群际偏差的进化：人类对暴力与疾病威胁的适应

内群体偏好与内群体贬低现象普遍存在于社会生活中, 但为何会存在这两种群际偏差的心理机制以及这两种群际偏差是否具有进化基础的问题一直没有得到解答。通过系统整理在暴力威胁和疾病威胁构成的生存压力下, 两种群际偏差遵循烟雾探测原则和功能弹性原则处理威胁线索的研究报告, 研究说明了两者虽然方向完全相反, 但却是同一威胁管理机制对特定的内外群体关系产生的不同反应, 具有进化的适应性, 支持其进化假说。     

Our flaws are more human than yours: ingroup bias in humanizing negative characteristics

Four studies investigated whether people tend to see ingroup flaws as part of human nature (HN) to a greater degree than outgroup flaws. In Study 1, people preferentially ascribed high HN flaws to their ingroup relative to two outgroups. Study 2 demonstrated that flaws were rated higher on HN when attributed to the ingroup than when attributed to an outgroup, and no such difference occurred for positive traits. Study 3 replicated this humanizing ingroup flaws (HIF) effect and showed that it was (a) independent of desirability and (b) specific to the HN sense of humanness. Study 4 replicated the results of Study 3 and demonstrated that the HIF effect is amplified under ingroup identity threat. Together, these findings show that people humanize ingroup flaws and preferentially ascribe high HN flaws to the ingroup. These ingroup humanizing biases may serve a group-protective function by mitigating ingroup flaws as "only human."     

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.     

A recognition advantage for members of higher-status racial groups

The other-race effect (ORE) is a recognition memory advantage afforded to one's racial ingroup versus outgroup. The motivational relevance of the ingroup—because of relationships, belonging and self-esteem—is central to many theoretical explanations for the ORE. However, to date, the motivational relevance of outgroups has received considerably less attention in the ORE literature. Across six experiments, Black, White, Asian and Latinx American participants consistently demonstrated better recognition memory for the faces of relatively higher-status racial/ethnic group members than those of lower-status groups. This higher-status recognition advantage even appeared to override the ORE, such that participants better recognized members of higher-status outgroups—but not an outgroup of equivalent status—compared to members of their own ingroup. However, across a variety of self-reported perceived status measures, status differences between the high- and low-status groups generally did not moderate the documented recognition advantage. These findings provide initial evidence for the potential role of group status in the ORE and in recognition memory more broadly, but future work is needed to rule out alternative explanations.     

Anticipated bias from an outgroup: An attributional analysis

Utilizing a group product evaluation paradigm, a study was conducted to investigate anticipated outgroup evaluations. Specifically, it was proposed that ingroup members view outgroups in a way that leads them to anticipate discrimination. Results indicated, as predicted, that while subjects expected outgroup members to favour their own (outgroup) product, they expected impartial judges to agree with their own more favourable rating of the (ingroup) product. It is thus suggested that while subjects saw outgroup members as biased in their anticipated evaluations, they saw their own evaluations as relatively impartial. The results are discussed as an expression of ethnocentric attribution.     

Ingroup identification as a moderator of positive–negative asymmetry in social discrimination

Group members typically favour ingroups over outgroups, particularly when distributing positive rather than negative resources. The present investigation examined whether the positive–negative discrimination asymmetry in the minimal group paradigm varies as a function of ingroup identification. After being categorized into arbitrary groups, participants expressing low to high ingroup identification allocated positive, neutral, or negative outcomes on the basis of group membership (i.e. ingroup versus outgroup recipients). The interaction between ingroup identification and outcome valence revealed that identification influenced the magnitude of discrimination asymmetry. Specifically, increases in identification led to discrimination in favour of the ingroup for positive but not negative outcomes. The implications for intergroup behaviour more generally are considered. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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.     

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.     

Minimal‐group membership influences children's responses to novel experience with group members

Children, like adults, tend to prefer ingroup over outgroup individuals, but how this group bias affects children's processing of information about social groups is not well understood. In this study, 5‐ and 6‐year‐old children were assigned to artificial groups. They observed instances of ingroup and outgroup members behaving in either a positive (egalitarian) or a negative (stingy) manner. Observations of positive ingroup and negative outgroup behaviors reliably reduced children's liking of novel outgroup members, while observations of negative ingroup and positive outgroup behaviors had little effect on liking ratings. In addition, children successfully identified the more generous group only when the ingroup was egalitarian and the outgroup stingy. These data provide compelling evidence that children treat knowledge of and experiences with ingroups and outgroups differently, and thereby differently interpret identical observations of ingroup versus outgroup members.     

We are, therefore they aren’t: Ingroup construal as a standard of comparison for outgroup judgments

Five studies tested the assumptions: (a) that ingroups are habitually used as a standard of comparison for outgroup judgments, and (b) that outgroup judgments are generally contrasted away from a momentary construal of the ingroup. Results generally support these assumptions. Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrated increased activation levels of ingroup knowledge as a result of corresponding outgroup judgments. Experiments 3 and 4 showed that outgroup judgments depend not only on cognitively accessible outgroup exemplars, but also on accessible ingroup exemplars. Finally, Experiment 5 demonstrated that the impact of accessible ingroup exemplars on outgroup judgments is mediated by changes in the construal of the ingroup, such that: (a) outgroups were judged lower with regard to a given trait the higher participants perceived their ingroup with regard to that trait, and (b) controlling for the effect of ingroup construal attenuated the obtained effects on outgroup judgments.     

Empathy constrained: Prejudice predicts reduced mental simulation of actions during observation of outgroups

Perception-action-coupling refers to the vicarious activation of the neural system for action during perception of action, and is considered important for forms of interpersonal sensitivity, including empathy. We hypothesize that perception-action-coupling is limited to the ingroup: neural motor networks will fire upon the perception of action, but only when the object-person belongs to the ingroup; if the object-person belongs to an outgroup these motor neurons will not fire. Using electroencephalographic oscillations as an index of perception-action-coupling, we found exactly this: participants displayed activity over motor cortex when acting and when observing ingroups act, but not when observing outgroups - an effect magnified by prejudice and for disliked groups (South-Asians, then Blacks, followed by East Asians). These findings provide evidence from brain activity for yet another detrimental aspect of prejudice: a spontaneous and implicit simulation of others’ action states may be limited to close others and, without active effort, may not be available for outgroups.     

Resource scarcity aggravates ingroup bias: Neural mechanisms and cross-scenario validation

Previous studies examining the relationship between ingroup bias and resource scarcity have produced heterogeneous findings, possibly due to their focus on the allocation of positive resources (e.g. money). This study aims to investigate whether ingroup bias would be amplified or eliminated when perceived survival resources for counteracting negative stimuli are scarce. For this purpose, we exposed the participants and another confederate of the experimenters (ingroup/outgroup member) to a potential threat of unpleasant noise. Participants received some ‘relieving resources’ to counteract noise administration, the amount of which may or may not be enough for them and the confederate in different conditions (i.e. abundance vs. scarcity). First, a behavioural experiment demonstrated that intergroup discrimination manifested only in the scarcity condition; in contrast, the participants allocated similar amounts of resource to ingroup and outgroup members in the abundance condition, indicating a context-dependent allocation strategy. This behavioural pattern was replicated in a follow-up neuroimaging experiment, which further revealed that when contrasting scarcity with abundance, there was higher activation in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) as well as stronger functional connectivity of the ACC with the empathy network (including the temporoparietal junction and medial prefrontal cortex) for ingroup compared to outgroup members. We suggest that ACC activation reflects the mentalizing process toward ingroup over outgroup members in the scarcity condition. Finally, the ACC activation level significantly predicted the influence of resource scarcity on ingroup bias in hypothetical real-life situations according to a follow-up examination.     

Don't ignore the other half: the impact of ingroup identification on implicit measures of prejudice

Recently several implicit measures of prejudice have been developed. Prejudice indices based on these measures are computed from response differences to positive and negative targets resulting from outgroup compared to ingroup stimuli. Up to now the focus of research involving these measures has mainly been on attitudes and relations to outgroups (i.e. negative attitudes towards the outgroup). It is suggested here that implicit measures of prejudice are also influenced by one's relation towards the ingroup (i.e. ingroup identification), because they involve ingroup as well as outgroup stimuli. A correlational study and an experiment were conducted that supported this prediction. Implications for the application of implicit measures are discussed. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Infrahumanization or familiarity? Attribution of uniquely human emotions to the self, the ingroup, and the outgroup

People attribute more secondary emotions to their ingroup than to outgroups. This effect is interpreted in terms of infrahumanization theory. Familiarity also could explain this differential attribution because secondary emotions are thought to be less visible and intense than primary ones. This alternative explanation to infrahumanization was tested in three studies. In Study 1, participants attributed, in a between-participants design, primary and secondary emotions to themselves, to their ingroup, or to an outgroup. In Study 2, participants answered for themselves and their ingroup or for themselves and an outgroup. In Study 3, participants made attributions to the ingroup or a series of outgroups varying in terms of familiarity. The data do not support an explanation in terms of familiarity. The discussion centers on conditions not conducting to infrahumanization.     

An angry = Outgroup effect

When are intergroup biases learned responses to specific social groups, and when are they the result of more general cognitive tendencies? This study investigates this question in the context of the tendency for White Americans to be influenced by angry facial affect when making racial categorizations (Hugenberg & Bodenhausen, 2004), asking whether this same tendency occurs when the groups in question are not racial groups but rather arbitrarily assigned minimal social groups. Results show that while participants are more likely to categorize angry faces as belonging to a racial outgroup, they are equally likely to categorize angry faces as belonging to a minimal outgroup. Thus, the link between anger and group membership cannot be characterized as a learned link between race and affect, but rather must be attributed to a more general intergroup processes. By contrast, implicit attitudes are considerably stronger for racial than minimal outgroups, suggesting a more central role for social learning in their emergence.     

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。     

Effects of instagram sports posts on the athletic motivation of female elite athletes: Do they inspire or backfire?

The social networking site Instagram provides users with an abundance of photos and information in many domains including sports. The posts are often intended to inspire and motivate users. We argue that the display of success and failure of professional athletes may influence elite athletes’ own sports ambitions. Research has shown that exposure to positive ingroup stereotypes and exposure to negative outgroup stereotypes can increase performance (i.e., the stereotype boost effect and the stereotype lift effect, respectively). Based on this research, we conducted three experiments in two different cultural contexts. In all three experiments, we examined whether Instagram posts that showed either ingroup members’ success or outgroup members’ failure influenced athletic motivation, self-efficacy, and sports-related behavioral intentions of female elite athletes. Experiment 1 (n = 117) was conducted in Germany, whereas Experiments 2 (n = 137) and 3 (n = 143) were conducted in Norway. Results showed that in Germany, participants’ athletic motivation and self-efficacy was highest when they were exposed to failing outgroup members (Exp. 1); however, this was not the case in Norway (Exp. 2). In contrast, only Norwegian participants who were exposed to successful ingroup members reported a significant increase in their athletic motivation, but there were no effects regarding self-efficacy and sports-related behavioral intentions (Exp. 3). Boundary conditions for Instagram’s role in motivating users and reasons for the differences between the two cultural contexts are discussed.     

Ingroup bias and the ‘black sheep’ effect: Assessing the impact of social identification and perceived variability on group judgements

Two studies compared the relative strength of motivational assumptions drawn from SIT (e.g. Tajfel, 1978) and memory-based assumptions drawn from the differential familiarity hypothesis (Linville, Fischer and Salovey, 1989) in explaining ingroup bias and the black sheep effect (Marques, 1986, 1990). In Study 1, 15 subjects estimated member distributions and gave overall ratings of an ingroup and two outgroups. In Study 2, 42 subjects performed similar tasks for ingroup or outgroup, and evaluated likeable and unlikeable group members. Results showed, first, that overall group ratings account better for ingroup bias than do central tendencies of group distributions. In addition, likeable and unlikeable ingroup members were, respectively, upgraded and downgraded relative to their outgroup counterparts. Finally, whole ingroup ratings as well as judgements of likeable and unlikeable ingroup members proved more independent from variability and central tendency of underlying distributions than did similar outgroup judgements. Results are discussed in light of motivational and knowledge-based determinants of group judgements.     

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.