Predictors of ingroup projection: The roles of superordinate category coherence and complexity

Group Processes and Intergroup Relations

Volumn 13, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 525-542

  Peker, Müjde ^a   Crisp, Richard J ^b   Hogg, Michael A ^c  

^a BOGAZICI UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b UNIVERSITY OF KENT   (United Kingdom)

^c CLAREMONT GRADUATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

coherence; complexity; identification; ingroup projection; intergroup discrimination

Indexed keywords

EID: 78049331698     PISSN: 13684302     EISSN: 14617188     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1368430209360205     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Bianchi, M., Mummendey, A., Steffens, M., & Yzerbyt, V. (2010). What do you mean by European? Evidence for spontaneous ingroup projection. Manuscript submitted for publication.
2. Brewer, M.B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,17,475-482.
3. Brewer, M.B., Manzi, J.M., & Shaw, J.S. (1993). In-group identification as a function of depersonalization, distinctiveness, and status. Psychological Science,4,88-92.
4. Brown, R., Vivian, J., & Hewstone, M. (1999). Changing attitudes through intergroup contact: The effects of group membership salience. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29,741-764.
5. Cadinu, M.R., & Rothbart, M. (1996). Self-anchoring and differentiation processes in the minimal group setting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 661-677.
6. Commission for Racial Equality (CRE). (2005). Citizenship and belonging: What is Britishness? London: Commission for Racial Equality.
7. Crisp, R.J., & Hogg, M.A. (2010). Depersonalization and projection in groups: Two paths to uncertainty reduction and self-construal. Unpublished manuscript.
8. Devos, T., & Banaji, M.R. (2005). American = White? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,88,447-466.
9. Dovidio, J.F., Gaertner, S.L., & Validzic, A. (1998). Intergroup bias: Status, differentiation, and a common in-group identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75,109-120.
10. Fiske, S.T. (1993). Controlling other people: The impact of power on stereotyping. American Psychologist, 48, 621-628.
11. Gaertner, S.L., & Dovidio, J.F. (2000). Reducing intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
12. Gaertner, S.L., Dovidio, J.F., Anastasio, P.A., Bachman, B.A., & Rust, M.C. (1993). The common ingroup identity model: Recategorization and the reduction of intergroup bias. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 1-26). London: Wiley.
13. Goodwin, S.A., Gubin, A., Fiske, S.T., & Yzerbyt, V.Y. (2000). Power can bias impression processes: Stereotyping subordinates by default and by design. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,3,227-256.
14. Haslam, S.A. (2004). Psychology in organization: The social identity approach (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
15. Haslam, S.A., & Parkinson, B. (2005). Pulling together or pulling apart? Towards organic pluralism in social psychology. The Psychologist,18,550-552.
16. Hewstone, M., & Brown, R. (1986). Contact is not enough: An intergroup perspective on the contact hypothesis. In M. Hewstone & R. Brown (Eds.), Contact and conflict in intergroup encounters (pp. 1-44). Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
17. Hogg, M.A. (2000a). Subjective uncertainty reduction through self-categorization: A motivational theory of social identity processes. European Review of Social Psychology,11, 223-255.
18. Hogg, M.A. (2000b). Social identity and social comparison. In J. Suls & L. Wheeler (Eds.), Handbook of social comparison: Theory and research (pp. 401-422). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
19. Hogg, M.A. (2007). Uncertainty-identity theory. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 39, pp. 70-126). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
20. Hogg, M.A., Sherman, D.K., Dierselhuis, J., Maitner, A.T., & Moffitt, G. (2007). Uncertainty, entitativity, and group identification. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,43, 135-142.
21. Judd, C.M., & McClelland, G.H. (1989). Data analysis: A model comparison approach. San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
22. Kuiper, N.A., & Rogers, T.B. (1979). Encoding of personal information: Self-other differences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,37,499-514.
23. Leonardelli, G.J., & Brewer, M.B. (2001). Minority and majority discrimination: When and why. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,37,468-485.
24. Machunsky, M., & Meiser, T. (2010). Ingroup projection or prototype projection? Cognitive and motivational components of biased prototypicality judgments in group perception. Manuscript submitted for publication.
25. Macrae, C.N., Milne, A.B., & Bodenhausen, G.V. (1994). Stereotypes as energy-saving devices: A peek inside the cognitive toolbox. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,66, 37-47.
26. McGarty, C., Haslam, A., Hutchinson, K.J., & Grace, D.M. (1995). Determinants of perceived consistency: The relationship between group entitativity and the meaningfulness of categories. British Journal of Social Psychology,34,237-256.
27. Mummendey, A., & Wenzel, M. (1999). Social discrimination and tolerance in intergroup relations: Reactions to intergroup difference. Personality and Social Psychology Review,3,158-174.
28. Otten, S. (2002). Me and us or us and them? The self as a heuristic for defining minimal groups. European Review of Social Psychology, 13,1-33.
29. Otten, S., & Epstude, K. (2006). Overlapping mental representations of self, ingroup, and outgroup: Unraveling self-stereotyping and self-anchoring. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,32,957-969.
30. Rosch, E.H., Mervis, C.B., Gray, W.D., Johnson, D.M., & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology,8,382-439.
31. Sherman, J.W., Macrae, C.N., & Bodenhausen, G.V. (2000). Attention and stereotyping: Cognitive constraints on the construction of meaningful social impressions. European Review of Social Psychology, 11, 145-175.
32. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J.C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
33. Turner, J.C. (1981). The experimental social psychology of intergroup behaviour. In J. C. Turner & H. Giles (Eds.), Intergroup behaviour (pp. 53-78). Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
34. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207-232.
35. 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.
36. 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.
37. Waldzus, S., Mummendey, A., Wenzel, M., & Boettcher, F. (2004). Of bikers, teachers and Germans: Groups' diverging views about their prototypicality. British Journal of Social Psychology,43,385-400.
38. 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.
39. Wenzel, M. (2001). A social categorization approach to distributive justice: Social identity as the link between relevance of inputs and need for justice. British Journal of Social Psychology,40,315-335.
40. Wenzel, M. (2004). A social categorisation approach to distributive justice. European Review of Social Psychology,15,219-257.
41. Wenzel, M., Mummendey, A., & Waldzus, S. (2007). Superordinate identities and intergroup conflict: The ingroup projection model. European Review of Social Psychology, 18, 331-372.
42. 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(4),461-473.