Effects of intergroup upward comparison, trait self-esteem, and identity shift on state self-esteem and affect in upward comparison with in-group members

The present study investigated factors that protect people low in trait self-esteem (Low-SEs), who may be less skilled at constructing information in self-enhancing manners, from threats after interpersonal upward comparison with in-group members. We hypothesized that even Low-SEs can maintain their state self-esteem under intergroup upward comparison. Furthermore, this study explored the possibility that individuals used identity-shift, a strategy to maintain their personal identity, even in an intergroup upward comparison condition. The results of a quasi-experiment supported these hypotheses. We further explored the possibility that individuals might use a twofold strategy to protect/enhance their self-esteem based on an interplay of personal and social identity.     

Cross-dimension-ambivalent in-group stereotypes: the moderating roles of social context of stereotype endorsement and in-group identification

In this study, the authors examined in-group stereotypes that are cross-dimensionally ambivalent-simultaneously (a) positive in cognition-related content dimensions and negative in affect-related content dimensions or (b) negative in cognition-related content dimensions and positive in affect-related content dimensions-to establish whether endorsement of such in-group stereotypes depends on whether this process occurs in an intragroup versus intergroup context. Drawing on social identity theory, the authors predicted that (a) endorsement of cross-dimension-ambivalent in-group stereotypes would be greater in an intragroup, relative to an intergroup, context and (b) this would hold for high but not low in-group identifiers. Confirming these hypotheses, results showed that endorsement of cross-dimension-ambivalent in-group stereotypes may vary as a function of their contribution to securing a positive social identity.     

Upward and downward comparison in the intermediate-status group: the role of social stratification stability

This work analyses intergroup comparison choices made by intermediate-status group members. Seventy-six psychology students were categorized in an intermediate position with respect to other faculties. Stability was manipulated at three levels: stable, upwardly unstable, and downwardly unstable. Data on strength of comparison, comparison for enhancing, comparison for evaluation, and ingroup identification were collected. Results revealed that in the stable condition, participants were equally engaged in both upward and downward comparison. In the upwardly unstable condition, participants were more likely to compare themselves with the high-status group, whereas in the downwardly unstable condition, they were more likely to choose a downward comparison. In this latter condition, both downward comparison for enhancement and in-group identification were lower than in other conditions.     

Social Identity versus Reference Frame Comparisons: The Moderating Role of Stereotype Endorsement

Two studies tested the prediction that belief in a negative stereotype about an in-group will cause members to shift from viewing their in-group as a social identity to viewing it as a frame of reference. The stereotype that was the focus of inquiry was the belief that women have less aptitude at math and spatial tasks than do men. In both studies, female participants took a test of math and spatial ability and then received social comparison information about their abilities relative to a male and a female confederate. In Study 1, participants felt enhanced when the two women outperformed the male confederate, even when this meant that the participants themselves performed worse than the other woman. If participants were first reminded of the negative stereotype, however, they felt best when they outperformed the other woman, even if this meant that the two women performed worse than the man. Study 2 showed that the effects of stereotype activation were especially pronounced among female participants who showed moderate to high levels of stereotype endorsement. These findings suggest that belief in stereotypes about the in-group can lead to in-group comparison and contrast, even in contexts in which a group member's ability level challenges the validity of the stereotype.     

Social comparison as a predictor of changes in burnout among nurses

Abstract

This study addressed the question whether the affect evoked by social comparisons and individual differences in social comparison orientation (SCO) may predict the development of burnout over a period of one year. The participants were 93 nurses (25 males and 68 females) who filled out a questionnaire twice, with an interval of about one year. Comparisons with others performing better than oneself (upward comparisons) were reported to occur more often, to evoke more positive affect, and to invoke less negative affect than comparisons with others performing worse than oneself (downward comparisons). Those who responded at Time 1 (T1) with more positive affect to upward comparison and with less negative affect to downward comparisons, showed a decrease in burnout at Time 2 (T2). In addition, those who responded with relatively more negative affect to upward comparisons at T1, showed an increase in burnout at T2, but only when they were high in SCO. It is concluded that in this population upward comparisons were more prevalent than, and evoked more favorable responses than, downward comparisons. The most important conclusion is that the affect evoked by social comparisons may predict future changes in burnout.     

Neuroticism and Reactions to Social Comparison Information Among Cancer Patients

In an experimental study neuroticism was examined as a moderator of breast cancer patients' affective reactions to social comparison information about a fellow patient. Fifty-seven women with breast cancer completed Eysenck's Personality Questionnaire and received social comparison information about a fellow patient who was either doing better (upward condition) or worse (downward condition) than themselves. As expected, patients showed more positive reactions to upward comparison information than to downward comparison information. Moreover, neuroticism was related to responding more negatively and less positively to social comparison information. Although respondents high and low in neuroticism did not differ in their reactions to downward comparison information, low neuroticism was associated with more positive responding to upward comparison information.     

Social dominance orientation and group context in implicit group prejudice

We tested the joint influence of individual difference and situational factors on implicit group prejudice. Participants in Experiments 1 and 2 were briefly shown in-group or out-group pronouns prior to evaluating good or bad trait adjectives. Under standard conditions (Experiment 1), there was no difference between participants with high and low social dominance orientation (SDO), but when the intergroup context was made more salient (Experiment 2), high-SDO participants alone showed implicit group prejudice. Implications for the malleability and consensuality of implicit prejudice are discussed.     

Yes we can!: prejudice reduction through seeing (inequality) and believing (in social change)

We investigated the effect of differential perceived efficacy to reduce racial inequality (in the context of increased awareness of illegitimate in-group advantages) on White Americans' intergroup attitudes and antidiscrimination behavior. White American university students read a passage describing the underrepresentation of African Americans in their university's faculty and then wrote letters to the university administration in support of appointing more African Americans to the faculty. We experimentally varied feedback concerning efficacy to change institutional racism. Before writing their letters, participants were told that there was a low, moderate, or high chance that their efforts would be effective. Later in the experiment, participants' perceived efficacy to influence their university system was measured. Intergroup attitudes improved and antidiscrimination actions increased among participants with higher perceived efficacy in comparison with participants with low perceived efficacy. Collective guilt partially mediated the effects of efficacy beliefs on antidiscrimination actions and fully mediated the effects of efficacy beliefs on intergroup attitudes.     

The affective consequences of social comparison: either direction has its ups and downs

Research on social comparison processes has assumed that a comparison in a given direction (upward or downward) will lead to a particular affective reaction. In contrast, the present two studies proposed and found that a comparison can produce either positive or negative feelings about oneself, independent of its direction. Several factors moderated the tendency to derive positive or negative affect from upward and downward comparisons. In Study 1, cancer patients low in self-esteem and with low perceived control over their symptoms and illness were more likely to see downward comparisons as having negative implications for themselves. Those low in self-esteem were also more likely to perceive upward comparisons as negative. In Study 2, individuals with high marital dissatisfaction and those who felt uncertain about their marital relationship were more likely to experience negative affect from upward and downward comparisons. The implications of these findings for social comparison theory and for the coping and adaptation literature are discussed.     

双向偏见引发冲突情境下自我归类对民族社会化觉察的影响——来自景颇族、傣族和汉族初中生的证据

采用情境实验法和故事补全任务,考察双向偏见引发冲突情境下的自我归类对景颇族、傣族与汉族初中生的民族社会化觉察的影响。结果表明,作为冲突事件的当事者,景颇族学生和傣族学生觉察到的促进和睦、文化社会化及促使不信任等民族社会化信息存在差异;景颇族、傣族和汉族学生的自我归类存在差异;自我归类对促进和睦、文化社会化与报告权威等信息的觉察的影响亦存在民族差异。在双向偏见冲突情境下,三族学生的自我归类与民族社会化觉察有一定关系:无论是做当事者/内群体归类、旁观者/外群体归类,还是做调解者/群际归类,被试对促进和睦的觉察均最多。偏见准备主要与当事者归类有关,而进行调解者归类的被试更容易觉察到"报告权威"。     

Choice of comparisons in intergroup settings: the role of temporal information and comparison motives

Three studies investigated comparison choices in intergroup settings, a neglected but important topic for theories of intergroup relations. Two main questions were addressed: What is role of comparison motives in determining comparison choices in intergroup contexts? How important are temporal comparisons (of the ingroup in the past or future) in intergroup settings? In Study 1 (N = 115), motives for Assessment or Enhancement were primed in a multi‐group performance context. Compared to Controls, Assessment priming encouraged both upward and downward comparisons, while Enhancement encouraged mainly downward comparisons. In general, temporal comparisons were as prevalent as comparisons with other groups. Study 2 (N = 199) employed a real‐world setting in which members of a mid‐ranking university indicated their interest in comparing with other higher or lower status universities or with their own university in the past. Temporal comparisons were once more much in evidence, and manipulating enhancement motives again encouraged downward comparisons. In Study 3 (N = 40), set in the context of inter‐nation student comparisons, Improvement motives were primed implicitly. This led to an increase in interest in an outgroup just above the ingroup but to a decrease in interest in future‐oriented comparisons. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Helpful Only in the Abstract?

ABSTRACT— This study tested the hypothesis that empathizing with out-group members is beneficial outside of, but not within, intergroup-contact situations. We predicted that in the context of intergroup interaction, the potential for evaluation would lead individuals' perspective-taking efforts to take on an egocentric and counterproductive flavor. As predicted, when empathy was instantiated during an intergroup exchange, it failed to exert its usual positive effect on intergroup attitudes and led higher-prejudice individuals to derogate an out-group member who was an interaction partner; empathy also blocked the prejudice-reducing influence of intergroup contact. Mediation analyses indicated that activation of negative metastereotypes regarding the out-group's view of the in-group accounted for these effects. The findings, which demonstrate ironic effects of empathy in intergroup interaction, indicate that interventions based on studies of individuals' reactions to out-group members in the abstract might have dramatically different consequences when put into practice in real exchanges between members of different groups.     

Social categorization, self-esteem, and the estimated musical preferences of male adolescents.

The authors investigated the intergroup processes of male adolescents within the context of social identity theory (SIT; H. Tajfel, 1978; H. Tajfel & J. C. Turner, 1979). The participants were English male adolescents (age = 14-15 years). They estimated in-group and out-group musical preferences and evaluated the in-group and out-group along a series of scales. The results showed in-group favoritism effects along the musical preference and evaluative dimensions. The participants reported greater liking for the in-group. Compared with the out-group, they associated the in-group more with positively stereotyped music and less with negatively stereotyped music. Compared with the out-group, they rated the in-group as more fun, more masculine, more sporty, less boring, less snobbish, and less weird. The participants with lower levels of self-esteem showed greater differentiation between groups and greater derogation of the out-group. The results supported the predictions of SIT and demonstrated the applicability of SIT for the study of adolescent behavior.     

初中生的社会比较对认知与情感信任的影响

本研究旨在探讨不同友谊状态下,初中生的社会比较对认知与情感信任的影响,及两种信任在社会比较与亲密度变化关系中的中介作用。有效被试为522名(M=12.87岁, SD=0.67),开学初让被试提名一位最亲密朋友,期中考试后让其比较与该好友的成绩排名并评价对好友的认知与情感信任水平,随后重新评价该好友的亲密度。结果表明:在亲密朋友(第二次依旧为最亲密的朋友)中,向下比较的情感信任高于向上比较,社会比较不影响认知信任;在普通朋友(第二次亲密度降低的朋友)中,向上比较的认知和情感信任均高于向下比较;社会比较只通过认知信任影响亲密度变化(完全中介),即相比于向下比较,向上比较时的认知信任水平较高,从而更有利于维持友谊的亲密性。     

Collective self and individual choice: The effects of inter-group comparative context on environmental values and behaviour

Self-categorization theory suggests that inter-group comparisons inform individual behaviour by affecting perceived in-group stereotypes that are internalized by group members. The present paper provides evidence for this chain of effects in the domain of environmental behaviour. In two studies, inter-group comparative context was manipulated. Study 1 found that the perceived in-group stereotype, self-stereotype (as represented by the reported value centrality), and behavioural intentions shifted away from a comparison out-group (irrespective of whether this was an upward or downward comparison). Study 1 also revealed that the effect of comparative context on individual environmental intentions was mediated by the perceived in-group stereotype and by changes in personal values. Study 2 extrapolated the observed effect on actual behavioural choices. The findings demonstrate the utility of a self-categorization approach to individual behaviour change.     

Social identification structures the effects of perspective taking

Researchers who study perspective taking are generally optimistic about the potential for interventions to improve intergroup perceptions. The current research provides new insight into the conditions that frame the intergroup outcomes of perspective taking. The results show that the effects of perspective taking are not always positive but depend on perspective takers' degree of identification with the in-group. In two experiments, we demonstrated that adopting the perspective of an out-group member can have damaging effects on intergroup perceptions among group members who are highly identified with the in-group. Specifically, compared with less committed members, those who identified highly with the in-group used a greater number of negative traits to describe the out-group following perspective taking. Such perspective taking also led participants with high in-group identification to judge the out-group less favorably. Understanding how social identity concerns frame the outcome of perspective taking is crucial to its effective employment in intergroup-relations programs.     

群体独特性对群际偏差的影响

群体独特性影响群体认同,较高或较低的群体独特性都可能引发群际偏差,分别称为“反射式独特性假说”与“反应式独特性假说”.调节作用研究揭示,在较低群体认同或上位群体分类凸显时,群体独特性越高越易引发群际偏差;而在较高群体认同时,独特性越低越易引发群际偏差.动机作用的研究表明,在具有群际竞争目标时,这两种过程分别受工具性动机与认同性动机的驱动.情绪与认知的中介作用研究显示,在低独特性条件下,社会身份复杂性与焦虑情绪可起中介作用引发群际偏差.     

Reactions to Intragroup Deviance: Does Disidentification Have a Role?

In this study, we address previous evidence about the interchangeable use of derogation and disidentification in protecting the self from intragroup deviance. We argue that when the in-group stands for a valued social identity, members may disidentify from the group, but only if the immediate context provides no opportunity to derogate. In the present experiments (n = 80 and n = 79), we provided or did not provide participants with the opportunity to recommend a punishment for an in-group or an out-group deviant. We also measured in-group identification before and after exposure to deviant behavior and after judgment. The results show that participants first disidentified from the in-group but, when presented with an opportunity to judge the deviant, also derogated. Importantly, participants who could judge the deviant also recovered their initial in-group identification level. Participants’ reactions to the out-group deviant suggest they used an intergroup rather than intragroup strategy.     

Intergroup differentiation: stereotyping as a function of status hierarchy

The authors explored how negative intergroup comparisons affect intergroup differentiation. More specifically, they tested the prediction that the in-group's negative intergroup comparisons with a high-status group would result in more negative stereotyping of a lower status out-group. The authors elicited stereotypes of a lower status university in 2 conditions. In the 1st, the participants judged only the middle-ranking university in-group and a lower status university. In the 2nd, those judgments followed comparison with a higher status university. In the 2nd condition, there was an increased differentiation between the in-group and the lower status out-group because of the more negative stereotyping of the lower status out-group. This evidence of intergroup differentiation was found only on the dimension judged most important and along which the in-group was negatively compared with the higher status group.     

Intergroup Differentiation: Stereotyping as a Function of Status Hierarchy

Abstract

The authors explored how negative intergroup comparisons affect intergroup differentiation. More specifically, they tested the prediction that the in-group's negative intergroup comparisons with a high-status group would result in more negative stereotyping of a lower status out-group. The authors elicited stereotypes of a lower status university in 2 conditions. In the 1st, the participants judged only the middle-ranking university in-group and a lower status university. In the 2nd, those judgments followed comparison with a higher status university. In the 2nd condition, there was an increased differentiation between the in-group and the lower status out-group because of the more negative stereotyping of the lower status out-group. This evidence of intergroup differentiation was found only on the dimension judged most important and along which the in-group was negatively compared with the higher status group.