Categorization, accentuation and social judgement
Abstract
Contrast effects have long been recognized as important for the study of judgement. It has been predicted that the presence of a categorization superimposed on a series of stimuli (and correlated with their magnitude) would serve to accentuate judged differences between and judged similarities within classes. Fifty‐five subjects judged political statements, classified in terms of their authors. It was predicted that the contrast effects would be mediated by the salience of the categorization, the political views of the subjects, their affective ratings of authors and evaluations of political terms. Unlike numerous other studies with similar designs the results provided evidence for both the accentuation of inter‐class differences and intra‐class similarities. The relationships between judges' views and contrast were in accordance with accentuation theory and social identity theory, in that judges whose positions were congruent with the positive evaluations of the scale labels showed more contrast between classes. The results are discussed with reference to social identity theory and the role of category salience.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Highlighting differences with rivals implicitly enhances ingroup status and reinforces group ties as shared characteristics with outgroups are reduced.
“By highlighting differences with rivals, there is also an implicit enhancement of ingroup status and a reinforcement of group ties as shared characteristics with outgroups are reduced (McGarty & Penny, 1988).”
From ¿Demasiado lejos? Cómo la polarización mal percibida alimenta la polarización afectiva en España (2025) · cites this paper as McGarty & Penny, 1988
Cited by
Sorted by citations
¿Demasiado lejos? Cómo la polarización mal percibida alimenta la polarización afectiva en España
Rojo-Martínez, J. M. (2025) · Papers. Revista de Sociologia · doi:10.5565/rev/papers.3363
- Authors
- McGarty, C., & Penny, R. E. C.
- Affiliations
- Macquarie University (AU)
- The University of Adelaide (AU)
- ORCID
- McGarty, Craig
- Venue
- British Journal of Social Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1988-06
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 147-157
- ISSN
- 0144-6665 (ISSN-L)
- 2044-8309
- OpenAlex
- W2113256799
- Cited by
- 85
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2014: 2
- FWCI
- 2.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- British Journal of Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Keywords
- contrast effects, categorization, social identity theory, social judgment, political commentary, political attitudes, affective ratings, intra-class similarity
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