Urban district identity as a common ingroup identity: The different role of ingroup prototypicality for minority and majority groups

In this paper, we examined how identification with urban districts as a common ingroup identity and perceived ingroup prototypicality influence the attitudes of residents toward other ethnic groups in their neighborhood. The overall conclusion of two field studies (N = 214 and N = 98) is that for majority‐group members, there may be a positive relation between identification with an overarching identity and outgroup attitudes but only when they perceive their ingroup as low in prototypicality for the overarching group (Study 1 and 2). Conversely, for minority‐group members, there may be a positive relation between identification and outgroup attitudes but only when they perceive their ingroup as high in prototypicality for the overarching group (Study 2). Outgroup prototypicality did not moderate the relation between identification and outgroup attitudes. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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.     

Effects of trustors' social identity complexity on interpersonal and intergroup trust

Although previous literature has revealed the effect of a single social identity on trust, only few studies have examined how multiple social identities affect trust in others. The present research examined the effects of trustors' social identity complexity on their level of trust toward another person (interpersonal trust), outgroup members (outgroup trust), and ingroup members (ingroup trust). Study 1, which was a correlational study, indicated that trustors' social identity complexity was positively related to their interpersonal and outgroup trust. Three experimental studies were performed to identify causal relationships. Study 2 found that activating trustors' high social identity complexity produced high levels of interpersonal trust, and Studies 3 and 4 found that this effect was more pronounced when the trustee was an outgroup member (outgroup trust) rather than an ingroup member (ingroup trust). The implications of these results for social harmony are discussed.     

Diverse groups and information sharing: The effects of congruent ties

The impact of congruence between social and knowledge ties on performance in diverse groups was examined. Congruence occurs when group members who are socially tied share the same information and a stranger has any unique information. Incongruence occurs when group members who are socially tied possess different information, and one of them shares information with a stranger. In Experiment 1, three-person groups with congruent social and knowledge ties utilized information more effectively, reported more effective group processes, and outperformed groups with incongruent ties. Experiment 2, which involved four-person groups, examined the role of congruence in groups with either a single minority information holder or two equal-sized subgroups. Congruent groups again outperformed incongruent groups, but this was only true when groups had a minority information holder. There was no difference in the performance of congruent and incongruent groups that had equal-sized subgroups. The implications of these findings for analyses of group composition and decision-making are discussed.     

In matters of opinion, what matters is the group: Minority group members’ emotional reactions to messages about identity expression

Two studies investigated the reactions of minority group members to messages about identity expression by ingroup and outgroup sources. Our main hypothesis was that compared to ingroup sources, outgroup sources arouse more anger when they argue for identity suppression. In the first study homosexuals evaluated an outgroup source arguing for identity suppression more negatively than an ingroup source, felt more threatened by this source and as a result, experienced stronger feelings of anger towards this source. The second study among members of a language-based minority replicated and extended these findings. Furthermore we showed that the anger that is experienced towards an outgroup source causes a willingness to change the opinion of this source. When ingroup or outgroup sources supported identity expression, evaluations and experience of anger did not differ in both studies. The importance of a source’s group membership in reactions to opinions about one’s group is discussed.     

Dominant group members in intergroup interaction: safety or vulnerability in numbers?

An experiment examined how low- and high-prejudice dominant group members' (LPs' and HPs') reactions to intergroup contact were affected by whether they were accompanied by fellow ingroup members who exhibited prejudice-relevant behavior. Participants answered questions alone or in a group and then estimated how they were viewed by an observer who was an ingroup or an outgroup member. HPs believed that they were viewed more negatively by an outgroup member in the individual than the group condition. LPs showed the opposite effect, which led them to evaluate the outgroup member more negatively in the group condition. All participants in the group condition expected an outgroup member to exaggerate their similarity to the other ingroup members present, and LPs evaluated the other ingroup members more negatively when the observer was an outgroup member. The results suggest that intergroup attitudes guide the types of intergroup contact situations that are experienced most positively.     

Can you forgive? It depends on how happy you are

This paper examined how individual group status and happiness influence forgiveness. In Study 1, happiness was treated as a trait difference: highly happy people, compared with very unhappy people, were found to be more willing to forgive murderers. More important, an interaction effect between happiness and group status on forgiveness was found, that is, highly happy people tended to be more forgiving when either ingroup or outgroup members were killed; unhappy people, however, tended to be less forgiving about murder when ingroup rather than outgroup members were killed. In Study 2, happiness was treated as an emotional state difference: happiness, rather than sadness, was found to bring greater forgiveness. Moreover, consistent with the interaction effect displayed in Study 1, happy participants tended to forgive more when ingroup or outgroup members were hurt; sad participants tended to forgive less when ingroup members rather than outgroup members were hurt. Implications for connections between happiness, group membership, and forgiveness are discussed.     

对公共媒体信息的加工偏向：内外群体属性的调节作用

本研究采用两个实验在公共媒体信息背景下考察人们对不同效价新闻的加工偏向,以及新闻群体属性在加工偏向中的调节作用。实验1、2均以不同效价的内外群体的真实新闻为实验材料,实验1采用选择接触范式,从行为选择层面间接考察被试阅览不同新闻时的注意选择偏向;实验2采用点探测范式,增加两种SOA（200ms / 500ms）条件,进一步直接地揭示被试加工新闻信息时的注意偏向特点选择行为偏向背后的注意偏向特点。结果表明,实验1中被试倾向加工积极的内群体新闻以及消极的外群体新闻;同样,在实验2的注意后期,也发现人们对内群体新闻的积极注意偏向,与对外群体新闻的消极注意偏向,而在注意早期,人们对积极新闻存在注意偏向,且不受群体属性影响。结果符合社会认知加工的内群体偏好与外群体贬低偏向。     

Effects of diversity versus segregation on automatic approach and avoidance behavior towards own and other ethnic groups

We present the results of a study in which we measured automatic intergroup behavior and evaluations in ethnic majority and minority group members. We focus our attention on the level of segregation and diversity of immediate life contexts as indicators of outgroup exposure. Specifically, Dutch ethnic minority and majority students enrolled at ethnically segregated and diverse schools completed a measure of automatic approach and avoidance behavior and reported explicit intergroup attitudes. The research is framed into prevailing theories in the field: Social Identity Theory and System Justification Theory. Results of our study suggest that segregation of minority group members' immediate life context may be an important moderator of evaluations as well as approach and avoidance behavior toward ingroup and outgroup. In particular, minority members in segregated schools showed an approach bias towards their ingroup, whereas minority members in diverse schools showed an approach bias towards the majority outgroup.     

Ingroup bias and the ‘black sheep’ effect: Assessing the impact of social identification and perceived variability on group judgements

Two studies compared the relative strength of motivational assumptions drawn from SIT (e.g. Tajfel, 1978) and memory-based assumptions drawn from the differential familiarity hypothesis (Linville, Fischer and Salovey, 1989) in explaining ingroup bias and the black sheep effect (Marques, 1986, 1990). In Study 1, 15 subjects estimated member distributions and gave overall ratings of an ingroup and two outgroups. In Study 2, 42 subjects performed similar tasks for ingroup or outgroup, and evaluated likeable and unlikeable group members. Results showed, first, that overall group ratings account better for ingroup bias than do central tendencies of group distributions. In addition, likeable and unlikeable ingroup members were, respectively, upgraded and downgraded relative to their outgroup counterparts. Finally, whole ingroup ratings as well as judgements of likeable and unlikeable ingroup members proved more independent from variability and central tendency of underlying distributions than did similar outgroup judgements. Results are discussed in light of motivational and knowledge-based determinants of group judgements.     

When I's meet: sharing subjective experience with someone from the outgroup

Believing one shares a subjective experience with another (i.e., I-sharing) fosters connections among strangers and alters perceptions of the ingroup and outgroup. In this article, the authors ask whether I-sharing also fosters liking for members of a salient outgroup. Study 1 establishes that I-sharing promotes liking for the other sex, even among people with salient social identities. Study 2 shows that I-sharing promotes liking for a member of the sexual orientation outgroup, whether it occurs before or after group memberships get revealed. Study 3 focuses on salient race categories and looks at the effects of I-sharing versus value-sharing as a function of shared group membership. For those high in existential isolation, I-sharing trumps value-sharing, regardless of the I-sharer's social identity. I-sharing may offer a way of improving attitudes toward outgroup members that still enables people to embrace their differing social identities.     

The threat of moral transgression: The impact of group membership and moral opportunity

When other ingroup members behave immorally, people's motivation to maintain a moral group image may cause them to experience increased threat and act defensively in response. In the current research, we investigated people's reactions to others' misconduct and examined the effect of group membership and the possible threat‐reducing function of moral opportunity—the prospect of being able to re‐establish the group's moral image. In Study 1, students who were confronted with fellow students' plagiarism and who received an opportunity to improve their group's morality reported feeling less threatened than students who did not receive such opportunity. In Study 2, students reacted to a recent academic fraud case, which either implicated an ingroup (scholar in their own discipline) or an outgroup member (scholar in another discipline). Results indicated that participants experienced more threat when an ingroup (versus an outgroup) member had committed the moral transgression. However, as hypothesized, this was not the case when moral opportunity was provided. Hence, the threat‐reducing effect of moral opportunity was replicated. Additionally, participants generally were more defensive in response to ingroup (versus outgroup) moral failure and less defensive when moral opportunity was present (versus absent). Together, these findings suggest that the reduction of threat due to moral opportunity may generally help individuals take constructive action when the behavior of fellow group members discredits the group's moral image.     

Majority — minority status and perceived ingroup variability revisited

Social identity theory predicts that ingroup members should see their group as more homogeneous when confronted by a large and presumably dominant outgroup. This prediction has been supported in a series of recent studies, all of which purport to show that the usual ingroup—outgroup difference in perceived variability, i.e. outgroup homogeneity, is reversed when the ingroup is in a minority position. In all of these studies, however, the ingroup—outgroup distinction has been confounded with the size of the target group judged. The present study was conducted to overcome this confound. Subjects judged both the ingroup and outgroup, under one of two different orders, and the first group judged varied in size across subjects while the size of the second group was held constant. This permitted comparisons of the perceived variability of the second judged group (be it the ingroup or outgroup) when it followed the judgment of either a larger or equal size first group. Consistent with social identity theory, ingroups were judged as less variable when judged after a large outgroup than after a small one. This was true, however, only on measures of perceived dispersion and not on measures of perceived stereotypicality. On both sorts of measures, however, overall outgroup homogeneity was found, over and above the difference due to the comparison of the ingroup with a large or small outgroup.     

The black sheep effect: Judgmental extremity towards ingroup members in inter-and intra-group situations

Two experiments yielded further evidence for the black sheep effect (Marques, Yzerbyt and by ens, 1988). In the first experiment, 66 subjects were presented with two good or two poor speeches, one supposedly made by an ingroup member and the other supposedly made by an outgroup member. In the second experiment, 37 subjects were presented with one good and one poor speech supposedly made either by two ingroup members or by two outgroup members. The black sheep effect was predicted and found in both experiments: subjects over-evaluated likeable ingroup members and under-evaluated unlikeable ingroup members as compared to equally likeable and unlikeable outgroup members. Collapsing the data of the two experiments suggests that social comparison may be performed, in purely symbolic terms, against a cognitive standard of positivity rather than an outgroup present in the judgmental situation. The emergence of the predicted effect when strongly individualized information was presented in inter- as well as in intra-group situations supports the robustness of the black sheep effect.     

Comparisons of Australians and Japanese on group-based cooperation

A cross-societal experiment with 49 Australian and 56 Japanese participants examined if the group heuristic account of ingroup-favoring behavior in a Prisoner's Dilemma game can be extended beyond the minimal group situation to a situation involving an enduring social category (i.e. participant's nationality). Participants played a Prisoner's Dilemma game five times, each time with a different partner. Two of the five partners were ingroup members, two were outgroup members, and the nationality of one partner was not known. Furthermore, one of the two ingroup (or outgroup) partners knew that the participant was a member of the same (or the other) nationality, and the other did not know it. The results indicated that the knowledge that the partner had about the nationality of the participant exerted an effect only when the partner was an ingroup member. No major difference was found between Australian and Japanese participants. An outgroup-favoring cooperation pattern was observed, but that pattern was shown to be a result of fairness concerns among Australian participants and of positive stereotypes of Australians among Japanese participants.     

Why did you choose that person over me? Ingroup rejection and attributions to discrimination

The present research examined the attributions that people make when an individual rejects a member of his or her own group in favor of a member of an outgroup (i.e., ingroup rejection). Study 1 showed that Latinos rejected by an ingroup member (perpetrator) made more attributions to discrimination than Whites under similar circumstances. Study 2 showed that Latinos made more attributions to discrimination for ingroup rejection when the perpetrator was Latino as compared to when the perpetrator was White, whereas Whites' attributions to discrimination were relatively low regardless of perpetrator's ethnicity. Study 3 showed that priming loyalty norms increased attributions to discrimination among Latinos in response to ingroup rejection, but not in response to outgroup rejection. This research brings a new perspective to discrimination research by focusing on intragroup rejection and nonprototypical cases of discrimination.     

Empathy, group norms and children's ethnic attitudes

Two minimal group studies (Ns = 150, 123) examined the impact of emotional empathy on the ethnic attitudes of 5 to 12-year old white Anglo-Australian children. Study 1 evaluated the relationship between empathy and attitudes towards a same (Anglo-Australian) versus different ethnicity (Pacific Islander) outgroup. A significant empathy × outgroup ethnicity interaction revealed that empathy was unrelated to the children's liking for the same ethnicity outgroup, but that liking for the different ethnicity outgroup increased as empathy increased. Study 2 examined the influence of empathy on attitudes towards the different ethnicity outgroup when the ingroup had a norm of inclusion versus exclusion. A significant empathy × group norm interaction revealed that empathy was unrelated to liking when the ingroup had a norm of exclusion, but that liking for the different ethnicity outgroup increased when the ingroup had a norm of inclusion. Implications of the findings for promoting children's positive attitudes to ethnic minority groups are discussed.     

What children remember about ingroup and outgroup peers: effects of stereotypes on children's processing of information about group members

Three studies are reported about children's memory for stereotypic behaviors attributed to ingroup and outgroup members. According to research and theory in social cognition, cues present in the situation make cultural representations about group members accessible, and once primed, influence all phases of the information processing sequence. In Study 1, Euro Canadian and Native Canadian children (N=98) recalled stereotypic behaviors attributed to ingroup and outgroup members. In Study 2 (N=87), the influence of individual difference variables was explored. In Study 3 (N=32), the memory of Native Canadian children living on a First Nation reserve for behaviors attributed to ingroup and outgroup members was studied. Biases in recall were found in Studies 1 and 2, but in Study 3, outgroup favoritism, typically found among low status group members, was reversed among children attending a heritage school. Among the individual difference measures examined, age and level of cognitive development predicted what was remembered about group members. Older Euro Canadian children recalled more negative behaviors about outgroup members than did younger children, and more cognitively mature children recognized more information about ingroup than outgroup members. Results were discussed in terms of cognitive and situational factors influencing children's processing of group-relevant information and the challenges children in low status groups face in maintaining a sense of cultural identity.     

A license to speak up: Outgroup minorities and opinion expression

Four studies examined the relationship between outgroup minority status, defined as both belonging to a different social category and holding a different opinion than other group members, and opinion expression. Specifically, it was hypothesized - and results confirmed - that outgroup minorities would be more willing to express their opinions on an issue when their social category membership granted them psychological standing (i.e., a subjective sense of entitlement to act) than when it did not. Implications for the roles of social category membership and psychological standing in opinion expression, and for how to encourage diverse viewpoints to emerge in group contexts, are discussed.     

Interpreting references to group membership in context: feelings about intergroup contact depending on who says what to whom

Contact research often manipulates the salience of group membership, with little consideration of how such manipulations affect feelings toward intergroup contact, and how contextual features may moderate its effects. We propose that feelings toward intergroup contact may not depend solely on the degree to which group membership appears to be salient, but on how references to group membership are interpreted in the intergroup context. Two experimental studies examined how references to group membership may be interpreted differently depending on their source (ingroup or outgroup) and the recipient (minority or majority), and how these interpretations predict feelings toward cross‐group interactions. In Study 1, references to group membership were interpreted more negatively from an outgroup source among majority participants, yet a reverse pattern was observed for minority participants. Similar effects were obtained in Study 2, yet participants tended to respond negatively when an outgroup member referred specifically to their group. Moreover, feelings about cross‐group interactions were predicted only (Study 1) and strongly (Study 2) by the degree to which outgroup members' references were interpreted negatively, beyond what was predicted by participants' general awareness of group membership. Implications of these findings for future research on contact and salience are discussed. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.