Search

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Four studies used three different implicit methods (the BriefIAT, Affect Misattribution Procedure, and Lexical Decision Task) to measure women’s gender stereotypes of violence, strength, competence, trustworthiness, and sociability. Analyses of response latencies in Study 1 (N = 100) showed that these stereotypes were based more in in-group favoritism than out-group derogation. Consistent with recent evidence that morality is central to the positive evaluation of in-groups, it was the implicit stereotype of women as more trustworthy that best predicted their implicit in-group favoritism across studies, r(249) = .27. Only by examining such specific stereotype content could we assess the moral stereotype of trustworthiness as distinctly tied to in-group favoritism. Alternative analyses of the two global dimensions of group evaluation (i.e., agency/competence and communion/warmth) obscured differences between the more specific stereotypes. Implications for theory and research on stereotype content, as well as the group favoritism of disadvantaged groups, are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present research investigated the intergroup allocation behavior of members of low-status groups. In two studies where status relations were either relatively illegitimate (Study 1, N = 139) or legitimate (Study 2, N = 114), undergraduate students completed a minimal group resource allocation task that took into account the intergroup status hierarchy. In both studies, members of low-status groups showed two forms of in-group favoritism. They selected resource allocation choices that (a) compensated for their low status and led to intergroup fairness (compensatory favoritism) and (b) competed with the out-group for status and led to positive distinctiveness for the in-group (competitive favoritism). These results suggest that members of low-status groups use in-group favoritism to make their group (a) as good as the high-status out-group and (b) better than the high-status out-group. The findings support the idea that in-group favoritism can serve different functions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Meta-stereotypes, the stereotypes believed to be held about one’s ingroup by an outgroup, represent barriers to positive intergroup contact. Little is known, however, about factors accounting for meta-stereotypes. Although previous researchers have speculated on conceptual overlap between social projection (perceiving one’s personal attitudes to be commonly held) and meta-stereotypes, these constructs are typically studied separately. We propose the notion that meta-stereotypes can be explained by social projection processes. We examined Whites’ “bias meta-stereotypes” (perceptions that Blacks consider Whites biased) across two studies. Participants projected personal biases onto both their ingroup (Whites) and outgroup (Blacks); in turn, both ingroup and outgroup bias perceptions uniquely predicted bias meta-stereotypes. Overall, the positive relation between personal bias perceptions and bias meta-stereotypes was fully mediated (i.e., explained) by heightened perceptions of ingroup (White) and outgroup (Black) bias. Overall, there is considerable value in integrating basic social projection within intergroup domains, particularly with regard to meta-stereotyping. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]