(991 words, 5-minute read)
“I do not want to work with the crazy guy.”
“I can‘t deal with you when you are this way, or are anxious and angry.”
“She’s crazy and probably dangerous, she should not be hired.”
——examples of workplace discrimination towards people with mental illnesses
Discrimination, intergroup bias and implicit mentalizing
Discrimination and prejudice against mental disorders can be traced back through centuries. These unfavorable attitudes and behaviors have adverse effects on individuals with mental illness, as they undermine and isolate themselves within family, community and wider societal contexts. The roots of such discrimination may lie in the human tendency towards intergroup bias, which refers to the tendency for individuals to favour members of their own group (“in-group”) over members of other groups (“out-group”). This raises the question: how can intergroup bias lead to discrimination?
Previous studies have suggested that inter-group bias may impact people’s mentalizing ability, which is a fundamental component of human social cognition. Think of mentalizing as the ‘sixth sense’ for social interactions—it’s what we use to ‘read’ the thoughts of ourselves and those around us.
Why does mentalizing matter? In the rich tapestry of human society, it’s this ability to mentalize that weaves together the threads of communication, creating connections that are both deep and meaningful. Conversely, lacking mentalizing can hinder understanding, empathy, and connection, causing discrimination and even dehumanization, especially towards individuals in stigmatized outgroups like those with mental illnesses. The negative effects of intergroup bias are pervasive, affecting even individuals with common mental disorders such as anxiety. Our research seeks to uncover whether this discrimination stems from reduced mentalizing due to inter-group bias and whether acknowledging one’s own anxiety can mitigate this bias.
We hypothesized that:
- Participants from the general population might be less inclined to mentalize towards someone with anxiety diagnosis compared to someone who appears to be “non-anxious”.
- The influence of intergroup bias on mentalizing can be moderated by participants’ own level of anxiety trait.
How did we test these hypotheses?
We assessed participants’ mentalizing abilities using an implicit mentalizing task (without being given explicit instruction or awareness of the task’s purpose), coupled with eye-tracking technology for measurement. Additionally, participants completed several questionnaires related to their levels of anxiety and depression traits and provided demographic information.
Implicit mentalizing task
The implicit mentalizing task we used is based on the classic false-belief paradigm. A famous example of this paradigm would be the Sally-Anne task. In the original version of the task, participants witness a girl, Sally, putting a ball in her basket and then leaving. While Sally’s away, another girl, Anne, secretly removes the ball from Sally’s basket and puts it into her box. The participant is then asked where Sally will search for the ball when she returns.
In our research, the role of “Sally” was enacted by two fictional characters, one lives with an anxiety disorder (Jennifer) and the other as healthy and sociable (Lily). The role of “Anne” was portrayed by a puppet. The participants watch a series of video capturing the interaction between the character, the puppet and the ball. The picture below shows the typical layout of the videos: the character is observing the puppet transferring the ball over a wall with two windows. Sometimes, the character would be distracted by a doorbell, allowing the puppet to transfer the ball away from its original location, thus creating the false belief of the character.
To capture implicit mentalizing, instead of direct questioning, we tracked participants’ eye movements as they watched Jennifer or Lily return to the scene: if participants are mentalizing with the character, they are expected to spontaneously spend more time looking at the spot where the character believed the object was placed, rather than its true location. To do this, we employed eye-tracking technology to capture participants’ natural eye movements.
Click there to see the example of eye-tracking technology, Tobii Pro Fusion:
Our findings
-Does inter-group bias clouds our ability to mentalize with those who has anxiety disorders?
-Yes.
We observed that participants from the general population felt a stronger connection to the non-anxious character, Lily. They saw her as part of their ‘in-group,’ and this identification played a significant role in their demonstration of mentalizing. On the other hand, Jennifer, who was perceived as “out-group” due to her anxiety diagnosis, received significantly less mentalizing. This disparity indicates that intergroup bias can indeed lead to reduced mentalizing towards those with anxiety disorders.
-Can participants’ own level of anxiety trait moderate the influence of intergroup bias on mentalizing?
–No
We initially hypothesized that participants with higher levels of self-reported anxiety would be more adept at mentalizing with Jennifer, the anxious character. However, this was not the case. Even if participants themselves experienced anxiety, it did not necessarily translate into greater level of mentalizing or understanding for Jennifer.
Implications and future studies
Our findings on intergroup bias offer a lens through which we can view the discrimination faced by those with anxiety disorders. Recognizing this bias is the first step to address it. The implications of this research extend to various sectors, from workplace diversity and inclusion initiatives to educational programs aimed at reducing stigma associated with mental health.
Looking ahead, it would be beneficial to conduct similar studies with clinical populations who experience more pronounced anxiety symptoms. Understanding if and how shared experiences of anxiety might alter the dynamics of intergroup bias could be a game-changer in how we approach mental health stigma. Additionally, broadening our scope to include other mental health disorders could provide a more comprehensive view of how intergroup biases affect mentalizing. This could be a significant step toward developing more effective empathy-building initiatives.
Conclusion
In conclusion, our exploration of discrimination, intergroup bias, and implicit mentalizing has uncovered the complex interplay of factors that influence societal attitudes towards mental health. By understanding these dynamics, we can work to build a society where individuals with mental health challenges are met with the kindness and understanding they deserve.
References
1. Hewstone, M., Rubin, M., & Willis, H. (2002). Intergroup bias. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 575–604. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135109
2. Lasalvia, A., & Tansella, M. (2008). Fighting discrimination and stigma against people with mental disorders. Epidemiologia e Psichiatria Sociale, 17(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1121189X00002608
3. Molenberghs, P., & Louis, W. R. (2018). Insights from fmri studies into ingroup bias. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1868. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01868
4. Russinova, Z., Griffin, S., Bloch, P., Wewiorski, N. J., & Rosoklija, I. (2011). Workplace prejudice and discrimination toward individuals with mental illnesses. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 35(3), 227–241. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-2011-0574
5. Senju, A., Southgate, V., White, S., & Frith, U. (2009). Mindblind eyes: An absence of spontaneous theory of mind in asperger syndrome. Science, 325(5942), 883–885. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1176170
6. Southgate, V., Senju, A., & Csibra, G. (2007). Action anticipation through attribution of false belief by 2-year-olds. Psychological Science, 18(7), 587–592. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01944.x
7. Tobii. (2019, October 15). Tobii Pro Fusion – Eye tracker for scientific research [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sX0OkJwCbps
8. Understanding autism. Open Learning. https://www.open.edu/openlearn/mod/oucontent/view.php?id=67018§ion=1.3
Credits
1. In-text figure 1 downloaded from Pexels Markus Spiske: https://www.pexels.com/zh-cn/photo/1679618/
2. In-text figure 2 downloaded from SimplyPsychology: https://www.simplypsychology.org/theory-of-mind.html#False-Belief-Tasks