Construal level and ingroup bias

The causal relationship between mental construal level and ingroup bias remains elusive. This paper uncovers a boundary condition and a mechanism underlying the relationship. We predict and find support for our hypotheses in four experiments conducted in East Asian and Western cultures. Data showed that a high- (vs. low-) level construal activated state belongingness, but had no effect on state rejection, state self-esteem, positive emotion, or negative emotion in participants from Korea (Experiment 1) and Australia (Experiment 3). Moreover, a high- (vs. low-) level construal triggered greater ingroup bias for Koreans (Experiment 2) and Australians (Experiment 3) primed with a relational self, but not for those primed with an independent self. This construal level effect on ingroup bias was eliminated when belongingness was primed at both a high- and a low-level construal; instead, relationals under a low-level construal were more ingroup-biased when they were primed with a belongingness (vs. baseline) condition (Experiment 4). These findings highlight that the relational self is a boundary condition for the construal level-ingroup bias link; belongingness explains the relationship.

The development of national in-group bias: English children's attributions of characteristics to English, American and German people

This study investigated the development of national in-group bias in 5-11-year-old children. Three hundred and seven English children were asked to attribute characteristics to their own national group either on its own or in conjunction with attributing characteristics to one of two national out-groups, either Americans or Germans. The importance which the children ascribed to their own national identity in relationship to their other social identities was also assessed. It was found that, with increasing age, there was an increase in the number of negative characteristics attributed to the national in-group, and an increase in the number of positive characteristics attributed to the two out-groups, the net result being an overall reduction in in-group bias across this age range. However, in-group favouritism was still exhibited at all ages. Greater importance was attributed to national identity with increasing age. However, the characteristics attributed to the English in-group did not vary as a function of the comparative out-group which was present while the attributions were being made. The presence of a comparative out-group also did not affect the importance that was ascribed to the national identity. These findings suggest that children are relatively insensitive to the prevailing comparative context when making judgments about national groups.

Examining fan attitudes toward sponsor brands using social identity frameworks

The majority of academic research has attempted to explain the effectiveness of sponsorship activities by focusing on individual outcomes (Cornwell, Weeks, & Roy, 2005). The current research builds upon the limited empirical studies that examine sponsorship outcomes using group behaviour theories (Cornwell & Coote, 2005; Gwinner & Swanson, 2003; Madrigal, 2000, 2001). Specifically, this study closely examines tenets of social identity theory (Brewer, 1991; Tajfel & Turner, 1979) within the context of sports sponsorship to test effects of team identification on attitudes toward associated sponsor brands. 1,840 unique surveys were collected from fans of the Queensland Maroons and New South Wales Blues rugby clubs over four timepoints during the 2012 State of Origin series. The results suggest that social identity effects were present regarding ingroup bias toward sponsor brands. Local sponsors were rated higher than non-local sponsors, suggesting that local brands may benefit more from sponsorship.

The Effects of Living in Segregated vs. Mixed Areas in Northern Ireland: A Simultaneous Analysis of Contact and Threat Effects in the Context of Micro-Level Neighbourhoods

This study examines the consequences of living in segregated and mixed neighbourhoods on ingroup bias and offensive action tendencies, taking into consideration the role of intergroup experiences and perceived threat. Using adult data from a cross-sectional survey in Belfast, Northern Ireland, we tested a model that examined the relationship between living in segregated (N = 396) and mixed (N = 562) neighbourhoods and positive contact, exposure to violence, perceived threat and outgroup orientations. Our results show that living in mixed neighbourhoods was associated with lower ingroup bias and reduced offensive action tendencies. These effects were partially mediated by positive contact. However, our analysis also shows that respondents living in mixed neighbourhoods report higher exposure to political violence and higher perceived threat to physical safety. These findings demonstrate the importance of examining both social experience and threat perceptions when testing the relationship between social environment and prejudice.

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.

Explaining the relationship between ingroup identification and intergroup bias following recategorization: A self-regulation theory analysis

We tested the hypothesis that regulation of discrepancies between perceived actual and ideal differentiation between the ingroup and outgroup could help to explain the relationship between ingroup identification and intergroup bias when participants are recategorized into a superordinate group. Replicating previous findings, we found that following recategorization, identification was positively related to intergroup bias. No such differences emerged in a control condition. However, we also, in the recategorization condition only, observed a positive association between ingroup identification and the perceived discrepancy between actual and ideal degree of differentiation from the outgroup: at higher levels of identification, participants increasingly perceived the ingroup to be less differentiated from the outgroup than they would ideally like. This tendency mediated the relationship between identification and bias. We discuss the theoretical, methodological and practical implications of these findings.

Intergroup bias in third-party punishment stems from both ingroup favoritism and outgroup discrimination

Social norms pervade almost every aspect of social interaction. If they are violated, not only legal institutions, but other members of society as well, punish, i.e., inflict costs on the wrongdoer. Sanctioning occurs even when the punishers themselves were not harmed directly and even when it is costly for them. There is evidence for intergroup bias in this third-party punishment: third-parties, who share group membership with victims, punish outgroup perpetrators more harshly than ingroup perpetrators. However, it is unknown whether a discriminatory treatment of outgroup perpetrators (outgroup discrimination) or a preferential treatment of ingroup perpetrators (ingroup favoritism) drives this bias. To answer this question, the punishment of outgroup and ingroup perpetrators must be compared to a baseline, i.e., unaffiliated perpetrators. By applying a costly punishment game, we found stronger punishment of outgroup versus unaffiliated perpetrators and weaker punishment of ingroup versus unaffiliated perpetrators. This demonstrates that both ingroup favoritism and outgroup discrimination drive intergroup bias in third-party punishment of perpetrators that belong to distinct social groups.

Common Ingroups and Complex Identities: Routes to Reducing Bias in Multiple Category Contexts

We tested the hypothesis that evaluative bias in common ingroup contexts versus crossed categorization contexts can be associated with two distinct underlying processes. We reasoned that in common ingroup contexts, self-categorization, but not perceived complexity, would be positively related to intergroup bias. In contrast, in crossed categorization contexts, perceived complexity, but not self-categorization, would be negatively related to intergroup bias. In two studies, and in line with predictions, we found that while self-categorization and intergroup bias were related in common ingroup contexts, this was not the case in crossed categorization contexts. Moreover, we found that perceived category complexity, and not self-categorization, predicted bias in crossed categorization contexts. We discuss the implications of these findings for models of social categorization and intergroup bias.

Perceptions of intergroup bias : the roles of social projection and meta-stereotypes

Underlying intergroup perceptions include processes of social projection (perceiving personal traitslbeliefs in others, see Krueger 1998) and meta-stereotyping (thinking about other groups' perceptions of one's own group, see Vorauer et aI., 1998). Two studies were conducted to investigate social projection and meta-stereotypes in the domain of White-Black racial relations. Study 1, a correlational study, examined the social projection of prejudice and 'prejudiced' meta-stereotypes among Whites. Results revealed that (a) Whites socially projected their intergroup attitudes onto other Whites (and Blacks) [i.e., Whites higher in prejudice against Blacks believed a large percentage of Whites (Blacks) are prejudiced against Blacks (Whites), whereas Whites low in prejudice believed a smaller percentage of Whites (Blacks) are prejudiced]; (b) Whites held the meta:..stereotype that their group (Whites) is viewed by Blacks to be prejudiced; and (c) prejudiced meta-stereotypes may be formed through the social projection of intergroup attitudes (result of path-model tests). Further, several correlates of social projection and meta-stereotypes were identified, including the finding that feeling negatively stereotyped by an outgroup predicted outgroup avoidance through heightened intergroup anxiety. Study 2 replicated and extended these findings, investigating the social projection of ingroup favouritism and meta- and other-stereotypes about ingroup favouritism. These processes were examined experimentally using an anticipated intergroup contact paradigm. The goal was to understand the experimental conditions under which people would display the strongest social projection of intergroup attitudes, and when experimentally induced meta-stereotypes (vs. other-stereotypes; beliefs about the group 11 preferences of one's outgroup) would be most damaging to intergroup contact. White participants were randomly assigned to one of six conditions and received (alleged) feedback from a previously completed computer-based test. Depending on condition, this information suggested that: (a) the participant favoured Whites over Blacks; (b) previous White participants favoured Whites over Blacks; (c) the participant's Black partner favoured Blacks over Whites; (d) previous Black participants favoured Blacks over Whites; (e) the participant's Black partner viewed the participant to favour Whites over Blacks; or (£) Black participants previously participating viewed Whites to favour Whites over Blacks. In a defensive reaction, Whites exhibited enhanced social projection of personal intergroup attitudes onto their ingroup under experimental manipulations characterized by self-concept threat (i.e., when the computer revealed that the participant favoured the ingroup or was viewed to favour the ingroup). Manipulated meta- and otherstereotype information that introduced intergroup contact threat, on the other hand, each exerted a strong negative impact on intergroup contact expectations (e.g., anxiety). Personal meta-stereotype manipulations (i.e., when the participant was informed that her/ his partner thinks s/he favours the ingroup) exerted an especially negative impact on intergroup behaviour, evidenced by increased avoidance of the upcoming interracial interaction. In contrast, personal self-stereotype manipulations (i.e., computer revealed that one favoured the ingroup) ironically improved upcoming intergroup contact expectations and intentions, likely due to an attempt to reduce the discomfort of holding negative intergroup attitudes. Implications and directions for future research are considered.

Neuroanatomy of intergroup bias: A white matter microstructure study of individual differences

Intergroup bias - the tendency to behave more positively towards an ingroup member than an outgroup member - is a powerful social force, for good and ill. And though it is widely demonstrated, intergroup bias is not universal, as it is characterized by significant individual differences. Recently, attention has begun to turn to whether neuroanatomy might explain these individual differences in intergroup bias. However, no research to date has examined whether white matter microstructure could help determine differences in behavior towards ingroup and outgroup members. In the current research, we examine intergroup bias with the third-party punishment paradigm and white matter integrity and connectivity strength as determined by diffusion tensor imaging (DTI). We found that both increased white matter integrity at the right temporal-parietal junction (TPJ) and connectivity strength between the right TPJ and the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (DMPFC) were associated with increased impartiality in the third-party punishment paradigm, i.e., reduced intergroup bias. Further, consistent with the role that these brain regions play in the mentalizing network, we found that these effects were mediated by mentalizing processes. Participants with greater white matter integrity at the right TPJ and connectivity strength between the right TPJ and the DMPFC employed mentalizing processes more equally for ingroup and outgroup members, and this non-biased use of mentalizing was associated with increased impartiality. The current results help shed light on the mechanisms of bias and, potentially, on interventions that promote impartiality over intergroup bias.

Correcting for bias when estimating the cost of hospital-acquired infection : an analysis of lower respiratory tract infections in non-surgical patients

Hospital acquired infections (HAI) are costly but many are avoidable. Evaluating prevention programmes requires data on their costs and benefits. Estimating the actual costs of HAI (a measure of the cost savings due to prevention) is difficult as HAI changes cost by extending patient length of stay, yet, length of stay is a major risk factor for HAI. This endogeneity bias can confound attempts to measure accurately the cost of HAI. We propose a two-stage instrumental variables estimation strategy that explicitly controls for the endogeneity between risk of HAI and length of stay. We find that a 10% reduction in ex ante risk of HAI results in an expected savings of £693 ($US 984).

Error, Bias, and Long-Branch Attraction in Data for Two Chloroplast Photosystem Genes in Seed Plants

Sequences of two chloroplast photosystem genes, psaA and psbB, together comprising about 3,500 bp, were obtained for all five major groups of extant seed plants and several outgroups among other vascular plants. Strongly supported, but significantly conflicting, phylogenetic signals were obtained in parsimony analyses from partitions of the data into first and second codon positions versus third positions. In the former, both genes agreed on a monophyletic gymnosperms, with Gnetales closely related to certain conifers. In the latter, Gnetales are inferred to be the sister group of all other seed plants, with gymnosperms paraphyletic. None of the data supported the modern ‘‘anthophyte hypothesis,’’ which places Gnetales as the sister group of flowering plants. A series of simulation studies were undertaken to examine the error rate for parsimony inference. Three kinds of errors were examined: random error, systematic bias (both properties of finite data sets), and statistical inconsistency owing to long-branch attraction (an asymptotic property). Parsimony reconstructions were extremely biased for third-position data for psbB. Regardless of the true underlying tree, a tree in which Gnetales are sister to all other seed plants was likely to be reconstructed for these data. None of the combinations of genes or partitions permits the anthophyte tree to be reconstructed with high probability. Simulations of progressively larger data sets indicate the existence of long-branch attraction (statistical inconsistency) for third-position psbB data if either the anthophyte tree or the gymnosperm tree is correct. This is also true for the anthophyte tree using either psaA third positions or psbB first and second positions. A factor contributing to bias and inconsistency is extremely short branches at the base of the seed plant radiation, coupled with extremely high rates in Gnetales and nonseed plant outgroups. M. J. Sanderson,* M. F. Wojciechowski,*† J.-M. Hu,* T. Sher Khan,* and S. G. Brady