Advantaged groups are more variable than disadvantaged groups: The case of preferences and habits

Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive

Volumn 22, Issue 4-5, 2004, Pages 407-425

  Chappe, Bruno ^a   Brauer, Markus ^a,c   Castano, Emanuele ^b  

^a UNIVERSITÉ CLERMONT AUVERGNE   (France)

^b NEW SCHOOL FOR SOCIAL RESEARCH   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITÉ BLAISE PASCAL   (France)

Author keywords

Habits; Intra group differentiation; Preferences; Variability

Indexed keywords

EID: 31144455650     PISSN: 02499185     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Anderson, C., & Berdahl, J. L. (2002). The experience of power: Examining the effects of power on approach and inhibition tendencies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1362-1377.
2. Brauer, M. (2001). Intergroup perception in the social context: The effects of social status and group membership on perceived out-group homogeneity and ethnocentrism. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 15-31.
3. Brauer, M., & Judd, C. M. (2000). Defining variables in relationship to other variables: When interactions suddenly turn out to be main effects. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 410-423.
4. Brauer, M., Ginet, M., Chambon, M., & Chekroun, P. (2005). Power and within-group differentiation: Objective differences in variability between powerful and powerless groups. Unpublished manuscript currently submitted for publication, University of Clermont-Ferrand.
5. Brewer, M. B., & Pickett, C. L. (1999). Distinctiveness motives as a source of the social self. In T. R. Tyler & R. M. Kramer (Eds.), Psychology of the social self (pp. 71-87). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
6. Brewer, M. B., & Roccas, S. (2001). Individual values, social identity, and optimal distinctiveness. In C. Sedikides and M. B. Brewer (Eds.), Individual self, relational self, collective self (pp. 219-237). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
7. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universal in language usage. Cambridge, England UK: Cambridge University Press.
8. Brown, R., & Smith, A. (1989). Perceptions of and by minority groups: the case of women in academia. European Journal of Social Psychology, 19, 61-75.
9. Cartwright, D. (1959). A field theoretical conception of power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 86-103). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
10. Castano, E. (2004). On the advantages of reifying the ingroup. In V. Y. Yzerbyt, C. M. Judd, & O. Corneille (Eds.), The psychology of group perception: Perceived variability, entitivity, and essentialism (pp. 381-400). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
11. Castano, E., Sacchi, S., & Gries, P. H. (2003). The perception of "The Other" in international relations: Evidence for the polarizing effect of entitativity. Political Psychology, 24, 449-468.
12. Dasgupta, N., Banaji, M. R., & Abelson, R. P. (1999). Group entitativity and group perception: Associations between physical features and psychological judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 991-1003.
13. th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 3-40). New York: McGraw-Hill.
14. Devos, T., Comby, L., & Deschamps, J.-C. (1996). Asymmetries in judgements of ingroup and outgroup variability. European Review of Social Psychology, 7, 95-144.
15. Ellyson, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (Eds.) (1985). Power, dominance, and nonverbal behavior. New York: Springer Verlag.
16. Galinsky, A. D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Magee, J. C. (2003). From power to action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 453-466.
17. Gonzaga, G. C., Keltner, D., Londahl, E. A., & Smith, M. (2001). Love and the commitment problem in romantic relations and friendship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 247-262.
18. Guinote, A., Judd, C. M., & Brauer, M. (2002). Effects of power on perceived and objective group variability: Evidence that more powerful groups are more variable. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 708-721.
19. Hall, J. A., Rosip, J. C., Smith-LeBeau, L., Horgan, T. G., & Carter, J. D. (in press). Attributing the sources of accuracy in unequal-power dyadic communication: Who is better and why? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.
20. Hecht, M., & LaFrance, M. (1998). License or obligation to smile: The effect of power and sex on amount and type of smiling. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1332-1342.
21. Hollander, E. P. (1958). Conformity, status, and idiosyncrasy credit. Psychological Review, 65, 117-127.
22. Hornsey, M. J., & Jetten, J. (2005). Loyalty without conformity: Tailoring self-perception as a means of balancing belonging and differentiation. Self and Identity, 4, 81-95.
23. Karasawa, M., Karasawa, K., & Hirose, Y. (2004). Homogeneity perception as a reaction to identity threat: Effects of status difference in a simulated society game. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 613-625.
24. Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Anderson, C. (2003). Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review, 110, 265-284.
25. Lee Y-T., & Ottati, V. (1993). Determinants of in-group and out-group perceptions of heterogeneity. An investigation of Sino-American stereotypes. Journal of cross-cultural Psychology, 24, 298-318.
26. Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving social conflicts. New York: Harper.
27. Lorenzi-Cioldi, F. (1998). Group status and perceptions of homogeneity. European Review of Social Psychology, 9, 31-75.
28. Lorenzi-Cioldi, F., Eagly, A. H., & Stewart T. L. (1995). Homogeneity of gender groups in memory. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 193-217.
29. McGuire, W. J. (1984). Search for the self: Going beyond self-esteem and the reactive self. In R. A. Zucker, J. Aronoff, & A. I. Rabin (Eds.), Personality and the prediction of behavior (pp. 73-120). New York: Academic Press.
30. Raven, B. H. (2001). Power/interaction and interpersonal influence: Experimental investigations and case studies. In A. Y. Lee-Chai & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The use and abuse of power: Multiple perspectives on the causes of corruption (pp. 217-240). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
31. Sacchi, S., Castano, E., & Brauer, M. (2005). Perceiving one's nation: Agency and security in the international arena. Manuscript submitted for publication.
32. Schwartz, D., Dodge, K. A., & Coie, J. D. (1993). The emergence of chronic peer victimization in boys' play groups. Child Development, 64, 1755-1772.
33. Simon, B. (1992). Intragroup differentiation in terms of ingroup and outgroup attributes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 407-413.
34. Simon, B., & Brown, R. (1987). Perceived intragroup homogeneity in minority-majority contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 703-711.
35. Simon, B., Glässner-Bayerl, B., & Stratenwerth, I. (1991). Stereotyping and self-stereotyping in a natural intergroup context: The case of heterosexual and homosexual men. Social Psychology Quarterly, 54, 252-266.
36. Voci, A. (2000). Perceived group variability and the salience of personnal and social identity. European Review of Social Psychology, 11, 177-221.
37. Van Knippenberg, D., Blaauw, B., & Vermunt, R. (1996). Asymmetries in intergroup perceptions: Ingroup bias and the outgroup homogeneity effect among inmates and guards in a US jail. Unpublished raw data.
38. Winter, D. G. (1988). The power motive in women and men. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 510-519.