When the outgroup becomes ingroup and when the ingroup becomes outgroup: Xenophobia and social categorization in a resource allocation task

Subjects classified as more or less xenophobic allocated resources to SWISS nationals (ingroup) and foreign residents (outgroup) in three intergroup judgement modes: negative interdependence, independence and positive interdependence. When both groups were assessed together as a single beneficiary (positive interdependence) they were allocated more resources than those provided to the outgroup under negative interdependence or independence. More xenophobic subjects, however gave less resources to both groups together under positive interdependence than to the ingroup under independence. In contrast, less xenophobic subjects allocated to both groups together a similar amount as to the ingroup under independence. These results suggest that, depending on their initial attitudes towards the outgroup, individuals will categorize a superordinate entity either more as an ingroup or more as an outgroup.     

Overlapping mental representations of self, ingroup, and outgroup: unraveling self-stereotyping and self-anchoring

Smith and collaborators presented strong response time evidence for overlapping mental representations of the self and relevant ingroups, and they interpreted their findings as reflecting that people define themselves in terms of their ingroups. Besides on inferences from ingroup to self (self-stereotyping) however, self-ingroup overlap could also be based on inferences from the self to the ingroup (self-anchoring). The present research tackled this interpretational ambiguity and empirically distinguished self-anchoring versus self-stereotyping as processes possibly under-lying self-ingroup overlap. Results from three studies revealed stronger evidence for inferences from self to ingroup (selfanchoring) than the other way round (self-stereotyping).     

Reactance,autonomy and paths to persuasion: Examining perceptions of threats to freedom and informational value

Autonomy, often associated with an open and reflective evaluation of experience, is sometimes confused with reactance, which indicates resistance to persuasion attempts. Two studies examined a path model in which autonomy and reactance predicted motivation following the provision of anonymous or source-identified health-risk information, via the mediation of perceived threat to decision-making freedom and of perceived informational value. Study 1 (N = 122) investigated alcohol consumption. The results showed that autonomy was positively related to autonomous motivation and intentions to drink responsibly. Reactance negatively predicted autonomous motivation in the source-identified information condition but positively predicted autonomous motivation and intentions in the anonymous information condition. Reactance negatively predicted attitudes through the mediation of perceived threat to decision-making freedom. Study 2 (N = 145) tested our hypothesized model for smoking behavior and replicated several of the Study 1 findings. Implications for our understanding of autonomy, reactance, and responses to risk-information are discussed.     

Cognitive differentiation between self,ingroup, and outgroup: The roles of identification and perceived intergroup conflict

Several models predict that persons ascribe opposite characteristics to self and ingroups on the one hand and outgroups on the other (outgroup contrast). However, only few studies have found this effect. This study explored its boundary conditions. Sixty‐two students rated (a) characteristics of themselves, an ingroup (own study major), and an outgroup (other study major), (b) ingroup identification, and (c) perceived intergroup conflict. Participants who were relatively high in ingroup identification and who perceived relatively high levels of intergroup conflict displayed outgroup contrast, as indicated by negative correlations between trait ratings for self and ingroup and between trait ratings for ingroup and outgroup. The other participants showed weaker or no outgroup contrast. Thus, this study is one of the few empirical demonstrations of outgroup contrast and points to moderators that should be considered in future research on this effect. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Reactance versus rationalization: divergent responses to policies that constrain freedom

How do people respond to government policies and work environments that place restrictions on their personal freedoms? The psychological literature offers two contradictory answers to this question. Here, we attempt to resolve this apparent discrepancy. Specifically, we identify the absoluteness of a restriction as one factor that determines how people respond to it. Across two studies, participants responded to absolute restrictions (i.e., restrictions that were sure to come into effect) with rationalization: They viewed the restrictions more favorably, and valued the restricted freedoms less, compared with control participants. Participants responded in the opposite way to identical restrictions that were described as nonabsolute (i.e., as having a small chance of not coming into effect): In this case, participants displayed reactance, viewing the restrictions less favorably, and valuing the restricted freedoms more, compared with control participants. We end by discussing future research directions.     

Asymmetrical evaluation of ingroup versus outgroup members: a look from an information integration perspective

In evaluating ingroup versus outgroup members two types of information can be used: ‘Categorizing information’ related to the target's group membership and ‘individuating information’ related to pieces of information specific to the target to be judged. Information integration theory (IIT, Anderson, 1981) is applied as a formal tool for predicting the judgement resulting from these different pieces of information. It is further assumed that due to a general positivity bias in evaluating own affairs judges tend to evaluate ingroup members more positively than outgroup members. By applying IIT ingroup favouritism on the level of individual targets can be predicted. More importantly, an interaction concerning an asymmetrical impact of ingroup versus outgroup membership information dependent on the individuating information's valence can be predicted: the enhancement of ingroup members should be stronger for negative individuating information, whereas the devaluation of outgroup members should be stronger for positive individuating information. Further a negative correlation between intragroup differentiation and intergroup differentiation on the level of individual judgements is assumed. In a two (judge's group membership: overestimator versus underestimator) by three (target's group membership information absent; target's group membership information present as either ingroup, or outgroup member) by three (valence of the individuating information: positive, neutral, negative) factorial minimal group design with repeated measures on the last two factors the targets' likability had to be rated. The findings are in accord with predictions. Theoretical conclusions with respect to social judgement—and to intergroup theories as well as with respect to general approaches to context effects in social judgement are discussed.     

A test of the extended intergroup contact hypothesis: the mediating role of intergroup anxiety, perceived ingroup and outgroup norms, and inclusion of the outgroup in the self

S. C. Wright, A. Aron, T. McLaughlin-Volpe, and S. A. Ropp (1997) proposed that the benefits associated with cross-group friendship might also stem from vicarious experiences of friendship. Extended contact was proposed to reduce prejudice by reducing intergroup anxiety, by generating perceptions of positive ingroup and outgroup norms regarding the other group, and through inclusion of the outgroup in the self. This article documents the first test of Wright et al.'s model, which used structural equation modeling among two independent samples in the context of South Asian-White relations in the United Kingdom. Supporting the model, all four variables mediated the relationship between extended contact and outgroup attitude, controlling for the effect of direct contact. A number of alternative models were ruled out, indicating that the four mediators operate concurrently rather than predicting one another.     

Unprejudiced and self-focused: When intergroup contact is experienced as being about the ingroup rather than the outgroup

Many problematic responses that occur in intergroup interaction, such as inhibited behavior, restricted disclosure of valuable information, and miscommunication, do not arise from negative attitudes and sometimes are more frequently exhibited by lower-prejudice individuals. Thus it is important to consider how lower-prejudice individuals respond to methods for improving intergroup relations that have been investigated with the prejudiced person in mind. Two studies tested the hypothesis that for lower-prejudice individuals intergroup contact is experienced as being about the ingroup rather than the outgroup, and thus fails to exert its usual effect of paving the way for more positive subsequent intergroup exchanges. As predicted, for individuals seeking to be unbiased an initial exchange with one outgroup member affected feelings about ingroup worthiness, but not reactions to a subsequently encountered outgroup member. The opposite pattern was evident for higher-prejudice individuals, who readily generalized from their experience with one outgroup member to the next.     

Intergroup threat,knowledge of the outgroup,and willingness to purchase ingroup and outgroup products: The mediating role of intergroup emotions

Established theories have acknowledged that intergroup threat is one of the key determinants of intergroup attitudes and behaviours, but how intergroup threat can affect consumer behaviour remains unclear. Here, four preregistered studies (total N = 988) examined the effect of intergroup threat (manipulated in terms of realistic and symbolic threats) on consumers’ willingness to purchase ingroup and outgroup products. In the context of China–West relations, we measured Chinese consumers’ willingness to purchase Chinese (ingroup) and Western (outgroup) products. These studies together revealed that realistic and symbolic threats (versus control) increased willingness to purchase ingroup products and decreased willingness to purchase outgroup products, regardless of the product category. Studies 3a and 3b also measured knowledge of the outgroup as a potential moderator, revealing that realistic threat (versus control) reduced willingness to purchase outgroup products only among individuals who had less knowledge of the outgroup. Furthermore, Study 3b showed that the intergroup threat manipulation indirectly influenced consumers’ willingness to purchase ingroup/outgroup products through increased anger and decreased hope. We discussed the contributions to the intergroup relations and consumer behaviour literature and the implications for transnational marketing practices, as well as the limitations of this research.     

Intergroup helping during the coronavirus crisis: Effects of group identification,ingroup blame and third party outgroup blame

Two studies tested predictors of helping across national boundaries. British participants reported blame attributions for the coronavirus crisis, either to the British government (ingroup blame), or to the Chinese government (third party outgroup blame), and it was tested whether this was associated with intentions to donate money to help outgroup members suffering from effects of the coronavirus crisis in the world's poorer countries. It was hypothesized that strength of identification with the national ingroup would be negatively associated with blame attributions to the ingroup, and that it would be positively associated with blame attributions to a third party outgroup. Blame attributions were predicted in turn to be related to outgroup helping, with ingroup blame being positively associated with helping intentions, and third party outgroup blame being negatively associated with helping intentions. Support for these predictions were found in one exploratory (N = 100) and one confirmatory (N = 250) study.     

Reactions to perceived deprivation in ingroup and outgroup: a cross-cultural comparison

An experiment is reported in which the reactions of observers to the relative and absolute deprivation of others are assessed. Eighty German and 80 Italian subjects made decisions about ingroup (own nationality) or outgroup (foreign) protagonists suffering high or low relative and absolute deprivation. Results showed that subjects were more likely to take social action that violated some rule when the protagonist was in high rather than low absolute deprivation. Racist subjects were somewhat more likely to satisfy the request of a deprived ingroup protagonist whereas non-racist subjects favoured the deprived outgroup. No differences emerged for non-deprived protagonists. Overall, Germans tended to take social action only when the protagonist suffered high absolute deprivation whereas Italians took action regardless of degree of absolute deprivation. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

When increased group identification leads to outgroup liking and cooperation: the role of trust

Two studies explored the influence of group identification and the functional relations between groups on outgroup liking. In a laboratory study, Study 1 (N = 112) found that outgroup liking was highest when group identification was high and relations between groups were cooperative, but outgroup liking was lowest when group identification was high and relations were competitive. In a field replication of Study 1, Study 2 (N = 181) similarly found more liking with high group identification and cooperative relations between groups. Additional analyses revealed that the Identification x Relations interactions found in Studies 1 and 2 were mediated by outgroup trust. We discuss how trust is an important factor for predicting outgroup bias for both high and low group identification.     

Differential processing of ingroup and outgroup information: the role of relative group status in permeable boundary groups

Perceivers individuate cognitively the ingroup more than the outgroup; that is, perceivers use person categories to process information about the ingroup, but use stereotypic attribute categories to process information about the outgroup. This phenomenon is labelled the differential processing effect (DPE). Is the DPE moderated by relative group status? In two experiments, either high- or low-status members of permeable-boundary groups (i.e. groups that encourage upward mobility) read through information about unfamiliar ingroup and outgroup members. Relative group status moderated the DPE. Clustering indices in recall and confusions in a name-matching task indicated that high-status members individuated the ingroup more than the outgroup, thus replicating the DPE. However, low-status members individuated the outgroup more than the ingroup, thus reversing the DPE. A third experiment suggested that these findings are predicated on the ingroup information being stereotype-consistent. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Effects of mortality salience on evaluation of ingroup and outgroup sources: the impact of pro- versus counterattitudinal positions

Past Terror Management Theory (TMT) research has demonstrated that mortality salience leads to favoritism toward ingroup members and derogation of outgroup members and to polarized attitudes toward the source of pro and counterattitudinal statements. In such research, the individual's group membership and the individual's worldview position were examined separately. Thus, when the individual's group membership was manipulated, one could normally assume that an outgroup member is counterattitudinal and an ingroup member is proattitudinal. It is unclear, therefore, whether ingroup members elicited favoritism from mortality salient participants because of their group membership or because of their presumably proattitudinal position, or both. The authors present two studies in which the individual's group membership and attitudinal position are jointly manipulated. Results showed that among mortality salient participants, the outgroup member received favorable or unfavorable evaluations depending on his position, whereas the ingroup member received moderately positive evaluations regardless of the position taken.     

Inequality as ingroup privilege or outgroup disadvantage: the impact of group focus on collective guilt and interracial attitudes

Among members of privileged groups, social inequality is often thought of in terms of the disadvantages associated with outgroup membership. Yet inequality also can be validly framed in terms of ingroup privilege. These different framings have important psychological and social implications. In Experiment 1 (N = 110), White American participants assessed 24 statements about racial inequality framed as either White privileges or Black disadvantages. In Experiment 2 (N = 122), White participants generated examples of White privileges or Black disadvantages. In both experiments, a White privilege framing resulted in greater collective guilt and lower racism compared to a Black disadvantage framing. Collective guilt mediated the manipulation's effect on racism. In addition, in Experiment 2, a White privilege framing decreased White racial identification compared to a Black disadvantage framing. These findings suggest that representing inequality in terms of outgroup disadvantage allows privileged group members to avoid the negative psychological implications of inequality and supports prejudicial attitudes.     

Men's and women's attributions of male and female traits to the ingroup and outgroup

In two experiments using the minimal group paradigm, subjects had to describe an ingroup member and an outgroup member on the BSRI. Although the targets were not categorized by sex, the results showed that the typical ingroup member was described by men as having more male traits and by women as having more female traits. They also showed that the lesser worth of outgroup members was associated for men with fewer male and female traits, whereas for women it was mainly associated with fewer female traits. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Reactance and the dynamics of disagreement: multiple paths from threatened freedom to resistance to persuasion

Many experiments show that threats to attitudinal freedom create reactance, but the underlying dynamics of reactance‐based disagreement have not received much attention. The present experiments identified two paths from threats to disagreement. In one path, threats to attitudinal freedom directly motivate disagreement; in the other, negative cognitive responses mediate the threat's effect on disagreement. Two experiments demonstrated the causes and consequences of each path from threat to persuasion. When a communicator threatened freedom at the beginning of the message, unfavorable cognitive responses (counterarguing, negative perceptions of the source's credibility) fully mediated the effect of threat on disagreement. When the threat appeared at the end of the message however, threat had a direct, unmediated effect on disagreement (Experiment 1). The two paths had different consequences for sleeper effects: disagreement rooted in negative cognitive responses persisted, whereas disagreement directly motivated by the threat declined when the threat was removed (Experiment 2). Implications for reactance and for threat‐based sleeper effects are discussed. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

What children remember about ingroup and outgroup peers: effects of stereotypes on children's processing of information about group members

Three studies are reported about children's memory for stereotypic behaviors attributed to ingroup and outgroup members. According to research and theory in social cognition, cues present in the situation make cultural representations about group members accessible, and once primed, influence all phases of the information processing sequence. In Study 1, Euro Canadian and Native Canadian children (N=98) recalled stereotypic behaviors attributed to ingroup and outgroup members. In Study 2 (N=87), the influence of individual difference variables was explored. In Study 3 (N=32), the memory of Native Canadian children living on a First Nation reserve for behaviors attributed to ingroup and outgroup members was studied. Biases in recall were found in Studies 1 and 2, but in Study 3, outgroup favoritism, typically found among low status group members, was reversed among children attending a heritage school. Among the individual difference measures examined, age and level of cognitive development predicted what was remembered about group members. Older Euro Canadian children recalled more negative behaviors about outgroup members than did younger children, and more cognitively mature children recognized more information about ingroup than outgroup members. Results were discussed in terms of cognitive and situational factors influencing children's processing of group-relevant information and the challenges children in low status groups face in maintaining a sense of cultural identity.     

On the psychology of procedural justice: reactions to procedures of ingroup vs. outgroup authorities

Theorizing on procedural justice has assumed that people's reactions to outgroup authorities are to a large extent based on instrumental concerns. Therefore, attention is primarily directed to outcomes rather than procedures in encounters with outgroup authorities. In the current article we propose that in order for people dealing with outgroup authorities to be strongly affected by procedural fairness, the available outcome information should be ambiguous. Furthermore, we argue that people confronted with an outgroup authority react particularly negatively to unfair procedures that give them negative outcome expectancies. These patterns are not expected in encounters with ingroup authorities. Two experiments support our line of reasoning. The discussion focuses on the implications of these findings for the integration of theoretical perspectives on procedural justice. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The two faces of dominance: The differential effect of ingroup superiority and outgroup inferiority on dominant-group identity and group esteem

The present paper provides evidence that dominant-group members distinguish dominance framed as ingroup superiority from dominance framed as outgroup inferiority, and that ingroup superiority enhances esteem for, and thus identification with, the group more than outgroup inferiority. In Experiment 1, Democrats report higher levels of party identification after being told that Democrats won an election than after being told that Republicans lost the election. These effects are attenuated among dominant group members whose values are in conflict with how dominance was achieved. In Experiments 2a and 2b, unearned dominance framed as ingroup superiority resulted in higher levels of White identification than unearned dominance framed as outgroup inferiority among Whites who did not value meritocracy. In contrast, Whites who valued meritocracy did not increase their levels of identification with the group. In Experiment 2b, this interactive effect on racial identification was mediated by esteem for the group.