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.     

Intergroup threat and experienced affect: the distinct roles of causal attributions, ingroup identification, and perceived legitimacy of intergroup status

Across three studies, it was predicted and found that in the case of intergroup threat, low ingroup identifiers experience greater negative affect when they make an ingroup-internal rather than an outgroup-internal attribution, and high ingroup identifiers experience greater negative affect when they make an outgroup-internal rather than an ingroup-internal attribution. These effects were mediated by the perceived legitimacy of ingroup- outgroup status differences that results from their reflecting social reality (i.e., actual differences in the groups' standing on a relevant comparison dimension). Combining the findings of two distinct literatures, the current work provides new insights into the yet-unexplored distinct roles played by intergroup attributions as a predictor and ingroup identification as a moderator of the affective responses produced by social identity threat.     

The Influence of Social Consensus Information on Intergroup Attitudes: The Moderating Effects of Ingroup Identification

ABSTRACT

Two studies examined the role of ingroup identification in the influence of social consensus information (information about others' beliefs) on intergroup attitudes. Research demonstrates that consensus information influences individuals' intergroup attitudes. However, the extent to which individuals identify with the group providing consensus information seems important to understanding consensus effects. In Study 1, 100 high or low ingroup identifiers received information that other ingroup members held favorable or unfavorable attitudes toward African Americans and then provided their own attitudes. In Study 2, 250 participants completed an ingroup identification manipulation (high, low, or control) before receiving favorable or no consensus information. Results of both studies demonstrated that ingroup identification moderated consensus effects, such that high identifiers were more susceptible to others' beliefs than individuals in the low identification and control conditions. In determining critical factors involved in consensus effects, we hope to create a useful method to promote favorable intergroup attitudes and behaviors.     

Affective responses to own violations of ingroup norms: the moderating role of norm salience

The findings from two experiments support the argument that the salience of a relevant ingroup norm may moderate the affective consequences of one's normative violations. Participants' counternormative behaviour only influenced their self‐reported affect under conditions of high norm salience. This relationship was mediated by participants' perceptions that their expression of ingroup favouritism was discrepant from a group norm of intergroup fairness. The presented evidence extends previous research in two ways. First, it qualifies prior work concerning the affective impact of normative ‘discrepancy’ on self‐directed negative affect. Second, it shows that increased self‐directed negative affect can be produced by deviations from the norms of a situationally salient and identity‐relevant reference group. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Ingroup and outgroup support for upward mobility: Divergent responses to ingroup identification in low status groups

Members of groups with low societal status can pursue individual upward mobility to improve their status. We examine the conditions under which ingroup and outgroup members are most inclined to support such upward mobility attempts. Whereas both ingroup and outgroup supports are important, there may be tension: dissociation from the low status group may lower ingroup support, whereas association with the low status group may lower outgroup support. Ingroup association can be expressed by communicating one's affective involvement or by behaving in line with typical ingroup practices. As predicted, studies 1 and 2 show that support from the low status ingroup depends more on affective involvement than on behavioral identity expression (BIE). In contrast, studies 3–5 show that support from the high status group is more driven by the upwardly mobile individual's BIE. Mediational analyses show that these opposite patterns are driven by differential processes, prompted by the group's respective positions in the social hierarchy. The findings provide insight into how members of low status groups negotiate the competing demands of the high and low status groups as they pursue upward mobility. Moreover, they show how affective involvement and BIE differentially affect ingroup support and outgroup opposition. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The effects of intergroup context of evaluation on ambivalence toward the ingroup and the outgroup

A study is reported which examines the relations between ambivalence toward the ingroup and the outgroup. The basic assumption was that ambivalent attitudes in intergroup contexts contribute to satisfying two competing motivations of group members, i.e. establishment of positive distinctiveness for the ingroup and conformity to the fairness norm. Participants were asked to evaluate the ingroup and one other group by using unipolar (positively and negatively valenced) affect‐ and cognition‐based items. We predicted an interaction effect of target group (ingroup versus outgroup) and attitude domain (affect‐based versus cognition‐based) on ambivalence. Additional hypotheses were formulated taking separately into account the positive and the negative unipolar items. We expected that on positively valenced items the ingroup would be favoured over the outgroup on both affect‐ and cognition‐based evaluations. Besides, we predicted that on negatively valenced items, the ingroup would be favoured over the outgroup on affect‐based evaluation but not on cognition‐based evaluation. Results indicated support for the predictions and shed light on the moderating role played by attitude domains on both ambivalence and ingroup favouritism. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Ingroup ambivalence and experienced discomfort: the moderating roles of affective versus cognitive attitudinal basis, group identification, as mediated by negative beliefs about the ingroup

Prior research has found individuals' reactions to vary depending on whether such associations are activated by emotions (an affective basis) or by beliefs (a cognitive basis) about the object's properties. Accordingly, this conceptual distinction should be relevant also for the discomfortive responses to one's ambivalent attitudes regarding fellow group members (or the ingroup). Findings from two studies support the argument that ambivalence-associated discomfort a) is a general tendency when it regards affect-based ambivalence towards fellow group members, while b) only holds for the more identified group members when ambivalence concerns beliefs about the ingroup, and for this latter group members c) this tendency is driven by the strength of their negative beliefs about the ingroup or fellow group members.     

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.     

Friend or foe? Ingroup identification moderates reactions to outgroup members' allocation behavior

In the present article we build on previous work suggesting that people react more strongly to the favorability of outgroup authority allocations than ingroup authority allocations. Based on theorizing and research on intergroup perception and self‐categorization, we refine this argument by suggesting that responses to outgroup authorities depend on people's level of ingroup identification. We present data from an experiment showing that the favorability of treatment by an outgroup member primarily influences decision acceptance among high (vs. low) ingroup identifiers. In line with theory and research based on the relational model of authority, findings of the present study also suggest that ingroup identification has a reversed effect on acceptance of an ingroup authority's decisions. Specifically, the favorability of treatment by an ingroup member primarily influences decision acceptance among low (vs. high) ingroup identifiers. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The role of affect in attitudes toward organ donation and donor-relevant decisions

We argue that affect plays a vital role in attitudes toward organ donation and that reluctance to become an organ donor is likely to be related to the experience of affective ambivalence. Assessing the affect associated with organ donation could help to predict donor-relevant decisions. Results of a confirmatory factor analysis on 464 students showed that affective evaluations can be distinguished both from cognitive evaluations and from overall evaluations. As expected, affective evaluations revealed ambivalence (using the ‘Griffin’ measure of ambivalence) toward organ donation, whereas the two other types of evaluations did not. Results of a follow-up study using logistic regression (n?=?85), showed that affective evaluations predicted donor-relevant decisions six months later. The present findings support the proposal to include separate affective evaluations in measures of attitudes to organ donation. More general implications for the measurement and structure of attitudes in health related domains are discussed.     

Cross-Community Contact, Perceived Status Differences, and Intergroup Attitudes in Northern Ireland: The Mediating Roles of Individual-level versus Group-level Threats and the Moderating Role of Social Identification

We tested a model which examined the relationship between contact quantity and quality, relative ingroup status, and intergroup attitudes in Northern Ireland. Intergroup anxiety was considered an individual-level mediator and realistic and symbolic threat as group-level mediators in the model. We examined the idea that the strength of ingroup identification moderates the predictive power of individual- versus group-level variables. Both contact and relative ingroup status predicted anxiety and perceived threats to the ingroup, which were significant mediators in the model. Our results also suggest that while anxiety predicts attitudes for low but not high identifiers, symbolic threats to the ingroup are more important for high than for low identifiers. There was also some evidence indicating that status perceptions moderate contact effects. We discuss these results in terms of their implications for intergroup relations in Northern Ireland.     

Identification with a wrongful subgroup and the feeling of collective guilt

The present study examined the relationship between group identification and the feeling of collective guilt. This study argued that identification with a subgroup of one's ingroup (subgroup identification) would predict the feeling of collective guilt better than identification with the whole ingroup (whole‐group identification). To manipulate the level of subgroup identification, we instructed participants to imagine the presence of a close friend (vs a friend of one's close friend) in a fictitious subgroup. In Experiment 1, we predicted and found that high subgroup identifiers experienced less collective guilt compared to low subgroup identifiers, regardless of their degree of whole‐group identification. In contrast, the results from Experiment 2 indicated that when the presence of the third party was made salient, high subgroup identifiers experienced more collective guilt in comparison to low subgroup identifiers. The importance of interpersonal connections for collective responsibility and the facilitating role of the third party for reconciliation of the intergroup conflicts are discussed.     

The influence of social consensus information on intergroup attitudes: the moderating effects of ingroup identification

Two studies examined the role of ingroup identification in the influence of social consensus information (information about others' beliefs) on intergroup attitudes. Research demonstrates that consensus information influences individuals' intergroup attitudes. However, the extent to which individuals identify with the group providing consensus information seems important to understanding consensus effects. In Study 1, 100 high or low ingroup identifiers received information that other ingroup members held favorable or unfavorable attitudes toward African Americans and then provided their own attitudes. In Study 2, 250 participants completed an ingroup identification manipulation (high, low, or control) before receiving favorable or no consensus information. Results of both studies demonstrated that ingroup identification moderated consensus effects, such that high identifiers were more susceptible to others' beliefs than individuals in the low identification and control conditions. In determining critical factors involved in consensus effects, we hope to create a useful method to promote favorable intergroup attitudes and behaviors.     

Bending without breaking: examining the role of attitudinal ambivalence in resisting persuasive communication

The present research aims at showing that ambivalence may serve an adaptive function: to preserve attitudes and to resist persuasion. In two experiments, participants were exposed to a counter‐attitudinal message attributed to an ingroup majority. Results of both experiments showed that individuals high in ambivalence changed toward the source more than individuals low in ambivalence at the direct level, while at the indirect level––where the link between attitudes and the source's message is less apparent––individuals low in ambivalence changed toward the source more than individuals high in ambivalence. Experiment 2 also showed that this effect is particularly true for high self‐monitoring participants, thereby supporting a motivational interpretation of the effect. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Protecting threatened identity: sticking with the group by emphasizing ingroup heterogeneity

In two studies (Ns=163, 164), the authors tested the prediction that perceptions of group variability can steer and guide the way that loyalty is expressed in times of identity threat. In both studies, participants were classified as lower or higher identifiers on the basis of their scores on a group identification measure, and manipulations involved group variability perceptions (homogeneous ingroup vs. heterogeneous ingroup) and threat to the ingroup. Higher identifiers presented with a homogeneous ingroup perceived more ingroup homogeneity under threat than when there was no threat. In contrast, higher identifiers who perceived the ingroup initially as heterogeneous perceived more ingroup heterogeneity under threat than in no threat conditions. Lower identifiers perceived more ingroup heterogeneity under threat (vs. no threat) irrespective of manipulated group variability perceptions. Discussion focuses on different ways that group loyalty can be expressed in times of identity threat.     

Receptivity to dating and marriage across the religious divide in Northern Ireland: The role of intergroup contact

Intergroup contact has long been recognized as an important factor in promoting positive intergroup attitudes. However, in operationalizing intergroup attitudes, previous studies have rarely investigated attitudes toward one of the most intimate forms of contact, romantic relationships. In this study (N = 176), we expand the intergroup contact literature to examine the association between intergroup contact and, arguably, a litmus test of intergroup attitudes: receptivity to intergroup romance. We do so in Northern Ireland, a context that is historically and presently characterized by sectarian division and tension between Catholics and Protestants. Our findings reveal that intergroup contact is positively associated with receptivity to both dating and marrying an outgroup member. These associations are mediated by ingroup norms toward outgroup romances. General outgroup attitudes were also found to be positively associated with contact but, in contrast to romantic attitudes, this association was shown, for the first time, to be simultaneously mediated by ingroup norms, anxiety, empathy, and trust. In addition, strength of ingroup identification played a moderating role, with a stronger positive relationship between contact and both romantic and general outgroup attitudes among higher identifiers. The findings highlight the importance of examining attitudes toward intergroup romantic relationships, as well as understanding the different mediating and moderating mechanisms which may account for how contact influences general attitudes and romantic attitudes. In the wake of the UK vote to leave the European Union, they also serve as an important reminder of how intergroup contact can be effective in promoting peace in Northern Ireland.     

The Relationship Between Attitudinal Ambivalence and Desire to Quit Smoking Among College Smokers1

Growing evidence shows that attitudes can exist on a bivariate rather than a bipolar plane. This conceptualization provides a more dynamic approach to studying how attitudinal ambivalence (i. e., evaluating an attitude object as both positive and negative) affects smoking‐related behaviors. Based on a sample of 157 college smokers, we obtained preliminary validational support for a smoking‐specific felt attitudinal ambivalence scale. Felt attitudinal ambivalence correlated positively with potential for ambivalence, negative attitudes, and negative as well as positive outcome expectancies related to smoking. Smokers who felt more ambivalent reported a greater desire to quit and were more likely to be contemplators, as defined by the transtheoretical model of behavioral change. In multivariate analyses, felt ambivalence toward smoking predicted desire to quit after controlling for positive and negative attitudes and negative smoking consequences. These results provide promising support for the smoking‐specific felt‐ambivalence scale, and suggest that attitudinal ambivalence should be investigated further as a motivational mechanism to affect smoking cessation.     

Emotional reactions to harmful intergroup behavior

In this paper, we examined reactions to situations in which, although one is not personally involved, one could see oneself connected to either the perpetrators or the victims of unfair behavior. We manipulated participants' similarity and measured their identification to either one of two groups which participants later learned was the victim or the perpetrator of harmful behavior. As predicted, making salient similarities to the victims lead participants to: 1) appraise the perpetrator's behavior as more unfair; 2) experience more anger; and 3) be more likely to take action against it and less prone to show support for it as a function of their level of identification with their salient ingroup. In sharp contrast, focusing participants' attention on their similarities to the perpetrators reversed this pattern of findings: Compared to high identifiers, low identifiers appraised the behavior as more unfair than high identifiers, which made them feel angry (and guilty) and less likely to show support for the perpetrator's behavior. The data also provide strong support for a mediational model in which appraisal of the situation colors the emotional reaction which in turn orients action tendencies. We discuss the implications of our findings for the issue of group‐based emotions. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Group Merger Between Political Parties: The Role of the Ingroup Projection Process

In 2007, the two most important Italian left‐wing parties merged into a single political entity. This study intends to analyze the merging process. Specifically, and in line with the ingroup projection hypothesis of Mummendey & Wenzel, we have explored whether the identification and the favoritism toward the upcoming common group was affected by the perceivers' projection of specific and common stereotypical traits from the subordinate groups to the superordinate one. Political militants' (N = 132) levels of ingroup identification; their representations of the previous ingroup, outgroup, and of the new party; and their attitudes towards the common group were assessed. Results confirmed that the cognitive representation of the merged party was shaped much more on the basis of the typical traits of the ingroup than of the outgroup. Moreover, structural equation analyses showed that the identification with the superordinate category and the consequent favoritism toward the merger were related to the projection of ingroup attributes. The findings also suggested that the ingroup projection may be particularly crucial when the intergroup bias is high. Finally, political implications are discussed in terms of obstacles and resources inherent to the merging process.     

Strength of identification and intergroup differentiation: the influence of group norms

The present study aimed at showing that the relationship between identification and ingroup bias is moderated by salient group norms that prescribe or proscribe differentiation in an intergroup context. A study (N=191) in which level of identification and group norms were manipulated showed that high identifiers acted more in accordance with a salient differentiation norm compared to low identifiers. When a fairness norm was made salient, however, the expected difference was not obtained. The results are discussed in the context of the inconsistent relationships between ingroup bias and identification found in previous research. ©1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.