The effects of ingroup-outgroup membership on minority influence when group membership is determined by a trivial categorisation

Two experiments are reported which investigate the influence of ingroup and outgroup minority influence where group membership was determined according to a trivial dimension. The results of the first experiment replicate an earlier study and show that an ingroup minority has significantly more influence than an outgroup minority. In the second study the connotations associated with membership of the ingroup and outgroup (positive/negative) were experimentally manipulated. When ingroup/outgroup membership was associated with a positive/negative image respectively, the ingroup minority had the most influence. However, when ingroup/outgroup membership was associated with a negative/positive image, as predicted, an outgroup minority had more influence than an ingroup minority. These results are interpreted as supporting an intergroup analysis of minority influence processes.

Ingroup and outgroup minorities:differential impact upon public and private responses

The experiment which is presented in this paper was designed to overcome some of the problems associated with previous research investigating the effects of social categorization and minority influence. Sixty-eight fourteen-year-old British Secondary School pupils indicated their attitudes towards a 'grant for pupils' before and after reading a text which advocated a minority position. The text was attributed as being the work of either pupils from their own school (ingroup minority) or from a school they discriminated against (outgroup minority). Responses were either made in ‘public’ (by telling subjects that other pupils would see their responses) or in ‘private’ (by subjects putting their responses into a ‘ballot box’). The results showed that on public responses ingroup minorities had more influence than outgroup minorities while there was no difference on private responses. Also, greater change occurred when responses were made in private than in public. These results are compatible with the intergroup analysis of minority influence.

Comparing direct and imagined intergroup contact among children:effects on outgroup stereotypes and helping intentions

We conducted an experimental intervention aimed at comparing the effectiveness of direct and imagined intergroup contact. Italian elementary school children took part in a three-week intervention with dependent variables assessed one week after the last intervention session. Results revealed that direct and imagined intergroup contact, compared to control conditions of direct and imagined intragroup contact, had an additive impact when it came to reducing negative stereotypes of immigrants and fostering future helping intentions toward this group. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.

'They cooperate with us, so they are like me': perceived intergroup relationship moderates projection from self to outgroups

Whereas projection of self-attributes to ingroups is ubiquitous, projection of self-attributes to outgroups (outgroup projection) is an elusive phenomenon. Two experiments examined the moderating effect of perceived intergroup relationship on outgroup projection and explored underlying mechanisms. Perceived cooperation versus competition between ingroup and outgroup was manipulated using fictitious (Experiment 1) or natural groups (Experiment 2). In both experiments, participants judged the outgroup as more similar to the self in the cooperation condition than in the competition condition. This effect was independent of recategorization, perceived intergroup similarity, and ingroup-to-outgroup projection. These studies demonstrate the very existence of outgroup projection and extend previous work on moderators of projection from self to groups.

Minority influence and social categorization:a replication

The effects of ingroup and outgroup minorities upon public and private levels of influence was examined. The results show that whilst ingroup minorities have greater influence in public, outgroup minorities can have as much, if not more influence than ingroup minorities when responses are made in private. These results are consistent with previous research and support the social identijkation model of social influence.

Minority influence and 'trivial' social categorization

This experiment examines ingroup and outgroup minority influence when group membership was determined by a trivial categorization. The results show that ingroup minorities had more public influence than outgroup minorities when the categorization was trivial and when subjects also believed that they were similar to their ingroup. However, no differences were found when group membership was not associated with similarity. These results are interpreted as supporting the social identification model of social influence.

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. © 2012 Canadian Psychological Association.

Ingroup categorization affects the structural encoding of other-race faces:evidence from the N170 event-related potential

The current research examined the influence of ingroup/outgroup categorization on brain event-related potentials measured during perceptual processing of own- and other-race faces. White participants performed a sequential matching task with upright and inverted faces belonging either to their own race (White) or to another race (Black) and affiliated with either their own university or another university by a preceding visual prime. Results demonstrated that the right-lateralized N170 component evoked by test faces was modulated by race and by social category: the N170 to own-race faces showed a larger inversion effect (i.e., latency delay for inverted faces) when the faces were categorized as other-university rather than own-university members; the N170 to other-race faces showed no modulation of its inversion effect by university affiliation. These results suggest that neural correlates of structural face encoding (as evidenced by the N170 inversion effects) can be modulated by both visual (racial) and nonvisual (social) ingroup/outgroup status. © 2014 © 2014 Taylor & Francis.

Perspective-taking mediates the imagined contact effect

We investigated the potential for mental imagery to reduce intergroup bias in Cyprus, an island that has suffered from interethnic tension for over 40 years. Seventy-three Turkish Cypriots were asked to imagine a scenario in which they interacted with Greek Cypriots, compared to those imagining an outdoor scene. Subsequently, participants in the imagined contact condition reported more positive outgroup evaluations. Mediational analysis showed this relationship was explained by increased levels of perspective-taking. The findings highlight theoretical and practical possibilities for future imagined contact research.

Perceptions of a changing world induce hope and promote peace in intractable conflicts

The importance of hope in promoting conciliatory attitudes has been asserted in the field of conflict resolution. However, little is known about conditions inducing hope, especially in intractable conflicts, where reference to the outgroup may backfire. In the current research, five studies yielded convergent support for the hypothesis that hope for peace stems from a general perception of the world as changing. In Study 1, coders observed associations between belief in a changing world, hope regarding peace, and support for concessions. Study 2 revealed the hypothesized relations using self-reported measures. Studies 3 and 4 established causality by instilling a perception of the world as changing (vs. unchanging) using narrative and drawing manipulations. Study 5 compared the changing world message with a control condition during conflict escalation. Across studies, although the specific context was not referred to, the belief in a changing world increased support for concessions through hope for peace.

Counter-stereotypes reduce emotional intergroup bias by eliciting surprise in the face of unexpected category combinations

In three experiments we investigated the impact that exposure to counter-stereotypes has on emotional reactions to outgroups. In Experiment 1, thinking about gender counter-stereotypes attenuated stereotyped emotions toward females and males. In Experiment 2, an immigrant counterstereotype attenuated stereotyped emotions toward this outgroup and reduced dehumanization tendencies. Experiment 3 replicated these results using an alternative measure of humanization. In both Experiments 2 and 3 sequential meditational analysis revealed that counter-stereotypes produced feelings of surprise which, in turn, elicited a cognitive process of expectancy violation which resulted in attenuated stereotyped emotions and an enhanced use of uniquely human characteristics to describe the outgroup. The findings extend research supporting the usefulness of counter-stereotype exposure for reducing prejudice and highlight its positive impact on intergroup emotions.

Imagined intergroup contact and common ingroup identity:an integrative approach

We conducted two studies involving two different age groups (elementary school children and adults) aimed at integrating imagined contact and common ingroup identity models. In the first study, Italian elementary school children were asked to imagine interacting with an unknown immigrant peer as members of a common group. Results revealed that common ingroup imagined contact, relative to a control condition, improved outgroup helping intentions assessed 1 week and 2 weeks after the intervention. In the second study, common ingroup imagined contact led Italian university students to display higher intentions to have contact with immigrants compared to control conditions. In conclusion, results from both studies demonstrate that imagining an intergroup interaction as members of the same group strengthens the effects of imagined contact. These findings point to the importance of combining the common ingroup identity model and the imagined contact theory in order to increase the potentiality of prejudice reduction interventions.

Humanizing outgroups through multiple categorization:the roles of individuation and threat

In three studies, we examined the impact of multiple categorization on intergroup dehumanization. Study 1 showed that perceiving members of a rival university along multiple versus simple categorical dimensions enhanced the tendency to attribute human traits to this group. Study 2 showed that multiple versus simple categorization of immigrants increased the attribution of uniquely human emotions to them. This effect was explained by the sequential mediation of increased individuation of the outgroup and reduced outgroup threat. Study 3 replicated this sequential mediation model and introduced a novel way of measuring humanization in which participants generated attributes corresponding to the outgroup in a free response format. Participants generated more uniquely human traits in the multiple versus simple categorization conditions. We discuss the theoretical implications of these findings and consider their role in informing and improving efforts to ameliorate contemporary forms of intergroup discrimination.

A new appraisal-based framework underlying hope in conflict resolution

Hope is a positive emotion that plays a pivotal role in intractable conflicts and conflict resolution processes by inducing conciliatory attitudes for peace. As a catalyser for conflict resolution, it is important to further understand hope in such contexts. In this paper we present a novel framework for understanding hope in contexts of intergroup conflict. Utilizing appraisal theory of emotions and heavily relying on the implicit theories framework, we describe three targets upon which hope appraisals focus in intractable conflict - the conflict, the outgroup, and the ingroup. Next, we describe the importance of developing ways to experimentally induce hope, and utilize the appraisal-target framework to describe and classify existing and potential interventions for inducing hope in intractable conflict resolution.

Hope comes in many forms:out-group expressions of hope override low support and promote reconciliation in conflicts

In conflicts, political attitudes are based to some extent on the perception of the outgroup as sharing the goal of peace and supporting steps to achieve it. However, intractable conflicts are characterized by inconsistent and negative interactions, which prevent clear messages of outgroup support. This problem calls for alternative ways to convey support between groups in conflict. One such method is emotional expressions. The current research tested whether, in the absence of outgroup support for peace, observing expressions of outgroup hope induces conciliatory attitudes. Results from two experimental studies, conducted within the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, revealed support for this hypothesis. Expressions of Palestinian hope induced acceptance of a peace agreement through Israeli hope and positive perceptions of the proposal when outgroup support expressions were low. Findings demonstrate the importance of hope as a means of conveying information within processes of conflict resolution, overriding messages of low outgroup support for peace.