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)     

Achieving positive social identity: Social mobility, social creativity, and permeability of group boundaries.

Three experiments examined 5 hypotheses of social identity theory ( H. Tajfel & J. C. Turner, 1979 ) concerning social mobility and social creativity strategies and how permeability of group boundaries affects strategy use. As predicted, members of negatively distinctive in-groups distanced themselves psychologically from the in-group (social mobility), rated the distinguishing dimension as less undesirable (social creativity), and rated the in-group more favorably on other dimensions (social creativity) than did members of nondistinctive in-groups. Also as predicted, social creativity strategies were more likely to be used when group boundaries were impermeable rather than permeable. Permeability effects on social mobility strategies were more complex than predicted. Additional findings shed light on relationships among identity-enhancement strategies and on how dimensions are chosen to flatter a negatively distinctive in-group. (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)     

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.     

Effects of the legitimacy of low group or individual status on individual and collective status-enhancement strategies.

Two experiments investigated predictions from social identity theory and relative deprivation theory regarding membership in low-status groups, using a 3 (legitimacy of low status)?×?2 (permeability of group boundaries)?×?2 (stability of group status) between-Ss design. Main dependent variables concerned in-group identification and individual and collective mobility attempts. Group members considered their low status more acceptable when it seemed legitimate. In Exp 1 (n?=?184), illegitimate assignment of low status to the Ss' group increased in-group identification. In Exp 2 (n?=?178), illegitimate allocation of individual Ss to a low-status group decreased group identification. Attempts to acquire higher status individually (individual mobilty) or collectively (group mobility) were more strongly affected by prospects for status improvement than by legitimacy manipulations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Illusory correlation and social categorization: Toward an integration of motivational and cognitive factors in stereotype formation.

Investigated the effect of group membership on the processes underlying the formation of group stereotypes. In two studies, Ss were randomly assigned to a majority group, a minority group, or neither group (control). Ss were then presented with 48 short statements in which other in-group and out-group members displayed disirable and undesirable behaviors, with either desirable or undesirable behaviors occurring more frequently. Across these items there was no correlation between group membership and desirability of behavior. In Study 1, measures of covariation perception showed that control Ss formed biased impressions of the group, consistent with a memory-based process of stereotype formation. Group members' perceptions showed little evidence of this bias. In Study 2, group members showed evidence of an in-group bias, with further evidence suggesting that these biased judgments were not dependent upon memory processes. Discussion focuses on the complexity of stereotyping processes introduced by social categorization. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Perception of out-group homogeneity and levels of social categorization: Memory for the subordinate attributes of in-group and out-group members.

Explored the hypothesis that in-group members perceive their own group as more variegated and complex than do out-group members (the out-group homogeneity principle). In Exps I and II, 168 men and 171 women estimated the proportion of men or women who would endorse a variety of personality/attitude items that varied on stereotypic meaning (masculinity–femininity) and social desirability (favorable–unfavorable). It was predicted and found that out-group members viewed a group as endorsing more stereotypic and fewer counterstereotypic items than did in-group members. Findings are interpreted as support for the out-group homogeneity principle, and it is argued that since this effect was general across items varying in social desirability, the phenomenon was independent of traditional ethnocentrism effects. Exp III asked 90 members of 3 campus sororities to judge the degree of intragroup similarity for their own and 2 other groups. Again, each group judged its own members to be more dissimilar to one another than did out-group judges. In Exp IV, a theory was proposed suggesting that different "levels of social categorization" are used to encode in- and out-group members' behavior and that this process could account for the perception of out-group homogeneity. It was predicted and found that 109 men and 131 women were more likely to remember the subordinate attributes of an in- than out-group member, which provides some evidence for the theoretical model. (26 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

In-group variability and motivation to reduce subjective uncertainty.

Building on the subjective uncertainty reduction model of social identity processes (M. A. Hogg, in press-b; M. A. Hogg & B.-A. Mullin, 1999), it was hypothesized that homogeneous groups would be better than heterogeneous groups at reducing uncertainty and therefore that people would show more intergroup differentiation and turn more to a homogeneous in-group under conditions of uncertainty rather than certainty. Two minimal-group studies were conducted to investigate this idea. As predicted, when groups were homogeneous, more intergroup differentiation was observed under low certainty than under high certainty (Study 1). Study 2 provided evidence that group members turn actively to their group to reduce low certainty when the group is homogeneous. Low certainty led group members to request more feedback about other group members' responses, and they were more likely to change their initial responses when the in-group was perceived as homogeneous. These findings confirm predictions derived from the uncertainty model proposing that uncertainty reduction is a motivation for group behavior. These findings also highlight the importance of social structural factors such as perceived group variability in the uncertainty reduction process. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Unique individual or interchangeable group member? The accentuation of intragroup differences versus similarities as an indicator of the individual self versus the collective self.

In 4 studies, the authors examined antecedents of self-definition as either a unique individual (the individual self) or an interchangeable group member (the collective self). Accentuation of perceived similarities versus differences among in-group members including the self served as the main indicator of participants' relative emphasis on their individual or collective self. Following prior work in the social identity and self-categorization theory tradition, the authors predicted and found systematic variations in the relative emphasis on the individual or collective self. Relative emphasis varied with the valence of temporarily salient in-group features, with the more stable or chronic attractiveness of one's in-group, and with awareness of special treatment of the in-group by the outside world. Finally, issues are discussed concerning the cognitive construal of in-groups as well as the role of the individual self and the collective self for strategies of social mobility and social change. (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)     

Group Decision Making and Perceived Decision Success: The Role of Communication Medium.

The authors investigated the role of communication medium on the relationship between team member perceptions and decision success. Seventy-three 3-person groups participated in a consensus intellective task either face-to-face (FTF) or via computer-mediated communication (CMC). The participants also assessed their group's decision success and team member competencies. CMC group members' success perceptions significantly predicted their group's performance, but FTF group members' perceptions did not. Furthermore, only CMC group members' judgments regarding their group's problem-solving ability significantly predicted their decision success. Last, judgments of decision success mediated the relationship between perceptions of members' problem-solving ability and decision success only for CMC group members. Implications are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The impact of cultural collectivism on reward allocation.

Two studies, with 224 American and 240 Chinese university students, tested the idea that the collectivism of a culture leads to different styles of reward allocation with in- and out-group members. The 1st study used an out-group situation, in which Ss were led to believe that they worked with a partner whom they would not meet, to obtain a group reward. The collectivistic Chinese Ss were found to follow the equity norm more closely in dividing the group reward than the individualistic American Ss when pressure of social evaluation was removed. In the 2nd study, Ss read a scenario in which an allocator worked with either an in- or out-group member. The allocator had either a low or high input and used either the equity or equality norm to divide a group reward. Compared with American Ss, Chinese Ss liked an allocator who divided the group reward equally with an in-group member more and regarded such an allocation as fairer. When Ss were asked to assume that they were the allocator and to hypothetically divide the reward, Chinese Ss followed the equity norm more closely than did American Ss when the recipient was an out-group member or when the Ss' input was low. However, when Ss' input was high and the recipient was an in-group member, Chinese Ss followed the equality norm more than did American Ss. Findings are discussed in terms of the desire for maintaining group solidarity in a collectivist culture. (42 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Vicarious moral licensing: The influence of others' past moral actions on moral behavior.

This article investigates the effect of others' prior nonprejudiced behavior on an individual's subsequent behavior. Five studies supported the hypothesis that people are more willing to express prejudiced attitudes when their group members' past behavior has established nonprejudiced credentials. Study 1a showed that participants who were told that their group was more moral than similar other groups were more willing to describe a job as better suited for Whites than for African Americans. In Study 1b, when given information on group members' prior nondiscriminatory behavior (selecting a Hispanic applicant in a prior task), participants subsequently gave more discriminatory ratings to the Hispanic applicant for a position stereotypically suited for majority members (Whites). In Study 2, moral self-concept mediated the effect of others' prior nonprejudiced actions on a participant's subsequent prejudiced behavior such that others' past nonprejudiced actions enhanced the participant's moral self-concept, and this inflated moral self-concept subsequently drove the participant's prejudiced ratings of a Hispanic applicant. In Study 3, the moderating role of identification with the credentialing group was tested. Results showed that participants expressed more prejudiced attitudes toward a Hispanic applicant when they highly identified with the group members behaving in nonprejudiced manner. In Study 4, the credentialing task was dissociated from the participants' own judgmental task, and, in addition, identification with the credentialing group was manipulated rather than measured. Consistent with prior studies, the results showed that participants who first had the opportunity to view an in-group member's nonprejudiced hiring decision were more likely to reject an African American man for a job stereotypically suited for majority members. These studies suggest a vicarious moral licensing effect. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

The communication of social stereotypes: The effects of group discussion and information distribution on stereotypic appraisals.

Stereotypes are fundamentally social constructs, formulated and modified through discussion and interaction with others. The present studies examined the impact of group discussion on stereotypes. In both studies, groups of participants discussed their impressions about a hypothetical target group after having read behaviors performed by target group members. These behaviors included both stereotypic and counterstereotypic examples, and the distribution of these behaviors varied across discussion group members. In some groups only 1 member knew of the counterstereotypic behaviors; in other groups this information was distributed across all group members. In general, discussion led to a polarization of the target group stereotypes, but this effect was lessened when the counterstereotypic behaviors were concentrated in 1 group member. In this case, these counterstereotypic behaviors were discussed more and retained better. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Evidence for terror management theory II: The effects of mortality salience on reactions to those who threaten or bolster the cultural worldview.

Three experiments were conducted to test the hypothesis, derived from terror management theory, that reminding people of their mortality increases attraction to those who consensually validate their beliefs and decreases attraction to those who threaten their beliefs. In Study 1, subjects with a Christian religious background were asked to form impressions of Christian and Jewish target persons. Before doing so, mortality was made salient to half of the subjects. In support of predictions, mortality salience led to more positive evaluations of the in-group member (the Christian) and more negative evaluations of the out-group member (the Jew). In Study 2, mortality salience led to especially negative evaluations of an attitudinally dissimilar other, but only among subjects high in authoritarianism. In Study 3, mortality salience led to especially positive reactions to someone who directly praised subjects' cultural worldviews and especially negative reactions to someone who criticized them. The implications of these findings for understanding in-group favoritism, prejudice, and intolerance of deviance are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Perceived intragroup homogeneity in minority-majority contexts.

Examined how the factors relative in-group size and relative outgroup size (i.e., minority vs. nonminority) affect the perception of in-group and out-group homogeneity. On the basis of social identity theory, we hypothesized that (a) members of minorities would perceive the in-group as more homogeneous than the out-group, whereas members of nonminorities would perceive the reverse; (b) this effect would be strongest on dimensions most strongly correlated with the social categorization; and (c) members of minorities would identify more strongly with their in-group than would members of nonminorities. 192 13–15 yr olds participated in the experiment. On the presumed basis of a perceptual task, approximately half were randomly allocated to minimal social categories, which differed in perceived size relative to an out-group (which also differed in perceived size). They were asked to estimate the homogeneity of the two groups on a number of dimensional attributes. The remaining (control) subjects gave similar estimates under identical conditions, except that they were not allocated to a category. The data confirmed all but the second hypothesis, which was only partially supported. The results were interpreted in terms of social identification processed. Results tend to rule out alternative explanations in terms of an inverse relation between group size and perceived group homogeneity, rating extremity, and in-group favoritism. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Role of meaningful subgroups in explaining differences in perceived variability for in-groups and out-groups.

Five aspects of the complexity of the knowledge representation of business and engineering majors were examined to see whether these differed by group memberships and whether these differences were related to differences in perceived variability. Significantly more subgroups were generated when describing the in-group than the out-group; this difference predicted the relative tendency to see the in-group as more variable, and when controlled for statistically, out-group homogeneity effects were eliminated. Familiarity, redundancy, number of attributes used to describe the group, and the deviance of the subgroups from the larger group generally showed differences for in-group and out-group but did not show consistent evidence of mediation. In a 2nd study, Ss who were asked to sort group members into meaningful subgroups perceived greater variability relative to those who did not perform the sorting task. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Training group members to set session agendas: Effects on in-session behavior and member outcome": Correction to Kivlighan, Jauquet, Hardie, Francis, and Hershberger.

Reports an error in "Training group members to set session agendas: Effects on in-session behavior and member outcome" by Dennis M. Kivlighan, Carol A. Jauquet, Anne W. Hardie, Anna Maria Francis and Bernard Hershberger (Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1993[Apr], Vol 40[2], 182-187). In Table 4 (p. 186) the values for the means and standard deviations in the second, third, and fourth rows of the "Agenda setting" column were transposed with those in the "No contact" column. The corrected table is presented in this erratum. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 1993-26598-001.) Addressed I. D. Yalom's (1983) hypothesis that group members who set session agendas would participate more effectively in group sessions and have enhanced outcomes. The independent variable, agenda, was manipulated by assigning the 24 members of established personal growth groups to 1 of 3 conditions: (1) training in agenda setting, (2) stabilizing interviews, and (3) no-contact control. Group members filled out pre- and posttest measures of enactments of intimate behaviors and attitudes toward these enactments. They also filled out self- and other ratings of in-group enactments of intimate behaviors, and group leaders rated group members' intimate behavior at the end of each group session. Group members who set here-and-now session agendas enacted more in-group intimate behaviors and had better outcomes. Implications of these results and suggestions for group counseling are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Intergroup norms and intergroup discrimination: Distinctive self-categorization and social identity effects.

Manipulation of in-group and out-group norms of discrimination and fairness allowed for the operation of competing social identity principles concerning in-group bias, conformity, and group distinctiveness. The combined effects of these principles on in-group bias were first examined in a modified minimal-group setting (Study 1). Results demonstrated that participants' allocation strategies were in accord with the in-group norm. Furthermore, dissimilar norms resulted in greater use of positive differentiation allocation strategies. However, in natural groups (Study 2), more in-group bias was found when both group norms were similar and discriminatory. The results confirm the importance of in-group norms and demonstrate differences between experimental and natural groups in the applicability of competing social identity and self-categorization principles. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 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)