Linguistic intergroup bias in Japan

This study examined linguistic intergroup bias in Japan. Linguistic intergroup bias is the tendency to describe positive in‐group and negative out‐group behaviors more abstractly than negative in‐group and positive out‐group behaviors. Participants were 26 Japanese high school students. Fans of the participants' favorite professional baseball team were employed as in‐groups and those of their least‐favorite professional baseball team as out‐groups. The students described the negative behaviors of out‐groups more abstractly than the negative behaviors of in‐groups, but there was no intergroup bias with regard to positive behaviors. It is suggested that linguistic intergroup bias contributes to the formation and maintenance of negative out‐group stereotypes in Japan.     

Reducing intergroup bias: elements of intergroup cooperation

The authors examined the potentially separable contributions of 2 elements of intergroup cooperation, interaction and common fate, and the processes through which they can operate. The manipulation of interaction reduced bias in evaluative ratings, which supports the idea that these components are separable, whereas the manipulation of common fate when the groups were interacting was associated with lower bias in nonverbal facial reactions in response to contributions by in-group and out-group members. Whereas interaction activated several processes that can lead to reduced bias, including decategorization, consistent with the common in-group identity model (S. L. Gaertner, J. F. Dovidio, P. A. Anastasio, B. A. Bachman, & M. C. Rust, 1993) as well as M. Hewstone and R. J. Brown's (1986) group differentiation model, the primary set of mediators involved participants' representations of the memberships as 2 subgroups within a superordinate entity.     

A normative perspective on the linguistic intergroup bias: How intragroup approval of ingroup members who use the linguistic intergroup bias perpetuates explicit intergroup bias

The present research examined from a normative perspective how intragroup normative processes regulate the consequences of the linguistic intergroup bias (LIB). Results of three studies supported our hypothesis that intragroup approval of an ingroup member who uses the LIB plays a key role in perpetuating pro-ingroup bias. In Study 1, ingroup members who used pro-ingroup (vs. pro-outgroup) LIB elicited more intragroup approval and this effect was mediated by the perception of the speaker as being biased in favor of the ingroup. In Studies 2 and 3, intragroup approval (vs. disapproval) of an ingroup member who used the LIB enhanced the expression of pro-ingroup bias. By providing the first demonstration of how the LIB relates to intragroup normative processes, our studies highlight a new path by which the LIB helps perpetuate intergroup bias.     

Anticipated outgroup evaluations and intergroup bias

A study is reported that tests the hypothesis that group members exhibit intergroup bias in response to the belief that outsiders will discriminate against them. To this end, two experimental conditions are included in which subjects anticipate either biased evaluations or fair evaluations respectively. In a control condition, subjects do not expect to be evaluated from an external source. Results indicated, as expected, that those who anticipated biased evaluations from an outgroup exhibited bias themselves, while those who anticipated fair evaluations exhibited outgroup favouritism. The fact that control subjects exhibited the same degree of bias as those who anticipated biased evaluations from the outgroup poses some difficulties for the hypothesized connection between anticipated discrimination and intergoup bias. Thus, it appears that intergroup bias is the rule and not the exception in an intergroup context. Nevertheless, it is clear that anticipated evaluations of outgroup members can effect intergroup bias.     

Constructing intergroup relationships in social communication

Abstract:  People communicate with each other about their ingroup and outgroup in a social context. These social communications may have profound effects in constructing intergroup relationships. In this paper, we outline how different combinations of the social identities of the sender, receiver, and target of the social communication may give rise to differing face concerns of the ingroup and outgroup, and may result in different patterns of communications about them. People may enhance or protect their ingroup social identity, and derogate the outgroup social identity to their ingroup audiences; however, they are more likely to enhance and protect their outgroup's social identity when communicating with outgroup audiences. Two studies tested these predictions. Study 1 used real groups of Australian and Asian students communicating about an Asian student in an Australian university context. In Study 2, participants assigned to two fictitious groups communicated about their ingroup and outgroup. In both studies, the findings were interpreted within the framework of intergroup communication, although there were some notable deviations from the predictions. Future directions of the research were also discussed.     

The reducing effect of positive imagined intergroup contact on intergroup attributional bias

Currently, the Han and Uygur ethnicities in Xinjiang, China are generally in a peaceful state; however, there are also disagreements and conflicts. Through three studies, this article explores intergroup attributional bias (in‐group favoring and out‐group derogating pattern of attribution) between the Hans and Uygurs in Xinjiang, China, and the reducing effect of positive imagined intergroup contact on intergroup attributional bias. Using high school students from Han and Uygur as participants, Study 1 investigated participants’ attributional patterns for in‐group and out‐group members presenting desirable or undesirable behaviors in daily situations. The results revealed that both Hans and Uygurs demonstrate an in‐group favoring pattern of attribution, but not an out‐group derogating pattern. Study 2 added a brief positive imagined intergroup contact (experimental group) or a brief positive imagination of an outdoor scene (control group) before participants completed the same questionnaire as in Study 1 and found a weaker intergroup attributional bias in the experimental group. In Study 3, Han students who had a positive imagined contact with a Uygur demonstrated a closer distance and reported more positive attitudes toward Uygurs than Han students who had imagined contact with a nonspecific stranger. Studies 2 and 3 together indicated a reducing effect of imagined contact on intergroup attributional bias through improvement of intergroup attitudes. The conclusion of this research is particularly meaningful for the Hans and Uygurs, as it implies that properly implemented positive imagined intergroup contacts might be a useful remedy for reducing potential conflicts.     

Communication constraints on the linguistic intergroup bias

We examined whether the linguistic intergroup bias (LIB) is a context-free, invariant process or influenced by communicative purpose. The reported experiment shows that biased language use (positive behaviors of a partner and negative behaviors of an opponent are described with abstract predicates, negative partner and positive opponent behaviors are described with concrete predicates) occurs only when the communication has a clear purpose, but not when it does not. The implications of communicative purpose as a constraint on the psychological processes driving the LIB are discussed as well as the possible impact of biased language use upon recipients.     

Hindsight bias in political elections

Two studies on political hindsight bias were conducted on the occasions of the German parliament election in 1998 and the Nordrhein-Westfalen state parliament election in 2000. In both studies, participants predicted the percentage of votes for several political parties and recalled these predictions after the election. The observed hindsight effects were stronger than those found in any prior study on political elections (using percentage of votes as the dependent variable). We argue that the length of the retention interval between original judgement and recollection is mainly responsible for this difference. In our second study, we investigated possible artifacts in political hindsight biases using a control-group design where half of the participants recalled their predictions shortly before or after the election. Hindsight bias was preserved, reinforcing the results of earlier studies with non-control-group designs. Finally, we discuss the possibility that the hindsight experience (in political judgement and in general) actually consists of three different, partly independent components.     

Hindsight bias in political elections

Two studies on political hindsight bias were conducted on the occasions of the German parliament election in 1998 and the Nordrhein-Westfalen state parliament election in 2000. In both studies, participants predicted the percentage of votes for several political parties and recalled these predictions after the election. The observed hindsight effects were stronger than those found in any prior study on political elections (using percentage of votes as the dependent variable). We argue that the length of the retention interval between original judgement and recollection is mainly responsible for this difference. In our second study, we investigated possible artifacts in political hindsight biases using a control-group design where half of the participants recalled their predictions shortly before or after the election. Hindsight bias was preserved, reinforcing the results of earlier studies with non-control-group designs. Finally, we discuss the possibility that the hindsight experience (in political judgement and in general) actually consists of three different, partly independent components.     

Linking superiority bias in the interpersonal and intergroup domains

The author conducted 2 studies to explore the link between superiority bias in the interpersonal and intergroup domains. Australian university students evaluated the extent to which various personality traits were more or less applicable to themselves than to other Australian university students in general. They then evaluated the extent to which the same traits were more or less applicable to Australians than to people from other countries in general. As expected, the more participants evaluated themselves as superior to other university students, the more they evaluated Australians as a whole as superior to people from other countries. This link between interpersonal and intergroup superiority biases explained 22.1% of variance in Study I and 33.6% of variance in Study 2. The author interprets the results of the 2 studies as support for fundamental principles of social identity theory: (a) that self-concept consists of not only one's personal self but also the social groups to which one belongs and (b) that people are motivated to view both levels of self in a relatively positive fashion.     

Reducing gender identity bias through imagined intergroup contact

Transgender individuals face high levels of stereotyping, prejudice, discrimination, and violence. However, there is a paucity of research (particularly experimental work) investigating the magnitude of gender identity bias (GIB) targeting transgender individuals, as well as interventions designed to ameliorate it. To address this gap, we conducted experimental investigations of reactions to identical, highly qualified men or women job applicants described as either transgender or cisgender (Experiments 1a, 1b), and tested the efficacy of an imagined intergroup contact (IIC) intervention (relative to a control condition) in ameliorating GIB against transgender women (Experiment 2). As expected, all applicants were perceived as equally highly competent, adding to the literature suggesting that clearly demonstrating excellent qualifications can prevent biased judgments of candidate competence. However, revealing GIB, transgender men and women were rated as less likeable and hirable than the identical cisgender applicants, despite the fact that they were viewed as equally competent (Experiments 1a, 1b). Providing additional evidence of GIB, in the absence of IIC, participants rated a transgender female applicant as less likeable and hirable than the identical cisgender applicant, and also reported less self‐other overlap and perspective taking for the transgender applicant (Experiment 2). However, these target gender identity differences were reduced (for likeability) or fully eliminated (for the remaining outcomes) in the IIC condition. Put another way, while reactions to the cisgender applicant were unaffected by intervention condition, IIC elevated perceptions of the transgender applicant, suggesting that it may function as an effective GIB intervention.     

Gender subgroups: intergroup bias within the sexes

We examined intergroup bias (more favourable evaluations of ingroups than outgroups) at the level of gender subgroups. Male and female subjects listed subgroups of men and women (e.g. career woman, mother). For each subgroup mentioned, we asked the same subjects to (a) describe the characteristics of this group in their own words (coded as positive or negative); (b) give an overall evaluative rating of this group; and (c) indicate whether they themselves belonged to this group. There was no indication that subjects' perceptions of subgroups of their own sex were more favourable than of other-sex subgroups. Within subjects' own gender category, on the other hand, subgroups they belonged to were described and rated more favourably than subgroups they did not belong to. These results, which can be explained by social identity motives, illustrate that subgrouping does not resolve the problem of negative outgroup stereotyping, but merely transfers it to the subordinate level. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Intergroup attribution bias in the context of extreme intergroup conflict

Limited research has examined attributional biases in the context of extreme intergroup conflict, and the research that does exist contains methodological shortcomings. To remedy this, 282 Indonesians read a newspaper article describing a violent incident in Ambon. Christians (but not Muslims) used stronger situational attributions for violent ingroup acts than for violent outgroup acts. In contrast, both Muslims and Christians used stronger dispositional attributions for violent outgroup acts than for violent ingroup acts. This latter tendency emerged independently of who was described in the article as the perpetrators of the violence. Implications for our understanding of intergroup conflict are discussed.     

Social identities and intergroup bias in immigrant and nonimmigrant children

Ethnic and American identity, as well as positivity and negativity toward multiple social groups, were assessed in 392 children attending 2nd or 4th grade in various New York City neighborhoods. Children from 5 ethnic groups were recruited, including White and Black Americans, as well as recent immigrants from China, the Dominican Republic, and the former Soviet Union. For ethnic minority children, greater positivity bias (evaluating one's ingroup more positively than outgroups) was predicted by immigrant status and ethnic identity, whereas negativity bias (evaluating outgroups more negatively than one's ingroup) was associated with increased age, immigrant status, and (among 4th graders only) ethnic identity. In addition, a more central American identity was associated with less intergroup bias among ethnic minority children.     

Gender bias in estimating political expertise

The present study reveals that there is a gender bias in estimates of spouses' political expertise. Data were collected from married couples in one city in north-eastern Japan and the results showed that when all respondents were included, the estimation of spouses' political expertise was moderately accurate. However, while husbands' estimates of the political expertise of their wives were lowered and less accurate, wives' estimates of the political expertise of their husbands were more accurate. The implication of these findings for the political equality of males and females is discussed.     

Considering multiple criteria for social categorization can reduce intergroup bias

Two experiments tested the notion that considering multiple criteria for social categorization can reduce intergroup bias. In both experiments, participants were required to consider alternative ways in which people could be classified, other than an initially salient intergroup dichotomy. In Experiment 1, the authors found that generating alternative social classifications that were unrelated to an initial target dichotomy reduced intergroup bias compared to a control condition. In Experiment 2, this effect was replicated and the authors found that unrelated, but not related, categorizations were necessary to reduce bias. This article adds support to the view that increasing categorical complexity is a useful tool in bias reduction. These findings are discussed in the context of a developing model of multiple categorization effects.     

Becoming us and them: Social learning and intergroup bias

In recent years, research has demonstrated that the basic features of prejudice and discrimination emerge early in children's development. These discoveries call into question the role of social learning in intergroup bias. Specifically, through what means do we learn to distinguish “us” from “them?” Here, we explore this question, focusing on three key issues: how children respond to biased information they receive from others, how children selectively seek out certain types of biased information, and how children communicate biased information to others. We close by discussing the implications of this research for interventions to reduce stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination.