Trusting strangers: The benefits of reciprocal self-disclosure during online computer-mediated communication and mediating role of interpersonal liking

Reciprocal self-disclosure has reportedly been associated with increased interpersonal trust. However, existing research mainly focuses on online disclosure between acquaintances and overlooks the types of reciprocal disclosure, especially in the initial interactions between strangers communicating online. This study aimed to investigate how three types of reciprocal self-disclosure (turn-taking reciprocity, extended reciprocity and non-reciprocity) contribute to trust and the mechanism of positive interpersonal liking, and whether any effect was instant and stable or increased across two interactions during computer-mediated communication (CMC). Participants were assigned to one of the three reciprocal disclosure conditions and engaged in online interactions. Self-reported and behavioural results demonstrated higher levels of interpersonal trust and liking in the second interaction phase than in the first across all conditions. The turn-taking reciprocity condition showed higher interpersonal trust than did the extended condition, and higher interpersonal liking than did the extended and non-reciprocity conditions; this effect was apparent in both interactions. These findings help us understand the relationship between online self-disclosure and interpersonal trust, suggesting that certain patterns of communication with strangers (e.g., turn-taking reciprocity) may foster more positive social outcomes during CMC over time, while demonstrating the importance of immediacy in synchronous conversations.     

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.     

Stereotype activation and self-regulation by conservatives and liberals in political encounters

We examined stereotyping and its effect on self-regulation in preparation for inter-ideological interactions. Turkish conservative and liberal students anticipated interacting with a political outgroup (vs. ingroup) member and the accessibility of outgroup and ingroup stereotypes was measured. Conservatives in both outgroup and ingroup interaction conditions showed higher accessibility for outgroup stereotypes. Liberals, however, showed lower accessibility for both outgroup and ingroup stereotypes in both conditions. Liberals’ suppression of stereotypes about the anticipated partner led to worse self-regulation when the anticipated partner was conservative but better self-regulation when the partner was liberal. Conservatives’ stereotype accessibility did not affect their self-regulation. These findings show that liberals may tend to rely on self-regulatory resources to suppress their stereotypes while anticipating inter-ideological interactions, while conservatives rely on stereotypes to navigate such interactions.     

When the outgroup becomes ingroup and when the ingroup becomes outgroup: Xenophobia and social categorization in a resource allocation task

Subjects classified as more or less xenophobic allocated resources to SWISS nationals (ingroup) and foreign residents (outgroup) in three intergroup judgement modes: negative interdependence, independence and positive interdependence. When both groups were assessed together as a single beneficiary (positive interdependence) they were allocated more resources than those provided to the outgroup under negative interdependence or independence. More xenophobic subjects, however gave less resources to both groups together under positive interdependence than to the ingroup under independence. In contrast, less xenophobic subjects allocated to both groups together a similar amount as to the ingroup under independence. These results suggest that, depending on their initial attitudes towards the outgroup, individuals will categorize a superordinate entity either more as an ingroup or more as an outgroup.     

Long and Short Routes to Success in Electronically Mediated Negotiations: Group Affiliations and Good Vibrations

To understand why e-mail negotiations break down, we investigated two distinct elements of negotiators' relationships with each other: shared membership in a social group and mutual self-disclosure. In an experiment, some participants negotiated with a member of an outgroup (a student at a competitor university), whereas others negotiated with a member of an ingroup (a student at the same university). In addition, some negotiators exchanged personal information with their counterparts, whereas others did not. When neither common ingroup status nor a personalized relationship existed between negotiators, negotiations were more likely to end in impasse. These results are attributable to the positive influence of mutual self-disclosure and common group membership on negotiation processes and rapport between negotiators.     

Keeping Your Distance: Group Membership,Personal Space,and Requests for Small Favors1

The effects of group membership and interpersonal distance on interpersonal anxiety and compliance with a small request were explored. In a field experiment, people seated alone in the public eating area or a shopping mall were approached by one of two female confederates: an in-group member or an out-group member. Three different interpersonal distances were assumed by the confederates: near, medium, and far. The “medium” distance was the normative distance for interactions between strangers in the experimental situation. Although the out-group confederate aroused greater anxiety and obtained less compliance than the in-group confederate overall, these differences completely disappeared in the far-distance condition. It is suggested that one reason why out-group members are less likely to elicit compliance with a small request is that they arouse interpersonal anxiety on the part of potential helpers. The results of the present experiment indicate that this anxiety can be reduced (and compliance thereby increased) if the out-group member assumes a somewhat greater distance than is normally deemed appropriate for interactions between strangers.     

Retributive justice and social categorizations: the perceived fairness of punishment depends on intergroup status

In the current research, the authors investigate the influence of intergroup status and social categorizations on retributive justice judgments, that is, the extent to which observers perceive punishment as fair. Building on social identity theory and the model of subjective group dynamics, it is predicted that when the ingroup has higher status than the outgroup, people are relatively less concerned about punishment of an outgroup offender than when the ingroup has lower status than the outgroup. Two experiments revealed that participants are more punitive towards an ingroup than an outgroup offender when ingroup status is high but not when ingroup status is low. Furthermore, in correspondence with our line of reasoning, this finding emerged because participants were less punitive towards outgroup offenders when ingroup status is high than when ingroup status was low. It is concluded that the perceived fairness of punishment depends on the offender's social categorization and intergroup status. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

How context-independent is the outgroup homogeneity effect? A response to Bartsch and Judd

Bartsch and Judd (1993) argue that outgroup homogeneity effects occur independently of any tendency for members of minority groups to see their ingroup as more homogeneous than the majority outgroup. This argument is based on evidence of an underlying outgroup homogeneity effect in a study which purports to unconfound the roles of judged group size and ingroup–outgroup judgement by presenting subjects first with a small or large ingroup (or outgroup) and then a small comparison outgroup (or ingroup). However, from the perspective of self-categorization theory (SCT), such a procedure actually introduces a confound as SCT predicts that when an ingroup is judged first it should be perceived as relatively heterogeneous due to the intragroup nature of this judgemental context. Close examination of Bartsch and Judd's data bears this point out: the tendency to see the ingroup as less homogeneous than the outgroup when the ingroup was judged first was extinguished when the ingroup was judged second even when the judged groups were of equal size. Consistent with SCT, this re-analysis suggests that manifestations of outgroup homogeneity are not independent of contextual factors which determine the relative appropriateness of category-based perception of ingroup and outgroup.     

群体身份调节最后通牒博弈的公平关注

群际互动是社会互动的一种重要形式, 在人类社会发展中起着重要作用。已有的行为研究表明个体参与群际互动时, 互动对象的群体身份会影响其心理加工和行为决策。但目前关于群体身份如何影响公平加工的动态时间过程尚不清楚。为了研究群体身份对最后通牒任务(Ultimatum Game, UG)中反应者公平关注的影响, 15名健康成人作为反应者与组内和组外提议者进行UG博弈, 提议包括极端不公平、中等不公平或公平提议三种。事件相关电位结果发现, 组外互动时公平提议和中等不公平提议比极端不公平提议诱发更负的AN1, 组内互动时不同提议诱发的AN1无显著差异。来自组内成员的中等和极端不公平提议比公平提议引起更负的内侧额叶负波(MFN), 但来自组外成员的不同提议则没有导致MFN波幅的变化。这些结果表明在群体互动情境下, 互动成员的群体身份能够影响个体的早期注意资源分配和公平关注加工。     

Representing ‘Us’ and ‘Them’: Building Blocks of Intergroup Cognition

Three experiments explored whether group membership affects the acquisition of richer information about social groups. Employing a minimal-groups paradigm, 6- to 8-year-olds were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 novel social groups. Experiment 1 demonstrated that immediately following random assignment to a novel group, children were more likely to generalize negative behaviors to outgroup members and positive behaviors to ingroup members and to report a preference for ingroup members. Experiments 2 and 3 showed that this initial ingroup-favoring bias interacts with subsequent learning, thereby attenuating the effect of negative information about the ingroup and enhancing the effect of negative information about the outgroup. These effects were more powerful with respect to preferences than induction: After hearing that some ingroup members behaved badly, children predicted that ingroup members would behave more negatively than outgroup members, but they did not express preferences for the outgroup over the ingroup. Together these data shed light on the construction of social category knowledge as well as the processes underlying the absence of own-group positivity among children from lower-status social groups.     

Expectation of outgroup behaviour: can you trust the outgroup?

Outgroups are usually viewed with suspicion and expected to discriminate against the ingroup. The present study demonstrated that ingroup members attributed past discriminatory behaviour committed by individuals of unknown group membership more to outgroup members than to either ingroup members or members of a neutral group. In contrast, past egalitarian behaviour was attributed less to outgroup members than to members of a neutral group. Ingroup members also expected more discrimination from a future outgroup allocator than from a future neutral group allocator. Finally, the study showed that ingroup members' own behaviour in allocating money became more biased in favour of ingroup members vis-á-vis outgroup members when the future allocator was from an outgroup rather than from a neutral group and when they had witnessed the discriminatory behaviour of an allocator in the past.     

Leaders and their treatment of subgroups: implications for evaluations of the leader and the superordinate group

This experiment examined members' evaluations of a group leader and the group in contexts where a superordinate group comprised two subgroups and the group leader was aligned with one or other subgroup. The design varied group leader (ingroup, outgroup) and leader behavior (ingroup favoring, outgroup favoring) as well as the broader comparative context (intragroup, intergroup). Across a number of measures, results indicated a consistent Group Leader × Leader Behavior interaction that was independent of comparative context. Although group members were most satisfied with an ingroup leader who favored the ingroup, ingroup leaders were perceived positively irrespective of their behavior. Outgroup leaders who unexpectedly favored the other subgroup were also perceived positively. However, outgroup leaders who favored their own subgroup were perceived as less fair and as more biased than other leaders. They also engendered less identification with the superordinate group and a less unified perception of the group. Results demonstrate the importance of social identity concerns to leadership in nested group contexts and emphasize the fact that perceptions of leader fairness and concern for the common group mediate responses to the superordinate category. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Unprejudiced and self-focused: When intergroup contact is experienced as being about the ingroup rather than the outgroup

Many problematic responses that occur in intergroup interaction, such as inhibited behavior, restricted disclosure of valuable information, and miscommunication, do not arise from negative attitudes and sometimes are more frequently exhibited by lower-prejudice individuals. Thus it is important to consider how lower-prejudice individuals respond to methods for improving intergroup relations that have been investigated with the prejudiced person in mind. Two studies tested the hypothesis that for lower-prejudice individuals intergroup contact is experienced as being about the ingroup rather than the outgroup, and thus fails to exert its usual effect of paving the way for more positive subsequent intergroup exchanges. As predicted, for individuals seeking to be unbiased an initial exchange with one outgroup member affected feelings about ingroup worthiness, but not reactions to a subsequently encountered outgroup member. The opposite pattern was evident for higher-prejudice individuals, who readily generalized from their experience with one outgroup member to the next.     

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 roles of ingroup identification and outgroup entitativity in intergroup retribution

A new aspect of intergroup conflict was investigated- vicarious retribution-in which neither the agent of retribution nor the target of retribution are directly involved in the initial intergroup provocation. The underlying processes involved in vicarious intergroup retribution were tested correlationally (Study 1) and experimentally (Study 2). Both ingroup identification and outgroup entitativity predict the degree of vicarious retribution. In both studies, there was evidence of motivated cognition, specifically that highly identified individuals perceived the outgroup as higher in entitativity than individuals low in identification. Structural equation modeling demonstrated that part of the effect of identification on retribution against the outgroup was mediated through perceptions of entitativity.     

Judging scandal: Standards or bias in politics

As the number of political scandals rises, we examined the circumstances that might influence how a politician would be judged as a result of a scandal. Specifically, we hypothesized that ingroup bias theory and shifting standards theory would produce different patterns of judgements. In two studies, we found support for the ingroup bias theory, such that participants rated the fictitious politician’s public approval and perceived character as higher if the politician was a member of their own political party (i.e. their ingroup) than if the politician was a member of the another political party (i.e. their outgroup). These results may explain, in part, why people may judge politicians involved in scandal more or less harshly depending on whether they are an ingroup member or outgroup member.     

The Dynamics of Intragroup Differentiation in an Intergroup Social Context

Status hierarchies typically emerge when groups of strangers interact. Relatively little work tests explanations for this process in homogenous groups, and the majority has been conducted in intragroup settings. We test an expectation‐states explanation in an intergroup context using the multilevel application of the actor–partner interdependence model. Participants (N= 48) discussed capital punishment in gender‐homogenous 6‐person groups containing 3 pro– and 3 anti–capital punishment adherents. The more speakers directed turns and proactive behavior at the outgroup than the ingroup, the higher they emerged in status. Further, high‐ but not low‐status group members obtained more successful interruptions by being proactive, but more unsuccessful interruptions by being reactive. Socioemotional standing in the group was an inverted‐U function of participation. Those higher on socioemotional standing also directed relatively less reactive behavior at the outgroup than the ingroup. The findings suggest that intragroup differentiation is subtly yet powerfully affected by status expectations and the intergroup context. Instructions for running these models in SAS and SPSS are appended.     

Affective divergence: automatic responses to others' emotions depend on group membership

Extant research suggests that targets' emotion expressions automatically evoke similar affect in perceivers. The authors hypothesized that the automatic impact of emotion expressions depends on group membership. In Experiments 1 and 2, an affective priming paradigm was used to measure immediate and preconscious affective responses to same-race or other-race emotion expressions. In Experiment 3, spontaneous vocal affect was measured as participants described the emotions of an ingroup or outgroup sports team fan. In these experiments, immediate and spontaneous affective responses depended on whether the emotional target was ingroup or outgroup. Positive responses to fear expressions and negative responses to joy expressions were observed in outgroup perceivers, relative to ingroup perceivers. In Experiments 4 and 5, discrete emotional responses were examined. In a lexical decision task (Experiment 4), facial expressions of joy elicited fear in outgroup perceivers, relative to ingroup perceivers. In contrast, facial expressions of fear elicited less fear in outgroup than in ingroup perceivers. In Experiment 5, felt dominance mediated emotional responses to ingroup and outgroup vocal emotion. These data support a signal-value model in which emotion expressions signal environmental conditions.     

Group Status and Hierarchy Legitimacy Effects on Effort Versus Ability Attributions for Ingroup and Outgroup Failures

Previous research has shown that people have a tendency to explain various outcomes in ways that favour their ingroup. However, there is also some evidence that this tendency may be moderated by perceptions of group status and hierarchy legitimacy. In this study, we experimentally test the combined effects of group status and hierarchy legitimacy on effort and ability attributions for ingroup and outgroup failures. It was predicted that participants assigned to an illegitimately low status condition would attribute ingroup but not outgroup failure more to a lack of effort than ability. Conversely, participants assigned to a legitimately high status group were expected to attribute ingroup but not outgroup failure more to a lack of effort than ability. Results supported these predictions and also showed outgroup failure was attributed more to a lack of effort than ability when ingroup status was either legitimately low or illegitimately high. We conclude that intergroup attributions are constrained by perceptions about relative group status and the legitimacy of the status hierarchy.     

Seeing the world with the eyes of the outgroup — The impact of perspective taking on the prototypicality of the ingroup relative to the outgroup

The positive effect of perspective taking on favorable attitudes towards stigmatized individuals and outgroups is well established (Batson et al., 1997). We draw on the ingroup projection model (Mummendey & Wenzel, 1999) to better understand the processes underlying this effect. Based on their egocentric perspective, ingroup and outgroup members have different representations of the superordinate group (perspective divergence) so that the ingroup is perceived as more relatively prototypical of the superordinate group, leading to negative outgroup evaluation. We hypothesize that the positive effect of perspective taking on outgroup attitudes is due to a reduction of relative ingroup prototypicality. Across three studies with different manipulations of perspective taking, we found that participants who were taking the perspective of an outgroup member evaluated the outgroup more positively and were less inclined to perceive their ingroup as more relatively prototypical. The effect of perspective taking on outgroup attitudes was mediated by relative ingroup prototypicality.