Discrimination and the positive-negative asymmetry effect: ideological and normative processes

Research using the minimal group paradigm demonstrates that categorization and ingroup identification can foster intergroup discrimination. However, the positive-negative asymmetry effect shows that less discrimination occurs when negative rather than positive outcomes are distributed. The normative hypothesis explains this asymmetry by the stronger inappropriateness of discrimination in negative than in positive outcome distributions. Results obtained in this minimal group paradigm study (N = 257) did not replicate the asymmetry effect: discrimination occurred in both positive and negative outcome distributions, even if norms against discrimination were stronger in negative than in positive outcome distributions. The absence of the asymmetry effect is explained by the effect of the discrimination-justifying ideology.     

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.     

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.     

The negative impact of perceiving discrimination on collective well‐being: the mediating role of perceived ingroup status

Previous research has found that, among stigmatized group members, perceiving discrimination against the ingroup simultaneously yields a positive indirect effect on self‐worth (mediated by ingroup identification) and a negative direct effect (Branscombe, Schmitt, & Harvey, 1999). This study not only replicated these effects with a sample of women, but also revealed that the negative direct effect was mediated by perceived status of the ingroup: as perceived discrimination increased, perceived ingroup status decreased, which in turn lowered collective self‐worth. Perceiving discrimination also increased the accessibility of the stigmatized group's devalued status. A new direction for future research may be to consider when stigmatized group members might affirm the ingroup rather than protect self‐worth. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Group identification moderates attitudes toward ingroup members who confront discrimination

Three studies examined the hypothesis that group identification moderates African Americans’, Asian Americans’, and women’s attitudes toward fellow ingroup members who challenge an outgroup member’s discriminatory comments or who do not speak up about the comments. Highly identified racial minorities expressed more positive attitudes toward ingroup members who confronted discriminatory comments compared to those who did not confront; whereas weakly identified minorities did not express different attitudes across the two conditions. Among women, the weakly identified expressed more negative attitudes toward other women who confronted discrimination relative to those who did not confront; whereas highly identified women did not differentially evaluate ingroup members in the two conditions. The less women identified with their group, the more negatively they evaluated ingroup members who confronted sexism. This research highlights the important role of group identification in understanding how members of devalued groups respond toward ingroup members who take a stand against discrimination.     

Host national and religious identification among Turkish Muslims in Western Europe: The role of ingroup norms,perceived discrimination and value incompatibility

Using a sample of 602 Turkish Muslims from Germany and the Netherlands, we examined the influence of ingroup norms and perceived discrimination on religious group identification and host national identification. Participants experiencing pressures from their ingroup to maintain an ethnoreligious lifestyle as well as those who perceived discrimination by natives identified more strongly with their religious group and, in turn, identified less with the host country. Further, the positive relationship between discrimination and religious group identification and the negative relationship between religious and national identification were especially strong for participants who perceived incompatibility between Western and Islamic ways of life. It is concluded that Muslim and host national identities are not always mutually exclusive and that it is important to study the conditions that reconcile and contrast them. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Group motives in threatening contexts: When a loyalty conflict paradoxically reduces the influence of an anti‐discrimination ingroup norm

The influence of pro‐ versus anti‐discrimination ingroup norms on Swiss nationals' attitudes towards foreigners was investigated as a function of national identification and perceived material ingroup threat. As predicted, results revealed a significant interaction between identification and threat: High identifiers showed a more negative attitude than low identifiers mainly when perceived threat was high. In other words, high identifiers conformed to the pro‐discrimination norm, but showed a counter‐conformity effect for the anti‐discrimination norm. Additional results revealed that high identifiers actually disagreed with the anti‐discrimination norm when perceived threat was high, but that they were more attached to the ingroup. These findings suggest that when the ingroup norm is not an appropriate response to an ingroup threat (i.e. anti‐discrimination norm), high identifiers find themselves in a loyalty conflict: they are unable to simultaneously conform to the group norm and protect the group. This conflict was resolved through a compensatory mechanism: High identifiers distanced themselves from the ingroup norm in order to protect the group (i.e. by increasing negative attitudes towards foreigners) but reinforced other ingroup ties (i.e. by increasing attachment to the ingroup values). Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Distancing oneself from negative attributes and the personal/group discrimination discrepancy

The personal/group discrimination discrepancy (PGDD) refers to greater reporting of discrimination at the group than personal level. We examined whether the PGDD is one example of people's general tendency to distance themselves from negative attributes related to the social categories to which they belong, and whether this tendency varies as a function of ingroup identification. Female undergraduates (n=87) rated the extent to which positive and negative attributes, including being discriminated against, characterized themselves personally and women as a social category. As expected, negative attributes, including discrimination, were more strongly associated with the category than with the self, whereas positive attributes were more strongly associated with the self than with the category. Women who were lower in group identification were especially likely to show these discrepancy effects. The implications for personal and social identity are discussed.     

Stereotypes as justifications for prior intergroup discrimination: Studies of Scottish national stereotyping

Two studies provide support for the group‐justification approach to stereotyping (Tajfel, 1981 ; Huici, 1984 ). This approach contends that stereotypes not only serve cognitive functions for individuals but also provide a means of justifying prior intergroup discrimination. Study 1 investigated whether the content of the Scottish ingroup stereotype changes due to the prior expression of intergroup discrimination. Scottish students were primed with either a ‘differentiation’ or a ‘fairness’ ingroup norm and completed two intergroup judgement tasks. Other Scottish students were primed only with a ‘differentiation’ ingroup norm, while a control group received no prime or judgement tasks. Only participants who experienced the ‘differentiation’ ingroup norm prime and the intergroup judgement tasks changed the content of their ingroup stereotype as an attempt to justify their discriminatory behaviour. Study 2 examined whether Scottish students would use both positive ingroup and negative outgroup stereotypes to rationalize intergroup discrimination. Students who experienced a ‘differentiation’ ingroup norm prime and intergroup judgement tasks showed the highest level of superior recall for positive ingroup and negative outgroup stereotype‐consistent words compared to stereotype‐neutral words. This finding suggests that the expression of intergroup discrimination activates the use of both positive ingroup and negative outgroup stereotypes. Together the findings of these two studies provide empirical support for the notion that stereotypes serve social as well as cognitive functions. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Ideological beliefs as determinants of discrimination in positive and negative outcome distributions

Social identity theory proposes that discrimination contributes favourably to group members' social identity. In minimal group paradigm (MGP) studies involving positive outcome distributions (e.g. money), discrimination is associated with a more positive social identity. But studies on the positive‐negative asymmetry effect show that categorization leads to less discrimination when negative (salary cuts) than when positive outcomes (salary increases) are distributed. Using structural equation modelling, this study (N = 279) tested whether discrimination involving negative outcome distributions could contribute as much to group members' positive social identity as discrimination on positive outcomes. The study also tested if ideological beliefs (i.e. social dominance orientation, authoritarianism), measured one month before the MGP experiment, could predict positive and negative outcome discrimination. While the fit of the hypothesized model was adequate, only social dominance orientation predicted both positive and negative outcome discrimination. Also, discrimination on positive outcomes but not on negative ones contributed to positive social identity. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Positive distinctiveness and social discrimination: An old couple living in divorce

The paper highlights the relation between positive distinctiveness and social discrimination as key concepts in Social Identity Theory. The often replicated finding of mere categorization leading to ingroup favouritism and outgroup discrimination plays a major role in supporting the view that discrimination is functional for a positive social identity. The paper confronts the mere categorization effect with recent findings which throw severe doubts on its robustness. Particularly the failure to extrapolate categorization effects to intergroup behaviour involving aversive stimuli (the positive–negative–asymmetry of social discrimination) lead to the plea for further specifications of SIT and its validity.     

Less negative=more positive? Social discrimination as avoidance or approach

A motivational approach to ingroup favoritism based on regulatory focus theory (RFT; Higgins, 1997) is introduced. RFT suggests that individual self-regulation is either more concerned with approaching positive events (promotion focus) or with avoiding negative events (prevention focus). It is suggested that if an individual self-categorizes as a group member, resource allocations to one’s group will be based on these mechanisms of self-regulation. Thus, a promotion focus should engender ingroup favoritism during the distribution of positive resources but not during the distribution of negative resources, whereas a prevention focus should engender ingroup favoritism for negative but not for positive resources. The results of two studies support this prediction based on momentary and chronic regulatory focus. The self-regulation approach to ingroup favoritism provides an explanation for social discrimination in the distribution of positive and negative resources.     

Group identification moderates emotional responses to perceived prejudice

Two studies tested the prediction that group identification (importance of the group in the self-concept) moderates the impact of perceived discrimination on self-evaluative emotions (depression and self-esteem). In Study 1, women low in gender identification experienced less depressed emotion and higher self-esteem if a negative evaluation was due to sexism than when it was not. The self-evaluative emotions of women high in gender identification were not buffered by attributions to sexism. In Study 2, ethnic identification and depressed emotions were positively related when Latino-Americans read about pervasive prejudice against the ingroup but were negatively related when they read about prejudice against an outgroup. Both studies demonstrated that for highly group identified individuals, prejudice against the ingroup is a threat against the self. Thus, the self-protective strategy of attributing negative feedback to discrimination may be primarily effective for individuals who do not consider the group a central aspect of self.     

个体和群体歧视知觉对流动儿童主观幸福感的影响

采用整班联系、自愿参加的方式,通过匿名方式对北京市1552名流动儿童施测个体和群体歧视知觉问卷、积极/消极情感量表、生活满意度量表、内群体认同测验与群体地位感测验,探讨个体和群体歧视知觉对流动儿童主观幸福感的影响及内群体认同感和群体地位感在其中的中介作用。结果表明：（1）个体和群体歧视知觉与流动儿童的主观幸福感、内群体情感认同及群体地位感之间存在显著性相关,与内群体认知认同之间相关不显著。（2）个体歧视知觉对流动儿童的主观幸福感存在直接显著的负向预测作用,并通过降低流动儿童的群体地位感,进而间接地负向影响流动儿童的主观幸福感;（3）群体歧视知觉对流动儿童的主观幸福感也存在直接显著的消极影响,并同时借助于群体地位感的中介作用、以及内群体情感认同和群体地位感的双重中介作用间接地降低流动儿童的主观幸福感。     

Social identity theory: past achievements,current problems and future challenges

This article presents a critical review of Social Identity Theory. Its major contributions to the study of intergroup relations are discussed, focusing on its powerful explanations of such phenomena as ingroup bias, responses of subordinate groups to their unequal status position, and intragroup homogeneity and stereotyping. In addition, its stimulative role for theoretical elaborations of the Contact Hypothesis as a strategy for improving intergroup attitudes is noted. Then five issues which have proved problematic for Social Identity Theory are identified: the relationship between group identification and ingroup bias; the self‐esteem hypothesis; positive – negative asymmetry in intergroup discrimination; the effects of intergroup similarity; and the choice of identity strategies by low‐status groups. In a third section a future research agenda for the theory is sketched out, with five lines of enquiry noted as being particularly promising: expanding the concept of social identity; predicting comparison choice in intergroup settings; incorporating affect into the theory; managing social identities in multicultural settings; and integrating implicit and explicit processes. The article concludes with some remarks on the potential applications of social identity principles. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Ethnic Identity, Legitimizing Ideologies, and Social Status: A Matter of Ideological Asymmetry

This paper examines the ideological asymmetry hypothesis with respect tothe interface between legitimizing ideologies and psychological attachment to one's ethnic group. The ideological asymmetry hypothesis suggests that hierarchy-enhancing legitimizing ideologies should be positively associated with ingroup attachment among high-status groups, but that among low-status groups these associations should be either less positive in magnitude (isotropic asymmetry) relative to high-status groups or negative in direction (anisotropic asymmetry). The opposite pattern should be found with respect to the interface between hierarchy-attenuating legitimizing ideologies and ingroup attachment: Among high-status groups these associations should be negative, but among low-status groups these associations should be either less negative in magnitude (isotropic asymmetry) relative to high-status groups or positive in direction (anisotropic asymmetry). The presence of isotropic versus anisotropic asymmetry is hypothesized to depend on the degree of disparity in status between the groups being compared: Wider status gaps should tend toward anisotropic asymmetries. The relationships between legitimizing ideologies and ingroup attachment were compared for (1) relatively high-status ethnic groups (European and Asian Americans) versus relatively low-status ethnic groups (Latinos and African Americans) in the United States, (2) the higher-status Jewish ethnic group (Ashkenazim) versus the lower-status Jewish ethnic group (Mizrachim) in Israel, and (3) the high-status Israeli Jews versus the low-status Israeli Arabs. The data were largely consistent with the ideological asymmetry hypothesis. The implications of these findings are discussed within the theoretical frameworks of social dominance theory and other approaches to intergroup relations.     

Social Identity, Modern Sexism, and Perceptions of Personal and Group Discrimination by Women and Men

Perceptions of gender-related discrimination against the self and group were examined in women and men, with a focus on the predictive utility of modern sexism and 3 dimensions of social identification (ingroup ties, centrality, and ingroup affect). Questionnaires were completed by 321 undergraduates (206 women and 115 men), of whom 78% self-identified as White and 10% as Asian. Higher levels of personal and group discrimination tended to be perceived by high-neosexism men and low-neosexism women. The centrality of gender identification was positively related to men's personal-level perceptions of discrimination, whereas effects of the emotional facets of social identity—ingroup ties and ingroup affect—occurred jointly with both gender and modern sexism. The results are discussed with reference to social identity theory and the personal/group discrimination discrepancy.     

Ingroup vitality and intergroup attitudes in a linguistic minority

In this study we argue that predictions of the impact of group status, status stability and status legitimacy on intergroup attitudes can be refined using the subjective perceptions of various dimensions of ingroup vitality. We tested the main and moderating effects of perceived present, future and the legitimacy of present ingroup vitality and perceived discrimination on intergroup attitudes in a nation-wide probability sample (N= 1,411) of Swedish-speaking Finns, controlling for ingroup identification. We found that those who perceived the legitimacy of present ingroup vitality to be low had more negative intergroup attitudes than those who perceived the legitimacy to be high. Perceived present and future ingroup vitality had no main effects on the dependent variable. Instead, perceived future ingroup vitality moderated the effect of perceived discrimination on intergroup attitudes. In addition, the perceived legitimacy of present ingroup vitality mediated the effect of perceived present ingroup vitality on intergroup attitudes.     

Ingroup identification moderates stereotype change in reaction to ingroup deviance

An experiment (N = 98) investigated the moderating effect of ingroup identification on reactions to deviant ingroup members. We measured psychology students' level of identification with the group ‘psychologists’ and presented them with information about either a normative or deviant psychologist. Participants completed an ingroup stereotype measure either before or after reading about and evaluating the target psychologist. High identifiers expressed a more positive stereotype of the ingroup after, compared to before, reading about a deviant ingroup member. High identifiers also expressed a more positive stereotype of the ingroup after reading about a deviant than after reading about a normative ingroup member. By contrast, low identifiers' stereotype judgements were relatively unaffected by the target information. The target evaluation ratings indicate that high identifiers were more positive than low identifiers towards the normative ingroup member, but were more negative than low identifiers towards the deviant. The results point to the greater motivational demands on high identifiers to maintain a positive image of the group. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Expectation of outgroup behaviour: can you trust the outgroup?

Outgroups are usually viewed with suspicion and expected to discriminate against the ingroup. The present study demonstrated that ingroup members attributed past discriminatory behaviour committed by individuals of unknown group membership more to outgroup members than to either ingroup members or members of a neutral group. In contrast, past egalitarian behaviour was attributed less to outgroup members than to members of a neutral group. Ingroup members also expected more discrimination from a future outgroup allocator than from a future neutral group allocator. Finally, the study showed that ingroup members' own behaviour in allocating money became more biased in favour of ingroup members vis-á-vis outgroup members when the future allocator was from an outgroup rather than from a neutral group and when they had witnessed the discriminatory behaviour of an allocator in the past.