On the crucial role of the mental ingroup representation for ingroup bias and the ingroup prototypicality-lngroup bias link

Experimental Psychology

Volumn 56, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 156-164

  Machunsky, Maya ^a   Meiser, Thorsten ^a   Mummendey, Amélie ^b  

^a PHILIPPS UNIVERSITY MARBURG   (Germany)

^b FRIEDRICH SCHILLER UNIVERSITY JENA   (Germany)

Author keywords

Ingroup bias; Relative ingroup protolypicalily; Subtyping

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; LEARNING; PERCEPTION; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; PREJUDICE;

CULTURE; GENERALIZATION (PSYCHOLOGY); HUMANS; JUDGMENT; PREJUDICE; SOCIAL CONFORMITY; SOCIAL IDENTIFICATION; SOCIAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 64249103522     PISSN: 16183169     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1027/1618-3169.56.3.156     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park; Sage Publications.
2. Bianchi, M., Mummendey, A., Steffens, M., & Yzerbyt, V. (2008). What do you mean by Europeans? Evidence of spontaneous ingroup projection. Manuscript submitted for publication.
3. Dijksterhuis, A., & van Knippenberg, A. (1999). On the parameters of associative strength: Central tendency and variability as determinants of stereotype accessibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 529-536.
4. Ford, T. E., & Stangor, C. (1992). The role of diagnosticity in stereotype formation: Perceiving group means and variance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 356-367.
5. Halberstadt, J. B., Niedenthal, P., & Setterlund, M. B. (1996). Cognitive organization of different tenses of the self mediates affect and decision making. In L. L. Martin & A. Tesser (Eds.), Striving and feeling. Interactions among goals, affect and self-regulation (pp. 123-150). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6. Hand, D. J. (1981). Discrimination and classification. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
7. Hewstone, M., Hassebrauck, M., Wirth, A., & Waenke, M. (2000). Pattern of discontinuing information and the processing instruction as determinants of stereotype change. British Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 399-411.
8. Johnston, L., & Hewstone, M. (1992). Cognitive models of stereotype change: III. Subtyping and the perceived typicality of disconfirming group members. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 360-386.
9. Lambert, A. J., Payne, B. K., Ramsey, S., & Shaffer, L. M. (2005). On the predictive validity of implicit attitude measures: The moderating effect of perceived group variability. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 114-128.
10. Maurer, K. L., Park, B., & Rothbart, M. (1995). Subtyping versus subgrouping processes in stereotype representation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 812-824.
11. Mummendey, A., & Wenzel, M. (1999). Social discrimination and tolerance in intergroup relations: Reactions to intergroup difference. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 158-174.
12. Otten, S. (2002). The self as determinant of ingroup favoritism. In J. P. Forgas & K. D. Williams (Eds.), The social self: Cognitive, interpersonal and intergroup perspectives (pp. 273-291). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
13. Park, B., & Judd, C. M. (1990). Measures and models of perceived group variability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 173-191.
14. Richards, Z., & Hewstone, M. (2001). Subtyping and subgrouping: Processes for the prevention and promotion of stereotype change. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 52-73.
15. Rothbart, M., & John, O. P. (1985). Social categorization and behavioral episodes: A cognitive analysis of the effects of intergroup contact. Journal of Social Issues, 41, 81-104.
16. Turner, J. C. (1987). A self-categorization theory. In J. C. Turner, M. A. Hogg, P. J. Oakes, S. D. Reicher, & M. S. Wetherell (Eds.), Rediscovering the social group (pp. 42-67). Oxford, UK; Blackwell.
17. Waldzus, S., & Mummendey, A, (2004). Inclusion in a superordinate category, in-group prototypicality, and attitudes towards out-groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 466-477.
18. Waldzus, S., Mummendey, A., Wenzel, M., & Weber, U. (2003). Towards tolerance: Representations of superordinate categories and perceived ingroup prototypicality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 31-47.
19. Waldzus, S., Mummendey, A., Wenzel, M., & Boetteher, F. (2004). Of bikers, teachers and Germans: Groups' diverging views about their prototypicality. British Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 385-400.
20. Waldzus, S., Mummendey, A., & Wenzel, M. (2005). When "different" means "worse": In-group prototypicality in changing intergroup contexts. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 76-83.
21. Weber, R., & Crocker, J. (1983). Cognitive processes in the revision of stereotypic beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 961-977.
22. Weber, U., Mummendey, A., & Waldzus, S. (2002). Perceived legitimacy of the intergroup status differences: Its predictions by relative ingroup prototypicality. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 449-470.
23. Wenzel, M., Mummendey, A., Weber, U., & Waldzus, S. (2003). The ingroup as pars pro toto: Projection from the ingroup onto the inclusive category as a precursor to social discrimination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 461-473.
24. Yzerbyt, V. Y., Schadron, G., Leyens, J.-R, & Rocher, S. (1994). Social judgeability: The impact of meta-informational cues on the use of stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 48-55.