Intergroup Bias Research Articles

Electrophysiological indexes of ingroup bias in a group Stroop task: Evidence from an event-related potential study

Although cognitive system assigns higher attentional resources to ingroup information than outgroup information, but it is unclear whether the ingroup bias can be measured by the processes that are related to allocation of attentional resources to ingroup information. Thus, a group Stroop task was developed to study the issues combining with event-related potential (ERP) technique in this study. Specifically, 34 subjects (17 female, mean age = 20.76 ± 1.26) were firstly divided into blue or red group (17 subjects for each group); then they were asked to categorize four words of Stroop task into “our team” or “other team” based on the ink color (blue/red) of the words whose meaning were also red/blue. The behavioral results showed that outgroup ink color processing was interfered by ingroup word meaning, but the ingroup ink color processing was less/not interfered by outgroup word meaning. The ERP results showed that the amplitude of frontal N100 was enhanced when more attentional resources were automatically captured by ingroup information in early stage than outgroup information; P2/N2 amplitude was reduced or enhanced when outgroup information processing was interfered by ingroup information; enhanced P3b amplitude reflected that attention could be more easily allocated to ingroup information than outgroup information based on target. This study implied a novel direction to study the neural basis of ingroup bias by investigating the roles of ingroup bias in assigning attentional resources to group information.

Looks can be deceiving: Investigating change blindness in an online setting.

In the real world, we often fail to notice changes in our environment. In some cases, such as not noticing a car moving into our lane, the results can be catastrophic. This so-called change blindness has been seen experimentally both through failing to notice changes to images on-screen as well as failing to notice a change in other people's identity. However, less is known regarding how change blindness manifests in virtual settings varying in visual clutter or with varying types of interaction with someone prior to the change. Across two studies (n = 134), participants engaged in an online video chat with a confederate, with two levels of visual clutter (none, a lot) and three levels of interaction (none, light conversations about weather/TV, deeper conversations about goals/greatest regrets). We found no modulation of change blindness rates across perceptual clutter. Curiously, we found a large discrepancy in change blindness rates in Experiment 1 (79%; 52/66) versus Experiment 2 (16%; 11/68) that we explored, leading to some evidence that increasing the level of interaction led to greater change blindness rates, but only for pairs who identified as belonging to different ethnicities. Taken together, our work suggests that we may pay attention to people differently in virtual settings compared to in-person, that in-group and out-group biases may have an effect on change blindness rates, and that while clutter does not seem to affect change blindness rates, one's level of interaction just might. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Group membership modulates empathic neural responses to pain in deaf individuals.

Empathy deficiencies are prevalent among deaf individuals. It has yet to be determined whether they exhibit an ingroup bias in empathic responses. This study employed explicit and implicit empathy tasks (i.e. attention-to-pain-cue [A-P] task and attention-to-nonpain-cue [A-N] task) to explore the temporal dynamics of neural activities when deaf individuals were processing painful/nonpainful stimuli from both ingroup models (deaf people) and outgroup models (hearing people), which aims to not only assist deaf individuals in gaining a deeper understanding of their intergroup empathy traits but also to aid in the advancement of inclusive education. In the A-P task, we found that (i) ingroup priming accelerated the response speed to painful/nonpainful pictures; (ii) the N2 amplitude of painful pictures was significantly more negative than that of nonpainful pictures in outgroup priming trials, whereas the N2 amplitude difference between painful and nonpainful pictures was not significant in ingroup priming trials. For N1 amplitude of the A-N task, we have similar findings. However, this pattern was reversed for P3/late positive component amplitude of the A-P task. These results suggest that the deaf individuals had difficulty in judging whether hearing individuals were in pain. However, their group identification and affective responses could shape the relatively early stage of pain empathy.

Why Do Voters Prefer Local Candidates? Evidence from a Danish Conjoint Survey Experiment

AbstractPolitical candidates enjoy a well-documented electoral advantage near their place of residence. But knowing that voters prefer candidates who live nearby does not explain why this is the case. What inferences do voters make about local candidates that make them so universally attractive? In this study, I distinguish two well-established theoretical explanations in a conjoint experiment conducted in Denmark. Do people prefer local candidates because of in-group favoritism, or do voters prefer local candidates because they expect them to favor their local area once in office? By independently varying signals of candidates’ (1) behavioral localism and (2) symbolic localism, I estimate the importance of each for voters’ preferences for local candidates. I find that voters’ preference for candidates who live nearby is driven in part by a preference for candidates who spend most of their time looking out for voters’ local interests. While I also find that voters prefer candidates who signal their commitment to the local in-group, these preferences appear to be unrelated to voters’ preference for candidates who live locally. Thus, I find that voters seem to prefer local candidates because of their behavioral localism, while I find no evidence that voters prefer local candidates because of their symbolic localism.

Knowledge Exchange Networks: Does Gender Matter?

Gender diversity in knowledge exchange networks can be a source of innovation in organizations as it provides new insights that improve the creative process. Diversity literature provides enough evidence of the importance of utilizing mixed-gender teams to gain innovative outcomes. However, in knowledge management literature, gender diversity has been scarcely addressed. Knowledge management literature happens to be dominant, and there is a need to study the impact of gender diversity in knowledge creation processes and networks. This theoretical paper links the diversity literature to knowledge management literature and provides new understandings by considering gender as an important factor in the knowledge creation process. This paper contributes to the literature by emphasizing on exploring knowledge exchange relationships through a feminist perspective. Feminist perspective is also missing in knowledge management literature; thus, by making gender an important consideration in the socialization phase of the knowledge creation process, this paper provides a diverse perspective in knowledge management literature. Furthermore, this paper presents a conceptual model of gender-diverse knowledge exchange networks that shows the inclusion of women in knowledge exchange networks enhances the effectiveness of teams. Women are being neglected when it comes to inclusion in knowledge creating networks because of in-group bias against men and the stereotypical perception of women’s lack of technical and innovative knowledge. This paper sheds light on the importance of women's inclusion in knowledge exchange networks by emphasizing the vitality of diversity in creating knowledge and innovation in collaborative networks and teams in organizations.

Election results can decrease intergroup threat and through that positively affect intergroup relations

AbstractPrevious research has established that intergroup threat is pivotal to intergroup relations in divided societies. We used the Northern Ireland Assembly Elections in 2022 as a unique chance to investigate how elections can affect feelings of threat and intergroup relations between communities with a history of violent intergroup conflict. We argued that because of their conflicting goals, if Sinn Féin (i.e., a Republican party that promotes a united Ireland) gains more votes than the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP, i.e., a party promoting Northern Ireland's union with the United Kingdom), it would threaten DUP supporters and vice versa. We assessed whether participants supported Sinn Féin or DUP relatively to each other, intergroup threat, and intergroup bias before and after the elections (N = 285). Following an election outcome where Sinn Féin gained more votes than DUP, Sinn Féin supporters showed decreased feelings of threat which in turn decreased their intergroup bias. DUP supporters, the party that received fewer votes, showed no changes in their feelings of threat or intergroup bias. This research highlights how electoral results affect intergroup relations in postconflict societies.

How Affective Polarization Deepens the Partisan Divide in US Cable News Use

Abstract: Currently, not only are partisans’ feelings toward Democrats and Republicans sharply divided along party lines, but so too are their choices regarding news media. Regarding this polarization, most studies have considered partisans’ selective use of news outlets as a crucial factor in widening affective polarization. However, insufficient attention has been directed to the potential role of affective polarization in selective exposure. Accordingly, this study seeks to fill this gap by verifying the effect of affective polarization on selective exposure and examining a potential mechanism using two-wave panel data. Our findings demonstrate that the degree of affective polarization is positively related to partisan bias in the credibility judgment of pro-party and counter-party cable news channels. In turn, favorable in-group bias in the credibility judgment of cable news channels has a significant effect on selective exposure to cable news outlets, mediating the effect of individual-level affective polarization on selective exposure. Lastly, we discuss the theoretical implications of our findings.

White Americans’ preference for Black people in advertising has increased in the past 66 years: A meta-analysis

This study investigates Black and White consumers' preferences for Black versus White people in United States advertising contexts over 66 y, from 1956 until 2022, a time in which the United States has experienced significant ethno-racial diversification. Examining Black and White consumers' reactions to visual advertising over more than half a century offers a unique and dynamic view of interracial preferences. Mass advertising reaches an audience of billions and can shape people's attitudes and behavior, emphasizing the relevance of clarifying the influence of race in advertising, how it has evolved over time, and how it may contribute to mitigating discrimination based on racial perceptions. A meta-analysis of extant experiments into the relationship between the depicted endorser's race (i.e., the model in a visual ad) and the reaction of Black and White viewers pertains to 332 effect sizes from 62 studies reported in 52 scientific papers, comprising 10,186 Black and White participants. Our results are anchored in a conceptual framework, including a comprehensive set of perceiver (viewer), target (endorser), social/societal context, and publication characteristics. Without accounting for temporal dynamics, the results indicate ingroup favoritism, such that White viewers prefer White models and Black viewers prefer Black models. But by controlling for the publication year, it is possible to observe a time-dependent trend: Historically, White consumers preferred endorsers of the same race, but this preference has significantly shifted toward Black endorsers in recent years. In contrast, the level of Black consumers' reactions to endorsers of the same race remains largely unchanged over time.

The formation of attitudes toward immigration in Colombia

What explains elevated hostility toward immigrants? We identify two concerns that affect support for immigration: labor market competition and social proximity between immigrants and natives. Relying on a conjoint experiment embedded in an original face-to-face survey, we explore these dynamics in one of the largest migratory flows of the last decade: the Venezuelan exodus to Colombia. We find that respondents primarily reject lower-skill migrants. While ethnic proximity does not mitigate xenophobic attitudes in our context, familial ties and personal contact do. These findings confirm the relevance of pocketbook considerations in guiding attitudes toward foreigners but challenge the common assumption of positive in-group bias among co-ethnics. Moreover, we affirm the relevance of individual and familial proximity as key contributing factors to attenuating xenophobia in response to immigration in the Global South.

Asymmetric cognitive learning mechanisms underlying the persistence of intergroup bias

Intergroup bias, the tendency to favor ingroups and be hostile towards outgroups, underlies many societal problems and persists even when intergroup members interact and share experiences. Here we study the way cognitive learning processes contribute to the persistence of intergroup bias. Participants played a game with ingroup and outgroup bot-players that entailed collecting stars and could sacrifice a move to zap another player. We found that intergroup bias persisted as participants were more likely to zap outgroup players, regardless of their zapping behavior. Using a computational model, we found that this bias was caused by asymmetries in three learning mechanisms. Participants had a greater prior bias to zap out-group players, they learned more readily about the negative behavior of out-groups and were less likely to attribute the positive behavior of one out-group player to other out-group players. Our results uncover the way cognitive social learning mechanisms shape and confound intergroup dynamics.

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.

Can group membership modulate the social abilities of autistic people? An intergroup bias in smile perception

Autistic adults struggle to reliably differentiate genuine and posed smiles. Intergroup bias is a promising factor that may modulate smile discrimination performance, which has been shown in neurotypical adults, and which could highlight ways to make social interactions easier. However, it is not clear whether this bias also exists in autistic people. Thus, the current study aimed to investigate this in autism using a minimal group paradigm. Seventy-five autistic and sixty-one non-autistic adults viewed videos of people making genuine or posed smiles and were informed (falsely) that some of the actors were from an in-group and others were from an out-group. The ability to identify smile authenticity of in-group and out-group members and group identification were assessed. Our results revealed that both groups seemed equally susceptible to ingroup favouritism, rating ingroup members as more genuine, but autistic adults also generally rated smiles as less genuine and were less likely to identify with ingroup members. Autistic adults showed reduced sensitivity to the different smile types but the absence of an intergroup bias in smile discrimination in both groups seems to indicate that membership can only modulate social judgements but not social abilities. These findings suggest a reconsideration of past findings that might have misrepresented the social judgements of autistic people through introducing an outgroup disadvantage, but also a need for tailored support for autistic social differences that emphasizes similarity and inclusion between diverse people.

Prognostic impacts of repeated sepsis in intensive care unit on autoimmune disease patients: a retrospective cohort study

BackgroundAutoimmune diseases (ADs) may be complicated by sepsis when intensive care unit (ICU) admission. But repeated sepsis among AD patients has not been studied yet. The aim of this study is to investigate the impact of repeated in-ICU sepsis on the 1-year overall-cause mortality, septic shock and in-ICU death of AD patients.MethodsData of AD patients with sepsis retrieved from Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV (MIMIC-IV) database were divided into the single group and the repeated group according to the frequency of in-ICU sepsis. Propensity score matching was used to balance inter-group bias. Cox proportional hazard regression and sensitivity analysis were utilized to assess the variables on mortality.ResultsThe incidence of repeated in-ICU sepsis in baseline was 19.8%. The repeated in-ICU sepsis was a risk factor for 1-year overall-cause mortality among AD patients (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.50, 95% CI: 1.16–1.93, P = 0.002), with robust adjusted HRs by the adjustment for confounders in the sensitivity analysis (all P < 0.01). Maximum Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (Max SOFA), Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and Simplified Acute Physiology Score-II (SAPS-II) were risk factors for 1-year overall-cause mortality among AD with repeated sepsis (Max SOFA: HR = 1.09, P = 0.002; CCI: HR = 1.08, P = 0.039; SAPS-II: HR = 1.03, P < 0.001).ConclusionsCompared to single hit, repeated in-ICU sepsis was independently related to a higher risk of 1-year overall-cause mortality among AD patients. Assessment tools (Higher SOFA, CCI and SAPS-II scores) were closely linked to poor prognosis of AD with repeated sepsis and helped to reflect ill physical conditions for the patients.

Small Sample Size and Group Homogeneity: A Crucial Ingredient to Inter-Group Bias.

Applying a recently developed framework for the study of sample-based person impressions to the level of group impressions resulted in convergent evidence for a highly robust judgment process. How stimulus traits mapped on the resulting group impressions was subject to two distinct moderators, diagnosticity of traits, and the amplifying impact of early sample truncation. Three indices of diagnosticity-negative valence, extremity, and distance to other traits in a density framework-determined participants' decision to truncate trait sampling early and hence the final group judgments. When trait samples were negative and extreme and when the distance between high-density traits was small, early truncation of the trait samples fostered high group homogeneity and polarized impressions. Granting that mental representations of in-groups and out-groups rely on systematically different samples, our sampling approach can account for various inter-group biases: out-group homogeneity, out-group polarization and (because negative traits are more diagnostic) out-group derogation.

Experimental testing of three categorization‐based interventions to reduce prejudice and discrimination against the unvaccinated in the aftermath of COVID‐19

AbstractFor many people, COVID‐19 vaccination now informs social identity, triggering prejudice and discrimination toward those with a different vaccination status. As this may jeopardize social cohesion, we investigated the effects of three brief, theory‐informed interventions for reducing ingroup bias in a preregistered experimental intervention study in Germany, assigning vaccinated participants (N = 2016) to one of four conditions: crossed categorization (emphasizing commonalities between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals), recategorization (framing vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals as members of a superordinate ingroup), counter‐stereotypic categorization (encouraging participants to think about mismatched stereotypes), or a control condition (no intervention). As compared to the control condition, crossed categorization and counter‐stereotypic categorization were found to reduce (evaluative) ingroup bias but the observed effects were weak and mostly diminished when controlling for demographic characteristics and vaccination status identification. Overall, the results indicate that none of the three interventions substantially reduced prejudice and discrimination toward the unvaccinated.

EEG evidence for racial ingroup bias in collective empathy for pain.

Previous research on racial ingroup bias in empathy for pain focused on neural responses to a single person's suffering. It is unclear whether empathy for simultaneously perceived multiple individuals' pain (denoted as collective empathy in this study) is also sensitive to perceived racial identities of empathy targets. We addressed this issue by recording electroencephalography from Chinese adults who responded to racial identities of 2 × 2 arrays of Asian or White faces in which 4 faces, 1 face, or no face showed painful expressions. Participants reported greater feelings of others' pain and their own unpleasantness when viewing 4 compared to 1 (or no) painful faces. Behavioral responses to racial identities of faces revealed decreased speeds of information acquisition when responding to the face arrays with 4 (vs. 1 or no) painful expressions of Asian (but not White) faces. Moreover, Asian compared to White face arrays with 4 (vs. 1 or no) painful expressions elicited a larger positive neural response at 160-190ms (P2) at the frontal/central electrodes and enhanced alpha synchronizations at 288-1,000ms at the central electrodes. Our findings provide evidence for racial ingroup biases in collective empathy for pain and unravel its relevant neural underpinnings.

Racial Socialization Experiences Among 1.5 and 2nd Generation Indian Americans

Few studies have focused on the racial socialization of Indian Americans, particularly those raised in the United States. The present study explored 1.5 and 2nd generation Indian Americans’ experiences of racial socialization in multiple contexts. Forty-four adult Indian Americans from diverse regions of the United States participated in semi-structured focus group interviews via video teleconference. Sixteen participants were 1.5 generation and 28 were 2nd generation. Data was analyzed using grounded theory. The results indicated three interrelated domains including: (a) Discussion of Race and Racism; (b) Awareness of Self in the Context of Racial and Cultural Differences; and (c) Role of Intra- and Inter-group Biases. The findings underscore how the minimization of racism within and outside of Indian American contexts, a colonial mentality transmitted intergenerationally, and negative impacts of casteism, sexism, and racism may influence one’s racial consciousness and racial socialization. Implications for culturally informed research, practice, advocacy, and training are detailed.

Who, how, and when do children help? A systematic review of children's outgroup prosocial behavior

AbstractGiven the ingroup bias in children's prosocial behaviors, understanding what characterizes and predicts children's prosocial behaviors directed at outgroups has implications for more harmonious intergroup relations. We conducted a systematic review outlining the important theoretical frameworks that drive research in this area and examined the targets, types, and predictors surrounding prosocial behavior toward socially relevant outgroups among children ages 3–12 years. A total of 24 studies were included in the narrative synthesis. A range of targets of prosocial behavior (i.e., who was the intended recipient of the act) was observed and included both individual outgroup members and the collective outgroup. The studies also varied in the types of outgroup prosocial behavior assessed, including resource allocation, helping intentions, and collective prosocial behavior. Predictors of prosocial behavior occurred at two levels: individual and contextual. Individual predictors included contact, outgroup stereotypes, essentialist beliefs, empathy and mentalization, and fairness. Contextual factors included geographic proximity, reciprocity and collaboration, cost of helping, structural inequality, and intergroup conflict. Finally, we focus on age‐related changes to map the developmental trajectory of both the characteristics and predictors of prosocial behaviors. In a divided world, the implications for future research on outgroup prosocial behavior during childhood are discussed. We also reflect on the need for future longitudinal and culturally embedded research.

Explicit discrimination and ingroup favoritism, but no implicit biases in hypothetical triage decisions during COVID-19

Disturbingly realistic triage scenarios during the COVID-19 pandemic provide an opportunity for studying discrimination in moral reasoning. Biases and favoritism do not need to be explicit and overt, but can remain implicit and covert. In addition to assessing laypeople’s propensity for engaging in overt discrimination, the present study examines whether they reveal implicit biases through seemingly fair random allocations. We present a cross-sectional online study comprising 6 timepoints and a total of 2296 participants. Each individual evaluated 19 hypothetical scenarios that provide an allocation dilemma between two patients who are in need of ventilation and differ only in one focal feature. Participants could either allocate the last ventilator to a patient, or opt for random allocation to express impartiality. Overall, participants exhibited clear biases for the patient who was expected to be favored based on health factors, previous ethical or caretaking behaviors, and in-group favoritism. If one patient had been pre-allocated care, a higher probability of keeping the ventilator for the favored patient indicates persistent favoritism. Surprisingly, the absence of an asymmetry in random allocations indicates the absence of covert discrimination. Our results demonstrate that laypeople’s hypothetical triage decisions discriminate overtly and show explicit biases.

The Influence of Group Favoritism on Moral Judgment -- Evidence From Event-Related Potential.

When judging the morality of an action, individuals may exhibit a bias stemming from group favoritism. It leads to the expression of different moral evaluations of the same behaviors performed by different social groups. The current study used event-related potentials (ERPs) to investigate the influence of in-group favoritism (in-group vs. homogeneous out-group) and out-group favoritism (in-group vs. high-quality out-group) on moral judgments. Two experiments were conducted, showing a higher moral score of the in-group compared to the homogeneous out-group by participants. ERP data indicated that in-group stimulation triggered larger P2 amplitudes than homogeneous out-group. Additionally, a larger N400-like amplitude, localized to the right hemisphere, was observed during the evaluation of the homogeneous out-group. Significantly, when comparing the in-group to the high-quality out-group, there was no discernible difference in moral scores or ERP amplitudes. Overall, the results indicate that in-group favoritism can affect moral judgments, especially when assessing homogeneous out-groups, but it can be reduced by the characteristics of groups.