The role of categorization and in-group norms in judgments of groups and their members.

Four minimal group experiments tested the prediction that judgments of groups and their members reflect evaluations made simultaneously but independently at the within-group and intergroup levels. On the basis of self-categorization theory and social identity theory, it was predicted that group members seek both intergroup distinctiveness and legitimization of in-group norms. In Experiments 1–3, membership (in-group, out-group), status of group members (modal, deviant), and either accountability to in-group or to out-group or salience of group norms were varied. Accountability and norm salience increased derogation of out-group normative (in-group deviant, out-group modal) and upgrading of in-group normative (in-group modal, out-group deviant) members. In Experiment 4, within-group differentiation reinforced in-group identification. These findings suggest that subjective group dynamics operate to bolster social identity when people judge modal and deviant in-group and out-group members. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The role of integral affect and category relevance on crossed categorization.

The authors investigated integral affect effects (insults or compliments from out-group members) on evaluations of crossed-categorization targets (in-group/in-group, in-group/out-group, out-group/in-group (Oi), and out-group/out-group) as discussion partners. The Oi target possessed a category membership that matched the out-group source of affect. The relevance of this category to participants’ own category membership determined the evaluation patterns. As predicted, negative affect lowered evaluations of targets with group memberships relevant to those of the insulting out-group members (Study 1). Positive affect primed the positive aspects of in-group memberships, leading to broader, more inclusive categorizations of targets irrespective of their relevance to the affective source (Study 2). Evaluation patterns across targets also confirmed predictions, with negative and positive affect respectively producing hierarchical and social inclusion patterns. (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)     

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)     

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)     

Audience-tuning effects on memory: The role of shared reality.

After tuning to an audience, communicators' own memories for the topic often reflect the biased view expressed in their messages. Three studies examined explanations for this bias. Memories for a target person were biased when feedback signaled the audience's successful identification of the target but not after failed identification (Experiment 1). Whereas communicators tuning to an in-group audience exhibited the bias, communicators tuning to an out-group audience did not (Experiment 2). These differences did not depend on communicators' mood but were mediated by communicators' trust in their audience's judgment about other people (Experiments 2 and 3). Message and memory were more closely associated for high than for low trusters. Apparently, audience-tuning effects depend on the communicators' experience of a shared reality. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Linguistic intergroup bias: Evidence for in-group-protective motivation.

Linguistic intergroup bias (LIB) is the tendency to describe positive in-group and negative out-group behaviors more abstractly than negative in-group and positive out-group behaviors. Two experiments investigated the role of in-group-protective motives, by varying threat to ingroup identity of hunters vs. environmentalists (Experiment 1, N?=?160) and northern vs. southern Italians (Experiment 2, N?=?212). Participants whose in-group had or had not been threatened described positive and negative behaviors of in-group and out-group protagonists. In both experiments, the LIB was greater under identity threat. Experiment 1 also showed that LIB was positively related to postexperimental but not to preexperimental individual and collective self-esteem. Results suggest that the magnitude of LIB depends on in-group-protective motivation and that in-group-favoring language may be functional to self-esteem maintenance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Some determinants of the persuasive power of in-groups and out-groups: Organization of information and attribution of independence.

Four experiments examined the hypothesis that in-groups exert more influence than do out-groups. The hypothesis was supported using both laboratory groups of university students and a natural social category (university affiliation). Ss exposed to in-group communicators attributed greater independence to them, made fewer errors in recalling their messages, and clustered recollections of messages by individual speaker. In addition, the persuasiveness of out-group members was enhanced when individuating information was provided about them that increased their heterogeneity. The individuated out-group members were as influential as in-group communicators. Results were interpreted in terms of attribution and social identity processes. (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)     

Big fish in small ponds: a social hierarchy analysis of intergroup bias

High- and low-self-esteem group members received feedback about their individual performance as well as that of their own group and an out-group. They then evaluated both groups. Yoked-control observer individuals also provided group evaluations. In the in-group success/out-group failure condition, in-group enhancement tendencies were attenuated by individual failure feedback and augmented by individual success feedback. Low-self-esteem group members who received individual failure feedback showed favoritism toward the unsuccessful out-group over their own successful in-group. In the in-group failure/out-group success condition, in-group enhancement tendencies were attenuated by individual success feedback and augmented by individual failure feedback. Thus individuals' position in a social hierarchy mediates upward and downward social mobility strategies.     

Repulsion or attraction?: Group membership and assumed attitude similarity.

Three studies investigated group membership effects on similarity-attraction and dissimilarity-repulsion. Membership in an in-group versus out-group was expected to create initially different levels of assumed attitude similarity. In 3 studies, ratings made after participants learned about the target's attitudes were compared with initial attraction based only on knowing target's group membership. Group membership was based on political affiliation in Study I and on sexual orientation in Study 2. Study 3 crossed political affiliation with target's obnoxiousness. Attitude dissimilarity produced stronger repulsion effects for in-group than for out-group members in all studies. Attitude similarity produced greater increments in attraction for political out-group members but not for targets with a stigmatic sexual orientation or personality characteristic. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Language use in intergroup contexts: The linguistic intergroup bias.

Three experiments examine how the type of language used to describe in-group and out-group behaviors contributes to the transmission and persistence of social stereotypes. Two experiments tested the hypothesis that people encode and communicate desirable in-group and undesirable out-group behaviors more abstractly than undesirable in-group and desirable out-group behaviors. Experiment 1 provided strong support for this hypothesis using a fixed-response scale format controlling for the level of abstractness developed from G. R. Semin and K. Fiedler's (see record 1988-20078-001) linguistic category model. Experiment 2 yielded the same results with a free-response format. Experiment 3 demonstrated the important role that abstract versus concrete communication plays in the perpetuation of stereotypes. The implications of these findings and the use of the linguistic category model are discussed for the examination of the self-perpetuating cycle of stereotypes in communication processes. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Role of out-group cues in determining social identity.

Examined the role of out-group cues in determining social identity and guiding behavior in 2 experiments with 131 undergraduates. In Exp I, Ss were exposed to a cue either of an in-group (Ss' college), a relevant out-group (a rival college), or an irrelevant out-group (a baseball team). Ss examined a list of words and were later asked to recognize those they had seen from a larger list in which words related to the 3 groups were embedded. Results indicate that Ss made more false recognitions of in-group related words when a relevant out-group was salient than when an irrelevant out-group was salient. Exp II tested a behavioral implication of Exp I: Out-group salience increases adherence to an in-group norm. In the 1st phase of Exp II, Ss were divided into 2 groups and deliberated 2 civil suits. Ss' in-group favored the plaintiffs for both cases. Ss were divided into new groups for the 2nd phase, and the same procedure was followed. This time, however, the in-group favored the defendants. In the 3rd phase, Ss were exposed to a cue either of the out-group in Phase 1 or Phase 2. Ss' judgments for 2 new cases were biased in the direction of the norm of the in-group that was associated with the salient out-group. Ss favored the plaintiff (or defendant) when the 1st (or 2nd) out-group was salient. (14 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Assimilation and contrast effects in the judgments of groups.

In a series of four experiments, we examined the impact of varying the salience of an extremely different out-group on subjects' evaluations of a moderately different out-group. Evaluations of the moderately different out-group were accentuated when the extreme out-group was present: In a preliminary study and in Experiment 1, the moderate out-group was rated more poorly; in Experiments 1, 2, and 3, it was rated more favorably. Results were interpreted in a social judgment framework. Evidence from Experiment 3 indicated that salience of the extreme out-group was associated with a shift in the positions subjects thought the moderate out-group espoused. This shift in judgment may have brought about or at least justified the change in subjects' evaluations of the moderate out-group. Implications for intergroup relations are considered in the discussion. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The view from below: Intergroup relations from the perspective of the disadvantaged group.

This study examined how disadvantaged group members perceive and respond to members of a disadvantaged out-group and an advantaged out-group. Three experiments revealed that a disadvantaged out-group was harmed more and seen as more homogeneous when its own performance was similar to or better than the in-group, and when it was in the presence of an advantaged out-group that performed similar to or better than the in-group. Conversely, an advantaged group was harmed more and seen as more homogeneous when its own performance was worse than the in-group, and when it was in the presence of a disadvantaged out-group that performed worse than the in-group. The results were interpreted in a social comparison framework, suggesting that responses to outgroups are influenced by their status and performance as well as the performance of other out-groups in the situation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Stereotype effects of attributions, predictions, and evaluations: No two social judgments are quite alike.

The effects of stereotypes on attributions, predictions, and evaluations were examined in 2 experiments. Black out-group targets and White in-group targets were described in stereotyped-consistent or stereotyped-inconsistent ways. Stereotyped-inconsistent behavior (1) was attributed to external causes or to effort, and internal stable cause for the out-group; (2) undermined prediction of future similar behavior, but only the out-group, and (3) resulted in more extreme evaluations in the direction of the inconsistency. Attributions mediated the relationship between race and target evaluations. A model is presented that emphasizes the importance of distinguishing among different types of social judgments in assessing stereotype effects. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 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)     

Effect of affective reactions by an out-group on preferences for crossed categorization discussion partners.

The authors experimentally examined the effects of positive or negative affect from an out-group (O) on preferences for the 4 crossed categorization targets—in-group–in-group (ii), in-group–outgroup (io), out-group–in-group (oi), and out-group–out-group (oo)—as discussion partners. Study 1 induced affect with compliments; Study 2 used insults; Study 3 cross-culturally assessed the effects of both types of affect. Preferences for the target who possessed a category membership that matched the out-group source of affect on 1 dimension of categorization (Oi) were increased by compliments and decreased by insults. Confirming predictions, positive affect produced a hierarchical rejection pattern (ii?=?Oi?>?io?>?oo). Negative affect produced a hierarchical acceptance pattern (ii?>?io?>?Oi?=?oo). All 3 control conditions yielded an additivity pattern (ii?>?io?=?oi?>?oo). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Racism and racial categorization.

Social identity theory predicts that perceivers strongly identified with an in-group will maximize the distinction and maintain a clear boundary between their own and other groups by categorizing others' membership accurately. Two experiments tested the prediction that racially prejudiced individuals, who presumably identify highly with their racial in-group, are more motivated to make accurate racial categorizations than nonprejudiced individuals. Results indicated that prejudiced participants not only took longer to categorize race-ambiguous targets (Experiments 1 and 2), but also made more nonverbal vocalizations when presented with them (Experiment 1), suggesting response hesitation. The results support the hypothesis that, compared to nonprejudiced individuals, prejudiced individuals concern themselves with accurate identification of in-group and out-group members and use caution when making racial categorizations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)