Showing papers on "Ingroups and outgroups published in 1999"
TL;DR: A review of research and theory on the motivations for maintaining ingroup boundaries and the implications of ingroup boundary protection for intergroup relations, conflict, and conflict prevention can be found in this paper.
Abstract: Allport (1954) recognized that attachment to one's ingroups does not necessarily require hostility toward outgroups. Yet the prevailing approach to the study of ethnocentrism, ingroup bias, and prejudice presumes that ingroup love and outgroup hate are reciprocally related. Findings from both cross-cultural research and laboratory experiments support the alternative view that ingroup identification is independent of negative attitudes toward outgroups and that much ingroup bias and intergroup discrimination is motivated by preferential treatment of ingroup members rather than direct hostility toward outgroup members. Thus to understand the roots of prejudice and discrimination requires first of all a better understanding of the functions that ingroup formation and identification serve for human beings. This article reviews research and theory on the motivations for maintenance of ingroup boundaries and the implications of ingroup boundary protection for intergroup relations, conflict, and conflict prevention.
2,768 citations
TL;DR: The authors showed that self-categorization, commitment to the group, and group self-esteem are related but separate aspects of group members' social identity, and that these three aspects are differentially related to manipulated group features, as well as displays of ingroup favouritism.
Abstract: The aim of this study is to show that, when examining social identification, it is both possible and important to distinguish between self-categorisation, commitment to the group, and group self-esteem, as related but separate aspects of group members' social identity. This was demonstrated in an experiment (N=119), in which Ingroup Status (high/low), Ingroup Size (majority/minority), and Group Formation (self-selected/assigned group membership) were manipulated orthogonally. The results of this study confirm that these three aspects of social identity can be distinguished as separate factors in a principal components analysis. Furthermore, as predicted, the three aspects are differentially related to manipulated group features, as well as displays of ingroup favouritism. Group members' self-categorisations were only affected by the relative size of the group, while group self-esteem was only influenced by group status. Affective commitment to the group depended both on group status and on the group assignment criterion. Importantly, only the group commitment aspect of social identity mediated displays of ingroup favouritism. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
1,355 citations
TL;DR: The authors hypothesize two clusters of outgroups, one perceived as competent but warm (resulting in paternalistic prejudice) and another perceived as not competent but not warm, resulting in envious prejudice.
Abstract: As Allport (1954) implied, the content of stereotypes may be systematic, and specifically, ambivalent. We hypothesize two clusters of outgroups, one perceived as incompetent but warm (resulting in paternalistic prejudice) and one perceived as competent but not warm (resulting in envious prejudice). Perceived group status predicts perceived competence, and perceived competition predicts perceived (lack of) warmth. Two preliminary surveys support these hypotheses for 17 outgroups. In-depth analyses of prejudice toward particular outgroups support ambivalent prejudice: Paternalistic prejudice toward traditional women, as well as envious prejudice toward career women, results in ambivalent sexism (Glick & Fiske, 1996). Envious prejudice toward Asians results in perceived competence but perceived lack of social skills. Ambivalent content reflects systematic principles.
751 citations
TL;DR: A theoretical approach to social discrimination and intergroup relations characterized by tolerance and plurality is presented and central to the analysis is the question of how members deal with intergroup difference.
Abstract: In this article, we present a theoretical approach to social discrimination on the one hand and intergroup relations characterized by tolerance and plurality on the other hand. Central to the analysis is the question of how members deal with intergroup difference. If the outgroup's difference is judged to be nonnormative and inferior, devaluation, discrimination, and hostility are likely responses toward the outgroup. Judging the outgroup's difference to be normative or positive leads to acceptance and appreciation of this group. Following self-categorization theory, the criteria—being norms and values for judging intergroup differences—are derived from the superordinate category that is perceived to include both groups. More specifically, they are derived from the prototype, or representation, of this inclusive category. Social discrimination results from the generalization of ingroup attributes to the inclusive category, which then become criteria for judging the outgroup. Tolerance, on the other hand, ...
583 citations
TL;DR: To understand why e-mail negotiations break down, two distinct elements of negotiators' relationships with each other are investigated: shared membership in a social group and mutual self-disclosure.
322 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined whether novel, minimal ingroups are automatically associated with positive affect while outgroups do not elicit such positive evaluative default, and found significant affective congruency effects emerged similarly for standard primes and category labels, indicating ingroup bias on an implicit level.
Abstract: Two experiments examined whether novel, minimal ingroups are automatically associated with positive affect while outgroups do not elicit such positive evaluative default. Participants were assigned to social categories in a typical minimal group setting and subsequently administered a masked priming task, i.e. prime words were not consciously recognized. Following either the presentation of a priori positive or negative words or the presentation of the group labels, participants classified adjectives with regard to their valence (positive/negative). In Experiment 1, a standard affective priming paradigm was realized with response latencies as dependent measures; in Experiment 2, a response window technique was used, with errors as crucial measure. In both studies, significant affective congruency effects emerged similarly for standard primes and category labels, indicating ingroup bias on an implicit level. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
194 citations
TL;DR: For example, this article found that strong ingroup identification was associated with more positive ingroup affect, and for nearly all groups, higher social dominance orientation was correlated with more negative affect toward low-status groups.
Abstract: American and Israeli university students completed questionnaires in their native languages assessing ingroup identification, social dominance orientation (SDO), and ingroup and outgroup affect. The interrelationships among the variables were examined for high- and low-status groups in three intergroup contexts: whites and Latinos in the United States, Ashkenazim and Mizrachim in Israel, and Jews and Arabs in Israel. Theoretical predictions of social identity theory and social dominance theory were tested. Results indicated that for all high- and low-status groups, stronger ingroup identification was associated with more positive ingroup affect, and for nearly all groups, higher SDO was associated with more negative affect toward the low-status group. In addition, SDO was positively associated with ingroup identification for all high-status groups, and negatively associated with ingroup identification for almost all low-status groups. Explanations for cross-cultural differences in the factors driving group affect are suggested, and theoretical refinements are proposed that accommodate them.
183 citations
TL;DR: The authors studied the effect of extended contact through peer modelling for tolerance promotion among 1480 Finnish students (ages 13-15) in three pairs of middle schools that were matched on the proportion of foreign students and randomised to control or experimental condition.
Abstract: A field experiment studied the effect of extended contact through peer modelling for tolerance promotion among 1480 Finnish students (ages 13–15) in three pairs of middle schools that were matched on the proportion of foreign students (ranging from 3 per cent to 19 per cent) and randomised to control or experimental condition. In the experimental schools, printed stories of ingroup members engaged in close friendship with members of outgroups were presented in two sessions as examples of successful intergroup contact. In order to avoid subtyping, i.e. to ensure both inclusion of the ingroup member in the self and generalisation from the outgroup friend to the whole outgroup, the typicality of both the ingroup exemplar and the outgroup friend was enhanced. Intergroup attitudes were measured before and after the experimental intervention. A scale score measuring intergroup tolerance showed stability or favourable changes in experimental schools, while attitudes worsened or stayed the same in the control schools. The experimental effect was significant in four statistical tests (p<0.001 to p<0.05). The results show that tolerance can be improved or maintained by extended contact, i.e. peer modelling of positive intergroup contacts. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
175 citations
TL;DR: In this article, a field study in East Germany, predictions by Social Identity Theory concerning relations among socio-structural characteristics of intergroup relations (stability, legitimacy, permeability) and identity management strategies (e.g. social competition) were examined.
Abstract: In a field study in East Germany, predictions by Social Identity Theory concerning relations among socio-structural characteristics of intergroup relations (stability, legitimacy, permeability) and identity management strategies (e.g. social competition) were examined. In general, East Germans were expected to consider their status position as inferior compared to West Germans. Moreover, depending on whether they regard such a status difference as legitimate or illegitimate, as stable or unstable, and whether they perceive group boundaries as permeable or impermeable, East German participants should differ with respect to identity management strategies such as change of status relations, change of categorization, change of comparison dimension, change of comparison object and change of group membership. Five hundred and seventeen participants from different regions of East Germany completed a questionnaire on various aspects of life satisfaction. A path model including stability, legitimacy and permeability as predictors, ingroup identification as mediator and identity management strategies as criteria was tested. Results are mainly in line with assumptions on main effects derived from Social Identity Theory. However, some extensions and clarifications with respect to assimilation situations seem to be adequate. In addition, results show that ingroup identification can be regarded as a powerful mediator between perceived intergroup relations and identity management strategies. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
165 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors investigated the relationship between group identification and protest participation and found that higher levels of group identification stimulate participation in protest on behalf of the group, while perceived characteristics of the intergroup situation such as the permeability of group boundaries, and the stability and legitimacy of intergroup relations are supposed to modify the role of group identifying.
Abstract: Social identity theory is employed to conceptualise the role of group identification in the conversion of discontent into participation in political protest. It is assumed that higher levels of group identification stimulate participation in protest on behalf of the group. Perceived characteristics of the intergroup situation such as the permeability of group boundaries, and the stability and legitimacy of intergroup relations are supposed to modify the role of group identification. Group identification is decomposed into an affective and a behavioural component. Furthermore, ingroup identification is distinguished from outgroup differentiation; and groups are defined at different levels of inclusiveness. In a longitudinal study among Dutch farmers (n=168) the relationship between group identification and protest participation is investigated. Group identification, be it affective or behavioural, appears to influence action preparedness. People seem to enter the protest arena with some level of group identification. This level of group identification sets the level of action preparedness. Once set, the level of action preparedness remains fairly stable over time and appears to be a strong predictor of future action preparedness and participation. Action preparedness in its turn together with the behavioural component of group identification influences actual participation in collective action. Outgroup differentiation did not have any impact on protest participation. Identification with farmers in the European Union did not matter, but identification with farmers at the national or regional level did stimulate protest participation. Perceived characteristics of the intergroup situation did not have an impact on group identification, but permeability and stability did affect protest participation. Theoretical implications of the findings are discussed. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
159 citations
01 Jan 1999
TL;DR: Interfaces of social and clinical psychology where we've been, where we are Attributional Processes - an Integration of Social and Clinical Psychology Everyday Egocentrism and Everyday Interpersonal Problems Social Comparisons in Dysphoric and Low Self-Esteem People Self-Regulation and Psychopathology Problematic Social Emotions Shame, Guilt, Jealousy and Envy The Social and Psychological Importance of SelfEsteeme Speaking the Unspeakable - Self-Disclosure and Mental Health Maladaptive Image Maintenance Social Support and Psychological Disorder - Insights from Social
Abstract: Interfaces of Social and Clinical Psychology Where We've Been, Where We Are Attributional Processes - an Integration of Social and Clinical Psychology Everyday Egocentrism and Everyday Interpersonal Problems Social Comparisons in Dysphoric and Low Self-Esteem People Self-Regulation and Psychopathology Problematic Social Emotions Shame, Guilt, Jealousy and Envy The Social and Psychological Importance of Self-Esteem Speaking the Unspeakable - Self-Disclosure and Mental Health Maladaptive Image Maintenance Social Support and Psychological Disorder - Insights from Social Psychology Dysfunctional Relationships Group Dynamics and Psychological Well-Being - the Impact of Groups on Adjustment and Dysfunction Social-Clinical Psychology - a 20-Year Retrospective.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors investigate the idea that an important motivation for identifying with social groups is to reduce subjective uncertainty, particularly uncertainty on subjectively important dimensions that have implications for the self-concept (e.g., Hogg, 1996; Hogg & Mullin, 1999).
Abstract: An experiment was conducted to investigate the idea that an important motive for identifying with social groups is to reduce subjective uncertainty, particularly uncertainty on subjectively important dimensions that have implications for the self-concept (e.g., Hogg, 1996; Hogg & Mullin, 1999). When people are uncertain on a dimension that is subjectively important, they self-categorize in terms of an available social categorization and, thus, exhibit group behaviors. To test this general hypothesis, group membership, task uncertainty, and task importance were manipulated in a 2 × × × 2 between-participants design (N = 128), under relatively minimal group conditions. Ingroup identification and desire for consensual validation of specific attitudes were the key dependent measures, but we also measured social awareness. All three predictions were supported. Participants identified with their group (H1), and desired to obtain consensual validation from ingroup members (H2) when they were uncertain about thei...
TL;DR: In this paper, a study of race-based ingroup and outgroup judgment demonstrates the links between two models of social judgment, the black sheep effect (Marques, Yzerbyt & Leyens, 1988) and expectancy violation theory (Jussim, Coleman & Lerch, 1987).
Abstract: A study of race-based ingroup and outgroup judgment demonstrates the links between two models of social judgment—the ‘black sheep’ effect (Marques, Yzerbyt & Leyens, 1988) and expectancy-violation theory (Jussim, Coleman & Lerch, 1987). White participants had a live interaction with a Black or White partner who contributed to a team success or failure at a game. Partner judgments, perceived expectancy violation, and mood changes indicated a pattern of ingroup polarization, though the race differential was reliable only when targets performed poorly. Consistent with other research, this pattern was most striking among Whites who were highly identified with their racial group. We suggest that racial identification activates favorable within-group judgment standards which, when violated, produce mood decrements and negative evaluations. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
TL;DR: This article found that high-identification respondents felt more group deprivation than low-Identification respondents in comparison with both Other Minorities and Whites, and reported more personal deprivation when comparing themselves with Whites and less personal satisfaction when compared themselves with other minorities, yet they generally expressed satisfaction in comparisons with Ingroup Members.
Abstract: Most research on social identity and relative deprivation has focused on the salience of social identity in social comparisons. In contrast, little research has studied relative deprivation in relation to one's identification with the ingroup, and across a variety of comparison targets. Using samples of Latino and African–American respondents, the present study investigated ingroup identification and relative deprivation in comparisons with Ingroup Members, Other Minorities, and Whites. High-Identification respondents felt more group deprivation than Low-Identification respondents in comparisons with both Other Minorities and Whites. High-Identification respondents also reported more personal deprivation than Low-Identification respondents when comparing themselves with Whites and less personal satisfaction when comparing themselves with Other Minorities, yet they generally expressed satisfaction in comparisons with Ingroup Members. Results suggest that ingroup identification and comparison targets are important considerations for deprivation research, as one's relationships with targets may be associated with outcomes of social comparisons. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
TL;DR: The role played by social identity theory in responding to the crisis of confidence in social psychology is described in this article, where the authors focus on the motivational role of subjective uncertainty reduction in social identification.
Abstract: The role played by social identity theory in responding to the crisis of confidence in social psychology is described. It is a theory that addresses group processes and intergroup relations by separating and articulating different levels of explanation. Social categorization depersonalizes perception, cognition, affect and conduct in terms of relevant ingroup or outgroup prototypes, and social categorization of self, in conjunction with beliefs about the nature of intergroup relations, is responsible for specific manifestations of group behavior. Social identity theory continues to develop. In this article we focus on the motivational role of subjective uncertainty reduction in social identification - a model is outlined (Hogg & Mullin, 1999), and data from a 2 × 2 minimal group experiment in which categorization and uncertainty were orthogonally manipulated (N = 151) are presented. As predicted, categorization produced discrimination, elevated identification, and reduced uncertainty, but only, or more markedly, under conditions where subjective uncertainty was relatively high.
TL;DR: The authors explored the underpinnings of gender differences in political tolerance and found that women are more reluctant than men to allow unpopular groups to exercise their constitutional rights; women also seem to differ from men in their choice of intolerance targets.
Abstract: While women and men do not differ in their attitudes in most areas, persistent gender differences have been identified in several issue domains, including support for civil liberties of political outgroups. Generally speaking, research shows that women are more reluctant than men to allow unpopular groups to exercise their constitutional rights; women also seem to differ from men in their choice of intolerance targets. While we have been cognizant of the existence of the gender gap in political tolerance since the beginning of survey research on the subject, we know less about its etiology. Using data from the 1987 Freedom and Tolerance National Survey and the General Social Survey from the same year, I explore the underpinnings of gender differences in political tolerance. To this end, I scrutinize explanations advanced in previous research on political tolerance (e.g., women's greater religiosity), propositions stemming from feminist theory (e.g., the notion of maternal thinking), as well as others that do not fit neatly into the above two categories (e.g., gender differences in commitment to democratic norms and political expertise). Because the implications of women's intolerance differ depending on whether their intolerance is focused on a single group or dispersed among several groups, I also examine the patterns in men's and women's choices of intolerance targets. Empirical analysis demonstrates that gender differences in commitment to democratic norms and political expertise (through the letter's influence on subscription to democratic norms), as well as threat perceptions, tolerance of uncertainty, and moral traditionalism (through the latter two's influence on threat perceptions), are the principal “culprits” for women's intolerance. Men's and women's choices of intolerance targets are largely pluralistically distributed and parallel, with only a few exceptions. Women exhibit a greater preference for the KKK and abortion groups (particularly those pro-choice in their orientation) as their least-liked targets. Men evince a preference for radical right-wing groups generally (and militarists in particular).
TL;DR: The authors analyzed the internal structure of nonpoor whites' emotional responses toward blacks and the poor and their attributions for these groups' disadvantaged status, as well as the influence of group affect and attribution on opinion toward welfare and affirmative action.
Abstract: Outgroup attitudes have important effects on policy opinions, but there are conflicting ideas on how to conceptualize and measure affective and cognitive responses to outgroups, and how these different dimensions of evaluation contribute to opinion. The present study analyzes the internal structure of nonpoor whites' emotional responses toward blacks and the poor and their attributions for these groups' disadvantaged status, as well as the influence of group affect and attribution on opinion toward welfare and affirmative action. I find that the internal structure of outgroup affect and attributions varies with the target of the attitude, and that cognitive elements of outgroup attitudes dominate affect in their influence on policy opinion.
DOI•
01 Jan 1999Abstract: Two such general claims regarding self-contained selves versus generalized others provide the empirical and theoretical focus of this chapter. The first claim postulates a "divergence" in attributions and inferences regarding self and other, or "actor" and "observer" (Jones and Nisbett 1971; Nisbett et al. 1973). The second claim proposes that there are differences between the affective and motivational consequences of choices made by the self and those of choices suggested to, or imposed on, the self by others (Cordova and Lepper 1996; deCharms 1968; Deci 1981; Lepper and Greene 1978; Zuckerman et al. 1978).
TL;DR: This article examined the contextual and identity-based determinants of both ingroup and outgroup variability judgements and empirically demonstrated that group variability judgments may vary as a function of the intragroup vs. intergroup nature of the social context, whether there is a threat to the image of the group, the presence of reality constraints, and the degree of ingroup identification.
Abstract: Research on perceptions of group variability has traditionally focused on the explanation of the so-called outgroup homogeneity effect. More recently, the conditions under which the opposite effect may occur, perceptions of relative ingroup homogeneity, have also received attention. The present article is not directly concerned with either outgroup or ingroup homogeneity per se, but examines the contextual and identity-based determinants of both ingroup and outgroup variability judgements. Specifically, we argue and empirically demonstrate that group variability judgements may vary as a function of: (a) the intragroup vs. intergroup nature of the social context; (b) whether there is a threat to the image of the group; (c) the presence of reality constraints; (d) the degree of ingroup identification; and (e) the temporal dynamics of intergroup relations. The implications of these findings are discussed in relation to the literature on outgroup and ingroup homogeneity effects.
TL;DR: This article used multilevel analysis to address the effects of both individual and contextual variables and their interactions, and concluded that a multi-level approach can make a contribution to the existing literature on intergroup evaluation and towards a more contextual social psychology.
Abstract: Social psychologists studying intergroup relations acknowledge the importance of social context but remain strongly focused on the individual in both theoretical and methodological respects. The present study tries to go beyond this ‘individualistic’ perspective by using multilevel analysis to address the effects of both individual and contextual variables and their interactions. Ethnic group evaluations among Dutch and Turkish children (10–13 years of age) were examined. First, the results showed that intergroup evaluations are determined not only by characteristics of the child but also by the context in which the child is situated. Second, contextual variables not only affected ingroup favouritism directly but also moderated the relationship between identification and ingroup favouritism. Third, children in classes in which the teacher pays attention to ethnic discrimination and cultural differences indicated less ingroup favouritism. Furthermore, relative group size did not affect ingroup favouritism directly, rather it was found that only children who constituted a numerical minority revealed a positive association between identification and ingroup favouritism. Additionally, at the individual level ingroup favouritism was explained by identification, the perception of the teacher's reaction to ethnic harassment among classmates and subject ethnicity. It is concluded that a multi-level approach can make a contribution to the existing literature on intergroup evaluation and towards a more contextual social psychology. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
01 Nov 1999
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors explore the idea that shared group membership between source and recipient has an important impact on persuasion and discuss some of the mechanisms by which such shared membership increases persuasive effectiveness.
Abstract: This chapter explores the idea that shared group membership between source and recipient has an important impact on persuasion. It discusses some of the mechanisms by which such shared membership increases persuasive effectiveness. The chapter describes a program of research designed to ascertain the processing strategies triggered by receiving a persuasive communication from an ingroup as opposed to an outgroup source. It demonstrates some conclusions about the importance of interactions between the "who" and the "whom" of persuasion and point to further research that needs to be done on this important topic. The differential impact of relevant and nonrelevant issues offers one means of explaining some of the apparent inconsistencies in the literature on similarity and persuasion. Category membership may operate as a heuristic cue either because of the attractiveness of the source to recipients or because participants can rely on an ingroup member's views as appropriately defining reality.
TL;DR: The authors found that in-group rather than out-group exchanges were more upsetting when identification with the source group was strong, and that the negative evaluation of a poster from an exchange partner was more upsetting than negative evaluation from the poster itself.
Abstract: Laboratory groups were formed, given an engaging task to perform, and then dissolved into new, smaller groups. Each of those groups produced an art poster. Every poster was then evaluated, first by the group itself and then by another group whose members came from the same source group (ingroup exchange) or from a different source group (outgroup exchange). Posters were evaluated more generously when ingroup rather than outgroup exchanges were made, especially when identification with the source group was strong. Every group later received the same negative evaluation of its poster, apparently from its exchange partner. This (bogus) criticism was more upsetting when in-group rather than outgroup exchanges were made, especially when identification with the source group was strong. These findings were discussed and several ideas for future studies of loyalty and betrayal were offered.
TL;DR: Sidanius et al. as mentioned in this paper found that ethnic minority students who scored high on social dominance orientation did not always maintain conservative policy stances or strong patriotic attachments, depending on their level of perceived injustice.
Abstract: Previous research in social dominance theory has found an asymmetry in the relationship between social dominance orientation (SDO) and various hierarchy-enhancing ideologies, such that the relationship between the two variables is significantly more positive among high-status group members than among low-status group members (Sidanius, Pratto, & Rabinowitz, 1994; Sidanius, Levin, & Pratto, 1996). Perceptions of systemic injustice toward one's ingroup may help to explain this ideological asymmetry. The hypothesis of a three-way interaction among group status, SDO, and perceived injustice was tested by using survey responses from American university students to predict opposition to hierarchy-attenuating policies as well as levels of patriotism. Analyses revealed the presence of a three-way interaction (ps < .05). Ethnic minority students who scored high on SDO did not always maintain conservative policy stances or strong patriotic attachments—it depends on their level of perceived injustice. Implications for social dominance theory and system-justification theory are discussed.
TL;DR: This article used a modified version of the Katz-Braly task to investigate the context-dependent nature of group identity and found that the ingroup identity definition produced in this condition did indeed differentiate the British from the Americans.
Abstract: Analysts from a range of disciplines (especially sociology and social anthropology) highlight the role of the ‘other’ in the construction and definition of national identity. Recently some social psychologists have come to emphasize the inherently relational nature of identity. Drawing upon these recent investigations, the present paper reports a field study investigating the context-dependent nature of group identity. Using a modified version of the Katz–Braly task, British subjects (n=240) stereotyped two national groups: Americans and British. They did so in two conditions. In the ‘one-group’ conditions, subjects rated either of the two groups. In the ‘two-group’ conditions, they rated one whilst also considering the other. Following Oakes, Haslam and Turner (1994) we predicted that whereas subjects' stereotypes of the national outgroup (the Americans) would be unaffected by this manipulation, their stereotype of the national ingroup (the British) would be affected. This prediction was confirmed. We also predicted that the national ingroup stereotype obtained in the ‘two-group’ condition would be one which was defined in contrast to the American ‘other’ which constituted the comparative context. Using a measure which takes into account the applicability of ingroup-defining terms to both the ingroup and the outgroup (the diagnosticity measure of stereotyping proposed by McCauley and Stitt, 1978) we show that the ingroup identity definition produced in this condition did indeed differentiate the British from the Americans. The significance of these data for those concerned with the application of social psychological theory to real-life social problems is discussed. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
TL;DR: This paper explored the effect of ingroup vs outgroup performance on the extent to which individuals value an attribute and self-appraisals of personal standing on the attribute were examined as a potential mediator of this relationship.
TL;DR: In this article, a survey was conducted to assess the prevalence of spontaneous social comparisons in people's ingroup descriptions and investigate factors involved in the choice of an outgroup comparator.
Abstract: A survey was conducted to assess the prevalence of spontaneous social comparisons in people's ingroup descriptions and to investigate factors involved in the choice of an outgroup comparator. The intel group context was that of different countries within the European Community (EC). Two hundred and ninety-three respondents from six countries provided open-ended descriptions of their own country, rank ordered the twelve EC countries, and selected two other countries for comparison purposes. Social comparisons were made spontaneously by 20% of the sample; temporal comparisons less frequently (11%). There was a general tendency for respondents to choose higher-status comparators. These were still generally somewhat similar to own country except in the case of the two lowest-status countries where the preference was for dissimilar (and superior) outgroups. Regression analysis revealed that threat to national identity was also correlated with comparison choice. The findings are related to classic and contemporary theories of social comparison process. Copyright (C) 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
TL;DR: This paper examined the influence of situational features on self-construal and conflict styles in work group settings and found that competitive group tasks lead to more dominating, avoiding, and third-party help and a greater emphasis of the independent self construal than do cooperative group tasks.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors review theory and research on strategies of hypothesis testing and propose that confirmation is the default option in information processing; however, and contrary to common belief, it is not necessarily a lazy strategy and can even have social advantages.
Abstract: In this chapter, we review theory and research on strategies of hypothesis testing. We propose that confirmation is the default option in information processing; however, and contrary to common belief, it is not necessarily a lazy strategy and can even have social advantages. Disconfirmation, on the other hand, may be spontaneous and effortless. We also propose that both strategies, confirmation and disconfirmation, can fulfill inclusionary or exclusionary goals. Finally, a last series of experiments illustrates how perceivers can create ingroup biases without resorting either to confirmation or to disconfirmation. In general, we offer a perspective on perceivers as very flexible gatherers and interpreters of information, who use diverse strategies to their functional advantage.
01 Nov 1999
TL;DR: In this article, the authors focus on the analysis of social influence provided by self-categorization theory and on the framework provided by the elaboration likelihood model and the heuristic systematic model.
Abstract: This chapter focuses on the analysis of social influence provided by self-categorization theory and on the framework provided by the elaboration likelihood model and the heuristic systematic model. As a consequence, group members might be expected to be motivated to systematically process the message from a prototypical group member as a source of information about ingroup normative attitudes. Prototypicality refers to the extent to which a category instance is representative of both within-group similarities and betweengroup differences. Ingroup prototypicality of the message was manipulated by introducing either the pro or the con message as "representative" of undergraduate attitudes to the issue in a recent attitude survey, and labeling the other message "not representative." Persuasion through systematic or central processing is contingent on the contents of the message alone and independent of noncontent cues, whereas persuasion in the heuristic or peripheral mode is independent of message contents.