Indirect minority influence: Evidence for leniency in source evaluation and counterargumentation.

In-group minorities instigate indirect change because of their distinctiveness, the unexpectedness of their position, and their common identity with their targets. Preliminary study (N?=?408) uncovered links among a set of attitudes and revealed participants were unaware of the relationship between some attitudes despite significant correlation and proximity in multidimensional space. Study 1 (N?=?222) advocated a ban of homosexual soldiers attributed to majority, in-group, or out-group minority sources. No direct influence was evident. When credited to an in-group minority, the message influenced attitudes toward gun control, which were linked to the focal beliefs. Relative to other sources, the in-group minority was more positively evaluated, and its message less strongly counterargued (both p N?=?78) reversed direct and indirect attitude objects and replicated these results. Study 3 (N?=?66) examined majority influence and revealed direct, but not indirect, majority influence when participants' membership group was threatened. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Measures and models of perceived group variability.

This article examines alternative measures of perceived variability of a group. The pattern of correlations among the measures suggests that variability can be thought of in 2 ways: the perceived dispersion of group members from the group central tendency and the extent to which the group is seen as fitting the group stereotype. Evidence of out-group homogeneity was present for both types of variability judgments, using men and women as the target groups. Judgments of group variability were not predicted by the variance of a retrieved set of group members around their own mean. In the case of the in-group, judgments of variability were predicted by the discrepancy of the retrieved set of group members from the group mean. Likewise, in-group, but not out-group, variability was also predicted by discrepancy of self from the group mean. A 2nd study using talk-aloud protocols revealed that the self and subgroups were more likely to be discussed when one was making variability judgments about the in-group than about the out-group. Instances of the group were almost never discussed for the in-group and were discussed for the out-group. Implications of the results for models of group variability judgments are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Being better by being right: Subjective group dynamics and derogation of in-group deviants when generic norms are undermined.

The authors predicted that derogation of group deviants depends on the extent to which in-group norms or values are validated or undermined in a social context. In Experiment 1 participants were less tolerant and derogated in-group deviants more when other in-group members opposed the norm. In Experiment 2 participants derogated in-group deviants more than out-group deviants and than noncategorized individuals, but only when normative in-group members lacked uniformity. In Experiment 3 participants derogated in-group deviants more when there was uncertainty about in-group superiority. These results are consistent with previous research on the black sheep effect (J. M. Marques, V. Y. Yzerbyt, & J. -P. Leyens, 1998) and with the model of subjective group dynamics (D. Abrams, J. M. Marques, N. J. Bown, & M. Henson, 2000; J. M. Marques, D. Abrams, D. Paez, & C. Martinez-Taboada, 1998). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Older but wilier: In-group accountability and the development of subjective group dynamics.

To test social and cognitive variables that may affect the development of subjective group dynamics, the authors had 224 children between the ages of 5 and 12 years evaluate an in-group and an out-group and normative and deviant in-group members under conditions of high or low accountability to in-group peers. In-group bias and relative favorability to normative versus deviant in-group members (differential evaluation) increased when children were accountable to peers and as a function of perceptions of peer group acceptance of these members (differential inclusion). These effects were significantly larger among older children. Multiple classification ability was unrelated to judgments of group members. This study shows that the development of subjective group dynamics involves an increase in sensitivity to the normative aspects of the intergroup context. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The extended contact effect: Knowledge of cross-group friendships and prejudice.

The extended contact hypothesis proposes that knowledge that an in-group member has a close relationship with an out-group member can lead to more positive intergroup attitudes. Proposed mechanisms are the in-group or out-group member serving as positive exemplars and the inclusion of the out-group member's group membership in the self. In Studies 1 and 2, respondents knowing an in-group member with an out-group friend had less negative attitudes toward that out-group, even controlling for dispositional variables and direct out-group friendships. Study 3, with constructed intergroup-conflict situations (on the robbers cave model), found reduced negative out-group attitudes after participants learned of cross-group friendships. Study 4, a minimal group experiment, showed less negative out-group attitudes for participants observing an apparent in-group–out-group friendship. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Influence of long-term racial environmental composition on subjective well-being in African Americans.

Two studies (N=126, N=114) of African Americans supported a model predicting that more racially segregated life contexts are associated with feelings of acceptance by other in-group members and, to a lesser extent, rejection by outgroup members. In-group acceptance and out-group rejection in turn influenced identification with the in-group, which was a strong predictor of psychological well-being. Alternative models were not supported. Results suggest that environments that are segregated offer in-group support and acceptance, thereby protecting self-esteem against possible perils of rejection by a powerful out-group. Findings suggest that the improvement of intergroup relations should not be at the expense of intragroup relations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The formation of in-group favoritism and out-group prejudice in young children: Are they distinct attitudes?

Although standardized measures of prejudice reveal high levels of ethnocentric bias in the preschool years, it may reflect in-group favoritism or out-group prejudice. A measure that partially decouples the two attitudes was given to White children between 4 and 7 years of age to examine the reciprocal relation between and the acquisition and correlates of in-group and out-group attitudes. The two attitudes were reciprocally correlated in 1 sample from a racially homogeneous school but not in a 2nd sample from a mixed-race school. In-group favoritism did not appear until 5 years of age but then reached significant levels; it was strongly related to developing social cognitions. Out-group prejudice was weaker, but its targets suffer from comparison with the high favoritism accorded in-group members. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Group norms and attitude–behavior consistency: The role of group salience and mood.

This study tested the social identity–self-categorization theory reconceptualization of the role of norms in attitude–behavior relations. Specifically, the study investigated how the effects of in-group norms on the relationship between people's attitudes and their behavior vary as a function of the salience of group membership and mood. Participants' (N?=?131) attitudes toward students being responsible for picking up litter on campus grounds were examined. As expected, the effects of the attitudinal congruency of norms varied as a function of group salience under neutral mood (i.e., deliberative processing) conditions. In-group norms were more influential for high-salience individuals than for low salience individuals in a neutral mood. These findings indicate that in-group norms influence behavioral decision making for individuals high in group salience only when there is an opportunity to carefully process the normative information. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

I know you are, but what am I? Self-evaluative consequences of judging in-group and out-group members.

When judging another person, people often spontaneously compare this person with themselves. Six studies examined the self-evaluative consequences of such spontaneous comparisons with in-group versus out-group members. They demonstrate that spontaneous comparisons with in-group members primarily involved the activation of specific individuating knowledge about the self. In particular, knowledge indicating that the self is similar to the judged target was rendered accessible. As a consequence, subsequent self-evaluations that were based on the implications of accessible self-knowledge were assimilated toward in-group targets. Spontaneous comparisons with out-group members, however, primarily involved the activation of more general category knowledge about the self. Specifically, knowledge about judges' membership in a group that distinguished them from the target was rendered accessible. Consequently, self-evaluations were contrasted away from out-group targets. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Social categorization and discriminatory behavior: Extinguishing the minimal intergroup discrimination effect.

Previous research on the minimal intergroup discrimination effect suggests that (a) apparently random social categorization may be sufficient to induce differential responses toward similarly and dissimilarly categorized others and (b) perceived categorical similarity (or intragroup vs intergroup comparisons) may be the basis for the effect. Four experiments were conducted with 227 undergraduates to provide 2 independent tests of the hypotheses. Exps I and II demonstrated that social categorization resulting from a lottery procedure was sufficient to elicit differential allocation of chips to and differential social evaluation of in- and out-group members. Exp III and IV demonstrated that both information about the reward value of the in-group and information about the reward value of the out-group had an impact on Ss' discriminatory behavior. The directions of the effects were opposite: rewards from the in-group increased and those from the out-group decreased discriminatory behavior. (27 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Processing of persuasive in-group messages.

Two studies investigated the processes mediating the persuasive impact of messages representing in-group opinions. In the 1st study, Ss read either a strong or a weak message attributed to either an in-group member or to another group. Ss were more persuaded by a strong message from the in-group than a weak one, suggesting content-focused processing of the in-group message. Ss were equally unpersuaded by either a strong or a weak message from the other group, and showed little sign of message processing. In the 2nd study, Ss listened to in-group or other-group messages about issues that varied in their relevance to in-group membership. When the issue was relevant to the in-group, Ss were persuaded by a strong message from the in-group, unpersuaded by a weak message from the in-group, and equally unimpressed by strong and weak messages from the other group. When the issue was irrelevant to the in-group, Ss accepted the position advocated by the in-group regardless of message quality, and again ignored messages from the other group. These results suggest that increased message processing, and not merely the impact of source persuasion cues, can underlie in-group-mediated attitude change. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-stereotyping and social context: The effects of relative in-group size and in-group status.

In 2 laboratory experiments, the tendency to stereotype oneself in terms of one's group membership as a function of the social context was examined. Exp 1 examined the effects of relative ingroup size on self-stereotyping. The results confirmed the prediction that minority members are more likely than majority members to stereotype themselves. Exp 2 examined the interactive impact of relative in-group size and in-group status. As predicted, a high (relative to a low) status of the in-group increased self-stereotyping primarily for minority members, but not for majority members. Moreover, analyses of the differences in perceived in-group and out-group homogeneity suggest that the in-group homogeneity effect should also be interpreted in terms of self-stereotyping processes. Finally, the interplay between cognitive and motivational determinants of self-stereotyping is discussed as well as a possible distinction between self-stereotyping effects on individual level vs group level self-representations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Implicit associations as the seeds of intergroup bias: How easily do they take root?

Three experiments provided evidence that intergroup bias occurs automatically under minimal conditions, using the Implicit Association Test (IAT; A. G. Greenwald, D. E. McGhee, & J. L. K. Schwartz, 1998). In Experiment 1, participants more readily paired in-group names with pleasant words and out-group names with unpleasant words, even when they were experienced only with the in-group and had no preconceptions about the out-group. Participants in Experiment 2 likewise showed an automatic bias favoring the in-group, even when in-group/out-group exemplars were completely unfamiliar and identifiable only with the use of a heuristic. In Experiment 3, participants displayed a pro-in-group IAT bias following a minimal group manipulation. Taken together, the results demonstrate the ease with which intergroup bias emerges even in unlikely conditions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Devaluing domains in response to threatening intergroup comparisons: Perceived legitimacy and the status value asymmetry.

Group status and status legitimacy were tested as moderators of devaluing in response to threatening intergroup comparisons. In 3 experiments, participants received feedback comparing their in-group (based on school or gender) to a higher or lower status out-group. When the legitimacy of group status differences was assumed (Studies 1 and 2) or manipulated (Study 3), participants devalued the domain when their in-group compared unfavorably with a lower status out-group but did not devalue the domain when their in-group compared unfavorably with a higher status out-group. In Study 3, this status value asymmetry was eliminated when status differences were delegitimized. Mediational analyses suggested that the status value asymmetry was explained by the perceived utility of the domain for gaining status-relevant rewards. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Memory for in-group and out-group information in a minimal group context: The self as an informational base.

The authors argue that persons derive in-group expectancies from self-knowledge. This implies that perceivers process information about novel in-groups on the basis of the self-congruency of this information and not simply its valence. In Experiment 1, participants recalled more negative self-discrepant behaviors about an in-group than about an out-group. Experiment 2 replicated this effect under low cognitive load but not under high load. Experiment 3 replicated the effect using an idiographic procedure. These findings suggest that perceivers engage in elaborative inconsistency processing when they encounter negative self-discrepant information about an in-group but not when they encounter negative self-congruent information. Participants were also more likely to attribute self-congruent information to the in-group than to the out-group, regardless of information valence. Implications for models of social memory and self-categorization theory are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of group membership, relative performance, and self-interest on the division of outcomes.

Each of 105 male undergraduates divided a fixed prize of $3 between 2 competitors. Three factors were varied: (a) group membership of Person 2 (in-group or out-group), (b) relative performance of Person 1 (higher or lower than Person 2, and (c) participation in the prize (Person 1 was self or another in-group member). Low-performing Ss allocated to high performers more than high-performing Ss allocated to themselves and more than nonparticipants allocated to high performers. The largest amount allocated to low performers occurred in the allocation by a nonparticipant to a low-performing in-group member who was competing against an out-group person. Results do not fit 2 existing theoretical analyses of group bias. Instead, results indicate the importance of impression management. The fixed prize induced a substantial number of winner-take-all allocations, rarely found when the prize is determined by the sum of the performances. (17 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Differential processing of in-group and out-group information.

People have a more differentiated cognitive representation of in-groups than of out-groups. This has led to the prediction that memory should be better for in-group information than for out-group information. However, past research has provided equivocal support for that prediction. This article advances a differential processing hypothesis that offers a solution to this paradox. The hypothesis suggests that whereas in-group information is organized by person categories, out-group information is organized through attribute categories. In-group membership alters the categorical basis of memory for person information, but these categories are not necessarily superior to the attribute categories that are used to organize out-group information. That is, both person and attribute categories elicit equal amounts of recall for the in-group and the out-group. Three experiments are reported that support the differential processing hypothesis. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

When are we better than them and they worse than us? A closer look at social discrimination in positive and negative domains.

This article argues that in-group favoritism occurs on positive and negative dimensions only when the dimensions of comparison provide an appropriate and meaningful basis for self–other definition, that is, when traits comparatively and normatively fit in-group–out-group categorizations. Three studies are reported in which groups were evaluated on positive or negative traits that varied in their degree of normative fit to in-group and out-group identity. In line with predictions, fit rather than stimulus valence was the crucial determinant of (1) in-group favoritism and (2) absolute level of differentiation between groups. Implications of the findings for explanations of positive–negative asymmetry and broader understandings of intergroup discrimination are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Linguistic intergroup bias: Differential expectancies or in-group protection?

The linguistic intergroup bias describes the tendency to communicate positive in-group and negative out-group behaviors more abstractly than negative in-group and positive out-group behaviors. This article investigated whether this bias is driven by differential expectancies or by in-group protective motives. In Exp 1, northern and southern Italian participants (N?=?151) described positive and negative behaviors of northern or southern protagonists that were either congruent or incongruent with stereotypic expectancies. Regardless of valence, expectancy-congruent behaviors were described more abstractly than incongruent ones. Exp 2 (N?=?40) showed that language is used in an equally biased fashion for individuals as previously demonstrated for groups. Exp 3 (N?=?192) induced expectancies experimentally and found greater abstraction for expectancy-congruent behaviors regardless of valence. All experiments confirmed the differential expectancy approach. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Identity-based motivation and health.

People do not always take action to promote health, engaging instead in unhealthy habits and reporting fatalism about health. One important mechanism underlying these patterns involves identity-based motivation (D. Oyserman, 2007), the process by which content of social identities influences beliefs about in-group goals and strategies. Seven studies show the effect of identity-based motivation on health. Racial-ethnic minority participants view health promotion behaviors as White middle class and unhealthy behaviors as in-group defining (Studies 1 and 2). Priming race-ethnicity (and low socioeconomic status) increases health fatalism and reduces access to health knowledge (Studies 3 and 4). Perceived efficacy of health-promoting activities is undermined when racial-ethnic minority participants who identify unhealthy behavior as in-group defining are asked to consider their similarities to (middle-class) Whites (Studies 5-7). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)