CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 209Social and Intergroup PsychologyDeath Anxiety and Social ExclusionSocial Power and Status Dynamics

Group Representations and Intergroup Bias: Positive Affect, Similarity, and Group Size

Dovidio, John F., Gaertner, Samuel L., Isen, Alice M., Lowrance, Robert·1995·Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
DOI 10.1177/0146167295218009
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This study examined how social (group size: two, three, or four persons), appearance (similar or dissimilar dress), and affective (positive or neutral mood) factors can influence social categorization and, consequently, intergroup bias. As expected, positive affect increased the extent to which subjects formed inclusive group representations, anticipating that the members of two groups would feel like one, superordinate group. Also as predicted, subjects in dissimilarly dressed groups expected the memberships to feel less like one group. Consistent with the common in-group identity model, stronger superordinate group representations, in turn, predicted more positive out-group evaluations and lower levels of intergroup bias. The conceptual and applied implications of affect and social representations for improving intergroup relations are considered.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0146167295218009

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Positive emotion has been shown to lead to the use of more inclusive social categories, so that people are more likely to view themselves as part of a larger group, which can facilitate empathy and increase the capacity to see others as members of a common ingroup as opposed to outgroup.

    “Positive emotion has also been shown to lead to the use of more inclusive social categories, so that people are more likely to view themselves as being part of a larger group,28,75 which can facilitate empathy and increase the capacity to see others as members of a common “ingroup,” as opposed to “outgroup.”43”

    From Reducing Racial Bias Among Health Care Providers: Lessons from Social-Cognitive Psychology (2007) · cites this paper as [75]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., Isen, A. M., & Lowrance, R.
Affiliations
  • Colgate University (US)
  • University of Delaware (US)
  • Cornell University (US)
ORCID
Dovidio, John F.
Venue
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
1995-08
Volume
21
Issue
8
Pages
856-865
ISSN
  • 0146-1672 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-7433
DOI
10.1177/0146167295218009
OpenAlex
W2105434491
Cited by
209
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 7
FWCI
17.04
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)
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
intergroup bias, group representations, social categorization, positive affect, mood, similarity, group size, intergroup relations, social representations

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