Striving for success in outgroup settings: effects of contextually emphasizing ingroup dimensions on stigmatized group members' social identity and performance styles

For members of stigmatized groups, being confronted with highstatus outgroup members threatens social identity and undermines performance on status-relevant dimensions. Two experiments examined whether the negative effects of outgroup contexts are alleviated when value is expressed for a dimension on which the stigmatized ingroup excels. Specifically, the authors assessed whether ingroup versus outgroup context and contextual value for ingroup dimensions affects group members' reactions to failure on status-relevant dimensions and subsequent performance. Experiment 1 showed that in comparison to ingroup contexts, outgroup contexts induce stigmatized group members to protect social identity and to feel more agitated following negative performance feedback. Experiment 2 showed that when others in the context emphasize the importance of a dimension on which the ingroup excels, the negative effects of outgroup contexts are alleviated, stigmatized group members feel more cheerful concerning an upcoming task, and task performance is characterized by a focus on success.     

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.     

When and How Do High Status Group Members Offer Help: Effects of Social Dominance Orientation and Status Threat

The present study explored the implications of an intergroup perspective on individual difference and situational influences on helping, specifically, outgroup members. In particular, we examined the effects of social dominance orientation (SDO) and group status threat on the amount and kind of help offered by Jewish participants (n = 99) to Arab and Jewish students. Dependent measures were the likelihood of helping outgroup and ingroup members across various situations of need and, when help is given, the likelihood that it would be dependency‐oriented rather than autonomy‐oriented assistance. As expected, higher SDO individuals offered less help to outgroup (Arab) students, particularly when they experienced threat to group status, but not to ingroup members. In addition, higher SDO participants, when they did report that they would help, were more likely to offer dependency‐oriented help to outgroup than to ingroup members. The theoretical and applied implications are discussed.     

Ingroup favouritism and outgroup favouritism in low status minimal groups: differential responses to status-related and status-unrelated measures

To account for the inconsistent findings from previous studies of group status and discrimination, it was hypothesized that low status groups defer to the high status outgroup on measures perceived as related to the status dimension, but favour the ingroup on status-unrelated measures. Subjects randomly assigned to low, equal, or high status minimal groups allocated points to anonymous ingroup and outgroup members using distribution matrices presented as either related or unrelated to the status dimension, and also rated the two groups on traits described as either status-related or status-unrelated. As predicted, low status groups favoured the ingroup more on status-unrelated measures than on status-related measures. Furthermore, while low status groups were less discriminatory than high status groups on status-related matrices, they were no less discriminatory on status-unrelated matrices. In contrast to low status groups, high status groups displayed greater ingroup favouritism when matrices were related to the status dimension than they did when matrices were unrelated. The relatedness manipulation had no significant effect on the discriminatory behaviour of equal status groups. These findings are discussed in terms of implications for research, and relevance to social identity theory. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd     

Managing one's social identity: Successful and unsuccessful identity management

This work explores the motivational dynamics of social identity management. Following social identity theory, we hypothesized that a threat to a positive social identity elicits specific negative emotions (i.e., outgroup‐directed anger) and motivates identity management. Successful identity management restores a positive social identity and decreases outgroup‐directed anger. However, when a successful identity management is blocked (e.g., because of limited cognitive resources), identity management will be unsuccessful and outgroup‐directed anger will remain at a higher level. This effect of unsuccessful identity management on outgroup‐directed anger should be particularly strong for group members who highly value their group (i.e., high group‐based self‐esteem). A negative comparison outcome is discrepant with these group members' positive view of the ingroup, and therefore, unsuccessful identity management should especially elicit negative emotions (i.e., anger) towards the threatening outgroup. Two studies tested these predictions. Study 1 (N = 110) showed that participants' outgroup‐directed anger increased when threatened under cognitive load. Study 2 (N = 99) demonstrated that this was particularly true for participants high in group‐based self‐esteem. The results' implications for research on the motivational processes underlying social identity management are discussed. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Status differenttals and intergroup behaviour

This study investigated the independent effects of status differential on intergroup behaviour. Using a variant of the minimal group paradigm (Tueland Turner, 1979), subjects were categorized into groups of differing status (high, equal, low) with two levels of category salience (high, low). Using Tajfel's matrices subjects rated the creativity of products ostensibly produced by ingroup and outgroup members. Own group identification, intergroup perceptions and self-reported strategies on the matrices constituted the other dependent measures. Results indicated a main effect for group status but none for salience. Equal status groups discriminated against each other thus replicating the minimal intergroup discrimination effect. High and equal status group members were more discriminatory against outgroups and more positive about their own group membership than were low status group members. In contrast, low status group members engaged in significant amounts of outgroup favouritism. Results also showed that social categorization per se was sufficient to elicit more ingroup than outgroup liking amongst all group members regardless of status differentials between groups. Overall, the results illustrate important aspects of the interplay between group status, social identity, prejudice and discrimination.     

Can We Identify with a Nation Low in Morality? The Heavy Weight of (Im)Morality in International Comparison

Research has shown that the perceived morality of the ingroup is a primary source of group pride and ingroup identification. The present research examined whether this is true even when a group has a poor reputation for morality in terms of dishonesty and corruption, such as in the case of Italians. To address this issue, two studies analyzed the role of the three fundamental dimensions of social judgment—morality, competence, and sociability—in predicting Italians’ identification with their nation when the salience of social comparison and the status of the comparison outgroup were varied. Findings showed that perceived morality predicted ingroup identification when participants did not engage in social comparison. Under salient social comparison, individuals based group identification on other dimensions: Perceived sociability was the main predictor of identification when respondents compared with a higher status outgroup (Germans; Study 1; N = 109), whereas perceived competence was the main predictor of identification when participants compared with a lower status outgroup (Romanians; Study 2; N = 121). Overall, findings showed compensation processes in social identification: When social comparison is salient, members of a low morality group base identification on the dimension which allows positive differentiation from the outgroup.     

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.     

Retributive justice and social categorizations: the perceived fairness of punishment depends on intergroup status

In the current research, the authors investigate the influence of intergroup status and social categorizations on retributive justice judgments, that is, the extent to which observers perceive punishment as fair. Building on social identity theory and the model of subjective group dynamics, it is predicted that when the ingroup has higher status than the outgroup, people are relatively less concerned about punishment of an outgroup offender than when the ingroup has lower status than the outgroup. Two experiments revealed that participants are more punitive towards an ingroup than an outgroup offender when ingroup status is high but not when ingroup status is low. Furthermore, in correspondence with our line of reasoning, this finding emerged because participants were less punitive towards outgroup offenders when ingroup status is high than when ingroup status was low. It is concluded that the perceived fairness of punishment depends on the offender's social categorization and intergroup status. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Social identity,relative group status and intergroup attitudes: when favourable outcomes change intergroup relations…for the worse

This study examines in a natural setting (N = 253) the effects of favourable outcomes at the individual and group levels on the relations between members of high (nondisabled) and low (disabled) status groups. Consistent with past research, the results show that, overall, high‐status group members are more likely than low‐status group members to display ingroup bias. Furthermore, as hypothesized on the basis of the role of relative gratification in intergroup relations, a favourable group outcome led high‐status group members to derogate the low‐status outgroup. On the other hand, as predicted from the assumption that outgroup favouritism reflects a strategy of individual mobility, a favourable individual outcome led low‐status group members to display an evaluative bias in favour of, and to identify with, the high‐status outgroup. The implications of these findings for the explanation of outgroup favouritism and outgroup derogation are discussed. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Discrimination of a low‐status outgroup: the role of ingroup threat

In the present study it was predicted that a threat to the ingroup by a high‐status outgroup would lead its members to increase the level of derogation of a lower‐status outgroup. Two experimental groups of psychologists were informed about the opinions (positive or negative) allegedly held by medical doctors regarding clinical psychologists whereas participants in the control condition did not receive any feedback. Later, all participants were asked to judge psychologists, social workers (low‐status outgroup), and medical doctors along professional and personality dimensions. As predicted, compared to participants in the positive feedback and in the control conditions, negative feedback participants increased derogation toward social workers but not toward medical doctors along the professional traits relevant to the feedback. Results are interpreted in the context of Downward Comparison Theory (Wills, 1981 ). Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

When differences matter: intergroup distinctiveness and the evaluation of impostors

The present study examined the effect of intergroup distinctiveness and group membership on evaluations of impostors. We predicted that ingroup members would be harsher than outgroup members on an impostor and that perceptions of intergroup distinctiveness would further moderate these evaluations. Specifically, we tested the social identity theory prediction that low intergroup distinctiveness would lead to greater derogation of the impostor (the ‘reactive distinctiveness’ hypothesis) against the self‐categorization hypothesis that high intergroup distinctiveness would instigate more derogation of an impostor (the ‘reflective distinctiveness’ hypothesis). In this study, vegetarians (ingroup members) and meat eaters (outgroup members) were presented with a target claiming to be vegetarian, but caught indulging in a meat dish. We found that ingroup members derogated the impostor more and felt less pleased about discovering the impostor behaviour than did outgroup members. In line with the reflective distinctiveness hypothesis, the heightened derogation displayed by ingroup members only emerged when intergroup distinctiveness was high, an effect that was mediated by ratings of group identification. The discussion focuses on the different responses intergroup distinctiveness may evoke. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Evaluative bias and self-enhancement among gender groups

One hundred and one middle managers (66 men, 35 women) evaluated themselves, ingroup (same sex) members and outgroup (opposite sex) members on both stereotypical and on contextual masculine and feminine dimensions. The results showed that men favoured ingroup members on the masculine dimensions and women favoured ingroup members on the feminine dimensions. In addition, both sexes favoured themselves over ingroup and outgroup. The results are discussed in terms of social identity theory, self-categorization theory and egocentric social categorization model.     

The other side of we: when outgroup members express common identity

Previous research on the common ingroup identity model has focused on how one's representations of members of the ingroup and outgroup influence intergroup attitudes. Two studies reported here investigated how learning how others, ingroup or outgroup members, conceive of the groups within a superordinate category affects intergroup bias and willingness to engage in intergroup contact. Across both studies, high school students who learned that other ingroup members categorized students at both schools within the common identity of "students" showed less intergroup bias in evaluations and greater willingness for contact. However, consistent with the hypothesized effects of identity threat, when participants read that outgroup members saw the groups within the superordinate category, they exhibited a relatively negative orientation, except when ingroup members also endorsed a superordinate identity (Study 1). This result occurred even when the relative status of the groups was manipulated (Study 2).     

Keeping it in‐house: how audience affects responses to group criticism

It is often assumed that group‐directed criticism is best kept ‘in‐house’, but the effects of audience on responses to criticism have not been directly examined. Consistent with predictions, ingroup members who criticized the group to an outgroup audience were seen to be making a less appropriate choice of audience (Experiments 2 and 3), aroused more negative feelings (Experiment 1), were downgraded more strongly on personality traits (Experiment 2), and were seen to be doing more damage to the group (Experiment 2) than were ingroup members who kept their criticisms in‐house. Experiment 3 showed that, whereas moderate identifiers agreed with the comments less and showed weaker friendly intentions toward the critic when an outgroup audience as compared to an ingroup audience was chosen, high identifiers agreed with the criticisms just as strongly—and showed more friendly intentions toward the critic—when they were made to an outgroup as compared to an ingroup audience. Results are discussed in light of the broader literature on identity threat. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Urban district identity as a common ingroup identity: The different role of ingroup prototypicality for minority and majority groups

In this paper, we examined how identification with urban districts as a common ingroup identity and perceived ingroup prototypicality influence the attitudes of residents toward other ethnic groups in their neighborhood. The overall conclusion of two field studies (N = 214 and N = 98) is that for majority‐group members, there may be a positive relation between identification with an overarching identity and outgroup attitudes but only when they perceive their ingroup as low in prototypicality for the overarching group (Study 1 and 2). Conversely, for minority‐group members, there may be a positive relation between identification and outgroup attitudes but only when they perceive their ingroup as high in prototypicality for the overarching group (Study 2). Outgroup prototypicality did not moderate the relation between identification and outgroup attitudes. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Effects of trustors' social identity complexity on interpersonal and intergroup trust

Although previous literature has revealed the effect of a single social identity on trust, only few studies have examined how multiple social identities affect trust in others. The present research examined the effects of trustors' social identity complexity on their level of trust toward another person (interpersonal trust), outgroup members (outgroup trust), and ingroup members (ingroup trust). Study 1, which was a correlational study, indicated that trustors' social identity complexity was positively related to their interpersonal and outgroup trust. Three experimental studies were performed to identify causal relationships. Study 2 found that activating trustors' high social identity complexity produced high levels of interpersonal trust, and Studies 3 and 4 found that this effect was more pronounced when the trustee was an outgroup member (outgroup trust) rather than an ingroup member (ingroup trust). The implications of these results for social harmony are discussed.     

Compensatory biases after ingroup threat: ‘yeah,but we have a good personality’

It was hypothesized that participants who strongly identify with the ingroup and receive unfavorable feedback about their group in one domain would compensate on alternative dimensions. A group of emergency medical service volunteers received negative, positive or no feedback on their volunteer organization and were asked to rate the ingroup and an outgroup on dimensions alternative to the feedback. As predicted, high identifiers showed an increase in ingroup favoritism after negative feedback (i.e. compensation) and a decrease after positive feedback (i.e. modesty effect). In contrast, low identifiers distanced themselves from the ingroup after negative feedback and accentuated self‐ingroup similarity after positive feedback. Results are discussed in relation to a schema‐maintenance model through compensation (Seta & Seta, 1993 ) and social identity theory. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Equity,Intergroup bias and Interpersonal bias in Reward allocation

Decisions to allocate rewards to ingroup and outgroup members are under the dual pressures of equity and intergroup bias. This study examined variations in equity and bias resulting from the incongruity and salience of intergroup status. Incongruity arose from a mismatch between high subjective and low accorded status. Congruity occurred when subjective status and accorded status were both high or both low. By pairing school classes with known subjective and accorded statuses, an incongruous and a congruous status setting were derived naturally. The setting was made either salient or nonsalient experimentally. It was hypothesized that bias would progressively increase, and equity would progressively decrease, with incongruity and salience. Each set of hypotheses was partially supported. Further data analysis showed a robust tendency to under-reward both ingroup and outgroup members. This interpersonal negativity bras was shown by incongruous status allocators either when rewarding superior performance or in the salient condition. Apparently, it served to safeguard personal rather than social identity. The implications for equity and social identity theories were discussed.     

Some Notes on the Census of Religious Bodies, 1926

In line with previous results that challenge the traditional primacy of warmth over competence in outgroup perception, we propose to bridge elements from stereotype content model and social identity theory: Perceivers will use the competence and warmth dimensions differentially when interpreting higher or lower status outgroup members' behavior. We test the hypothesis that the dimension that is less favorable for the outgroup and more favorable for the ingroup will be used. In particular, we investigate whether the warmth dimension would better predict the interpretation of higher status outgroup members' behavior than the competence dimension, whereas the competence dimension would better predict the interpretation of lower status outgroup members' behavior than the warmth dimension. Two studies separately test these effects. Results suggest the existence of a motivated bias in interpreting outgroup members' behavior, especially when there is ingroup identification.