What do we think about muslims?: The validity of Westerners' implicit theories about the associations between Muslims' religiosity, religious identity, aggression potential, and attitudes toward terrorism
What do we think about muslims?: The validity of Westerners' implicit theories about the associations between Muslims' religiosity, religious identity, aggression potential, and attitudes toward terrorism
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/1368430207078697
复制
发表时间：
2007-07-01
影响因子：
4.4
通讯作者：
Kastenmueller, Andreas
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fischer, Peter;Greitemeyer, Tobias;Kastenmueller, Andreas
在一系列的三项研究中，我们调查了德国公众对穆斯林的内隐理论的有效性。德国参与者认为穆斯林比基督徒更具侵略性，因此比基督徒更支持恐怖主义。此外，穆斯林被认为比基督徒更具有内在的宗教性，并且对他们的宗教有更强的认同感（研究1）。然而，对独立国家联合体（独联体：前苏联）的穆斯林和基督徒的自我评估调查显示，穆斯林并不比基督徒更具侵略性，更具内在宗教性，或更支持恐怖主义。相比之下，穆斯林报告了比基督徒更强烈的宗教认同（研究2）。相应地，对宗教身份的威胁被发现只影响穆斯林，而不是基督徒，对恐怖主义的态度进行了外群体肇事者。与德国人关于穆斯林的隐含理论相反，宗教身份的重要性而不是增加的攻击潜力介导了这种影响（研究3）。
In a series of three studies, we investigated the validity of implicit theories that the German public holds regarding Muslims. German participants expected Muslims to be more aggressive than Christians, and therefore be more supportive of terrorism than Christians. Furthermore, Muslims were assumed to be more intrinsically religious and to hold a stronger identity with their religion than Christians (Study 1). However, self-assessment surveys of Muslims and Christians in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS: ex-Soviet Union) revealed that Muslims were not more aggressive, more intrinsically religious, or more supportive of terrorism than Christians. In contrast, Muslims reported a stronger religious identification than Christians (Study 2). Correspondingly, threat to religious identity was found to affect only Muslims', but not Christians', attitudes toward terrorism conducted by outgroup perpetrators. In contrast to Germans' implicit theories regarding Muslims, it was the importance of religious identity and not increased aggression potential that mediated this effect (Study 3).