共同内群体认同对心理融合的促进效应及其机制

摘要：采用实验法从外显和内隐两个层面探讨共同内群体认同对心理融合的促进效应及其机制。实验1采用最简群体范式,通过重新范畴化操纵共同内群体认同,测量外显心理融合,结果发现,共同内群体认同显著促进了心理融合;实验2以民族群体为被试,采用GANT范式,从外显和内隐两个水平进一步探究共同内群体认同对民族心理融合的促进效应,结果发现,共同内群体认同促进了外显和内隐心理融合,感知相似性在共同内群体认同和心理融合间起中介作用。两个实验证明了共同内群体认同可以在外显和内隐两个水平促进心理融合,其促进作用是通过感知相似性实现的,也证实了GNAT范式在心理融合研究中的有效性。     

群体认同对群际敏感效应及其行为表现的影响

通过实验研究了群际互动中个体对不同来源身份的消极群体评价的情绪反应及群体认同的调节作用, 并从情绪-行为反应的连续性视角探索群际敏感效应的行为表现及内在机制。结果发现:(1)相比内群体的消极群体评价, 外群体的消极群体评价更能引起消极情绪反应; (2)群体认同对群际敏感效应起调节作用, 高群体认同者对来自外群体消极评价的情绪反应更加负面, 而低群体认同者这种趋势并不明显; (3)高群体认同者在经历外群体的消极群体评价后会表现出更多的内群体积极行为, 且消极情绪反应对此起中介作用。研究扩展了群际敏感效应的适用范围, 并为探讨其内部机制和后续影响提供了新的研究思路。     

共同内群体认同对医患竞争受害感的影响及其机制

本研究基于共同内群体认同模型,以医务人员和患者及家属为研究对象,考察了共同内群体认同对医患竞争受害感的影响及机制。预研究通过问卷调查证明了医患群体间存在竞争受害感;实验1采用共同内群体认同的操作范式,发现共同内群体认同能够有效减少医患双方的竞争受害感;实验2A进一步发现,权力需要在医方和患方共同内群体认同和竞争受害感之间起中介作用,而道德需要的中介作用不显著。实验2B采用更接近社会现实情境的重新范畴化范式,结果显示共同内群体认同的主效应不显著,但与群体身份的交互作用显著,仅医方权力需要的中介路径成立。本研究揭示了共同内群体认同不仅能够直接降低医患双方的竞争受害感,而且可以通过减少权力需要进一步降低竞争受害感,从群际角度为缓和医患之间的紧张关系提供了新的视角。     

共同内群体认同促进民族心理融合：积极解释偏向的中介作用

从解释偏向视角探讨共同内群体认同促进民族心理融合的认知加工过程。实验1和实验2设置群体情境（竞争/非竞争）,分别考察即时解释偏向（包含自动解释偏向、迭代解释偏向）和延时解释偏向在共同内群体认同与民族心理融合关系中的作用。结果发现,在竞争和非竞争情境下,共同内群体认同能够促进民族心理融合,其促进作用发生在自动积极解释偏向和延时积极解释偏向阶段。研究从认知加工的视角拓展了共同内群体认同模型,并完善了解释偏向阶段模型。     

内群体偏爱或黑羊效应?经济博弈中公平规范执行的群体偏见

公平规范执行代指人们自愿损耗利益来惩罚违反公平原则行为的意愿和行为, 被视为人类社会的重要特征及维持合作行为的关键因素。群体认同是指个体对其所属群体身份的知觉及其所付诸于该群体身份上的价值与情绪, 直接影响着群际互动中人们的公平规范执行行为。基于多种资产分配任务, 国内外学者发现公平规范执行中群体偏见存在两种矛盾的表现形式：人们有时更愿意接受内群体成员的不公提议, 表现为内群体偏爱现象(the in-group favoritism, IGF), 有时又更愿意拒绝内群体成员的不公提议, 表现出黑羊效应(the black sheep effect, BSE)。当前, 纯粹偏好理论和规范聚焦理论常被用来解释上述两种相悖的现象。未来研究应侧重从多种视角揭示公平规范执行偏见的边界条件, 比较多种线索操纵所致偏见的差异性, 促进两种理论的融合与补充, 并增强其潜在神经机制的探索。     

群体内疚:界定、心理机制、行动倾向及干预策略

当个体认为内群体为外群体受到的不道德伤害负有责任时会体验到群体内疚。该情绪常见的触发情境包括过往历史的伤害事件、当下的群际冲突、不公正的社会关系及未来的伤害事件。群体认同、内群体责任和不当性评估是影响群体内疚产生的三大心理机制。群体内疚会导致施害群体对受害群体表现出积极行动,如友善态度,冲突和解、群体补偿及群际支持。通过群体肯定、自我肯定、促进共同认同、强调内群体责任及展现已有补偿行为等干预策略可以引发施害群体的群体内疚。未来的研究应澄清群体内疚的成因机制,进一步探索群体内疚与补偿行为间的作用关系。     

群体认同与个体心理健康的关系:调节变量与作用机制

近年来,群体认同与个体心理健康的关系得到了研究者的关注。本研究通过对相关文献的梳理与归纳发现:民族、国家、学校、家庭等不同种类群体的认同,群体认同数量与个体心理健康的关系显著;群体认同与个体心理健康之间的关系受群体认同动机和个体对群体评价的调节,并依赖于自尊、社会支持、控制知觉、归因方式等因素的中介;未来应利用多种方法继续研究群体认同与个体心理健康关系的调节变量与作用机制。     

群体认同在集群行为中的作用机制

在集群行为背景下, 群体认同对个体的集群行为意愿既具有直接的动员作用, 同时也可以调节群体情绪和群体效能变量与人们行为意愿间的关系。政治认同、共同认同与双重认同等特殊形式的群体认同对集群行为的发生具有不同的影响。从动态性研究的角度看, 参与集群行为会强化个体对内群体的认同感, 而强烈的群体认同则会对参与者的行动产生持续影响。今后的研究应根据集群行为的不同触发情境、不同形式及不同发展阶段对群体认同的复杂工作机制进行探讨。     

初中生同伴群体交往与自我同一性发展研究

使用社会认知地图(SCM)与自我同一性状态客观测量的标准化同卷(EOM-EIS-II),对初中生群体交往与自我同-性发展的关系进行研究,结果发现:(1)初中生普遍存在群体归属需要,绝大多数人都认为自己从属于一个或多个群体.(2)群体类型不影响自我同-性发展,班级内不同群体类型间,个体的自我同-性状态不存在显著差异.(3)群体内的个体地位影响自我同-性发展,处于群体中不同地位的个体.其自我同-性状态存在显著差异.     

内隐理论与群体关系

内隐理论是外行人对社会世界中人与事的朴素解释。人们对社会分类(种族、宗教、性别、职业等)属性的理解, 影响着个体对群体信息的加工、判断和反应, 能显著地预测群体过程(如刻板印象、偏见、歧视等), 并调节着社会认同的心理效应, 这弥补了社会认同过程中对个体差异的考虑, 对社会认同理论的发展具有重要贡献。实证研究表明：在改善和促进群体关系的实践中, 可以将外行人的内隐理论作为一个中介, 以此减少刻板印象和偏见, 培育良好的群体关系。未来研究中, 需要进一步整合内隐理论的概念, 采取一些纵向的研究为实践提供科学的指导。     

Striving for difference: On the spontaneous preference for ingroup members who maximize ingroup positive distinctiveness

Previous research demonstrated that individuals spontaneously prefer ingroup members who display ingroup favoritism rather than egalitarian behaviors (Castelli, Tomelleri, & Zogmaister, 2008). In the current work, we explored what specific strategies toward ingroup favoritism are spontaneously preferred. Results from four studies showed that ingroup members who made it possible for the ingroup to achieve a positive intergroup differentiation were preferred as compared to ingroup members who maximized the absolute gain for the ingroup. Study 5 further demonstrated that in the search for positive distinctiveness people are sensitive to the ratio between the gains of the ingroup and outgroup. Study 6 ruled out a possible alternative explanation. Overall, the current findings indicate that group members who set the difference from an outgroup elicit the most positive spontaneous responses demonstrating that the search for a positive intergroup distinctiveness automatically affects intragroup perception. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Individual-collective primacy and ingroup favoritism: enhancement and protection effects

Individual-collective primacy refers to the extent to which people emphasize their individual interests (individual-primacy) vs. the interests of their ingroup (collective-primacy). This study examined the interactive effects of individual-collective primacy, ingroup performance, and outgroup performance on ingroup favoritism. Participants from two cultures completed a measure of their individual vs. collective-primacy orientation. Performance feedback (favorable or unfavorable) for themselves, their ingroup, and the outgroup were manipulated orthogonally. As predicted, greater collective-primacy led to more ingroup favoritism when the ingroup performed better or worse than the outgroup. However, when the ingroup and outgroup both performed well or both performed poorly, the relationship between collective-primacy and ingroup favoritism was not significant. Implications for analyses of ingroup favoritism and cross-cultural differences are discussed.     

Suppressing the negative effect of devaluation on group identification: The role of intergroup differentiation and intragroup respect

We examined (N = 76) how social creativity strategies such as intergroup differentiation and intragroup respect suppress the negative impact of threat to an ingroup’s value on group identification. Threat was manipulated through false feedback concerning how other groups perceived an ingroup. Both intergroup differentiation and intragroup respect were higher when participants learned that the ingroup was devalued compared to when it was valued. Mediational analyses demonstrated that these factors suppressed the direct negative relationship between value threat and group identification. Discussion focused on the consequences of these social creativity strategies for group identification and collective action.     

Effects of mortality salience on evaluation of ingroup and outgroup sources: the impact of pro- versus counterattitudinal positions

Past Terror Management Theory (TMT) research has demonstrated that mortality salience leads to favoritism toward ingroup members and derogation of outgroup members and to polarized attitudes toward the source of pro and counterattitudinal statements. In such research, the individual's group membership and the individual's worldview position were examined separately. Thus, when the individual's group membership was manipulated, one could normally assume that an outgroup member is counterattitudinal and an ingroup member is proattitudinal. It is unclear, therefore, whether ingroup members elicited favoritism from mortality salient participants because of their group membership or because of their presumably proattitudinal position, or both. The authors present two studies in which the individual's group membership and attitudinal position are jointly manipulated. Results showed that among mortality salient participants, the outgroup member received favorable or unfavorable evaluations depending on his position, whereas the ingroup member received moderately positive evaluations regardless of the position taken.     

Hypnotic ingroup-outgroup suggestion influences economic decision-making in an Ultimatum Game

Studies in economic decision-making have demonstrated that individuals appreciate social values supporting equity and disapprove unfairness when distributing goods between two or more parties. However, this seems to critically depend on psychological mechanisms partly pertaining to the ingroup-outgroup distinction. Little is known as to what extent economic bargaining can be manipulated by means of psychological interventions such has hypnosis. Here we show that a hypnotic ingroup versus outgroup suggestion impacts the tolerance of unfairness in an Ultimatum Game. Specifically, the ingroup suggestion was associated with significantly greater acceptance rates of unfair offers than the outgroup suggestion, whereas hypnosis alone exerted only small effects on unfairness tolerance. These findings indicate that psychological interventions such as hypnotic suggestion can contribute to ingroup favoritism and outgroup rejection.     

I am against us? Unpacking cultural differences in ingroup favoritism via dialecticism

The authors proposed a novel explanation for cultural differences in ingroup favoritism (dialecticism) and tested this hypothesis across cultures/ethnicities, domains, and levels of analysis (explicit vs. implicit, cognitive vs. affective). Dialecticism refers to the cognitive tendency to tolerate contradiction and is more frequently found among East Asian than North American cultures. In Study 1, Chinese were significantly less positive, compared to European Americans, in their explicit judgments of family members. Study 2 investigated ingroup attitudes among Chinese, Latinos, and European Americans. Only Chinese participants showed significant in-group derogation, relative to the other groups, and dialecticism (Dialectical Self Scale) was associated with participants' in group attitudes. Study 3 manipulated dialectical versus linear lay beliefs; participants primed with dialecticism showed more negative, explicit ingroup attitudes. Although ingroup disfavoring tendencies were more prevalent among Chinese across studies, they may be a reflection of one's culturally based lay beliefs rather than deep-rooted negative feelings toward one's ingroup.     

On being peripheral: effects of identity insecurity on personal and collective self‐esteem

We examined collective self‐esteem and personal self‐esteem as a function of anticipated changes in one's prototypicality within a valued ingroup. In Study 1 (N = 80), all participants received information that they were currently peripheral group members. Expectations for the future were then manipulated, with some expecting to become more prototypical and others expecting they would be even more peripheral in the future. In addition, the source of future movement (either the group or the self) was varied. It was found that when the group was the source of movement, those who expected to shift to a more prototypical position in the future had higher collective self‐esteem than those who expected to change to an even more peripheral position. In contrast, those who anticipated an even more peripheral position had higher personal self‐esteem than those who expected to become more prototypical in the future. In Study 2 (N = 100), intragroup position at present (peripheral versus prototypical) and future intragroup position (peripheral versus prototypical) were manipulated orthogonally. It was found that future expectations only affected self‐esteem among those with an insecure current identity, but not among those who were currently prototypical of the ingroup. In addition, ingroup favoritism was mediated by self‐esteem changes among those whose identity was insecure. The importance of a dynamic framework for investigating group processes is stressed. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Intergroup and intragroup competition and cooperation

This study examined the effects on group performance and evaluation of three factors: intergroup competition or cooperation, intragroup competition or cooperation, and task means-interdependence. Intragroup cooperation was related positively to performance on a high means-interdependent task and was related negatively to performance on a low means-interdependent task. However, this relationship held only when there was intergroup cooperation rather than intergroup competition. These results were discussed in terms of their implications for the relative magnitude of the motives produced by the intragroup and intergroup reward structure. Evaluations of ingroup members were higher when there was intragroup cooperation than when there was intragroup competition. To foster ingroup liking, it was not necessary to introduce intergroup competition.     

Perceived ingroup entitativity and intergroup bias: an interconnection of self and others

Campbell's (1958) concept of ingroup entitativity is reformulated as a perceived interconnection of self and others. A 2 (intergroup relations: competitive, neutral)×3 (intragroup interaction: low, medium, high) between-subjects design was used to examine (1) the effects of intergroup and intragroup relations on perceived ingroup entitativity and (2) the relation between ingroup entitativity and intergroup bias. Regardless of the relations between groups, members who experienced intragroup interaction had stronger perceptions of ingroup entitativity and stronger representations of the aggregate of ingroup and outgroup members as two separate groups than members who lacked intragroup interaction. Furthermore, perceptions of ingroup entitativity mediated the effect of the salience of the intergroup boundary on behavioral intergroup bias. These results call into question the ‘intergroup’ nature of group based phenomena. An ingroup entitativity framework is presented that locates the source of group-based phenomena (e.g. intergroup bias) in intragroup processes. Copyright © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.