Outgroup Threat Research Articles

Fitness consequences of outgroup conflict.

In social species across the animal kingdom, conspecific outsiders threaten the valuable resources of groups and their members. This outgroup conflict is recognised as a powerful selection pressure, but we argue that studies explicitly quantifying the fitness consequences need to be broader in scope: more attention should be paid to delayed, cumulative, and third-party fitness consequences, not just those arising immediately to group members involved in physical contests. In the first part of this review, we begin by documenting how single contests can have survival and reproductive consequences either immediately or with a delay. Then, we step beyond contests to describe fitness consequences that can also result from interactions with cues of rival presence and the general landscape of outgroup threat, and beyond single interactions to describe cumulative effects of territorial pressure and elevated outgroup-induced stress. Using examples from a range of taxa, we discuss which individuals are affected negatively and positively, considering both interaction participants and third-party group members of the same or the next generation. In the second part of the review, we provide suggestions about how to move forward. We highlight the importance of considering how different types of outgroup conflict can generate different selection pressures and of investigating variation in fitness consequences within and between species. We finish by discussing the value of theoretical modelling and long-term studies of natural populations, experimental manipulations, and meta-analyses to develop further our understanding of this crucial aspect of sociality.

Outgroup threat, ideology, and favorable evaluations of the government's responses to COVID-19.

Based on social psychological theories of intergroup relations, perceptions of threat from outgroups contribute to ingroup favoritism. This research examined the effects of the perceived threat from outgroups (the US) on Chinese people’s favorable evaluations of their government’s responses to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Study 1 conducted an experiment and found that the US’ criticism of China’s responses to the pandemic increased Chinese citizens’ favorable evaluations of the government’s performance. Study 2 was a correlational design and found that the relationship between perceptions of outgroup threats and evaluations of the government’s performance was moderated by ideology and the approval of lockdown policies. These results show that outgroups are sophisticatedly employed by politicians to increase ingroup favoritism and suggest that ideological divide is an important moderator in the association between outgroup threat and the evaluation of ingroup.

The Fusion-Secure Base Hypothesis

Identity fusion is traditionally conceptualized as innately parochial, with fused actors motivated to commit acts of violence on out-groups. However, fusion’s aggressive outcomes are largely conditional on threat perception, with its effect on benign intergroup relationships underexplored. The present article outlines the fusion-secure base hypothesis, which argues that fusion may engender cooperative relationships with out-groups in the absence of out-group threat. Fusion is characterized by four principles, each of which allows a fused group to function as a secure base in which in-group members feel safe, agentic, and supported. This elicits a secure base schema, which increases the likelihood of fused actors interacting with out-groups and forming cooperative, reciprocal relationships. Out-group threat remains an important moderator, with its presence “flipping the switch” in fused actors and promoting a willingness to violently protect the group even at significant personal cost. Suggestions for future research are explored, including pathways to intergroup fusion.

Does loving a group mean hating its rivals? Exploring the relationship between ingroup cohesion and outgroup hostility among soccer fans

ABSTRACT Why does group loyalty sometimes take the form of cooperation or peaceful competition with rival groups and, at other times, violent outgroup hostility? We approached this question using online surveys and an experimental manipulation with British soccer fans. Identity fusion (a visceral sense of “oneness” with the group) is known to motivate strong forms of pro-group action, both peaceful and violent. We identified three crucial factors that influence fused supporters’ intergroup behaviours: age, gender, and exposure to out-group threat. Intergroup behaviours included ingroup altruism (e.g., giving one’s time, or emotional/financial support), barrier-crossing altruism (altruistic acts toward rival fan groups), and outgroup hostility (e.g., insulting, spitting at, or physically attacking). Overall, fused fans were more hostile towards outgroups than were weakly fused fans, but they prioritised ingroup altruism over outgroup hostility, and were most likely to report high levels of barrier-crossing altruism. Older fused fans desired future outgroup hostility only under high threat conditions. A clearer understanding of the factors that modulate these different behaviours is a crucial first step in devising more effective ways of reducing intergroup hostility and, crucially, of channelling extreme forms of group alignment into peaceful forms of prosocial action.

Democratic Hypocrisy and Out-Group Threat: Explaining Citizen Support for Democratic Erosion

With widespread democratic backsliding globally, people’s support for democracy-eroding leaders is receiving overdue attention. But existing studies have difficulty disentangling contextual effects (such as who is in power at the time of the survey) from individual differences (like which party one supports and how strongly). Moreover, we lack evidence on the causal antecedents of these attitudes. We propose a novel survey experimental design to strip away the political context through hypothetical scenarios, allowing us to identify citizens’ differential support for democratic norms when their own party is in versus out of power. Our findings indicate a large degree of democratic hypocrisy among the American public, whose support for norm-eroding policies increases when their own party is in power, an effect further amplified by two indicators of polarization: strong expressive partisanship and threat perceived from the opposing party.

Parochial cooperation in wild chimpanzees: a model to explain the evolution of parochial altruism.

Parochial altruism, taking individual costs to benefit the in-group and harm the out-group, has been proposed as one of the mechanisms underlying the human ability of large-scale cooperation. How parochial altruism has evolved remains unclear. In this review paper, we formulate a parochial cooperation model in small-scale groups and examine the model in wild chimpanzees. As suggested for human parochial altruism, we review evidence that the oxytocinergic system and in-group cooperation and cohesion during out-group threat are integral parts of chimpanzee collective action during intergroup competition. We expand this model by suggesting that chimpanzee parochial cooperation is supported by the social structure of chimpanzee groups which enables repeated interaction history and established social ties between co-operators. We discuss in detail the role of the oxytocinergic system in supporting parochial cooperation, a pathway that appears integral already in chimpanzees. The reviewed evidence suggests that prerequisites of human parochial altruism were probably present in the last common ancestor between Pan and Homo.This article is part of the theme issue ‘Intergroup conflict across taxa’.

The Impact of Threatening News Coverage of the Ethiopian “Al-Nahda Dam” on Egyptian Collective Insecurity (Arabic)

This study seeks to contribute to mediated out-group threat research by examining the consequences of exposure to news coverage depicting the Al-Nahda Dam crisis between Egypt and Ethiopia. It examines Egyptian feelings of collective insecurity and the role of group-based affect and group identity when exposed to a mediated out-group threat. Specifically, the study utilized the Ethiopians’ Al-Nahda Dam as an economic, safety, and cultural example of out-group threat to disentangle the effects of distinct types of threats and media outlets on the cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses of Egyptian audiences. Using a sample of 613 Egyptian respondents, recruited through an online survey service, this study explored the circumstances under which Egyptians might experience direct fear and anxiety when exposed to threatening news coverage of Al-Nahda Dam. Results from this study provide support for the proposed hypotheses related to the mediated role of distinct affective reactions to threat, exposure to different issues communicated by the media about the Ethiopian dam. Given these results, recommendations for future research are discussed, with particular emphasis on the role of political ideology and media content. It also expands the research on the potential for media to evoke this out-group directed affective response. Future scholarship could also examine the role of group identities and salient group membership in creating feelings of collective insecurity.

The dynamics of social cohesion in response to simulated intergroup conflict in banded mongooses.

Intergroup conflict is widespread in nature and is proposed to have strong impacts on the evolution of social behavior. The conflict–cohesion hypothesis predicts that exposure to intergroup conflict should lead to increased social cohesion to improve group success or resilience in future conflicts. There is evidence to support this prediction from studies of affiliative responses to outgroup threats in some animal societies. However, most of these studies have focused on behavioral changes over short time periods (minutes and hours after exposure to an outgroup), and hence very little is known about the dynamics and durability of responses to intergroup conflict over the longer term. We investigated this question by simulating intergroup encounters in wild banded mongooses (Mungos mungo) and measuring social behavior before, during, and after these encounters over a 5‐day period. We also ran control trials with non‐threatening stimuli. Banded mongooses reacted immediately to intrusion stimuli by vocalizing, grouping together, and advancing on the stimulus. In the first 5 min after simulated intrusions, we saw an elevation in grooming levels, but in the hour after exposure grooming rates declined sharply, contrary to our expectation. In the two subsequent days, grooming rates remained at this depressed rate. In control trials, the initial increase in grooming was not seen, but grooming declined compared to the longer‐term time periods. Grooming changed across time, but not in the same pattern as during intrusions, suggesting that intrusions had an impact above and beyond that of the experimental setup. The dynamics of grooming responses were short lived and more complex than we initially expected. We suggest this unexpected result may be linked to the frequency of aggressive intergroup encounters in this system. As control and experimental trials were run at different times of year, future work would be needed to confirm that these relative patterns are replicable. Our results indicate short‐lived impacts of outgroup threat on measures of social cohesion in this species, but cannot confirm longer‐term changes.

Perceiving Immigrants as a Threat: A Motivational Approach to False Consensus

False consensus, or biased projection of one’s opinion onto others, has repeatedly been described by political communication scholars as a derivative of selective exposure to attitude-consistent information. This study proposes a distinctive approach to understanding the phenomenon by suggesting “perceived threat” as a motivational factor that contributes to self-serving estimates of public opinion. Based on a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults, we test a path model in which political ideology relates to false consensus regarding the issue of immigration through cognitive assessments of communication environment and perceived immigration threat. Results suggest that the relationship between cognition and false consensus may not be direct but instead works through motivational factors when one perceives threat, and that conservatives are more sensitive to outgroup threat and thus are more likely to overestimate public consensus for their attitudes on immigration than their ideological counterparts. Implications of these findings are discussed.

Perceived injustice, perceived group threat and self-reported right-wing violence: An integrated approach

AbstractThe present study seeks to explain individual differences in self-reported politically motivated violence and vandalism, and participation within an extreme right-wing group. While violent extremism is highly debated, few criminological studies explicitly test factors that can trigger violent extremism. The present study addresses this gap by integrating two different frameworks: a perceived injustice and group threat-initiated model and an impulsivity-initiated model. We also investigate several intervening mechanisms. We draw on a sample of 705 adolescents and young adults living in Flanders, Belgium to test the strength of direct and intermediary effects of perceived injustice, perceptions of out-group threat from Jewish populations, ethnocentrism, feelings of superiority, moral support for right-wing extremism, and exposure to racist peers on politically motivated violence and vandalism. Results of structural equation models (SEM) indicate various direct and intermediary effects between both perceived injustice and violent extremism, and between impulsivity and violent extremism. Our model reveals the complex and intricate antecedents of violent extremism. Importantly, we find that feelings of injustice and unfair treatment are a major source of extremist violence, as they easily trigger often debated causes such as high in-group identification and ethnocentrism. Implications of these findings for preventing violent extremism are discussed, given the centrality of perceptions of injustice and threat.

Outgroup threat and the emergence of cohesive groups: A cross-cultural examination

Evolutionary models and empirical evidence suggest that outgroup threat is one of the strongest factors inducing group cohesion; however, little is known about the process of forming such cohesive groups. We investigated how outgroup threat galvanizes individuals to affiliate with others to form engaged units that are willing to act on behalf of their in-group. A total of 864 participants from six countries were randomly assigned to an outgroup threat, environmental threat, or no-threat condition. We measured the process of group formation through physical proximity and movement mirroring along with activity toward threat resolution, and found that outgroup threat induced activity and heightened mirroring in males. We also observed higher mirroring and proximity in participants who perceived the outgroup threat as a real danger, albeit the latter results were imprecisely estimated. Together, these findings help understand how sharing subtle behavioral cues influences collaborative aggregation of people under threat.

Ethno-Religious Identification and Support for Interreligious Violence: A Study of Muslim and Christian Students in Indonesia and the Philippines

AbstractThis study examines mechanisms and conditions under which ethnoreligious identification is related to support for out-group violence. It uses unique survey data collected among religious minorities and majorities in conflict and non-conflict regions in Indonesia and the Philippines. We find that strong ethno-religious identification is positively related to support for out-group violence. This relationship is fully mediated by the perception of out-group threat, suggesting that ethno-religious identification facilitates the perception of out-group threat, which, in turn, is positively related to support of violence. While the experience of communal violence increases support for interreligious violence, it does not influence the relationship between perceived group threat and support for violence. Interestingly, there is some evidence that the negative influence of intergroup contact on violence support is weaker for those who experienced communal violence.

Perception of threat as a mediator of the relationship between stereotypes and prejudice towards Venezuelan migrants in Peru

Objectives: The present study aims to explore the relationship between stereotypes (morality, warmth, and competence) and prejudice (subtle and blatant) towards Venezuelan immigrants in Peru. In addition, the role of threat perception as a mediator in the relationship between stereotypes and prejudice towards this social group is analyzed. Method: A correlational research design was conducted, using the Subtle and Blatant Prejudice Scale, the National Stereotypes Scale, and the Out-Group Threat Perception Scale. The sample consisted of 115 participants of Peruvian nationality between 18 and 60 years old (M = 29.6; SD = 11.77). Results: The results confirm the inverse relationship between positive representation and ambivalent prejudice. In other words, when Venezuelans are represented as more competent, warm and moral, there are fewer expressions of subtle and blatant prejudice towards this social group. The regression coefficient of the relationships between stereotypes and prejudice tends to decrease when perceived threat is incorporated as a mediating variable in the partial mediation model. Conclusions: The relationships between the studied variables are confirmed. Furthermore, their importance for the implementation of interventions that promote intergroup contact, social inclusion, and questioning of social agents that reinforce a threatening representation of the Latin American immigrant is discussed.

Threatened Masculinity: Gender-Related Collective Narcissism Predicts Prejudice Toward Gay and Lesbian People among Heterosexual Men in Poland

ABSTRACT We examined the relationships between different types of in-group positivity and prejudice toward gay and lesbian people among heterosexual men. We assumed that prejudice toward gay and lesbian people among heterosexual men should be predicted by gender-related collective narcissism (i.e., an unrealistic belief about in-group’s greatness which is contingent on external validation and extremely sensitive to any signs of threats) and not secure gender in-group identification (i.e., a confidently held in-group evaluation which is independent of the recognition of the group by others and serves as a buffer against threats). Across two studies (final Ns = 212 and 180) we found that gender-related collective narcissism (but not secure gender in-group identification or gender self-esteem) is positively related to prejudice toward gay and lesbian people among heterosexual men. The results of Study 2 demonstrated that this relationship was largely accounted for by the perceived out-group threat.

Prejudice towards Immigrants: The Importance of Social Context, Ideological Postulates, and Perception of Outgroup Threat

Recent years have witnessed a rise in support for political parties with an anti-immigration sentiment and nationalistic rhetoric as their distinguishing traits. Within this context, our study, through a survey, analyses the relation of prejudice toward immigrants with ideological postulates of right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance and outgroup threat. With a sample of 247 individuals (54.7% men and 45.3% women), our results reveal that positions favouring right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance and perception of realistic and symbolic threat have an influence on negative attitudes toward immigrants. At the same time, greater prejudice is found in those individuals scoring high in authoritarianism and symbolic threat. These results confirm, on one hand, the dual process motivation model of ideology and prejudice, and on the other, the bifactor structure of outgroup threat. As a conclusion, we propose that in order to foment peaceful coexistence and reduce hostility towards minority groups within today’s social context, it is important to consider the relevance of ideological postulates and outgroup threat. It is a priority to design public policies that favour the inclusion and integration of minority groups with the goal of building more sustainable societies that respect human rights.

Making America Great Again? National Nostalgia's Effect on Outgroup Perceptions.

Nostalgia is a fond longing for the past that has been shown to increase feelings of meaning, social connectedness, and self-continuity. Although nostalgia for personal memories provides intra- and interpersonal benefits, there may be negative consequences of group-based nostalgia on the perception and acceptance of others. The presented research examined national nostalgia (a form of collective nostalgia), and its effects on group identification and political attitudes in the United States. In a sample of US voters (N = 252), tendencies to feel personal and national nostalgia are associated with markedly different emotional and attitudinal profiles. Higher levels of national nostalgia predicted both positive attitudes toward President Trump and racial prejudice, though there was no evidence of such relationships with personal nostalgia. National nostalgia most strongly predicted positive attitudes toward president Trump among those high in racial prejudice. Furthermore, nostalgia's positive relationship with racial prejudice was partially mediated by perceived outgroup threat. Results from this study will help us better understand how the experience of national nostalgia can influence attitudes and motivate political behavior.

Looking Out For (White) Australia

Abstract. We conceptualized and developed a measure of right-wing protective popular nationalism (RWPPN) – a specific form of popular nationalism where people seek to protect the national culture from outgroup influences. RWPPN is derived from a sociological analysis of right-wing popular nationalism in Australia and is theoretically related to several key psychological constructs, including right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), social dominance orientation (SDO), and symbolic threat. We conducted two surveys using nationally representative samples of Australian citizens. In study 1 ( n = 657), participants completed measures of RWPPN and related constructs. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis resulted in a 10-item scale. Construct validity was tested and confirmed across divergent, convergent, predictive, and concurrent validation domains. Additional convergent validation with RWA and SDO was tested in study 2 ( n = 316). Together, RWPPN was found to relate to expressions of national identity, prejudice, perceived outgroup threat, opposition to multiculturalism, and aggressive tendencies toward ethnic minorities. These effects remained significant when controlling for nationalism (measured as a concern for national superiority) and blind patriotism. In study 2, the effect on aggressive tendencies held when controlling for RWA and SDO and RWPPN mediated the relationship between RWA and aggressive tendencies. Reflecting the conservative nature of Australian popular nationalism, RWPPN correlated with right-wing political alignment. The research was conducted in Australia, but given the rise in right-wing populism internationally, RWPPN may be a phenomenon in other countries. Therefore, this paper offers a new construct and scale to investigate it in Australia and internationally.

Immigration Threat, Partisanship, and Democratic Citizenship: Evidence from the US, UK, and Germany

Politicians and media frequently invoke immigration threats to shape public opinion. But how do outgroup threat frames affect norms of citizenship, including behavior, liberal value commitments, and national belonging? This paper presents evidence from an embedded vignette survey experiment in three immigrant-receiving societies: United States, United Kingdom, and Germany. I find immigration threats are filtered through partisanship in polarized settings, and asymmetrically affect norms of “good citizenship” among individuals on the partisan left. However, we see variation within this group: Democrats (US) de-value norms of behavior, like voting and being informed, while Labor supports (UK) repudiate liberal norms like tolerance and rally around national belonging. By contrast, in Germany, we observe more consensus in citizenship norm responses. The strong effect of immigration threat framing on the partisan left brings our attention to the strategic use of immigration discourse to move traditionally sympathetic citizens away from democratic civic ideals.

Uniting against a common enemy: Perceived outgroup threat elicits ingroup cohesion in chimpanzees.

Outgroup threat has been identified as an important driver of ingroup cohesion in humans, but the evolutionary origin of such a relationship is unclear. Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) in the wild are notably aggressive towards outgroup members but coordinate complex behaviors with many individuals in group hunting and border patrols. One hypothesis claims that these behaviors evolve alongside one another, where outgroup threat selects for ingroup cohesion and group coordination. To test this hypothesis, 5 groups of chimpanzees (N = 29 individuals) were observed after hearing either pant-hoots of unfamiliar wild chimpanzees or control crow vocalizations both in their typical daily environment and in a context of induced feeding competition. We observed a behavioral pattern that was consistent both with increased stress and vigilance (self-directed behaviors increased, play decreased, rest decreased) and increased ingroup cohesion (interindividual proximity decreased, aggression over food decreased, and play during feeding competition increased). These results support the hypothesis that outgroup threat elicits ingroup tolerance in chimpanzees. This suggests that in chimpanzees, like humans, competition between groups fosters group cohesion.

Attitude to multiculturality at school scale: validation and psychometric properties on a Chilean sample

The increasing number of immigrant students on the Chilean educational system stresses the importance of study teachers’ attitudes to multiculturality in schools settings. Nevertheless, there is a lack of adequate measurement instruments to apply on Chilean population. The aim of this work was to validate the Attitude to Multiculturality at School Scale (León del Barco et al., 2007) on a Chilean sample, composed by N=160 teachers. Confirmatory factor analysis showed that the unifactorial model had the best fit to the data. Correlation analysis revealed significant relations between attitude to multiculturality at school, perceived out-group threat and prejudice. Linear regression analysis showed that perceived threat and prejudice explained 42% of the attitude to multiculturality at school variability, supporting criterion validity.