CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 110Death Anxiety and Social ExclusionSocial and Intergroup PsychologyCultural Differences and Values

Social Identities, Group Norms, and Threat: On the Malleability of Ingroup Bias

Giannakakis, Andrew Erik, Fritsche, Immo·2011·Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
DOI 10.1177/0146167210386120
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Ingroup bias is one of the most basic intergroup phenomena and has been consistently demonstrated to be increased under conditions of existential threat. In the present research the authors question the omnipresence of ingroup bias under threat and test the assumptions that these effects depend on the content of social identity and group norm salient in a situation. In the first two studies cross-categorization and recategorization manipulations eliminated and even reversed mortality salience effects on bias in relations between English and Scottish students (Study 1) as well as English and French people (Study 2). In the third study the specific normative content of a given social identity (collectivism vs. individualism) was shown to moderate mortality salience effects on ingroup bias. The results of these studies suggest a social identity perspective on terror management processes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0146167210386120

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • People may contradict norms when they feel pressured to conform, do not identify-or even disidentify-with the reference group or conventional society, want to stress individuality after experiences of depersonalization, or perceive injunctive and descriptive norms to contradict each other.

    “Instead, people may contradict norms when they feel pressured to conform (see research on reactance; Miron & Brehm, 2006), do not identify—or even disidentify—with the reference group or conventional society (e.g., Giannakakis & Fritsche, 2011), want to stress individuality after experiences of depersonalization (Brewer, 1991), or perceive injunctive and descriptive norms to contradict each other”

    From Do Salient Social Norms Moderate Mortality Salience Effects? A (Challenging) Meta-Analysis of Terror Management Studies (2023) · cites this paper as Giannakakis & Fritsche, 2011

  • On the grounds of a social identity version of terror management, MS should increase people's self-stereotyping in terms of those attributes and behaviors that they consider prototypical (i.e., normative) for their ingroup.

    “On the grounds of a social identity version of terror management, MS should increase people’s self-stereotyping in terms of those attributes and behaviors that they consider prototypical (i.e., normative) for their ingroup (Giannakakis & Fritsche, 2011; Halloran & Kashima, 2004).”

    From Do Salient Social Norms Moderate Mortality Salience Effects? A (Challenging) Meta-Analysis of Terror Management Studies (2023) · cites this paper as Giannakakis & Fritsche, 2011

  • MS was shown to increase identification with salient ingroups.

    “Supporting this idea, MS was shown to increase identification with salient ingroups (Castano et al., 2002; Fritsche et al., 2008; Giannakakis & Fritsche, 2011; Jonas & Fritsche, 2012; Sani et al., 2009).”

    From Do Salient Social Norms Moderate Mortality Salience Effects? A (Challenging) Meta-Analysis of Terror Management Studies (2023) · cites this paper as Giannakakis & Fritsche, 2011

  • After mortality salience, making a common superordinate group identity salient can decrease outgroup derogation.

    “After mortality salience, making a common superordinate group identity salient can decrease outgroup derogation (Giannakakis & Fritsche, 2011; Motyl et al., 2011).”

    From Existential threat and responses to emotional displays of ingroup and outgroup members (2023) · cites this paper as Giannakakis & Fritsche, 2011

  • Previous research has demonstrated that mortality salience can bolster the process described in Allport's contact hypothesis and Gaertner et al.'s common ingroup identity model, whereby establishing personal connections between individual group members can initiate recategorization of outgroup members into one's social group.

    “Previous research has demonstrated that mortality salience can bolster the process described in Allport’s (1954) contact hypothesis and Gaertner et al.’s (1993) common ingroup identity model: Establishing personal connections between individual group members can initiate a recategorization mechanism whereby individuals who could be seen as outgroup members are included in one’s social group (Giann”

    From Existential threat and responses to emotional displays of ingroup and outgroup members (2023) · cites this paper as Giannakakis & Fritsche, 2011

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 48 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Giannakakis, A. E., & Fritsche, I.
Affiliations
  • University of Plymouth (GB)
  • Friedrich Schiller University Jena (DE)
Corresponding author
Giannakakis, Andrew Erik
ORCID
Fritsche, Immo
Venue
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2010-10-18
Volume
37
Issue
1
Pages
82-93
ISSN
  • 0146-1672 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-7433
DOI
10.1177/0146167210386120
OpenAlex
W2003418945
Cited by
110
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 2
FWCI
6.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Cultural Differences and Values
Keywords
in-group favoritism, social identity, group norms, existential risk, mortality salience, terror management theory, recategorization, collectivism, individualism, intergroup relations
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aggression, Defense Mechanisms, England, Existentialism, Female, France, Group Processes, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Scotland, Social Behavior, Social Identification, Social Values, Students, White People, Young Adult

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