Ingroup bias as a function of salience, relevance, and status: An integration

This paper reports the results of a meta‐analytic integration of the results of 137 tests of the ingroup bias hypothesis. Overall, the ingroup bias effect was highly significant and of moderate magnitude. Several theoretically informative determinants of the ingroup bias effect were established. Thi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inEuropean journal of social psychology Vol. 22; no. 2; pp. 103 - 122
Main Authors Mullen, Brian, Brown, Rupert, Smith, Colleen
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Chichester, UK John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 01.03.1992
Wiley
Subjects
Behavior. Attitude
Bias
Biological and medical sciences
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
Group Dynamics
Prejudice
Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry
Psychology. Psychophysiology
Psychosocial Factors
Relevance
Salience
Small Groups
Social psychology
Social comparison
Human
Social influence
Social perception
Attitude
Self evaluation
Social group
Social structure
Self
Social belonging
Social cognition
Metaanalysis
Dichotomy
Social status
Social interaction
Minority
Ethnocentrism
Categorization
Intergroup relation
Social identity
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:This paper reports the results of a meta‐analytic integration of the results of 137 tests of the ingroup bias hypothesis. Overall, the ingroup bias effect was highly significant and of moderate magnitude. Several theoretically informative determinants of the ingroup bias effect were established. This ingroup bias effect was significantly stronger when the ingroup was made salient (by virtue of proportionate size and by virtue of reality of the group categorization). A significant interaction between the reality of the group categorization and the relative status of the ingroup revealed a slight decrease in the ingroup bias effect as a function of status in real groups, and a significant increase in the ingroup bias effect as a function of status in artificial groups. Finally, an interaction between item relevance and ingroup status was observed, such that higher status groups exhibited more ingroup bias on more relevant attributes, whereas lower status groups exhibited more ingroup bias on less relevant attributes. Discussion considers the implications of these results for current theory and future research involving the ingroup bias effect.
Bibliography:istex:857812CEC61D612AEA95ECA24221A05BD2EA931A
ark:/67375/WNG-Q11P7FN7-2
ArticleID:EJSP2420220202
Portions of these results were presented at the 98th annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Boston, MA. The authors would like to express their appreciation to all of the authors of the original studies who provided supplementary information needed for inclusion in the integration. The authors would also like to thank Tara Anthony, Carolyn Copper, Craig Johnson, Pam Maras, Pat Warren, Dyane Winans and Lynne Wooton, who served as judges, and Richard Bourhis, Jack Dovidio, Nick Emler, Steve Hinkle, Norm Miller, and three anonymous reviewers for helpful comments on an earlier version of this paper.
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0046-2772
1099-0992
DOI:10.1002/ejsp.2420220202