Ingroup favouritism and outgroup favouritism in low status minimal groups: differential responses to status-related and status-unrelated measures

Reichl, Arleigh J.

doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-0992(199711/12)27:6<617::aid-ejsp829>3.0.co;2-t

Cited by 33 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…SIT argues that discrimination is motivated by a need for positive and distinctive social identity, but that it is constrained by objective status relations between groups. Consistent with this, it has been established that high-status groups show ingroup favouritism particularly in status-relevant domains, while low-status groups show ingroup favouritism in status-irrelevant domains (Bettencourt, Dorr, Charlton, & Hume, 2001; Brewer, 1979; Mullen, Brown, & Smith, 1992; Reichl, 1997; Sachdev & Bourhis, 1985, 1987, 1991). However, existing research does not define these domains in terms of content, assuming it depends entirely on the specific nature of the status relation.…”

supporting

confidence: 53%

“…They found that members of groups high in status or power showed ingroup favouritism while members of groups low in status or power showed outgroup favouritism. In a separate study, Reichl (1997) showed that members of low-status experimental groups showed outgroup favouritism in status-related domains, but ingroup favouritism in status-unrelated domains. Thus, high-status groups are often particularly discriminatory, and low-status groups often show out- group favouritism, in status-related domains.…”

Section: Social Identity Theory and Intergroup Discriminationmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Since successful discrimination enhances the positive distinctiveness of the ingroup, the importance of the ingroup to one’s self-concept (i.e., strength of identification) has been hypothesized to predict dis- crimination (Abrams & Hogg, 1988). However, identification does not consistently predict discrimination empirically (Hinkle & Brown, 1990; Kelly, 1993) and groups often show outgroup favouritism, particularly towards higher status groups on status-related dimensions (Bettencourt et al, 2001; Mullen et al, 1992; Reichl, 1997; Sachdev & Bourhis, 1985, 1987, 1991). Social identity theorists have been careful to stress that identification per se is not sufficient to predict discrimination, and that the broader social context, including status relations between groups, needs to be taken into account (e.g., Turner, 1999).…”

Section: Social Identity Theory and Intergroup Discriminationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Sachdev and Bourhis (1987, 1991) used a bogus creativity test to manipulate group status and assessed discrimination in terms of evaluations of the creativity of group products. Similary, Reichl (1997) used a bogus “Creative Intelligence Test” to manipulate status between groups, and then assessed discrimination through point allocations that were either based on test scores (relevant) or part of a separate study (irrelevant).…”

Section: Social Identity Theory and Intergroup Discriminationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another way group members may pursue positive distinctiveness is through differential discrimination in domains related to competence and warmth. Just as status has been shown to constrain and direct discrimination in status-related domains (Reichl, 1997), stereotypes of competence and warmth may constrain and direct discrimination in domains related to or requiring these traits. That is, high-status groups may show more discrimination in domains related to competence, while low-status groups may show more discrimination in domains related to warmth.…”

Section: Stereotype Content and Positive Distinctivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Social status and the pursuit of positive social identity: Systematic domains of intergroup differentiation and discrimination for high- and low-status groups

Oldmeadow

Fiske

2010

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on intergroup discrimination has focused on the cognitive and motivational mechanisms involved, but the role of stereotype content has been neglected. Drawing on social identity theory and stereotype content research, the current studies investigated the role of stereotype content in intergroup differentiation and discrimination. Across two studies, students from high- and low-status groups differentiated themselves positively on stereotypes of competence and warmth respectively, and in allocations of resources in domains relevant to competence (academics, research) and warmth (sports, community outreach). Furthermore, there was evidence that discrimination by high- and low-status groups was driven by their respective stereotypes of competence and warmth. It is argued that stereotypes of competence and warmth, derived from status and power relations between groups, define the domains in which groups pursue positively distinct identities.

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 53%

Section: Social Identity Theory and Intergroup Discriminationmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Social Identity Theory and Intergroup Discriminationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Social Identity Theory and Intergroup Discriminationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Stereotype Content and Positive Distinctivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Social status and the pursuit of positive social identity: Systematic domains of intergroup differentiation and discrimination for high- and low-status groups

Oldmeadow

Fiske

2010

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Social identity and the perception of history: cultural representations of Aotearoa/New Zealand

Liu

Wilson

McClure

et al. 1999

Eur. J. Soc. Psychol.

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The context of intergroup relations in Aotearoa/New Zealand was investigated using perceptions of history by Maori (Polynesian-descended) and Pakeha (Europeandescended) samples from university and the general public. There was strong consensus that the Treaty of Waitangi was the most important event in New Zealand's history, but only Maori, the subordinate ethnic group, showed in-group favouritism in their judgments regarding the Treaty. Pakeha, the dominant group, showed outgroup favouritism, and distanced themselves from past injustices using linguistic strategies. Maori students showed interest in their ethnic origins (ontogeny), rating the distant past and Polynesian history higher, and free-recalling more events prior to European arrival than other groups; Maori in the general population shared a more similar perception of history to Pakeha. Both in-group favouritism and ontogeny were found in sentencecompletion choices. Historical perceptions were strongly related to positions on current political issues. Results are related to social identity theory, social representations theory, and social dominance theory.

show abstract

Social identity theory: past achievements, current problems and future challenges

Brown

2000

Eur. J. Soc. Psychol.

1,279

943

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents a critical review of Social Identity Theory. Its major contributions to the study of intergroup relations are discussed, focusing on its powerful explanations of such phenomena as ingroup bias, responses of subordinate groups to their unequal status position, and intragroup homogeneity and stereotyping. In addition, its stimulative role for theoretical elaborations of the Contact Hypothesis as a strategy for improving intergroup attitudes is noted. Then five issues which have proved problematic for Social Identity Theory are identified: the relationship between group identification and ingroup bias; the self‐esteem hypothesis; positive – negative asymmetry in intergroup discrimination; the effects of intergroup similarity; and the choice of identity strategies by low‐status groups. In a third section a future research agenda for the theory is sketched out, with five lines of enquiry noted as being particularly promising: expanding the concept of social identity; predicting comparison choice in intergroup settings; incorporating affect into the theory; managing social identities in multicultural settings; and integrating implicit and explicit processes. The article concludes with some remarks on the potential applications of social identity principles. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Ingroup favouritism and outgroup favouritism in low status minimal groups: differential responses to status-related and status-unrelated measures

Cited by 33 publications

References 12 publications

Social status and the pursuit of positive social identity: Systematic domains of intergroup differentiation and discrimination for high- and low-status groups

Social status and the pursuit of positive social identity: Systematic domains of intergroup differentiation and discrimination for high- and low-status groups

Social identity and the perception of history: cultural representations of Aotearoa/New Zealand

Social identity theory: past achievements, current problems and future challenges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About