Intergroup Sensitivity Effect Research Articles

They have a point: Testing strategies to improve receptivity to interracial criticism and promote behavioral change

People tend to be more resistant to criticism of their own group when it is given by outgroup members as opposed to ingroup members because they view the criticism as less constructive and legitimate when delivered by an outsider—a phenomenon known as the intergroup sensitivity effect, or ISE. The present study (N = 827) examines the effectiveness of two rhetorical techniques—balanced criticism (delivering criticism of one’s own group in addition to the target group) and buttering up (delivering praise alongside criticism) in reducing the ISE among European Americans, African Americans, and Latino Americans. The impact of criticism on intentions to engage in corrective behavior was also explored. Participants read a fictitious interview excerpt containing criticism of their racial group delivered by a racial ingroup or outgroup member and then rated the critic and their statement on several dimensions. We found buttering up reduces the ISE among European Americans and Latino Americans, but not African Americans, while critiquing one’s own racial group alongside the target group is ineffective in reducing the ISE for the three examined groups. Additionally, we found African Americans were more willing to engage in corrective behavior to address criticism directed toward their racial group than their European American or Latino American counterparts. However, contrary to previous research, the group membership of the critic did not affect participants’ willingness to engage in corrective action. These findings contribute to our understanding of interracial dynamics in the United States and illuminate how to facilitate interracial criticism.

Respecting Conversational Norms Improves Reception of Expert Messages Among Unvaccinated Individuals

ABSTRACT The association of medical experts with politically left-leaning cities and states early in the COVID-19 pandemic may have exacerbated vaccine hesitancy in right-leaning states of the US. Criticism from outside experts violates rules of communication between social groups (i.e. an intergroup sensitivity effect), leading to rejection of messages promoting vaccine safety and efficacy. In two studies, we document the effects of shared geographical group membership for medical expert messages promoting vaccination. We also found evidence that satisfying conversational norms against intergroup criticism reduces message rejection. Specifically, an invitation from ingroup political elites for a doctor to speak reduced the negative effects of unshared group identity.

Intergroup sensitivity in a divided society: Calls for unity and reconciliatory behavior during the 2020 U.S. presidential election

The United States is highly divided along party lines, and this partisan divide has a tremendous impact on social relationships and even health-related behavior. Although group members frequently reject criticism from individuals outside their own group relative to criticism from within the group (intergroup sensitivity effect), it remains unclear whether this effect holds for calls for unity across party lines. Additionally, the democratic process may itself help to mend intergroup sensitivity. Our high-powered experiment with self-identified U.S. Democratic or Republican voters across three time points during the 2020 U.S. presidential election demonstrates consistent rejection of calls for unity across party lines, which differentially affected consequent reconciliatory behavior. While the ascription of unconstructive motives decreased reconciliatory behavior, heightened threat perceptions increased reconciliatory behavior. Effects were consistent across time and party affiliation, indicating that the democratic election process and the determination of the election outcome were unable to mend intergroup sensitivity across the partisan divide. Calls for unity affected the reported emotional experience of pride but these self-reports had no consistent impact on behavior. We discuss how understanding these psychological mechanics of partisanship helps to prevent democratic backsliding and promote reconciliation.

Behavioral consequences of intergroup sensitivity

AbstractCommunication of criticism between groups is important to productive societal discourse, but may serve to inflame conflict. The defensive rejection of intergroup, relative to intragroup, criticism (intergroup sensitivity effect [ISE]) may contribute to such divides. The ISE has been observed in self‐report measures, but such measures are weak and biased predictors of actual (divisive) behavior. We review recent research demonstrating that the ISE does have costly behavioral consequences. We next consider the debate concerning whether the ISE reflects defense of a valued social identity or enforcement of a conversational norm. We therefore review recent evidence for an ISE among individuals lacking identification with the target of the criticism. Third, we examine how the ISE may affect a variety of behaviors relevant to societal divisions, including political reconciliation, environmental sustainability, and vaccination. Lastly, we outline future research that can clarify the underlying mechanisms of the ISE and promote conciliatory intergroup behavior.

When group members dissent: A direct comparison of the black sheep and intergroup sensitivity effects

How do people react to opinion conflict occurring within an ingroup? Whereas some work suggests that dissenting ingroup members evoke more negativity than equivalently dissenting outgroup members (termed the black sheep effect), other research instead finds that people are more receptive to dissent from within the group relative to the same opinion originating from outsiders (termed the intergroup sensitivity effect). We sought to integrate these largely independent lines of work by investigating how people react to opinion conflict within and between groups based on U.S. political party affiliation. Participants read about a target person, “Robert C.,” with whom they shared or did not share party affiliation. Robert C. criticized (Study 1; N = 637; preregistered) or insulted (Study 2; N = 647; preregistered) the Democratic or Republican party. Ingroup members who criticized or insulted the ingroup elicited more negativity than outgroup members who criticized or insulted the outgroup, representing the black sheep effect. Moreover, criticism and insults targeting the ingroup elicited more negativity when they originated from an outgroup (vs. ingroup) member, representing the intergroup sensitivity effect. Taken together, the present studies demonstrate that whereas ingroup critics are at times perceived as black sheep, they are also afforded a degree of benefit of the doubt. We suggest that both of these effects may be driven by social identity concerns.

The intergroup sensitivity effect among racial groups in the United States

The intergroup sensitivity effect (ISE) refers to individuals responding more negatively to criticism directed toward their ingroup if the criticism is delivered by someone outside the group. The ISE has never been examined for groups defined by race. In light of ongoing racial tensions in America, the purpose of the current research was to examine whether the ISE replicates among racial groups. Study 1 replicated the ISE among African American, European American, and Latinx American university students and, unexpectedly, found that European American participants responded more positively to praise delivered by a racial outgroup member. Study 2 replicated these results in a nonstudent sample and identified motivation to respond without prejudice as a moderator of the praise effect. In both studies, the ISE was mediated by perceptions of comment legitimacy/constructiveness but was not moderated by feelings toward the outgroup. Future directions and explanations for the praise effect are discussed.

Intergroup Sensitivity and Promoting Sustainable Consumption: Meat Eaters Reject Vegans’ Call for a Plant-Based Diet

Reducing meat consumption can make immediate contributions to fighting the climate crisis. A growing minority adheres to meat-free diets and could convince others to follow suit. We argue, however, that recipients’ social identification as meat eaters may impede the effectiveness of such calls (i.e., an intergroup sensitivity effect based on dietary groups). Indeed, meat eaters in our experiment (N = 260) were more likely to reject calls for dietary change from a vegan than from a fellow meat eater. This effect was also evidenced in evaluations of and engagement with an initiative to promote a vegan diet (“Veganuary”), providing some indication for behavioral impact. In contrast, our societal dietary norm manipulation had no consistent effects on observed outcomes. Exploratory moderation analyses show a limited impact of participants’ social identification as meat eaters but highlight the role of peoples’ general willingness to engage in environmentally friendly behavior. We discuss theoretical and practical implications, including how our results challenge existing approaches to promoting a meat-reduced diet.

The intergroup sensitivity effect in mergers and acquisitions: Testing the role of merger motives

AbstractResearch has shown that people are more defensive to criticism when it stems from an outgroup member, compared to an ingroup member (the intergroup sensitivity effect: ISE). We conducted two online vignette experiments to examine the ISE in the context of an organizational merger and the role of merger motives for the ISE. We predicted that the ISE would also emerge in mergers and acquisitions (M&As), but people would respond less negatively to criticism from the outgroup when the motive for the merger is described as achieving synergies rather than growth. In Experiment 1 (N = 452), which did not mention any motives behind the acquisition, a significant ISE emerged. Experiment 2 (N = 587) again showed an ISE regardless of the merger motive. In both experiments, the ISE was mediated by perceptions of the outgroup criticism as less legitimate and constructive. Overall, this research points to the intergroup sensitivity effect as a relevant phenomenon during post‐merger integration.

Disentangling the intergroup sensitivity effect: Defending the ingroup or enforcing general norms?

AbstractGroup members reject threatening outgroup criticism compared to the same criticism from the ingroup (intergroup sensitivity effect [ISE]). Uninvolved bystanders (i.e., members of third groups) also view intergroup criticism as inappropriate. Classic ISE studies were largely underpowered, used inconsequential self‐reports, and no study has observed behavioural responses of bystanders versus ingroup members. We argued that norms may elicit self‐report responses but only social identity concerns of highly identified ingroup members should motivate costly behaviour. Contrary to our prediction, a high‐powered and pre‐registered 2 (Source: same‐group vs. outgroup) × 2 (Target: ingroup vs. uninvolved outgroup) experiment revealed a classic ISE and an even larger bystander ISE in self‐reports and behaviour, favouring a norm account. Moreover, a target effect emerged such that people were more sensitive to criticism targeting an outgroup than their ingroup. Identity thus had an impact, but not in line with social identity theory, highlighting the need for theoretical integration.

群体认同对群际敏感效应及其行为表现的影响

The intergroup sensitivity effect(ISE) shows that people have more pronounced negative emotional responses and are less likely to respond with acceptance to criticism from outgroup members than to criticism from ingroup members. Although ISE has been confirmed in a variety of group contexts(e.g., country, religion, and gender), many issues still remain to be resolved. For instance, it is still unknown how social interaction may affect the strength of ISE and what its aftereffects may be. Therefore, the first aim of the current study was to assess the applicability of ISE in an inter-group interaction context and examine the effect of intra-individual group identification on ISE. The second aim of the current study was to explore the behavioral aftereffects of ISE and its emotional-behavioral mechanism. Experiment 1 a(N = 93) repeated the test of ISE in Chinese participants who identified with a specific college group. Experiment 1 b(N = 114) examined the influence of negative group evaluations from different sources(an ingroup critic versus an outgroup critic) on emotion in the context of inter-group interaction with the minimal group. In experiment 2(N = 137) we explored the influence of negative group evaluations from different sources(an ingroup critic versus an outgroup critic) on emotion by instructing participants to read their school’s negative evaluations on college BBS, and we also assessed their group identification. Experiment 3(N = 138) further tested group-donation behavior as an indicator of positive intragroup behavior to examine the influence of group identification and sources of negative group evaluations(an ingroup critic versus an outgroup critic) on behavioral consequences, while the negative emotions may act as important intermediates in the relationship between the interaction and positive intragroup behavior. The results showed the following: a) We replicated and extended the basic view of ISE and found negative evaluations from outgroup members can cause more intense negative emotional responses than similar evaluations from ingroup members, even within an inter-group interaction context. b) Group identification was found to play a moderate role in ISE: for high-group identification individuals, negative evaluation from outgroup members caused stronger negative emotional responses than from ingroup members, while for those low-group identification individuals, this effect was not significant. c) Group identification performed a mediated moderating role on the influence of different sources of negative group evaluations on negative emotion response and positive intragroup behavior: under high-group-identification condition, sources of negative group evaluations had an indirect positive effect on positive intragroup behavior via emotional responses, whereas under low-group-identification condition, emotional responses did not mediate the relationship between sources of evaluation and positive intragroup behavior. In conclusion, the current work is the first study to explore the intergroup sensitivity effect in China. We examined the influence of negative group evaluation on individual emotion and behavior and its mechanism from the perspective of group identification. This study provides a new theoretical basis and empirical support for the individual’s psychological and behavioral response in the inter-group interaction context, and has important implications for future inter-group relationship research. Future research should further explore the dynamic relationship for the change of inter-group attitude and behavior caused by negative group evaluation and the influence of interactions of situational factors and intra-individual factors on intergroup sensitivity effect.

If You Criticize Us, Do It in Concrete Terms: Linguistic Abstraction as a Moderator of the Intergroup Sensitivity Effect

This research examined whether linguistic abstraction in group-directed criticisms moderates the intergroup sensitivity effect. Study 1 ( N = 76) showed that criticisms coming from an out-group member and formulated in concrete terms—which imply lower generalizability and stability of the information transmitted—provoked less negative reactions compared with out-group criticisms formulated in abstract terms. Linguistic abstraction did not affect reactions to in-group criticism. In Study 2 ( N = 77), receivers of concrete criticism from an out-group representative attributed less hostile intentions and prejudice to the critic, and this mediated the impact of critic group membership and linguistic abstraction on negativity toward criticism. Participants also reported more favorable attitudes toward the out-group as a whole when out-group criticism was formulated in concrete terms. This research underlines that linguistic abstraction can facilitate or obstruct effective group communication, and has important implications for the development of communicative strategies aiming to promote social change.

Intergroup Communication in Online Forums: The Effect of Group Identification on Online Support Provision

Guided by the frameworks of the social identity model of deindividuation effects (SIDE) and the intergroup sensitivity effect, this experiment examined whether and how group identification manifested in user avatars, along with the supportiveness of others’ comments to a support-seeking post, may affect people’s support provision online. Participants were given the option to reply to a support-seeking post in an interactive forum. Participants’ responses were coded for verbal person-centeredness (VPC) and action-focused supportiveness. The SIDE model received some support. The results suggested that more participants replied to a support-seeking message posted by an in-group than by an out-group. Participants provided higher levels of action-focused supportiveness after viewing supportive comments from in-groups than from out-groups. They also provided messages with lower levels of VPC when exposed to unsupportive comments from in-groups than from out-groups. The intergroup sensitivity effect did not receive strong support. The implications of the study are discussed.

Motivated Collective Defensiveness: Group Members Prioritize Counterarguing Out-Group Criticism Over Getting Their Work Done

Group members defensively reject out-group criticism in self-reports because they perceive it as more threatening than the same criticism from the in-group (intergroup sensitivity effect). But does this effect motivate action? In five experiments, group members exhibited behavior patterns characteristic of motivated goal pursuit: They prioritized defending their group over completing their individual work (Experiments 1–5), even when work was intrinsically rewarding (Experiment 2) or incentivized (Experiment 3). Lastly, this effect disappeared when group members had attained their goal of protecting their group by other means (i.e., group affirmation; Experiments 4 and 5). Together, the experiments suggest that intergroup sensitivity motivates goal-directed action. We discuss how motivated collective defensiveness may undermine constructive debate and heighten acrimony between groups.

Framing and source effects on White college students' reactions to racial inequity information.

This study addressed: (a) Do professors' race/ethnicity and the race-related inequity information they present influence students' evaluations of the professors, acknowledgment of racial inequity, or motivation to respond without prejudice (MRWP)? (b) Do collective guilt and students' evaluations of professors mediate these relationships? White American undergraduate students (N = 614, 66.3% females, 64.7% first year, mean age of 19.3 years [age SD = 1.5]) completed an anonymous online survey. Students imagined they were taking a racial diversity course with either a Black or a White male professor who presented either White privilege or Black disadvantage statements. Participants then completed surveys that assessed their evaluations of the professor, collective guilt, beliefs regarding racial inequity, and MRWP. Students evaluated White professors as having lower expertise, learning conduciveness, and warmth/intelligence but rated Black professors as more biased. Consistent with the inequality-framing model, intergroup sensitivity effect (ISE), and findings from prejudice confrontation research, White professors induced greater acknowledgment of racial inequity when they discussed White privilege rather than Black disadvantage. But, Black professors induced more external MRWP when they presented White privilege rather than Black disadvantage. Students' perceptions of the professors' warmth/intelligence determined the effectiveness of the inequity message while perceptions of the professors' expertise, judgmental, and conduciveness to learning determined students' concerns about appearing prejudiced. The presenters' race/ethnicity and how they frame racial inequity information affect students' evaluation of the presenters, the message effectiveness, and students' external MRWP. (PsycINFO Database Record

Shooting the messenger: Outsiders critical of your group are rejected regardless of argument quality

People are more resistant to criticisms of their group when those criticisms are made by an outgroup rather than an ingroup member, a phenomenon referred to as the intergroup sensitivity effect (ISE). The current study compared four competing models of how argument quality would moderate the ISE, with a view to establishing the complex interrelationships between source and message effects in group-directed criticism. Quality of the argument affected responses to ingroup critics, but not to outgroup critics. For outsiders who wish to promote positive change and reform in a group culture, this leads to a somewhat depressing conclusion: their message is likely to be rejected regardless of whether it is objectively 'right', well-considered, well-justified, or well-argued.

Reactions to threatening critical messages from minority group members with shared or distinct group identities

AbstractReactions to members of other groups are important in multicultural societies. In four studies (N = 725), we investigate the reactions of majority group members to minority group members who stress either their distinct identity or their shared identity when they express threatening critical messages. In Study 1, we investigate reactions to a person who stresses the importance of either his Moroccan and Muslim identity or his Dutch and non‐Islamic identity. In Studies 2 and 3, we disentangle national and religious identity. Across all studies, we find that minority group members who stress their shared identity rather than their distinct identity are evaluated more positively, are perceived as more similar to the self, and tend to evoke less anger. In Study 4, we replicate this finding and show that perceived similarity mediates the impact of identity on these evaluations, but constructiveness only partially mediates these relations. Results are discussed in terms of recategorization models and the intergroup sensitivity effect. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Does time reduce resistance to out‐group critics? An investigation of the persistence of the intergroup sensitivity effect over time

Group-directed criticism typically arouses greater defensiveness when it stems from an out-group member as opposed to an in-group member (the intergroup sensitivity effect). In light of work on the sleeper effect, the current research examines whether this defensiveness persists over time. Students received criticism of their faculty area from either a member of the same faculty area (in-group condition), or a member of a different faculty area (out-group condition), or they received no criticism (control condition). Despite relatively poor recall of the content of the criticism, the intergroup sensitivity effect (ISE) found immediately after presentation of the criticism had not significantly decreased 3-4 weeks later. However, the heightened intergroup bias found immediately after the out-group criticism did dissipate with time. Implications of these results for those who wish to initiate social change as outsiders are discussed.

Resistance to Group Criticism and Recommendations for Change: Lessons from the Intergroup Sensitivity Effect

AbstractThis essay reviews research relating to criticism of groups. It is argued that, in order to successfully critique (and change) a group culture, it is not enough to be right. Rather, critics need to be sensitive to a range of variables wrapped up in who they are: their group memberships, their history, and the intergroup context. One example of this is the intergroup sensitivity effect, the phenomenon whereby criticisms that seem reasonable in the mouth of an insider are rejected when coming from an outsider. We discuss the intergroup sensitivity effect, the psychological mechanisms underpinning it, and the contextual factors that moderate it. On the basis of this review, we present a model that can be used to predict resistance (or open‐mindedness) in the face of group‐directed criticisms and recommendations for change. It is hoped that this model can open up new ways of thinking about group‐mediated communication, and at the same time can provide specific, concrete and usable instruction for how to promote change within and between groups.

United we stand: Intergroup conflict moderates the intergroup sensitivity effect

AbstractIngroup members who criticize their group face much less resistance than outgroup members who say the same thing (the intergroup sensitivity effect). In the context of intergroup conflict, however, it was predicted that treatment of ingroup critics would not be so generous. Muslim Indonesians read an extract from an interview in which the speaker criticized Muslims. The comments were attributed to either another Muslim or to a Christian. Before reading the criticism, half of the participants had read an article describing intense conflict between Muslims and Christians in Indonesia, whereas the other half read a neutral article. As predicted, negativity toward the ingroup critic and the ingroup critic's comments increased in the conflict salience condition, to the point that the intergroup sensitivity effect disappeared. However, conflict salience did not have an effect on attributions of motive or on agreement with the message. Implications for our understanding of “patriotic criticism” are discussed. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Message content, group identification and the intergroup sensitivity effect: Responses to the message and recognition memory

An intergroup sensitivity effect (ISE) is people's tendency to react more negatively to a criticism when it was made by an outgroup member than when the same criticism was made by an ingroup member. The present study investigated variation in ISE when the criticism was varied in terms of valence (absence of positive qualities or presence of negative qualities) and level of abstraction (traits or behaviours). Dependent measures were emotional reactions to the criticism, perceived constructiveness, ingroup bias, and recognition memory for the criticism. All participants showed an ISE to the negative abstract criticism. In addition, consistent with the social identity account of ISE, participants' levels of identification with their ingroup moderated the ISE in some of the measures.