The effects of ingroup and outgroup homogeneity on ingroup favouritism,stereotyping and overestimation of relative ingroup size

An experiment (n = 61) investigated the effects of ingroup and outgroup homogeneity on ingroup favouritism, stereotyping and the overestimation of relative ingroup size. As predicted, outgroup homogeneity was conducive to ingroup favouritism. Ingroup homogeneity, however, failed to influence ingroup favouritism. Also unexpectedly, asymmetry in group homogeneity — irrespective of whether the ingroup or the outgroup was the more homogeneous group — led to pronounced stereotyping of both groups and to the overestimation of relative ingroup size.     

Attributions of intergroup bias and outgroup homogeneity to ingroup and outgroup others

The research in this article explores the structure and content of attributed intergroup beliefs: to what extent do perceivers think others of their ingroup and their outgroup display intergroup evaluative bias and outgroup homogeneity? We report studies that address this question in ethnicity, gender, and nationality intergroup contexts. In all of these, we show that perceivers attribute to others more biased intergroup beliefs than they themselves espouse. Even when perceivers themselves do not show intergroup bias or outgroup homogeneity, they attribute such biases to others, both others from their ingroup and others from their outgroup. We argue that such attributed intergroup beliefs are fundamentally important to expectations concerning intergroup interaction. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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.     

Differential processing of ingroup and outgroup information: the role of relative group status in permeable boundary groups

Perceivers individuate cognitively the ingroup more than the outgroup; that is, perceivers use person categories to process information about the ingroup, but use stereotypic attribute categories to process information about the outgroup. This phenomenon is labelled the differential processing effect (DPE). Is the DPE moderated by relative group status? In two experiments, either high- or low-status members of permeable-boundary groups (i.e. groups that encourage upward mobility) read through information about unfamiliar ingroup and outgroup members. Relative group status moderated the DPE. Clustering indices in recall and confusions in a name-matching task indicated that high-status members individuated the ingroup more than the outgroup, thus replicating the DPE. However, low-status members individuated the outgroup more than the ingroup, thus reversing the DPE. A third experiment suggested that these findings are predicated on the ingroup information being stereotype-consistent. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Ingroup and outgroup support for upward mobility: Divergent responses to ingroup identification in low status groups

Members of groups with low societal status can pursue individual upward mobility to improve their status. We examine the conditions under which ingroup and outgroup members are most inclined to support such upward mobility attempts. Whereas both ingroup and outgroup supports are important, there may be tension: dissociation from the low status group may lower ingroup support, whereas association with the low status group may lower outgroup support. Ingroup association can be expressed by communicating one's affective involvement or by behaving in line with typical ingroup practices. As predicted, studies 1 and 2 show that support from the low status ingroup depends more on affective involvement than on behavioral identity expression (BIE). In contrast, studies 3–5 show that support from the high status group is more driven by the upwardly mobile individual's BIE. Mediational analyses show that these opposite patterns are driven by differential processes, prompted by the group's respective positions in the social hierarchy. The findings provide insight into how members of low status groups negotiate the competing demands of the high and low status groups as they pursue upward mobility. Moreover, they show how affective involvement and BIE differentially affect ingroup support and outgroup opposition. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Intragroup differentiation in terms of ingroup and outgroup attributes

An experiment (n = 36) was conducted to test the hypothesis that attribute typicality moderates intragroup differentiation. The predicted reversal from perceived relative ingroup homogeneity on typical ingroup attributes to perceived relative outgroup homogeneity on typical outgroup attributes was confirmed for both homogeneity measures (standard deviation and probability of differentiation). But the ingroup homogeneity effects were more reliable than the outgroup homogeneity effects. Relative ingroup size (minority versus majority) was included in the experimental design as a between-subjects factor but did not qualify the reversal of perceived relative homogeneity.     

The effects of intergroup context of evaluation on ambivalence toward the ingroup and the outgroup

A study is reported which examines the relations between ambivalence toward the ingroup and the outgroup. The basic assumption was that ambivalent attitudes in intergroup contexts contribute to satisfying two competing motivations of group members, i.e. establishment of positive distinctiveness for the ingroup and conformity to the fairness norm. Participants were asked to evaluate the ingroup and one other group by using unipolar (positively and negatively valenced) affect‐ and cognition‐based items. We predicted an interaction effect of target group (ingroup versus outgroup) and attitude domain (affect‐based versus cognition‐based) on ambivalence. Additional hypotheses were formulated taking separately into account the positive and the negative unipolar items. We expected that on positively valenced items the ingroup would be favoured over the outgroup on both affect‐ and cognition‐based evaluations. Besides, we predicted that on negatively valenced items, the ingroup would be favoured over the outgroup on affect‐based evaluation but not on cognition‐based evaluation. Results indicated support for the predictions and shed light on the moderating role played by attitude domains on both ambivalence and ingroup favouritism. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Perception of racial discrimination and psychopathology across three U.S. ethnic minority groups

To examine the association between the perception of racial discrimination and the lifetime prevalence rates of psychological disorders in the three most common ethnic minorities in the United States, we analyzed data from a sample consisting of 793 Asian Americans, 951 Hispanic Americans, and 2,795 African Americans who received the Composite International Diagnostic Interview through the Collaborative Psychiatric Epidemiology Studies. The perception of racial discrimination was associated with the endorsement of major depressive disorder, panic disorder with agoraphobia, agoraphobia without history of panic disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, and substance use disorders in varying degrees among the three minority groups, independent of the socioeconomic status, level of education, age, and gender of participants. The results suggest that the perception of racial discrimination is associated with psychopathology in the three most common U.S. minority groups.     

Group identification and outgroup attitudes in four South African ethnic groups: a multidimensional approach

Although Sumner's ethnocentrism hypothesis, which expects stronger group identification to be associated with more negative outgroup attitudes, has been widely accepted, empirical findings have been inconsistent. This research investigates the relationship of four dimensions of ethnocultural group identification previously proposed by Phinney, that is, salience, evaluation, attachment, and involvement, with attitudes to ethnic outgroups in four South African ethnocultural groups (Africans, Afrikaans Whites, English Whites, Indians). The findings supported the factorial independence of the four identification dimensions and indicated that only one, ethnocultural evaluation (ingroup attitudes), was systematically related to outgroup attitudes, but the association could be positive, negative, or zero. Both functionalist and similarity-dissimilarity approaches to intergroup relations seemed to provide plausible explanations for the pattern of relationships obtained between ingroup and outgroup attitudes.     

Reactions to perceived deprivation in ingroup and outgroup: a cross-cultural comparison

An experiment is reported in which the reactions of observers to the relative and absolute deprivation of others are assessed. Eighty German and 80 Italian subjects made decisions about ingroup (own nationality) or outgroup (foreign) protagonists suffering high or low relative and absolute deprivation. Results showed that subjects were more likely to take social action that violated some rule when the protagonist was in high rather than low absolute deprivation. Racist subjects were somewhat more likely to satisfy the request of a deprived ingroup protagonist whereas non-racist subjects favoured the deprived outgroup. No differences emerged for non-deprived protagonists. Overall, Germans tended to take social action only when the protagonist suffered high absolute deprivation whereas Italians took action regardless of degree of absolute deprivation. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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.     

The perception of ingroup and outgroup homogeneity: On the confounding of group size,level of abstractness and frame of reference. A reply to Bartsch and Judd

In this reply, I criticize Bartsch and Judd's (1993) article on several grounds. First, they under-utilize the efforts undertaken in prior work to rule out the possibility of an inverse relation between group size and perceived group homogeneity as an alternative explanation of the observed ingroup homogeneity effect. Secondly, Bartsch and Judd's design doubles and thus aggravates the confounding problem. By trying to avoid the target group size confound, they end up with two other confounds involving level of abstractness and frame of reference. Finally, I criticize Bartsch and Judd's methodological advice to avoid within-subjects comparisons of ingroup and outgroup homogeneity in minority–majority contexts. Quite on the contrary, I highlight the socialpsychological significance of these comparisons.     

On the psychology of procedural justice: reactions to procedures of ingroup vs. outgroup authorities

Theorizing on procedural justice has assumed that people's reactions to outgroup authorities are to a large extent based on instrumental concerns. Therefore, attention is primarily directed to outcomes rather than procedures in encounters with outgroup authorities. In the current article we propose that in order for people dealing with outgroup authorities to be strongly affected by procedural fairness, the available outcome information should be ambiguous. Furthermore, we argue that people confronted with an outgroup authority react particularly negatively to unfair procedures that give them negative outcome expectancies. These patterns are not expected in encounters with ingroup authorities. Two experiments support our line of reasoning. The discussion focuses on the implications of these findings for the integration of theoretical perspectives on procedural justice. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Some effects of attitudinal similarity and exposure on attraction and aggression

Previous research investigating the relationship of attraction and aggression has yielded somewhat equivocal results. The present study investigated the influence of two variables, attitudinal similarity and exposure, on interpersonal attraction and physical aggression. Fifty-four subjects received differential exposure to another individual and were later given information concerning this individual's attitudes. The subject's attraction toward the stimulus person was assessed followed by measures of aggression toward the stimulus person. Analysis of variance indicated that an attitudinally similar other was liked significantly more (p < .01) and aggressed against significantly less (p < .05) than an attitudinally dissimilar other. The exposure variable had no main effect on either attraction or aggression but interacted significantly (p < .05) with the attitudinal variable in producing differential attraction.     

Discrimination of a low‐status outgroup: the role of ingroup threat

In the present study it was predicted that a threat to the ingroup by a high‐status outgroup would lead its members to increase the level of derogation of a lower‐status outgroup. Two experimental groups of psychologists were informed about the opinions (positive or negative) allegedly held by medical doctors regarding clinical psychologists whereas participants in the control condition did not receive any feedback. Later, all participants were asked to judge psychologists, social workers (low‐status outgroup), and medical doctors along professional and personality dimensions. As predicted, compared to participants in the positive feedback and in the control conditions, negative feedback participants increased derogation toward social workers but not toward medical doctors along the professional traits relevant to the feedback. Results are interpreted in the context of Downward Comparison Theory (Wills, 1981 ). Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Intergroup threat,knowledge of the outgroup,and willingness to purchase ingroup and outgroup products: The mediating role of intergroup emotions

Established theories have acknowledged that intergroup threat is one of the key determinants of intergroup attitudes and behaviours, but how intergroup threat can affect consumer behaviour remains unclear. Here, four preregistered studies (total N = 988) examined the effect of intergroup threat (manipulated in terms of realistic and symbolic threats) on consumers’ willingness to purchase ingroup and outgroup products. In the context of China–West relations, we measured Chinese consumers’ willingness to purchase Chinese (ingroup) and Western (outgroup) products. These studies together revealed that realistic and symbolic threats (versus control) increased willingness to purchase ingroup products and decreased willingness to purchase outgroup products, regardless of the product category. Studies 3a and 3b also measured knowledge of the outgroup as a potential moderator, revealing that realistic threat (versus control) reduced willingness to purchase outgroup products only among individuals who had less knowledge of the outgroup. Furthermore, Study 3b showed that the intergroup threat manipulation indirectly influenced consumers’ willingness to purchase ingroup/outgroup products through increased anger and decreased hope. We discussed the contributions to the intergroup relations and consumer behaviour literature and the implications for transnational marketing practices, as well as the limitations of this research.     

Men's and women's attributions of male and female traits to the ingroup and outgroup

In two experiments using the minimal group paradigm, subjects had to describe an ingroup member and an outgroup member on the BSRI. Although the targets were not categorized by sex, the results showed that the typical ingroup member was described by men as having more male traits and by women as having more female traits. They also showed that the lesser worth of outgroup members was associated for men with fewer male and female traits, whereas for women it was mainly associated with fewer female traits. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

On the asymmetry in the cognitive construal of ingroup and outgroup: A model of egocentric social categorization

A model of egocentric social categorization (ESC-model) is presented. It predicts an asymmetry in the cognitive construal of ingroups and outgroups which is traced back to an egocentrism in the cognitive differentiation of the social world. The more specific assumptions are: (1) At the most basic level of cognitive differentiation, the perceiver distinguishes between the categories ME and NOT-ME. (2) This basic level categorization predicates an asymmetry in the cognitive construal of ingroup and out-group as social categories: The ingroup is construed as a heterogeneous aggregate of separate entities and the outgroup as a homogeneous social category. (3) Egocentric social categorization thus facilitates self-definition in terms of personal identity relative to self-definition in terms of social identity. The ESC-model is highly relevant to research on perceived ingroup and outgroup homogeneity. Moreover, it alerts researchers to the possibility of ‘quasi-intergroup’ situations in which the outgroup, but not the ingroup, is a salient entity. This article also discusses the relationship between the ESC-model and self-categorization theory and points out some prospects for future research.     

Infrahuman outgroup or suprahuman ingroup: The role of nationalism and patriotism in the infrahumanization of outgroups

Previous research has shown that people are more likely to attribute uniquely human emotions to their ingroup than an outgroup (infrahumanization). In the current research, we examine whether these research findings are an indication of the infrahumanization of outgroups or the suprahumanization of the ingroup. We examined the role of nationalism and patriotism in the attribution of secondary emotions to groups. In line with the infrahumanization argument, we obtained a significant positive relationship between nationalism and the differential attribution of secondary emotions to the ingroup versus outgroup. In contrast, patriotism was negatively related to the differential attribution of secondary emotions. These findings indicate that the differential attribution of secondary emotions to the ingroup (vs. outgroup) is an indication of the derogation or infrahumanization of outgroups. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Procedural Perceptions and Support for the U.S. Supreme Court

This paper examines public support toward the U.S. Supreme Court. Although previous scholars have rightly focused on policy outcomes in explaining public attitudes toward the Court, outcome‐based theories are unable to explain why support for the Court remains high despite public disagreement with Court decisions. Some scholars argue the low visibility of the Court shields it from public scrutiny. The exposure explanation, however, is inconsistent with the empirical finding that to know the Court is to love it. This paper reconciles these differences by showing how media coverage of the Court can influence procedural perceptions and subsequent support for the Court. Expanding on recent studies examining media coverage of the Court and perceptions of fairness, this study examines how procedural perceptions mediate support for the Court. An experimental design shows that the media's portrayal of procedural information as either fair or unfair influences public evaluations of procedural fairness and subsequently support for the Court as an institution and the individual justices serving on the Court's bench.