Explanations of interindividual – intergroup discontinuity: A review of the evidence

The authors review and evaluate various explanations for the tendency of intergroup relations to be more competitive, or less cooperative, than interindividual relations (the discontinuity effect). They distinguish between two general perspectives, each comprising a set of explanations for the discontinuity effect. The fear and greed perspective assumes that intergroup relations are characterised by greater fear and greed than are interindividual relations. The group decision-making perspective assumes a crucial role for group discussion in facilitating rational comprehension of mixed-motive situations. In general, explanations from the fear and greed perspective were found to be more consistent with the empirical record than explanations from the group decision-making perspective. The authors propose that a complete understanding of the discontinuity effect is yet to be achieved.     

Do observer ratings validate self-reports of intergroup contact?: A round-robin analysis

Two studies used a round-robin design to examine whether the observers made consensual judgments of targets' degree and quality of intergroup contact, and whether these consensual judgments were correlated with the targets' own self ratings, and moderated by the observability of the contact. Study 1 revealed projection/assumed similarity, with participants rating others as similar to themselves to a large extent, but also yielded evidence for the validity of whites' self-reports of direct, but not extended, intergroup contact with Asians, even when controlling for extraversion and perceived attitudes. Study 2 replicated the main results, using both Asians and Gay men as outgroups, and showed that participants' ratings discriminated between the two discrete outgroups, with measures of contact and attitude being only meaningfully related within, but not between, outgroups. Overall, these findings help to validate self-report measures of direct intergroup contact.     

The power of being heard: The benefits of ‘perspective-giving’ in the context of intergroup conflict

Although hundreds of dialogue programs geared towards conflict resolution are offered every year, there have been few scientific studies of their effectiveness. Across 2 studies we examined the effect of controlled, dyadic interactions on attitudes towards the ‘other’ in members of groups involved in ideological conflict. Study 1 involved Mexican immigrants and White Americans in Arizona, and Study 2 involved Israelis and Palestinians in the Middle East. Cross-group dyads interacted via video and text in a brief, structured, face-to-face exchange: one person was assigned to write about the difficulties of life in their society (‘perspective-giving’), and the second person was assigned to accurately summarize the statement of the first person (‘perspective-taking’). Positive changes in attitudes towards the outgroup were greater for Mexican immigrants and Palestinians after perspective-giving and for White Americans and Israelis after perspective-taking. For Palestinians, perspective-giving to an Israeli effectively changed attitudes towards Israelis, while a control condition in which they wrote an essay on the same topic without interacting had no effect on attitudes, illustrating the critical role of being heard. Thus, the effects of dialogue for conflict resolution depend on an interaction between dialogue condition and participants' group membership, which may reflect power asymmetries.     

Does social dominance generate prejudice? Integrating individual and contextual determinants of intergroup cognitions

Social dominance orientation (SDO) has been proposed as an important variable in the explanation of prejudice. We distinguish between three conceptualizations of SDO: SDO as a personality trait (personality model), SDO as a moderator of the effects of situational variables (Person x Situation model), and SDO as a mediator of the effect of social position on prejudice (group socialization model [GSM]). Four studies (N = 1.657) looking at the relations between social positions, SDO, and prejudice in a natural setting and in a laboratory setting provide strong support for the GSM. In contrast to previous correlational findings, there is evidence of a cause (dominant social position), an effect (prejudice increases), and a mediator (SDO). These results suggest new perspectives on the integration of individual and contextual determinants of prejudice.     

How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Meta‐analytic tests of three mediators

Recent years have witnessed a renewal of interest in intergroup contact theory. A meta‐analysis of more than 500 studies established the theory's basic contention that intergroup contact typically reduces prejudices of many types. This paper addresses the issue of process: just how does contact diminish prejudice? We test meta‐analytically the three most studied mediators: contact reduces prejudice by (1) enhancing knowledge about the outgroup, (2) reducing anxiety about intergroup contact, and (3) increasing empathy and perspective taking. Our tests reveal mediational effects for all three of these mediators. However, the mediational value of increased knowledge appears less strong than anxiety reduction and empathy. Limitations of the study and implications of the results are discussed. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Is there any scapegoat around? Determinants of intergroup conflicts at different categorization levels.

Recategorization at a higher level reduces tensions between groups. However, recategorization may cause conflicts between the common in-group and a new out-group. Additionally, determinants of conflict between subgroups may enhance conflict at the higher categorization level. In the context of German unification, the authors explored these suggestions with an East German 3-wave longitudinal study and a West German control group. Results show that a salient East German versus West German categorization enhances conflict between subgroups, whereas categorization as German enhances conflict at the common in-group level. Determinants of subgroup conflict also influence conflict at the inclusive level (Germans and foreigners). Thus, recategorization is a 2-edged instrument: Although it reduces conflict at the subgroup level, it may initiate conflict at the common in-group level.     

Can intergroup contact improve humanity attributions?

In this paper, intergroup contact was evaluated as a strategy to favor outgroup humanization. We tested a double‐mediation model, in which contact is associated with both decreased salience of intergroup boundaries and the adoption of a common identity. These recategorizations, in turn, are related to lower levels of anxiety and higher levels of empathy, both emotions being proximal predictors of outgroup humanization. The model was tested using structural equation modeling in the context of different intergroup relations: Italians versus immigrants (Study 1); Northern Italians versus Southern Italians (Study 2). Supporting the hypotheses, group representations and emotions mediated the relationship between contact and humanity attributions. The practical implications of results are discussed.     

Can music bring people together? Effects of shared musical preference on intergroup bias in adolescence

Recent research has successfully applied social identity theory to demonstrate how individuals use music as a basis for intergroup differentiation. The current study investigated how music might also be used to encourage the development of positive intergroup attitudes. Participants (N = 97) were allocated to one of two experimentally created social groups and then led to believe that the groups had similar or different musical preferences. They then evaluated each group and reported their perceptions concerning how they expected their own group to be evaluated by the other group. Participants who believed the groups had similar musical preferences reported more positive intergroup attitudes relative to a control group; they also expected to be evaluated more positively by members of the other group. However, positive intergroup perceptions were also reported by those who believed the two groups had different musical preferences. The implications of these findings for theory and practice are discussed.     

Implicit associations as the seeds of intergroup bias: how easily do they take root?

Three experiments provided evidence that intergroup bias occurs automatically under minimal conditions, using the Implicit Association Test (IAT). In Experiment 1, participants more readily paired in-group names with pleasant words and out-group names with unpleasant words, even when they were experienced only with the in-group and had no preconceptions about the out-group. Participants in Experiment 2 likewise showed an automatic bias favoring the in-group, even when in-group/out-group exemplars were completely unfamiliar and identifiable only with the use of a heuristic. In Experiment 3, participants displayed a pro-in-group IAT bias following a minimal group manipulation. Taken together, the results demonstrate the ease with which intergroup bias emerges even in unlikely conditions.     

Does intergroup contact affect personality? A longitudinal study on the bidirectional relationship between intergroup contact and personality traits

We conducted a longitudinal study to test whether, in addition to being predicted by personality, intergroup contact is longitudinally associated with personality traits. Participants were 388 majority (Italian) and 109 minority (immigrant) first‐year high school students. Results revealed a bidirectional relationship between contact and personality: Quality of contact was longitudinally associated with greater agreeableness and openness to experience, whereas agreeableness and openness to experience were longitudinal predictors of contact quality. An unexpected negative longitudinal association also emerged between quantity of contact and agreeableness. These effects were not moderated by group of belonging (majority vs. minority). Our findings highlight the importance of integrating research on intergroup contact with research on personality.     

Warm or competent? Improving intergroup relations by addressing threatened identities of advantaged and disadvantaged groups

Applying the Needs‐Based Model of Reconciliation to contexts of group disparity, two studies examined how messages from outgroup representatives that affirmed the warmth or competence of advantaged or disadvantaged groups influenced their members' intergroup attitudes. Study 1 involved natural groups differing in status; Study 2 experimentally manipulated status. In both studies, advantaged‐group members responded more favorably, reporting more positive outgroup attitudes and willingness to change the status quo toward equality, to messages reassuring their group's warmth. Disadvantaged‐group members responded more favorably to messages affirming their group's competence. Study 2 further demonstrated that the effectiveness of reassuring a disadvantaged group's competence stemmed from restoring its threatened dimension of identity, irrespective of a change of the status quo. In line with Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979), these results indicate that beyond the competition over tangible resources, groups are concerned with restoring threatened dimensions of their identities. Exchanging messages that remove identity‐related threats may promote not only positive intergroup attitudes but also greater willingness to act collectively for intergroup equality. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

How are social identities linked to self-conception and intergroup orientation? The moderating effect of implicit theories

Social identity approaches assume that social identification affects both self-conception and intergroup orientation. The authors contend that such social identification effects are accentuated when people hold a fixed view of human character and attribute immutable dispositions to social groups. To these individuals, social identities are immutable, concrete entities capable of guiding self-conception and intergroup orientation. Social identification effects are attenuated when people hold a malleable view of human character and thus do not view social identities as fixed, concrete entities. The authors tested and found support for this contention in three studies that were conducted in the context of the Hong Kong 1997 political transition, and discussed the findings in terms of their implications for self-conceptions and the meaning of social identification.     

The relational versus collective “We” and intergroup allocation: The role of nested group categorization

Intergroup research has focused primarily, if not solely, on how an intergroup comparative context primes social categorization. The current research examines how individual differences, in terms of distinct forms of social self (the relational versus collective self), differentially drive social categorization and zero-sum resource allocation across groups nested within a superordinate group. Results show that the relational self exhibited more ingroup-biased allocations than the collective self; superordinate categorization mediated this relationship. Moreover, the relational self showed more ingroup-biased allocations under the condition of intergroup competition than cooperation; whereas the collective self showed equally unbiased allocations under the conditions of intergroup competition and cooperation. Our research suggests that competition worsens nested group relations for the relational self, but not for the collective self.     

Identifying “types” of ideologies and intergroup biases: Advancing a person-centred approach to social psychology

Whether it be those who are “high” on right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO), or a mixture of “low” on explicit, but “high” on implicit, bias, many social psychological theories predict the existence of distinct “types” of people. These assumptions are, however, untestable using variable-centred analyses. Accordingly, we argue that the time has come to utilise person-centred analyses that enable us to test these key assumptions. We open by demonstrating how to implement – and interpret – latent profile analysis (a type of person-centred analysis), using RWA and SDO as an example. We then discuss the debate over the dimensionality of political ideology to highlight the need for person-centred analyses. Next, we review person-centred approaches to political ideology and highlight recent work using person-centred analyses to assess key assumptions of ambivalent sexism and relative deprivation. We conclude by discussing limitations to person-centred approaches and by providing suggestions for future research.     

How we think they see us? Valence and difficulty of retrieval as moderators of the effect of meta‐stereotype activation on intergroup orientations

Previous research indicates that meta‐stereotypes are predominantly negative. However, the valence of the meta‐stereotypes may not be the only factor accounting for the detrimental effects associated with their activation. In addition to valence, we propose that the subjective difficulty of retrieving the meta‐stereotype might critically determine whether its activation deteriorates intergroup orientations. An experimental study showed that the effect of the meta‐stereotype activation on the desire to interact with outgroup members was moderated by the interaction between the valence of the meta‐stereotype and its difficulty of retrieval. In particular, the activation of a positive meta‐stereotype deteriorated intergroup orientations when the difficulty of retrieval was high as compared with a condition in which the difficulty of retrieval was low. In sharp contrast, the activation of a negative meta‐stereotype worsened intergroup orientations when the difficulty of retrieval was low as compared with a condition in which the difficulty of retrieval was high.     

Interindividual–intergroup discontinuity in the prisoner’s dilemma game: How common fate,proximity, and similarity affect intergroup competition

In two experiments with the PDG we manipulated the Campbell (1958), or Wertheimer (1923), indices of entitativity (common fate, proximity, and similarity) to examine when a set of individuals interacts with another set of individuals in the competitive manner that is characteristic of group-on-group interactions. Experiment 1 found that interactions between two 3-person sets were more competitive when participants within each set shared (vs. did not share) common fate. In Experiment 2, the Wertheimer–Campbell indices were manipulated for one 3-person set only (targets). Participants in the other 3-person set were sequestered in separate rooms (observers). Observers as well as targets were more competitive when targets shared (vs. did not share) common fate. Path analyses in both experiments supported the idea that common fate increases competition via increased own-set entitativity and subsequent greed, and via increased other-set entitativity and subsequent fear. We found no consistent evidence for the possible roles of proximity and similarity.     

Coalition or derogation? How perceived discrimination influences intraminority intergroup relations

Five studies explored how perceived societal discrimination against one's own racial group influences racial minority group members' attitudes toward other racial minorities. Examining Black-Latino relations, Studies 1a and 1b showed that perceived discrimination toward oneself and one's own racial group may be positively associated with expressed closeness and common fate with another racial minority group, especially if individuals attribute past experiences of discrimination to their racial identity rather than to other social identities (Study 1b). In Studies 2-5, Asian American (Studies 2, 3, and 4) and Latino (Study 5) participants were primed with discrimination against their respective racial groups (or not) and completed measures of attitudes toward Black Americans. Participants primed with racial discrimination expressed greater positivity toward and perceived similarity with Blacks than did participants who were not primed. These results suggest, consistent with the common ingroup identity model (Gaertner & Dovidio, 2000), that salient discrimination against one's own racial group may trigger a common "disadvantaged racial minority" (ingroup) identity that engenders more positive attitudes toward and feelings of closeness toward other racial minorities.     

Liberty and justice for all? Implications of exposure to the U.S. flag for intergroup relations

Three studies examined the implications of nationalistic ideologies and exposure to the U.S. flag for the activation of egalitarian concepts and outgroup hostility. Study 1 demonstrated that subliminal exposure to the U.S. flag activated participants' egalitarian concepts. In Study 2, highly nationalistic participants who were exposed to the U.S. flag reported less hostility than did those not exposed to the flag, whereas the flag did not influence the hostility of participants low in nationalism. Study 3 demonstrated that for participants high in nationalism, greater activation of egalitarian concepts on subliminal exposure to the U.S. flag was associated with less hostility toward Arabs and Muslims in the presence of the U.S. flag. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.     

Perceived intergroup competition and adolescents’ behavioural intentions toward minorities: the role of threat,stereotypes and emotions

The main purpose of this study was to analyse the effect of perceived intergroup competition on majority adolescents’ behavioural intentions toward two relevant immigrant groups in the Spanish context, Ecuadorians and Moroccans. We proposed an integrative path model in which perceived intergroup competition led to perception of outgroup threat, which in turn affected warmth stereotypes (morality and sociability). Perceived warmth further fostered positive and negative emotions, which in turn predicted facilitative and harmful interpersonal behavioural tendencies. Following a between subject design, participants (N = 231, M_age = 15.39, SD = 1.09) evaluated Moroccans (n = 114) or Ecuadorians (n = 117) on the examined variables. Results indicate that Ecuadorians were perceived as more moral and sociable and elicited less negative emotions than Moroccans. The model had a good fit for both groups. Perceived intergroup competition predicted perceived outgroup threat which, in turn, fostered perceived morality and sociability. Only perceived morality predicted both positive and negative emotions, whereas sociability elicited only positive emotions. Finally, facilitation intentions were predicted by both positive and negative emotions, while harm intentions were triggered only by negative ones. Results highlight the distinctive role of morality for intergroup relations during adolescence and extend previous literature regarding perceived intergroup competition, stereotype content, emotions and perceived outgroup threat.

     

Social representations and intergroup conflicts: Who's smoking here?

We studied the influence of explicitating a social conflict between smokers and nonsmokers on the social representations held about tobacco. Two representations were found: a psychological' representation which was defined by psychological explanations of the causes of beginning to smoke, a characterization of smokers as psychologically disturbed, and negative feelings towards smokers; a second defensive representation which attributes smoking to social factors, and hold both a positive stereotype of smokers and positive feelings towards smokers. The percentage of smokers who adhere to the defensive representation increased significantly when the conflict was made salient. Non-smokers were not influenced by the explicitation of the social conflict. The structure of each representation was analyzed. It was found that in the psychological' representation the structuring element was the negative stereotype of smokers. By contrast, the structuring element in the defensive representation was identification with smokers. The implicatlons of this data for theories of both intergroup relations and social representations are discussed.