Status differenttals and intergroup behaviour

This study investigated the independent effects of status differential on intergroup behaviour. Using a variant of the minimal group paradigm (Tueland Turner, 1979), subjects were categorized into groups of differing status (high, equal, low) with two levels of category salience (high, low). Using Tajfel's matrices subjects rated the creativity of products ostensibly produced by ingroup and outgroup members. Own group identification, intergroup perceptions and self-reported strategies on the matrices constituted the other dependent measures. Results indicated a main effect for group status but none for salience. Equal status groups discriminated against each other thus replicating the minimal intergroup discrimination effect. High and equal status group members were more discriminatory against outgroups and more positive about their own group membership than were low status group members. In contrast, low status group members engaged in significant amounts of outgroup favouritism. Results also showed that social categorization per se was sufficient to elicit more ingroup than outgroup liking amongst all group members regardless of status differentials between groups. Overall, the results illustrate important aspects of the interplay between group status, social identity, prejudice and discrimination.     

Power and status differentials in minority and majority group relations

Using a variant of the minimal group paradigm (Tajfel and Turner, 1986), this study tested the effects of power, status and group numbers on intergroup behaviours and perceptions. Subjects (N = 160) were categorized into groups that varied on status (high or low), power (dominant or subordinate) and group numbers (majority or minority) variables within a 2 × 2 × 2 experimental design. Based on their evaluations of others' creative products, subjects distributed credit points to ingroup and outgroup others using the Tajfel matrices. Results showed that dominant group members were much more discriminatory and less parity oriented towards outgroup others than subordinate group members. High status group members were more discriminatory and less parity oriented than low status group members. Minority group members who were dominant and of high status were highly discriminatory and were unique in showing no parity whatsoever towards outgroup others. Subordinate low status minorities did not discriminate and were exceptional in showing out-group favouritism. Relative to group status and group numbers, group power seemed more predictive of actual discriminatory behaviour. Group status accounted for the greatest variance in social identification and intergroup perceptions measures. Results also showed that social categorization was sufficient to elicit more in-group than outgroup liking amongst all group members regardless of their position in the intergroup structure. Overall, this study indicated that power, status and group numbers independently and in combination, have a strong impact on intergroup behaviours and perceptions.     

Minimal majorities and minorities

This study is one of a series of experiments designed to examine how sociostructural factors such as group numbers, power and status affect intergroup behaviour. Using a variant of Tajfel's ‘minimal group’ paradigm the present study investigated the intergroup behaviour of college students categorized as numerical minority, majority or ‘equal’ group members. The effects of salient (S) versus non-salient (S?) group categorizations were also examined. These manipulations yielded a 3 × 2 design matrix consisting of majority/equal/minority × salient (S)/non-salient (S?) group conditions. Unlike most previous studies using this paradigm, subjects' responses on Tajfel's point distribution matrices were supplemented with subjects' report of their own and outgroup's point distribution strategies. As expected, minimal group results were replicated in the ‘equal’ group (S?) condition such that mere categorization into ingroup/outgroup was sufficient to foster intergroup discrimination. However salient (S) equal group members were more fair than discriminatory in their responses. Minorities (S/S?) were generally less fair than equal groups, showed high levels of absolute ingroup favouritism (S?) while simultaneously attempting to establish positive distinctiveness from majorities. Though majorities were generally fair (S/S?), they also appeared to be more concerned than minorities about maintaining positive differentials between themselves and minorities. Although, majority (S/S?) and equal group (S?) members accurately reported their actual distribution strategies, minorities (S/S?) and equal (S) group members were not as accurate in their self reports. Overall the present results are consistent with hypotheses derived from Social Identity Theory. But the results also show that sociostructural variables such as group numbers can have an important impact on intergroup behaviours.     

The Effect of Discussion upon the Correctness of Group Decisions,when the Factor of Majority Influence is Allowed For

Abstract

Examined were a number of predictions from major intergroup theories concerning factors associated with individual and collective mobility strategies among minority group members. Respondents were first-generation “visible” minority immigrants to Canada. Interviews were conducted by interviewers from the same ethnic group as that of the respondents and in the respondents' preferred languages. Contrary to the five-stage model of Taylor and McKirnan (1984), but in accord with a minority group perspective on intergroup relations, individual action was preferred by less talented minority group members. In support of social identity theory (Tajfel &; Turner, 1986), individual action was associated with higher belief in the legitimacy of the social system, and, as predicted by relative deprivation theory (Runciman, 1966), collective action was associated with perceived group but not personal discrimination. Support was also found for resource mobilization theory (McCarthy &; Zald, 1979), in that resource availability was associated with collective action.     

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.     

The Treatment of Relevant and Irrelevant Outgroups in Minimal Group Situations With Crossed Categorizations

Abstract

Among a sample of Belgian high school boys, the author attempted to determine on the basis of social identity theory (H. Tajfel & J. C. Turner, 1979) whether an outgroup's relevancy in intergroup comparisons influences the amount of intergroup discrimination. Relevancy was manipulated by the use of 2 trivial categorization dimensions that were orthogonally crossed. In 1 of the crossed categorization conditions, this procedure resulted in the formation of 4 groups, whereas in the 2nd condition, only 2 of these groups were effectively formed. Nevertheless, the participants in both conditions were instructed to evaluate 4 groups–either 4 actual groups (1st condition) or 2 actual and 2 hypothetical groups (2nd condition). In both conditions, the intergroup evaluations exhibited the same pattern–that is, they did not differentiate their ingroups from the partly overlapping groups but were clearly biased against the double outgroup.     

Intergroup distinctiveness and differentiation: a meta-analytic integration

The authors examined the relation between perceptions of intergroup distinctiveness and intergroup differentiation in a meta-analysis. They tested the social identity theory prediction that low intergroup distinctiveness underlies differentiation (the "reactive distinctiveness" hypothesis) for effects on behavioral and judgmental differentiation. In addition, they examined the moderating power of 4 variables that H. Tajfel and J. C. Turner (1979) predicted would influence differentiation (group identification, relevance of the dimension of comparison, relevance of the outgroup. and nature of intergroup relations). Analysis of 60 tests revealed that the overall effect of distinctiveness on differentiation was not significantly different from 0, but reactive distinctiveness was found on behavioral differentiation measures, whereas reflective distinctiveness was found on judgmental differentiation measures. Only group identification was a reliable moderator. High identifiers showed reactive distinctiveness, whereas low identifiers showed reflective distinctiveness.     

The treatment of relevant and irrelevant outgroups in minimal group situations with crossed categorizations

Among a sample of Belgian high school boys, the author attempted to determine on the basis of social identity theory (H. Tajfel & J. C. Turner, 1979) whether an outgroup's relevancy in intergroup comparisons influences the amount of intergroup discrimination. Relevancy was manipulated by the use of 2 trivial categorization dimensions that were orthogonally crossed. In 1 of the crossed categorization conditions, this procedure resulted in the formation of 4 groups, whereas in the 2nd condition, only 2 of these groups were effectively formed. Nevertheless, the participants in both conditions were instructed to evaluate 4 groups--either 4 actual groups (1st condition) or 2 actual and 2 hypothetical groups (2nd condition). In both conditions, the intergroup evaluations exhibited the same pattern--that is, they did not differentiate their ingroups from the partly overlapping groups but were clearly biased against the double outgroup.     

Social differentiation between ‘dominant’ and ‘dominated’ groups: Toward an integration of social stereotypes and social identity

In the experiment reported here, 116 male and female adult subjects allocated the points of Tajfel's matrices to the self; an ingroup (same sex), and an outgroup (opposite sex) member, on the basis of gender stereotypical comparison dimensions, individually or in the presence of an ingroup and two outgroup members. Results show that interindividual and intergroup differentiation are associated with masculine characteristics, but not with feminine ones and that there are differences in the male and female patterns of differentiation. Results are discussed within the framework of social identity theory. A theoretical integration of social stereotypes and social identity is proposed, in order to elucidate the process of intergroup discrimination between gender categories.     

Group power as a determinant of interdependence and intergroup discrimination

This experiment (N = 239) investigated the effects of group power and legitimacy of power differentials on intergroup discrimination, measured through negative outcome allocations and linguistic abstraction. Furthermore, it examined the mechanisms through which group power affects discrimination by testing the mediating role of perceived interdependence and social identification. Three power conditions were created by modifying the standard minimal group paradigm: equal, high and low power conditions. Power was directly proportional (legitimate conditions) or inversely proportional (illegitimate conditions) to group members' performance in a problem-solving task. Results showed that intergroup discrimination in the high and low power conditions was higher than in the equal power condition on both the allocation and the linguistic measures. Legitimacy moderated the effect of group power on negative outcome allocations, while it had a main effect on the linguistic abstraction. In addition, perceived interdependence turned out to be the main mediator of the effect of power on negative outcome allocations. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Effects of Limited and Conflicting Stereotypic information on Group Categorization in Northern Ireland1

The process of group categorization, as suggested by Tajfel and Turner's (1979) theory of intergroup comparison, was examined under conditions of intergroup conflict in Northern Ireland. The theory predicts that under “normal” conditions groups have a need to distinguish themselves from others. The present study investigates how individuals in Northern Ireland under extreme environmental pressures to identify both their own and other groups, can use learned stereotypic cues in making such categorizations. Results suggested that such limited information was highly effective in the process of categorization, with both Protestant and Catholic subjects exhibiting significant agreement and confidence in identifying unknown persons on the basis of stereotypic cues Conflicting information was found to reduce subject's confidence levels, with conflicting Catholic cues being more disruptive than Protestant ones     

Individual versus collective responses to membership in a low-status group: the effects of stability and individual ability

To test predictions of social identity theory (SIT; M. A. Hogg & D. Abrams, 1988; H. Tajfel & J. C. Turner, 1979) and the 5-stage model (FSM; D. M. Taylor & D. J. McKirnan, 1984) concerning reactions to membership in a low-status group, the authors led 112 pupils to believe that another (anonymous) class outperformed their class. In an overall permeable and legitimate intergroup context, the authors manipulated the stability of the low group status and the individual ability of the group members. Contrary to SIT and FSM, the pupils generally favored collective normative action. Individual mobility was preferred only by group members, especially boys, with high individual ability who thought that the low status of their group was stable. The results support FSM assumptions (a) that individual ability is a powerful determinant of intergroup behavior but (b) that one should consider its impact in combination with perceived stability.     

The minimal group paradigm: Categorization into two versus three groups

The minimal group paradigm (Tajfel, Billig, Bundy and Flament, 1971) has been influential in the study of intergroup relations. Thus far, most minimal group experiments have divided the subjects either into two groups, or have categorized them on two separate dichotomous dimensions in cross-categorization experiments. This study examines the minimal group paradigm using three distinct and independent groups. Comparison of the results with three minimal groups with those of a baseline two-group experiment shows that with a three-group structure there is no significant ingroup bias. It is suggested that the two-group minimal group experiment shows ingroup bias because subjects access a dichotomous categorization, and that this dichotomous categorization primes a competitive orientation. A two-group context may be particularly efective in evoking an ‘us versus them’ contrast. Self-categorization as a group member is more likely to occur in the presence of two groups whereas three minimal groups renders an ‘us–them’ contrastive orientation less salient. The absence of intergroup discrimination found in the present minimal group study may be limited to the behaviour of minimal or artificially created groups. In the real world of intergroup relations discrimination towards multiple outgroups is a well-known phenomenon. While this study should be regarded as only preliminary research, further elaboration and specification of the conditions under which multiple group contexts may hinder intergroup discrimination is required.     

Coping Options: Missing Links between Minority Group Identification and Psychological Well-Being

Using concepts from social identity theory ( Tajfel & Turner, 1979 ) and Lazarus and Folkman's (1984) cognitive theory of stress and coping we tested the capacity for group identification to foster beliefs in one's ability to cope successfully and in turn predict psychological well-being. Black American participants appraised the availability of coping options that varied by level of identity (individual, intragroup, and intergroup) as well as function of coping (problem-focused and emotion-focused). Replicating prior work, participants who were higher in racial group identification reported more positive well-being. Appraisals of individual emotion-focused and intergroup problem-focused options mediated the relationship of group identification with both self-esteem and life satisfaction. Appraisals of intergroup emotion-focused options also partially mediated the relationship between group identification and life satisfaction. Findings suggest that the relationship between minority group identification and well-being may partly be due to its influence over a person's sense that they and their group can respond effectively to disadvantage.     

Individual Versus Collective Responses to Membership in a Low-Status Group: The Effects of Stability and Individual Ability

Abstract

To test predictions of social identity theory (SIT; M. A. Hogg & D. Abrams, 1988; H. Tajfel & J. C. Turner, 1979) and the 5-stage model (FSM; D. M. Taylor & D. J. McKirnan, 1984) concerning reactions to membership in a low-status group, the authors led 112 pupils to believe that another (anonymous) class outperformed their class. In an overall permeable and legitimate intergroup context, the authors manipulated the stability of the low group status and the individual ability of the group members. Contrary to SIT and FSM, the pupils generally favored collective normative action. Individual mobility was preferred only by group members, especially boys, with high individual ability who thought that the low status of their group was stable. The results support FSM assumptions (a) that individual ability is a powerful determinant of intergroup behavior but (b) that one should consider its impact in combination with perceived stability.     

Favouritism as a function of assumed similarity and anticipated interaction

Discussions of intergroup behavior (e.g., Rabbie and Wilkens, 1971; Tajfel, Flament, Billig and Bundy, 1971) have drawn attention to the influence of both assumed similarity and anticipated future interaction between an individual and other members of his group on his tendency to assign more favourable outcomes to members of his own group than to members of another group. This note examines whether similar processes may also affect an individual's tendency to make intragroup discriminations between different members of a group to which he himself does not belong, in a situation where the variables of similarity and anticipated interaction may be treated as independent factors.     

The effects of social context,source fairness,and perceived self‐source similarity on social influence: a self‐categorisation analysis

Based upon a self‐categorisation analysis of social influence (Turner, 1991), we predicted that individuals who self‐categorise with the source of a communication would align their own private attitudes more closely with the source when that source was distributively fair rather than unfair in an intragroup context. We expected this pattern to reverse in an intergroup context when the unfairness was ingroup favouring. These expectations were confirmed in a laboratory experiment (N=101). The data suggest that neither source similarity nor source fairness serve simply as persuasion cues to which individuals thoughtlessly conform. We argue, instead that, once self‐categorised, individuals: (1) actively attend to an ingroup member's behaviours and the context in which they occur, and (2) are influenced only by a source who provides some form of social identity enhancement, either by being fair in an intragroup context (Lind & Tyler, 1988) or ingroup favouring in an intergroup context (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Ethnic identity, self-esteem, and occupational aspirations of Indian and Anglo-Saxon British adolescents

A questionnaire monitoring occupational aspiration, ethnic identification, adolescent experience, and self-esteem was administered to a large sample of Indian and Anglo-Saxon British male and female adolescents attending school in the West Midlands. The relationship between these variables and differences between the four groups were consistent with predictions derived from the social identity approach to intergroup relations and group behaviour (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). Indian males were found to possess a social mobility belief structure that mediates high occupational aspirations and keeness to marry out of their ethnic group. In contrast, Indian females were found to possess a social change belief structure associated with acceptance of the status quo and lower aspirations. Males and Anglo-Saxons reported higher self-esteem than females or Indians. The adolescent experience findings were less clear, but were consistent with the general interpretation of the data that the differences in intersex relations and gender-related experiences are contingent on ethnicity.