A news study from Israel has revealed that the way news stories frame unexpected behaviour by minority groups could play a pivotal role in shifting entrenched attitudes, particularly among those with conservative leanings. Researchers from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem explored how highlighting surprise in media reports about counter-stereotypical actions like an Arab individual excelling in a prestigious field might encourage people to rethink their preconceptions about outgroups. The findings, centred on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, suggest that explicitly noting surprise could be a subtle yet powerful tool for reducing prejudice. The research was published in the journal Media Psychology.
The team conducted two survey experiments involving hundreds of Jewish-Israeli participants. In the first, nearly 500 people read articles about a Palestinian student winning a mathematics award, with some versions explicitly labelling the achievement as surprising, others hinting at it subtly, and a third omitting any mention of surprise. A control group read an unrelated piece about a horse trainer. The second study, with over 560 participants, tweaked the context to feature an Arab geneticist receiving a cancer research award from a neutral institution, aiming to eliminate any political bias tied to academia.
Across both studies, the results were striking for those on the political right. When the news explicitly flagged the achievement as surprising, right-leaning participants showed a noticeable increase in liking towards Arabs compared to the control group. They also expressed less desire to keep social distance and viewed Arabs as less uniform, suggesting a crack in the wall of homogenous stereotyping. Left-leaning participants, however, remained largely unmoved by the surprise framing, likely because their existing views were already more positive.
The researchers argue that this difference stems from how political ideology shapes expectations. Right-leaning individuals, often holding stronger negative stereotypes, experience a greater jolt when faced with evidence that defies their beliefs. Explicitly acknowledging surprise in the story seems to legitimise that jolt, making it easier for them to process and adjust their attitudes. For those on the left, the information aligns more closely with their worldview, so the surprise lacks the same punch.
This approach builds on the idea that stereotypes act as mental shortcuts, allowing quick judgements but often entrenching bias. When someone encounters a person who defies these assumptions, like a highly skilled member of a group typically seen as less competent, it can spark cognitive dissonance. The study suggests that calling out this unexpectedness in media framing could interrupt the tendency to dismiss such individuals as exceptions, fostering broader attitude shifts instead.
While the research focused on a specific conflict, its implications stretch further. In a world where media often reinforces divisions, tweaking how stories are told could nudge societies towards greater understanding. The team cautions that the effect might not hold in every context and calls for more studies to test its reach. For now, though, the message is clear: a little surprise in the news might just help bridge some stubborn divides.
