Effects of framing counter-stereotypes as surprising on rethinking prior opinions about outgroups

Media representation of low-power groups usually preserves the general stereotype regarding these groups, who are depicted negatively for the most part, having wide implications for low-power groups, such as amplifying prejudice, suspicion, and intergroup negative emotions. However, repeated attempts to change stereotypes by exposure to counter-stereotypical individuals have shown mixed results. On the one hand, some indicate that prolonged and repeated exposure to a counter-stereotype results in some stereotypical change. On the other hand, such research resulted in bypassing the desired outcome despite the potential of counter-stereotypes and their effect of raising surprise. Given the broad reach of media effects, this research investigates the impact of explicitly validating surprise arising from exposure to counter-stereotypes in the media on intergroup relations, focusing on the moderating role of political ideology. In a two-study survey experiment (Nstudy 1= 475, Nstudy 2= 565) in the context of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions presenting a successful individual of Arab descent or to a control group. On the first condition (explicit surprise) the group belonging of the individual (Arab-Muslim) was clearly stated, and the title explicitly indicated a surprise in light of the individual’s achievement (titled: "surprise at the Merchavim awards ceremony"). On the second condition (insinuated surprise), the text did not state explicit surprise, only the group belonging. Finally, the control group read an unrelated text. The results indicated that when given external validation of the feeling of surprise (compared to control), right-leaning individuals expressed more liking towards Arabs (M = 3.27, SD = 1.03) more than those in the control (M = 2.74, SD = 1.17), [t(196) = -2.29, p < .05], were more inclined to social proximity with Arabs (M = 3.45, SD = 1.46), compared to those in the control (M = 2.88, SD = 1.5) [t(282) = -2.32, p < .05], and perceived Arabs as less homogeneous (M = 2.58, SD = 1.13) compared to those in the control (M = 3.14, SD = 1.34) [t(282) = 2.64, p < .01]. Left-leaning participants, however, remained unaffected by this validation. By highlighting the psychological needs of different ideological groups, the study provides insights into the mechanisms underlying stereotype and attitude changes, particularly concerning outgroups. Notably, the paper recognizes the psychological necessity for validation, asserting its role in modifying the effects of surprise. Additionally, in the realm of framing research, the study challenges the dichotomy of positive vs. negative and stereotypical vs. counter-stereotypical frames. The concepts of surprise and surprise validation do not neatly fit into these categories, prompting a call for further investigation into the power and value of validating emotions in communication research. In conclusion, the research demonstrates how validating the feeling of surprise following exposure to counter-stereotypes can induce attitudinal changes among individuals with deeply internalized attitudes. Overall, the study calls for reconsidering framing approaches, emphasizing the importance of surprise validation in promoting positive intergroup relations.