In the last post, I highlighted the fact that social networks are assortative, meaning that we tend to form connections to people who are similar to us, and I discussed the implications of that phenomenon for our perceptions of reality. In this post, I will continue with that theme and look at how that decreased exposure to people that are different from us can affect our attitudes towards those people.
You have probably heard the cliché “familiarity breeds contempt” which captures the idea that when you are around someone a lot, you may start to get on each other’s nerves and ultimately resent each other. However, psychologists have examined whether this is actually true, and much of the evidence mostly points in the opposite direction. Perhaps under extreme circumstances (lockdowns?) that adage may hold, but generally speaking, neutral exposure usually causes people to change their assessment of that thing for the better. In an influential 2001 review paper, this observation was summarized as follows:
“Research has demonstrated that repeated exposures enhance preferences for the exposed stimuli. The exposures can also generate positive affect in response to additional stimuli that are similar in form or substance— even though they were not previously exposed.” Zajonc, Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2001
For example, we tend to like a song more once we have heard it a few times. Experiments have shown that even being quickly presented with a person’s picture (so quickly that you do not even realize it was there) causes people to have a more positive perception of that person later on.
This phenomenon has been so widely documented that it has been dubbed the “mere-exposure effect” and it has important implications for how we view other people. A variety of studies have shown that people who interact with people of other cultures tend to demonstrate less prejudice. In one interesting study, white college students were randomly assigned to either white or African American roommates during their freshman year. They were then interviewed at the beginning and at the end of the quarter in order to ascertain the changes in their attitudes toward their roommates and toward members of their roommates’ race. They found that white freshman in interracial rooms tended to have significantly more positive views of African Americans at the end of the semester, despite reporting “less satisfaction and less involvement with their roommates”. No such effect was observed in white freshman with white roommates. This suggests that interacting with people who are different can be challenging, but that doesn’t mean it is not worth the effort.
There are a variety of theories for why this happens. One theory is that exposure reduces uncertainty thereby counteracting fear of the unknown. Others have suggested that familiarity makes it easier for us to recognize objects/people and therefore more comfortable and adept at interacting with them. Even if we are uncertain about the precise mechanism by which this effect emerges, there is little debate about the central conclusion that “mere-exposure” can shape our attitudes for the better.
I have seen this happen in my own life. [Warning: Personal Digression!] I spent the first 11 years of my life in the US living in primarily suburban areas. I had few interactions with people from other races or ethnicities. Early on, I remember hearing about how immigrants were taking American jobs and how illegal immigrants were a significant threat to society. I remember thinking that sounded like a big problem and concluded that we needed tougher rules so that people would follow them.
At the age of 11, I moved with my family to Latin America and I spent five of the next six years living in San Jose, Costa Rica and Lima, Peru. When I arrived in Costa Rica, I was uncomfortable around the locals. I didn’t speak their language and I didn’t feel like I had much in common with them, so I spent all my time around other expats for the first year. The next year, we moved to Lima, Peru and my parents sent me to a bilingual school. My Spanish was still quite poor, but I had no choice to interact with Peruvians. It was trial by fire and was difficult at first, but over time I started to reap the benefits of this exposure. My Spanish improved and I began to make friends in my neighborhood and church. I started to feel comfortable in my new surroundings and came to appreciate both the differences and the similarities between American and Peruvian cultures. Ultimately, I formed lasting friendships that I maintain to this day.
Along the way, I heard many stories about Peruvians’ experiences trying to come to the US (usually just to visit). People had to wait in line for hours and pay costly fees, often only to find that they needed to start over due to insufficient documentation. Ultimately, when they applied for a visa, they were at the mercy of the whims of their interviewer and the decisions as to who would and would not receive a visa were completely opaque and felt extremely arbitrary. I even knew people who flew all the way to the US only to be pulled into a room and interrogated before being placed back on a flight home again without ever being told why. When I got married, one of my friends from Peru decided to try to make the trip to Michigan. However, when he applied for a visa, he was denied. This guy was a hard-working young professional with a college degree and a good job. He had no intention of overstaying his visa. He just wanted to be a part of a friend’s wedding, but he was denied that opportunity.
Fast forward to today, and my perspective on immigration and my relationship with the Hispanic/Latino community have changed dramatically. When I hear someone speaking Spanish, my ears perk up and I look forward to engaging them in conversation. When I hear people complaining about immigrants, I cringe and share my story because some of those immigrants are my friends and I know just how much they have contributed to my life and how much they can contribute to society. And when I discuss the topic of illegal immigration, I have a more nuanced perspective. I still believe following the law is important, but I am skeptical that tougher rules are the answer. Is this the result of some dramatic philosophical shift? No, it is the result of exposure to people from another culture and a deeper understanding of life from their perspective. Because of this exposure, I was forced to confront an equally important issue: Yes, following the law is important, but is the law just? Is it wise? Is it transparent? Or is there a better way?
Getting back to the central issue, the mere-exposure effect suggests that familiarity can actually breed acceptance. Unfortunately, the assortative mixing observed in social networks means that exposure to people from other backgrounds doesn’t always come naturally. Sometimes it is necessary to seek it out. It would be naïve to think that more exposure can eliminate racism and discrimination entirely, but I suspect that more exposure would help, especially if we were to take the time to actually get to know each other and listen to each other.
It is worth mentioning that although positive or even neutral exposures can have a positive effect on our perceptions, negative exposures can have the opposite effect. Especially when our exposure is limited, a couple of bad experiences can color our perceptions, but I don’t think that should deter us from seeking out opportunities to engage with people who are different. I will talk more about that in the next post.