Defensive helping: Threat to group identity, ingroup identification, status stability, and common group identity as determinants of intergroup help-giving.

On the basis of development of the concept of “defensive helping,” the authors demonstrated that high ingroup identifiers thwart a threat to group identity through defensive help-giving (i.e., by extending help to an outgroup member whose achievements jeopardize their status). Participants were 255 Israeli high school students (130 boys and 125 girls) ages 16–18. The phenomenon of defensive helping was demonstrated in a minimal group (Study 1) and real-group (Study 2) experiment. Study 3, which examined real groups, supported the extension of the phenomenon of defensive helping to relations between high- and low-status groups, showing that members of a high-status group who perceive status relations with the low-status outgroup as unstable will protect the ingroup’s identity by providing dependency-oriented help to the low-status outgroup. Priming for common ingroup identity reversed this pattern, with participants electing to offer autonomy-oriented rather than defensive help. Theoretical and applied implications of these findings are discussed with respect to social change, paternalism, and helping between nations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Status differences and in-group bias: A meta-analytic examination of the effects of status stability, status legitimacy, and group permeability.

This work examines the moderating effects of status stability, legitimacy, and group permeability on in-group bias among high- and low-status groups. These effects were examined separately for evaluative measures that were relevant as well as irrelevant to the salient status distinctions. The results support social identity theory and show that high-status groups are more biased. The meta-analysis reveals that perceived status stability, legitimacy, and permeability moderate the effects of group status. Also, these variables interacted in their influences on the effect of group status on in-group bias, but this was only true for irrelevant evaluative dimensions. When status was unstable and perceived as illegitimate, low-status groups and high-status groups were equally biased when group boundaries were impermeable, compared with when they were permeable. Implications for social identity theory as well as for intergroup attitudes are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Sticking together or falling apart: In-group identification as a psychological determinant of group commitment versus individual mobility.

Two experiments investigated how in-group identification, manipulated with a bogus pipeline technique affects group members' desire for individual mobility to another group. In the first experiment (N?=?88), the in-group had low status, and group boundaries were either permeable or impermeable. Low identifiers perceived the group as less homogeneous, were less committed to their group, and more strongly desired individual mobility to a higher status group than did high identifiers. The structural possibility of mobility afforded by permeable group boundaries had no comparable effect. The second experiment (N?=?51) investigated whether in-group identification can produce similar effects when relative group status is unknown. Even in the absence of an identity threat, low identifiers were less likely to see the groups as homogeneous, felt less committed to their group, and more strongly desired individual mobility than did high identifiers. Results are discussed with reference to social identity and self-categorization theories. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Intergroup perception in naturally occurring groups of differential status: A social relations perspective.

This study investigated intergroup perception in well-acquainted groups. Also of interest were the effects of a naturally occurring status differential on these perceptions. The study is framed within the social relations model, which provided a measure of in-group bias as well as 3 innovative measures of out-group homogeneity. Results indicated that low-status groups consistently displayed out-group favoritism. High-status groups displayed in-group bias, but only on ratings of leadership ability. The results also provided consistent evidence of out-group homogeneity. In instances when group status moderated out-group homogeneity effects, members of the high-status groups perceived their in-group as more variable than the out-group, whereas members of the low-status groups tended to see the in-group and out-group as equally variable. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Less pain and more to gain: Why high-status group members blame their failure on discrimination.

Retracted August 2001. (See record 2001-01642-001.) Members of high-status groups are more likely than members of low-status groups to blame their failure on discrimination and are less likely to blame it on themselves. This tendency was demonstrated in 3 experiments comparing men and women, White and Black students, and members of experimentally created high- and low-status groups. Results also showed that when making an attribution to discrimination, high-status group members were less likely to experience a threat to their social state self-esteem, performance perceived control, and social perceived control and were more likely to protect their performance state self-esteem. These findings help to explain why high-status group members are more willing to blame their failure on discrimination by showing that it is less harmful for them than for low-status group members. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Helping one's way to the top: Self-monitors achieve status by helping others and knowing who helps whom.

The authors argue that high self-monitors may be more sensitive to the status implications of social exchange and more effective in managing their exchange relations to elicit conferrals of status than low self-monitors. In a series of studies, they found that high self-monitors were more accurate in perceiving the status dynamics involved both in a set of fictitious exchange relations and in real relationships involving other members of their social group. Further, high self-monitors elevated their social status among their peers by establishing a reputation as a generous exchange partner. Specifically, they were more likely than low self-monitors to be sought out for help and to refrain from asking others for help. This behavior provides one explanation for why high self-monitors acquire elevated status among their peers--they are more attuned to status dynamics in exchange relations and adapt their behavior in ways that elicit status. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Perceiving personal discrimination: The role of group status and legitimizing ideology.

It was hypothesized that relative group status and endorsement of ideologies that legitimize group status differences moderate attributions to discrimination in intergroup encounters. According to the status-legitimacy hypothesis, the more members of low-status groups endorse the ideology of individual mobility, the less likely they are to attribute negative outcomes from higher status group members to discrimination. In contrast, the more members of high-status groups endorse individual mobility, the more likely they are to attribute negative outcomes from lower status group members to discrimination. Results from 3 studies using 2 different methodologies provide support for this hypothesis among members of different high-status (European Americans and men) and low-status (African Americans, Latino Americans, and women) groups. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Confrontation with aggressive peers at school: Students' reluctance to seek help from the teacher .

Asking for assistance from a teacher is generally viewed by elementary school students as a way of avoiding rather than resolving peer conflict. However, there are situations when it is appropriate and perhaps necessary to seek help. This study investigated such situations. Vignettes that portrayed aggressive peer conflict at school were presented to 128 3rd and 4th graders, who were asked what they would do and why. Students' self-perceptions of peer relations also were measured. At Grade 3, boys and girls were equally likely to go to the teacher for help, whereas at Grade 4, girls were more likely than boys to do so. At Grade 4, girls showed greater interest than boys in resolving conflict and "getting things back to normal." At Grade 3, students interested in revenge tended to go to the teacher. At both grades, boys were more concerned than girls that help seeking might lead to hassles with the teacher or reprisals from classmates. Boys who perceived themselves as popular and girls who perceived themselves as unpopular were relatively likely to seek help. Relations between help seeking and children's grade level, gender, and self-perceptions are discussed in terms of goal and strategy components in a social-information-processing model of conflict resolution. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Less pain and more to gain: Why high-status group members blame their failure on discrimination": Retraction.

Reports a retraction of the original article by Karen M. Ruggiero and David M. Marx (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1999 [Oct], Vol 77(4), 774–784). The data reported in this article are invalid and should not be considered part of the scientific literature of psychology. The responsibility for this problem rests solely with the first author, Karen M. Ruggiero. The second author, David M. Marx, is in no way responsible for this problem. (The following abstract of this article originally appeared in record 1999-11645-009.) Members of high-status groups are more likely than members of low-status groups to blame their failure on discrimination and are less likely to blame it on themselves. This tendency was demonstrated in 3 experiments comparing men and women, White and Black students, and members of experimentally created high- and low-status groups. Results also showed that when making an attribution to discrimination, high-status group members were less likely to experience a threat to their social state self-esteem, performance perceived control, and social perceived control and were more likely to protect their performance state self-esteem. These findings help to explain why high-status group members are more willing to blame their failure… (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Tokenism also works with groups as tokens: The impact of group openness and group qualification on reactions to membership in a low-status group.

Two experiments tested whether the tokenism effect would also emerge when groups as a whole rather than individual group members are denied access into a high-status group. In total, 317 pupils were led to believe that their class was not accepted into a high-status group. The openness of this high-status group toward other groups (open, minimally open, and closed) and the qualification of the own class (low, high) were manipulated. In both studies, pupils of a highly qualified class confronted with a closed high-status group differed from all other conditions by preferring nonnormative action to normative action. These results indicate that tokenism is a very robust phenomenon that occurs even when groups strongly expected to join the high-status group. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Who cares what the outgroup thinks? Testing an information search model of the importance individuals accord to an outgroup member's view of them during intergroup interaction.

Four studies examined whether the intensity of individuals' concern with evaluation is affected by whether they are engaged in intragroup or intergroup interaction. According to the authors' theoretical framework, the importance that individuals attach to another person's opinion is a function of how predictive that person's evaluation seems to be of their social standing and outcomes. Members of lower status groups are more invested in outgroup members' opinions with increasing perceived legitimacy of the group status difference because outgroup members are seen as better judges of the competencies necessary for success in society. Members of a higher status group are more invested in outgroup members' opinions with decreasing perceived legitimacy of the group status difference because outgroup members are seen as better judges of moral goodness. Results were generally consistent with these predictions and demonstrated that intergroup exchanges are sometimes characterized by heightened levels of the basic motivation to know one's social standing with others. Findings also revealed that the interactive effect of group status and perceived legitimacy extends to egocentric biases that contribute to tension and miscommunication in intergroup interaction. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Importance of work versus nonwork among socially and occupationally stratified groups.

The importance of work-related versus nonwork-related factors as opportunities for satisfaction was compared among low-, medium-, and high-status groups, and between white-collar and blue-collar occupational groups by analysis of questionnaire responses from 1,468 Civil Service resident employees of a Government community. The value hierarchy, in terms of increasing importance, was recreation, education, church, work-context, and work-content factors Significant differences were found between the value systems of white-collar and blue-collar groups However, no significant differences were found between low-, medium-, and high-status groups unless the occupational group of the employee was simultaneously considered. Then, differences between white-collar and blue-collar values were marked in the high-status level. Results are discussed in terms of the opportunities that various environmental stimuli present to contrasting occupational and status groups for effective and competent interaction with their environment. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Do dogs (Canis familiaris) seek help in an emergency?

The question of whether dogs recognize an emergency and understand the need to seek help from a bystander was tested in two experiments. In the first experiment, dogs' owners feigned a heart attack in an open field, and in the second experiment, dogs' owners experienced an accident in which a bookcase fell on them and pinned them to the floor. In these experiments, one or two bystanders were available to which dogs could go for help. The dogs' behavior was taped for 6 min after the owner had fallen and was later scored for the frequency and time the dogs spent performing different behaviors. In no case did a dog solicit help from a bystander. It is concluded that dogs did not understand the nature of the emergency or the need to obtain help. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Intergroup Distinctiveness and Differentiation: A Meta-Analytic Integration.

The authors examined the relation between perceptions of intergroup distinctiveness and intergroup differentiation in a meta-analysis. They tested the social identity theory prediction that low intergroup distinctiveness underlies differentiation (the "reactive distinctiveness" hypothesis) for effects on behavioral and judgmental differentiation. In addition, they examined the moderating power of 4 variables that H. Tajfel and J. C. Turner (1979) predicted would influence differentiation (group identification, relevance of the dimension of comparison, relevance of the outgroup. and nature of intergroup relations). Analysis of 60 tests revealed that the overall effect of distinctiveness on differentiation was not significantly different from 0, but reactive distinctiveness was found on behavioral differentiation measures, whereas reflective distinctiveness was found on judgmental differentiation measures. Only group identification was a reliable moderator. High identifiers showed reactive distinctiveness, whereas low identifiers showed reflective distinctiveness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Social climate comparison of mutual help and psychotherapy groups.

Mutual help groups for the mentally ill (n?=?33) were significantly different from psychotherapy groups (n?=?25) on 9 of 10 perceived social climate dimensions from the 90-item Group Environment Scale. The mutual help members perceived that their groups had more active leaders, greater group cohesion, more structure and task-orientation, and fostered more independence. The members of psychotherapy groups perceived that their groups encouraged more expression of negative and other feelings and showed more flexibility in changing the group's activities. The present findings could be used to improve cooperation and referrals between mutual help groups and the mental health community. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Diversity in in-group bias: Structural factors, situational features, and social functions.

Four experiments addressed the different forms and functions of in-group bias in different contexts. The authors proposed 2 functions: an identity-expressive function and an instrumental function (or promotion of positive social change). The authors manipulated status differentials, the stability of these differences, and the communication context (intra- vs. intergroup) and measured in-group bias and both functions. As predicted, identity expression via in-group bias on symbolic measures was most important for stable, high-status groups. By contrast, material in-group bias for instrumental motives was most prevalent in unstable, low-status groups but only when communicating with in-group members. This latter effect illustrates the strategic adaptation of group behavior to audience (i.e., displaying in-group bias may provoke the out-group and be counterproductive in instrumental terms). Stable, low-status groups displayed more extreme forms of in-group bias for instrumental reasons regardless of communication context (i.e., they had nothing to lose). Results are discussed in terms of a contextual-functional approach to in-group bias. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of perceived ability and grade status on social interaction and influence in cooperative groups.

In this study we investigated how a natural status characteristic (grade level) and an experimentally induced status characteristic (ability) combine to affect group interaction and interpersonal perception in homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. Eighty male fifth and sixth graders were randomly assigned to groups of four that were made into homogeneous or heterogeneous "ability" groups on the basis of a bogus aptitude test. Their social interaction was videotaped as groups worked on a group consensus task. The data indicated that the two status characteristics (actual and induced) had a similar and significant effect on the social interaction in the groups. High-status students dominated group interaction, were more influential, and were more likely to be perceived as leaders. The data also indicated that differences in helping behavior may be due, in part, to the perceived status of the student and not only to the student's ability to give help. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Peripheral ingroup membership status and public negativity toward outgroups.

Peripheral membership status in a desirable ingroup was predicted to elevate outgroup derogation when Ss believed other ingroup members might learn of their responses. Less negativity toward outgroups was expected when peripheral members' responses were to remain private. Core ingroup members, in contrast, were not expected to show public–private differences in derogation of outgroups. The results of 2 experiments supported these predictions, with peripheral but not core ingroup members advocating the most coercion for the outgroup under public conditions in both laboratory-created ingroups (Exp 1) and naturally occurring groups that had meaning for the participants (Exp 2). Thus, outgroup derogation can serve a public presentation function that allows for enhancement of an insecure status within a desirable ingroup. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Children's naturalistic entry behavior and sociometric status: A developmental perspective.

Extended previous research by examining the relation between children's entry behavior and sociometric status under more naturalistic conditions. First, 3rd, and 5th graders (N?=?72) of high, low, and average status were observed during recess. Observers coded Ss' entry and noninteractive behaviors, peers' responses, and the size of groups with whom Ss interacted. Low-status Ss engaged in more passive entry attempts and less sustained group interaction than high-status Ss, and were accepted less and ignored more. Compared with 5th graders, 1st graders attempted entry proportionately more, were alone more, joined smaller groups, and sustained interaction with groups a smaller proportion of time. Group size influenced both the choice of entry bids and the group's response to an entering peer. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)