Ingroup Evaluations Research Articles

Group virtue: The importance of morality (vs. competence and sociability) in the positive evaluation of in-groups.

Although previous research has focused on competence and sociability as the characteristics most important to positive group evaluation, the authors suggest that morality is more important. Studies with preexisting and experimentally created in-groups showed that a set of positive traits constituted distinct factors of morality, competence, and sociability. When asked directly, Study 1 participants reported that their in-group's morality was more important than its competence or sociability. An unobtrusive factor analytic method also showed morality to be a more important explanation of positive in-group evaluation than competence or sociability. Experimental manipulations of morality and competence (Study 4) and morality and sociability (Study 5) showed that only in-group morality affected aspects of the group-level self-concept related to positive evaluation (i.e., pride in, or distancing from, the in-group). Consistent with this finding, identification with experimentally created (Study 2b) and preexisting (Studies 4 and 5) in-groups predicted the ascription of morality, but not competence or sociability, to the in-group.

The link between identification and in‐group favouritism: Effects of threat to social identity and trust‐related emotions

The relation between identification and in-group favouritism was analysed across two studies, in which the relevance of three intervening factors was demonstrated: (a) the moderating role of social identity threat, (b) the mediating role of trust-related emotions experienced towards in-group and out-group members, and (c) the importance of the distinction between in-group and out-group evaluations. When the in-group was not threatened, the link between identification and in-group bias was unreliable. The effect of in-group identification on in-group bias was stronger when either the value or the distinctiveness of the in-group were threatened. A value threat strengthened the influence of identification on in-group evaluation and, via out-group distrust, on out-group derogation. Under a distinctiveness threat, identification affected out-group evaluation and intergroup differentiation. These results demonstrate that the relation between identification and in-group favouritism is reliable only in a clear intergroup context. Moreover, they show that the role and the strength of in-group and out-group trust are altered by the type of social identity threat introduced. Finally, they clarify that in-group love and out-group hate phenomena are not zero-sum, and that their presence may be simultaneous when the value of the in-group is threatened by out-group members.

Interethnic Relations in a Changing Political Context

The aim of this study was to examine evaluations of multiple groups by both ethnic majority-group (Dutch) and minority-group (Turkish-Dutch) members during a turbulent political period in the Netherlands, marked by the rapid rise and subsequent decline of a new-rightist, populist movement. The analysis of cross-sectional data from three periods (2001 to 2003) showed clear changes in these evaluations. As expected, both the Dutch and the Turkish participants showed higher ingroup identification and ingroup evaluation in 2002 than in 2001 and 2003. In addition, in 2002 the Dutch participants evaluated the Islamic outgroups (Turks and Moroccans) more negatively, whereas their evaluation of other ethnic minority groups did not differ across the three years. In contrast, Turkish participants evaluated all ethnic outgroups, including the Dutch and the Moroccans, more negatively in 2002. We conclude that it is important to study ethnic relations across time, in relation to political circumstances, from the perspective of both majority- and minority-group members, and in relation to different ethnic outgroups.

White Selves: Conceptualizing and Measuring a Dominant-Group Identity.

This article addresses the nature and measurement of White racial identity. White identification is conceptualized as an automatic association between the self and the White ingroup; this association is fostered through social exposure to non-Whites and serves to link self- and ingroup evaluations. Four studies validated a measure of White identification against criteria derived from this model. In Study 1, the White Identity Centrality Implicit Association Test (WICIAT) predicted response latencies in a task gauging self-ingroup merging. In Study 2, the WICIAT correlated with census data tapping exposure to non-Whites. In Studies 3 and 4, the WICIAT predicted phenomena associated with the linking of self- and ingroup evaluations: identity-related biases in intergroup categorization (Study 3) and self-evaluative emotional reactions to ingroup transgressions (Study 4). Together, the findings shed light on the antecedents and consequences of White identity, an often-neglected individual difference construct.

Ethnic Group Identification and Group Evaluation Among Minority and Majority Groups: Testing the Multiculturalism Hypothesis.

Following social identity theory, the author hypothesized that members of minority groups are more likely than majority group members to endorse multiculturalism more strongly and assimilationist thinking less strongly. In addition, the multiculturalism hypothesis proposes that the more minority groups endorse the ideology of multiculturalism (or assimilationism), the more (or less) likely they will be to identify with their ethnic in-group and to show positive in-group evaluation. In contrast, the more majority group members endorse multiculturalism (or assimilationism), the less (or more) likely they are to identify with their ethnic group and to show negative out-group evaluation. Results from 4 studies (correlational and experimental) provide support for this hypothesis among Dutch and Turkish participants living in the Netherlands.

Community-Building with Web-Based Systems ? Investigating a Hybrid Community of Students

This paper examines WiInf-Central, the 'virtual homeplace' of a student community (on Information Systems) at the University of Hamburg, and focuses on processes of social identity and community-building. Drawing on social-identity theory and communities of practice as our theoretical basis, we illustrate that the processes of identity-building and positive in-group evaluation triggered by WiInf-Central serve as a means for students of Information Systems to assert themselves against faculty members and students of other disciplines. While our study reveals strong mechanisms of social exclusion, inclusion mechanisms have to be assessed in a more differentiated way. In particular, our study shows the emergence of several 'subgroups', which appear largely closed to other community members. We ascribe this to both the self-organized and the hybrid -- half virtual, half real -- nature of the community based on WiInf-Central.

Adolescents' Intergroup Attributions: A Comparison of Two Social Identities

This study investigated the intergroup perceptions of 2 social groups. English adolescents aged 14–15 years were asked to make causal attributions for various positive and negative behaviors performed by members of an in-group and an out-group. In the first condition (n = 45), participants rated members of their own peer group and members of a peer group to which they did not belong. Participants in the second condition (n = 45) rated English adolescents and members of a national out-group (either France or Germany). Results showed that participants in both conditions reported perceptions that were biased towards the formation of a favorable in-group evaluation. However, the relationship between intergroup discrimination and identification with the in-group was in the expected direction for participants in the peer group condition only. This observation is explained in terms of the potential level of identity threat posed by the prevalent intergroup context.

Young Children's Evaluations of the Ingroup and of Outgroups: A Multi‐National Study

AbstractIn investigating intergroup attitudes, previous research in developmental psychology has frequently confounded ingroup favouritism and outgroup derogation. The present study, using unconfounded measures, examines the possibility that ingroup favouritism and outgroup derogation are distinct phenomena. Six‐year‐old children (n=594) from five, culturally diverse nations were asked to make various evaluations of the national ingroup and of four national outgroups. The data indicate that although there is overwhelming evidence that young children favour the ingroup over other groups, outgroup derogation is limited in extent and appears to reproduce attitudes held by adult members of the particular nations investigated.

Self, in‐group, and out‐group evaluation: bond or breach?

AbstractA number of studies have looked at causes of in‐group bias, but few studies have actually investigated whether the two components of in‐group bias, i.e. in‐group and out‐group evaluation, are related to each other and whether they have similar or different predictors. In the Fiji Islands, self‐, in‐group, and out‐group evaluations were obtained using within‐subject correlations from a sample of 336 indigenous and Indian Fijians. Self‐evaluation was positively related to in‐group evaluation, and both were positively related to out‐group evaluation, supporting a spillover model. After controlling for background variables and the other evaluation variables, regression analyses showed that in‐group identification was positively related to in‐group evaluation, and social distance and political ethnocentrism were negatively related to out‐group evaluation. Additionally, ethnicity interacted with collective self‐esteem in determining both in‐group favouritism and out‐group derogation. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Evaluations and Perceptions of Self, Ingroup, and Outgroup: Comparisons Between Mexican-American and European-American Children

The present research examined evaluations of self, ingroup members, and outgroup members among young Mexican-American and European-American children. European-American children showed a greater discrepancy between evaluations of themselves and other ingroup members, and perceived fewer ingroup members as like themselves, relative to Mexican-American children. European-American children also evaluated ingroup targets more positively than outgroup targets, and perceived substantially fewer outgroup targets to be like them, while Mexican-American children showed more balanced perceptions and evaluations of ingroup and outgroup targets. Considerations of group differences in status and culture are discussed, along with implications of these findings for research on children's self-evaluations.

Self-Anchoring in the Minimal Group Paradigm: The Impact of Need and Ability to Achieve Cognitive Structure

A study is reported that focused on the role of self-anchoring in the definition of social groups. We assumed that group members give meaning to a novel ingroup by defining it as similar to the self. Moreover, the need and ability to engage in cognitive structuring should affect this process. A minimal group study in which self, ingroup and outgroup evaluations were obtained supported these hypotheses. Regression analysis revealed that self-evaluations predicted ingroup evaluations, but that this effect was qualified by an interaction with ability and need for cognitive structuring. Participants high both in the need for cognitive structure and the ability to achieve cognitive structure relied most heavily on the self as a heuristic for ingroup evaluations.

Being Attuned to Intergroup Differences in Mergers: The Role of Aligned Leaders for Low-Status Groups

The present research focused on responses of low-status group members to a merger with a high-status group. A study was conducted (N = 153) in which the alignment of the leader for the merged group (ingroup vs. outgroup) and leader behavior (equality, outgroup favoritism, ingroup favoritism, complementarity) were manipulated. The authors predicted that the leader, by his or her behavior, would play an important role in defining the new relationship between premerger groups. Overall, low-status ingroup leaders were evaluated more positively than high-status outgroup leaders. Ingroup leaders were evaluated more favorably and were more likely to engender a common identity in the merged group than were outgroup leaders when leaders behaved in an ingroup-favoring or complementary fashion. In contrast, evaluations of ingroup and outgroup leaders did not differ when the leader stressed equality or was outgroup favoring. The findings demonstrate the important role leaders can play in accentuating or de-emphasizing premerger status differences.

Ethnic minority identity and group context: self‐descriptions, acculturation attitudes and group evaluations in an intra‐ and intergroup situation

AbstractIn an experimental questionnaire study among Chinese participants living in the Netherlands, it was found that self‐descriptions, acculturation attitudes and ingroup evaluation were affected by the comparative group context. Following self‐categorization theory, different predictions were tested and supported. Self‐ratings on trait adjectives systematically differed between an intragroup (Chinese) and an intergroup (Chinese versus Dutch) context. Furthermore, ethnic self‐categorization turned out to be related to self‐descriptions in the intragroup context, whereas ethnic self‐esteem showed an effect on self‐descriptions in the intergroup context. Acculturation attitudes and ingroup favouritism were also affected by the comparative context. In the intergroup context, participants were more strongly in favour of heritage culture maintenance and reported higher ingroup favouritism than in the intragroup context. It is concluded that studies on ethnic minorities should consider the important and often neglected intragroup processes and comparisons in addition to the familiar minority–majority group comparisons. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The ‘Post-Holocaust Jew’ and the Instrumentalization of Philosemitism

Altfelix attempts to examine and explain why xenophiles are politically prone to an ambivalent re-utilization of xenophobic images of the Other. In Germany both ‘the Jew’ and ‘the Ausländer’ have been instrumentalized xenophilically in their capacity as abstract notions by certain system actors and publics in a manner which appears to shed more light on the in-group than the Other. Xenophilia as a self-oriented, positive in-group evaluation may be identified as particularly evident in the post-war German political discourse on the Holocaust. In similar fashion to antisemitism, philosemitism represents an ‘allosemitic’ (Bauman) abstraction of ‘the Jew’, whose evocation is comparable to the idea of a ‘good foreigner’ as expressed in Ausländerfreundlichkeit (foreigner-friendliness). Xenophilia/philosemitism—like xenophobia/antisemitism—is dependent upon a relative opposition between ‘concretized Self’ and ‘abstracted Other’. Altfelix argues that this relationship emerges for two reasons. First, manifestations of xenophilia are generally preceded by bouts of xenophobia. Consequently, some publics may identify a need for creating a positive in-group focus. In this, the Other must not become too concrete for fear of distracting attention away from the xenophile's agenda. Second, the difference between Self and Other must be effectively maintained, since the xenophile's raison d'être depends upon it. Post-war German philosemitism appears to be a good exemplar for this definition of ‘xenophilia’. It demonstrates the dangers of moving within an allosemitic cycle in which difference becomes a method of keeping otherness at bay through abstraction. The fear of a misremembrance of the Holocaust resulting from an abstract memorialization seems to provide a very solid political basis for perpetuating a philosemitic identity construction of ‘the Jew’ as abstracted Other.

In-Group Favoritism Among Native and Immigrant Turkish Cypriots: Trait Evaluations of In-Group and Out-Group Targets

The authors investigated whether in-group favoritism manifests itself as praise for the in-group or as denigration of the out-group. A total of 450 Turkish Cypriots (248 native, 202 immigrant) judged the applicability of positive and negative trait words to in-group and out-group targets. Both the native and the immigrant groups judged the positive traits as more applicable to their respective in-groups than to the out-group. The native group evaluated the negative social traits as more applicable to the immigrant group. The immigrant group also judged the negative social traits as more applicable to themselves. The two groups did not differ in their judgments for more personal negative traits.

Collective self-esteem, personal self-esteem, and collective efficacy in in-group and outgroup evaluations

In assessing the relationship between self-esteem and in-group/outgroup evaluations, this study examined whether self-esteem is better measured at a collective (collective self-esteem [CSE]) than a personal level (personal self-esteem [PSE]). It was expected that subjects high in CSE would engage in more in-group favoritism (measured by in-group evaluations), whereas those low in CSE would engage in more outgroup derogation (measured by outgroup evaluations). No effect for PSE was predicted. Furthermore, the study explored whether perceptions of collective efficacy may underlie this relationship. Subjects played a public goods task. The in-group's outcome was compared to the outcome of other relevant outgroups, enhancing pressures towards intergroup differentiation. Consistent with the predictions, subjects high in CSE evaluated in-group members more positively than those in low CSE (i.e., in-group favoritism), whereas subjects low in CSE evaluated outgroup members more negatively than those high in CSE (i.e., outgroup derogation). Also in line with our predictions, no effect for PSE was found. Perceptions of collective efficacy appeared to be a mediator of the effect of CSE.

Effect of Collective Self-Esteem on Ingroup Evaluations

Effect of Collective Self-Esteem on Ingroup Evaluations

The Effects of Linguistic Voice on Evaluations and Attributions of Ingroup And Outgroup Members

This current study investigated the effects of English language active and passive voice on evaluations and attributions of responsibility toward an ingroup member or an outgroup member who behaved in either a positive or a negative manner. Prior theoretical and empirical analyses suggested that passive voice transformations would have the effect of: (1) reducing the saliency of the logical subject of a sentence relative to the logical object, thereby (2) reducing attributions of responsibility toward the logical subject. Results indicated that, regardless of group membership, attributions of responsibility for positive behavior, but not negative behavior, were reduced when described in the passive voice compared to the active voice. A passive voice transformation also had the effect of reducing the extremity of ingroup evaluations relative to outgroup evaluations for both positive and negative behaviors. We discuss the implications of these data with reference to social‐linguistic analyses of masking and influence.

Evaluations of Ingroup and Outgroup Members: The Role of Category-Based Expectancy Violation

Examines the role of category-based expectancy violation in explaining extreme evaluations of ingroup and outgroup members. In three experiments, descriptions about ingroup and outgroup targets were varied to manipulate expectancy violation. Participants evaluated the global favorability and rated the trait characteristics of either an ingroup or an outgroup target. In addition, they indicated the extent to which the targets violated category-based expectancies. Experiment 1, which included two different scenarios that violated category-based expectancies, showed that expectancy violation affected global evaluations of target favorability and that measured expectancies mediated these evaluations. Experiment 2 replicated Experiment 1 and showed that ingroup and outgroup targets were evaluated similarly when category-based expectancies were not violated. Experiment 3 presented positive job resumes that violated or did not violate stereotyped expectancies for female and male job applicants. The results showed that female and male targets were evaluated more positively when they violated stereotyped expectations for their gender group and that these outcomes were not modified by the subject's group membership. The results are discussed in terms of expectancy-violation theory as well as assumed-characteristics and cognitive-complexity theories.

Ingroup bias, self-enhancement and group identification

These two studies integrate self-enhancement and ingroup bias and analyse the phenomena from the social identity theory and self-categorization theory. In Study 1, the subjects (N=181) evaluated supporters of two presidential candidates on a rating scale. In Study 2, the subjects (N=302) evaluated either Finnish women's and men's positive characteristics (success condition) or negative characteristics (failure condition) which might play a role in achieving equality between the sexes in Finland. Self-evaluations were conducted on the same scale as those of ingroup and outgroup evaluations. The results showed that ingroup was evaluated more positively than outgroup (hypothesis 1) and that self was evaluated more positively than ingroup (in Study 2, however, this main effect was qualified by gender). As expected, group identification did not dilute self-enhancement (hypothesis 2) in either of the studies but strengthened self-enhancement in Study 1. Hypothesis 3 stated that self-enhancement is inversely related to ingroup favouritism but the hypothesis was only partially confirmed in that the correlation was predictably negative in Study 1 but near zero in both conditions of Study 2. Finally, contrary to hypothesis 4, it turned out that high identified group members evaluated self and ingroup more independently than lows which contradicts the idea of depersonalization. Together the results would be plausible if we rejected the unidimensional conception of interpersonal–intergroup behaviour and assumed instead that interpersonal and intergroup behaviour constitute two bipolar continua. © 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.