The ingroup as pars pro toto: projection from the ingroup onto the inclusive category as a precursor to social discrimination

In an approach to intergroup discrimination and tolerance, it is assumed that the outgroup's difference from the ingroup is evaluated with reference to the prototype of the higher-order category that includes both groups. Two correlational studies yielded evidence that (a) group members tend to perceive their ingroup as relatively prototypical for the inclusive category (projection), (b) members highly identified with both ingroup and inclusive category (dual identity) tend to project most, and (c) relative prototypicality is related to negative attitudes toward the outgroup. The latter relation was further specified in Study 3, manipulating the valence of the inclusive category. Projection was related to more negative attitudes toward the outgroup when the inclusive category was primed positively but to more positive attitudes when it was primed negatively. The meaning of dual identities for intergroup relations is discussed.     

Group status is related to group prototypicality in the absence of social identity concerns

Based on self-categorization theory, group status should be positively related to group prototypicality when the relevant superordinate category is positively valued. In this case, high-status groups should be perceived to be more prototypical than low-status groups even in the absence of concerns about maintaining a positive social identity. To test this hypothesis, a minimal group study was conducted in which participants (N = 139) did not belong to any of the groups involved. Consistent with predictions, participants perceived high-status groups to be significantly more prototypical than low-status groups. Consistent with self-categorization theory's cognitive analysis, these results demonstrate that the relation between group status and group prototypicality is a relatively basic and pervasive effect that does not depend on social identity motives.     

Urban district identity as a common ingroup identity: The different role of ingroup prototypicality for minority and majority groups

In this paper, we examined how identification with urban districts as a common ingroup identity and perceived ingroup prototypicality influence the attitudes of residents toward other ethnic groups in their neighborhood. The overall conclusion of two field studies (N = 214 and N = 98) is that for majority‐group members, there may be a positive relation between identification with an overarching identity and outgroup attitudes but only when they perceive their ingroup as low in prototypicality for the overarching group (Study 1 and 2). Conversely, for minority‐group members, there may be a positive relation between identification and outgroup attitudes but only when they perceive their ingroup as high in prototypicality for the overarching group (Study 2). Outgroup prototypicality did not moderate the relation between identification and outgroup attitudes. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

We all live in Germany but … Ingroup projection,group‐based emotions and prejudice against immigrants

Immigration, cultural diversity and integration are among the most central challenges for modern societies. Integration is often impeded by negative emotions and prejudices held by the majority members towards immigrants in a common society. Based on the ingroup projection model (Mummendey & Wenzel, 1999), we examined the impact of perceived relative ingroup prototypicality on intergroup emotions and prejudice. Additionally, we examined whether this impact is causal and explored the issue of causality in more detail contrasting a linear causal model with bi‐directional or reciprocal causality. Hypotheses were tested in a study with a two‐wave panel of majority members (N=1085) in Germany. We examined the proposed relations between relative ingroup prototypicality, intergroup emotions and prejudice and determined the causal direction of these relationships. Results support the predictive power of relative ingroup prototypicality on intergroup emotions and prejudice. Moreover, most causal relations between our measures are reciprocally causal. We discuss the implications of these findings for the general conception of prejudice and intergroup emotions. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Boundaries of American Identity: Relations Between Ethnic Group Prototypicality and Policy Attitudes

We sought to document that the extent to which different ethnic groups are perceived as embodying the American identity is more strongly linked to antiminority policy attitudes and acculturation ideologies among majority‐group members (European Americans) than among minority‐group members (Asian Americans or Latino/as). Participants rated 13 attributes of the American identity as they pertain to different ethnic groups and reported their endorsement of policy attitudes and acculturation ideologies. We found a relative consensus across ethnic groups regarding defining components of the American identity. However, European Americans were perceived as more prototypical of this American identity than ethnic minorities, especially by European American raters. Moreover, for European Americans but not for ethnic minorities, relative ingroup prototypicality was related to antiminority policy attitudes and acculturation ideologies. These findings suggest that for European Americans, perceptions of ethnic group prototypicality fulfill an instrumental function linked to preserving their group interests and limiting the rights afforded to ethnic minorities.     

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.     

Towards tolerance: Representations of superordinate categories and perceived ingroup prototypicality

According to Mummendey and Wenzel (1999), group members tend to perceive their ingroup, relative to an outgroup, as more prototypical of the superordinate category encompassing both groups. Hence, they tend to regard the outgroup as deviating from the norms of the superordinate category. Factors that inhibit perception of relative ingroup prototypicality should thus promote intergroup tolerance. In two experiments, the representation of the superordinate category was manipulated. Both an undefinable prototype (Experiment 1; N=63) and a complex representation (Experiment 2; N=88) led to a decrease in relative ingroup prototypicality. Dual identification with the ingroup and the superordinate category increased relative ingroup prototypicality, which was negatively correlated with positive attitudes towards the outgroup. The findings supported Mummendey and Wenzel’s assumptions about the conditions that lead to intergroup tolerance.     

Choosing between conciliatory and oppositional leaders: The role of out‐group signals and in‐group leader candidates' collective action tactics

In this paper, we examine the role of out‐group signals and in‐group leader tactics in the choice and evaluation of rival in‐group leader candidates. Study 1 found preference for a negotiating in‐group leader over an oppositional leader, mediated by perceived leader effectiveness and prototypicality. In Study 2, participants chose a leader who had received out‐group endorsement, and in Studies 3 and 4, participants chose a negotiating in‐group leader where the out‐group was prepared to negotiate and an oppositional leader where the out‐group was not prepared to negotiate. In the latter three studies, there was evidence for participants being strategic in their choices: effects were mediated by effectiveness but not prototypicality. These findings suggest our understanding of collective action will be enriched through attention to the situational cues provided by out‐groups, and to the context of competing voices of collective action leadership.     

The role of dual categorization and relative ingroup prototypicality in reparations to a minority group: An examination of empathy and collective guilt as mediators

In the current study, we investigate factors that facilitate or otherwise obstruct reparations of a perpetrating group (i.e. Muslims) to a victim group (i.e. Christians). The study (N = 200) reveals that among Muslim participants, the role of dual Abrahamic categorization in positively predicting reparation attitude towards Christians was mediated by the first group's prosocial emotions of empathy and collective guilt towards the latter group. In addition, relative Muslim prototypicality negatively predicted dual Abrahamic categorization and each of the two prosocial emotions. Empathy and collective guilt in turn mediated the role of relative ingroup prototypicality in negatively predicting reparation attitude. Moreover, as hypothesized, we found that the roles of empathy and collective guilt in predicting reparation intention, as manifested in participants' willingness to engage in collective action on behalf of the victim group, were not significant on their own, but were mediated by reparation attitude. These findings shed light on the importance of the relationship between the perpetrating group's shared identity with the victim group, reduced ingroup focus and its support for making reparations to the victim group. Theoretical implications, study limitations and practical strategies highlighting how to decrease relative Muslim prototypicality are discussed.     

Inclusion in a superordinate category, in-group prototypicality, and attitudes towards out-groups

We hypothesized that group members’ attitudes towards an out-group are negatively related to the in-group’s perceived relative prototypicality for a superordinate category, but only if both the in-group and out-group are included in this superordinate category. In Experiment 1 (N=40), Germans’ attitudes towards Poles were negatively correlated with the relative prototypicality of Germans when “Europe” (including Poles), but not when “West-Europe” (excluding Poles), was the superordinate category. In Experiment 2 (N=63), female single parents’ attitudes about the competence of single parents to raise children depended on the in-group’s relative prototypicality for “single parents” (including fathers), but not on their relative similarity to “mothers” (excluding fathers). Both experiments showed that inclusion in a superordinate category had a more negative influence on attitudes towards the out-group when relative in-group prototypicality is high rather than low.     

Seeing the world with the eyes of the outgroup — The impact of perspective taking on the prototypicality of the ingroup relative to the outgroup

The positive effect of perspective taking on favorable attitudes towards stigmatized individuals and outgroups is well established (Batson et al., 1997). We draw on the ingroup projection model (Mummendey & Wenzel, 1999) to better understand the processes underlying this effect. Based on their egocentric perspective, ingroup and outgroup members have different representations of the superordinate group (perspective divergence) so that the ingroup is perceived as more relatively prototypical of the superordinate group, leading to negative outgroup evaluation. We hypothesize that the positive effect of perspective taking on outgroup attitudes is due to a reduction of relative ingroup prototypicality. Across three studies with different manipulations of perspective taking, we found that participants who were taking the perspective of an outgroup member evaluated the outgroup more positively and were less inclined to perceive their ingroup as more relatively prototypical. The effect of perspective taking on outgroup attitudes was mediated by relative ingroup prototypicality.     

Effects of information about group members on young children's attitudes towards the in‐group and out‐group

Research shows that being a member of a group is sufficient to instigate more positive attitudes towards the in‐group than an out‐group in young children. The present study assessed whether children's intergroup attitudes during the middle childhood years are moderated by additional information about in‐group and out‐group members, as proposed by Aboud's (1988) socio‐cognitive theory (ST). To a minimal group 6‐, 8‐, and 10‐year‐old children (N=159) were assigned, and received information, or no information, about the interests and activities of the in‐group and out‐group members. Results indicated that the in‐group was always rated more positively than the out‐group, and that the in‐group's ratings were unaffected by either the in‐group or out‐group information. In contrast, out‐group ratings were affected by out‐group information, but only when there was no information available about the in‐group. The implications of the findings for ST, and for social identity development theory, are discussed.     

Religious and national group identification in adolescence: A study among three religious groups in Mauritius

Religious group identification is an important but understudied social identity. The present study investigates religious group identification among adolescents of different faiths (Hindu, Muslim, Christian) living in multicultural Mauritius. It further explores how religious and national group identities come together among religious majority and minority adolescents. For three age groups (11 to 19 years, N = 2152) we examined the strength of adolescents’ religious and national group identification, the associations between these two identities, and the relationships to global self‐esteem. Across age and religious group, participants reported stronger identification with their religious group than with the nation. Identification with both categories declined with age, with the exception of Muslims, whose strong religious identification was found across adolescence. The association between religious and national identification was positive, albeit stronger for the majority group of Hindus and for early adolescents. We examined the manner in which religious and national identities come together using a direct self‐identification measure and by combining the separate continuous measures of identification. Four distinct clusters of identification (predominant religious identifiers, dual identifiers, neutrals, and separate individuals) that were differently associated with global self‐esteem were found. Dual identifiers reported the highest level of global self‐esteem. The clusters of identification did not fully correspond to the findings for the direct self‐identification measure. The results are discussed in terms of the meaning of dual identity and the positive manner in which adolescents can manage their multiple identities while taking into account the ideological framework in which those identities are played out.     

The good,the bad and the central of group identification: Evidence of a U‐shaped quadratic relation between in‐group affect and identity centrality

The present research investigates the interrelation between two widely studied dimensions of social group identity—in‐group affect and centrality. Specifically, we test the validity of a quadratic curvilinear relation between in‐group affect and identity centrality. We propose that group members who feel either decidedly positive affect or decidedly negative affect towards their group are more likely to feel that their identity is a central component of their self‐concept relative to group members with neutral affect. We find evidence for a quadratic relation between in‐group affect and identity centrality with respect to people's cultural identity (N = 512), ethnic identity (N = 462), religious identity (N = 61, N = 384) and racial identity (N = 3600, N = 2400). Theoretical and practical implications for the measurement and conceptualization of group identification are discussed. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Feelings toward refugees and non‐Muslims in Turkey: The roles of national and religious identifications,and multiculturalism

The current study, conducted in Turkey, examined feelings toward Muslim refugees among Turkish participants (n = 605) in comparison to feelings toward established non‐Muslim national minority groups. Using the social identity perspective, these feelings were examined in relation to national and religious group identifications, and the endorsement of multicultural beliefs. The feelings toward both refugees and minority communities were similarly negative, yet the processes behind these feelings were somewhat different. While stronger national identification was associated with more negative feelings toward Muslim refugees, stronger religious group identification was associated with more negative feelings toward non‐Muslim minority communities. Further, higher endorsement of multiculturalism was associated with less negative feelings toward both refugees and minority communities, but only for relatively low national identifiers.     

Improving academic attitudes among ethnic minority youth at risk for early school leaving: the interactive effects of cross‐group friendships and ethnic identity

A growing body of research suggests that positive interethnic experiences enhance academic attitudes among ethnic minority youth. A number of studies also show that minority youth with an achieved ethnic identity have better academic attitudes and performance. Integrating these literatures, we aim to verify the combined effects of cross‐group friendships and ethnic identity on academic attitudes among a sample of youth at risk for early school leaving. The results showed that cross‐group friendships had a positive impact on academic attitudes for minority youth, but not for majority youth. However, individual levels of ethnic identity moderated these effects, which held true for minority youth with higher levels of ethnic identity. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.     

The development of national in‐group bias: English children's attributions of characteristics to English,American and German people

This study investigated the development of national in‐group bias in 5–11‐year‐old children. Three hundred and seven English children were asked to attribute characteristics to their own national group either on its own or in conjunction with attributing characteristics to one of two national out‐groups, either Americans or Germans. The importance which the children ascribed to their own national identity in relationship to their other social identities was also assessed. It was found that, with increasing age, there was an increase in the number of negative characteristics attributed to the national in‐group, and an increase in the number of positive characteristics attributed to the two out‐groups, the net result being an overall reduction in in‐group bias across this age range. However, in‐group favouritism was still exhibited at all ages. Greater importance was attributed to national identity with increasing age. However, the characteristics attributed to the English in‐group did not vary as a function of the comparative out‐group which was present while the attributions were being made. The presence of a comparative out‐group also did not affect the importance that was ascribed to the national identity. These findings suggest that children are relatively insensitive to the prevailing comparative context when making judgments about national groups.     

Ubiquity of Whiteness in majority group national imagination: Australian = White,but New Zealander does not

This research examined cross‐national differences in the extent to which majority ethnic group members (White Europeans) in Australia and New Zealand automatically privileged members of their ingroup, relative to Indigenous targets, in cognitive representations of nationhood. As predicted, European Australian undergraduates implicitly associated their own ethnic group with the concept of “Australian”, relative to Aboriginal Australian targets (N = 50), but the implicit preferencing of Whiteness in representations of nationhood (relative to Maori targets) was absent in a comparable sample of New Zealand European undergraduates (N = 50). These results indicate that the extent to which representations of minority groups are interwoven with non‐conscious cognitive representations of nationhood and national identity are not immutably fixed. Instead, it is argued that this cross‐national difference is due to underlying systemic differences in the extent to which symbolic markers of Indigenous culture, identity, and values are consensually represented in majority group (White) national culture.     

When different means bad or merely worse. How minimal and maximal goals affect ingroup projection and outgroup attitudes

Group members tend to perceive their ingroup relative to an outgroup as more prototypical for a common superordinate group because they project features of their ingroup onto the superordinate group. As a consequence, the ingroup is perceived as more positive than the outgroup (Mummendey & Wenzel, 1999). We extend the ingroup projection model by examining different types of ingroup goals: minimal and maximal goals as well as actual and ideal goals. Minimal goals should engender either‐or thinking and lead to more ingroup projection compared with maximal goals that should involve more nuanced thinking. Ingroup prototypicality in terms of ideal goals (e.g., what we ideally should strive for) was expected to show a stronger relation to outgroup attitudes than ingroup prototypicality in terms of actual goals (e.g., what we are actually striving for). We manipulated minimal and maximal goal orientation and assessed actual and ideal goals. Across two studies, relative ingroup prototypicality was higher in the minimal compared with the maximal goal condition. Moreover, ingroup prototypicality referring to ideal goals showed a stronger relation to outgroup evaluation than ingroup prototypicality referring to actual goals. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Effects of group membership,intergroup competition and out‐group ethnicity on children's ratings of in‐group and out‐group similarity and positivity

Based on self‐categorization theory (SCT; Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987 ), this study examined the extent to which 7‐ and 10‐year‐old children's perceptions of similarity to, and positivity towards, their in‐group would be increased by factors predicted to enhance the salience of in‐group–out‐group categorizations. In a minimal group study, participants met the in‐group before or after the out‐group (group timing), the out‐group had the same or different ethnicity as the in‐group (out‐group ethnicity), and there was or was not to be a competition between the in‐group and the out‐group (intergroup competition). Ratings of the in‐group similarity were influenced by the out‐group ethnicity, but not by group timing or intergroup competition. Consistent with SCT, participants rated themselves as more similar to the in‐group when the out‐group had different vs. the same ethnicity. SCT's predictions concerning in‐group positivity were not confirmed. Instead, participants rated the in‐group more positively than the out‐group and the in‐group was rated more positively, when participants met the in‐group before rather than after the out‐group. Older compared with younger participants were also more prepared to change groups when the out‐group had different ethnicity. The implications for SCT are discussed.