Outgroup Evaluations Research Articles

Self-esteem, ingroup favoritism, and outgroup evaluations: A meta-analysis

Social identity theory hypothesizes that ingroup positive distinctiveness serves as a source of self-esteem that in turn propels individuals to favor ingroups over outgroups. The current meta-analysis extends past reviews of this hypothesis by testing if (a) self-esteem is differentially related to ingroup versus outgroup evaluations, and (b) the self-esteem–outgroup evaluation relation is moderated by four theoretically driven factors. A total of 103 effect sizes measured the self-esteem and outgroup derogation relation ( N = 15,764) and the self-esteem and ingroup liking relation ( N = 15,741). High self-esteem was associated with strong ingroup liking and, to a lesser extent, strong outgroup liking. Regarding the second goal, moderator analyses of the relation between self-esteem and outgroup evaluations (up to 71 effect sizes) revealed four patterns: the relation emerged when personal self-esteem was measured, real groups were targeted, low-status groups judged high-status groups, and there was no domain match between self-esteem and the outgroup.

Testing a moral exemplar intervention in a non‐conflict context: The effects of moral exemplars on key dimensions of outgroup evaluations

AbstractMoral exemplar interventions have been shown to increase many positive intergroup outcomes, including perceptions of outgroup morality. However, existing research on moral exemplar interventions has only been conducted in post‐conflict contexts. This study investigates the effects of a moral exemplar intervention on outgroup evaluations in a non‐conflict context. By examining the effects on three key dimensions of outgroup evaluations (morality, sociability, and competence) in Sweden, we aim to extend the generalizability of moral exemplar interventions. An online experiment was conducted with self‐identified Swedes (N = 193) to explore the effects of outgroup (Middle Eastern) moral versus neutral exemplars. Results indicate that moral exemplar stories increased perceptions of outgroup morality while not significantly affecting perceived outgroup competence or sociability. These findings support the hypothesis that moral exemplars influence a specific positive dimension of outgroup evaluations, namely perceptions of morality, rather than any positive dimension such as sociability or competence. The present study also gives tentative support for the applicability of moral exemplar interventions in contexts and settings with no recent history of collective violence.

Generalizing from negative contact: The causal sequence problem and proposed mechanisms of (negative) secondary transfer effects

The secondary transfer effect (STE) describes how contact with one outgroup (the so-called ‘primary outgroup’) can affect evaluations of another outgroup (the so-called ‘secondary outgroup’), that was uninvolved in the contact scenario. This research is about the transfer of negative contact. There are only few studies on the STE from negative contact available and even less longitudinal ones. We conducted such a longitudinal study, utilizing data from the GESIS-Panel, (N = 390; 3 survey waves). We investigated negative STE in an understudied intergroup context: forced migration. The primary outgroup was comprised of ‘foreigners’, living in Germany, the secondary outgroup were ‘refugees.’ We investigated three mechanisms by which negative STE might occur: firstly, contact might affect the primary outgroup attitude, which then affects the secondary outgroup attitude – a mechanism termed ‘attitude generalization.’ Secondly contact might be mediated by the general acceptance of diversity and thereby evaluations of outgroups associated with cultural diversity – a mechanism termed ‘multiculturalism.’ Lastly, contact might affect the perceived threat posed by the primary outgroup, and consequentially evaluations of secondary outgroups – a mechanism that we term ‘primary outgroup threat.’ Applying a cross-lagged panel mediation model, we investigated these theorized mechanisms. Negative STE emerged directly and also indirectly via ‘attitude generalization’ and ‘multiculturalism’ – findings congruent with previous cross-sectional research. Contrary to previous research no indirect effect via ‘primary outgroup threat’ emerged. Our results provide additional empirical evidence for negative STE. They further indicate that negative- and positive STE might operate via similar mechanisms.

The contributions of positive outgroup and negative ingroup evaluation to implicit bias favoring outgroups

People sometimes prefer groups to which they do not belong (outgroups) over their own groups (ingroups). Many long-standing theoretical perspectives assume that this outgroup favorability bias primarily reflects negative ingroup evaluations rather than positive outgroup evaluations. To examine the contributions of negative ingroup versus positive outgroup evaluations to outgroup bias, we examined participants' data (total n > 879,000) from Implicit Association Tests [A. G. Greenwald, D. E. McGhee, J. L. K. Schwartz, J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 74, 1464-1480 (1998)] measuring intergroup attitudes across four social domains in exploratory and preregistered confirmatory analyses. Process modeling [F. R. Conrey, J. W. Sherman, B. Gawronski, K. Hugenberg, C. J. Groom, J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 89, 469-487 (2005)] was applied to the responses of participants who demonstrated implicit outgroup bias to separately estimate the contributions of negative ingroup and positive outgroup evaluations. The outgroup biases of lower-status group members (i.e., Asian, Black, gay and lesbian, and older people) consistently reflected greater contributions of positive outgroup evaluations than negative ingroup evaluations. In contrast, the outgroup biases of higher-status group members (i.e., White, straight, and younger people) reflected a more varied pattern of evaluations. We replicated this pattern of results using explicitly measured intergroup evaluations. Taking these data together, the present research demonstrates a positive-negative asymmetry effect of outgroup bias, primarily among members of lower-status groups.

Denigrating Women, Venerating “Chad”: Ingroup and Outgroup Evaluations among Male Supremacists on Reddit

Can negative evaluations of a broad outgroup paired with positive evaluations of a broad ingroup, sustain willing affiliation with even intensely self-derogating online communities? Synthesizing concepts from masculinities scholarship, social identity theory, and self-verification theory, this study compares language from two distinctive misogynist communities active on Reddit.com —Men Going Their Own Way, male separatists who positively frame members as superior to other men and men as superior to women, and Involuntary Celibates (incels), who openly derogate incel community members—to understand what sustains misogynist incels’ willing affiliation with the self-derogating incel community. Using thematic qualitative analysis, I find that while male separatists favor both their own narrower online community and the broader ingroup of men, misogynist incels engage in a patriarchal bargain, using relatively benevolent depictions of some men alongside negative depictions of all women to perpetuate broader gender inequality.

Awareness of the psychological bias of naïve realism as a subtle strategy for improving stereotypes towards Moroccan women in Spain

The present research explored whether the exposure to the psychological bias of naïve realism (i.e., the conviction that one’s own views are objective, and the other’s views are biased) could promote stereotype change along the dimensions of morality, sociability, and competence. Due to their double discrimination, we considered Moroccan women living in Spain as the target group. Participants (307 Spaniards; Mage = 35.92, SD = 13.37; 61.6% women) were randomly assigned to a naïve realism (vs. control) condition and were further asked to evaluate Moroccan or Spanish women. Findings reveal that Moroccan women were evaluated as more moral, sociable and competent in the naïve realism than in the control condition. The ingroup favouritism towards Spanish women (compared to Moroccan women) disappeared in the moral dimension: once aware of the naïve realism bias, participants perceived Moroccan women as honest, sincere and trustworthy as Spanish women. Taken together, our findings suggest that making people aware of the bias of naïve realism might be beneficial for intercultural relations as it contributes to enhance outgroup evaluations and reduce the ingroup bias on morality, a core dimension in social perception.

Perspective taking in conflict settings: Can perspective taking smooth tensions between Trump and Clinton supporters in the aftermath of 2016 U.S. presidential election?

AbstractCan perspective taking improve intergroup attitudes in conflict contexts? How does a context of conflict shape people's responses to perspective‐taking tasks and their ultimate effectiveness? The present study addressed these questions by examining the effect of perspective taking (compared with a perspective giving and a control condition) on intergroup attitudes between Trump and Clinton supporters (N = 537) one month after the 2016 presidential election. Perspective taking had positive effects on some intergroup attitudes: It increased warmth toward the outgroup (thermometer ratings), outgroup tolerance, perceived similarities between groups, and marginally increased positive outgroup evaluation. This study also sheds light on the mechanisms that might reduce the effectiveness of perspective taking in conflict settings by assessing the content and the effects of the induced perspectives in response to perspective‐taking task. About half of the induced perspective‐taking narratives involved negative views of the other, which were associated with worse intergroup outcomes. In addition, higher perceived intensity of the conflict between Trump and Clinton supporters and more negative emotions about the election outcome predicted more induced negative perspectives as a response to the perspective‐taking task. In turn, negative perspectives were associated with more negative intergroup attitudes. To sum up, while perspective taking had an overall positive impact on intergroup attitudes in this conflict setting, its impact seems to be contingent upon the content of induced perspective‐taking narratives.

Fragmented foes: Affective polarization in the multiparty context of the Netherlands

Affective polarization, or antipathy between the supporters of opposing political camps, is documented to be on the rise in the United States and elsewhere. At the same time, there are limits to our understanding of this phenomenon in multiparty contexts. How do citizens draw the line between 'ingroups' and 'outgroups' in fragmented contexts with multiple parties? Answering this question has been hampered by a relative lack of data on citizens' views towards compatriots with opposing political views outside the US. This study is based on original data collection, measuring citizens’ evaluations of various political and non-political outgroups among a population-representative sample of 1071 Dutch citizens. These data allow to study the extent and configuration of affective polarization in the highly fragmented context of the Netherlands. The analysis shows that respondents do distinguish between parties and partisans. They report more dislike towards political outgroups than towards almost all non-political outgroups. Rather than disliking all out-partisans equally, evaluations grow gradually colder as ideological distance towards a group increases. Affective polarization is especially strong between those who disagree on cultural issues, and between those who support and oppose the populist radical right. The article discusses how these findings enhance our understanding of affective polarization in multiparty systems.

The effect of imagined contact valence on adolescents’ and early adults’ stereotypes, emotions, and behavioral intentions toward ethnic groups

AbstractAcross two experimental studies, this research examined the effects of positive and negative imagined intergroup contact on adolescents’ (Study 1, N = 124) and early adults’ (Study 2, N = 169) stereotype content, emotions, and behavioral intentions toward two immigrant groups in Spain: Ecuadorians, a valued group, and Moroccans, a devalued group. The results showed that the imagined contact valence influenced only adolescents’ outgroup evaluations and only toward Moroccans, the devalued targeted group. Specifically, negative contact indirectly triggered passive harm tendencies through increased negative emotions toward Moroccans. Our findings support previous studies regarding the stronger effect of negative contact on attitudes toward devalued outgroups.

Feeling correct is feeling prejudiced: The differential effects of attitude correctness and attitude clarity on evaluations of outgroups

Global attitude certainty consists of two subconstructs: attitude clarity—certainty that one is aware of one’s true attitudes—and attitude correctness, certainty that one’s attitudes are morally correct and valid. Attitude correctness is more often associated with group-related psychological and behavioral outcomes than attitude clarity. As such, we expected that attitude correctness, but not attitude clarity, would be associated with more negative attitudes toward outgroups when group boundaries are defined by attitudes. Across four studies, greater attitude correctness related to more negative attitudes toward attitudinal outgroups regardless of context (e.g., political, religious); attitude clarity’s relationship to prejudice was inconsistent (Studies 1a and 2: positive or no relationship; Study 3: negative; Studies 1b and 4: no relationship). In Studies 2 and 3, mediational analyses showed that greater attitude correctness was associated with stronger beliefs that group boundaries are sharp and distinct (i.e., discreteness beliefs), which in turn was associated with greater prejudice. Finally, Study 4 demonstrated that the attitude correctness–prejudice link was associated with greater intention to engage in competitive behaviors in a conflict resolution scenario with an outgroup member.

Age Invariance in Implicit Bias: Alternative Perspectives and Their Implications for the Development of Implicit Cognition

Current theories of social cognition assume that implicit bias is influenced by early socialization experiences. To the extent that implicit biases reflect traces of past experiences, they should form slowly over time and grow with repeated experience. However, most research examining implicit bias in children indicates that levels of bias do not vary across age groups (i.e., age invariance). This article reviews the dominant theoretical interpretation of age invariance in implicit bias and considers alternative interpretations for these findings in light of several methodological and theoretical limitations. Specifically, the available evidence cannot distinguish between the effects of cohort versus development, category versus exemplar, attitude activation versus application, ingroup versus outgroup evaluation, or attitude-versus control-oriented processes. When considered from a developmental perspective, these issues suggest plausible alternative interpretations of age invariance, with important implications for understanding the mechanisms underlying the formation of implicit cognition and theories of implicit cognition.

The Immigrant and the Citizen: Out-Group Evaluations and Well-Being of Turkish Immigrants From Bulgaria.

This study examines the postulates of the Rejection Identification Model (RIM) and Rejection Disidentification Model (RDIM) in a sample of 314 ethnic Turks from Bulgaria who migrated to Turkey. We investigate the intervening roles of immigrant and citizen identifications between perceived discrimination and the outcome variables (well-being and out-group evaluations). The results indicate that perceived discrimination predicts negative affect and out-group evaluations. Besides, Turkish citizen identification significantly and positively predicts life satisfaction and satisfaction from living in Turkey, whereas immigrant identification negatively predicts satisfaction in Turkey. Citizen identification predicts positive, and immigrant identification predicts negative out-group evaluations. Immigrant identification plays a mediating role in the link between perceived discrimination and satisfaction in Turkey as well as in that between perceived discrimination and out-group attitudes. The results imply the importance of consideration of contextual factors, including historical and cultural backgrounds, and the meaning of different identities for minority groups in predicting well-being.

Group evaluations as self‐group distancing: Ingroup typicality moderates evaluative intergroup bias in stigmatized groups

AbstractOutgroup favoritism among members of stigmatized groups can be seen as a form of self‐group distancing. We examined how intergroup evaluations in stigmatized groups vary as a function of ingroup typicality. In Studies 1 and 2, Black participants (N = 125,915; N = 766) more strongly preferred light‐skinned or White relative to dark‐skinned or Black individuals the lighter their own skin tone. In Study 3, overweight participants (N = 147,540) more strongly preferred normal‐weight relative to overweight individuals the lower their own body weight. In Study 4, participants with disabilities (N = 35,058) more strongly preferred non‐disabled relative to disabled individuals the less visible they judged their own disability. Relationships between ingroup typicality and intergroup evaluations were at least partially mediated by ingroup identification (Studies 2 and 3). A meta‐analysis across studies yielded an average effect size of r = .12. Furthermore, higher ingroup typicality was related to both ingroup and outgroup evaluations. We discuss ingroup typicality as an individual constraint to self‐group distancing among stigmatized group members and its relation to intergroup evaluations.

On the effectiveness of approach-avoidance instructions and training for changing evaluations of social groups.

Prior evidence suggests that White participants who repeatedly approach images of Black people and avoid images of White people can exhibit a reduction in implicit racial bias (Kawakami, Phills, Steele, & Dovidio, 2007). In contrast, a recent study by Van Dessel, De Houwer, Gast, and Smith (2015) showed that mere instructions to perform approach-avoidance training in an upcoming phase produces a similar change in implicit evaluations of unfamiliar but not familiar social groups. We report 4 experiments that examined the replicability and generalizability of these findings for well-known social groups. Experiment 1 was a replication of the study by Kawakami et al. (2007) in a different domain (i.e., Flemish students' bias toward Turkish people) showing relatively weak evidence for small approach-avoidance training effects on implicit evaluations and explicit liking ratings. Experiment 2 replicated the finding of Van Dessel et al. (2015) that approach-avoidance instructions do not influence implicit evaluations of social out-groups and found no instruction effects even when participants first completed training with nonsocial stimuli. Experiment 3 established the presence of a small approach-avoidance training effect on implicit (but not explicit evaluations) in a large online sample. Experiment 4 directly compared approach-avoidance training and instruction effects, corroborating (a) the effect of training on implicit evaluations which was both small and subject to boundary conditions and (b) the absence of such an effect of instructions. There were again no effects on explicit evaluations. Whereas the current findings provide supportive evidence for training-based approach-avoidance effects (on Implicit Association Test [IAT] scores: meta-analytic effect size current experiments: d = 0.18, Bayes Factor = 65.22; current and prior experiments: d = 0.23, Bayes Factor = 4404.42) and evidence for the absence of instruction-based effects (Bayes Factors < 0.19), they also illustrate that there is still much uncertainty regarding the boundary conditions of these effects and the underlying mental processes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Tracking Prejudice: A Mouse-Tracking Measure of Evaluative Conflict Predicts Discriminatory Behavior

Explicit evaluations of racial out-groups often involve conflict between opposing evaluative tendencies. Yet this type of conflict is difficult to capture with standard measures of evaluative processing, which either ignore explicit evaluation or capture only the aspects of explicit evaluation that are consciously accessible and freely reported. A new tool may fill this gap in our ability to measure conflict in racial evaluation. This tool, called the mouse-tracking measure of racial bias (Race-MT), is designed to capture conflict in explicit evaluations of racial groups, even if that conflict is neither consciously accessible nor freely reported. We vetted the Race-MT by exploring whether it predicts discriminatory behavior. Across five studies (four preregistered, N = 1,492), we used the Race-MT to measure conflict in people’s positive, explicit evaluations of racial out-groups versus in-groups. These measures predicted discriminatory behavior in a noisy, naturalistic setting, suggesting that the Race-MT provides theoretically meaningful and predicatively useful insights into racial evaluation.

How Does Motivation Modulate the Operation of the Mentalizing Network in Person Evaluation?

The mentalizing network is theorized to play a central role in making sense of people (compared with nonsocial targets), but is its involvement affected when we make sense of people in a nondispassionate manner (e.g., favoritism toward others on the basis of group membership)? First, mixed findings and small samples have prevented strong conclusions about whether intergroup evaluation increases or decreases activation regions associated with the mentalizing network. Second, little is known about the psychological mechanism underlying mentalizing network activation shaped by ingroup versus outgroup evaluations. Psychological models suggest two hypotheses that can be challenging to disentangle with self-report: Ingroup trait evaluations may benefit from a priori expectations and/or preferential evidence accumulation. Therefore, the current study (n = 50) drew on a combination of drift diffusion modeling and fMRI to examine how group membership affects the engagement of the mentalizing network for trait evaluation and whether group-differentiated activation is associated with a priori expectations and/or preferential evidence accumulation. Outgroup trait evaluations engaged dorsomedial pFC activation, whereas ingroup trait evaluations engaged ventromedial pFC activation as well as other regions associated with mentalizing such as precuneus, posterior cingulate cortex, and right TPJ. Furthermore, the ventromedial pFC and posterior cingulate cortex activation was associated with differential expectations applied to ingroup trait evaluation. The current findings demonstrate the importance of combining motivational factors, computational modeling, and fMRI to deepen our understanding of the neural basis of person evaluation.

Rethinking intergroup contact across cultures: Predicting outgroup evaluations using different types of contact, group status, and perceived sociopolitical contexts

Two studies were conducted to examine the relationship between three different types of intergroup contact (i.e., direct contact, extended contact, and online contact) and outgroup evaluation, and the moderating effect of group status and sociopolitical contexts across two cultural contexts. A total of 75 European Americans (majority) and 44 Chinese Americans (minority) participated in Study 1; whereas 61 Javanese (majority) and 72 Chinese Indonesians (minority) participated in Study 2. In both studies, participants completed an outgroup feeling thermometer as well as a set of questionnaires measuring intergroup contact, perceived outgroup political power, perceived outgroup economic power, perceived government support, and perceived quality of the current intergroup relations. Results from the two studies revealed that although contact was beneficial in both cultural contexts, there were notable moderators of the links between contact and outgroup evaluations. Specifically, the value of direct contact was greater for the minority group members in the United States, extended contact only mattered in a specific condition when the perceived government support was taken into account in the United States, and online contact was beneficial across group status in the Indonesian context. Overall, the findings provide evidence of the need to take into account the role of specific sociopolitical relations between the two groups in intergroup relations research.

Dual identification, multicultural identity styles, and intergroup evaluations: Some preliminary findings

The current study examines dual identification (i.e., identification with one’s ethnic and national cultures) and cultural identity styles (i.e., the ways in which one negotiates ethnic and national identities) as predictors of intergroup evaluations in a sample of 228 Chinese New Zealanders. It was hypothesized that dual identification predicts more positive ingroup and outgroup evaluations, but also more ingroup bias. Furthermore, we expected that the Hybrid Identity Style (HIS), which reflects blending ethnic and national identities, is linked to positive ingroup and outgroup evaluations, but that the Alternating Identity Style (AIS), which involves shifting between these identities depending on the circumstances, is associated with negative ingroup and outgroup evaluations. We also predicted that HIS moderates the link between dual identification and ingroup bias. As expected, multiple regression analysis indicated that dual identification predicted more positive ingroup evaluation and greater ingroup bias, and HIS moderated these effects. A high level of HIS buffered the influence of dual identification on ingroup bias. HIS was positively, and AIS was negatively associated with both ingroup and outgroup evaluations. The results suggest that HIS is a promising route to positive intergroup relations.

The Moderation Effect of Self-Enhancement on the Group-Reference Effect.

Previous studies have documented that people tend to respond faster and memorize better to the in-group traits. It may be particularly manifest for ethnic minorities, due to their salient ethnic identity. However, few studies have explored how the valence of traits modulates the in-group preference effect. The present study examined the impacts of ethnic identity salience and the valence of traits on the group-preference effect among 33 Han Chinese in a Tibetan-dominant area and 32 Tibetan participants in a Han-dominant area. Two weeks before the experiment, we measured the ethnic identity salience of participants in both groups. In the formal experiment, we used the group-reference effect (GRE) paradigm with three encoding tasks. The results showed that, regardless of whether ethnic identity was salient, both groups responded faster to positive traits than to negative traits when evaluating their own group, whereas there were no significant difference between the processing of positive traits and negative traits in the out-group evaluation and font judgment tasks. This suggested a pervasive processing advantage of the in-group positive characteristics. The results imply that self-enhancement motivation had a moderation effect on the GRE, as well as the ethnic identity salience may not be necessary for a GRE.

“An Australian-style points system”: Individualizing immigration in radical right discourse in the 2015 U.K. General election campaign.

Analyses of racist discourse have often involved data from contexts concerning issues of human mobility. A great deal of this literature points to the extent to which people draw on the tropes of liberalism in order to justify social exclusion, and in particular to warrant negative evaluations of outgroups. Using media data from political debates involving the radical right-wing United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) in the UK General Election campaign of 2015, the present paper highlights a different rhetorical strategy by which exclusion can be warranted by speakers arguing for a reduction in immigration. This novel strategy explicitly avoids any negative characterisation of outgroups, and instead advocates the individualization of immigration decisions. This is exemplified in UKIP’s policy of basing the UK’s approach to immigration on an ‘Australian style points-based system’. This was invoked by UKIP representatives in the debates as a straightforward ‘off-the-shelf’ system that would enable the UK to ‘take back control’ of immigration, whilst ensuring that immigration decisions were based on individual merit rather than on group membership. As such, the points system could also be invoked specifically to anticipate and counter accusations of racism and/or xenophobia. The findings are discussed in relation to the tacit ideological assumptions underpinning UKIP’s policy, specifically around psychologisation, the reliance on an acultural version of Australia, and the tacit use of categorical accounting.