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.     

Evaluations of the in-group and of out-groups among Portuguese children

The current research examined in-group/out-group attitudes among Portuguese children. The sample consisted of 366 children (183 boys and 183 girls) aged 5, 6, 10 and 11. Children were interviewed about attitudes of the Portuguese in-group and of two out-groups (Cape Verdeans and Brazilians). Three measures were used: a trait attribution task including positive and negative personality traits, and an overall affective evaluation of in-group and out-group members. Results revealed: (a) Portuguese children ascribed more positive attitudes (i.e., assigned more positive and less negative features, and greater positivity and affective evaluation) towards the Portuguese in-group than towards two out-groups; (b) developmental differences in attitudes towards the national groups; (c) an absence of gender differences on any of the variables considered. The findings are discussed in light of past empirical research and theoretical views.     

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.     

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.     

Group-Based Trust in Strangers: The Role of Stereotypes and Expectations

ABSTRACT— Across two studies, we provide evidence for group-based trust in strangers. Specifically, when we offered participants a choice between an unknown monetary allocation made by an in-group (university or major) or an out-group allocator, both of whom had total control over the distribution of an identical sum of money, participants strongly preferred the in-group allocator. This preference occurred regardless of whether the stereotype of the in-group was relatively more positive or more negative than that of the out-group. However, this preference did not persist when participants believed that the allocator was unaware of their group membership. Measures of expected share of the allocator's funds support our hypothesis that differential trust of in-group members results from expectations of altruistic and fair behavior toward fellow in-group members rather than from positive stereotypes of the in-group.     

Cultural Stereotypes and the Self: A Closer Examination of Implicit Self-Stereotyping

Recent research and theory on implicit self-stereotyping suggests that individuals nonconsciously incorporate stereotypes about their social groups into the self-concept; however, evidence as to whether this holds true for negative stereotypes remains limited. Using a subliminal priming measure, the current research found that women (Experiment 1) and White Americans (Experiment 2) implicitly associated the self with in-group stereotypic traits but not out-group stereotypic traits. Of importance, both groups implicitly self-stereotyped on negative in-group traits to a similar extent as they did on positive in-group traits. Moreover, exploratory analysis showed that the degree to which White Americans associated positive, but not negative, in-group stereotypes with the self was related to higher self-esteem. Implications of implicit self-stereotyping on self-esteem and stereotype-consistent behavior are discussed.     

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.     

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 Black-Sheep Effect: How Positive and Negative Advertisements Affect Voters' Perceptions of the Sponsor of the Advertisement1

Participants read a positive or negative (mock) political advertisement that was sponsored by either an in-group (subject and sponsor were members of the same political party) or an out-group (subject and sponsor were members of different political parties) member. The results found support for a black-sheep effect. An in-group sponsor of a positive advertisement was evaluated more positively than any out-group member, regardless of advertisement type, or an in-group member who sponsored a negative advertisement. However, an in-group sponsor of a negative advertisement was evaluated more negatively than either an in-group sponsor of a positive advertisement. or an out-group sponsor. regardless of advertisement type. The results are discussed in terms of social identity theory.     

Majority group children expect that ethnic out-group peers feel fewer positive but more negative emotions than in-group peers

Across two studies majority group children’s (8–13 years) perception of positive and negative emotions in ethnic in-group and disadvantaged ethnic out-group peers was examined. Study 1 (N?=?302) showed that children expected in-group peers to feel better in a positive situation compared to out-group peers. Whereas, in a negative situation, children expected in-group peers to feel less bad compared to out-group peers, particularly when they evaluated the in-group as very positive. Study 2 (N?=?201) replicates these findings across multiple positive and negative situations, and additionally shows that in very negative situations children expect in-group and out-group peers to feel equally bad. These results suggest that children’s perception of emotions in others is influenced by ethnic group membership.     

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.     

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。     

Contagion or restitution? When bad apples can motivate ethical behavior

When there is a “bad apple” in the group, are we more likely to follow the example or compensate for their sins? Three experiments showed that whether a group member’s unethical actions lead to contagion or restitution depends on the presence of out-group observers. In Experiment 1, participants were more likely to compensate for the transgression of an in-group member than an out-group member when there were out-group observers. Experiment 2 varied the presence of out-group observers and showed that such compensatory behaviors occur only in the presence of out-group members. We suggest that the presence of out-group observers trigger a self-categorization process that induces guilt in individuals for their group members’ transgressions. Indeed, associated guilt mediated the relationship between in-group member’s unethical behavior and participants’ compensatory behavior (Experiment 3). These results suggest that norms implied by others’ behavior and group categorization are important determinants of ethical behavior.     

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.     

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.     

Ethnic group identification and group evaluation among minority and majority groups: testing the multiculturalism hypothesis

Following social identity theory, the author hypothesized that members of minority groups are more likely than majority group members to endorse multiculturalism more strongly and assimilationist thinking less strongly. In addition, the multiculturalism hypothesis proposes that the more minority groups endorse the ideology of multiculturalism (or assimilationism), the more (or less) likely they will be to identify with their ethnic in-group and to show positive in-group evaluation. In contrast, the more majority group members endorse multiculturalism (or assimilationism), the less (or more) likely they are to identify with their ethnic group and to show negative out-group evaluation. Results from 4 studies (correlational and experimental) provide support for this hypothesis among Dutch and Turkish participants living in the Netherlands.     

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。     

In my mind, we all smile: A case of in-group favoritism

The goal of the present study was to examine whether a highly valued social behavior—the smile—is attributed more frequently to in-group than to out-group members. For this, participants were asked to read a vignette describing a protagonist in a non-emotional situation, and to choose a facial expression that would be appropriate to the context. For Study 1 the vignette depicted a potentially social context, whereas for Study 2, the context was strictly non-social. In both studies, participants of European descent attributed smiles more often to members of their in-group, whereas they attributed a larger number of neutral faces to out-group members. In a third study the same pattern of attributions was found for recent immigrants from French speaking African countries and from Asian countries. These results suggest the presence of an in-group bias in the attribution of smiles.     

In-group favoritism among Native and immigrant Turkish Cypriots: trait evaluations of in-group and out-group targets

The authors investigated whether in-group favoritism manifests itself as praise for the in-group- or as denigration of the out-group. A total of 450 Turkish Cypriots (248 native, 202 immigrant) judged the applicability of positive and negative trait words to in-group and out-group targets. Both the native and the immigrant groups judged the positive traits as more applicable to their respective in-groups than to the out-group. The native group evaluated the negative social traits as more applicable to the immigrant group. The immigrant group also judged the negative social traits as more applicable to themselves. The two groups did not differ in their judgments for more personal negative traits.