The DOI matches its Crossref record; 66 of the 66 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
In-group bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis.
Abstract
Experimental research on intergroup discrimination in favor of one's own group is reviewed in terms of the basis of differentiati on between in-group and outgroup and in terms of the response measure on which in-group bias is assessed. Results of the research reviewed suggest that (a) factors such as intergroup competition, similarity, and status differentials affect in-group bias indirectly by influencing the salience of distinctions between in-group and out-group, (b) the degree of intergroup differentiation on a particular response dimension is a joint function of the relevance of intergroup distinctions and the favorableness of the in-group's position on that dimension, and (c) the enhancement of in-group bias is more related to increased favoritism toward in-group members than to increased hostility toward out-group members. The implications of these results for positive applications of group identification are discussed. In 1906, sociologist William Sumner articulated a functionalist approach to the nature of intergroup attitudes in his exposition of the concept of ethnocentrism . The differentiation of peoples into distinct ethnic groups originates, according to Sumner, in context of the conditions of the struggle for existence. At the individual level, the psychological consequences of this differentiation both reflect and sustain the basic state of conflict between the in-group (or we-group) and out-groups (or others-groups):
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Negative traits are thus associated with teammates that they believe are dissimilar from them and sometimes actively avoid interactions with those teammates [24].”
From Challenges and barriers in virtual teams: a literature review (2020) · cites this paper as [24]
In the citing paper
“People tend to favor members of their ingroup over outgroup members, which may result in negative intrateam interactions, conflict, distrust, disliking, and limited communication between members of different subgroups (Brewer, 1979;Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987).”
From Leading diversity: Towards a theory of functional leadership in diverse teams. (2020) · cites this paper as Brewer, 1979
In the citing paper
“These mechanisms are best characterized as cognitive–motivational, insofar as they involve the goal-directed (motivational) use of information processing (cognition), as described in several classic social psychological theories88,96,97.”
From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [88]
In the citing paper
“These observations about the ways in which different types of political polarization amplify others are consistent with social identity theory, which emphasizes the tendency for people to sort themselves into distinct groups that compete for symbolic and material resources88–92.”
From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [88]
In the citing paper
“Group-justifying mechanisms, which are central to social identity theory88,90,91,94, involve group-serving tendencies to advance and maintain the interests and assumptions of the in-group against one or more out-groups (‘us versus them’).”
From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [88]
Citations
Cites
The psychology of interpersonal relations
Heider, F. (1958) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2089062 · Cited by 17,189
Tversky, A. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.4.327 · Cited by 7,414
Hardin, G. (2009) · Journal of Natural Resources Policy Research · doi:10.1080/19390450903037302 · Cited by 6,461
Social categorization and intergroup behaviour
Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundy, R. P., & Flament, C. (1971) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420010202 · Cited by 5,562
(1978) · Cited by 5,009
Experiments in Intergroup Discrimination
Tajfel, H. (1970) · Scientific American · doi:10.1038/scientificamerican1170-96 · Cited by 2,577
Basking in reflected glory: Three (football) field studies.
Cialdini, R. B., Borden, R. J., Thorne, A., Walker, M. R., Freeman, S., & Sloan, L. R. (1976) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.34.3.366 · Cited by 2,361
Intergroup Conflict And Cooperation: The Robbers Cave Experiment
Sherif, M. (2013) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 2,344
The Analysis of Subjective Culture.
Mazur, A., Triandis, H. C., Vasiliou, V., Vassiliou, G. A., Tanaka, Y., & Shanmugam, A. V. (1974) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2061987 · Cited by 1,769
Common fate, similarity, and other indices of the status of aggregates of persons as social entities
Campbell, D. T. (2007) · Systems Research and Behavioral Science · doi:10.1002/bs.3830030103 · Cited by 1,597
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.117.3.497 · Cited by 23,245
The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (2004) · Political Psychology · doi:10.4324/9780203505984-16 · Cited by 13,467
Affect and Cognition Based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations
McAllister, D. J. (1995) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256727 · Cited by 7,346
Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes
Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.102.1.4 · Cited by 6,682
Power, approach, and inhibition.
Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Anderson, C. (2003) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.110.2.265 · Cited by 3,427
Metadata
- Authors
- Brewer, M. B.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
- Corresponding author
- Brewer, Marilynn B.
- ORCID
- Brewer, Marilynn B.
- Venue
- Psychological Bulletin
- Published
- 1979-03
- Volume
- 86
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 307-324
- ISSN
- 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1455
- OpenAlex
- W2166061111
- Cited by
- 3,411
- References
- 66
- Citations by year
- 2026: 55 · 2025: 72 · 2024: 71 · 2023: 125 · 2022: 113 · 2021: 119 · 2020: 168 · 2019: 157 · 2018: 124 · 2017: 129 · 2016: 119 · 2015: 125 · 2014: 147 · 2013: 121 · 2012: 147
- FWCI
- 69.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
- Keywords
- in-group favoritism, intergroup discrimination, minimal group paradigm, outgroup hostility, intergroup differentiation, intergroup competition, similarity, status differentials, group identification, ethnocentrism
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: In-group bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.307
- The paper
- Brewer, M. B. (1979). In-group bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis. Psychological Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.307
