Outgroup Audience Research Articles

Satire without borders: the age-moderated effect of one-sided versus two-sided satire on hedonic experiences and patriotism.

The differential satire effects across domestic and foreign audiences are largely unknown; yet, this is of growing relevance as political satire increasingly reaches international audiences. A two-country experiment was conducted in which satirical stimuli from the Netherlands with either a one-sided (only targeting the United States) or two-sided humorous message (targeting both the U.S. and the Netherlands) was presented to a domestic (in-group) or foreign (out-group) audience. Specifically, this study examines political satire's differential emotional and attitudinal impact on audiences located in the country-of-production (Netherlands) or abroad (U.S.). Results show that satire sidedness uniformly influenced hedonic enjoyment: compared to two-sided satire, one-sided satire elicited negative emotions and decreased positive emotions for both the in-group (Dutch) and the out-group (U.S.) audience. Yet, satire differentially affected patriotic attitudes. This effect was moderated by country and age: younger U.S. citizens became less patriotic after exposure to the one-sided satire that targeted their country and decreased their positive emotions; older U.S. citizens, in contrast, became more patriotic after exposure to this one-sided satire that particularly increased their negative emotions. The Dutch audience's level of patriotism remained stable irrespective of satire sidedness. Altogether, this study demonstrates how humor type, country-of-reception, and age matter for satire effects.

Feeling judged? How the presence of outgroup members promotes healthier food choices

AbstractThe present article examines how the presence of others from a different social group (i.e., outgroup audience) influences consumers' food choices relative to the presence of others from their own social group (i.e., ingroup audience). In four studies, using various types of group memberships (race, university affiliation, and work affiliation), we first find that consumers are more likely to make healthy food choices in the presence of racial (Study 1) and university (Study 2) outgroup (vs. ingroup) audiences. Then, using an experimental causal‐chain mediation approach, we show this effect occurs because consumers anticipate more negative judgment from outgroup (vs. ingroup) audiences (Studies 3a and 3b). We discuss the possible role of outgroup contact and diversity in promoting healthy eating.

Testing the effect of historical representations on collective identity and action.

Historical representation of collective identity offer means of influencing the extent to which group members engage in activities in line with the collective interests of their group vs. their own individual interests. This research tested the effect of different historical representations of the African people on Africans' perceptions of African social identity and engagement in identity management strategies across two studies. In Study 1 (N = 162), we tested the effect of two historical representations: positive (prestigious precolonial African history and resistance to the colonial power) and negative (inhumane practices of precolonial Africans). In Study 2 (N = 431), we tested the effect of two historical representations: positive (prestigious precolonial African history) and negative factual (inhuman practices of precolonial Africans) while also making salient the ubiquitous historical representation of the African people (negative colonial-perspective) across all history conditions. We predicted that positive (vs. negative) historical representation would lead to more positive perceptions of African identity, which in turn would predict more collectively-oriented identity management strategies. Altogether, results provided no support for these predictions. We highlight methodological (and by extension theoretical) features-such as, psychological reactance and outgroup audience effect-which may have limited the effect of the manipulations to help inform the interpretation of the null findings obtained. We conclude by discussing other limitations and the theoretical implications of our work, before pointing out various avenues for future research to help us better test, and understand, the role of historical representation in the African context.

Shared reality in intergroup communication: Increasing the epistemic authority of an out-group audience.

Communicators typically tune messages to their audience's attitude. Such audience tuning biases communicators' memory for the topic toward the audience's attitude to the extent that they create a shared reality with the audience. To investigate shared reality in intergroup communication, we first established that a reduced memory bias after tuning messages to an out-group (vs. in-group) audience is a subtle index of communicators' denial of shared reality to that out-group audience (Experiments 1a and 1b). We then examined whether the audience-tuning memory bias might emerge when the out-group audience's epistemic authority is enhanced, either by increasing epistemic expertise concerning the communication topic or by creating epistemic consensus among members of a multiperson out-group audience. In Experiment 2, when Germans communicated to a Turkish audience with an attitude about a Turkish (vs. German) target, the audience-tuning memory bias appeared. In Experiment 3, when the audience of German communicators consisted of 3 Turks who all held the same attitude toward the target, the memory bias again appeared. The association between message valence and memory valence was consistently higher when the audience's epistemic authority was high (vs. low). An integrative analysis across all studies also suggested that the memory bias increases with increasing strength of epistemic inputs (epistemic expertise, epistemic consensus, and audience-tuned message production). The findings suggest novel ways of overcoming intergroup biases in intergroup relations. (PsycINFO Database Record

Supplemental Material for Shared Reality in Intergroup Communication: Increasing the Epistemic Authority of an Out-Group Audience

Supplemental Material for Shared Reality in Intergroup Communication: Increasing the Epistemic Authority of an Out-Group Audience

Creating shared reality in interpersonal and intergroup communication: the role of epistemic processes and their interplay

ABSTRACTWe describe research on the creation of shared reality in communication, emphasizing the epistemic processes that allow communicators to achieve confident judgements and evaluations about a communication topic. We distinguish three epistemic inputs: (1) the communicator’s own judgement about the topic (judgement of communicator); (2) the communicator’s perception of the audience’s judgement about the topic (judgement of audience); and (3) the communicator’s message to the audience about the topic (message of communicator). We argue that the influence of each input increases with the communicator’s confidence in the validity of that input. We review a variety of empirical studies in terms of this framework. We also address barriers to shared-reality creation in intergroup communication and describe interventions that work by increasing the validity strength of judgement of an outgroup audience. We discuss the relation between the present research and other approaches to social influence and social sharing.

Reactions to group devaluation and social inequality: A comparison of social identity and system justification predictions

AbstractSystem justification theory (SJT) proposes that support for social inequality should be stronger among members of devalued groups than among members of higher status groups; that embracing the system in this way soothes anger and leads to a withdrawal of support for social change; and that these effects should occur when group interest is weak. We compared these SJT predictions with identity management and hope for group advancement accounts that we deduced from social identity theory (SIT) which suggest that both system justification and support for social change will be significant when group interest is strong. Consistent with the SIT-based accounts, Study 1 (N = 116, Malaysia, Mage = 19.09 years) showed that strong identifiers were more concerned about their in-group’s reputation than weak identifiers, and that this concern increased system justification but only before an out-group audience to whom a need to present one’s group in good light is normally strong. Study 2 (N = 375, Australia, Ma...

Adjusting Shared Reality: Communicators' Memory Changes As Their Connection with Their Audience Changes

Communicators' memory can be shaped by their tuning of a message to their audience's attitude, reflecting their creation of a shared reality with the audience. We investigated whether this audience-tuning effect on communicators' subsequent memory is sensitive to post-message changes in their personal connection with their audience. In Experiment 1, we created conditions unfavorable to shared reality, that is, communication with an out-group audience. The audience-tuning memory effect was absent when communication-success feedback was impersonal (experimenter-transmitted), replicating previous findings. However, it was present when success feedback was personally communicated by the out-group audience. In Experiment 2, the effect was eliminated when communicators learned that their message, intended for an in-group audience, was mistakenly delivered to an out-group audience. In Experiment 3, such elimination also occurred when the mistaken audience remained an in-group member. Thus, the personal (vs. group) relation is critical. In sum, memory adjustment reflects the situatedness of shared reality.

The effect of metastereotyping on judgements of higher-status outgroups when reciprocity and social image improvement motives collide.

Two experiments examined the effect of metastereotype valence on high and low identifiers' judgments of an outgroup. As high identifiers are strongly emotionally invested in the ingroup, we expected that such group members would feel angry when they activate negative metastereotypes which would correspondingly lead to less favourable evaluation of the outgroup. We further expected this pattern to be particularly visible when high identifiers could communicate their dissatisfaction to an outgroup (but not an ingroup) audience presumably to persuade the outgroup to reevaluate their attitudes toward the ingroup. We did not expect low identifiers to reflect the valence of metastereotypes in their outgroup attitudes and judgments, given their weak emotional ties with the ingroup and because such members are likely to feel that metastereotypes do not apply to them personally. Results from two experiments (Study 1, N = 78; Study 2, N = 80) supported these predictions and are discussed in light of the implications of metastereotyping for intergroup relations.

On not airing our dirty laundry: Intergroup contexts suppress ingroup criticism among strongly identified group members

Not every situation affords the appropriate setting to articulate group problems, and I predicted that strongly identified members would be particularly sensitive to the intergroup context in which ingroup criticism is expressed. In Study 1, strongly but not weakly identified members reduced criticism of their ingroup when communicating with an outgroup (vs. ingroup) audience, and this effect was mediated by concerns for the reputation of the group. In Study 2, heightening the salience of intergroup competition suppressed criticism among group members high (but not low) in the solidarity component of identification, even though they were communicating with an ingroup audience. These findings show that even when criticizing their group, strongly identified members are attuned to the collective interest: they are more willing to articulate problems to an insider than when asked to do so by an outgroup member or when reminded of a competitive intergroup dynamic.

Embarrassment: The ingroup–outgroup audience effect in faux pas situations

AbstractEmbarrassment arises when we reveal an apparent flaw of the self in front of others, for instance, in a faux pas situation. An audience is crucial for embarrassment, but the group membership of the audience has not yet been studied. According to the social identity approach, we assign more importance to evaluations by ingroup than by outgroup members, particularly when we identify highly, and the outgroup is of lower status. A pilot study (N = 30) showed that embarrassment correlated positively with group membership of the audience and with identification. Studies 1 to 3 presented participants with several faux pas scenarios. In Study 1 (between‐participants design; N = 75), participants reported higher embarrassment in ingroup (Norwegian) and equal‐status outgroup (Swedish) conditions than in a lower‐status outgroup condition (Polish). In Study 2 (within‐participants design; N = 135), participants reported higher embarrassment when they imagined the audience to be other Scots (ingroup) than Americans or Poles (outgroups), particularly when they perceived the outgroup to be lower in status. In Study 3 (between‐participants design; N = 59), high identifiers but not low identifiers showed the expected ingroup–outgroup audience effect. Implications for intergroup relations are discussed. Key Message: Embarrassment following faux pas situations depends on the group membership of the audience, relative status of the audience and ingroup identification. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

When history constrains identity: Expressing the self to others against the backdrop of a problematic past

AbstractNegative histories threaten collective identity. Much research has focussed on how group members strategically defend against such threats. However, within certain groups such defence is difficult—because the group's past actions were unambiguously negative and because these were public and continue to frame relations with outgroups. We explored the consequences of this form of identity constraint on the individual's experience of the self. Two studies varied the salience of the past as German participants expressed their national identity to either an ingroup (German) or outgroup (English) audience. In both studies expressing German identity to an outgroup audience when the past was salient resulted in a more fragmented sense of self and reduced self‐esteem. This effect was mediated through a perceived inability to enact the self. Results are discussed with respect to the power of context to constrain identity expression, and the consequences of this for the self. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The Role of Intergroup Status in Tendencies to Play Up or Play Down Intergroup 'Conflict'

Although intergroup conflict is generally treated as unambiguous, it is often not so clear whether groups are in ‘conflict’, either from protagonists’ or outsiders’ perspectives. In two studies, we examine the strategic considerations that shape group members’ tendencies to acknowledge or downplay conflict with a transgressing outgroup, focusing on the role of intergroup status. Study 1 tested and found support for the prediction that conflict would be downplayed more when the ingroup had high rather than low status relative to the outgroup. Underlining the strategic nature of this effect of status, it was significant when group members were addressing an outgroup audience (providing a communication context that facilitated the strategic characterization of ‘conflict’), but not when addressing an ingroup audience. The effect of status was also independent of perceptions of negative interdependence. Study 2 replicated the effect of status, and showed that it only occurred when status relations were stable (unlikely to change without strategic action), and not when they were unstable (i.e., likely to change without the need for strategic action). We also examined the link between ingroup status, conflict acknowledgement and outgroup derogation in Study 2. While ingroup status had a positive (direct) effect on outgroup derogation, it also had an indirect, negative effect on derogation through conflict acknowledgement, suggesting the operation of distinct reflective and strategic routes from ingroup status to outgroup derogation. Together, these findings suggest that the very definition of the relationship between ‘us’ and ‘them’ is itself a crucial, strategically-driven aspect of intergroup struggles.

Who Says We Are Bad People? The Impact of Criticism Source and Attributional Content on Responses to Group-Based Criticism

We investigated the interplay between the source of criticism and the attributional content of their message on behavioral responses to group-based criticism. Studies 1 and 2 revealed that outgroup critics were more effective when their criticism included internal attributions (to the ingroup's character) rather than external attributions (the ingroup's circumstances), whereas there was no effect of attributional content for ingroup critics (a significant Source x Content interaction). Study 3 explored the role of audiences in responses to outgroup criticism. The results indicated that the positive effects of internal versus external attributions were only evident when an outgroup audience was witness to participants' responses. Furthermore, these effects were mediated through concerns about the ingroup's image. Together, these patterns suggest that responses to criticism depend not just on the identity of the critic but also on what the critic says and who is watching. People may be surprisingly responsive to outgroup criticism-particularly when inaction might lead others to perceive them as "bad people."

Subtyping and social consensus: the role of the audience in the maintenance of stereotypic beliefs

AbstractTwo studies investigated the effect of stereotypes held by a prospective audience on participants' reactions to a stereotype‐disconfirming member. In Study 1, participants formed an impression of a positive disconfirming gay in order to communicate it to an audience known to hold a negative versus positive stereotype about gays. As predicted, participants subtyped the deviant more in the former than in the latter case. Moreover, participants' stereotype at the end of the study mirrored the audience's assumed stereotypes about gays. In Study 2, participants learned about a stereotype allegedly held by an ingroup or an outgroup audience about Belgians and then received information about a Belgian who disconfirmed the stereotype. As predicted, the deviant was seen as less typical when he violated the stereotype held by an ingroup than by an outgroup audience. Also, participants' stereotype about Belgians was more similar to the one held by the ingroup audience. A mediational analysis confirmed that participants subtyped the disconfirming member in order to embrace the stereotype advocated by the ingroup audience. Results are discussed in light of recent models of stereotype change. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Group‐directed criticism in Indonesia: Role of message source and audience

Research in individualist cultures has shown that group members are more likely to agree with criticisms of their group when the criticisms are made by another ingroup member as opposed to an outgroup member (the intergroup sensitivity effect). However, evaluations of ingroup critics are often harsher when they take their comments to an outgroup audience. In light of research on facework and tolerance for dissent, it seems important to test whether these effects are generalizable to a collectivist culture. Indonesian Muslims (N = 191) received a criticism of their religion stemming either from another Muslim or a Christian, and published in either a Muslim or a Christian newspaper. Participants agreed with the comments more when they were made by an ingroup as opposed to an outgroup member. Furthermore, consistent with previous research in Australia, the effects of audience on agreement were moderated by levels of group identification. Results are discussed in relation to theory about the functional role internal critics can play in group life.

Keeping it in-house: how audience affects responses to group criticism

It is often assumed that group-directed criticism is best kept ‘in-house’, but the effects of audience on responses to criticism have not been directly examined. Consistent with predictions, ingroup members who criticized the group to an outgroup audience were seen to be making a less appropriate choice of audience (Experiments 2 and 3), aroused more negative feelings (Experiment 1), were downgraded more strongly on personality traits (Experiment 2), and were seen to be doing more damage to the group (Experiment 2) than were ingroup members who kept their criticisms in-house. Experiment 3 showed that, whereas moderate identifiers agreed with the comments less and showed weaker friendly intentions toward the critic when an outgroup audience as compared to an ingroup audience was chosen, high identifiers agreed with the criticisms just as strongly—and showed more friendly intentions toward the critic—when they were made to an outgroup as compared to an ingroup audience. Results are discussed in light of the broader literature on identity threat. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Audience-tuning effects on memory: The role of shared reality.

After tuning to an audience, communicators' own memories for the topic often reflect the biased view expressed in their messages. Three studies examined explanations for this bias. Memories for a target person were biased when feedback signaled the audience's successful identification of the target but not after failed identification (Experiment 1). Whereas communicators tuning to an in-group audience exhibited the bias, communicators tuning to an out-group audience did not (Experiment 2). These differences did not depend on communicators' mood but were mediated by communicators' trust in their audience's judgment about other people (Experiments 2 and 3). Message and memory were more closely associated for high than for low trusters. Apparently, audience-tuning effects depend on the communicators' experience of a shared reality.