Asymmetrical evaluation of ingroup versus outgroup members: a look from an information integration perspective

Abstract

In evaluating ingroup versus outgroup members two types of information can be used : 'Categorizing information' related to the target's group membership and 'individuating information' related to pieces of information specific to the target to be judged. Information integration theory (IIT, Anderson, 1981) is applied as a formal tool for predicting the judgement resulting from these different pieces of information. It is further assumed that due to a general positivity bias in evaluating own affairs judges tend to evaluate ingroup members more positively than outgroup members. By applying IIT ingroup favouritism on the level of individual targets can be predicted. More importantly, an interaction concerning an asymmetrical impact of ingroup versus outgroup membership information dependent on the individuating information's valence can be predicted : the enhancement of ingroup members should be stronger for negative individuating information, whereas the devaluation of outgroup members should be stronger for positive individuating information. Further a negative correlation between intragroup differentiation and intergroup differentiation on the level of individual judgements is assumed. In a two (judge's group membership : overestimator versus underestimator) by three (target's group membership information absent ; target's group membership information present as either ingroup, or outgroup member) by three (valence of the individuating information : positive, neutral, negative) factorial minimal group design with repeated measures on the last two factors the targets' likability had to be rated. The findings are in accord with predictions. Theoretical conclusions with respect to social judgement-and to intergroup theories as well as with respect to general approaches to context effects in social judgement are discussed.