Status, legitimacy and ingroup bias in the context of an organizational merger

Adopting an intergroup perspective, the research was designed to examine predictors of employee responses to an organizational merger. Data were collected from 120 employees of a newly merged scientific organization. As predicted from social identity theory, the most negative responses to the merger were apparent among the employees of the low status premerger organization. There was also evidence of ingroup bias among both groups of employees involved in the merger—as expected, the bias was most marked on the status-irrelevant dimensions for the employees of the lower status organization, but most marked on the status-relevant dimensions for the employees of the high status organization. Also, in support of social identity theory, the perceived legitimacy of the basis for the status differentiation between the groups was associated with more positive responses to the merger among employees of the low status premerger organization, but with poorer responses among employees of the high status premerger organization. There was consistent evidence that the status by legitimacy interaction was mediated through the extent to which employees of the newly merged organization perceived a common ingroup identity

Examining the effects of work externalization through the lens of social identity theory

This study examines whether dissimilarity among employees that is based on their work status (i.e., whether they are temporary or internal workers) influences their organization-based self-esteem, their trust in and attraction toward their peers, and their altruism. A model that is based on social identity theory posits that work-status dissimilarity negatively influences each outcome variable and that the strength of this relationship varies depending on whether employees have temporary or internal status and the composition of their work groups. Results that are based on a survey of 326 employees (189 internal and 137 temporary) from 34 work groups, belonging to 2 organizations, indicate that work-status dissimilarity has a systematic negative effect only on outcomes related to internal workers when they work in temporary-worker-dominated groups.

Dragging down and dragging up: How relative group status affects responses to common fate

The authors examined whether status differences moderate the effects of common fate on subgroup relations. University students (N = 103) were led to believe that their subgroup was performing well (high status) or poorly (low status) relative to another subgroup. They were then told that the combined performances of the subgroups would have shared implications for their subgroup's welfare. (common fate) or that there would be a direct link between their subgroup's performance and its welfare (no common fate). High-status (but not low-status) group members responded to the common fate situation by (a) decategorizing and (b) showing benevolence to the out-group. Results are discussed with respect to their implications for managing subgroup relations.

Motivations for group membership: The role of subjective importance and uncertainty reduction

An experiment was conducted to investigate the idea that an important motive for identifying with social groups is to reduce subjective uncertainty, particularly uncertainty on subjectively important dimensions that have implications for the self-concept (e.g., Hogg, 1996; Hogg & Mullin, 1999). When people are uncertain on a dimension that is subjectively important, they self-categorize in terms of an available social categorization and, thus, exhibit group behaviors. To test this general hypothesis, group membership, task uncertainty, and task importance were manipulated in a 2 x 2 x 2 between-participants design (N = 128), under relatively minimal group conditions. Ingroup identification and desire for consensual validation of specific attitudes were the key dependent measures, but we also measured social awareness. All three predictions were supported. Participants identified with their group (H1), and desired to obtain consensual validation from ingroup members (H2) when they were uncertain about their judgments on important dimensions, indicating that uncertainty reduction motivated participants towards embracing group membership. In addition, identification mediated the interactive effect of the independent variables on consensual validation (H3), and the experimental results were not associated with an increased sense of social awareness and, therefore, were unlikely to represent only behavioral compliance with generic social norms. Some implications of this research in the study of cults and totalist groups and the explication of genocide and group violence are discussed.

Subgroup relations: A comparison of mutual intergroup differentiation and common ingroup identity models of prejudice reduction

Two studies examined relations between groups (humanities and math-science students) that implicitly or explicitly share a common superordinate category (university student). In Experiment 1, 178 participants performed a noninteractive decision-making task during which category salience was manipulated in a 2 (superordinate category salience) x 2 (subordinate category salience) between-groups design. Consistent with the mutual intergroup differentiation model, participants for whom both categories were salient exhibited the lowest levels of bias, whereas bias was strongest when the superordinate category alone was made salient. This pattern of results was replicated in Experiment 2 (N = 135). In addition, Experiment 2 demonstrated that members of subgroups that are nested within a superordinate category are more sensitive to how the superordinate category is represented than are members of subgroups that extend beyond the boundaries of the superordinate category.

Selection bias in gene extraction on the basis of microarray gene-expression data

In the context of cancer diagnosis and treatment, we consider the problem of constructing an accurate prediction rule on the basis of a relatively small number of tumor tissue samples of known type containing the expression data on very many (possibly thousands) genes. Recently, results have been presented in the literature suggesting that it is possible to construct a prediction rule from only a few genes such that it has a negligible prediction error rate. However, in these results the test error or the leave-one-out cross-validated error is calculated without allowance for the selection bias. There is no allowance because the rule is either tested on tissue samples that were used in the first instance to select the genes being used in the rule or because the cross-validation of the rule is not external to the selection process; that is, gene selection is not performed in training the rule at each stage of the cross-validation process. We describe how in practice the selection bias can be assessed and corrected for by either performing a cross-validation or applying the bootstrap external to the selection process. We recommend using 10-fold rather than leave-one-out cross-validation, and concerning the bootstrap, we suggest using the so-called. 632+ bootstrap error estimate designed to handle overfitted prediction rules. Using two published data sets, we demonstrate that when correction is made for the selection bias, the cross-validated error is no longer zero for a subset of only a few genes.

PCR bias toward the wild-type k-ras and p53 sequences: Implications for PCR detection of mutations and cancer diagnosis

PCR-based cancer diagnosis requires detection of rare mutations in k-ras, p53 or other genes. The assumption has been that mutant and wild-type sequences amplify with near equal efficiency, so that they are eventually present in proportions representative of the starting material. Work factor IX suggests that this assumption is invalid for one case of near-sequence identity To test the generality of this phenomenon and its relevance to cancer diagnosis, primers distant from point mutations in p53 and k-ras were used to amplify, wild-type and mutant sequences from these genes. A substantial bias against PCR amplification of mutants was observed for two regions of the p53 gene and one region of k-ras. For kras and p53, bias was observed when the wild-type and mutant sequences were amplified separately or when mixed in equal proportions before PCR. Bias was present with proofreading and non-proofreading polymerases. Mutant and wild-type segments of the factor V cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator and prothrombin genes were amplified and did not exhibit PCR bias. Therefore, the assumption of equal PCR efficiency for point mutant and wild-type sequences is invalid in several systems. Quantitative or diagnostic PCR will require validation for each locus, and enrichment strategies may be needed to optimize detection of mutants.

Mothers' mental illness and child behavior problems: Cause-effect association or observation bias

Objective: A number, of studies have consistently found that a mother's mental health (particularly her level of depression) is a strong predictor of mental health problems experienced by her child(ren). However, the validity of this finding is in doubt because the majority of these studies have relied on maternal reports as indicators of children's behavior. Method: This prospective, longitudinal study examines data an the mental health of the mother from prior to the birth of her child to when the child reaches 14 years of age. Child behavior is measured at 14 years of age using reports from mother and child. Mother and child responses are compared to provide an indication of the possible magnitude of maternal observation bias in the reporting of child behavior problems. Results: Anxious and/or depressed mothers tend to report more cases of child behavior problems than do their mentally healthy counterparts or children themselves. Differences between mothers and youths In reporting behavior problems appear to be related to the mothers' mental health. Conclusions: Current maternal mental health impairment appears to have a substantial effect on the reporting of child behavior problems by the mother, thereby raising questions about the validity of reports of child behavior by persons who are currently emotionally distressed.

Investigation of threat-related attentional bias in anxious children using the startle eyeblink modification paradigm

We used the startle eyeblink modification paradigm to investigate whether clinically anxious children, like high trait-anxious adults, display a bias in favour of threat words compared to neutral words. The present study included 16 clinically anxious children whose diagnostic status was determined using the parent version of a semistructured diagnostic interview as part of a larger childhood anxiety study. The children were presented with threat and neutral words fur 6 s each. A startle-eliciting auditory stimulus - a 100 dBA burst of white noise of 50 ms duration - was presented during the words at lead intervals of 60, 120, 240, or 3500 ms and during intertrial intervals. The overall pattern of startle eyeblink modification indicated inhibition at the 120 and 240 ms lead intervals and facilitation at the 3500 ms lead interval. startle-latency shortening during threat words at the :60 ms lead interval was larger than at other intervals, whereas there was no difference during neutral words. This result reflects an anxiety-related bias in favour of threat words occurring at a very early - and possibly preattentive stage - of information processing.

Stereotypic explanatory bias: Implicit stereotyping as a predictor of discrimination

Two experiments examined whether a measure of implicit stereotyping based on the tendency to explain Black stereotype-incongruent events more often than Black stereotype-congruent events (Stereotypic Explanatory Bias or SEB) is predictive of behavior toward a partner in an interracial interaction. In Experiment I SEB predicted White males' choice to ask stereotypic questions of a Black female (but not a White male or White female) in an interview. In Experiment 2 the type of explanation (internal or external attribution) made for stereotype-inconsistency was examined. Results showed that White participants who made internal attributions for Black stereotype-incongruent behavior were rated more positively and those who made external attributions were rated more negatively by a Black male confederate. These results point to the potential of implicit stereotyping as an important predictor of behavior in an interracial interaction. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.

'You can criticise because you care': Identification, constructiveness, and the intergroup sensitivity effect

Group criticisms judged to be reasonable in the mouth of an ingroup member are aggressively rejected when they stem from an outgroup member (the intergroup sensitivity effect). Mediational analyses suggest that this phenomenon is underpinned by an attributional bias; criticisms from insiders are more likely to be perceived as being motivated for constructive reasons than are criticisms from outsiders, thus arousing lower levels of defensiveness. But what if group members were to receive information that called into question the ingroup critic's commitment to the group? For example, if the ingroup critic was known to be a low identifier with their group, or used language to suggest that they were psychologically distancing themselves from their group, we might expect that ingroup critics will be downgraded as strongly as outgroup critics. Furthermore, it might be possible for people to turn an outgroup criticism into an ingroup criticism by making salient their shared identity at the superordinate level. Three experiments are described that provide support for each of these propositions.

The link between prejudiced attitudes and discriminatory behaviour: The role of ingroup norms

In the present research, a reconceptualisation of the role of norms in the link between prejudiced attitudes and discriminatory behaviour — along the lines suggested by the social identity perspective — was tested. In the first study, group salience and group norm were manipulated. As expected, participants ascribed negative traits to significantly fewer Asian university students when they had received consensus information along these lines from a salient ingroup rather than from a salient outgroup. These results were replicated on a measure of strength of motivation to appear nonprejudiced. In a second study, group salience and norm were once again manipulated and strength of attitude and perceived group threat were measured. As predicted, people's negative attitudes towards globalisation were more likely to predict congruent behavioural responses to the extent that the group norm supported the attitude and group salience was high, particularly when high levels of group threat were perceived.