Affirmation, acknowledgment of in-group responsibility, group-based guilt, and support for reparative measures.

Three studies, 2 conducted in Israel and 1 conducted in Bosnia and Herzegovina, demonstrated that affirming a positive aspect of the self can increase one's willingness to acknowledge in-group responsibility for wrongdoing against others, express feelings of group-based guilt, and consequently provide greater support for reparation policies. By contrast, affirming one's group, although similarly boosting feelings of pride, failed to increase willingness to acknowledge and redress in-group wrongdoing. Studies 2 and 3 demonstrated the mediating role of group-based guilt. That is, increased acknowledgment of in-group responsibility for out-group victimization produced increased feelings of guilt, which in turn increased support for reparation policies to the victimized group. Theoretical and applied implications are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

In-group bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis.

Experimental research on intergroup discrimination in favor of one's own group is reviewed in terms of the basis of differentiation between in-group and out-group and in terms of the response measure on which in-group bias is assessed. Results of the research reviewed suggest that (a) factors such as intergroup competition, similarity, and status differentials affect in-group bias indirectly by influencing the salience of distinctions between in-group and out-group, (b) the degree of intergroup differentiation on a particular response dimension is a joint function of the relevance of intergroup distinctions and the favorableness of the in-group's position on that dimension, and (c) the enhancement of in-group bias is more related to increased favoritism toward in-group members than to increased hostility toward out-group members. Implications of these results for positive applications of group identification (e.g., a shift of in-group bias research from inter- to intragroup contexts) are discussed. (67 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Not quite human: Infrahumanization in response to collective responsibility for intergroup killing.

The present research examines how awareness of violence perpetrated against an out-group by one's in-group can intensify the infrahumanization of the out-group, as measured by a reduced tendency to accord uniquely human emotions to out-groups. Across 3 experiments that used different in-groups (humans, British, White Americans) and out-groups (aliens, Australian Aborigines, and Native Americans), when participants were made aware of the in-group's mass killing of the out-group, they infrahumanized the victims more. The perception of collective responsibility, not just the knowledge that the out-group members had died in great numbers, was shown to be necessary for this effect. Infrahumanization also occurred concurrently with increased collective guilt but was unrelated to it. It is proposed that infrahumanization may be a strategy for people to reestablish psychological equanimity when confronted with a self-threatening situation and that such a strategy may occur concomitantly with other strategies, such as providing reparations to the out-group. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The effect of difference oriented communication on the subjective validity of an in-group norm: Doc can treat the group.

The subjective group dynamics model predicts that in-group deviants who violate in-group norms that differentiate between the in-group and the out-group threaten the in-group's public image and its sense of validity. Previous research has shown that, to reduce this threat, group members attempt to symbolically marginalize in-group deviants through negative evaluation. In the current study (N = 107), the effect of another form of symbolic marginalization (difference oriented communication) is investigated. The findings support the subjective group dynamics model by showing that group members whose communications to deviants highlighted differences experienced a subsequent increase in subjective validity of in-group norms. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Moral identity and the expanding circle of moral regard toward out-groups.

This article examines moral identity and reactions to out-groups during intergroup conflict. Four studies suggest that a highly self-important moral identity is associated with an expansive circle of moral regard toward out-group members (Study 1) and more favorable attitudes toward relief efforts to aid out-group members (Study 2). Study 3 examines moral identity and national identity influences on the provision of financial assistance to out-groups. Study 4 investigates the relationship between moral identity and (a) the willingness to harm innocent out-group members not involved in the conflict and (b) moral judgments of revenge and forgiveness toward out-group members directly responsible for transgressions against the in-group. Results are discussed in terms of self-regulatory mechanisms that mitigate in-group favoritism and out-group hostility. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Intergroup emotions: Explaining offensive action tendencies in an intergroup context.

Three studies tested the idea that when social identity is salient, group-based appraisals elicit specific emotions and action tendencies toward out-groups. Participants' group memberships were made salient and the collective support apparently enjoyed by the in-group was measured or manipulated. The authors then measured anger and fear (Studies 1 and 2) and anger and contempt (Study 3), as well as the desire to move against or away from the out-group. Intergroup anger was distinct from intergroup fear, and the inclination to act against the out-group was distinct from the tendency to move away from it. Participants who perceived the in-group as strong were more likely to experience anger toward the out-group and to desire to take action against it. The effects of perceived in-group strength on offensive action tendencies were mediated by anger. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Reduction of interindividual-intergroup discontinuity: The role of leader accountability and proneness to guilt.

Two experiments contrasted interactions between group leaders with interactions between individuals in a mixed-motive setting. Consistent with the idea that being accountable to the in-group implies normative pressure to benefit the in-group, Experiment 1 found that accountable leaders were more competitive than individuals. Consistent with the idea that being unaccountable to the in-group implies normative pressure to be cooperative and that high guilt proneness provides motivation to be moral, Experiment 2 found that when guilt proneness was high, unaccountable leaders were less competitive than accountable leaders and did not differ significantly from individuals. In other words, the robust interindividual-intergroup discontinuity effect was eliminated when groups had unaccountable leaders who were high in guilt proneness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Trust, variability in relationship evaluations, and relationship processes.

Little is known about why some people experience greater temporal fluctuations of relationship perceptions over short periods of time, or how these fluctuations within individuals are associated with relational processes that can destabilize relationships. Two studies were conducted to address these questions. In Study 1, long-term dating partners completed a 14-day diary study that assessed each partner's daily partner and relationship perceptions. Following the diary phase, each couple was videotaped trying to resolve the most important unresolved problem from the diary period. As predicted, (a) individuals who trusted their partners less reported greater variability in perceptions of relationship quality across the diary period; (b) they also perceived daily relationship-based conflict as a relatively more negative experience; and (c) greater variability in relationship perceptions predicted greater self-reported distress, more negative behavior, and less positive behavior during a postdiary conflict resolution task (rated by observers). The diary results were conceptually replicated in Study 2a, in which older cohabiting couples completed a 21-day diary. These same participants also took part in a reaction-time decision-making study (Study 2b), which revealed that individuals tend to compartmentalize positive and negative features of their partners if they (individuals) experienced greater variability in relationship quality during the 21-day diary period and were involved in higher quality relationships. These findings advance researchers' understanding of trust in intimate relationships and provide some insight into how temporal fluctuations in relationship quality may undermine relationships. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Perceiving interpersonal conflict and reacting to it: the case for agreeableness

Two converging, multimethod studies probed the hypothesis that individual differences in Agreeableness are related to patterns of interpersonal conflict. In Study 1, participants (N = 263) evaluated the efficacy of 11 modes of conflict resolution within the context of 5 different interpersonal relationships. Across all relationships, high- and low-agreeable participants rated negotiation and disengagement tactics as better choices that power assertion tactics. However, low-agreeable participants rated power assertion as a better choice than did high-agreeable participants. In Study 2, participants (N = 124) were assigned partners and were asked to resolve jointly 2 social conflict problems. Partners were videotaped, and observers coded behaviors. Participants also completed ratings of perceived conflict, partner perception, and liking of their partner. Agreeableness differences, sex of participant, and type of dyad partner were related to patterns of interpersonal conflict. Results were discussed in terms of personality and social influences during interpersonal conflict.     

Toward an explanation of cultural differences in in-group favoritism: The role of individual versus collective primacy.

Previous research conducted on a Western sample has shown that people are less apt to exhibit in-group favoritism when they perform well individually while their in-group performs poorly. The authors evaluated whether this finding would be moderated by the cultural dimension of individual–collective primacy, which refers to whether people give more weight to their personal interests rather than their in-group's interests when forced to choose between the two. The authors hypothesized that relative to their counterparts from the United States, participants from the People's Republic of China would have more of a collective-primacy orientation and therefore would exhibit more in-group favoritism when they performed well individually while their in-group performed poorly. The results supported the hypothesis. Implications for the literatures on in-group favoritism and cross-cultural differences are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

To belong or not to belong, that is the question: Terror management and identification with gender and ethnicity.

The terror management prediction that reminders of death motivate in-group identification assumes people view their identifications positively. However, when the in-group is framed negatively, mortality salience should lead to disidentification. Study I found that mortality salience increased women's perceived similarity to other women except under gender-based stereotype threat. In Study 2, mortality salience and a negative ethnic prime led Hispanic as well as Anglo participants to derogate paintings attributed to Hispanic (but not Anglo-American) artists. Study 3 added a neutral prime condition and used a more direct measure of psychological distancing. Mortality salience and the negative prime led Hispanic participants to view themselves as especially different from a fellow Hispanic. Implications for understanding in-group derogation and disidentification are briefly discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"A vengefulness of the impotent": The pain of in-group inferiority and schadenfreude toward successful out-groups.

Nietzsche (1887/1967) suggested that the emotional pain individuals feel about their in-group's inferiority leads them to feel the pleasure of schadenfreude when a successful out-group fails. To test this idea, 2 studies examined a fictitious competition between real universities. Individuals' pain about their in-group's inferiority explained schadenfreude at the failure of a successful out-group better than dislike of the out-group, interest in the domain of competition, illegitimacy of the out-group's success, and illegitimacy of the in-group's inferiority. In addition, emotions regarding the out-group's success (i.e., envy, dislike-based anger, and illegitimacy-based anger) were weaker explanations of schadenfreude than the pain of in-group inferiority and anger based in this pain (which Nietzsche referred to as ressentiment). Thus, schadenfreude has more to do with the inferiority of the self than with the success of others. As well as providing evidence for a specific form of prejudice grounded in group-based emotions, this research also revives displacement explanations of prejudice toward 3rd parties. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Affective responses, cognitive appraisals, and conflict tactics in late adolescent romantic relationships: Associations with attachment orientations.

Although research has linked late adolescent attachment difficulties with broad problems in romantic relationships, less work has focused on how these difficulties relate to precise problems in these relationships. In the current study, the authors examined associations between attachment orientations and coping with conflict in romantic relationships in a sample of 357 college students by developing a path analytic model. Adolescents with more-insecure attachment orientations were predicted to report more negative affect during disagreements, less confidence in coping during arguments, and less optimal conflict tactics (e.g., more conflict escalation) than youth with more-secure representations. The predictions imbedded within the model were generally supported. Although more-avoidant and more-ambivalent adolescents reported less optimal conflict tactics than did more-secure adolescents, individual differences in the attachment process predicted differential affective-cognitive responses during these disputes. This study has implications for attachment research and interventions with adolescents. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

When sex is more than just sex: Attachment orientations, sexual experience, and relationship quality.

The authors explored the contribution of individual differences in attachment orientations to the experience of sexual intercourse and its association with relationship quality. In Study 1, 500 participants completed self-report scales of attachment orientations and sexual experience. The findings indicated that whereas attachment anxiety was associated with an ambivalent construal of sexual experience, attachment avoidance was associated with more aversive sexual feelings and cognitions. In Study 2, 41 couples reported on their attachment orientations and provided daily diary measures of sexual experiences and relationship interactions for a period of 42 days. Results showed that attachment anxiety amplified the effects of positive and negative sexual experiences on relationship interactions. In contrast, attachment avoidance inhibited the positive relational effect of having sex and the detrimental relational effects of negative sexual interactions. The authors discuss the possibility that attachment orientations are associated with different sex-related strategies and goals within romantic relationships. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The importance of being we: Human nature and intergroup relations.

The author discusses the nature of in-group bias and the social motives that underlie ethnocentric attachment to one's own membership groups. Two common assumptions about in-group bias are challenged: that in-group positivity necessitates out-group derogation and that ingroup bias is motivated by self-enhancement. A review of relevant theory and research on intergroup relations provides evidence for 3 alternative principles: (a) in-group attachment and positivity are primary and independent of out-groups, (b) security motives (belonging and distinctiveness) underlie universal in-group favoritism, and (c) attitudes toward out-groups vary as a function of intergroup relationships and associated threats to belonging and distinctiveness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Nuestra culpa: Collective guilt and shame as predictors of reparation for historical wrongdoing.

Three studies examined the hypothesis that collective guilt and shame have different consequences for reparation. In 2 longitudinal studies, the ingroup was nonindigenous Chileans (Study 1: N = 124/120, lag = 8 weeks; Study 2: N = 247/137, lag = 6 months), and the outgroup was Chile's largest indigenous group, the Mapuche. In both studies, it was found that collective guilt predicted reparation attitudes longitudinally. Collective shame had only cross-sectional associations with reparation and no direct longitudinal effects. In Study 2, collective shame moderated the longitudinal effects of collective guilt such that the effects of guilt were stronger for low-shame respondents. In Study 3 (N = 193 nonindigenous Chileans), the cross-sectional relationships among guilt, shame, and reparation attitudes were replicated. The relationship between shame and reparation attitudes was mediated by a desire to improve the ingroup's reputation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Working models of attachment: implications for explanation, emotion and behavior

Two studies examined attachment style differences in social perception. In Study 1, participants wrote open-ended explanations for hypothetical relationship events and described how they would feel and behave in response to each event. Compared with secure participants, preoccupied participants explained events in more negative ways; they also reported more emotional distress and behaviors that were likely to lead to conflict. Avoidant participants also provided negative explanations, but did not report emotional distress. Path analysis indicated that attachment style differences in behavior were mediated by explanation patterns and emotional distress. Study 2 was designed to replicate Study 1 and test the relative importance of attachment style and relationship quality to predicting each outcome. Results indicated that both variables were significant predictors of explanations, but only attachment style predicted emotional responses. These findings are consistent with the idea that adults with different working models of attachment are predisposed to think, feel, and behave differently in their relationships.     

Membership has its (epistemic) rewards: Need for closure effects on in-group bias.

Three studies examined the impact of the need for cognitive closure on manifestations of in-group bias. All 3 studies found that high (vs. low) need for closure increased in-group favoritism and out-group derogation. Specifically, Study 1 found a positive relation between need for cognitive closure and both participants' ethnic group identification and their collective self-esteem. Studies 2 and 3 found a positive relation between need for closure and participants' identification with an in-group member and their acceptance of an in-group member's beliefs and attitudes. Studies 2 and 3 also found a negative relation between need for closure and participants' identification with an out-group member and their acceptance of an out-group member's beliefs and attitudes. The implications of these findings for the epistemic function of in-groups are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Depression, working models of others, and relationship functioning.

Two studies examined depressives' working models of others and the relative contribution of these models and depression to relationship functioning. Respondents reported on their childhood relationships, adult attachment style, and relationship functioning. Study 1 compared 163 mildly depressed and nondepressed college women (aged 17–48 yrs), and Study 2 compared 25 married women recovering from clinical depression with 23 nondepressed married women (mean age 40 yrs for both groups). Mildly depressed college women evidenced greater preoccupation and fearful avoidance in romantic relationships than did nondepressed women; recovering depressed women evidenced greater fearful avoidance. In both studies, relationship functioning was predicted more strongly by adult attachment style than by depression status. Among college women, positive experiences with mother also were linked to better relationship functioning; however, attachment style and depression status mediated this effect. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)