Evidence for Terror Management Theory II: The Effects of Mortality Salience on Reactions to Those Who Threaten or Bolster the Cultural Worldview

Three experiments were conducted to test the hypothesis, derived from terror management theory, that reminding people of their mortality increases attraction to those who consensually validate their beliefs and decreases attraction to those who threaten their beliefs. In Study 1, subjects with a Chr...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of personality and social psychology 1990-02, Vol.58 (2), p.308-318
Main Authors: Greenberg, Jeff, Pyszczynski, Tom, Solomon, Sheldon, Rosenblatt, Abram, Veeder, Mitchell, Kirkland, Shari, Lyon, Deborah
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Attitudes
Behavior
Death and Dying
Fear & phobias
Human
Impression Formation
Management theory
Personal relationships
Psychology
Religious Affiliation
Social life & customs
Social research
Stimulus Salience
World View
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Three experiments were conducted to test the hypothesis, derived from terror management theory, that reminding people of their mortality increases attraction to those who consensually validate their beliefs and decreases attraction to those who threaten their beliefs. In Study 1, subjects with a Christian religious background were asked to form impressions of Christian and Jewish target persons. Before doing so, mortality was made salient to half of the subjects. In support of predictions, mortality salience led to more positive evaluations of the in-group member (the Christian) and more negative evaluations of the out-group member (the Jew). In Study 2, mortality salience led to especially negative evaluations of an attitudinally dissimilar other, but only among subjects high in authoritarianism. In Study 3, mortality salience led to especially positive reactions to someone who directly praised subjects' cultural worldviews and especially negative reactions to someone who criticized them. The implications of these findings for understanding in-group favoritism, prejudice, and intolerance of deviance are discussed.
ISSN:0022-3514
1939-1315
DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.58.2.308