Uncertainty, entitativity, and group identification

Two studies examined the effects of self-uncertainty and ingroup entitativity on group identification. From uncertainty reduction theory (Hogg, 2000), it was hypothesized that people would identify most strongly with their group if they felt self-conceptually uncertain and the group was highly entitative. Study 1 was a field experiment (N = 114) in which the perceived entitativity of participants’ political party was measured, and self-uncertainty was primed (high vs. low). Study 2 was a laboratory experiment (N = 89) with ad hoc non-interactive groups. Uncertainty was primed as in Study 1, but perceived entitativity was manipulated. In both cases the dependent variable was a multi-item measure of group identification. The hypothesis was fully supported in both studies—participants identified more strongly when they were uncertain and the group was highly entitative. Implications of this research for the role of uncertainty and social identity in extremism, orthodoxy, and ideological belief systems are discussed.     

Perceived entitativity of social networks

Four studies examined how people perceive entitativity of small and large social networks based on the graphical information of interaction among individuals. Participants rated social network graphs on entitativity while controlling for the number of individuals and connectivity of social relationships. Overall, network connectivity corresponded to the degree of interaction among individuals in a social network. Whereas entitativity of small social networks slowly increased with a higher level of connectivity, entitativity of large social networks rapidly increased with a lower level of connectivity. The difference in the increase rates of entitativity is explained in terms of how individuals typically interact in different sizes of social networks.     

The fundamentality of group principles and perceived group entitativity

We argue that the level of consensus about a set of social identity principles, and their perceived fundamentality, can influence the degree to which members perceive their group as an entity. This idea was explored through an experiment in which participants judged the entitativity of specific (in)groups on the basis of the distribution of the opinions held by their members about three identity-related principles that participants had previously rated for fundamentality. The results demonstrated that the more fundamental a principle was judged to be in comparison to other principles, the more important consensus about that principle was for producing group entitativity, relative to consensus about other principles.     

Perceived group identity of outgroup members and anticipated rejection: People think that strongly identified group members reject non‐group members

Many studies of intergroup relations have examined the effects of group identity on various types of intergroup cognition and behavior. However, few studies have focused on the perceived group identity of outgroup members. This study examined the effects of perceptions of outgroup identity on anticipated rejection by an outgroup. In Study 1, we administered a questionnaire pertaining to 30 social groups to Japanese undergraduate and vocational students. The collective images and intra‐individual processes relating to perceived outgroup identity were investigated by applying correlation analysis and multilevel structural equation modeling. In Study 2, we conducted an experiment in which we manipulated the participants' perceptions of relative levels of outgroup members' identity. Both studies demonstrated, as predicted, that people anticipated rejection by strongly identified outgroup members more than by weakly identified outgroup members. Furthermore, in Study 2, anticipated same‐group favoritism mediated the relationship between the manipulation of perceived outgroup identity and anticipated rejection. These findings suggest the important role of perceived outgroup identity in intergroup cognition.     

Varieties of groups and the perception of group entitativity

Three studies examined perceptions of the entitativity of groups. In Study 1 (U.S.) and Study 2 (Poland), participants rated a sample of 40 groups on 8 properties of groups (e.g., size, duration, group member similarity) and perceived entitativity. Participants also completed a sorting task in which they sorted the groups according to their subjective perceptions of group similarity. Correlational and regression analyses were used to determine the group properties most strongly related to entitativity. Clustering and multidimensional scaling analyses in both studies identified 4 general types of groups (intimacy groups, task groups, social categories, and loose associations). In Study 3, participants rated the properties of groups to which they personally belonged. Study 3 replicated the results of Studies 1 and 2 and demonstrated that participants most strongly valued membership in groups that were perceived as high in entitativity.     

Origins of the stuttering stereotype: stereotype formation through anchoring-adjustment

The stereotype of people who stutter is predominantly negative, holding that stutterers are excessively nervous, anxious, and reserved. The anchoring–adjustment hypothesis suggests that the stereotype of stuttering arises from a process of first anchoring the stereotype in personal feelings during times of normal speech disfluency, and then adjusting based on a rapid heuristic judgment. The current research sought to test this hypothesis, elaborating on previous research by [White, P. A., & Collins, S. R. (1984). Stereotype formation by inference: A possible explanation for the “stutterer” stereotype. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 27, 567–570]. Participants provided ratings of a hypothetical typical person who stutters, a person suffering from normal speech disfluency and a typical male on a 25-item semantic differential scale. Results showed a stereotype of people who stutter similar to that found in previous research. The pattern of results is consistent with the anchoring–adjustment hypothesis. Ratings of a male stutterer are very similar to a male experiencing temporary disfluency, both of which differ from ratings of a typical male. As expected, ratings of a stutterer show a small but statistically significant adjustment on several traits that makes the stereotype of stutterers less negative and less emotionally extreme than the temporarily disfluent male. Based on the results of this research, it appears that stereotype formation is a result of generalization and adjustment from personal experience during normal speech disfluency.

Educational objectives: The reader will be able to: (1) explain how the negative stereotype of people who stutter arises; (2) discuss the negative implications of stereotypes in the lives of people who stutter; and (3) summarize why the stereotype of people who stutter is so consistent and resistant to change.     

From individual to group impressions: Availability heuristics in stereotype formation

When subjects are presented with information about the attributes of individuals and are then asked to make judgments about the characteristics of the group composed of those individuals, the group impression may depend on the way in which data on individuals are organized in memory. Experiment 1 demonstrated that under conditions of low memory load (16 instances of person-trait pairings), subjects organize their perceptions of a group around the characteristics of its individual members, whereas under high memory load (64 instances of person-trait pairings), subjects organize trait information in an undifferentiated way around the group as a whole. Under low memory load, subjects distinguish between repeated occurrences of a trait in the same individual and comparable repeated occurrences of that trait in different individuals; under high memory load, subjects do not make such a differentiation. Subjects' judgments about the frequency of categories of traits were related to the ease of recall of category instances, as predicted by an availability heuristic. Experiments 2 and 3 demonstrated that group members who are most available in memory will be disproportionately represented in the group impression. Specifically, the proportion of extreme individuals in a group was retro-spectively overestimated; this was true for both physical stimuli (height) and social stimuli (criminal acts).     

Perceived consensus influences intergroup behavior and stereotype accessibility

Past research has demonstrated the powerful influence other people have on the thoughts and behaviors of individuals. However, the study of intergroup attitudes has focused primarily on the influence of direct exposure to out-group members as determinants of stereotypes and prejudice. Two experiments tested the hypothesis that learning that others share one's intergroup beliefs influences intergroup attitudes and behavior as well as stereotype representation. Experiment 1 demonstrated that learning that one's beliefs are shared or not shared with others influences attitudes, behavior, and the strength of the attitude-behavior relationship. Experiment 2 demonstrated a potential mechanism for such effects by showing that learning about whether others share one's stereotypes influences the accessibility of those stereotypes and related stereotypes.     

The role of diagnosticity in stereotype formation: perceiving group means and variances.

Three experiments tested the hypotheses that while forming stereotypes of social groups, people abstract the central tendency and variability of different attribute dimensions to determine which ones best differentiate the groups and that more differentiating dimensions are more likely to become stereotypical in the sense of becoming strongly associated with the groups in memory. Supporting these hypotheses. Experiment 1 found that, after viewing behaviors performed by members of 2 groups, Ss characterized the groups more in terms of attribute dimensions indicating larger differences between the central tendencies of the groups, and Experiment 2 showed that this effect did not occur when Ss formed impressions of only 1 group. Experiment 3 found that Ss also characterized groups more in terms of attribute dimensions indicating lower within-group variability.     

Perceived ingroup entitativity and intergroup bias: an interconnection of self and others

Campbell's (1958) concept of ingroup entitativity is reformulated as a perceived interconnection of self and others. A 2 (intergroup relations: competitive, neutral)×3 (intragroup interaction: low, medium, high) between-subjects design was used to examine (1) the effects of intergroup and intragroup relations on perceived ingroup entitativity and (2) the relation between ingroup entitativity and intergroup bias. Regardless of the relations between groups, members who experienced intragroup interaction had stronger perceptions of ingroup entitativity and stronger representations of the aggregate of ingroup and outgroup members as two separate groups than members who lacked intragroup interaction. Furthermore, perceptions of ingroup entitativity mediated the effect of the salience of the intergroup boundary on behavioral intergroup bias. These results call into question the ‘intergroup’ nature of group based phenomena. An ingroup entitativity framework is presented that locates the source of group-based phenomena (e.g. intergroup bias) in intragroup processes. Copyright © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Implicit theories about groups and stereotyping: the role of group entitativity

The consequences of holding an entity (i.e., the belief that a group's characteristics are fixed) or incremental (i.e., the belief that a group's characteristics are malleable) implicit theory about groups was examined for stereotyping and perceptions of group entitativity. Two studies showed that implicit theories about groups affect stereotyping by changing perceptions of group entitativity. Study 1 found that entity theorists were more likely to stereotype than incremental theorists and that perception of group entitativity significantly accounted for this relation. In Study 2, implicit theories of groups were manipulated via instruction set and entity theorists stereotyped more and perceived groups as more entitative than incremental theorists. Again, the effect of implicit theory was significantly, although partially, mediated by perceptions of group entitativity. The roles of implicit theories about groups and perceptions of group entitativity are discussed regarding stereotyping.     

One-shot illusory correlations and stereotype formation

In four studies, the authors explored the emergence of one-shot illusory correlations--in which a single instance of unusual behavior by a member of a rare group is sufficient to create an association between group and behavior. In Studies 1, 2, and 3, unusual behaviors committed by members of rare groups were processed differently than other types of behaviors. They received more processing time, prompted more attributional thinking, and were more memorable. In Study 4, the authors obtained evidence from two implicit measures of association that one-shot illusory correlations are generalized to other members of a rare group. The authors contend that one-shot illusory correlations arise because unusual pairings of behaviors and groups uniquely prompt people to entertain group membership as an explanation of the unusual behavior.     

Cognitive processes in stereotype formation: the role of correct contingency learning for biased group judgments

Three studies investigated contingency learning and stereotype formation in a scenario about group membership and behavior with a confounding context factor. The studies tested predictions from theoretical accounts of biased group judgments in terms of simplistic reasoning, parallel distributed memory, and pseudocontingencies. Study 1 revealed a positive correlation between erroneous stereotype formation and learning of the true contingencies with the confounding factor. Study 2 showed that a focus manipulation during encoding moderated the correlation between stereotype formation and contingency learning but not the strength of the erroneous stereotype. Study 3 used a quasiexperimental comparison between participants with biased versus unbiased group judgments and extended the findings of a positive relation between stereotype formation and contingency learning. The results support an explanation of biased group judgments by pseudocontingencies; that is, unwarranted inferences from accurately perceived bivariate correlations in complex environments.     

Conspiracy stereotyping and perceptions of group entitativity of Jews, Germans, Arabs and homosexuals by Polish students

The relationship among conspiracy stereotypes and perceived entitativity (the degree to which a collection of persons are perceived as being bonded together in a homogeneous entity) of Jews, Germans, Arabs, and homosexuals was examined. 63 volunteer university students answered the Conspiracy Beliefs Scale and the Group Entitativity Scale. The conspiracy stereotypes of all the categories were positively correlated with scores for perceived entitativity. The perception of entitativity seems to be an important factor in conspiracy stereotyping and therefore in intergroup relations.     

Group entitativity and group perception: associations between physical features and psychological judgment

Two experiments tested whether the perceived entitativity of groups (i.e., cohesiveness) influences judgments about those groups, in terms of both their observable physical properties and underlying psychological traits. Entitativity was manipulated with groups whose members were similar or dissimilar in skin color. Experiment 1 demonstrated that beliefs about entitativity elicited more accurate judgments of skin color for entitative than nonentitative social groups, although memory for individual members of entitative groups was relatively impoverished. Experiment 2 revealed that entitative groups were viewed as not only physically similar but also psychologically homogeneous and elicited strong negative trait and behavioral judgments. Together, these findings suggest that physical properties (e.g., similarity) can create perceptions of psychological "groupness" that have important consequences for group perception.     

Disentangling stereotype activation and stereotype application in the stereotype misperception task

When forming impressions about other people, stereotypes about the individual's social group often influence the resulting impression. At least 2 distinguishable processes underlie stereotypic impression formation: stereotype activation and stereotype application. Most previous research has used implicit measures to assess stereotype activation and explicit measures to assess stereotype application, which has several disadvantages. The authors propose a measure of stereotypic impression formation, the stereotype misperception task (SMT), together with a multinomial model that quantitatively disentangles the contributions of stereotype activation and application to responses in the SMT. The validity of the SMT and of the multinomial model was confirmed in 5 studies. The authors hope to advance research on stereotyping by providing a measurement tool that separates multiple processes underlying impression formation.     

Perspective-taking: decreasing stereotype expression, stereotype accessibility, and in-group favoritism

Using 3 experiments, the authors explored the role of perspective-taking in debiasing social thought. In the 1st 2 experiments, perspective-taking was contrasted with stereotype suppression as a possible strategy for achieving stereotype control. In Experiment 1, perspective-taking decreased stereotypic biases on both a conscious and a nonconscious task. In Experiment 2, perspective-taking led to both decreased stereotyping and increased overlap between representations of the self and representations of the elderly, suggesting activation and application of the self-concept in judgments of the elderly. In Experiment 3, perspective-taking reduced evidence of in-group bias in the minimal group paradigm by increasing evaluations of the out-group. The role of self-other overlap in producing prosocial outcomes and the separation of the conscious, explicit effects from the nonconscious, implicit effects of perspective-taking are discussed.     

Group structure and entitativity in group fitness: considering groupness at within- and between-group levels

Objective: How can we distinguish between a collection of individuals exercising alongside one another from group that is exercising ‘together’? This question is central to research on the extent that individuals perceive their fitness settings to entail core features of groups. To advance understanding of the nature of groupness and its implications in exercise, the current study (a) evaluated a brief measure of groupness and (b) examined the extent that groupness predicted perceptions of exertion and affect.

Design: Participants included 633 exercisers (M_age?=?33.92, SD?=?11.05, 74% female) who completed surveys after group fitness classes (k?=?34).

Main outcome measures: Groupness, affect, exertion, and group cohesion.

Results: Exploratory structural equation modelling provided support for a two-factor solution reflecting entitativity and group structure as subdimensions of groupness. The groupness factors were differentially associated with theoretically relevant aspects of classes (e.g. synchronised movement), the individual (e.g. number of members interacted with), as well as group cohesion. Groupness also predicted perceived exertion and affect.

Conclusion: Our research provides support for a brief measure of groupness, advances theory related to how individuals perceive exercise groups, and provides evidence regarding how broader experiences during exercise may relate to exercisers’ perceptions of groupness.     

The contagious leader: impact of the leader's mood on the mood of group members, group affective tone, and group processes

The present study examined the effects of leaders' mood on (a) the mood of individual group members, (b) the affective tone of groups, and (c) 3 group processes: coordination, effort expenditure, and task strategy. On the basis of a mood contagion model, the authors found that when leaders were in a positive mood, in comparison to a negative mood, (a) individual group members experienced more positive and less negative mood, and (b) groups had a more positive and a less negative affective tone. The authors also found that groups with leaders in a positive mood exhibited more coordination and expended less effort than did groups with leaders in a negative mood. Applied implications of the results are discussed.     

Effects of a group stereotype on memory for behaviors performed by a group member

Participants were provided with a group impression prior to receiving behavioral information pertaining to a group member. The group impression conveyed a below average level of intelligence or an above average level of intelligence. In addition, the distribution of intelligence scores within the group was unimodal in one condition and bimodal in another condition. The behavioral information pertaining to the individual group member was predominantly intelligent or predominantly unintelligent, thereby affording the on‐line formation of an intelligent or unintelligent personal impression regarding the group member. After receiving the behavioral information, participants recalled the behaviors and rated the group member along the intelligence dimension. Recall and judgment data revealed that the group impression functioned as the dominant expectancy that influenced processing of the behavioral information. Moreover, the effect of the group expectancy was substantially greater in the unimodal condition than in the bimodal condition. Presence of a group impression appears to reduce the tendency for participants to derive a personal impression on‐line, and reduce the tendency for participants to rely on a derived personal expectancy when encoding behaviors performed by a group member. Potential moderators of this effect are discussed. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.