The effects of dichotomous and crossed social categorizations upon intergroup discrimination

The present study explores the effect of crossing social categorizations upon subsequent intergroup discrimination. In the simple categorization conditions, subjects were divided into groups either on an explicitly random basis or on the basis of a very trivial similarity. In the crossed categorization condition, these two categorizations were criss-crossed. After performing a perceptual estimation task, subjects had to evaluate the performance of the different groups in this task. Subsequently they had to evaluate the groups on general characteristics less directly related to task performance. There was significant intergroup discrimination favouring the own group in the two simple categorization conditions, but this discrimination was strongly reduced in the crossed categorization condition. This was true for both kinds of evaluations. Subjects of a no categorization condition exhibited no self-favouritism. The theoretical implications of the data are discussed.     

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.     

Intergroup competition and its effect on intragroup and intergroup relations

Seventy-two male subjects from lower technical schools were divided into groups of three and assigned to three conditions in which they expected to work together in competition with another group, to work together but independently of the other group, or did not anticipate to work together at all. Subjects who anticipated working together showed a more favorable attitude toward their group and its members than subjects who did not. Moreover, actual social interaction increased in-group attractiveness. Intergroup competition led to a more differentiated leadership structure and a greater consensus about the distribution of influence in the group. Contrary to our predictions, intergroup competition produced no greater in-group solidarity, nor any over-evaluation of the group's product. Low influence persons felt comparatively more positive about their group even before they actually had the opportunity to work together. An attempt was made to relate this finding to the ordinal position of the low status figure, his affiliative tendencies under stress, and his greater social dependence.     

What Have They Done for Us Lately? The Dynamics of Reciprocity in Intergroup Contexts1

Two studies examined the dynamics of social judgments in natural intergroup contexts. In Study 1, the manipulated positivity of an out‐group's stereotype of participants’ national in‐group was reciprocated, particularly when the out‐group shared the in‐group's negative stereotype of a third national group. Study 2 investigated the extent to which reciprocal judgments are observed in a large real‐life intergroup context by analyzing data from the Eurovision Song Contest. In this festival, juries from different European countries award points to singers from the various other countries taking part. Here it was observed that (a) nations received more points from countries to which they had given a considerable number of points during the previous 5 years, and (b) nations gave more points to countries from which they had received a large numbers of points over the preceding 5 years. This last pattern was more pronounced for countries with a high collectivistic orientation and for countries low in economic power. The studies point to the theoretical and practical importance of the dynamics of reciprocity in applied intergroup settings.     

Ingroup and outgroup minorities: Differential impact upon public and private responses

The experiment which is presented in this paper was designed to overcome some of the problems associated with previous research investigating the effects of social categorization and minority influence. Sixty-eight fourteen-year-old British Secondary School pupils indicated their attitudes towards a 'grant for pupils' before and after reading a text which advocated a minority position. The text was attributed as being the work of either pupils from their own school (ingroup minority) or from a school they discriminated against (outgroup minority). Responses were either made in ‘public’ (by telling subjects that other pupils would see their responses) or in ‘private’ (by subjects putting their responses into a ‘ballot box’). The results showed that on public responses ingroup minorities had more influence than outgroup minorities while there was no difference on private responses. Also, greater change occurred when responses were made in private than in public. These results are compatible with the intergroup analysis of minority influence.     

Intergroup emotions and gateway groups: Introducing multiple social identities into the study of emotions in conflict

After 2 decades of extensive empirical studies on affective intergroup processes, it is now clear that emotional processes play a critical role in the dynamics of intergroup conflict. However, it seems that much of the research in this domain views intergroup relations in a dichotomous manner of pure in‐groups and out‐groups despite the developments in the realm of social identity that suggest otherwise. We here suggest that the incorporation of more complex social identity models into the study of affective social science can not only help to better understand intergroup conflict dynamics but can also offer new possible venues for conflict resolution. Specifically, we claim that the presence of groups with multiple identities, which include both the in‐group's and the out‐group's identity (e.g., biracial groups that encompass both a White and a Black social identity) can impact intergroup emotional processes between the different groups comprising those multiple identities (e.g., between Whites and Blacks). Accordingly, we review recent developments in the literatures of emotion in intergroup conflict and multiple social identity and offer a conceptual integration of the two. Thus, we attempt to enrich the theory in both fields, better explain intergroup conflict, and possibly pave the way for the development of novel conflict resolution methods.     

Warm or competent? Improving intergroup relations by addressing threatened identities of advantaged and disadvantaged groups

Applying the Needs‐Based Model of Reconciliation to contexts of group disparity, two studies examined how messages from outgroup representatives that affirmed the warmth or competence of advantaged or disadvantaged groups influenced their members' intergroup attitudes. Study 1 involved natural groups differing in status; Study 2 experimentally manipulated status. In both studies, advantaged‐group members responded more favorably, reporting more positive outgroup attitudes and willingness to change the status quo toward equality, to messages reassuring their group's warmth. Disadvantaged‐group members responded more favorably to messages affirming their group's competence. Study 2 further demonstrated that the effectiveness of reassuring a disadvantaged group's competence stemmed from restoring its threatened dimension of identity, irrespective of a change of the status quo. In line with Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979), these results indicate that beyond the competition over tangible resources, groups are concerned with restoring threatened dimensions of their identities. Exchanging messages that remove identity‐related threats may promote not only positive intergroup attitudes but also greater willingness to act collectively for intergroup equality. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Octave equivalence as measured by similarity ratings

Octave equivalence refers to the musical equivalence of notes separated by one or more octaves; such notes are assigned the same name in the musical scale. The present series of experiments was an attempt to determine whether octave equivalence would be incorporated into subjects’ similarity ratings of pairs of tones or tone sequences. In the first experiment, subjects on each trial rated the similarity of two successively presented tones. The results failed to show evidence of octave equivalence. In subsequent experiments, the range of frequency values presented and the musical context were manipulated. Evidence of octave equivalence was found only when the range of tone height differences presented was small; the effect of musical context was negligible. The implications of these results for theories of music perception and recognition are discussed.     

Social comparison and group interest in ingroup favouritism

Studied the effects of reward magnitude and comparability of the outgroup on minimal intergroup discrimination where self-interest was related to ingroup profit. Favouritism towards own group is hypothesized to arise from intergroup comparisons to enhance self-esteem as well as instrumental rivalry for group and self-interest. Sixty-two fourteen to fifteen years' old school-boys and girls were randomly assigned to a high or low reward condition in which they distributed monetary rewards, via choice-matrices, to the ingroup and a relevant comparison outgroup, and the ingroup and an irrelevant comparison outgroup. Monetary self-interest was explicitly and directly linked to ingroup's absolute profit. Ss sacrificed group and personal gain to achieve intergroup differences in monetary outcomes favouring the ingroup; and were less fair and more discriminatory towards the relevant than irrelevant outgroup. especially with High Rewards.     

Individual,social group and intergroup behaviour. Some conceptual remarks on the social identity theory

An investigation of the group concept proposed by Tqjfel and Turner shows that group formation and intergroup behaviour cannot be explained by the similarity of group members. Taking into account only similarity of elements leads to conceptual contaminations concerning group and class, group and collective, personal and social identity, and finally interpersonal and intergroup behaviour. It is claimed that only the consideration of group structure and the differentiation of partially individual and partially structural attributes of the group members results in a conceptually adequate theory of group formation and intergroup behaviour of its members.     

Does remembering past ingroup harmdoing promote postwar cross‐group contact? Insights from a field‐experiment in Liberia

In the aftermath of the Liberian civil wars, we investigated whether it is possible to systematically influence how people construe their group's role during the conflict and how this affects intergroup emotions and behavioral intentions. In a field experiment, 146 participants were randomly assigned to think about incidents of violence during the war that were either committed by fellow ingroup members (perpetrator‐focus) or against fellow ingroup members (victim‐focus). Adopting a perpetrator‐focus led to greater willingness to engage in cross‐group contact, greater need for acceptance, and greater intergroup empathy. The focus manipulation did not affect participants' need for empowerment. Key message: Appraising the ingroup as “victim” or “perpetrator” after conflicts with reciprocal harmdoing is largely a matter of psychological construction. A promising avenue for promoting positive cross‐group contact consists in widening the ingroup's victim role by also remembering the harm that the ingroup inflicted upon others. This amplifies the need of acceptance, which leads to greater intergroup empathy and greater willingness to engage in cross‐group contact. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Refusing intergroup help from the morally superior: How one group's moral superiority leads to another group's reluctance to seek their help

We examine how group members paradoxically refuse intergroup help where they might need it most: in the moral status domain. Based on the Sacred Value Protection Model (Tetlock, 2002), we predicted and found that group members felt stronger group-based anger and a stronger motivation to reaffirm their group's moral status when an outgroup was morally superior to them. Despite this moral motivation, however, we also predicted and found that group members more strongly refused intergroup help to improve their moral status vis-à-vis the morally superior outgroup (compared to an uninvolved outgroup). Consistent with the Social Identity model of Deindividuation Effects (Reicher, Spears, & Postmes, 1995), group members thus strategically refused intergroup help to defend their group identity. Supporting this interpretation, particularly highly identified group members were most likely to refuse intergroup help when they needed it most. We discuss theoretical and practical implications of our findings.     

Group participation and intergroup relations: An experimental study of negotiation groups

Negotiations were conducted to investigate the effects on settlement-points andon the attitudes and perceptions of participants of (i) group participation and (ii)belief in own group's point of view, in a 2 × 2 factorial design. Ninety-six school children prepared cases in groups of four before representing their group's position against an individual of a similarly prepared opposed group. Group participation was manipulated by groups either participating in preparatory discussions or observing video films of another group's discussions. Belief was manipulated by systematically varying the composition of groups according to scores on a pre-test of attitudes towards the raising of the school-leaving age. In general the belief manipulation operated as expected, ‘believers’ exhibiting less variability, more tit-for-tat agreements and less opinion change than the ‘disbelievers’. Group participation did not influence the measures as predicted, and measures of interpersonal perception did not conform to the pattern of findings in recent experiments on intergroup discrimination. The results are discussed in terms of (i) their relevance to the issue of the appropriate relationship of the representative to his group in a negotiation and (ii) their implications for intergroup relations theory.     

The effects of intergroup discrimination and social values on level of self-esteem in the minimal group paradigm

The proposition that individuals engage in intergroup discrimination to increase or maintain positive social identity and a high level of self-esteem has received some empirical support. An attempt was made to extend prior findings by evaluating whether intergroup allocation behaviour consistent with subjects' social values would lead to higher self-esteem than inconsistent allocation behaviour. More specifically, it was predicted that competitive subjects' self-esteem will be higher following discriminatory choices than fair choices and prosocial subjects' self-esteem will be higher following fair choices than discriminatory choices. It was also predicted that after subjects were constrained to make discriminatory choices, competitors' self-esteem would be higher than prosocials' self-esteem and after subjects were constrained to make fair choices, prosocials' self-esteem would be higher than competitors' self-esteem. Experiment I supported the first of these predictions when a measure of personal self-esteem was used as a dependent variable. Experiment 2 attempted to extend the generality of the findings of Experiment 1 by defining and measuring self-esteem in collective terms. The expected prior pattern of results did not occur again. Constraining subjects to make discriminatory choices increased their collective self-esteem regardless of their social values.     

I will help you because we are similar: Quality of contact mediates the effect of perceived similarity on facilitative behaviour towards immigrants

This research aimed to analyse interpersonal behaviour towards immigrants by exploring related psychosocial variables such as intergroup similarity and quality of intergroup contact. A new interpersonal behavioural tendencies scale was developed. In Study 1, Spanish participants reported their willingness to take different actions towards a Moroccan (i.e. a devalued target, n = 132) or an Ecuadorian (i.e. a valued target, n = 138), perceived intergroup similarity and quality of intergroup contact. Multigroup confirmatory factor analysis identified the expected dimensions: active facilitation (AF), passive facilitation (PF), passive harm (PH) and active harm (AH). Participants reported less similarity, less pleasant contact, less AF and less PF, and more PH with respect to Moroccans relative to Ecuadorians. Quality of contact mediated the effect of perceived similarity on interpersonal behaviour (especially facilitative behaviour) towards immigrants. Study 2 (N = 134) confirmed that this mediation effect also applied to Romanian immigrants, and tested a serial mediation pathway, in which perceived similarity affected symbolic threat, which in turn affected quality of contact, which finally affected behaviour. Changing perceived intergroup similarity might be a way of improving the quality of contact with minority groups, and this would be expected to increase pro‐social behaviour towards such groups.     

Effects of intergroup similarity on intergroup relations

We examined the impact of intergroup similarity on two aspects of intergroup relations. Drawing on social identity and belief congruence theory, we hypothesized that — at high levels of intergroup similarity — increasing similarity has dual, seemingly opposed effects: It increases ingroup favouritism in evaluations but also increases readiness for social contact with the outgroup. We further hypothesized that both effects are moderated by the strength of individuals' identification with their ingroup. Finally, we hypothesized that there is ingroup favouritism on dimensions relevant for defining the group, but outgroup favouritism on dimensions irrelevant for this purpose. One hundred and forty-nine students from two prestigious high schools, who were assigned to one of three levels of manipulated similarity between their schools, evaluated both schools on dimensions relevant and irrelevant to the school context and expressed their readiness for social contact with the other school. Ingroup favouritism appeared on relevant dimensions and outgroup favouritism on irrelevant dimensions. As predicted, for those highly identified with their ingroup, intergroup similarity led to greater ingroup favouritism in evaluations on relevant dimensions but to increased readiness for outgroup social contact. Implications for interpreting inconsistent results of past research and for specifying conditions for intergroup bias are discussed.     

Social categorization and intergroup behaviour

The aim of the studies was to assess the effefcs of social categorization on intergroup behaviour when, in the intergroup situation, neither calculations of individual interest nor previously existing attitudes of hostility could have been said to have determined discriminative behaviour against an outgroup. These conditions were satisfied in the experimental design. In the first series of experiments, it was found that the subjects favoured their own group in the distribution of real rewards and penalities in a situation in which nothing but the variable of fairly irrelevant classification distinguished between the ingroup and the outgroup. In the second series of experiments it was found that: 1) maximum joint profit independent of group membership did not affect significantly the manner in which the subjects divided real pecuniary rewards; 2) maximum profit for own group did affect the distribution of rewards; 3) the clearest effect on the distribution of rewards was due to the subjects' attempt to achieve a maximum difference between the ingroup and the outgroup even at the price of sacrificing other ‘objective’ advantages. The design and the results of the study are theoretically discussed within the framework of social norms and expectations and particularly in relation to a ‘generic’ norm of outgroup behaviour prevalent in some societies.     

Personal involvement and the evaluation of group products

This research examined favouritism in group product evaluations as a function of personal involvement. After being divided into groups on an arbitrary basis, subjects worked at a group brainstorming task. Some subjects then assessed the merits of their own group's product relative to that of an outgroup's product, whereas other subjects assessed the merits of an ingroup's product relative to that of an outgroup's product. In both conditions, a significant bias was observed such that owngroup and ingroup products were rated as superior to outgroup products. Moreover, this bias was equally strong regardless of whether subjects were appraising a product they had personally helped create. The implications of the findings for understanding the antecedents of group bias are considered.     

Perceived legitimacy of intergroup status differences: its prediction by relative ingroup prototypicality

Research demonstrates that the perceived legitimacy of intergroup status differences has profound effects on intergroup attitudes, emotions and behavior. However, there has only been little intergroup research that predicts the perception of legitimacy. We hypothesize that the perception of legitimate or illegitime status relations depends upon the perceived relative prototypicality of the ingroup for the inclusive category. Since the prototype of the inclusive category provides a normative comparison standard for subgroup evaluation, similarity to this standard (i.e. prototypicality) should be positively evaluated and used to justify high status. A first study in a natural intergroup context (N = 67) offered correlational data in support of the predicted relationship. The second study (N = 60), using Germans as ingroup with Poles as outgroup and Europe as inclusive category, demonstrated that the link between prototypicality and legitimacy is contingent upon the valence of the inclusive category. In order to elucidate the causal direction, the third study manipulated relative prototypicality in an artificial intergroup context (N = 94) and introduced status as a moderator variable. Overall, we found strong support for the hypothesis that legitimacy is related to prototypicality and that this relation is moderated by ingroup status and valence of the inclusive category. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Automatic contrast: Evidence that automatic comparison with the social self affects evaluative responses

The aim of the present research was to investigate whether unconsciously presented affective information may cause opposite evaluative responses depending on what social category the information originates from. We argue that automatic comparison processes between the self and the unconscious affective information produce this evaluative contrast effect. Consistent with research on automatic behaviour, we propose that when an intergroup context is activated, an automatic comparison to the social self may determine the automatic evaluative responses, at least for highly visible categories (e.g. sex, ethnicity). Contrary to previous research on evaluative priming, we predict automatic contrastive responses to affective information originating from an outgroup category such that the evaluative response to neutral targets is opposite to the valence of the suboptimal primes. Two studies using different intergroup contexts provide support for our hypotheses.