Perceptions of and by minority groups: The case of women in academia

Thirty seven academics participated in a field study in which perceptions of the size and attributes of a majority and minority group were obtained. (The groups concerned were male and female academics at a British university). These observations were used to examine the phenomenon of illusory correlation, and to test hypotheses concerning the perceived homogeneity and competence of ingroup and outgroup in majority-minority contexts. To test for the illusory correlation effect estimates of the numbers of male and female senior staff were elicited. These estimates were consistently inaccurate, producing a lower perceived correlation between gender and seniority than actually existed. Measures of intragroup homogeneity revealed that, as predicted from previous research, members of the minority group saw their own group as more homogeneous than the outgroup. For majorty group members the reverse was true. The intergroup evaluations generally favoured the minority group; this was especially evident in the evaluations from the minority group members themselves. Possible explanations of these findings and their correspondence with those obtained from laboratory research are discussed.     

Perceptions of relative group size and group status: Effects on intergroup discrimination in negative evaluations

The positive–negative asymmetry in social discrimination proposes a threshold for ingroup favouritism within the negative domain: in contrast to comparable studies dealing with in- and outgroup evaluations on positive attributes, ingroup favouritism does not occur when negative attributes are used. The present study focuses on two aspects of this threshold: it investigates processes, which may influence the absence of ingroup favouritism in the negative domain, and it tests ‘aggravating’ variables, which seem to be suficient to elicit ingroup favouritism even in the negative domain. Results show that ingroup favouritism occurred within the negative domain when several aggravating conditions were included, namely high salience of size- and status- similarity between groups and high ingroup identification. Furthermore, subjects under minimal conditions tended to overestimate relative size as well as relative status of their ingroup. The perception of group members to belong to a high status majority is interpreted as a sufficient condition counteracting tendencies towards ingroup favouritism within the negative domain.     

In-group Bias Test adapted to the relative acculturation extended model: reliability and validity evidences

In-group favouritism has become a variable of enormous importance in the study of inter-ethnic relations. According to current approaches, it can be understood as a tendency among the members of one group to favour or value the behaviour, attitudes, preferences or perceptions of their own group over those of another group to which they do not belong. The aim of this work is to study the psychometric properties of a new test for measuring inter-ethnic in-group bias, in majority (native) and minority (immigrant) groups. The test is based on the acculturation areas of the Relative Acculturation Extended Model (RAEM). Participants were 992 Spaniards and 975 immigrants (500 Romanians and 475 Ecuadorians). The reliability estimate and validity evidence for these samples show that the psychometric properties of the In-group Bias Test are appropriate for use in multi-ethnic contexts, as it can be used in majority (native) and minority (Romanian and Ecuadorian immigrants) groups.     

Parental Attributions of the Causes of Their Children's Behavior

We investigated causal attributions parents made regarding their children's best and worst behavior while the children were taking methylphenidate (MPH) for Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Twenty-six parents were surveyed each week for six weeks using the Parent Attribution Scale-Revised. This scale measures parents' attributions of the causes for their children's behavior when taking MPH to treat symptoms of ADHD. When attributing causes for best behavior, the parents rated their children's effort most often followed by their own effort and the positive medication effects. When attributing causes for worst behavior, the parents rated their children's lack of effort most often followed by inadequate medication effects and their own lack of effort. Our study suggests that parents rate effort most often when making attributions for their children's best and worst behavior. When making attributions for best behavior only, parents saw no difference between their own efforts and the effects of medication. When making attributions for worst behavior only, parents were more likely to blame their children's lack of effort and the ineffectiveness of medication more often than their own lack of effort.     

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.     

Accuracy in perceptions of consensus: Differential tendencies of people with majority and minority positions

When people are interested in how common one or more of their attributes is in a reference population, they must often generate their own comparison information based on a limited sample of acquaintances and experiences. Subjects in the present research were asked to describe themselves in terms of a variety of attributes, and were also asked to estimate the percentage of other college students who would indicate possession of each attribute. For each attribute, subjects were assigned a majority or minority status, depending on whether the majority of the population did or did not share their attribute. The principle findings were (1) the majority subjects generated more accurate comparison information than did the minority; (2) the majority subjects were better than chance and better than minority subjects in distinguishing between attributes for which there was high versus moderate consensus; and (3) the minority subjects tended to overestimate the consensus for their attributes, while the majority subjects tended to err in the direction of underestimation of their Consensus. The discussion focused on possible causes of these tendencies, and on research implications involving attributional biases and intergroup conflict.     

Minority influence and idiosyncrasy credit: A new comparison of the Moscovici and Hollander theories of innovation

Moscovici's model of minority influence and Hollander's model of idiosyncrasy credit were compared in an experiment conducted with I6 discussion groups composed of four male undergraduates (N = 64) and a confederate. Their task was to rank-order unanimously 10 proposals to remediate urban problems, to which the confederate attempted to have one more added, thus introducing a norm change. Two variables were manipulated: Status of the innovator (minority versus elected leader) and Ideological criterion for innovation (avant-garde versus reformist). It was predicted that the consistent behavioural style of the minority would make him more influential under the avant-garde condition than under the reformist condition whereas the idiosyncrasy credit of the leader would make him more influential under the reformist condition. Although the adoption hypotheses failed to be supported, the evaluations of the confederate were consistent with both the Moscovici and Hollander models. While the minority con federate's action gained him visibility and distinctive attributions of determination and assurance, the leader con federate's initiative cost him his competence and cooperation credits. Strategies devised to adopt the innovation or to reject it (five groups versus four) pointed to the importance of interactive networks within the majority and to the decisive role played by group leaders for the innovator's influence to be exerted. These findings lead to speculate that Hollander's theorizing could be complementary to Moscovici's to account for the diffusion of minority influence.     

Group size,controllability of group membership,and comparative dimension as determinants of intergroup discrimination

We expected that, when group members cannot control their group membership, majority members show ingroup favouritism on task-relevant dimension, whereas minority members were expected to show ingroup favouritism on task-irrelevant dimension (hypothesis I) In addition, it was expected that intergroup comparisons will change when group membership changes from uncontrollable to controllable. Based on Social Identity Theory, two alternative hypotheses were explored: Compared with uncontrollable settings, ingroup bias will decrease (2a) or increase (2b) in controllable settings. Ninety-two subjects were divided into four groups (minority versus majority, controllable versus uncontrollable group membership), allegedly on the basis of their essay writing style. The results supported the first hypothesis. Hypothesis 2a received support among the majority members and hypothesis 2b among the minority members. The findings are discussed in terms of Social Identity Theory and the effect the perceived control of group membership and the dimension may have on intergroup comparisons.     

Adolescents' expectancies of success,self-evaluations,and attributions about performance on spatial and verbal tasks

The present study examined the expectancies of success, evaluations of performance, and achievement-related attributions that high school students made about verbal and spatial tasks that typically show sex differences. Although no sex differences were found in task performance, boys expected to do better than girls on both the spatial and verbal tasks. After completing the task, the girls continued to evaluate their performance more negatively than did boys on the spatial tasks. On spatial tasks girls also attributed to themselves less ability and saw the tasks as being more difficult than did boys. The results suggest that there are generalized, rather than task-specific, sex differences in achievement expectancies, evaluations, and attributions. These findings are discussed in terms of their implications for sex-related differences in cognitive functioning and subsequent achievement behaviors.The authors gratefully acknowledge support from the Judith Offer Fund and from the Spencer Foundation.     

Your ethnic model speaks to the culturally connected: Differential effects of model ethnicity in advertisements and the role of cultural self‐construal

This paper examines self‐construal and consumer self‐referencing as a mechanism for explaining ethnicity effects in advertising. Data were collected from a 2 (participant ethnicity: Turkish versus Kurdish) × 2 (model ethnicity: Turkish versus Kurdish) × 2 (self‐construal: independent versus interdependent) experiment. Results show that (i) individuals with interdependent self‐construal display more positive evaluations towards an in‐group ethnic ad model than do individuals with independent self‐construal; (ii) ethnic minority individuals (Kurdish people) self‐referenced more advertising portrayals of models of a similar ethnicity than models of a different ethnicity, as did ethnic majority individuals (Turkish people); (iii) ethnic minority individuals who experienced high levels of self‐referencing exhibited more favourable attitude towards the advertisement, attitude towards the brand and a higher purchase intention than ethnic minority individuals who experienced low levels of self‐referencing; and (iv) self‐referencing is found to partially mediate the relationship between culturally constructed self‐concept (self‐construal) and ethnicity on consumer evaluations for interdependent subjects. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Social identity,relative group status and intergroup attitudes: when favourable outcomes change intergroup relations…for the worse

This study examines in a natural setting (N = 253) the effects of favourable outcomes at the individual and group levels on the relations between members of high (nondisabled) and low (disabled) status groups. Consistent with past research, the results show that, overall, high‐status group members are more likely than low‐status group members to display ingroup bias. Furthermore, as hypothesized on the basis of the role of relative gratification in intergroup relations, a favourable group outcome led high‐status group members to derogate the low‐status outgroup. On the other hand, as predicted from the assumption that outgroup favouritism reflects a strategy of individual mobility, a favourable individual outcome led low‐status group members to display an evaluative bias in favour of, and to identify with, the high‐status outgroup. The implications of these findings for the explanation of outgroup favouritism and outgroup derogation are discussed. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The development of national in‐group bias: English children's attributions of characteristics to English,American and German people

This study investigated the development of national in‐group bias in 5–11‐year‐old children. Three hundred and seven English children were asked to attribute characteristics to their own national group either on its own or in conjunction with attributing characteristics to one of two national out‐groups, either Americans or Germans. The importance which the children ascribed to their own national identity in relationship to their other social identities was also assessed. It was found that, with increasing age, there was an increase in the number of negative characteristics attributed to the national in‐group, and an increase in the number of positive characteristics attributed to the two out‐groups, the net result being an overall reduction in in‐group bias across this age range. However, in‐group favouritism was still exhibited at all ages. Greater importance was attributed to national identity with increasing age. However, the characteristics attributed to the English in‐group did not vary as a function of the comparative out‐group which was present while the attributions were being made. The presence of a comparative out‐group also did not affect the importance that was ascribed to the national identity. These findings suggest that children are relatively insensitive to the prevailing comparative context when making judgments about national groups.     

Discriminatory peer aggression among children as a function of minority status and group proportion in school context

This study investigates discriminatory peer aggression among primary school aged children as a function of minority status (based on nationality, ethnicity, religion) of the target and the relative proportions of minority and majority children in the school. Participants were 925 8‐ to 12‐year‐olds attending schools in Britain. Children of minority status were no more likely than children of majority background to experience peer aggression in general. However, minority children were more likely to experience being the victims of discriminatory aggression. Two contrasting predictions were tested: that discriminatory aggression would be more likely when the minority group was relatively small in number or, alternatively, that as the proportions of children of minority backgrounds increased across schools, discriminatory aggression would be greater. The latter hypothesis was supported. Findings also revealed that in schools with a lower minority presence, discriminatory aggression experienced by majority children was significantly lower than that reported by minority children. When the school minority rate exceeded 81%, discriminatory aggression was more commonly experienced among majority children than among minority children. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Examining differences in minority versus majority preschoolers on social categorization and perceived intergroup distance

We examined the differences between majority and minority children (i.e., group membership) on racial categorization and perceived cultural distance, among 4‐ to 6‐year‐old children, in low diversified schools. We used a spontaneous social categorization task using pictures of children from three different racial groups broadly represented in France (Europeans, Black‐, and North‐Africans), and an evaluation of the perceived cultural distance between participants' in‐group and the racial group represented in the picture, adapted to children and based on three factors (language, eating habits, and music). Results revealed an effect of age on racial categorization: the older the children, the more successful they are in this task. They showed a significant effect of the racial group represented in the photos on perceived cultural distance: members of minority groups (i.e., Black‐ and North‐Africans) were evaluated as more different compared to those of the majority group on each of the factors. Finally, we got an interaction between participants' in‐group and the racial group represented in the pictures, for the language factor: members of the majority group perceived as more different photographs representing minorities peers than those representing majority peers, while participants belonging to minority groups perceived no differences between photographs, according to the racial criteria.     

Interpersonal Consequences of Expressing Personal or Team Affect for Team Success or Failure Among Turkish Students

Two experiments were conducted among Turkish students to explore the effects of team or personally oriented expressions of pride or shame for joint success or failure on evaluations of the outcome, team, and partner; causal attributions were also explored. In the second experiment, complying with a partner's choice of task and influencing the preference for future partners under high or low pressure were examined. Results indicated that for success outcomes, team expressions (relative to personal ones) caused more favorable evaluations of the outcome, team harmony, and the partner, and more causal attributions to the team as a unit. Nonsignificant but consistent opposite tendencies were observed for failure outcomes. The results of the second experiment further indicated that low pressure was more effective than high in increasing preference for personally oriented partners and was marginally effective in increasing agreement for future tasks under the personal expression condition.     

Children's Illusory Correlations: The Role of Attentional Bias in Group Impression Formation

Two experiments examined 2nd and 5th graders' tendency to perceive illusory correlations between a minority group and infrequent behaviors. Experiment 1 examined perceptions of fictitious majority and minority groups in which 67% of each group's behaviors were positive and 33% were negative. Second and 5th graders formed illusory correlations between the minority group and negative behaviors on group attribution and frequency estimation tasks, and frequency estimations predicted differential evaluations of the majority and minority groups. Experiment 2 replicated findings from Experiment 1 under conditions in which 67% of the target groups' behaviors were negative and 33% were positive. In this case, children perceived an illusory correlation between the minority group and positive behaviors, and frequency estimations again predicted differential group evaluations. The results are discussed in terms of their implications for understanding judgment biases and stereotype formation and for stereotyping and prejudice interventions.     

Personal involvement and the evaluation of group products

This research examined favouritism in group product evaluations as a function of personal involvement. After being divided into groups on an arbitrary basis, subjects worked at a group brainstorming task. Some subjects then assessed the merits of their own group's product relative to that of an outgroup's product, whereas other subjects assessed the merits of an ingroup's product relative to that of an outgroup's product. In both conditions, a significant bias was observed such that owngroup and ingroup products were rated as superior to outgroup products. Moreover, this bias was equally strong regardless of whether subjects were appraising a product they had personally helped create. The implications of the findings for understanding the antecedents of group bias are considered.     

Normative evaluations and frequency expectations regarding positive versus negative outcome allocations between groups

Data from several recent studies consistently show a positive–negative asymmetry in social discrimination: within a minimal social situation tendencies towards ingroup favouritism which usually appear in allocations of positively valenced resources are absent in the domain of negatively valenced stimuli. The present study investigates whether this valence-asymmetry has any correspondence to variations in normative evaluations of positive versus negative outcome allocations. For this purpose perceptions of normative appropriateness as well as frequency expectations of outside observers regarding outcome allocations made by categorized group members were investigated. Results show that parity choices were perceived as more normatively appropriate than out- or ingroup favouritism. While outgroup favouritism was judged as inappropriate as ingroup favouritism for positive resources, ingroup favouring decisions for negative resources were perceived as the least appropriate response within the minimal social situation. In addition, in contrast to results of St. Claire and Turner (1982) non-categorized subjects expected ingroup favouring decisions by group members more frequently than parity or outgroup favouring choices with respect to positively valanced resources. When, however, negative resources were to be allocated, outgroup favouritism was predominantly expected. Results are discussed in terms of justice considerations and are linked to a normative account of the positive--negative asymmetry in social discrimination. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Effects of Technology on Attributions of Performance and Employee Evaluation1

This study examines the effects of technological automation on explanations of why a person failed or succeeded at a task, and on evaluations of the user of technology. Subjects were presented with scenarios involving a photographer on an assignment. The scenarios manipulated 3 variables: (a) whether the camera was automatic or required skill, (b) experience level, and (c) whether the picture was a success or a failure. Subjects rated the picture's success or failure on attributions of ability and the technology. They also evaluated the photographer. Internal attribution was associated with technological devices requiring a greater amount of skill, while external attribution was associated with technological devices requiring less skill. When the picture was a success, ratings of internal attributions correlated positively with evaluations. When the picture was a failure, ratings of internal attributions correlated negatively with evaluations.     

When do the stigmatized stigmatize? The ironic effects of being accountable to (perceived) majority group prejudice-expression norms

How do frequently stigmatized individuals feel about and respond to members of other potentially stigmatizable groups? Four studies demonstrated that perceptions of majority group norms regarding prejudice expression can shape how minority individuals respond to minority individuals from other groups. Study 1 revealed that Black and White men and women have somewhat different perceptions of Whites' norms regarding prejudice expression. Study 2 manipulated whether evaluations of Native American job candidates were to remain private or to be made public to unfamiliar Whites upon whom the evaluators were dependent: Black men used a strategy of publicly (but not privately) denigrating the minority target to conform to presumed prejudice-expression norms. Study 3, in which the authors explicitly manipulated prejudice-expression norms, and Study 4, in which they manipulated audience race, further supported the role of such norms in eliciting public discrimination against minority group members by other minority group members. The desire to avoid being targeted for discrimination, in conjunction with the perception that the majority endorses discrimination, appears to increase the likelihood that the often-stigmatized will stigmatize others.