Self‐Categorization and Bystander Non‐intervention: Two Experimental Studies1

This paper outlines a new approach to the study of bystander intervention. Using insights derived from self‐categorization theory (Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987), we explore the social category relations among those present in the context of physical violence. The paper describes two experiments that manipulate the social category relations between (a) bystander and fellow bystanders, and (b) bystander and victim. Analysis indicates that fellow bystanders are only influential when they are in‐group rather than out‐group members. Furthermore, bystanders are more likely to help victims who are described as in‐group as opposed to out‐group members. Overall, the findings suggest an important role for a self‐categorization perspective in developing strategies to promote bystander intervention.     

Can't get over me: Ego depletion attenuates prosocial effects of perspective taking

Many studies attest to the beneficial and prosocial effects of perspective taking. The present research tests the notion that such perspective taking is a process involving active self‐regulation and, hence, that effects of perspective taking on prosocial behaviour are more pronounced when self‐control resources are high, rather than low. Results confirmed this hypothesis. Across two experiments using acts of compliance as a specific form of prosocial behaviour, perspective‐taking participants were more willing to comply with a request for help by the experimenter (experiment 1) and donated more time to a charitable cause (experiment 2) than participants who did not engage in perspective taking, but only when self‐regulatory resources were in sufficient supply. Under conditions of ego depletion, the impact of perspective taking on compliance was attenuated. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Group boundary permeability moderates the effect of a dependency meta‐stereotype on help‐seeking behaviour

Previous studies have found that when low‐status group members are aware that their in‐group is stereotyped as dependent by a specific out‐group (i.e. a dependency meta‐stereotype is salient), they are reluctant to seek help from the high‐status out‐group to avoid confirming the negative meta‐stereotype. However, it is unclear whether low‐status group members would seek more help in the context of a salient dependency meta‐stereotype when there is low (vs. high) group boundary permeability. Therefore, we conducted two experiments to examine the moderating effect of permeability on meta‐stereotype confirmation with a real group. In study 1, we manipulated the salience of the dependency meta‐stereotype, measured participants' perceived permeability and examined their help‐seeking behaviour in a real‐world task. Participants who perceived low permeability sought more help when the meta‐stereotype was salient (vs. not salient), whereas participants who perceived high permeability sought the same amount of help across conditions. In study 2, we manipulated the permeability levels and measured the dependency meta‐stereotype. Participants who endorsed a high‐dependency meta‐stereotype sought more help than participants who endorsed a low‐dependency meta‐stereotype; this effect was particularly strong in the low‐permeability condition. The implications of these results for social mobility and intergroup helping are discussed.     

Meta‐stereotypes,Social Image and Help Seeking: Dependency‐Related Meta‐stereotypes Reduce Help‐Seeking Behaviour

People who need help can be reluctant to seek it. This can be due to social image concerns. Here, we investigate if these concerns may be prompted by a salient negative meta‐stereotype: the belief that one's group is judged negatively by another group. Specifically, we researched group members' help‐seeking behaviour in the context of a dependency‐related meta‐stereotype. In a two‐condition study (N = 45), we manipulated participants' belief that their national group was judged dependent by a significant out‐group. We then examined their subsequent help‐seeking behaviour on a real‐world task. Participants whose social identity as a group member was salient showed greater reluctance to seek help when the meta‐stereotype was made prominent compared with when it was not. This suggests that, in a context where social image and social identity concerns are relevant, group members are willing to sacrifice the possibility of accessing needed help in order to avoid confirming a negative stereotype of their group. The implications of these results for helping transactions and community development are discussed. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

“Self‐promotion”: How regulatory focus affects the pursuit of self‐interest at the expense of the group

Self‐interested behavior may have positive consequences for individual group‐members, but also negatively affects the outcomes of the group when group‐level and individual‐level interests are misaligned. In two studies, we examined such self‐interested, group‐undermining behavior from the perspective of regulatory focus theory. We predicted that when individual and group interests are out of alignment, individuals under promotion focus would be more likely than individuals under prevention focus to pursue individual success at the expense of their group. Two studies provided support for this prediction. Promotion oriented individuals were more willing to act in their self‐interest (at the expense of their group) than individuals under prevention focus when self‐interested goals were not compatible with cooperation. No effect of regulatory focus on group loyalty was found when cooperation formed the only viable route to individual success. We discuss how these findings extend our understanding of the role of regulatory focus in social situations and of the practice of ensuring loyalty in contexts where individual and group goals are misaligned while cooperation is an important part of group success.     

Hide and seek: the effects of revealing one's personal interests in intra‐ and intergroup negotiations

The present research examined the effects of information sharing about self‐interest and group membership of the negotiation partner on negotiation cognitions, behaviors and outcomes. Study 1 (n = 77) showed that in anticipation of the negotiation, participants placed more trust in an in‐group member, and were more willing to exchange information with a negotiation partner who revealed his/her self‐interest. Study 2 (n = 80) examined how these effects influenced the development of attitudes and behavior during and after the negotiation. Results showed that negotiations with in‐group members were more cooperative when they shared, rather than not shared, information about underlying self‐interest. By contrast, negotiations with out‐group members were more cooperative when they did not share, rather than shared, information about their underlying self‐interest. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Social identification structures the effects of perspective taking

Researchers who study perspective taking are generally optimistic about the potential for interventions to improve intergroup perceptions. The current research provides new insight into the conditions that frame the intergroup outcomes of perspective taking. The results show that the effects of perspective taking are not always positive but depend on perspective takers' degree of identification with the in-group. In two experiments, we demonstrated that adopting the perspective of an out-group member can have damaging effects on intergroup perceptions among group members who are highly identified with the in-group. Specifically, compared with less committed members, those who identified highly with the in-group used a greater number of negative traits to describe the out-group following perspective taking. Such perspective taking also led participants with high in-group identification to judge the out-group less favorably. Understanding how social identity concerns frame the outcome of perspective taking is crucial to its effective employment in intergroup-relations programs.     

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.     

When and How Do High Status Group Members Offer Help: Effects of Social Dominance Orientation and Status Threat

The present study explored the implications of an intergroup perspective on individual difference and situational influences on helping, specifically, outgroup members. In particular, we examined the effects of social dominance orientation (SDO) and group status threat on the amount and kind of help offered by Jewish participants (n = 99) to Arab and Jewish students. Dependent measures were the likelihood of helping outgroup and ingroup members across various situations of need and, when help is given, the likelihood that it would be dependency‐oriented rather than autonomy‐oriented assistance. As expected, higher SDO individuals offered less help to outgroup (Arab) students, particularly when they experienced threat to group status, but not to ingroup members. In addition, higher SDO participants, when they did report that they would help, were more likely to offer dependency‐oriented help to outgroup than to ingroup members. The theoretical and applied implications are discussed.     

Perspective taking and prejudice reduction: the mediational role of empathy arousal and situational attributions

This research was designed to examine whether perspective taking promotes improved intergroup attitudes regardless of the extent that stereotypic perceptions of outgroups are endorsed, as well as examining the mechanisms (attributional or empathy related) by which perspective taking motivates improved intergroup attitudes. Participants were presented with an interview segment where an African American interviewee discussed the difficulties experienced as a result of his membership in a negatively stereotyped group. Materials were presented in a 2 (perspective taking: other focused or objective focused) × 2 (target stereotypicality: confirming or disconfirming) between participants design. Findings revealed that the manipulation of target stereotypicality influenced subsequent stereotype endorsement; those exposed to a stereotype confirming target later endorsed more stereotypic perceptions of African Americans than did those exposed to a stereotype disconfirming target. However, perspective taking promoted improved intergroup attitudes irrespective of stereotypicality; those encouraged to adopt the perspective of the target later reported more favourable intergroup attitudes than did those who remained detached and objective listeners. Whereas empathy partially mediated the relation between perspective taking and intergroup attitudes, situational attributions were a stronger and more reliable mediator. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

In‐group bias in children's intention to help can be overpowered by inducing empathy

An experimental vignette study was conducted among children (8–13 years) to examine whether inducing empathic understanding is an effective intervention to overpower peer group boundaries in children's helping. Children were induced or not induced to empathize with the recipient of help, who was or was not part of their (imagined) group of friends. Results showed that children intended to help in‐group peers more compared to outgroup peers when empathic understanding was not induced. However, when empathy was induced, they intended to help friends and non‐friends equally. Inducing empathic understanding was effective independent of the recipient's level of need, and children's advanced social perspective‐taking ability. Encouraging children to imagine how a recipient of help feels might thus be a useful strategy to prevent peer group‐based biases in children's helping behaviour.     

Student attitudes towards socially acceptable and unacceptable group working practices

While there is much support for co‐operative learning among learning theorists, not all learners exhibit the same enthusiasm for groupwork. A number of factors such as sex, group size and ability mix, subject domain, task type and organization have been shown to influence the effectiveness of co‐operative and collaborative learning. This study established learners' attitudes to various shared working scenarios. In this mixed design, 140 post‐graduate teacher trainees were asked to imagine their responses to seven groupwork scenarios presented as a series of short vignettes. The vignettes varied on the degree of co‐operation required; the sex of the prospective co‐worker(s) including single and mixed‐sex groups; type of assessment, including no assessment at all; and on academically acceptable and unacceptable ‘shared’ working practices. Anticipated attitudinal and behavioural responses of the students were assessed by questionnaire. On the whole, students were cautiously willing to be involved in groupwork. There were caveats, however. Factors such as the characteristics of the group members, the level and type of assessment procedures in operation, and individual differences, including sex and self‐reported social deviance, also governed their responses. There was very limited agreement to be involved in socially undesirable collaborative group activities at a personal level or to condone such activities by others. Those students who showed a tendency towards mild anti‐social behaviour were more willing to take direct punitive action against non‐contributors than their peers. Female students were more willing to invoke the help of the tutor than their male counterparts, but only if the anti‐social behaviour impacted on them personally.     

Less pain and more to gain: why high-status group members blame their failure on discrimination.

Members of high-status groups are more likely than members of low-status groups to blame their failure on discrimination and are less likely to blame it on themselves. This tendency was demonstrated in 3 experiments comparing men and women, White and Black students, and members of experimentally created high- and low-status groups. Results also showed that when making an attribution to discrimination, high-status group members were less likely to experience a threat to their social state self-esteem, performance perceived control, and social perceived control and were more likely to protect their performance state self-esteem. These findings help to explain why high-status group members are more willing to blame their failure on discrimination by showing that it is less harmful for them than for low-status group members.     

Looking through the eyes of the powerful

Across four experiments, we test the idea that power decreases metastereotyping, and that this effect is mediated by reduced perspective taking. Metastereotypes refer to the beliefs that members of group A share about the stereotypes that members of specific outgroup B typically have about ingroup A. We propose that the dominant psychological orientation of the powerless is aimed at seeing how others see them. In an intergroup situation they are therefore inclined to activate and apply metastereotypes. In the first three experiments we consistently find that low power leads to more metastereotyping than high power and control (in Experiment 3). Specifically, we show this effect with three different manipulations of power, namely a role manipulation (Experiment 1), experiential priming (Experiment 2), and parafoveal priming (Experiment 3). In the fourth experiment we uncover the mediating role of perspective taking. Together these findings provide strong evidence that powerlessness leads to metastereotyping.     

EMOTION HELPERS: THE ROLE OF HIGH POSITIVE AFFECTIVITY AND HIGH SELF-MONITORING MANAGERS

Who provides help to employees suffering anxiety and emotional pain in organizations? From an interactionist perspective, we anticipated that increasing levels of managerial responsibility would unlock discretionary helping behavior related to differences in self‐monitoring and positive affectivity. Results from a study of 94 members of a recruitment firm confirmed that those active in providing emotional help to others in the workplace tended to possess a combination of managerial responsibility and a high self‐monitoring or high positive affectivity disposition. By contrast, when members were low in positive affect or self‐monitoring they provided less emotional help to others, irrespective of the level of managerial responsibility. These interaction results remained significant after taking into account centrality in friendship and workflow networks, as well as significant effects of gender.     

Creativity through Connectedness: The Role of Closeness and Perspective Taking in Group Creativity

Achievements in various fields of creativity are resulting more and more from collaborative teams. This research investigated the role of interpersonal process variables, namely closeness and perspective taking in group creativity, with a 2 by 2 experimental design. Sixty-one 3-person groups assigned to 4 conditions (a: closeness and perspective taking, b: perspective taking, c: no closeness and no perspective taking, d: closeness). Group members collaboratively wrote stories that were rated by 3 independent expert judges. There was a positive main effect of closeness and negative main effect of perspective taking on group creativity scores. Moreover, the significant interaction between perspective taking and closeness displayed that combination of closeness with perspective taking negatively affect group creativity. These results indicate that closeness might be beneficial for group creativity only when it is not accompanied with perspective taking.     

Trust and Acceptance in Response to References to Group Membership: Minority and Majority Perspectives on Cross‐Group Interactions1

This research examined anticipated feelings of trust and acceptance in cross‐group interactions among members of ethnic minority and majority groups, depending on whether an out‐group member referred to their group membership. In Study 1, Asian, Latino, and White participants read scenarios describing interactions between them and an in‐group member, an out‐group member, or an out‐group member who referred to their group membership. Participants from each group responded more negatively toward interactions with out‐group members when they referred to group membership. These findings were replicated in Study 2 with samples of Black and White participants, also showing that anticipated prejudice partially mediated the effects of out‐group members' references to group membership on feelings of trust and acceptance. Implications of these findings are discussed in terms of facilitating intergroup communication and conversations about group differences.     

Less Biased Under Threat? Self‐Verificatory Reactions to Social Identity Threat Among Groups With Negative Self‐Stereotypes1

According to social identity theory, when group status is threatened, highly committed group members respond with greater in‐group favoritism. However, some of the groups build their identities on negative self‐stereotypes. For such groups, status‐threatening information should lead their members to confirmation of the group's negative self‐image. Study 1 examined the effects of group‐directed threat in a group with a long tradition of negative self‐perception. The manipulation led participants to higher ratings of the out‐group, and reduced adherence to in‐group‐defending ideologies. Study 2 provided further support to our predictions: Participants holding negative self‐stereotypes reacted to group‐image threats with more positive feelings about out‐groups. Findings are discussed within the theoretical framework of social identity theory and self‐verification theory.     

Perspective taking and member‐to‐group generalization of implicit racial attitudes: The role of target prototypicality

Actively considering an individual outgroup member's thoughts, feelings, and other subjective experiences —perspective taking— can improve attitudes toward that person's group. Here, we tested whether such member‐to‐group generalization of implicit racial attitudes is more likely when perspective‐taking targets are viewed as prototypical of their racial group. Results supported a gendered‐race‐prototype hypothesis: The positive effect of perspective taking on implicit attitudes toward Black people and Asian people, respectively, was stronger when the perspective‐taking target was a Black man or Asian woman (gender–race prototypical) versus a Black woman or Asian man (gender–race nonprototypical). These findings identify a boundary condition under which perspective taking may not improve intergroup attitudes and add to a growing literature on social cognition at the intersection of multiple social categories.     

Effects of intergroup exclusion on individual needs threat and behavior tendencies

This study explores the effects of intergroup exclusion on need‐threat and the behavioral tendencies of excluded individuals. Results show that those excluded by in‐group members perceived more threat to relational needs, while participants excluded by out‐group members perceived more threat to efficacy needs. In addition, participants excluded by out‐group members displayed significantly more aggression intention and less helping intention than those who were excluded by in‐group members. This study indicates that the group relationship between excluders and the excluded will directly affect threat perception and behavioral responses.