The dissertation centers on implicit attitudes, which refer to attitudes that are less conscious and more automatic than explicit attitudes. In three papers, I try to detail the contextual nature of implicit attitudes while also analyzing the tension between implicit and explicit attitudes.

In Study 1, I argue that certain implicit attitudes may be more contextual and malleable than previously thought. The argument is illustrated by showing how terror attacks in France affect implicit bias toward Arab Muslims. By analyzing the longevity and specificity of this effect, I also detail when and why implicit bias might change. The article consists of two parts. Part 1 shows that the attacks significantly increased implicit bias in France (n = 449), whereas Part 2 shows that the attacks had a similar effect globally (n = 25 795). There was no corresponding effect on explicit bias in either study.

In Study II, I combine research on banal and unconscious nationalism with cognitive psychology to outline a novel framework of so-called “implicit nationalism.” In the first part of the article, I detail how different events, symbols, and discourses affect nationalist attitudes and sentiments beyond conscious awareness and control. I argue that certain events and symbols affect implicit—but not necessarily explicit—nationalism by changing the accessibility of implicit nationalist associations. In the second part of the article, I use this framework to analyze the 2014 FIFA World Cup. The study consists of a natural experiment, including respondents from Germany, Brazil, and the United Kingdom. Winning the World Cup increased implicit nationalism in Germany, and losing decreased implicit nationalism in Brazil and the United Kingdom. Importantly, winning and losing had no corresponding effect on explicit nationalism in any country.

In Study III, I focus on differences between explicit and implicit perceptions of Swedishness. People report increasingly tolerant and inclusive attitudes in many Western countries, but minorities still face considerable (and in some cases growing) discrimination and exclusion. In this paper, I suggest that the discrepancy could be related to a difference between explicit and implicit attitudes. Most people may want to be inclusive and tolerant, but implicitly harbor more exclusionary views of belonging and national identity. To survey potential differences between explicit and implicit attitudes, I fielded a survey consisting of 217 Swedish participants who completed both explicit and implicit measures of perceived “Swedishness”. Participants evaluated four different minority groups: people with Norwegian, Finnish, Syrian, or Bosnian backgrounds. The results reveal large-scale differences between explicit and implicit perceptions and between groups. All groups were explicitly perceived as Swedish, but only people with a Norwegian background were implicitly perceived as Swedish. People with a Finnish background were perceived as neither Swedish nor foreign, while people with Bosnian and Syrian backgrounds were perceived as foreign.