year of publication | 2007 |
| Type | Appeared in Conference without Proceedings |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Description | “Language Abstraction, Intergroup Bias and National Essentialism“ is a part of an international project initiated at the EAESP Summer School 2006 in Padova supervised by Anne Maass and Guen R. Semin. Our experimental study builds on the Linguistic Category Model (LCM) by Semin & Fiedler (1988, 1991) and its recent developments suggested by Carnaghi, Maass, Gresta, Bianchi, Arcuri, & Cadinu (submitted). In their research, Carnaghi et al. have shown differences in the inductive potential of nouns versus adjectives. We attempted to link their findings with intergroup attitudes and national essentialism. In four European countries, we examined whether the use of nouns versus adjectives for nationality labels of target persons has effects on intergroup bias. The use of more abstract language for the description of a target person (e.g. a Czech) should lead to stronger intergroup bias than the use of less abstract language (e.g. Czech). Based on Carnaghi and colleagues’ ideas we supposed that the link between more abstract language and stronger intergroup bias is mediated via the process of ascribing more essentialist characteristics to the target person. In the context of our research, national essentialism is defined as a belief system that is based on different components of national identity. Along with Habermas (2000), we distinguish three components of national identity: ethnic, cultural and civic. Denoting nationality with a noun (e.g. a German) should trigger a higher rate of perceived essentialism whereas using an adjective for a nationality label (e.g. German) should lead to a lower level of perceived essentialism. |