Social categorization, self-esteem, and the estimated musical preferences of male adolescents.

The authors investigated the intergroup processes of male adolescents within the context of social identity theory (SIT; H. Tajfel, 1978; H. Tajfel & J. C. Turner, 1979). The participants were English male adolescents (age = 14-15 years). They estimated in-group and out-group musical preferences and evaluated the in-group and out-group along a series of scales. The results showed in-group favoritism effects along the musical preference and evaluative dimensions. The participants reported greater liking for the in-group. Compared with the out-group, they associated the in-group more with positively stereotyped music and less with negatively stereotyped music. Compared with the out-group, they rated the in-group as more fun, more masculine, more sporty, less boring, less snobbish, and less weird. The participants with lower levels of self-esteem showed greater differentiation between groups and greater derogation of the out-group. The results supported the predictions of SIT and demonstrated the applicability of SIT for the study of adolescent behavior.     

Punishing Individuals for Their Infirmities: Effects of Personal Responsibility, Just-World Beliefs, and In-Group/Out-Group Status

This research examined how derogation of cancer victims was moderated by (a) the perceived responsibility of the victim, (b) individual differences in just-world beliefs, and (c) whether the victim was an in-group versus out-group member. Participants formed an impression of an in-group or an out-group member who was known to have a terminal case of cancer. Half of the participants were informed that the target person was partially responsible for this medical condition, whereas the remaining participants were not given this information. Results showed that blaming judgments of high versus low responsibility targets were moderated by just-world beliefs, but this was only true when the person being judged was an out-group member. The implications of these results for research and theory on differential processing of in-group versus out-group members are discussed.     

Explanations for positive and negative behavior: the intergroup attribution bias in achieved groups

Previous research into intergroup attribution has addressed mainly the behavior of groups to which members are ascribed (e.g. gender, race). The attribution processes of groups of which membership is achieved (e.g. friendship groups) is less well understood, and the current study sought to address this. Fifty-five undergraduate participants were asked to explain the positive and negative behavior of a member of the in-group and a member of the out-group. As predicted, the participants attributed an in-group member's positive behavior more, and their negative behavior less, to internal, global, and specific causes than they did the corresponding behavior of an out-group member. There was also evidence that the participants employed a strategy of out-group derogation in their attributions: they made a higher intemality rating for an out-group member's negative behavior than they did for that person's positive behavior. It is proposed that the current study's use of achieved groups maximized participants' levels of group identification, and that this in turn motivated behavioral strategies aimed at protecting that identity.     

Explanations for positive and negative behavior: the intergroup attribution bias in achieved groups

Previous research into intergroup attribution has addressed mainly the behavior of groups to which members are ascribed (e.g. gender, race). The attribution processes of groups of which membership is achieved (e.g. friendship groups) is less well understood, and the current study sought to address this. Fifty-five undergraduate participants were asked to explain the positive and negative behavior of a member of the in-group and a member of the out-group. As predicted, the participants attributed an in-group member's positive behavior more, and their negative behavior less, to internal, global, and specific causes than they did the corresponding behavior of an out-group member. There was also evidence that the participants employed a strategy of out-group derogation in their attributions: they made a higher intemality rating for an out-group member's negative behavior than they did for that person's positive behavior. It is proposed that the current study's use of achieved groups maximized participants' levels of group identification, and that this in turn motivated behavioral strategies aimed at protecting that identity.     

使用加工分离程序对低地位群体内\外群体偏爱的研究

使用加工分离程序（PDP）,以50名农村籍大学生为被试, 采用2（群体：外群体、内群体）×2（特质词效价：积极、消极）×2（加工：意识加工、无意识加工）混合设计,研究了低地位群体对内群体以及高地位外群体偏爱的内隐特征。在本研究情境中发现：农村大学生在提取城市群体积极特质词比消极特质词时的无意识加工更显著;而提取农村群体的积极和消极特质词时,无意识加工的贡献没有显著差异。说明低地位群体成员对外群体有内隐偏爱,对内群体却不存在内隐偏爱。     

The Janus face of power in intergroup contexts: a further exploration of the noblesse oblige effect

The authors examined the impact of power on in-group bias by manipulating group members' power over the in-group and power over the out-group as orthogonal factors. Each factor had 3 levels: 0%, 50%, and 100%. Participants were 216 male pupils (12-13 years old). Participants showed no in-group bias when they had 0% control over the in-group, strong in-group bias with 50% control, but less in-group bias with 100% control. Participants showed more in-group bias when they had 0% control over the out-group than when they had 50% or 100% control. The combination of these 2 main effects resulted in the noblesse oblige effect: Group members with complete control over both in-group and out-group expressed less in-group bias than did group members who shared control with an out-group.     

“It’s not funny if they’re laughing”: Self-categorization, social influence, and responses to canned laughter

Pre-recorded, or “canned” laughter is often used to encourage audience laughter. Previous research suggests that hearing others laugh can influence an audience, although several variables moderate its effects. We examined an unexplored moderator, hypothesizing that canned laughter would influence listeners only if they believed the laughter came from fellow in-group members. We manipulated the presence or absence of canned laughter in a potentially humorous recording and participants’ beliefs about the in-group or out-group composition of the laughing audience. The results confirmed our hypothesis: participants laughed and smiled more, laughed longer, and rated humorous material more favorably when they heard in-group laughter rather than out-group laughter or no laughter at all.     

Friendship trumps ethnicity (but not sexual orientation): comfort and discomfort in inter-group interactions

An experience sampling study tested the degree to which interactions with out-group members evoked negative affect and behavioural inhibition after controlling for level of friendship between partners. When friendship level was statistically controlled, neither White nor Black participants reported feeling more discomfort interacting with ethnic out-group members compared to ethnic in-group members. When partners differed in sexual orientation, friendship level had a less palliating effect. Controlling for friendship, both gay and straight men - but not women - felt more behaviourally inhibited when interacting with someone who differed in sexual orientation, and heterosexual participants of both genders continued to report more negative affect with gay and lesbian interaction partners. However, gay and lesbian participants reported similar levels of negative affect interacting with in-group (homosexual) and out-group (heterosexual) members after friendship level was controlled. Results suggest that much of the discomfort observed in inter-ethnic interactions may be attributable to lower levels of friendship with out-group partners. The discomfort generated by differences in sexual orientation, however, remains a more stubborn barrier to comfortable inter-group interactions.     

Gender subgroups and intergroup perception: adolescents' views of own-gender and other-gender groups

The authors examined intergroup bias and perceived group variability regarding gender subgroups relevant to the adolescent culture. Participants were 126 high school students, between 16 years and 19 years of age, who listed male and female subgroups, performed a series of group perception tasks, and, for each subgroup, indicated whether they themselves belonged to the group. Results showed that adolescents' perceptions of gender subgroups were subject to in-group favoritism and out-group derogation, as well as to group homogeneity effects. In line with predictions derived from Optimal Distinctiveness Theory, male and female participants favored in-groups over own-gender and other-gender out-groups and favored other-gender out-groups over own-gender outgroups. Ambivalence was particularly high with other-gender out-groups. The authors discussed implications for future research on the development of gender prejudice and for interventions to reduce prejudice.     

Stereotype-based faultlines and out-group derogation in diverse teams: The moderating roles of task stereotypicality and need for cognition

Alignment of individuals on more than one diversity attribute (i.e., faultlines) may lead to intergroup biases in teams, disrupting the efficiency expectancies. Research has yet to examine if this can be a consequence of a stereotypical consistency between social and information attributes of diversity. The present study tests the hypothesis that, in a team with a stereotype-based faultline (a stereotypical consistency between gender and skills), there is increased out-group derogation compared to a team with a stereotype-inconsistent faultline. Furthermore, the study proposes that tasks can activate stereotypes, and the need for cognition dictates whether stereotypes are applied. The findings confirm the hypothesis and additionally provide evidence that tasks that activate gender stereotypes emphasize out-group derogation, especially for team members with low need for cognition.     

Decoupling Children’s Gender-based In-Group Positivity from Out-Group Negativity

In the current study we attempted to determine whether children’s gender-based intergroup biases reflect positive attitudes toward the in-group and/or negative attitudes toward the out-group. Third through fifth grade children were asked to determine whether positive and negative traits described boys, girls, both genders, or nobody. This methodology allowed for separate evaluation of in-group favoritism and out-group derogation. Girls and children who perceived their gender as important viewed their in-group as having more positive than negative attributes and more positive and less negative attributes than the out-group. Boys and children who viewed gender as less important viewed both genders as having more positive than negative attributes. These results support Brewer’s (Journal of Social Issues 55:429–444, 1999) claim that in-group love and out-group hate are not reciprocally related.     

Being better by being right: subjective group dynamics and derogation of in-group deviants when generic norms are undermined

The authors predicted that derogation of group deviants depends on the extent to which in-group norms or values are validated or undermined in a social context. In Experiment 1 participants were less tolerant and derogated in-group deviants more when other in-group members opposed the norm. In Experiment 2 participants derogated in-group deviants more than out-group deviants and than noncategorized individuals, but only when normative in-group members lacked uniformity. In Experiment 3 participants derogated in-group deviants more when there was uncertainty about in-group superiority. These results are consistent with previous research on the black sheep effect (J. M. Marques, V. Y. Yzerbyt, & J. -P. Leyens, 1988) and with the model of subjective group dynamics (D. Abrams, J. M. Marques, N. J. Bown, & M. Henson, 2000; J. M. Marques, D. Abrams, D. Paez, & C. Martinez-Taboada, 1998).     

Intergroup differentiation: stereotyping as a function of status hierarchy

The authors explored how negative intergroup comparisons affect intergroup differentiation. More specifically, they tested the prediction that the in-group's negative intergroup comparisons with a high-status group would result in more negative stereotyping of a lower status out-group. The authors elicited stereotypes of a lower status university in 2 conditions. In the 1st, the participants judged only the middle-ranking university in-group and a lower status university. In the 2nd, those judgments followed comparison with a higher status university. In the 2nd condition, there was an increased differentiation between the in-group and the lower status out-group because of the more negative stereotyping of the lower status out-group. This evidence of intergroup differentiation was found only on the dimension judged most important and along which the in-group was negatively compared with the higher status group.     

Reactions to Intragroup Deviance: Does Disidentification Have a Role?

In this study, we address previous evidence about the interchangeable use of derogation and disidentification in protecting the self from intragroup deviance. We argue that when the in-group stands for a valued social identity, members may disidentify from the group, but only if the immediate context provides no opportunity to derogate. In the present experiments (n = 80 and n = 79), we provided or did not provide participants with the opportunity to recommend a punishment for an in-group or an out-group deviant. We also measured in-group identification before and after exposure to deviant behavior and after judgment. The results show that participants first disidentified from the in-group but, when presented with an opportunity to judge the deviant, also derogated. Importantly, participants who could judge the deviant also recovered their initial in-group identification level. Participants’ reactions to the out-group deviant suggest they used an intergroup rather than intragroup strategy.     

Older but wilier: In-group accountability and the development of subjective group dynamics

To test social and cognitive variables that may affect the development of subjective group dynamics, the authors had 224 children between the ages of 5 and 12 years evaluate an in-group and an out-group and normative and deviant in-group members under conditions of high or low accountability to in-group peers. In-group bias and relative favorability to normative versus deviant in-group members (differential evaluation) increased when children were accountable to peers and as a function of perceptions of peer group acceptance of these members (differential inclusion). These effects were significantly larger among older children. Multiple classification ability was unrelated to judgments of group members. This study shows that the development of subjective group dynamics involves an increase in sensitivity to the normative aspects of the intergroup context.     

Intergroup contact: The typical member and the exception to the rule

Three studies examined the role of the perceived typicalness of an out-group member on her effectiveness in improving evaluations of her group. Subjects were students at two adjacent colleges. In the first study they interacted with a member of the out-group college. The interaction was either pleasant or unpleasant, and the contact person either confirmed or disconfirmed several stereotypes of the out-group (typicalness manipulation). Subjects evaluated the out-group most favorably when they interacted with the typical-pleasant member of the out-group. The second study demonstrated that contact with a highly typical member is not beneficial if her typicalness is based on stereotypes that reflect negatively on the subject's in-group. Several explanations of the typicalness findings were considered in a third study. Support was found for the hypothesis that the more typical member is perceived to be more predictive of the personality and actions of other out-group members.     

New knowledge for old credences: Asymmetric information search about in-group and out-group members

Three experiments examined how people gather information on in-group and out-group members. Previous studies have revealed that category-based expectancies bias the hypothesis-testing process towards confirmation through the use of asymmetric-confirming questions (which are queries where the replies supporting the prior expectancies are more informative than those falsifying them). However, to date there is no empirical investigation of the use of such a question-asking strategy in an intergroup context. In the present studies, participants were asked to produce (Study 1) or to choose (Studies 2 and 3) questions in order to investigate the presence of various traits in an in-group or an out-group member. Traits were manipulated by valence and typicality. The results revealed that category-based expectancies do not always lead to asymmetric-confirming testing: whereas participants tended to ask questions that confirmed positive in-group and negative out-group stereotypical attributes, they used a more symmetric strategy when testing for the presence of negative in-group or positive out-group traits. Moreover, Study 3 also revealed a moderation effect of in-group identification. The findings point to the role played by motivational factors associated with preserving a positive social identity. Possible consequences of these hypothesis-testing processes in preserving a positive social identity for intergroup relations are discussed.     

Intergroup Differentiation: Stereotyping as a Function of Status Hierarchy

Abstract

The authors explored how negative intergroup comparisons affect intergroup differentiation. More specifically, they tested the prediction that the in-group's negative intergroup comparisons with a high-status group would result in more negative stereotyping of a lower status out-group. The authors elicited stereotypes of a lower status university in 2 conditions. In the 1st, the participants judged only the middle-ranking university in-group and a lower status university. In the 2nd, those judgments followed comparison with a higher status university. In the 2nd condition, there was an increased differentiation between the in-group and the lower status out-group because of the more negative stereotyping of the lower status out-group. This evidence of intergroup differentiation was found only on the dimension judged most important and along which the in-group was negatively compared with the higher status group.     

Scandalous: Christian identification,sex guilt,and the mediated demonization of the participants in the AshleyMadison scandal

In 2015, AshleyMadison.com (AshleyMadison) was hacked, leading to the release of site members’ personal information. The exposed members faced public scrutiny, judgment, and other negative outcomes. In this study, we examined predictors of the demonization of the AshleyMadison participants (i.e., AshleyMadison members, owners, hackers) to help explain victim derogation. We attempted to discern the role religiosity and sexual guilt played in the demonization of the AshleyMadison hacking participants. We predicted sexual guilt would mediate between religiosity and demonization of the AshleyMadison hacking participants. Our findings indicate that religiosity alone does not predict demonization. Instead, sex guilt was a necessary part of the equation and mediated between participants’ religiosity and the amount they demonized the different groups.