Abstract
Three studies have tested the hypothesis that intermediate-status groups are more oriented to ally with outgroups when their social position is under threat. In study 1, participants believed that their ingroup was intermediate in status and social stratification was manipulated as either stable or status-detrimental unstable. Results indicated that participants were more likely to seek alliances a) with a high-status group and b) when social stratification was status-detrimental unstable. Study 2 showed that participants were more likely to seek alliances with a lower status group when social stratification was status-detrimental unstable rather than stable, while they were supportive of policies helping disadvantaged groups regardless of the stability of social stratification. Study 3 showed that when social stratification was status-detrimental unstable, intermediate-status group members were more oriented to ally with a low-status group, equally supportive of policies helping disadvantaged groups, but less oriented to supplying direct help to a low-status group.
Highlights
The triadic social stratification theory [2,3] focalizes on intermediate-status groups, that is, groups that, in comparison with at least two other groups, occupy the social position that is inbetween
Given that social identity is satisfied through downward comparison, intermediate-status group members are expected to have no, or little, motivation to compete with other groups when social stratification is stable
Starting from the triadic social stratification theory [2], we showed that intermediate-status groups may be oriented to ally with a low-status outgroup when this group is threatening and social stratification is downwardly unstable
Summary
The triadic social stratification theory [2,3] focalizes on intermediate-status groups, that is, groups that, in comparison with at least two other groups, occupy the social position that is inbetween. Given that social identity is satisfied through downward comparison, intermediate-status group members are expected to have no, or little, motivation to compete with other groups when social stratification is stable. When social stratification becomes unstable, intermediate-status group might instead experience a threat to their social identity, and this should be especially evident when instability concerns differences with low-status groups (i.e., status-detrimental instability). In such a case, TSST expects that intermediate-status group members might act in a reactionary way, trying to defend and maintain their intermediate position it is not completely advantageous. It has been shown that intermediate-status group members are more biased against both high-status and low-status outgroups when social stratification in depicted as unstable rather than stable [e.g., 7]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
