2013 ◽  
pp. n/a-n/a ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul James Maher ◽  
Wijnand Adriaan Pieter Van Tilburg ◽  
Annemieke Johanna Maria Van Den Tol
Keyword(s):  

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 757-769 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvia Moscatelli ◽  
Miles Hewstone ◽  
Monica Rubini

This study examines the impact of relative group size on linguistic ingroup favoritism and outgroup derogation. Members of minority, majority, and equal-size groups freely described outcome allocations made by either ingroup or outgroup members. The abstraction and valence of the terms used were analyzed. Majority members expressed ingroup favoritism by describing the majority ingroup with positive terms at a higher level of abstraction than negative terms. They also provided more favorable descriptions of ingroup members than minority members did. Minority members expressed ingroup favoritism, but also outgroup derogation, by referring to the majority outgroup with negative terms at a higher level of abstraction than positive terms. These findings highlight the distinct consequences of minority and majority memberships on these two facets of intergroup discrimination.


2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 116-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tiffany Morisseau ◽  
Martial Mermillod ◽  
Cécile Eymond ◽  
Jean-Baptiste Van Der Henst ◽  
Ira A. Noveck

This paper explores the impact of group affiliation with respect to the on-line processing and appreciation of jokes, using facial electromyography (EMG) activity and offline evaluations as dependent measures. Two experiments were conducted in which group affiliation varied between the participant and each of two independent (recorded confederate) speakers whose described political profiles were distinguished through one word: “Right” versus “Left.” Experiment 1 showed that jokes were more highly evaluated and that associated EMG activity was more intense when it was later determined that the speaker was a member of the listener’s ingroup rather than outgroup. In an effort to determine whether these parochial effects can be isolated to ingroup favoritism as opposed to outgroup derogation, Experiment 2 paired a joke-teller described as politically active (either from the right or the left) with one who was described as politically neutral. These more subtle comparisons suggest that the parochial effects observed in our joke understanding paradigm are mediated, at least in part, by the presence of an outgroup member.


2006 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 262-278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karmela Liebkind ◽  
Anna Henning-Lindblom ◽  
Erling Solheim

2012 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Omar Shahabudin McDoom

How do security threats mobilize social groups against each other? The strength of such threats lies in the power of group emotions, notably the primary emotion of fear. Fear works by activating psychological processes at the group level that polarize attitudes between different groups. An analysis of survey data, radio broadcasts, and interviews from Rwanda's civil war and genocide of 1990–94 reveals four psychosocial mechanisms at work in group polarization: boundary activation, outgroup derogation, outgroup homogenization, and ingroup cohesion. Additionally, scholarly debates on the role of emotions, material opportunities, and rationality in ethnic conflicts represent a false theoretical choice. Both emotions and material opportunities matter, and rationality and emotion are not incompatible. Two simple refinements to extant theoretical and empirical approaches are needed. First, scholars ought to distinguish between attitudes and violence in ethnic conflicts; emotions matter for the polarization of attitudes, but material and structural opportunities mediate their expression as violence. Second, scholars should pay greater attention to the extensive research in social psychology that shows that both emotion and reason interact in individual judgment and decisionmaking.


2012 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Loris Vezzali ◽  
Luca Andrighetto ◽  
Elena Trifiletti ◽  
Emilio Paolo Visintin

We examined whether perceptions of status (in)stability moderate the effects of ingroup identification on explicit and implicit intergroup attitudes. We expected that identification with Italians (low-status group) would enhance ingroup bias toward (US) Americans (high-status group) more when status was unstable rather than stable. We also predicted that the effects of identification on bias would be driven by ingroup enhancement for explicit attitudes and by both ingroup enhancement and outgroup derogation for implicit attitudes. The results revealed that identification increased explicit ingroup evaluation and ingroup bias independently from status (in)stability. However, identification increased implicit outgroup derogation only with unstable status. The results are discussed with reference to social identity theory and to the importance of considering both explicit and implicit attitudes.


2014 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Gustafsson Sendén ◽  
Torun Lindholm ◽  
Sverker Sikström

This paper examines whether pronouns in news media occurred in evaluative contexts reflecting psychological biases. Contexts of pronouns were measured by computerized semantic analysis. Results showed that self-inclusive personal pronouns (We, I) occurred in more positive contexts than self-exclusive pronouns (He/She, They), reflecting self- and group-serving biases. Contexts of collective versus individual pronouns varied; We occurred in more positive contexts than I, and He/She in more positive contexts than They. The enhancement of collective relative to individual self-inclusive pronouns may reflect that media news is a public rather than private domain. The reversed pattern among self-exclusive pronouns corroborates suggestions that outgroup derogation is most pronounced at the category level. Implications for research on language and social psychology are discussed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document