39

British Journal of Social Psychology (2014), 53, 39–53 © 2012 The British Psychological Society www.wileyonlinelibrary.com

To be respected and to respect: The challenge of mutual respect in intergroup relations Bernd Simon* and Hilmar Grabow Institute of Psychology, Kiel University, Germany Building on theorizing in social and political philosophy the article illuminates the phenomenology of respect and examines its role in intergroup relations. The particular focus is on members of the gay and lesbian community in Germany, their respect experiences, and how these experiences relate to their attitudes towards Muslims. We predicted and found that the experience of being respected in society primarily reflected perceived recognition of gays and lesbians as equal members of society. In addition, we predicted and found that perceived respect from the Muslim community was negatively related to anti-Muslim attitude among gays and lesbians. The same was true for perceived respect from society at large. More specifically, respondents who felt respected by the majority of society showed lower levels of anti-Muslim attitude and, in line with the dominant status of perceived equality recognition in the experience of being respected, this decrease was fully mediated via an increase in perceived equality recognition.

Justice is not only a matter of fair (re)distribution of material goods (Rawls, 2001), but also a matter of recognition of and respect for different ways of life and associated identities (Fraser & Honneth, 2003). In fact, especially in culturally diverse societies, various ethnoor sociocultural groups are engaged in ‘the struggle for recognition’ (Honneth, 1995), and this is particularly true for minority groups, who usually have to fight for a respected place in society, whereas majority groups can typically take their place in society for granted (Licata, Sanches-Mazas, & Green, 2011; Simon, 2004). The popularity that Aretha Franklin’s song ‘Respect’ gained as the hymn of the US civil rights movement in the 1960s illustrates this point. In social psychology, the groundwork for the fairly recent introduction of respect as a scientific concept was laid in research on procedural justice and authority relations which demonstrated that respectful treatment in organizations by authorities increases subordinates’ organizational commitment and rule compliance (for a review, see Tyler & Blader, 2000). Subsequent research, especially in experimental social psychology, reported the discovery of a number of affective, cognitive, motivational, and behavioural consequences of respect, but it remained gravely under-theorized compared with the

*Correspondence should be addressed to Bernd Simon, Institut f€ur Psychologie, Christian-Albrechts-Universit€at, Olshausenstraße 40, Kiel D-24098, Germany (e-mail: [email protected]). DOI:10.1111/bjso.12019

40

Bernd Simon and Hilmar Grabow

analysis of respect in the neighbouring scientific disciplines, especially social and political philosophy (for a critical review, see Simon, 2007). Moreover, social psychological research remained restricted mainly to investigations into respect in intragroup relations (intragroup respect) while paying little attention to the role of respect in intergroup relations (intergroup respect; for notable exceptions, see Huo & Molina, 2006; Licata et al., 2011). In this article, we aim to rectify these limitations by articulating influential theorizing on respect in social and political philosophy with empirical social psychological research on intergroup relations. With very few exceptions (e.g., Licata et al., 2011), little use has been made so far by social psychologists of Honneth’s otherwise highly influential recognition theory (Honneth, 1995; Fraser & Honneth, 2003; see also McBride & Seglow, 2009, for an entire volume of the European Journal of Political Theory dedicated to his theory). Honneth distinguishes three forms of mutual recognition in modern society. Each form is rooted in a specific sphere of social relations which is governed by its own internal normative principle. First, recognition in the form of care is rooted in the sphere of intimate relationships governed by love. Second, recognition in the form of respect is rooted in the sphere of legal relations governed by the equality principle.1 Third, recognition in the form of social esteem is rooted in the sphere of profession and (capitalist) market relations governed by the achievement principle. The distinction between the latter two forms of recognition parallels Darwall’s (1977) early philosophical distinction between recognition respect and appraisal respect, while the social psychological distinction recently made by Huo, Binning, and Molina (2010) between liking and (status) equality as two important components of respect resembles Honneth’s distinction between recognition as (love-based) care and recognition as (equality-based) respect. However, whereas Darwall (1977) as well as Huo et al. (2010) use respect as an umbrella term, and other social psychologists occasionally equate respect with liking or (positive) evaluation of competencies or performances (e.g., Ellemers, Doosje, & Spears, 2004; Sleebos, Ellemers, & de Gilder, 2006), following Kant (1974) it appears to be more appropriate to reserve the notion of respect for recognition based on the equality principle as opposed to the love or achievement principles. Finally, it is noteworthy that Honneth’s distinction among the three normative principles of love, equality, and achievement, underlying recognition as care, respect, and social esteem, respectively, nicely matches the distinction between the three justice norms or principles of need, equality, and equity (or desert), which is widely accepted across disciplines (e.g., Deutsch, 1975; Miller, 1999).

The present research The social psychological analysis presented in this article revolves around the phenomenology of respect. We take the subjective experience of being respected (or not) as our starting point and, in a first step, examine its empirical relation to each of the three forms of recognition suggested by Honneth (1995; Fraser & Honneth, 2003). More specifically, we examine if, and to what extent, the respect experience reflects the perceived recognition of one’s needs, equality, or achievements. In line with the Kantian perspective, according to which all people deserve respect as a consequence

1 In the original German publication of Kampf um Anerkennung, Honneth refers to this form of recognition as ‘kognitive Achtung’.

The challenge of mutual respect

41

of their equal possession of dignity (Kant, 1974), as well as prior work in experimental social psychology which has demonstrated the importance of equality-based respect for positive intragroup relations (Renger & Simon, 2011; Simon, 2007), we expect the respect experience to primarily reflect recognition of one’s equality (Equality Hypothesis). In a second step, we then examine the experience of being respected (or not respected) as a possible determinant of intergroup attitudes, especially outgroup rejection. Like all forms of (genuine) recognition, respect should be characterized by mutuality or reciprocity (Honneth, 1995; Sennett, 2003; see also Gouldner, 1960). We therefore expect that the experience of being respected by outgroup members is responded to in kind resulting in a negative relationship between the experience of such intergroup respect and outgroup rejection (Mutuality Hypothesis). Because intergroup relations are usually embedded in a wider societal context, within which the general population or society at large very likely functions as an(other) important source of respect for one’s ingroup (Simon & Klandermans, 2001), we also examine the relationship between more general societal respect and outgroup rejection. Recently, Huo and Molina (2006) have argued that members of groups that are respected in society have less psychological need to show ingroup favouritism as a means to establish a secure collective identity (Tajfel & Turner, 1986) and indeed found a negative relationship between societal respect and ingroup favouritism among ethnic (sub)groups in US society. Similarly, we also expect the experience of societal respect to be negatively related to outgroup rejection (Societal Respect Hypothesis). But going beyond prior work and in line with our Equality Hypothesis, we further expect that this relationship is mediated via perceived equality recognition. Such mediation would corroborate the universalistic implications of equality recognition (Honneth, 1995). We tested our hypotheses with members of the gay and lesbian community in Germany as research participants. Despite undeniable emancipatory progress in their favour over the last three decades, gays and lesbians in Germany are still the target of various forms of social, institutional, and legal discrimination and, consequently, continue to be involved in the struggle for recognition (e.g., Simon, 2008; St€ urmer & Simon, 2004). The present research deepens our understanding of this struggle by further illuminating what it means to be respected as a gay or lesbian member of society. In keeping with the Equality Hypothesis, our corresponding prediction is that, phenomenologically, such respect primarily reflects recognition of gays and lesbians as equal citizens. We then take our analysis of the phenomenology of respect for gays and lesbians one step further and articulate it with an examination of outgroup rejection among gays and lesbians. Prompted by Inglehart and Norris’s (2003, p. 63) supposition that ‘the cultural fault line that divides the West and the Muslim world is not about democracy but sex’ (i.e., gender equality and sexual liberation), we specifically focus on anti-Muslim attitude among gays and lesbians. Such a focus is all the more important as critics have recently warned that the struggle of gays and lesbians could become misdirected to a false opposition against Muslims and Muslim immigrants (Butler, 2009) and may thus degenerate into ‘homonationalist’ mobilization of the gay and lesbian community (Haritaworn & Petzen, 2011). In keeping with the Mutuality Hypothesis, we predict that the experience of being respected by the Muslim community is negatively related to anti-Muslim attitude among members of the gay and lesbian community in Germany. Similarly, in keeping with the Societal Respect Hypothesis, we predict lower levels of anti-Muslim attitude among those members of the gay and lesbian community who feel respected by society at large (i.e., by the majority of society rather than by only

42

Bernd Simon and Hilmar Grabow

a minority of society’s overall population), and this relationship should be mediated via perceived equality recognition. Finally, it is important to emphasize that the study presented in this article is not, nor was it intended to be, a representative survey of the experiences and attitudes of gays and lesbians in Germany. Instead, it is an empirical test of theoretically derived hypotheses so that the major methodological concern is not sample representativeness, but the control of possible confounding variables which may contaminate the hypothesized relationships (see Method Section for details).

Method Procedure and respondents Data were collected with an electronic Web-based questionnaire in February 2011 as part of a larger research project concerned with ‘conflicts between the gay and lesbian community and other social groups in German society’. Potential respondents were contacted through mailing lists of various institutions and organizations within, or linked with, the gay and lesbian community in Germany. Full anonymity was ensured. To facilitate recruitment, respondents could participate in a lottery in which five people were able to win EUR 50 (approximately USD 69). In addition, for each completed questionnaire, we offered to make a donation of EUR 2 (approximately USD 2.80) to an institution or organization of the respondent’s choice. One thousand and twenty-eight self-identified gay men and 703 self-identified lesbian women living in Germany completed the questionnaire. Respondents’ ages ranged from 15 to 76 years, with a mean age of 38 years (SD = 11). Fifty-one per cent of the respondents lived in larger cities with more than 500,000 inhabitants.2 Fifty-seven per cent had a university degree, and the (median) monthly net income was EUR 1,700 (approximately USD 2,346). Thirty-two per cent of the respondents were Christian, whereas 66% belonged to no religious community or did not provide pertinent information. Only 2% of the respondents indicated that they belonged to another religious community, among them four Muslims. Finally, 14% of the respondents had a migration background (including 63 respondents with a Polish background, 25 respondents with a Czech and 20 with an Austrian background, while all other subgroups had less than 20 members3).

Measures4 Sociodemographic information (gender, age, size of hometown or city, education, income, religious affiliation, and migration background) was elicited at the beginning of the questionnaire followed by the measures described below. For each question or item, a no answer button (‘can’t or don’t want to answer’) was added to the corresponding answer categories or rating scale. Selection of this option was treated as missing data.

2

Percentages are based on total sample size including cases with missing data. Respondents could indicate multiple migration backgrounds. 4 The measures were developed by the authors on the basis of the relevant respect, prejudice, and identity literatures (e.g., Altemeyer & Hunsberger, 1992; Heitmeyer, 2005; Simon, 2007; St€urmer & Simon, 2004). The questionnaire also included additional measures relevant to the larger project. Further information is available from the authors. 3

The challenge of mutual respect

43

Perceived recognition Perceived recognition of equality, achievements, or needs was measured with the following three questions respectively: ‘In your opinion, is German society in general for or against the recognition of lesbians and gays as equal citizens’?5 ‘In your opinion, does German society sufficiently acknowledge what gays and lesbians achieve in their lives’? ‘Do you believe that German society sufficiently cares about the needs of lesbians and gays’? To cover the full spectrum from perceived support for to perceived opposition to equality for lesbians and gays, the first question was answered on a bipolar 7-point rating scale ranging from -3 (clearly against) to 3 (clearly for). The other questions were answered on 5-point rating scales ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (absolutely).

Perceived respect To gauge perceived respect from the Muslim outgroup, respondents provided estimates of the percentage of Muslims living in Germany that would be willing ‘to respect homosexuality and other forms of sexual diversity’. To gauge perceived societal respect, respondents provided analogous estimates regarding the general population (i.e., ‘the population in Germany overall’). Both estimates were provided on an 11-point rating scale ranging from 0% to 100%.

Anti-Muslim attitude We used three items (Cronbach’s a = .80): ‘To accept Islam in Germany is tantamount to a step backwards for society’, ‘Muslims should be denied immigration to Germany’, and ‘Because of the many Muslims here I sometimes feel like a stranger in my own country’. Ratings were made on 5-point scales ranging from 0 (not true/don’t agree) to 4 (very true/ strongly agree).

Supplementary measures We also measured a number of other variables to explore their role as additional determinants of anti-Muslim attitude and/or to include them as control variables in the analysis of the relationship between respondents’ experiences of being respected as a gay or lesbian person and their anti-Muslim attitude. Specifically, to gauge endorsement of the three normative principles suggested by Honneth (1995; Fraser & Honneth, 2003), respondents rated how important it was to them ‘that in the society in which you live the following values are endorsed:’ ‘equality of all human beings’ (equality principle), ‘solidarity with the weak’ (love/need principle), and ‘recognition of individual achievements’ (achievement principle). As a group-level complement to these individual-level principles, we also measured endorsement of the principle ‘respect for differences between groups and cultures’ (Taylor, 1992). Ratings were made on 5-point scales ranging from 0 (not important at all) to 4 (very important). In addition, we measured religiosity (‘Religion plays an important role in my life’ and ‘I am a religious person,’ r = .86, p < .001), authoritarian attitude (‘In order to enforce the law the police should be able to take tough action’, ‘The youth need clear directives and rules’, and ‘The social order must 5 The original wording in German for ‘equal’ was ‘gleichwertig’ meaning ‘of equal worth’. We chose this wording because, in combination with the German word for ‘citizen’ (‘Mitb€urger’), the literal translation of ‘equal’ (‘gleich’) would have been rather unusual, if not misleading.

44

Bernd Simon and Hilmar Grabow

consistently be defended against its enemies’, Cronbach’s a = .72), identification with Germany (‘I am glad that I live in Germany’, ‘I identify with the German culture’, and ‘I feel strong ties with Germany and its people’, Cronbach’s a = .82), and identification with the gay and lesbian community (‘I feel strong ties with the gay and lesbian community’, ‘The interests of the gay and lesbian community are also my interests’, ‘I am often sceptical of the gay and lesbian community’ [reverse coded], ‘I personally feel part of the gay and lesbian community’, and ‘I don’t really like to be associated with the gay and lesbian community’ [reverse coded], Cronbach’s a = .85). Ratings were again made on 5-point scales.

Results Table 1 presents the means, standard deviations, and intercorrelations for the variables under study. The analyses reported below are based on the total sample including both gay (men) and lesbian (women) respondents. Preliminary analyses conducted separately for gay and lesbian respondents revealed that, with a few exceptions, the patterns of relationships relevant to our hypotheses were very similar for the two subsamples so that there was no need to qualify our general conclusions. Exceptions are noted below. Unless otherwise noted, alpha was set at .05 (two-tailed) for all statistical tests.

The phenomenology of being respected All three forms of perceived recognition from German society were significantly and positively related to perceived respect from the general population (in Germany), with correlation coefficients ranging from .35 to .52 (all ps < .001). However, as predicted by the Equality Hypothesis, perceived recognition of one’s equality was more strongly related to perceived respect (r = .52) than was perceived recognition of one’s achievements (r = .39) or perceived recognition of one’s needs (r = .35). Both differences were significant with p < .001. As shown in Table 2, this pattern was also replicated in a multiple regression analysis with perceived respect as the criterion and the three forms of perceived recognition as predictor variables, while gender (coded as 1 for gay men and +1 for lesbian women), age, size of hometown/city (coded as 1 for up to 500,000 inhabitants and +1 for more than 500,000 inhabitants), education (coded as 1 for respondents without a university degree and +1 for respondents with a university degree), net income, and migration background (coded as 1 for respondents without a migration background and +1 for respondents with a migration background) were included as control variables (R2 = .31, R2adj = .31), F(9, 1,459) = 73.89, p < .001. All three forms of perceived recognition received a significant and positive regression weight, but perceived recognition of one’s equality clearly emerged as the strongest predictor. It uniquely explained 12.7 per cent of the variance. Perceived recognition of one’s achievements uniquely explained only 0.6% and perceived recognition of one’s needs 0.7%. Finally, lesbian women perceived less respect than gay men, and perceived respect was also lower among older respondents and among inhabitants of large cities as well as among respondents with lower income.

The relationship between perceived respect for gays and lesbians and anti-Muslim attitude We performed a multiple regression analysis with anti-Muslim attitude as the criterion and perceived respect from the Muslim community and perceived respect from the general

The challenge of mutual respect

45

population as the predictor variables, while sociodemographic variables (i.e., gender, age, size of hometown/city, education, net income, and migration background), religiosity, authoritarian attitude, identification with Germany, identification with the gay and lesbian community, and endorsement of the four normative principles served mainly as controls (R2 = .30, R2adj = .29), F(16, 1,368) = 36.78, p < .001. As predicted by the Mutuality and Societal Respect Hypotheses, perceived respect from the Muslim community was negatively related to anti-Muslim attitude (B = 0.014, SE = .002, b = .200, t = 7.98, p < .001), as was perceived respect from the general population (B = 0.004, SE = .001, b = .077, t = 3.05, p = .002). Endorsement of the equality principle was also negatively related to anti-Muslim attitude (B = 0.133, SE = .044, b = .075, t = 3.04, p = .002), whereas endorsement of the achievement principle was positively related (B = 0.127, SE = .030, b = .103, t = 4.21, p < .001) and endorsement of the need principle unrelated to anti-Muslim attitude (B = 0.049, SE = .039, b = .032, t = 1.25, p = .212). Hardly surprising, endorsement of the intergroup/intercultural difference principle was negatively related to anti-Muslim attitude (B = 0.338, SE = .038, b = .228, t = 8.97, p < .001). In addition, three other (control) variables received significant regression weights. Anti-Muslim attitude was less pronounced among respondents with a university degree (B = 0.089, SE = .023, b = .095, t = 3.91, p < .001) and among those with a migration background (B = 0.069, SE = .031, b = .051, t = 2.24, p = .025), but became stronger with increasing strength of respondents’ authoritarian attitudes (B = 0.335, SE = .029, b = .297, t = 11.51, p < .001). Separate regression analyses for gay and lesbian respondents replicated these relationships with the following exceptions. In the subsample of lesbian respondents, endorsement of the equality principle was no longer related to anti-Muslim attitude (B = 0.003, SE = .077, b = .002, t = 0.04, df = 508, p = .966), whereas the negative relationship between endorsement of the need principle and anti-Muslim attitude now approached statistical significance (B = 0.117, SE = .061, b = .084, t = 1.93, df = 508, p = .054). Finally, the negative relationship between migration background and anti-Muslim attitude lost its statistical significance in both subsamples analysed separately (for gay respondents: B = 0.068, SE = .043, b = .046, t = 1.60, df = 845, p = .109; for lesbian respondents: B = 0.077, SE = .044, b = .067, t = 1.76, df = 508, p = .079).6 To further illuminate the role of societal respect, we also examined whether antiMuslim attitude actually varied depending on whether gays and lesbians were perceived to be respected by the majority or only a minority of society (i.e., by the majority or a minority of the overall population in Germany). To capture this qualitative distinction, we contrasted the respondents who believed that gays and lesbians were respected by the majority of society (coded as +1) with those who believed they were respected only by a minority of society’s overall population (coded as -1).7 As depicted in Figure 1, antiMuslim attitude was less pronounced among respondents who felt respected by the majority as opposed to only a minority of society (MMajority = 0.82, SD = 0.88; MMinority = 0.96, SD = 1.02; B = 0.083, SE = .026, b = .087, t = 3.18, df = 1,366, p = .001). The main effect of gender was also significant, with lesbian respondents 6 We also reran the overall analysis as well as the separate analyses, this time without the four self-identified Muslim respondents. These analyses replicated the original results. 7 Because the midpoint of the 11-point respect scale stood for ‘respect from 50% of the general population’, the societal majority represented 60% or more of the general population, the minority only 40% or less.

1. Gender (gay men vs. lesbian women) 2. Age (years) 3. Size of hometown/city 4. Education 5. Net income (Euro) 6. Migration background 7. Religiosity 8. Authoritarian attitude 9. Identification with Germany 10. Identification with gay and lesbian community 11. Perceived recognition of equality 12. Perceived recognition of achievements 13. Perceived recognition of needs

Measures

.10***

–

12 –

41%a

38 52%b

–

1.27 0.74

1.48 0.84

0.24 1.41

2.53 0.80

2.76 0.81

0.99 1.20 2.21 0.84

14%d

– 57%c 1,758 1,045

2

SD 1

M

4

.10*** .22*** .12***

.12*** .04

3

.31***

.48*** .08**

.13***

5

.03 .03

.06* .05*

.03

6

.02

.09*** .04

.12*** .11***

.01

7

.01

.04

.06* .14***

.05 .01

.20***

8

.14*** .33***

.03

.08*** .20***

.17*** .02

.09***

9

Table 1. Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations for the variables under study

.12***

.03 .02

.01

.07** .06*

.16*** .02

.11***

10

.10***

.24***

.01 .10***

.02

.07** .12***

.02 .03

.08**

11

.48***

.04

.20***

.01 .08***

.04

.01 .10***

.06* .06*

.17***

12

.56***

.42***

.07**

.19***

.02 .11***

.03

.07** .10***

.08*** .09***

.18***

13

.05*

.06*

.02

.10***

.06**

.02 .04

.02

.04 .02

.07** .01

.02

14

.04

.03

.04

.03

.10***

.01 .19***

.01

.05* .04

.09*** .02

.05*

15

.04

.00

.02

.13***

.03

.10*** .16***

.01

.01 .03

.16*** .01

.01

16

.00

.02

.03

.09***

.03

.03 .14***

.01

.02 .02

.09*** .05*

.07**

17

.17***

.17***

.18***

.00

.03

.10*** .14***

.03

.06* .04

.10*** .07**

.12***

18

.08***

.07**

.10***

.08***

.07**

.05 .40***

.06*

.15*** .03

.02 .05*

.10***

20

Continued

.35***

.39***

.52***

.06*

.22***

.08*** .15***

.02

.00 .09***

.06* .03

.11***

19

46 Bernd Simon and Hilmar Grabow

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14 .08***

15

.08**

.35***

16

.33***

.26***

.26***

17

.07**

.08**

.12***

.03

18

.29***

.01

.03

.04

.01

19

.09***

.29***

.29***

.19***

.14***

.15***

20

Note. Except for gender ( 1 = gay man, +1 = lesbian woman), age (years), size of hometown/city ( 1 = up to 500,000 inhabitants, +1 = more than 500,000 inhabitants), education ( 1 = no university degree, +1 = university degree), net income (Euro), migration background ( 1 = no, +1 = yes), and perceived recognition of equality (scores between 3 and +3), scores can vary between 0 and 4, with higher scores indicating more of the construct in question. N varies between 1,452 and 1,731. a Percentage of lesbian respondents. b Percentage of respondents from cities with more than 500,000 inhabitants. c Percentage of respondents with a university degree. d Percentage of respondents with a migration background. *p  .05; **p  .01; ***p  .001 (two-tailed).

0.86 0.94

51.57 17.78

11.80 13.69

3.60 0.64

3.66 0.61

3.41 0.77

3.81 0.53

14. Endorsement of equality principle 15. Endorsement of achievement principle 16. Endorsement of need principle 17. Endorsement of intergroup/ intercultural difference principle 18. Perceived respect from Muslim community 19. Perceived respect from general population 20. Anti-Muslim attitude

SD 1

M

Measures

Table 1. Continued

The challenge of mutual respect 47

48

Bernd Simon and Hilmar Grabow

Table 2. Multiple regression analysis with perceived respect from general population as criterion Control and predictor variables Gender (gay men vs. lesbian women) Age Size of hometown/city Education Net income Migration background Perceived recognition of equality Perceived recognition of achievements Perceived recognition of needs

B 1.081 0.173 0.959 0.632 0.001 0.211 5.202 2.162 2.473

SE .404 .037 .388 .410 .000 .560 .317 .586 .647

b

t(1,459)

.060 .116 .055 .036 .079 .008 .417 .103 .104

2.68** 4.70*** 2.47* 1.54 3.10** 0.38 16.40*** 3.69*** 3.82***

Note. R2 = .31, R2adj = .31, F(9, 1,459) = 73.89***. *p  .05; **p  .01; ***p  .001 (two-tailed).

showing generally lower levels of anti-Muslim attitude (MGays = 0.97, SD = 0.99; MLesbians = 0.73, SD = 0.85; B = 0.132, SE = .026, b = .137, t = 5.07, df = 1,366, p < .001), but the interaction was nonsignificant (B = 0.010, SE = .026, b = .010, t = 0.37, df = 1,366, p = .712). In line with our earlier observation that perceived respect from the general population primarily reflected perceived societal recognition of one’s equality, the perception of such recognition was more pronounced among respondents who felt respected by the majority of society (MMajority = 0.89, SD = 1.14; MMinority = 0.59, SD = 1.36; B = 0.720, SE = .034, b = .495, t = 20.87, df = 1,366, p < .001), and controlling for this variable (B = 0.074, SE = .020, b = .113, t = 3.64, df = 1,365, p < .001) completely removed the difference in anti-Muslim attitude between the majority and minority conditions (B = 0.030, SE = .030, b = .031, t = 1.00, df = 1,365, p = .320). In analogous analyses controlling either for perceived recognition of one’s achievements or for perceived recognition of one’s needs, the critical majority–minority difference remained

Figure 1. Mean anti-Muslim attitude among gay and lesbian respondents as a function of feeling respected by the majority or only a minority of society. Error bars represent standard errors.

The challenge of mutual respect

49

intact (ps < .04). In other words, only perceived recognition of one’s equality fully mediated the relationship between perceived respect from (the majority or minority of) society and anti-Muslim attitude (for indirect effect, 99% bootstrap CI = [ 0.096, 0.013]).8 While separate analyses for gay respondents and lesbian respondents both replicated the full mediation via perceived recognition of one’s equality, the relationship between perceived respect from the majority or minority of society and anti-Muslim attitude in the subsample of lesbian respondents was fully mediated also via perceived recognition of one’s needs (for indirect effect, 99% bootstrap CI = [ 0.074, 0.001]). Finally, in the total sample, the full mediation via perceived recognition of one’s equality also held up when age, size of hometown/city, education, net income, and migration background were included as additional controls. This was also true for the subsample of gay respondents. For the subsample of lesbian respondents, the full mediation via perceived recognition of one’s needs was replicated with these controls, while that via perceived recognition of one’s equality was now only marginally significant (for indirect effect, 92% bootstrap CI = [ 0.071, 0.002]).

Discussion Building on recent theorizing in social and political philosophy this research illuminated the phenomenology of respect and examined its role in intergroup relations. Our particular focus was on members of the gay and lesbian community, whose struggle for recognition and respect has become an important part of public and political life in many (post)modern societies, including Germany where we collected our data. While the gay and lesbian community has become an increasingly visible part of cultural pluralism in Germany as well as in other societies, its struggle has also created tensions with more traditional or religious groups, including the Muslim community (Butler, 2009; Simon, 2010). We therefore not only analysed what it means for gays and lesbians to be respected, but also how such respect (or the lack thereof) relates to their attitudes towards Muslims, or in other words to their own willingness to respect others. At this point, we want to reiterate that we do not claim to have recruited a sample that could be considered representative of gays and lesbians in Germany in general. In fact, we obviously oversampled members of the German middle class who were well-educated and from larger cities. It thus appears that, through our particular recruitment channels, we might not have secured a generally representative sample, but we very likely reached a highly influential, if not the dominant, segment or ‘voice’ of the gay and lesbian community in Germany. Hence, we are confident that we were able to tap into highly influential themes in the experience of being respected as a gay or lesbian person in German society as well as into key aspects of the dynamic of mutual respect in the context of cultural pluralism. More specifically, we predicted and found that the respondents’ experience of being respected in society first and foremost reflected perceived recognition of gays and lesbians as equal members of society (Equality Hypothesis). Perceived recognition of their achievements and needs also played a role in the respect experience, but only to a lesser extent. This pattern, which was found for both gay and lesbian respondents, strengthens the empirical foundation of the philosophical (Kantian) notion of respect as equality-based 8

Indirect effects were tested using bootstrapping based on 5,000 resamples (Preacher & Hayes, 2008).

50

Bernd Simon and Hilmar Grabow

and adds ecological robustness to conclusions drawn from experimental work in social psychology that perceived equality is a key ingredient of the respect experience (Renger & Simon, 2011; Simon, 2007).9 With regard to the dynamic of mutual respect in intergroup relations between the gay and lesbian community and the Muslim community we predicted and found a negative relationship between perceived intergroup respect and outgroup rejection (Mutuality Hypothesis) while controlling for other possible influences, such as authoritarianism (Altemeyer, 1996) and collective identification (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). We also expected and found that perceived respect from society at large played a similar role in intergroup relations (Societal Respect Hypothesis). That is, members of the gay and lesbian community who felt respected by (the majority of) German society showed lower levels of anti-Muslim attitude. Moreover, in line with the universalistic connotations of equality recognition and its dominant status in the experience of being respected by society, the decrease in anti-Muslim attitude was fully mediated via an increase in perceived equality recognition. This research thus not only complements prior work on the relationship between societal respect and ingroup favouritism (e.g., Huo & Molina, 2006), but also extends it beyond relationships between ethnic groups and provides novel insights into the underlying process or the active ingredient of respect for that matter. With regard to future research it would be an important task to examine whether or to what extent the present findings also generalize to members of majority groups. Members of minority or marginalized groups, such as gays and lesbians, may arguably be particularly sensitive to equality recognition. At the same time, however, theorizing in social and political philosophy (Honneth, 1995; Taylor, 1992) as well as more recent work in experimental social psychology (Renger & Simon, 2011) would lead us to expect that the importance of equality recognition is not limited to such groups. The endorsement of various normative principles, which seemed to be largely independent of the more specific recognition perceptions (see Table 1), was also related to anti-Muslim attitude in interesting ways. For instance, the endorsement of equality as a general normative principle was negatively related to anti-Muslim attitude. This finding parallels our mediation results and underscores the constructive role of equality recognition in intergroup relations, which goes beyond mutuality between specific groups and most likely reflects a shift towards universalism and the corresponding re-categorization of self and others at the superordinate human level (Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987). However, it should be recalled that both findings were more robust in, if not limited to, the subsample of gay respondents, whereas need recognition (i.e., perceived recognition of one’s own needs as well as endorsement of the general need principle) played comparable roles in the subsample of lesbian respondents. This divergence may actually reflect a more general gender difference along the dimension of agentic (men) versus communal (women) orientation (Williams, 1984). Finally, the positive relationship between endorsement of the achievement

9 Because we did not treat perceived respect and perceived recognition of one’s equality, achievements, or needs as latent constructs measured with multiple indicators, one might be concerned about the stability of our findings. However, we believe that we are dealing here with rather straightforward perceptions, which should be accessible to direct measurement with single items, and we were in fact able to cross-validate the dominant status of equality recognition in perceived societal respect with an independent sample from a different intergroup context. In a brief Web-based study, 40 respondents with a foreign background completed the analogous respect and recognition items. Multiple regression analysis with perceived societal respect for people with a foreign background in Germany as the criterion, and gender and age as control variables, confirmed the dominant role of equality recognition (b = .538, p < .001, 21.3% uniquely explained variance) relative to the recognition of needs (b = .284, p = .020, 5.4% uniquely explained variance) or achievements (b = .060, p = .614, 0.2% uniquely explained variance).

The challenge of mutual respect

51

principle and anti-Muslim attitude observed for both gay and lesbian respondents is noteworthy as it points to a kind of ‘achievement chauvinism’ such that those oriented towards individual(istic) success disrespect putative societal outsiders as ‘losers’.

Conclusions Our investigation into the phenomenology of respect strongly suggests that recognition as an equal lies at the heart of the respect experience, at least for members of a disadvantaged social minority such as gays and lesbians. Moreover, equality recognition not only emerged as a key ingredient (or predictor) of the respect experience, it also seemed to operate as an active ingredient (or mediator) translating the experience of being respected into willingness to respect others (possibly assisted by need recognition as observed for lesbian respondents). Our research shed particular light on the operation of such a dynamic of mutual respect in intergroup relations. Interestingly, outgroup rejection appeared to be fuelled not only by a lack of respect from the particular outgroup, but also by a lack of respect from society at large. This observation underscores that society as a whole is rarely a neutral or innocent observer of intergroup conflicts. Especially when these conflicts are largely struggles for recognition and respect, society as a whole or representatives thereof likely become involved and, implicitly or explicitly, take sides or are forced to do so (Simon & Klandermans, 2001). In this sense, struggles for recognition and respect are politicized struggles, and a disrespectful society may then contribute to a polarization or even radicalization of intergroup attitudes and ensuing behaviour. In light of the overall rather low level of antiMuslim attitude among our respondents it would clearly be unjustified to conclude that the gay and lesbian community in Germany is already engaged in some kind of radicalized (e.g., ‘homonationalist’) mobilization against Muslims, but our study, nevertheless, points to the potential for such radicalization.

Acknowledgements Bernd Simon and Hilmar Grabow, Institute of Psychology, Kiel University, Germany. The research was made possible by a grant from the Berlin Office for Equal Treatment – against Discrimination (Landesstelle f€ ur Gleichbehandlung – gegen Diskriminierung) to Bernd Simon. We are grateful to Nicolas B€ ohme, Ann-Christin Brause, Susanne Pr€ uß, Mandy Ristau, and I_lhan Sßen for their assistance in preparing the electronic questionnaire and during data analysis. We also thank Rauha Laurus for providing the cross-validation data. Finally, we owe special thanks to Claus Nachtwey for his support during all stages of the research project.

References Altemeyer, B. (1996). The authoritarian specter. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley. doi:10.1001/ jama.1997.03540400078041 Altemeyer, B., & Hunsberger, B. (1992). Authoritarianism, religious fundamentalism, quest, and prejudice. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 2, 113–133. doi:10.1207/ s15327582ijpr0202_5 Butler, J. (2009). Frames of war: When is life grievable? London: Verso. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0025. 2011.01698.x Darwall, S. L. (1977). Two kinds of respect. Ethics, 88, 36–49. doi:10.1086/292054

52

Bernd Simon and Hilmar Grabow

Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis for distributive justice? Journal of Social Issues, 31, 137–150. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560. 1975.tb01000.x Ellemers, N., Doosje, B., & Spears, R. (2004). Sources of respect: The effects of being liked by ingroups and outgroups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 155–172. doi:10.1002/ ejsp. 196 Fraser, N., & Honneth, A. (2003). Redistribution or recognition? A political-philosophical exchange. London: Verso. doi:10.3366/per.2005.1.2.215 Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 165–170. doi:10.2307/2092623 Haritaworn, J., & Petzen, J. (2011). Integration as a sexual problem: An excavation of the German “Muslim homophobia” panic. In K. Yilmaz-G€ unay (Ed.), Karriere eines konstruierten Gegensatzes: zehn Jahre «Muslime versus Schwule». Sexualpolitiken seit dem 11. September 2001 (pp. 115–134). Heitmeyer, W. (2005). Gruppenbezogene Menschenfeindlichkeit: Die theoretische Konzeption und empirische Ergebnisse aus 2002, 2003 und 2004 [Group-focused enmity: The theoretical conception and empirical results from 2002, 2003, and 2004]. In W. Heitmeyer (Ed.), Deutsche € Zustande (3) (pp. 13–34). Frankfurt, Germany: Suhrkamp. Honneth, A. (1995). The struggle for recognition: The moral grammar of social conflicts. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Huo, Y. J., Binning, K. R., & Molina, L. E. (2010). Testing an integrative model of respect: Implications for social engagement and well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 200– 212. doi:10.1177/0146167209356787 Huo, Y. J., & Molina, L. E. (2006). Is pluralism a viable model of diversity? The benefits and limits of subgroup respect. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 9, 359–376. doi:10.1177/ 1368430206064639 Inglehart, R., & Norris, P. (2003). The true clash of civilizations. Foreign Policy, 135, 63–70. doi:10. 2307/3183594 Kant, I. (1974). Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten [Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals]. Frankfurt, Germany: Suhrkamp. Licata, L., Sanches-Mazas, M., & Green, E. G. T. (2011). Identity, immigration, and prejudice in Europe: A recognition approach. In: S. J. Schwartz, K. Luyckx & V. L. Vignoles (Eds.), Handbook of identity theory and research, volume 2: Domains and categories (pp. 895–916). New York: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-7988-9_38 McBride, C., & Seglow, J. (2009). Introduction. Recognition: Philosophy and politics. European Journal of Political Theory, 8, 7–12. doi:10.1177/1474885108096957 Miller, D. (1999). Principles of social justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. doi:10. 1177/009059102237039 Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879– 891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 Rawls, J. (2001). Justice as fairness: A restatement. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. doi:10.1215/00318108-111-4-618 Renger, D., & Simon, B. (2011). Social recognition as an equal: The role of equality-based respect in group life. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 501–507. doi:10.1002/ejsp. 814 Sennett, R. (2003). Respect: The formation of character in a world of inequality. London: Penguin. Simon, B. (2004). Identity in modern society. Oxford: Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9780470773437 Simon, B. (2007). Respect, equality, and power: A social psychological perspective. € Gruppendynamik und Organisationsberatung – Zeitschrift fur angewandte Sozialpsychologie, 38, 309–326. doi:10.1007/s11612-007-0027-2 Simon, B. (2008). Einstellungen zur Homosexualit€at: Auspr€agungen und psychologische Korrelate bei Jugendlichen mit und ohne Migrationshintergrund (ehemalige UdSSR und T€ urkei) [Attitudes towards homosexuality: Levels and psychological correlates among adolescents with and

The challenge of mutual respect

53

€ without migration background (former USSR and Turkey)]. Zeitschrift fur € Entwicklungspsychologie und Padagogische Psychologie, 40, 87–99. doi:10.1026/00498637.40.2.87 Simon, B. (2010). Respekt und Zumutung bei der Begegnung von Schwulen/Lesben und Muslimen [Respect and demands in encounters between gays/lesbians and Muslims]. Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, 15–16, 27–32. Simon, B., & Klandermans, B. (2001). Politicized collective identity: A social psychological analysis. American Psychologist, 56, 319–331. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.56.4.319 Sleebos, E., Ellemers, N., & de Gilder, D. (2006). The paradox of the disrespected: Disrespected group members’ engagement in group-serving efforts. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 413–427. doi:10.1016/j.jesp. 2005.06.002 St€ urmer, S., & Simon, B. (2004). The role of collective identification in social movement participation: A panel study in the context of the German gay movement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 263–277. doi:10.1177/0146167203256690 Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall. Taylor, C. (1992). Multiculturalism and “The politics of recognition”. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell. Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2000). Cooperation in groups: Procedural justice, social identity, and behavioral engagement. Philadelphia: Psychology Press. doi:10.1026//0932-4089.45.4.212 Williams, J. A. (1984). Gender and intergroup behaviour: Towards an integration. British Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 311–316. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1984.tb00646.x Received 23 April 2012; revised version received 31 October 2012