Familiarity and categorization in intergroup behavior

Several studies have shown that social categorization into groups, unaffected by other variables such as own interest, interpersonal relations, conflict of interests, previous hostility, etc., was a sufficient condition to induce discrimination against an outgroup. The purpose of the present study was to test the hypothesis that the subjects' uncertainty and insecurity in a novel situation was, at least in part, responsible for this phenomenon. Two groups of subjects were tested: one group was made familiar with the social and physical setting of the experiment in a situation closely resembling the actual experiment, and came back for a second session in which the actual experiment was conducted; the second group came only for the actual experimental session. The results clearly indicate that, contrary to the hypothesis, the “familiar” group engaged in more out-group discrimination than the “unfamiliar” one. The theoretical and methodological implications of this finding 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.     

Social categorization and similarity in intergroup behaviour

The present study is one of a series exploring the role of social categorization in intergroup behaviour. It has been found in our previous studies that in ?minimal' situations, in which the subjects were categorized into groups on the basis of visual judgments they had made or of their esthetic preferences, they clearly discriminated against members of an outgroup although this gave them no personal advantage. However, in these previous studies division into groups was still made on the basis of certain criteria of ?real' similarity between subjects who were assigned to the same category. Therefore, the present study established social categories on an explicitly random basis without any reference to any such real similarity. It was found that, as soon as the notion of ?group' was introduced into the situation, the subjects still discriminated against those assigned to another random category. This discrimination was considerably more marked than the one based on a division of subjects in terms of interindividual similarities in which the notion of ?group' was never explicitly introduced. In addition, it was found that fairness was also a determinant of the subjects' decisions. The results are discussed from the point of view of their relevance to a social-cognitive theory of intergroup behaviour.     

Crossed categorization versus simple categorization and intergroup evaluations: a meta‐analysis

Crossed categorization typically refers to the crossing of two dichotomous social dimensions, resulting in four groups (double‐ingroup, two mixed groups, and double‐outgroup). This paper reports the results of a meta‐analysis comparing the effects of crossed categorization on intergroup evaluations with the effects of simple categorization on intergroup evaluations. The crossed categorization paradigm is shown to increase or decrease ingroup bias, depending on how ingroup bias is defined in the crossed categorization paradigm. Moreover, just as in simple categorization, ingroup bias in crossed categorization is shown to be greater when the proportionate size of the ingroup is smaller. However, contrary to the patterns established in simple categorization, the reality of the group categorizations does not increase ingroup bias in crossed categorization. We discuss the implications of these results for future research on intergroup evaluations. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Micro-ecological behavior and intergroup contact

Research evaluating intergroup contact has tended to rely on self-report measures. Drawing on recent micro-ecological research, the two studies reported here used a multi-method approach to examine contact in a more holistic fashion. This involved the measurement of observable behavior at the micro-level, intergroup attitudes via infrahumanization and focus groups. Participants were taking part in a community intervention program in Northern Ireland. We conclude that micro-ecological behavior is not necessarily indicative of outgroup attitudes. Although behavior and attitudes changed in line with one another in Study 1 (less aggregation and significantly less infrahumanization), there were no infrahumanization differences between those who sat beside an outgroup member and those who did not. Importantly, the work presented here illustrates a unique method that allows micro-ecological behavioral observations to be made for the first time in non-racial settings.     

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.     

On the immediate consequences of intergroup categorization: activation of approach and avoidance motor behavior toward ingroup and outgroup members

The present research argues that intergroup categorization has immediate behavioral consequences. Specifically, intergroup categorization is hypothesized to prepare the organism to respond differently to ingroup and outgroup members so that approach-like motor movements should be faster toward ingroup- versus outgroup-related stimuli. In contrast, avoidance-like behavior should be facilitated when reacting to outgroup versus ingroup members. Studies 1 and 2 test the basic hypothesis in relation to ethnic, national, age, and political categorization. Study 3 uses a minimal group paradigm to test the hypothesis in relation to newly formed groups. Across these experiments, participants were generally faster in performing approach-like motor movements toward ingroup members or avoidance behaviors toward outgroup members. The evolutionary function and the cognitive underpinnings of this state of "physical readiness" to approach ingroup and avoid outgroup members are discussed.     

Social categorization and group‐motivated interindividual–intergroup discontinuity

Research on the interindividual–intergroup discontinuity effect has demonstrated that intergroup relations are often less cooperative than interindividual relations. The aim of the present paper is to test whether mere social categorization suffices to create a group‐motivated discontinuity effect. In two experiments, we manipulated actors' personal versus social identity salience, whereas controlling for actors' outcome independence (1 : 1) versus interdependence (3 : 3). Making actors' social identity salient using a minimal group treatment was sufficient to increase defection in a Prisoner's Dilemma Game, irrespective of whether this was in an interindividual or intergroup interaction (Experiment 1). Using a Mutual Fate Control matrix in Experiment 2, results indicate that this effect can be attributed to actors' increased motivation to maximize relative differences to outgroup opponents under social identity salience. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Perceived consensus influences intergroup behavior and stereotype accessibility

Past research has demonstrated the powerful influence other people have on the thoughts and behaviors of individuals. However, the study of intergroup attitudes has focused primarily on the influence of direct exposure to out-group members as determinants of stereotypes and prejudice. Two experiments tested the hypothesis that learning that others share one's intergroup beliefs influences intergroup attitudes and behavior as well as stereotype representation. Experiment 1 demonstrated that learning that one's beliefs are shared or not shared with others influences attitudes, behavior, and the strength of the attitude-behavior relationship. Experiment 2 demonstrated a potential mechanism for such effects by showing that learning about whether others share one's stereotypes influences the accessibility of those stereotypes and related stereotypes.     

Negational racial identity and presidential voting preferences

Previous research suggests that narrow identification with one’s own racial group impedes coalition building among minorities. Consistent with this research, the 2008 Democratic primary was marked by racial differences in voting preferences: Black voters overwhelmingly preferred Barack Obama, a Black candidate, and Latinos and Asians largely favored Hillary Clinton, a White candidate. We investigated one approach to overcoming this divide: highlighting one’s negational identity. In two experiments simulating primary polling procedures, Asians and Latinos randomly assigned to think of and categorize themselves in negational terms (i.e., being non-White) were more likely to vote for Obama than participants focused on their affirmational identity (i.e, being Asian or Latino), who showed the typical preference for Clinton. This shift in voting preference was partially mediated by warmer attitudes towards other minority groups. These results suggest that negational identity is a meaningful source of social identity and demonstrate that whether one thinks about “who one is” versus “who one is not” has far-reaching impact for real-world decisions.     

Gender roles and the categorization of gender-relevant behavior

Biological sex has been assumed to be a basic category that importantly influences perceptions people have of others. However, it has recently been proposed that there are individual differences in this presumed generic propensity to use sex in person perception — that some people have schemas with regard to sex and gender, whereas others do not. Prior attempts to demonstrate these differences have frequently operationalized their variables in such a way that activation of hypothesized elaborate and dense gender schemas (schemas relating to psychological masculinity and femininity) could not be disentangled from activation of very shallow schemas related simply to biological sex or sex stereotypes. This study provides initial support for the conceptual distinction between cognitive processing based on biological sex vs. psychological gender. Independent manipulation of both sex-stereotyped information and less salient, nonstereotyped gender-relevant behavioral cues demonstrated that two levels of cognitive operation seem to be used. All subjects, regardless of gender role, used surface information regarding biological sex to make inferences regarding targets' masculinity and femininity. However, only some subjects made use of gender-related behavioral cues when assessing masculinity and femininity on indirect measures. Masculine males demonstrated their expertise in sex appropriateness in judging a male target who behaved sex appropriately, whereas cross-sex-typed subjects demonstrated expertise in sex inappropriateness in judgments of a male target who behaved sex inappropriately. The results are consistent with self-schema theory predictions regarding individual differences in schematic processing.An earlier report of this research was presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, New York, 1987, and additionally received Honorable Mention in the 1986 Association of Women in Psychology/APA Division 35 Student Research Competition. This research was supported by university funds to the second author, and was completed while the first author was at the University of California, Berkeley. The authors would like to thank Lauren Heim, Brad Elman, and Rosa Shen for their assistance with data collection and coding, and Sheri Matteo and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper.     

Reaction in action: intergroup contrast in automatic behavior

Whereas previous research has shown automatic behavior conforming to outgroup stereotypes, the authors demonstrate automatic behavioral contrast away from a stereotype/trait associated with an outgroup (Study 1 and 2) and point to the importance of an "us-them" intergroup comparison in this process. In Study 1, participants colored pictures more messily when neatness was associated with an outgroup rather than the ingroup. In Study 2, using a different behavior, participants primed with busy business people reacted faster than controls (assimilation) but became slower when their student ingroup identity was activated (contrast). Subliminally priming an "us-them" intergroup comparison set undermined the accessibility of outgroup stereotypic words (Study 3), especially for those higher in prejudice (Study 4). This suggests that people automatically distance themselves from outgroup attributes when intergroup antagonism is cued or chronic. Implications for the role of self and comparison processes in automatic behavior are discussed.     

The crossed-categorization hypothesis: Evidence of reductions in the strength of categorization, but not intergroup bias

Deschamps and Doise’s (1978) classic crossed categorization hypothesis states that both category differentiation and intergroup bias should be reduced in crossed conditions (e.g., race × gender groups comprised of Asian females, Asian males, White females, and White males) compared to simple conditions, where people vary on just one social category. Although there has been extensive work testing this hypothesis, we suggest that conclusions from this work are limited because (1) almost none of it has examined category differentiation outcomes, (2) several studies that have examined intergroup bias effects have not directly tested the classic hypothesis, and (3) no studies have examined both categorization and bias outcomes simultaneously. We conducted two experiments to overcome these limitations. In Experiment 1, target race (Asian or White) and gender were manipulated. In Experiment 2, target relationship status (single or significant other) and hometown size (big town or little town) were manipulated. In both experiments, categorization was weaker in crossed than simple conditions, but there was no evidence of reduced intergroup bias in crossed contexts.     

Perceiving expatriate coworkers as foreigners encourages aid: social categorization and procedural justice together improve intergroup cooperation and dual identity

We propose that social categorization can encourage particular forms of intergroup cooperation because it differentiates a group in need from a group that can give aid. Moreover, social categorization is most likely to occur when individuals perceive procedural justice (i.e., fair treatment) from authorities in a superordinate group that includes the individuals' subgroup. Two field studies investigating relations between local and foreign coworkers tested not only this prediction, but also whether high social categorization and procedural justice would yield a dual identity, in which group members identify simultaneously with their social category and the superordinate group. Both studies supported our predictions: Local employees engaged a dual identity and offered knowledge to aid a foreign coworker's adjustment more often when local-foreign categorization and procedural justice from organizational authorities were high than when these variables were low. These discoveries point to controllable mechanisms that enable intergroup cooperation, and our findings have important implications for intergroup aid, expatriate adjustment, immigration, and multiculturalism.     

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.     

Emotional responses to intergroup apology mediate intergroup forgiveness and retribution

According to intergroup emotion theory, the impact of many intergroup events on intergroup outcomes is mediated by group-directed emotions. We demonstrate that the ability of apology to reduce retribution against and increase forgiveness of a transgressing outgroup is contributed to by discrete intergroup emotions. We examined both negative (anger and fear) and positive (respect and satisfaction) emotions directed toward the transgressing outgroup. Apology reduced the desire for retribution whereas lack of apology increased it, and outgroup-directed anger uniquely mediated this effect. In contrast, apology increased and lack of apology decreased forgiveness, particularly when the ingroup responded to the transgression, and only outgroup-directed respect mediated this effect. These results provide the first evidence that intergroup emotions can mediate the impact of apology on intergroup relations outcomes.     

The distinct roles of subordinate and superordinate group power, conflict, and categorization on intergroup prejudice in a multiethnic Italian territory

A German-speaking population majority and an Italian-speaking minority have lived in Italian Tyrol, also called "South Tyrol," an area of northern Italy, for 85 years. In contrast, Trentino, which is adjacent to South Tyrol, has always been an Italian-speaking region. For this latter population, thus, intergroup contact with the population of South Tyrol has been minimal for 85 years. Researchers have shown that intergroup contact forms a condition that can affect levels of intergroup prejudice (S. L. Gaertner et al., 2000). Accordingly, the present author predicted and found differences in prejudice between Trentini participants on the one hand and South Tyrolean participants on the other hand as an effect of the differential level of intergroup contact that these 2 populations experienced. The author also found evidence for his prediction that this effect is mediated by the differential perceptions held by these 2 populations of culturally based intergroup conflict. Further, as hypothesized, because of this latter perception, members of the Italian minority in South Tyrol also perceived the political power of the Trentino-South Tyrol higher order administrative "Region" to be stronger than did members of both the Austrian South Tyrolean and the Trentini majorities. The author discussed implications at the societal level with respect to the role of perceived intergroup conflict for improving intergroup relations.