Current stereotypes and prejudices have evolved into different forms that are very difficult to recognize and combat. Biased beliefs and evaluations are pervasive, subtle, and complex, and this nature has become a challenge for intervention techniques that cannot only be based on rational mechanisms (Gaertner & Dovidio, 2008). Motivation and affect are also important grounds to build a reliable training in order to fight prejudice. Perspective taking is one of the mixed cognitive and motivational strategies that has been evaluated to reduce intergroup bias through making narrower the distance between the ingroup and the outgroup, and between the self and the other (Galinsky, Ku, & Wang, 2005). Recently, perspective taking has been proposed by Galinsky, Wang, & Ku (2008) as a very robust and effective manipulation to cause individuals to think of themselves and act in stereotype-consistent ways. The inclusion of stereotypical traits and behaviors in the self during perspective-taking was used by participants to increase social coordination. But strategies of this kind may not be so strong and transferable as apparently shown by the evidence published in international journals. Social contexts affect how stereotypes, prejudice, and racism develop (Teichman & Bar-Tal, 2008), and perhaps they also influence the way bias is eradicated. Second, in the same manner that a medication interacts with a bunch of factors (age, weight, blood pressure, blood sugar, allergies, etc.) in a symptom alleviation, interventions to reduce prejudice are likely linked to individual differences. Our study is aimed to reach some conclusions over the so-thought cross-cultural and cross-individual effects of perspective taking. Data were collected in four different Spanish teacher student samples to test the hypothesis that adopting other’s views and feelings is an effective procedure to reduce intergroup biases, but only in some participants.

Four experimental studies with different manipulations and a posttest-only control group design were carried out in two Spanish regions (Castilla y León, and Andalucía). Interventions were based on mental imagery in three studies (i.e., participants were told to imagine a day in an immigrant’s life from his perspective), and on role-playing in the last one (participants were asked to act as immigrants in some daily contexts). Implicit and explicit stereotyping and prejudice were measured. Data were also collected for a wide array of variables that could moderate the incidence of perspective taking on stereotyped beliefs and evaluations–sociodemographic factors, personality, values, self-esteem, self-categorization, attribution, and empathy.

Results support our hypothesis. Main effects were not found in ANOVAs, suggesting that the effectiveness of perspective taking cannot be generalized to every cultural context. Therefore perspective taking is not so robust as shown by Galinsky and his colleagues (2005, 2008; Galinsky & Moskowitz, 2000; Galinsky & Ku, 2004). On the other hand, some effects due to interaction reveal that the intervention was effective for some of the participants. Remarkably, most of variables that moderated the influence of the intervention were related to emotional reactions and values, but not to cognition or personality. This finding could shed some light on the very nature of perspective taking, emphasizing its affective component. Conclusions are drawn about the field of educator training. While there is a need to train future professionals to perceive minority members without prejudice, programme design should pay attention to matches and mismatches between applied and experimental contexts.