Do unto others as they do unto you: reciprocity and social identification as determinants of ingroup favoritism

Predictions from the bounded and unbounded reciprocity hypotheses and from social identity theory (SIT) were examined in a minimal group experiment in which ingroup outcome dependence, outgroup outcome dependence, and the strength of social identity were orthogonally manipulated. Both ingroup and outgroup outcome dependence affected reward allocations. Participants made more ingroup-favoring reward allocations across all conditions. The identification manipulation produced hypothesized effects on social identification measures and marginal effects of identification on reward allocations in the no-dependence condition. Support was found for both an unbounded and bounded version of the reciprocity hypothesis and marginal support for a SIT approach to intergroup discrimination. The study highlights insufficiencies of both theoretical approaches and suggests possibilities for integration and elaboration.     

Rational selective exploitation and distress: employee reactions to performance-based and mobility-based reward allocations

Prior research has demonstrated that allocators frequently distribute greater rewards to persons with high professional and geographic mobility than to persons with constrained mobility, especially among the very competent. This phenomenon has been termed rational selective exploitation. Do the recipients of such allocations actually experience this distribution rule as unjust and distressing, or is it a misnomer to refer to this phenomenon as exploitation? Two studies were conducted to explore this question. Study 1 was a laboratory experiment in which we manipulated relative performance level, relative mobility level, and allocation standard: performance based versus mobility based. Study 2 was a cross-sectional survey of actual employees in which subjects reported the degree to which performance and mobility were the basis for pay decisions at their places of employment, as well as the degree to which they perceived each standard to be fair. Both studies demonstrated that people regard mobility-based allocations as less fair and more distressing than performance-based allocations. Furthermore, the degree of distress resulting from mobility-based allocations is greater among persons who are disadvantaged by that standard: among people with constrained mobility, especially those who perform at high levels. These findings provide good support for the assertion that so-called rational selective exploitation is indeed distressing to employees. Reactions to this form of distress are also explored, and the implications of these findings for the allocation process are discussed.     

Individual Differences in Good Manners Rather Than Compassion Predict Fair Allocations of Wealth in the Dictator Game

One of the most common tools for studying pro‐sociality is the dictator game, in which allocations to one's partner are often described in terms of altruism. However, the motivations driving these allocations may represent either emotional concern for others (compassion), adherence to social norms regarding fairness (politeness), or both. In this article, we apply personality psychology to the study of behavior in the dictator game, in which we examine the discriminant validity of distinct pro‐social constructs from the Big Five and HEXACO models in relation to allocations of wealth. Across four studies (Study 1: N = 192; Study 2: N = 212; Study 3: N = 304; Study 4: N = 90) utilizing both hypothetical and incentivized designs, we found that the politeness—but not compassion—aspect of Big Five Agreeableness, as well as HEXACO Honesty‐Humility, uniquely predicted dictator allocations within their respective personality models. These findings contribute to a growing literature indicating that the standard dictator game measures “good manners” or adherence to norms concerning fairness, rather than pure emotional concern or compassionate motives, and have important implications for how this paradigm is used and interpreted in psychological research.     

Social Motives Underlying Rational Selective Exploitation: The Impact of Instrumental Versus Social-Emotional Allocator Orientation on the Distribution of Rewards in Groups

Prior research has demonstrated that allocators frequently distribute lesser rewards to employees with constrained mobility, and that this tendency is more pronounced among more competent employees. This phenomenon is termed "rational selective exploitation." This allocation rule is rational in that it serves to maintain membership among the most desirable group members–those who contribute most to the group's task goals–but is exploitative in that it produces an erosion of equity: Although deserving of high rewards, the outcomes of competent but entrapped employees are lower than those of their counterparts with greater mobility. Four experiments tested several predictions concerning reward allocation processes. First, allocators distributed greater rewards to more competent employees. This tendency was more pronounced under conditions of instrumental allocator orientation than under conditions of social-emotional orientation. Second, allocators distributed greater rewards to more mobile employees. This tendency was more pronounced under conditions of instrumental orientation and constrained labor pool, and was weakly promoted by the anticipation of future allocations. Third, employee competence and employee mobility interacted; the tendency to allocate greater rewards to more mobile employees was especially pronounced among highly competent employees. This interaction of competence with mobility–the rational selective exploitation effect–was stronger under conditions of instrumental allocator orientation than under conditions of greater social-emotional concern, and was weakly promoted by the anticipation of future allocations.     

Why are maximizers less happy than satisficers? Because they maximize positive and negative outcomes

Although extant research suggests maximizing is related to objectively positive outcomes (e.g., job offers), I propose maximizing may be simultaneously and positively related to objectively negative outcomes (e.g., job rejections). Specifically, I argue maximizers bear more instances of positive and negative outcomes than satisficers, and that in spite of their positive outcomes—yet because of their negative outcomes—maximizers are less happy than satisficers. In Study 1, participants took the alternate uses test; as expected, maximizing was related to seeking alternatives, yet, maximizing was also related to seeking low‐quality alternatives. Moreover, the number of low‐quality alternatives partially mediated the relationship between maximizing and negative affect. In Study 2, the impact of maximizing on experiencing negative affect was further assessed by examining whether maximizing is related to seeking and choosing low‐quality alternatives. Participants played the Iowa Gambling Task; it was found maximizing was related to alternating among decks, and in particular, sampling bad decks; ultimately, maximizing was related to winning less money, and experiencing more negative affect. Finally, in Study 3, participants responded to questionnaires about positive and negative life outcomes; it was found that maximizing was simultaneously related to experiencing more positive and more negative outcomes, and that negative outcomes predicted happiness to a greater degree than positive outcomes. These findings suggest an irony of maximizing: It produces both positive and negative outcomes, contributing to literature explaining why maximizers are less happy than satisficers, and ultimately whether happiness is a matter of choice. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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 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.     

Rational Selective Exploitation Among Americans and Chinese: General Similarity, With One Surprise

A cross-cultural experiment tested predictions regarding reward allocation decisions among subjects in the United States and Taiwan. The experiment included five independent variables—two between-subject factors (American vs. Chinese; instrumental vs. unspecified vs. social-emotional allocator orientation) and three within-subject factors (high vs. low employee competence, social skill, and mobility). In general, Americans and Chinese distributed rewards quite similarly: In both cultures, allocators distributed greater rewards to employees who were more competent and possessed greater social skill. In both cultures, instrumental allocator orientation induced stronger tendencies to base allocations on competence; social-emotional allocator orientation induced stronger tendencies to base allocations on social skill. In both cultures, subjects engaged in competence-based "rational selective exploitation"—among highly competent employees, those with greater professional mobility received larger portions of the reward pool than did counterparts with constrained mobility. In both cultures, subjects also evidenced an unexpected social-skill-based rational selective exploitation—among employees with good social skill those with greater professional mobility received larger portions of the reward pool than did counterparts with constrained mobility. However, there were a number of interactions with culture that ran contrary to our a priori predictions: We hypothesized that Americans would exhibit greater individualism by focusing on competence in allocating outcomes, and that Chinese would exhibit greater collectivism by focusing on social skill. Although Americans did attend to employee competence more than Chinese, Americans also attended to employee social skill more than Chinese. These findings are discussed in terms of an expanded conceptualization of the nature of individualism and collectivism.     

Ideological beliefs as determinants of discrimination in positive and negative outcome distributions

Social identity theory proposes that discrimination contributes favourably to group members' social identity. In minimal group paradigm (MGP) studies involving positive outcome distributions (e.g. money), discrimination is associated with a more positive social identity. But studies on the positive‐negative asymmetry effect show that categorization leads to less discrimination when negative (salary cuts) than when positive outcomes (salary increases) are distributed. Using structural equation modelling, this study (N = 279) tested whether discrimination involving negative outcome distributions could contribute as much to group members' positive social identity as discrimination on positive outcomes. The study also tested if ideological beliefs (i.e. social dominance orientation, authoritarianism), measured one month before the MGP experiment, could predict positive and negative outcome discrimination. While the fit of the hypothesized model was adequate, only social dominance orientation predicted both positive and negative outcome discrimination. Also, discrimination on positive outcomes but not on negative ones contributed to positive social identity. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Social Identity Theory: a critical synthesis of its bases, evidence and controversies

The social identity theory (SIT) and the self-categorization theory have had considerable influence on contemporary Social Psychology, making notable contributions to our understanding of the social dimension of behaviour. In the present work, we summarise the bases of these theories and critically review the most controversial elements of SIT, exploring its limits and potential. As shown here, the literature offers a heterogeneous body of research that includes outstanding efforts of synthesis and integration, but also numerous fragmentary studies and decontextualized interpretations that have generated distorted views of group behaviour. Taking into account the multidimensional, contextually mediated, dynamic and functional nature of identitary processes, which clearly emerge in the most serious works in the field, there is obviously a need to review the epistemological and methodological tools currently employed, with a view to developing practices that allow the study of group phenomena in a manner more suited to their complexity.     

Group play therapy and tangible reinforcers used to modify the behavior of 8-yr-old boys

Eleven third-grade boys were randomly assigned to three play therapy groups. The boys had been referred by their teachers because of shy, withdrawn behavior. The Token Group met in a play group (4 Ss), had a therapist, and received tangible reinforcements for social approach behavior. The Verbal Group (4 Ss) was treated similarly to the Token Group except that no tangible reinforcements were used. The Control Group (3 Ss) met in a play group without a therapist present. Fourteen play sessions were held for each group. The Token Group changed more than the Verbal Group; the Verbal Group changed more than the Control Group; the Control Group showed no change on the objective measures used. The Token Group exhibited an increase in social approach behavior and a decrease in discrete, problem behavior. The Verbal Group increased slightly in social approach behavior. All groups failed to demonstrate changes in “productivity”, “anxiety” and “general psychological adjustment”.     

The effect of culture and power on cooperation in commons dilemmas: Implications for global resource management

This study adopted a contextual framework to examine whether an interaction between group culture and economic power influences self-interest in a simulated commons dilemma. Full-time managers enrolled in executive MBA programs in Germany, Hong Kong, Israel, and the United States (US) made decisions in an asymmetric commons dilemma. Relative to managers from the US and Germany, Israeli managers were more likely to follow an individually rational decision-making approach, taking more resources in a high versus low economic power condition. In contrast, managers from Hong Kong in a high economic power condition followed a collectively rational approach, voluntarily taking fewer resources. Egocentrism mediated this interaction effect of group culture and economic power for the Israeli managers who were more egocentric and believed it was fair to harvest more resources in a high power condition. However, egocentrism did not mediate the interaction effect for managers from Hong Kong. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings highlight the importance of studying the proximal effect of group culture on contextual factors, such as economic power asymmetry, that influence cooperation in social dilemmas.     

Probability matching in risky choice: The interplay of feedback and strategy availability

Probability matching in sequential decision making is a striking violation of rational choice that has been observed in hundreds of experiments. Recent studies have demonstrated that matching persists even in described tasks in which all the information required for identifying a superior alternative strategy—maximizing—is present before the first choice is made. These studies have also indicated that maximizing increases when (1)?the asymmetry in the availability of matching and maximizing strategies is reduced and (2)?normatively irrelevant outcome feedback is provided. In the two experiments reported here, we examined the joint influences of these factors, revealing that strategy availability and outcome feedback operate on different time courses. Both behavioral and modeling results showed that while availability of the maximizing strategy increases the choice of maximizing early during the task, feedback appears to act more slowly to erode misconceptions about the task and to reinforce optimal responding. The results illuminate the interplay between “top-down” identification of choice strategies and “bottom-up” discovery of those strategies via feedback.     

Immigrant identity of Israeli adolescents from Ethiopia and the former USSR: culture‐specific principles of organization

The study examines how a sample of 210 high‐school immigrant students (ages 14–15) from Ethiopia and the former USSR socially represent their notion of what klitat aliyah (successful adaptation to Israel) means. Prevalent relevant theories—Berry's model of Acculturation Tendencies (BAT), Social Identity Theory (SIT) and Social Comparison Theory (SCT)—suggest three kinds of patterns by which minority or socially weak groups deal with these kinds of situations. These underlying patterns were tested by a 47‐item questionnaire (with a 4‐point Likert‐like scale), constructed from immigrant narratives regarding their klitat aliyah according to SIT, SCT and BAT categories of adaptation strategies. A Guttman non‐parametric Similarity Structure Analysis (SSA) revealed four‐facet organization of items for both males and females in both sub‐samples. These facets, which reflected social representations of Israeli society, were dubbed: Extended Identity, Rivalry Identity, Secluded Identity and Identity Loss. Results did not confirm the underlying categorization of strategies suggested by SIT and SCT, and partially replicated those suggested by BAT. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Do maximizing consumers engage more in conspicuous consumption?

While much of the previous research has examined the influence of consumers' social and economic states on conspicuous consumption, little attention has been paid to the potential role that consumers' decision-making tendency plays. This study investigates whether, how, and when maximizing, as a type of decision-making tendency (both dispositional and situationally primed), influences subsequent decisions regarding conspicuous consumption. Four studies were conducted, revealing that maximizing consumers are more likely to engage in conspicuous consumption than non-maximizing consumers (Studies 1 and 2). The need for status serves as the underlying mechanism behind this behavior (Study 3). In addition, the observed effect holds only when the situation is public but disappears when it is private (Study 4). As one of the first investigations into the effect that maximizing has on a type of consumption, these findings offer valuable contributions to both theory and practice.     

Normative evaluations and frequency expectations regarding positive versus negative outcome allocations between groups

Data from several recent studies consistently show a positive–negative asymmetry in social discrimination: within a minimal social situation tendencies towards ingroup favouritism which usually appear in allocations of positively valenced resources are absent in the domain of negatively valenced stimuli. The present study investigates whether this valence-asymmetry has any correspondence to variations in normative evaluations of positive versus negative outcome allocations. For this purpose perceptions of normative appropriateness as well as frequency expectations of outside observers regarding outcome allocations made by categorized group members were investigated. Results show that parity choices were perceived as more normatively appropriate than out- or ingroup favouritism. While outgroup favouritism was judged as inappropriate as ingroup favouritism for positive resources, ingroup favouring decisions for negative resources were perceived as the least appropriate response within the minimal social situation. In addition, in contrast to results of St. Claire and Turner (1982) non-categorized subjects expected ingroup favouring decisions by group members more frequently than parity or outgroup favouring choices with respect to positively valanced resources. When, however, negative resources were to be allocated, outgroup favouritism was predominantly expected. Results are discussed in terms of justice considerations and are linked to a normative account of the positive--negative asymmetry in social discrimination. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Performative Force,Convention, and Discursive Injustice

I explore how gender can shape the pragmatics of speech. In some circumstances, when a woman deploys standard discursive conventions in order to produce a speech act with a specific performative force, her utterance can turn out, in virtue of its uptake, to have a quite different force—a less empowering force—than it would have if performed by a man. When members of a disadvantaged group face a systematic inability to produce a specific kind of speech act that they are entitled to perform—and in particular when their attempts result in their actually producing a different kind of speech act that further compromises their social position and agency—then they are victims of what I call discursive injustice. I examine three examples of discursive injustice. I contrast my account with Langton and Hornsby's account of illocutionary silencing. I argue that lack of complete control over the performative force of our speech acts is universal, and not a special marker of social disadvantage. However, women and other relatively disempowered speakers are sometimes subject to a distinctive distortion of the path from speaking to uptake, which undercuts their social agency in ways that track and enhance existing social disadvantages.     

Maintaining social identity in a mixed-gender setting: Minority/majority status and cooperative/competitive feedback

This study tested the applicability of Tajfel and Turner's (1986) Social Identity Theory (SIT) to cooperative behavior in a mixed-gender setting. SIT suggests that as a “socially subordinate” group in a male-dominated society, women, when their gender is in the numerical minority, will engage in social competition in an attempt to enhance social identity. However, gender-based socialization may encourage men toward competition and women toward cooperation, regardless of group gender composition. In this study, male and female subjects were assigned to a six-person mixed-gender group in which their gender was either in the numerical minority or majority, and performed an interactive task under either cooperative or competitive feedback. An interaction of sex and feedback showed males in the cooperative feedback condition responded more competitively than did males in the competitive feedback condition, while females were equally cooperative in both feedback conditions. Feedback also interacted with the numerical ingroup/outgroup gender balance. While competitive feedback elicited little variation in subjects' responses across the ingroup/outgroup balance variable, the cooperative condition elicited greater competition from subjects in the numerical minority and greater cooperation from those in the numerical majority. Results were interpreted as partial support for SIT, while stressing the need for further investigation into gender as a unique influence on intergroup behavior.     

Social identity gratifications of social network sites and their impact on collective action participation

Collective action has been studied by social psychologists for over a century. Social network sites such as Facebook have further extended the ability of individuals to instigate social, political and organizational change, and provide a new context in which to study collective action. Drawing on social identity theory (SIT), self‐categorization theory (SCT) and uses and gratifications theory (UGT), this study explores the role of individuals’ group identification, social identity gratifications (SIG) and Facebook group use intensity on their willingness to participate in collective actions instigated through a Facebook group. Members of a Facebook group representing a cause against management completed an online survey (N = 406). Factor analyses reveal that motivations based on psychological affiliation with the group explained the most variance for Facebook group use. Moreover, compared to Facebook group use intensity, SIG were the stronger mediator between group identification and willingness to participate in collective action. The study demonstrates the utility of blending concepts from SIT, SCT and UGT to explore how socially motivated uses of the media can predict collective actions.     

社会困境中同伴行为、合作信念对合作变化的影响

本研究采用连续式公共物品困境,考察不同类型的个体在同伴遵守和违反均等规范两种条件下合作的前后变化及其可能的机制。结果发现：（1）依据行为决策对被试进行的分类与其社会价值取向之间不存在相关;（2）一人违反均等条件下被试的合作水平高于多人违反均等条件下的合作水平;（3）高贡献者在前后两次互动中维持较高的合作水平和信念水平;（4）低贡献者第二次决策时比第一次决策时更合作,这可能是由于他们的合作信念提高。