Life on the ocean wave: Testing some intergroup hypotheses in a naturalistic setting

A survey (N= 352) was conducted among British passengers of a cross-channel ferry. The survey aimed to test hypotheses drawn from Realistic Group Conflict, Social Identity and Contact theories using mainly a correlational design. However, an intervention by members of the outgroup (French fishermen blockading a port) also allowed a quasi-experimental test of the effects of a direct experience of intergroup conflict. Results supported the hypotheses since conflict and national identification were associated with more negative and with less positive attitudes toward the outgroup, while contact had the reverse effects. In addition, the salience of group membership in the contact relationship weakly moderated the effect of contact.

"They're scared of it": Intergroup determinants of attitudes toward children with HIV

The study used an intergroup perspective to explore teachers' willingness to teach children with HIV within mainstream education. One hundred thirty-eight teachers from 13 high schools across the United Kingdom participated in a survey. The results suggest that previous contact with an individual who was HIV positive (whether an adult or a child) was strongly associated with greater willingness to teach a child with HIV. However, this effect disappeared when intergroup anxiety, positive affect, and positive beliefs were included as covariates. There was little evidence that instrumental variables (i.e., relatively pragmatic concerns about infection) were associated with willingness to teach. Participants who had some contact reported lower fear of contagion from a child with HIV, but there was no evidence that this was associated with overall attitudes. The results are interpreted to suggest that interventions to reduce prejudice should not simply concentrate on improving knowledge about HIV transmission.

Employee adjustment to an organizational merger: An intergroup perspective

Adopting an intergroup perspective, the research was designed to examine predictors of employee responses to an organizational merger Data were collected from 465 fleet staff employed in a newly merged airline company. As predicted from social identity theory, the negative effects of the merger were most marked for employees of the low-status premerger organization. Also, as predicted, the perception of permeable intergroup boundaries in the new organization was associated positively with identification with the new organization and both job-related and person-related outcomes among employees of the low-status premerger organization but negatively with person-related outcomes among employees of the high-status premerger organization. As predicted, there was some evidence that the main and interactive effects involving status, perceived permeability, and intergroup contact on employee adjustment were mediated through strength of identification with the new organization.

"It's OK if we say it, but you can't": responses to intergroup and intragroup criticism

Three experiments were conducted examining group members' responses to criticism from ingroup and outgroup members. In Experiment I a, Australians read scripts of a person making either negative or positive comments about Australia. The speaker was identified as coming from either Australia (ingroup member) or another country (outgroup member). Responses indicated an intergroup sensitivity effect; that is, while ingroup criticisms were tolerated surprisingly well, outgroup criticisms were met with sensitivity and defensiveness. This pattern was replicated using the identity of,university student' (Experiment 1b). Experiment 2 demonstrated that the intergroup sensitivity effect is driven by perceptions that ingroup criticisms are seen to be more legitimate and more constructive than are outgroup criticisms. The results are discussed in terms of their implications for intragroup and intergroup relations. Copyright (C) 2002 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.