Linguistic Intergroup Bias Research Articles

A Critical Discourse Analysis of Intergroup Interpretations and Representations of Ideologies and National Identities in Sino-US News Reports of Russia-Ukraine Affair

This study applies critical discourse analysis (CDA) and linguistic intergroup bias (LIB) theory to conduct a comparison of reports related to the Russia-Ukraine incident by Chinese media CGTN and US media CNN from late February to late March 2022. By analyzing their linguistic features and the intergroup psychological characteristics they project, the study explores the national identity embodied in these features, as well as the underlying ideological meaning and the power relations between different countries implied behind it. The results of the analysis show that: 1) discursive strategies are adopted by the newspapers to construct national identity and intergroup relations, including the discursive categorization of group identity and intragroup identity, and the discursive re-categorization of intergroup relations, 2) the similarities and differences in discursive strategies made by the Chinese and American media, 3) different ideologies and power relations reflected by these discursive strategies and the phenomenon of linguistic intergroup bias.

A textual analysis of the effect of short-term volunteering on attitudes toward refugees in Malaysia

ABSTRACT Does exposure to an unfamiliar migrant community change implicit biases? We conducted an experimental study by exposing Malaysians them to a few hours of volunteering with Rohingya refugees, and we examined the effect of this treatment on their attitudes through a textual analysis. We measured changes in attitude through pure valence and multiple measures of implicit bias, including linguistic intergroup bias. We found that the volunteers became markedly more positive, and this change was statistically significant. Our results suggest that brief exposure to refugees may be a cost-effective policy lever for changing local perceptions of refugees.

Opportunities and limitations of using the linguistic category model as a measure of teachers’ implicit stereotypes in Germany

The current work focused on how ethnic stereotypes manifest themselves in language. The aim of our research was to investigate whether the Linguistic Category Model (LCM) is applicable to German teachers' language. More precisely, we investigated whether the categories proposed by Semin and Fiedler (1988) and mostly tested in the English-speaking world are applicable to German teachers' language and whether the pattern of Linguistic Intergroup Bias is evident in teachers' language. The analyses of two samples including in- and pre-service teachers (Study 1: N = 124, 76.6% female; Study 2: N = 104, 67.6% female) revealed difficulties in applying the LCM to German teachers' language. Further, neither of the two conducted studies found patterns of Linguistic Intergroup Bias in teachers’ language. We attribute this to a mismatch between the LCM and the German language and discuss the difficulties and limitations of applying the category system to other languages.

The Effect of Perspective-Taking on Linguistic Intergroup Bias

In this experiment, we examined the effect of perspective-taking—actively contemplating others’ psychological experiences—on linguistic intergroup bias. We asked some participants to adopt the perspective of a character (an Italian or a Maghrebian), while others did not receive similar instructions, and complete a short dialogue comprised of a series of vignettes, resulting in a 2 (perspective-taking: presence vs. control) × 2 (group: ingroup vs. outgroup) between-participants design. We analyzed the texts produced on the basis of the linguistic category model. As expected, participants were more likely to describe the outgroup member using less abstract terms when we asked them to take the perspective of a Maghrebian. Since the level of abstraction of the terms used to describe a person’s behavior is considered an index of stereotype use, one might describe Maghrebians less stereotypically when he or she can see the world from their perspective. The results extend previous findings on the role of perspective-taking as it relates to reducing intergroup stereotypes.

A normative perspective on the linguistic intergroup bias: How intragroup approval of ingroup members who use the linguistic intergroup bias perpetuates explicit intergroup bias

AbstractThe present research examined from a normative perspective how intragroup normative processes regulate the consequences of the linguistic intergroup bias (LIB). Results of three studies supported our hypothesis that intragroup approval of an ingroup member who uses the LIB plays a key role in perpetuating pro‐ingroup bias. In Study 1, ingroup members who used pro‐ingroup (vs. pro‐outgroup) LIB elicited more intragroup approval and this effect was mediated by the perception of the speaker as being biased in favor of the ingroup. In Studies 2 and 3, intragroup approval (vs. disapproval) of an ingroup member who used the LIB enhanced the expression of pro‐ingroup bias. By providing the first demonstration of how the LIB relates to intragroup normative processes, our studies highlight a new path by which the LIB helps perpetuate intergroup bias.

Intergroup Threat and the Linguistic Intergroup Bias: A Stress Biomarker Study

This study investigates the physiological consequences of derogation. In the face of an ingroup threat, an opportunity to derogate the outgroup is associated with increases in salivary cortisol, a stress biomarker. These findings support the intergroup anxiety model, which suggests that following an anxiety-inducing threatening experience, outgroup evaluations can amplify emotional reactions and stress. In this study, we investigated whether threatened participants who derogated would show higher cortisol levels. Canadian undergraduates ( N = 169) read either a threatening or favourable passage about Canadians. They then engaged in either a linguistic intergroup bias (LIB) or control task. Salivary samples were collected prethreat, postthreat, and posttask. The results suggest that ingroup threat was associated with increases in cortisol levels. Threatened participants who displayed LIB showed higher cortisol levels than those who were threatened and did not show LIB. These findings illustrate the importance of incorporating a neuroscientific approach.

Linguistic Intergroup Bias About the 2016 U.S. Presidential Candidates As a Function of Political Ideology

AbstractThe present study investigated preference for linguistically biased characterization of events attributed to Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump during the 2016 Presidential election cycle. The linguistic intergroup bias (LIB) reflects abstract characterization of positive events attributed to ingroup members and negative events attributed to outgroup members; conversely, it also reflects concrete characterization of negative events attributed to outgroup members and positive events attributed to outgroup members. University students (N = 117) who preferred Hillary Clinton completed on‐line measures before and after the 2016 Presidential election, including liberal‐conservative ideology and measures of LIB. Participants showed clear preference for characterizations consistent with LIB (e.g., Clinton is intelligent; Trump is quick‐tempered). This pattern was more pronounced as strength of liberal ideology increased; it also was more pronounced immediately following the election than after time had passed. A smaller sample of Trump supporters also showed LIB favoring Trump. This study is the first to demonstrate that members of the electorate gravitate towards linguistic characterizations that favor their preferred political candidates and that this tendency is exacerbated by a relevant individual difference. Findings have implications for the continued polarization of the American electorate.

When Sugar-Coated Words Taste Dry: The Relationship between Gender, Anxiety, and Response to Irony.

This article approaches the question of mocking compliments and ironic praise from an interactional gender perspective. A statement such as “You're a real genius!” could easily be interpreted as a literal compliment, as playful humor or as an offensive insult. We investigate this thin line in the use of irony among adult men and women. The research introduces an interactional approach to irony, through the lens of gender stereotype bias. The main question concerns the impact of individual differences and gender effect on the perception and production of ironic comments. Irony Processing Task (IPT), developed by Milanowicz (2016), was applied in order to study the production and perception of ironic criticism and ironic praise in adult males and females. It is a rare case of a study measuring the ability to create irony because, unlike most of known irony research, it is not a multiple choice test where participants are given the response options. The IPT was also used to assess the asymmetry of affect (humor vs. malice) and impact of gender effect in the perception of ironic comments. Results are analyzed in relation to the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) scores. The findings reveal the interactional relationship between gender and response to irony. Male responses were consistently more ironic than female's, across all experimental conditions, and female responses varied more. Both, men and women used more irony in response to male ironic criticism but female ironic praise. Anxiety proved to be a moderate predictor of irony comprehension and willingness to use irony. Data, collected in control and two gender stereotype activation conditions, also corroborates the assumption that the detection of compliments and the detection of criticism can be moderated by the attitude activation effect. The results are interpreted within the framework of linguistic intergroup bias (LIB) and natural selection strategies.

Social Identity and the Linguistic Intergroup Bias: Exploring the Role of Ethnic Identification in the Context of Intergroup Relations Between Hong Kong and Mainland China

Two survey experiments examined how linguistic intergroup bias (LIB) varies according to ethnic identification within a homogenous ethnic group (Hong Kong citizens). Study 1 showed that Hong Kong citizens who identified as “Hongkonger” used more abstract expressions to describe prosocial behaviors of the in-group (Hong Kong citizen) and antisocial behaviors of the out-group (Mainland Chinese); those who identified as “Chinese” exhibited less LIB. Study 2 found similar results for a context based on location of behaviour (in Hong Kong vs. in China) rather than the nationality of the protagonist. The combined evidence suggests that LIB can have an important intragroup as well as intergroup dimension.

Zing Zing Bang Bang:How Do You Know What She Really Meant. Gender Bias in Response to Irony: The Role of Who is Speaking to Whom

AbstractLiterature points towards the role of context in irony interpretation and the existence of gender differences in language use. We decided to examine the influence of interlocutors’ gender stereotypes on interpreting and reacting to ironic criticism in conversation. To this end, we designed two experiments gathering participants’ responses to the same ironic utterances voiced both by women and by men in control and gender stereotype activation conditions. Results of the first experiment showed that women tended to use irony significantly more often when responding to a man than to another woman. The second, ongoing experiment will additionally examine participants’ response times and total time of utterance in respect to their addressee’s gender. The results are discussed with regard to the social comparison theory (Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987) and the linguistic intergroup bias theory (Wigboldus & Douglas, 2007).

Evidence of Linguistic Intergroup Bias in U.S. Print News Coverage of Immigration

This study content analyzed all print newspaper articles addressing U.S. immigration from Mexico appearing in Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas during a 1-year period for presence of linguistic intergroup bias. Across all four states, negative statements outnumbered positive statements; this negativity bias was more pronounced for out-group than in-group statements in all states except California. Consistent with the linguistic intergroup bias, positive in-group and negative out-group statements were encoded using more abstract language than negative in-group and positive out-group statements.

Inferring Identity From Language

The present research examined whether a communicator’s verbal, implicit message regarding a target is used as a cue for inferring that communicator’s social identity. Previous research has found linguistic intergroup bias (LIB) in individuals’ speech: They use abstract language to describe in-group targets’ desirable behaviors and concrete language to describe their undesirable behaviors (favorable LIB), but use concrete language for out-group targets’ desirable behaviors and abstract language for their undesirable behaviors (unfavorable LIB). Consequently, one can infer the type of language a communicator is likely to use to describe in-group and out-group targets. We hypothesized and found evidence for the reverse inference. Across four studies, individuals inferred a communicator’s social identity on the basis of the communicator’s use of an LIB. Specifically, participants more strongly believed that a communicator and target shared a social identity when the communicator used the favorable, rather than the unfavorable, LIB in describing that target.

Mindful attention reduces linguistic intergroup bias.

A brief mindfulness intervention diminished bias in favor of one's in-group and against one's out-group. In the linguistic intergroup bias (LIB), individuals expect in-group members to behave positively, and out-group members to behave negatively. Consequently, individuals choose abstract language beset with character inferences to describe these expected behaviors, and in contrast, choose concrete, objective language to describe unexpected behaviors. Eighty-four participants received either mindful attention instructions (observe their thoughts as fleeting mental states) or immersion instructions (become absorbed in the vivid details of thoughts). After instruction, participants viewed visual depictions of an imagined in-group or out-group member's positive or negative behavior, selecting the best linguistic description from a set of four descriptions that varied in abstractness. Immersion groups demonstrated a robust LIB. Mindful attention groups, however, exhibited a markedly tempered LIB, suggesting that even a brief mindfulness-related instruction can implicitly reduce the propensity to perpetuate stereotypical thinking through language. These results contribute to understanding the mechanisms that facilitate unprejudiced thinking.

Exploring a Linguistic Intergroup Bias on Communication of Compound-word Names and Acronyms Among Political Parties

According to the linguistic intergroup bias (LIB), positive actions of ingroup members are described with more abstract predicates than those of outgroup members, whereas negative actions of ingroup members are described with more concrete predicates than those of outgroup members. The researchers extrapolated the LIB to compound-word names (for example African National Congress) and their acronymic equivalents ( for example A.N.C). They theorized that compound-word names are positive abstract terms, thus, suiting description of the ingroup's positive identity. Besides, their concrete equivalents acronyms can be easily ascribed a negative meaning and, thus, would be suitable for outgroups. Using content and discourse analysis on a sample of nine African political parties, they investigated the hypothesis that people mention a compound-word name of an ingroup more frequently than of outgroups. Results indicated that people use compound-word names more frequently than outgroups. They explained the effect as a form of a linguistic intergroup bias.

Old and New Forms of Racial Bias in Mediated Sports Commentary: The Case of the National Football League Draft

Applying Social Identity Theory and Linguistic Intergroup Bias to the analysis of mediated sports commentary, this study examines racial bias surrounding the National Football League draft. A content analysis of 41 mock drafts—amounting to more than 1,300 descriptions of individual athletes—revealed significant differences in how commentators discussed White and non-White athletes. In particular, commentators more often described White athletes and in-group athletes in terms of mental traits, but described non-White athletes and out-group athletes in terms of physical traits. Additionally, in-group athletes were talked about in more abstract terms, consistent with Linguistic Intergroup Bias.

Linguistic intergroup bias at school: An exploratory study of black and white children in France and their implicit attitudes toward one another

“Linguistic intergroup bias” (LIB) (Maass et al., 2000) was investigated in French elementary schools between children of the French majority group (White children of European heritage) and a French minority group (Black children from Sub-Saharan Africa). Participants (N=360; 7–11-year-old; mean age=10.36, SD=.85) were shown photographs presenting a target character (ingroup or outgroup) engaging in a positive behavior (e.g., a helping action) or a negative behavior (e.g., an aggressive action). Demonstrations of ingroup favoritism with no outgroup derogation were expected for White children from the majority group. These hypotheses were confirmed. Unexpectedly, the same pattern of results was found for the minority group: ingroup favoritism and no outgroup derogation. Theoretical and applied implications of these findings are discussed.

Linguistic intergroup bias in Chinese crime stories: propaganda model vs. commercial model

This study aimed to test linguistic intergroup bias (LIB) in the Chinese media. Language abstraction of crime stories was compared between the propaganda model and the commercial model. The results revealed LIB in Chinese language and Chinese journalism. They can be explained by both motivational and cognitive mechanisms in LIB. Moreover, the study explored the impacts of two contextual factors on LIB – time and occupation. The analysis of time illustrated the development trend of Chinese journalism, where the propaganda model has been revealed to be invading and eroding the commercial model. The analysis of occupation indicated the mutual influence between language abstraction and stereotypes, and discussed its impacts over the images of particular social groups as well as the challenges it brought to the state and the Party. This study further explained how and why the journalistic models manipulate language abstraction in order to meet their communication goals as well as the political needs of social power behind them.

News Coverage of Immigration: The Influence of Exposure to Linguistic Bias in the News on Consumer's Racial/Ethnic Cognitions

This two-study design applies assumptions rooted in frameworks of linguistic intergroup bias to the context of mass media content and effects. First, a content analysis of U.S. newspaper coverage of U.S.-Mexico immigration issues was conducted. The content analysis demonstrated a tendency to characterize undocumented immigrants in abstract and unfavorable language. The opposite was true of language associated with White immigration opponents. Next, an experiment indicated that exposure to abstract news articles resulted in more unfavorable attitudes about Latinos. However, exposure to concrete articles was associated with greater perceived severity of immigration. Both of these effects were moderated by in-group identification.

Communication of stereotypes in the classroom: biased language use of German and Turkish adolescents

Little is known about the linguistic transmission and maintenance of mutual stereotypes in interethnic contexts. This field study, therefore, investigated the linguistic expectancy bias (LEB) and the linguistic intergroup bias (LIB) among German and Turkish adolescents (13 to 20 years) in the school context. The LEB refers to the general phenomenon of describing stereotypes more abstractly. The LIB is the tendency to use language abstraction for in-group protective reasons. Results revealed an unmoderated LEB, whereas the LIB only occurred when foreigners were in the numerical majority, the classroom composition was perceived as a learning disadvantage, or the interethnic conflict frequency was high. These findings provide first evidence for the use of both LEB and LIB in an interethnic classroom setting.

How the Linguistic Intergroup Bias Affects Group Perception: Effects of Language Abstraction on Generalization to the Group

ABSTRACT The present research investigated whether the impact of the Linguistic Intergroup Bias (LIB; Maass, 1999) is related to the effects of linguistic abstraction on social attribution (Yzerbyt & Rogier, 2001). We did this by assessing the impact of abstract descriptions versus concrete descriptions on the generalization of a group member's behaviors to the whole group. A target's behaviors were more attributed to the group when the description was abstract than when it was concrete, and this effect of language abstraction was stronger when the description was positive than when it was negative. Our results provide an insight into how the LIB is involved in the perpetuation of intergroup bias.