Beyond the group mind: a quantitative review of the interindividual-intergroup discontinuity effect

This quantitative review of 130 comparisons of interindividual and intergroup interactions in the context of mixed-motive situations reveals that intergroup interactions are generally more competitive than interindividual interactions. The authors identify 4 moderators of this interindividual-intergroup discontinuity effect, each based on the theoretical perspective that the discontinuity effect flows from greater fear and greed in intergroup relative to interindividual interactions. Results reveal that each moderator shares a unique association with the magnitude of the discontinuity effect. The discontinuity effect is larger when (a) participants interact with an opponent whose behavior is unconstrained by the experimenter or constrained by the experimenter to be cooperative rather than constrained by the experimenter to be reciprocal, (b) group members make a group decision rather than individual decisions, (c) unconstrained communication between participants is present rather than absent, and (d) conflict of interest is severe rather than mild.     

The two sides of competition: Competition‐induced effort and affect during intergroup versus interindividual competition

Competition strongly affects individual effort and performance for both individuals and groups. Especially in work settings, these effort gains might come at the cost of individual well‐being. The present study tested whether competition increases both effort (as indicated by task performance) and stress (in terms of cardiovascular reactivity and affective response), and whether this effect is further qualified by the type of competition (interindividual vs. intergroup), using a cognitive computer‐based task and a 2 (Group: Yes, No) × 2 (Competition: Yes, No) × 2 (Gender) factorial design (N= 147). All participants either worked as a representative of a group or as an individual, and were offered performance‐related incentives distributed in a lottery. In the competition conditions, participants were informed that they competed with someone else, and that only the winning person/team would take part in the lottery. Consistent with expectations, competition increased both individual effort and cardiovascular reactivity compared to non‐competitive work. Moreover, for female participants, intergroup competition triggered increased effort and more positive affect than interindividual competition. Aside from documenting costly side‐effects of competition in terms of stress, this study provides evidence for a stress‐related explanation of effort gains during intergroup competition as compared to interindividual competition.     

Are Japanese groups more competitive than Japanese individuals? A cross‐cultural validation of the interindividual–intergroup discontinuity effect

The interindividual–intergroup discontinuity effect is the tendency for relationships between groups to be more competitive than the relationships between individuals. It has been observed robustly in studies conducted in the United States, which is a society characterized as “individualistic.” In this study, it was explored whether the effect was replicable in a “collectivistic” society such as Japan. From the traditional view in cross‐cultural psychology, which emphasizes the collectivistic nature of East Asian peoples, it was expected that the discontinuity effect would be greater in Japan than in the United States. On the other hand, based on recent empirical findings suggesting that North Americans are no less group‐oriented than East Asians, it was expected that the discontinuity effect would be no greater in Japan than in the United States. One hundred and sixty Japanese university students played a 10‐trial repeated prisoner's dilemma game: 26 sessions of interindividual and 18 sessions of intergroup. Following exactly the procedure of prior experiments in the US, individuals and groups were allowed face‐to‐face communication with their opponents before making their decisions, and participants in the intergroup condition were further allowed to converse freely with their in‐group members. Results replicated previous findings in the United States; groups made more competitive choices than did individuals. In addition, neither the magnitude of the discontinuity effect, nor the frequency of competitive choices made by the groups, were larger in Japan than they were in the majority of prior studies conducted in the United States. These findings suggest cross‐cultural robustness of the interindividual–intergroup discontinuity effect. Also, interestingly, they contradict the simple distinction between individualism and collectivism. Implications for studies of culture and group processes are discussed.     

Votes Without Power:Procedural Justice as Mutual Control in Majority-Minority Relations1

In an application of procedural justice theory (Lind & Tyler, 1988; Tyler, 1989) to the domain of intergroup relations, we investigated justice preferences among members of numerical majority and minority groups as a function of two parameters: the number of representatives allotted to each group, and the decision rule used to determine the outcome (ranging from simple majority vote to unanimity). In the first study, minority group members perceived the combination of proportional representation and majority vote to be significantly less fair than all other combinations, and their choices of procedure stressed “mutual control” (when the decision rule exceeds the number of representatives possessed by either group). In a second study, majority group members perceived the combination of equal representation and majority vote to be significantly less fair than other procedures, but their choices of procedure did involve a considerable degree of mutual control. These findings suggest that there may be some basis for agreement between majority and minority group members' justice preferences and that both groups may perceive situations of mutual control to be acceptable. A third study involving both majority and minority group members ruled out an interpretation of the previous results in terms of motivation to maintain vs. change the status quo.     

Modeling collective choice: decision‐making on complex intellective tasks

Three studies examined group problem‐solving on complex intellective tasks. In Study 1, a decision model proposed by Laughlin and Hollingshead ( 1995 ) provided the best fit to actual group choices. This study also compared three‐person group versus individual performance with time constrained and number of problems unconstrained, with individuals solving non‐significantly more problems and groups obtaining significantly superior trials‐to‐solution scores. In Study 2, one member of each group was given additional information on how to perform the task and member extroversion was measured. Neither factor significantly impacted the decision‐making process. In Study 3, task expertise was assessed prior to the group interaction. Results indicate that group members were twice as likely to adopt an option proposed by an expert compared to other group members. Together these studies demonstrate that group problem solving is governed jointly by qualities of the task and qualities of the group members. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The context of intergroup belief cross wherein minority members maintain consistency: Belief minority and majority in a categorical in‐group and out‐group1

Abstract: The present study investigated the social conditions required for minority members to preserve their attitudinal and behavioral consistency in an intergroup context. In the experiment, intergroup belief crosses wherein a belief minority (or majority) in a categorical in‐group was reversed as a majority (or minority) in an out‐group were manipulated. It was hypothesized that individuals supported by the majority in the categorical in‐group would preserve their attitudes and behavioral intentions even though they were a minority in the categorical out‐group. The results supported the hypothesis. Specifically, members of a majority in the categorical in‐group had more consistent behavioral intentions and less attitude changes although they were located as a minority in the out‐group. In contrast, members of a minority within the in‐group preserved consistency on the basis of support from the majority in the out‐group. The theoretical implications of these results are discussed with reference to future research.     

Republican Voters Prefer Candidates Who Have Conservative‐Looking Faces: New Evidence From Exit Polls

Research shows people share common political facial stereotypes: They associate faces with political ideologies. Moreover, given that many voters rely on party affiliation, political ideology, and appearances to select political candidates, we might expect that political facial stereotypes would sway voting preferences and, by extension, the share of votes going to each candidate in an election. And yet few studies have examined whether having a stereotypically conservative‐looking (or liberal‐looking) face predicts a candidate's vote shares. Using data from U.S. election exit polls, we show that the Republican voters within each state are more likely to vote for a candidate (even a Democrat) the more that person has a stereotypically Republican‐looking face. By contrast, the voting choices of the Democratic voters within each state are unrelated to political facial stereotypes. Moreover, we show that the relationship between political facial stereotypes and voting does not depend on state‐level ideology: Republican voters in both right‐leaning (“red”) and left‐leaning (“blue”) states are more likely to vote for candidates with conservative‐looking faces. These results have several important practical and theoretical implications concerning the nature and impact of political facial stereotypes, which we discuss.     

Trait Agreeableness and Social Status Moderate Behavioral Responsiveness to Communal Behavior

The present study examined the influence of trait Agreeableness and its interaction with social role status on interpersonal correspondence as reflected in the within‐person relation between a person's communal (agreeable‐quarrelsome) behavior and perceptions of the interaction partner's communal behavior. We used a sample of working adults (original data set: 113 participants and 12,303 interpersonal events; constrained data set in the work setting: 109 participants and 3,193 interpersonal events) and an event‐contingent recording procedure to assess behavior in naturalistic interpersonal events. The results of multilevel modeling indicated that interpersonal correspondence was lower for high trait Agreeableness persons than for low trait Agreeableness persons, apparently due to less responsiveness to more disagreeable behavior by the other person in an interaction. High Agreeableness persons manifest greater interpersonal correspondence when in a high‐status role than when in a low‐status role, apparently by increasing responsiveness to disagreeable behavior from others. The results imply that high social role status may influence the effortful control process of high trait Agreeableness persons over their behavioral reactions to others' disagreeable behavior during interpersonal interactions.     

Exploring the rabbit hole of possibilities by myself or with my group: The benefits and liabilities of activating counterfactual mind‐sets for information sharing and group coordination

The current experiment explored the effect of activating a counterfactual mind‐set on the discussion of unique information and group judgment accuracy. Evidence suggests that a counterfactual mind‐set is characterized by a focused, analytic mental state and, when activated at the group level, improves group judgment accuracy in the murder mystery paradigm (a hidden profile task). We hypothesized that the beneficial effect of the counterfactual mind‐set would only help group problem‐solving tasks if the mind‐set had been activated at the group level, allowing the analytical mind‐set to play out in an atmosphere of synergistic coordination. In contrast, if this highly focused mental state is activated at the individual level, it could impair group judgment quality because inwardly focused analytical individuals may fail to coordinate their behavior with other group members. Consistent with our hypothesis, activating a counterfactual mind‐set at the individual level had a debilitating effect on the group judgment task, whereas activating a counterfactual mind‐set at the group level had a facilitative effect, increasing information sharing, synergistic coordination and judgment accuracy. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Behavioural style and group cohesiveness as sources of minority influence

Behavioural style and group cohesiveness were tested as sources of minority influence under conditions in which rejection of the minority from the group was possible and under conditions in which it was not. Female subjects (N = 120) were led to believe that they were interacting as a group and that they held a majority position on a relevant issue. The influence agent, ostensibly one of the group members, advocated a minority position throughout their interaction. Three variables were manipulated: group cohesiveness (high or low), behavioural style of the deviate (high or low consistency) and opportunity for rejection of the deviate from the group (possible or not possible). It was predicted that the deviate would be more influential under high cohesive than under low cohesive conditions and that she would be most influential when she was highly consistent and there was no opportunity to reject her. Although both hypotheses were confirmed, unexpected minority influence effects were also found.     

Framing effects of per‐person versus aggregate prices in group meals

This research draws on regulatory focus theory and applies it to the context of price framing in group meals. Specifically, it examines the possibility that a per‐person framing of price (an aggregate price) may activate a promotion focus (prevention focus) in consumers. The results of five experiments show that participants (a) generated more promotion‐relevant (vs. prevention‐relevant) thoughts, (b) were more inclined to consume the group meal when a persistent focus on promotion (vs. prevention) was exhibited, (c) rated promotion‐focused (vs. prevention‐focused) messages more favorably, and (d) reported a higher intention to opt for an offer where the chance of obtaining a positive goal was enhanced, in response to a per‐person price rather than an aggregate price. Mediation analyses provide additional evidence for the notion that pursuit of promotion goals (prevention goals), which relate to obtaining value (avoiding loss) primed by a per‐person price (an aggregate price), had the effect of regulating one's choices. Managerial implications of the findings are discussed, followed by recommendations for future research.     

Effects of initial choices in the prisoner's dilemma

In the two‐person prisoner's dilemma game (PDG), there is considerable evidence that the tit‐for‐tat (TFT) strategy is most effective in inducing the other person to cooperate. One of the important features of the TFT strategy is that it cooperates on the first trial. We varied the initial choices of a simulated other, and tested the effects of (a) initial choices (cooperation or defection), and (b) persistence of initial choices: unilateral cooperation (or defection) on the first trial, first two trials, or first four trials. Results showed that a cooperative strategy—one that starts with cooperative choices—induced greater cooperation than a strategy that started with defections. The results of this study clearly show that (a) a cooperative strategy—one that initiates unilateral cooperation at the outset and then adopts a TFT strategy—is very effective in inducing subsequent cooperation from the other party, (b) the effectiveness of a cooperative strategy varies directly with the cooperative orientation of the other party (a cooperative strategy is more effective against a cooperative than a competitive person), and (c) initial cooperation is more effective if it is repeated more than once. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The subjective group dynamics in negative campaigns

I relied on the subjective group dynamics framework to analyse the derogation of inparty candidates involved in negative campaigns. In an experimental study (dynamic simulation of an electoral campaign, N = 118), I found that participants downgraded the inparty candidate (both in terms of evaluation and vote choice) more when he ran a person‐based negative campaign than when he ran an issue‐based negative campaign. This effect was significant for participants with high levels of political identification only. Overall, the findings revealed that political candidates, as members of significant social groups, are not exempt from the forms of extremity in evaluations typically observed in other social groups.     

Effects of gain versus loss and certain versus probable outcomes on social value orientations

In an experiment, the effects of types of outcomes on social value orientations (individualism, competition, pro‐social orientation) were investigated. Ninety‐nine students made 28 choices which affected outcomes (points to be converted into money) for themselves and another (unknown) person. About half of them started out with nothing but they could allocate positive outcomes (gains) to themselves and/or the other. The other half were told that they themselves and another person would start out with some outcomes but they could lose outcomes depending on the choices. For about half the participants it was certain that their choices would result in outcomes while for the other half outcomes would be likely rather than certain. The expected utility of the outcomes was the same in the four conditions. In accordance with prospect theory, it was expected and found that participants would be more individualistic in the conditions with losses than in the conditions with gains. In accordance with social comparison theory, it was expected and found that participants would be more competitive in the conditions with probable outcomes than in the conditions with certain outcomes. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Robust step‐down tests for multivariate independent group designs

A composite step‐down procedure, in which a set of step‐down tests are summarized collectively with Fisher's combination statistic, was considered to test for multivariate mean equality in two‐group designs. An approximate degrees of freedom (ADF) composite procedure based on trimmed/Winsorized estimators and a non‐pooled estimate of error variance is proposed, and compared to a composite procedure based on trimmed/Winsorized estimators and a pooled estimate of error variance. The step‐down procedures were also compared to Hotelling's T² and Johansen's ADF global procedure based on trimmed estimators in a simulation study. Type I error rates of the pooled step‐down procedure were sensitive to covariance heterogeneity in unbalanced designs; error rates were similar to those of Hotelling's T² across all of the investigated conditions. Type I error rates of the ADF composite step‐down procedure were insensitive to covariance heterogeneity and less sensitive to the number of dependent variables when sample size was small than error rates of Johansen's test. The ADF composite step‐down procedure is recommended for testing hypotheses of mean equality in two‐group designs except when the data are sampled from populations with different degrees of multivariate skewness.     

The effects of collaboration and punishment on prospective memory performance in a group setting

Remembering to perform a delayed intention is termed prospective memory (PM). Often delayed intentions are shared by more than one person; however, there is a dearth of studies examining PM in social settings. We aimed to investigate whether the potential consequences of one's behavior across diverse group settings influence PM performance in event‐ and time‐based tasks. A total of 207 participants were randomly allocated to either an individual, collaborative, or collaborative plus penalty motivation condition and were tested in a 2‐ or 3‐person setting. For the time‐based PM task, participants responded less timely in the individual motivation condition, whereas there was no difference between the collaborative motivation conditions. No significant effects were found for motivation condition on the event‐based task or for group size on PM performance. Analyses of ongoing task performance revealed that participants' attention allocation policies change depending on how individuals prioritize the ongoing and PM tasks.     

Acknowledgment of handicap as a tactic in social interaction

Nonhandicapped people often report discomfort and uncertainty when interacting with handicapped individuals. The three studies reported here investigated a possible tactic that handicapped people could use to reduce a fellow interactant's discomfort and uncertainty. Nonhandicapped subjects watched two videotapes of handicapped individuals being interviewed. Each subject then chose the handicapped person with whom he would prefer to work on a cooperative task. Results of all three studies supported the hypothesis that a handicapped person acknowledging his handicap will be preferred to a handicapped person who does not acknowledge his handicap. In Study 1, subjects significantly preferred a handicapped person who acknowledged his handicap to a handicapped person who did not disclose anything personal. In Study 2, subjects significantly preferred an acknowledging person over one who made a personal disclosure other than about his handicap. In Study 3, subjects preferred the individual acknowledging a handicap over one who disclosed something else personal even when the acknowledging individual was clearly nervous about doing so. These results suggest that acknowledging the handicap may be a promising tactic.     

Minority influence: The effect of majority reactionaries and defectors,and minority and majority compromisers,upon majority opinion and attraction

The effects of shifting opinions within a group upon majority opinion, communication between members and perceived attractiveness of other members were studied. Each subject perceived himself to be a member of the majority in a group whose opinion was divided 6–2 on an important issue. But later one to three group members changed their vote. Six conditions of change were established: Control, majority reactionary, majority compromise, majority defection (5-3), minority compromise, minority compromise plus majority reactionary. Only majority compromise or defection affected majority opinion (private and public). Majority members were disliked when they deviated from majority opinion, but particularly so when they shifted toward minority opinion. Minority members were liked most when they induced a majority member to compromise (but not defect). Majority communication to minority occurred most when the minority was compromising, but most disagreement with minority opinion was expressed when a majority member had either compromised or defected.     

Obedience and Believing a Person

I argue that there is a mutually illuminating parallel between the concept of obedience and the concept of believing a person. Just as both believing what a person says and believing what a person says for the reason that the person says it are insufficient for believing the person, so acting as a person demands and acting as a person demands for the reason that the person demands it are insufficient for obeying the person. Unlike the concept of believing a person, however, the concept of obedience has two distinct senses, one applying to coerced action and one applying to non‐coerced action based on authoritative directives. While the former sense of obedience has no theoretical analogue, the latter sense of obedience can be understood as the practical analogue of the theoretical case of believing a person, making room for a deep parallel between believing and acting on authority.     

When rejection by one fosters aggression against many: Multiple-victim aggression as a consequence of social rejection and perceived groupness

Two experiments examined the hypothesis that social rejection and perceived groupness function together to produce multiple-victim incidents of aggression. When a rejecter’s group membership is salient during an act of rejection, the rejectee ostensibly associates the rejecter’s group with rejection and retaliates against the group. Both experiments manipulated whether an aggregate of three persons appeared as separate individuals or members of an entity-like group and whether one of those persons rejected the participant. Consistent with the hypothesis, participants who experienced both rejection and perceived groupness behaved more aggressively against the aggregate (Experiment 1) and evidenced less favorable affective associations toward the aggregate (Experiment 2) than did participants who did not experience both rejection and perceived groupness.