Effects of intergroup similarity on intergroup relations

We examined the impact of intergroup similarity on two aspects of intergroup relations. Drawing on social identity and belief congruence theory, we hypothesized that — at high levels of intergroup similarity — increasing similarity has dual, seemingly opposed effects: It increases ingroup favouritism in evaluations but also increases readiness for social contact with the outgroup. We further hypothesized that both effects are moderated by the strength of individuals' identification with their ingroup. Finally, we hypothesized that there is ingroup favouritism on dimensions relevant for defining the group, but outgroup favouritism on dimensions irrelevant for this purpose. One hundred and forty-nine students from two prestigious high schools, who were assigned to one of three levels of manipulated similarity between their schools, evaluated both schools on dimensions relevant and irrelevant to the school context and expressed their readiness for social contact with the other school. Ingroup favouritism appeared on relevant dimensions and outgroup favouritism on irrelevant dimensions. As predicted, for those highly identified with their ingroup, intergroup similarity led to greater ingroup favouritism in evaluations on relevant dimensions but to increased readiness for outgroup social contact. Implications for interpreting inconsistent results of past research and for specifying conditions for intergroup bias are discussed.     

Social categorization and intergroup behaviour

The aim of the studies was to assess the effefcs of social categorization on intergroup behaviour when, in the intergroup situation, neither calculations of individual interest nor previously existing attitudes of hostility could have been said to have determined discriminative behaviour against an outgroup. These conditions were satisfied in the experimental design. In the first series of experiments, it was found that the subjects favoured their own group in the distribution of real rewards and penalities in a situation in which nothing but the variable of fairly irrelevant classification distinguished between the ingroup and the outgroup. In the second series of experiments it was found that: 1) maximum joint profit independent of group membership did not affect significantly the manner in which the subjects divided real pecuniary rewards; 2) maximum profit for own group did affect the distribution of rewards; 3) the clearest effect on the distribution of rewards was due to the subjects' attempt to achieve a maximum difference between the ingroup and the outgroup even at the price of sacrificing other ‘objective’ advantages. The design and the results of the study are theoretically discussed within the framework of social norms and expectations and particularly in relation to a ‘generic’ norm of outgroup behaviour prevalent in some societies.     

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.     

Superordinate identities and intergroup conflict: The ingroup projection model

This chapter summarises results from a research programme on the psychological basis of tolerance and discrimination in intergroup relations, with particular consideration of the role of superordinate identities. According to the ingroup projection model, a relevant superordinate group provides dimensions and norms for comparisons between ingroup and outgroup. Groups gain positive value or status when they are considered prototypical for the (positively valued) superordinate group. Group members tend to generalise (project) distinct ingroup characteristics onto the superordinate category, implying the relative prototypicality of their ingroup. To the extent that outgroup difference is regarded as a deviation from the ethnocentrically construed prototype it is evaluated negatively. Our research studied consequences and determinants of ingroup projection, as well as moderators of its implications. The findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the processes involved in intergroup discrimination and indicate new pathways for the reduction of prejudice, towards mutual intergroup appreciation and tolerance.     

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

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

Towards tolerance: Representations of superordinate categories and perceived ingroup prototypicality

According to Mummendey and Wenzel (1999), group members tend to perceive their ingroup, relative to an outgroup, as more prototypical of the superordinate category encompassing both groups. Hence, they tend to regard the outgroup as deviating from the norms of the superordinate category. Factors that inhibit perception of relative ingroup prototypicality should thus promote intergroup tolerance. In two experiments, the representation of the superordinate category was manipulated. Both an undefinable prototype (Experiment 1; N=63) and a complex representation (Experiment 2; N=88) led to a decrease in relative ingroup prototypicality. Dual identification with the ingroup and the superordinate category increased relative ingroup prototypicality, which was negatively correlated with positive attitudes towards the outgroup. The findings supported Mummendey and Wenzel’s assumptions about the conditions that lead to intergroup tolerance.     

How intergroup friendship works: A longitudinal study of friendship effects on outgroup attitudes

Cross‐sectional research has shown that frequency of self‐disclosure to outgroup members mediates the positive relationship between intergroup friendship and outgroup attitudes. The current research investigated the relationship between self‐disclosure and attitudes in more depth. New undergraduate students were asked to nominate an ingroup or outgroup friend and then report the intimacy of their disclosures to them, their anxiety and attitudes towards a series of social groups, in the first week of the semester and 6 weeks later. Intimacy of disclosure predicted more positive attitudes towards outgroups over time, but this association was only found among participants who nominated an outgroup friend. In the ingroup friend condition, a negative association was found. These associations were mediated by general intergroup anxiety. These relationships highlight the importance of integrating theories of interpersonal and intergroup relations when investigating intergroup contact. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Asymmetrical evaluation of ingroup versus outgroup members: a look from an information integration perspective

In evaluating ingroup versus outgroup members two types of information can be used: ‘Categorizing information’ related to the target's group membership and ‘individuating information’ related to pieces of information specific to the target to be judged. Information integration theory (IIT, Anderson, 1981) is applied as a formal tool for predicting the judgement resulting from these different pieces of information. It is further assumed that due to a general positivity bias in evaluating own affairs judges tend to evaluate ingroup members more positively than outgroup members. By applying IIT ingroup favouritism on the level of individual targets can be predicted. More importantly, an interaction concerning an asymmetrical impact of ingroup versus outgroup membership information dependent on the individuating information's valence can be predicted: the enhancement of ingroup members should be stronger for negative individuating information, whereas the devaluation of outgroup members should be stronger for positive individuating information. Further a negative correlation between intragroup differentiation and intergroup differentiation on the level of individual judgements is assumed. In a two (judge's group membership: overestimator versus underestimator) by three (target's group membership information absent; target's group membership information present as either ingroup, or outgroup member) by three (valence of the individuating information: positive, neutral, negative) factorial minimal group design with repeated measures on the last two factors the targets' likability had to be rated. The findings are in accord with predictions. Theoretical conclusions with respect to social judgement—and to intergroup theories as well as with respect to general approaches to context effects in social judgement are discussed.     

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.     

Social identity,peer group rejection,and young children's reactive,displaced, and proactive aggression

The effects of peer group rejection on 7‐ and 9‐year‐old children's (N= 192) reactive, displaced, and proactive aggression were examined in a group simulation study. Children were assigned membership in a pretend social group for a drawing competition and were then rejected or accepted by their group. Their direct and indirect aggressive intentions towards either the ingroup or outgroup were assessed. Analysis of their aggressive intentions revealed enhanced indirect aggression but less direct aggression. Peer group rejection, in comparison with acceptance, instigated reactive aggression towards the ingroup, and displaced reactive aggression towards the outgroup. Accepted children displayed proactive aggression towards the outgroup but not the ingroup. The implications of the findings for peer group rejection and aggression research are discussed.     

Property and prejudice: How racial attitudes and social‐evaluative concerns shape property appraisals

Property evaluations rarely occur in the absence of social context. However, no research has investigated how intergroup processes related to prejudice extend to concepts of property. In the present research, we propose that factors such as group status, prejudice and pressure to mask prejudiced attitudes affect how people value the property of racial ingroup and outgroup members. In Study 1, White American and Asian American participants were asked to appraise a hand‐painted mug that was ostensibly created by either a White or an Asian person. Asian participants demonstrated an ingroup bias. White participants showed an outgroup bias, but this effect was qualified. Specifically, among White participants, higher racism towards Asian Americans predicted higher valuations of mugs created by Asian people. Study 2 revealed that White Americans' prejudice towards Asian Americans predicted higher valuations of the mug created by an Asian person only when participants were highly concerned about conveying a non‐prejudiced personal image. Our results suggest that, ironically, prejudiced majority group members evaluate the property of minority group members whom they dislike more favourably. The current findings provide a foundation for melding intergroup relations research with research on property and ownership.     

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

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

Stereotypes as justifications for prior intergroup discrimination: Studies of Scottish national stereotyping

Two studies provide support for the group‐justification approach to stereotyping (Tajfel, 1981 ; Huici, 1984 ). This approach contends that stereotypes not only serve cognitive functions for individuals but also provide a means of justifying prior intergroup discrimination. Study 1 investigated whether the content of the Scottish ingroup stereotype changes due to the prior expression of intergroup discrimination. Scottish students were primed with either a ‘differentiation’ or a ‘fairness’ ingroup norm and completed two intergroup judgement tasks. Other Scottish students were primed only with a ‘differentiation’ ingroup norm, while a control group received no prime or judgement tasks. Only participants who experienced the ‘differentiation’ ingroup norm prime and the intergroup judgement tasks changed the content of their ingroup stereotype as an attempt to justify their discriminatory behaviour. Study 2 examined whether Scottish students would use both positive ingroup and negative outgroup stereotypes to rationalize intergroup discrimination. Students who experienced a ‘differentiation’ ingroup norm prime and intergroup judgement tasks showed the highest level of superior recall for positive ingroup and negative outgroup stereotype‐consistent words compared to stereotype‐neutral words. This finding suggests that the expression of intergroup discrimination activates the use of both positive ingroup and negative outgroup stereotypes. Together the findings of these two studies provide empirical support for the notion that stereotypes serve social as well as cognitive functions. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Downward Social Comparison in the Minimal Intergroup Situation: A Test of a Self-Enhancement Interpretation1

We tested some implications of Wills' (1981) downward comparison interpretation of ingroup bias in the minimal intergroup paradigm. Based on a self-enhancement interpretation of ingroup bias, we predicted that subjects who expected to succeed on a task for dispositional reasons and subsequently failed would be most threatened by the feedback and hence, would engage in downward social comparison strategies. The results did not support the self-enhancement interpretation, but a number of interesting findings emerged. First, downward social comparison involving favorable comparisons of the ingroup relative to the outgroup was pervasive and not mediated by self-esteem. Second, ingroup bias was greatest when individuals' outcomes were consistent with their expectations; ingroup bias was mitigated when subjects received feedback that was inconsistent with their expectations. Third, although low self-esteem subjects rated members of the outgroup more negatively than did high self-esteem subjects, high self-esteem subjects engaged in more downward social comparison by enhancing the self relative to both members of the outgroup and their own ingroup. Finally, self-enhancement strategies were affected by performance expectations, attributions, and chronic self-esteem: People who expected to perform well because of stable, dispositional reasons and who were high in self-esteem showed the greatest tendency to engage in self-enhancing comparisons with others. This was true regardless of whether subjects ultimately succeeded or failed on the important task and regardless of whether the comparison others were members of the outgroup or the ingroup.     

Outgroup prejudice and perceptions of prosocial intergroup behaviors

How people perceive outgroup prosocial behaviors is an important but under‐researched aspect of intergroup relations. In three experiments conducted in two cultural contexts (Italy and Kosovo) and with two different populations (adolescents and adults; N = 586), we asked participants to imagine being offered help by an outgroup versus ingroup member. Participants attributed fewer prosocial motives to and were less willing to accept help from the outgroup (vs. ingroup) member. This was particularly true for highly prejudiced participants and when the outgroup was described negatively. Participants' perceptions of the outgroup helper's prosocial motives and expected quality of the interaction with the helper mediated the effect of helper's group membership on willingness to accept the help (Experiment 3). We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings for intergroup relations.     

Group Merger Between Political Parties: The Role of the Ingroup Projection Process

In 2007, the two most important Italian left‐wing parties merged into a single political entity. This study intends to analyze the merging process. Specifically, and in line with the ingroup projection hypothesis of Mummendey & Wenzel, we have explored whether the identification and the favoritism toward the upcoming common group was affected by the perceivers' projection of specific and common stereotypical traits from the subordinate groups to the superordinate one. Political militants' (N = 132) levels of ingroup identification; their representations of the previous ingroup, outgroup, and of the new party; and their attitudes towards the common group were assessed. Results confirmed that the cognitive representation of the merged party was shaped much more on the basis of the typical traits of the ingroup than of the outgroup. Moreover, structural equation analyses showed that the identification with the superordinate category and the consequent favoritism toward the merger were related to the projection of ingroup attributes. The findings also suggested that the ingroup projection may be particularly crucial when the intergroup bias is high. Finally, political implications are discussed in terms of obstacles and resources inherent to the merging process.     

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.     

Group membership,group norms,empathy, and young children's intentions to aggress

This study assessed the effect of ingroup norms and empathy on 6 and 9‐year‐old children's (N=161) attitudes and aggressive intentions toward outgroup members. Prior to an intergroup drawing competition against an outgroup, participants' empathy was measured, and they were randomly assigned to a simulated group with a norm of direct or indirect aggression, or no aggression norm. Results indicated participants' attitudes were less positive toward the outgroup vs. the ingroup, and that both direct and indirect aggressive intentions were displayed toward the outgroup. Most importantly, the ingroup was liked less when it had an aggression norm, and the participants' aggressive intentions were not enhanced by the group aggression norm. Empathy was a significant negative predictor of direct but not indirect aggression intentions. Implications for understanding the instigation and inhibition of children's aggression intentions are discussed. Aggr. Behav. 35:244–258, 2009. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

The Process of Group Differentiation in a Dynamic Intergroup Setting

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the social categorization processes of between-group differentiation and within-group similarity in a dynamic intergroup setting. Traditionally, these processes have generally been examined in static settings, and it was hypothesized that they may not operate in the same way when group members are in a dynamic intergroup setting. Spectators at four collegiate hockey games were tested throughout the games in order to examine ingroup (home team) versus outgroup (visiting team) perceptions. The traditional effect of ingroup favoritism was found with respect to between-group differentiation, but this effect was influenced by objective measures of performance (i.e., goals). For negative characteristics, ingroup favoritism prevailed regardless of the ingroup's relative performance. The results also demonstrated that a distinction could be made between ingroup favoritism and outgroup discrimination. Although the results pertaining to within-group similarity were only suggestive, they indicated that the outgroup homogeneity effect was not operating in this dynamic context.