The effects of status on subgroup relations

Two experiments were conducted to assess the impact of status differentials on subgroup attitudes and behaviours. In Experiment 1, 73 maths-science students were led to believe they had higher or lower status than humanities students. They then performed a non-interactive decision-making task during which they were categorized exclusively as a university student (superordinate condition), or as a university student and maths-science student simultaneously (subgroups condition). Experiment 2 (N = 98) differed from Experiment I in that perceptions of relative subgroup status were measured rather than manipulated. Consistent with social identity theory, subgroup members tended to categorize themselves more at the superordinate (university) level the lower status they considered their subgroup to be. In Experiment 2, a series of interactions also emerged, showing that status and inter-subgroup bias were positively related when the participants had been categorized exclusively at the superordinate level. When superordinate and subgroup identities were activated simultaneously, perceptions of status had no effect on levels of bias. The results were interpreted in terms of participants' needs for identity enhancement and identity distinctiveness.

"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.

Improving attitude-behavior correspondence through exposure to normative support from a salient ingroup

Two experiments were conducted to test predictions derived from social identity/self-categorization theory concerning the role of group norms in attitude-behavior consistency. In Experiment 1, 160 students who could be classified as having a more or less certain target attitude were exposed to attitude congruent versus incongruent normative support from a relevant reference group (own university) under conditions of low versus high group salience. Experiment 2 was very similar in design and methodology (N=180), but a different correlate of attitude accessibility was used (an experimental manipulation of repeated expression), the target attitude was changed, and the reference group was gender. Across the 2 experiments there was consistent support for the hypothesis that participants would behave more in accordance with their attitudes when they received normative support for, rather than opposition to, their original attitude from a relevant reference group (i.e., their ingroup, not an outgroup). There was slightly weaker support for the second hypothesis that this effect would be stronger under high-than low-salience conditions. The third hypothesis (see Fazio, 1986), that attitude certainty and repeated expression of the attitude would strengthen attitude-behavior consistency, was well supported, as was the expectation that accessibility effects would be independent of reference group norm effects on attitude-behavior consistency.

Being attuned to intergroup differences in mergers: The role of aligned leaders for low-status groups

The present research focused on responses of low-status group members to a merger with a high-status group. A study was conducted (N = 153) in which the alignment of the leader for the merged group (ingroup vs. outgroup) and leader behavior (equality, outgroup favoritism, ingroup favoritism, complementarity) were manipulated. The authors predicted that the leader, by his or her behavior, would play an important role in defining the new relationship between premerger groups. Overall, low-status ingroup leaders were evaluated more positively than high-status outgroup leaders. Ingroup leaders were evaluated more favorably and were more likely to engender a common identity in the merged group than were outgroup leaders when leaders behaved in an ingroup-favoring or complementary fashion. In contrast, evaluations of ingroup and outgroup leaders did not differ when the leader stressed equality or was outgroup favoring. The findings demonstrate the important role leaders can play in accentuating or de-emphasizing premerger status differences.

Levels of consensus and majority and minority influence

Three experiments are reported which examine the effects of consensus information on majority and minority influence. In all experiments two levels of consensus difference were examined; large (82% versus 18%) and small (52% versus 48%). Experiment 1 showed that a majority source had more influence than a minority source, irrespective of consensus level. Experiment 2 examined the cause of this effect by presenting only the source label ('majority' versus 'minority'), only the consensus information (percentages) or both. The superior influence of the majority was again found when either (a) both source label and consensus information were given (replicating Experiment 1) and (b) only consensus information was given, but not when (c) only the source label was given. The results showed majority influence was due to the consensus information indicating more than 50% of the population supported that position. Experiment 3 also manipulated message quality (strong versus weak arguments) to identify whether systematic processing had occurred. Message quality only had an impact with the minority of 18%. These studies show that consensus information has different effects' for majority and minority influence. For majority influence, having over 50% support is sufficient to cause compliance while for a minority there are advantages to being numerically small, in terms of leading to detailed processing of its message. Copyright (C) 2002 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.

Young children's performance on the balance scale: The influence of relational complexity

Three experiments investigated the effect of complexity on children's understanding of a beam balance. In nonconflict problems, weights or distances varied, while the other was held constant. In conflict items, both weight and distance varied, and items were of three kinds: weight dominant, distance dominant, or balance (in which neither was dominant). In Experiment 1, 2-year-old children succeeded on nonconflict-weight and nonconflict-distance problems. This result was replicated in Experiment 2, but performance on conflict items did not exceed chance. In Experiment 3, 3- and 4-year-olds succeeded on all except conflict balance problems, while 5- and 6-year-olds succeeded on all problem types. The results were interpreted in terms of relational complexity theory. Children aged 2 to 4 years succeeded on problems that entailed binary relations, but 5- and 6-year-olds also succeeded on problems that entailed ternary relations. Ternary relations tasks from other domains-transitivity and class inclusion-accounted for 93% of the age-related variance in balance scale scores. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science (USA).

Perceptions of younger, middle-aged, and older adults in Australia and Japan: Stereotypes and age group vitality

This study investigated the perceptions of young adults in Japan and Australia about their own age group, as well as middle-aged and older adults. Using a self-administered questionnaire, 155 Japanese and 171 Australian students rated people in the three age groups on traits of personal vitality and benevolence, and also rated their age group vitalities. Results indicated that Australians perceived both middle-aged and older adults in more positive terms than did Japanese and also perceived the vitality of these age groups as higher. On the other hand, both Japanese and Australian young people judged the vitality of their own group as lower than that of middle-aged adults. These results suggest that norms of filial piety, especially its respect dimension, in Japan may be eroding, whereas older Australians may be gaining in social stature.

Relations between high and low power groups: The importance of legitimacy

Using a social identity perspective, two experiments examined the effects of power and the legitimacy of power differentials on intergroup bias. In Experiment 1, 125 math-science students were led to believe that they had high or low representation in a university decision-making body relative to social-science students and that this power position was either legitimate or illegitimate. Power did not have an independent effect on bias; rather, members of both high and low power groups showed more bias when the power hierarchy was illegitimate than when it was legitimate. This effect was replicated in Experiment 2 (N =105). In addition, Experiment 2 showed that groups located within an unfair power hierarchy expected the superordinate power body to be more discriminatory than did those who had legitimately high or low power. The results are discussed in terms of their implications for group relations.

Believing is not enough: Predicting support for the NTEU on an Australian campus

Asurvey-based field study was conducted with 232 members and nonmembers of the National Tertiary Education Union to investigate the psychological processes underpinning union support. Drawing on value-expectancy models and social identity/self-categorisation theory, this study investigated the role that both individual and grouprelated factors play in predicting attitudinal and behavioural support for the union. Variables investigated included instrumental and ideological attitudes, perceptions of a normative climate of union-support, and perceptions of higher education being under threat. Further to support for previous findings for the role of instrumental and ideological attitudes it was found that the perceived workplace norm had the anticipated direct effect on behaviour and evaluation and also moderated the behavioural expression of ideological and instrumental attitudes. The perception of threat to employment and higher education also directly impacted on behaviour and moderated the behavioural expression of ideological beliefs. The implications of these findings for collective action research will he discussed.

Vicarious dissonance: Attitude change from the inconsistency of others

Three studies support the vicarious dissonance hypothesis that individuals change their attitudes when witnessing members of important groups engage in inconsistent behavior. Study 1, in which participants observed an actor in an induced-compliance paradigm, documented that students who identified with their college supported an issue more after hearing an ingroup member make a counterattitudinal speech in favor of that issue. In Study 2, vicarious dissonance occurred even when participants did not hear a speech, and attitude change was highest when the speaker was known to disagree with the issue. Study 3 showed that speaker choice and aversive consequences moderated vicarious dissonance, and demonstrated that vicarious discomfort-the discomfort observers imagine feeling if in an actor's place-was attenuated after participants expressed their revised attitudes.

Opening windows into the mind: mothers' preferences for mental state explanations and children's theory of mind

A new questionnaire, the Maternal Mental State Input Inventory (MMSII) was created to measure mothers' preferences for introducing and elaborating on mental states in conversation with their young children. In two studies, the questionnaire was given to mothers of young children, and the children's theory of mind (ToM) development was assessed with standard tasks. In both studies, the questionnaire exhibited good internal reliability, and significant correlations emerged between mothers' self-reported preferences for elaborated, explanatory talk about the mental states and children's theory of mind performance. Further, mothers' conversational preferences, as measured by the MMSII, were the best predictors of children's theory of mind development when relevant control variables were included in the analyses. These results converge with naturalistic observational research that has demonstrated links between mothers' conversational styles and their children's theory of mind. They go further in suggesting that mothers' tendencies toward elaborated, explanatory talk about a range of mental states is particularly beneficial to children's theory of mind development. (C) 2003 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.