Actor or victim of aggression: Divergent perspectives—divergent evaluations

The present study investigated the general assumption of perspective-specific dissent between actor and victim in evaluating aggressive interactions. Four experimental designs were established to test the relation of evaluations between (a) actor versus victim when judging a single act, (b) initiator versus reactor when judging action and reaction, and (c) actor as well as recipient when judging own versus other's behaviour. Results of 2 × 2 ANOVAs supported the hypotheses showing a consistently more favourable evaluation of identical actions by actors versus recipients with respect to the dependent variable ‘appropriateness’. For the second dependent variable ‘aggressiveness’ differences were not significant.     

The personal-group discrepancy: Is there a common information basis for personal and group judgment?

In contrast to motivational accounts of the personal-group discrepancy, results from this article suggest that the discrepancy is explained by aggregating different sets of comparison outcomes for either personal or group ratings. Results from a longitudinal study with East German (the minority group) and West German (the majority group) samples confirm the personal-group discrepancy and support our approach. First, social comparisons influenced evaluations of economic situation at both group and personal levels. Second, ratings of group versus personal economic situation were based on different sets of comparisons. Third, the mean structure of both sets of comparison outcomes mirrored the personal-group discrepancy. Fourth, an interaction between personal-group discrepancy and group status supported the authors' suggestions-concerning the direction of the discrepancy.     

Minimal and maximal goal orientation and reactions to norm violations

Violations of social norms can either be evaluated in an absolute or in a gradual fashion depending on whether group goals are represented as minimal or maximal goals. Recent research has shown that absolute versus gradual deviations lead to increased levels of demanded punishment and inclination to exclude the deviant from the respective moral community. In this article, we investigate whether individual differences in orientation towards setting goals in either minimal or maximal terms predict reactions to norm violation. In three studies we found that a dominant minimal goal orientation (MIN) relative to maximal goal orientation (MAX) increased punishment inclinations and social exclusion tendencies towards norm violators. These effects were mediated by affective reaction and proved to be unique goal orientation effects when possible effects of need for closure, intolerance of ambiguity and regulatory focus were controlled for. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Strategies to cope with negative social identity: predictions by social identity theory and relative deprivation theory

Predictions by social identity theory (SIT) and relative deprivation theory (RDT) concerning preferences for strategies to cope with a negative in-group status position were tested. The focus of the present research was a comparison of the theories regarding their differential patterns of prediction. For this purpose, a natural sample within a specific historical situation was investigated: East Germans after the German unification. First, the predictive power of SIT and RDT variables was tested separately. In a second step, a possible integration of the theories was addressed. Combining the SIT variables and RDT variables led to an integrated model indicating a differential pattern of prediction for intergroup strategies. The RDT components explained the collective responses, whereas SIT constructs were related to individual strategies.     

Responding to negative social identity: a taxonomy of identity management strategies

Taken from literature on social identity theory and social comparison theory, 12 strategies of identity management were identified as possible responses to negative social identity. A taxonomy with two orthogonal axes is proposed as theoretical organization of these diverse strategies. While the first axis considers responses as being either individual or collective, the second axis refers to the distinction between behaviours and cognitions. It is assumed that the German unification process implied a lower status position of East Germans relative to West Germans on relevant comparison dimensions, and that East Germans have to deal with this threat to their identity. Hence, data of an East German sample are used to empirically systematize identity management strategies, and, thus, to test the proposed taxonomy. Results support the expected four-factor solution only for those strategies taken from social identity theory, while the responses derived from social comparison research build a fifth factor. In addition, the empirical assignments of strategies to cells of the taxonomy are only partly in line with the expected pattern. The empirical findings suggest some clarification and modifications of the proposed response taxonomy. The most important refers to a re-interpretation of the taxonomy's first axis, which now differentiates between responses according to the specific changes of the comparison parameters they imply. © 1998 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.     

Less negative=more positive? Social discrimination as avoidance or approach

A motivational approach to ingroup favoritism based on regulatory focus theory (RFT; Higgins, 1997) is introduced. RFT suggests that individual self-regulation is either more concerned with approaching positive events (promotion focus) or with avoiding negative events (prevention focus). It is suggested that if an individual self-categorizes as a group member, resource allocations to one’s group will be based on these mechanisms of self-regulation. Thus, a promotion focus should engender ingroup favoritism during the distribution of positive resources but not during the distribution of negative resources, whereas a prevention focus should engender ingroup favoritism for negative but not for positive resources. The results of two studies support this prediction based on momentary and chronic regulatory focus. The self-regulation approach to ingroup favoritism provides an explanation for social discrimination in the distribution of positive and negative resources.     

The judgement of behaviour as aggressive and sanctionable

The influence of the factors norm deviation, intent, and injury, on the judgement of a critical act as aggressive and sanctionable was tested using a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial design. Scenarios depicting aggressive interactions represented the experimental conditions. 859 school children rated these scenarios on bipolar rating scales. The results show that norm deviation, intent, and injury, are important criteria for the interpretation of aggressive behaviour. Judging an action as sanctionable proved to be more sensitive for the variation of factors than the interpretation of behaviour as aggressive. In addition, an analysis of how the scenarios representing the experimental conditions were subjectively interpreted by the subjects was carried out. This showed that all combinations of the three definition criteria are psychologically meaningful. However, preferences were observed for specific interpretation patterns.