回族儿童族群偏爱态度的形成与发展

以回族儿童为被试,从发展心理学的视角,两个研究分别考察了回族儿童族群偏爱态度的形成及其发展特点。研究1借鉴经典的学前儿童种族族态度测验法,发现儿童在4岁时开始具有民族类别意识,并产生内群（回族）偏爱态度;研究2运用内隐联想测验范式以及自我报告法,发现无论内隐态度还是外显态度,儿童均表现出强劲的内群（外群体为汉族）偏爱态度,并且内隐偏爱态度随年龄增长而增强,外显态度随年龄增长趋于稳定。最后讨论了本研究与国外研究结果差异的原因,并展望了未来研究的方向。     

Collective self-esteem, personal self-esteem, and collective efficacy in in-group and outgroup evaluations

In assessing the relationship between self-esteem and in-group/outgroup evaluations, this study examined whether self-esteem is better measured at a collective (collective self-esteem [CSE]) than a personal level (personal self-esteem [PSE]). It was expected that subjects high in CSE would engage in more in-group favoritism (measured by in-group evaluations), whereas those low in CSE would engage in more outgroup derogation (measured by outgroup evaluations). No effect for PSE was predicted. Furthermore, the study explored whether perceptions of collective efficacy may underlie this relationship. Subjects played a public goods task. The in-group's outcome was compared to the outcome of other relevant outgroups, enhancing pressures towards intergroup differentiation. Consistent with the predictions, subjects high in CSE evaluated in-group members more positively than those in low CSE (i.e., in-group favoritism), whereas subjects low in CSE evaluated outgroup members more negatively than those high in CSE (i.e., outgroup derogation). Also in line with our predictions, no effect for PSE was found. Perceptions of collective efficacy appeared to be a mediator of the effect of CSE.     

Collective self-esteem, personal self-esteem, and collective efficacy in in-group and outgroup evaluations

In assessing the relationship between self-esteem and in-group/outgroup evaluations, this study examined whether self-esteem is better measured at a collective (collective self-esteem [CSE]) than a personal level (personal self-esteem [PSE]). It was expected that subjects high in CSE would engage in more in-group favoritism (measured by in-group evaluations), whereas those low in CSE would engage in more outgroup derogation (measured by outgroup evaluations). No effect for PSE was predicted. Furthermore, the study explored whether perceptions of collective efficacy may underlie this relationship. Subjects played a public goods task. The in-group's outcome was compared to the outcome of other relevant outgroups, enhancing pressures towards intergroup differentiation. Consistent with the predictions, subjects high in CSE evaluated in-group members more positively than those in low CSE (i.e., in-group favoritism), whereas subjects low in CSE evaluated outgroup members more negatively than those high in CSE (i.e., outgroup derogation). Also in line with our predictions, no effect for PSE was found. Perceptions of collective efficacy appeared to be a mediator of the effect of CSE.     

Moral identity and the expanding circle of moral regard toward out-groups

This article examines moral identity and reactions to out-groups during intergroup conflict Four studies suggest that a highly self-important moral identity is associated with an expansive circle of moral regard toward out-group members (Study 1) and more favorable attitudes toward relief efforts to aid out-group members (Study 2). Study 3 examines moral identity and national identity influences on the provision of financial assistance to out-groups. Study 4 investigates the relationship between moral identity and (a) the willingness to harm innocent out-group members not involved in the conflict and (b) moral judgments of revenge and forgiveness toward out-group members directly responsible for transgressions against the in-group. Results are discussed in terms of self-regulatory mechanisms that mitigate in-group favoritism and out-group hostility.     

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.     

The formation of in-group favoritism and out-group prejudice in young children: are they distinct attitudes?

Although standardized measures of prejudice reveal high levels of ethnocentric bias in the preschool years, it may reflect in-group favoritism or out-group prejudice. A measure that partially decouples the two attitudes was given to White children between 4 and 7 years of age to examine the reciprocal relation between and the acquisition and correlates of in-group and out-group attitudes. The two attitudes were reciprocally correlated in 1 sample from a racially homogeneous school but not in a 2nd sample from a mixed-race school. In-group favoritism did not appear until 5 years of age but then reached significant levels; it was strongly related to developing social cognitions. Out-group prejudice was weaker, but its targets suffer from comparison with the high favoritism accorded in-group members.     

Implications for the self determine benevolence and self-protection in intergroup relations

People often favor groups they belong to over those beyond the in-group boundary. Yet, in-group favoritism does not always occur, and people will sometimes favor an out-group over the in-group. We delineate theoretically when in-group favoritism (i.e., self-protection) and out-group favoritism (i.e., benevolence) should occur. In two experiments, groups’ relative status and competence stereotypes were manipulated; groups’ outcomes were non-contingent in Experiment 1 and contingent in Experiment 2. When allocating reward, members of a low-status group were self-protective, favoring the in-group over the out-group under both non-contingent and contingent outcomes. Those with high status benevolently favored the out-group when outcomes were non-contingent, but were self-protective with contingent outcomes. People were willing to engage in social activities with an out-group member regardless of competence. However, when task collaboration had implications for the self, those with low status preferred competent over less competent out-group members. Traits of high status targets were differentiated by those with low status in both experiments, whereas those with high status differentiated low-status members’ traits only when outcomes were contingent. A general principle fits the data: The implications of intergroup responses for the self determine benevolence and self-protection.     

Status conferral in intergroup social dilemmas: behavioral antecedents and consequences of prestige and dominance

Bridging the literatures on social dilemmas, intergroup conflict, and social hierarchy, the authors systematically varied the intergroup context in which social dilemmas were embedded to investigate how costly contributions to public goods influence status conferral. They predicted that contribution behavior would have opposite effects on 2 forms of status-prestige and dominance-depending on its consequences for the self, in-group and out-group members. When the only way to benefit in-group members was by harming out-group members (Study 1), contributions increased prestige and decreased dominance, compared with free-riding. Adding the option of benefitting in-group members without harming out-group members (Study 2) decreased the prestige and increased the dominance of those who chose to benefit in-group members via intergroup competition. Finally, sharing resources with both in-group and out-group members decreased perceptions of both prestige and dominance, compared with sharing them with in-group members only (Study 3). Prestige and dominance differentially mediated the effects of contribution behavior on leader election, exclusion from the group, and choices of a group representative for an intergroup competition. Taken together, these findings show that the well-established relationship between contribution and status is moderated by both the intergroup context and the conceptualization of status.     

内群偏私：自我锚定还是社会认同？

以往关于内群偏私的研究大多采用社会认同理论（social identityt heory）做解释。近期,自我锚定（self-anchoring principle）原理被证实可用于解释内群偏私的原因。基于中国人及美国人在内群偏私的目的、方法上的不同,我们采用最小群体范式,验证这两种理论在中国大学生上的适用性。410名大学生（其中前测94名）在互联网上完成以认知能力评估为名的实验,实验控制反馈类型,要求参与者对自身、内群及外群在不同维度上评分。实验证明内群偏私存在;分化理论成立;采用演绎策略时,个体评价与内群评价的差异显著小于个体采用归纳策略时两者的差异,符合社会认同理论的假设。     

When are we better than them and they worse than us? A closer look at social discrimination in positive and negative domains

This article argues that in-group favoritism occurs on positive and negative dimensions only when the dimensions of comparison provide an appropriate and meaningful basis for self-other definition, that is, when traits comparatively and normatively fit in-group-out-group categorizations. Three studies are reported in which groups were evaluated on positive or negative traits that varied in their degree of normative fit to in-group and out-group identity. In line with predictions, fit rather than stimulus valence was the crucial determinant of (a) in-group favoritism and (b) absolute level of differentiation between groups. Implications of the findings for explanations of positive-negative asymmetry and broader understandings of intergroup discrimination are discussed.     

Self-esteem and in-group bias among members of a religious social category

In a sample of New Zealand university students, the author extended earlier research into the relationship between self-esteem and intergroup discrimination. He found no support for the hypothesis that social-category members (i.e., Christians) experience an elevation in the domain of self-esteem (i.e., religious self-esteem) judged as more relevant to the in-group after evaluations favoring the in-group. Regardless of whether the evaluation targets behaved positively or negatively, the respondents in the experimental condition evaluated in-group (Christian) targets more highly than out-group (Atheist) targets. After evaluations favoring the in-group, the respondents did not experience an elevation of religious self-esteem, global self-esteem, or mathematical self-esteem (judged as less relevant to the in-group).     

Devaluing domains in response to threatening intergroup comparisons: perceived legitimacy and the status value asymmetry

Group status and status legitimacy were tested as moderators of devaluing in response to threatening intergroup comparisons. In 3 experiments, participants received feedback comparing their in-group (based on school or gender) to a higher or lower status out-group. When the legitimacy of group status differences was assumed (Studies 1 and 2) or manipulated (Study 3), participants devalued the domain when their in-group compared unfavorably with a lower status out-group but did not devalue the domain when their in-group compared unfavorably with a higher status out-group. In Study 3, this status value asymmetry was eliminated when status differences were delegitimized. Mediational analyses suggested that the status value asymmetry was explained by the perceived utility of the domain for gaining status-relevant rewards.     

What Is Social about Justice? Inclusive Identity and Group Values as the Basis of the Justice Motive

Three studies tested the claim that the justice motive is based on commitment to the perceived values of the “primary category” of potential recipients of an allocation. In Study 1, participants who identified more strongly with their group regarded a member who represented the group's strengths as more entitled to a common profit. In Study 2, participants judged their own entitlement versus that of a member who represented the group's strengths. Members who identified more strongly with their group were less likely to display self-interest in their judgments. In Study 3, participants judged the entitlement of an in-group member representing out-group strengths versus an out-group member representing in-group strengths. When identification with the primary category (including in-group and out-group) was strong, members who identified more strongly with their in-group viewed the out-group member representing in-group values as more deserving.     

Common Heritable Effects Underpin Concerns Over Norm Maintenance and In‐Group Favoritism: Evidence From Genetic Analyses of Right‐Wing Authoritarianism and Traditionalism

Research has shown that in‐group favoritism is associated with concerns over the maintenance of social norms. Here we present two studies examining whether genetic factors underpin this association. A classical twin design was used to decompose phenotypic variance into genetic and environmental components in two studies. Study 1 used 812 pairs of adult U.S. twins from the nationally representative MIDUS II sample. Study 2 used 707 pairs of middle‐age twins from the Minnesota Twin Registry. In‐group favoritism was measured with scales tapping preferences for in‐group (vs. out‐group) individuals; norm concerns were measured with the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire–Traditionalism (Study 1) and Right‐Wing Authoritarianism (RWA; Study 2) scales. In Study 1, heritable effects underlying traditionalism were moderately (c. 35%) overlapping with the genetic variance underpinning in‐group favoritism. In Study 2, heritable influences on RWA were entirely shared with the heritable effects on in‐group favoritism. Moreover, we observed that Big Five Openness shared common genetic links to both RWA and in‐group favoritism. These results suggest that, at the genetic level, in‐group favoritism is linked with a system related to concern over normative social practices, which is, in turn, partially associated with trait Openness.     

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。     

Self-Esteem and In-Group Bias Among Members of a Religious Social Category

Abstract

In a sample of New Zealand university students, the author extended earlier research into the relationship between self-esteem and intergroup discrimination. He found no support for the hypothesis that social-category members (i.e., Christians) experience an elevation in the domain of self-esteem (i.e., religious self-esteem) judged as more relevant to the in-group after evaluations favoring the in-group. Regardless of whether the evaluation targets behaved positively or negatively, the respondents in the experimental condition evaluated in-group (Christian) targets more highly than out-group (Atheist) targets. After evaluations favoring the in-group, the respondents did not experience an elevation of religious self-esteem, global self-esteem, or mathematical self-esteem (judged as less relevant to the in-group).     

The Attribution of Primary and Secondary Emotions to the In-Group and to the Out-Group: The Case of Equal Status Countries

ABSTRACT

We examined the attribution of primary and secondary emotions in the context of equal status groups with a non-conflictual relationship, that is, Germans and French. In Study 1 (N = 169), we found that in such an intergroup context, there was no differential attribution of secondary emotions but an over-attribution of primary emotions to the out-group. Only high identifiers tended to attribute more secondary emotions to the in-group than to the out-group. In Study 2 (N = 423), the role of the identification with the in-group and a superordinate group (Europe) in the process of infrahumanization was examined. Participants' national versus European identification was primed. The results did not differ between these two conditions. As in Study 1, an over-attribution of primary emotions to the out-group was observed. Concerning the secondary emotions, the classical infrahumanization effect occurred, that is, an over-attribution of secondary emotions to the in-group.     

Perceptual asymmetry in consensus estimates of majority and minority members

Three experiments revealed a consistent pattern of consensus estimates. Numerical status and group growth or decline were manipulated between subjects. Growth was manipulated orthogonally to a 3rd variable: focus. Focus was manipulated by describing growth information with respect either to the in-group or the out-group (e.g., in-group growth and out-group decline). A Numerical Status X Focus interaction emerged in Study 1. Numerical minority members' consensus estimates for an opinion issue increased when growth information was out-group focused, whereas majority members' estimates did not differ as a function of the focus variable. Study 2 replicated these effects across other opinion dimensions. Study 3 confirmed the importance of the growth and focus variables in the absence of numerical status manipulations.     

儿童在不同卷入情境下基于资源价值的分配行为特点：内群体偏爱的作用

为探究不同卷入情境下儿童基于资源价值的分配行为特点以及内群体偏爱在其中的作用, 呈现给儿童两种实验情境：实验1, 134名5~8岁儿童在第一方情境下与来自内、外群体的一名儿童分配不同价值的物品, 结果发现7~8岁儿童公平分配比例与5~6岁儿童无显著差异; 实验2, 130名5~8岁儿童在第三方情境下给来自特定群体的两名儿童分配资源, 结果发现7~8岁儿童公平分配比例显著高于5~6岁儿童。两个实验均发现儿童的分配行为表现出内群体偏爱, 5~6岁儿童比7~8岁儿童更明显。并且, 5~6岁女生比男生有更明显的内群体偏爱, 但在7~8岁组无性别差异。此外, 只有7~8岁儿童的公平分配行为表现出卷入情境上的差异, 他们在第三方情境比第一方情境下更能做出公平分配, 但5~6岁儿童的公平分配行为并无情境差异。综上可见, 比起年幼儿童, 年长儿童基于资源价值的公平行为发展得更好, 并且在两种卷入情境下受内群体偏爱的影响均更小。