Positive Mood and the Perception of Variability Within and Between Groups
Open accessAbstract
Three experiments investigated the effects of positive mood on perceptions of variability within and between groups. Participants formed impressions of two different and highly variable groups under a neutral or positive mood. When participants expected to learn about both groups, positive mood increased perceived intergroup similarity but did not affect perceived intragroup variability. In contrast, when participants expected to learn about only one group, judgments of intergroup and intragroup similarity were both affected by mood. Mood and the intergroup context influenced the nature and degree of information processing and resultant judgments of variability in social groups.
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?
Findings from mood and cognition research are consistent with the hypothesis that social attitudes modulate mimicry via effects on inhibitory mechanisms.
“The results of studies investigating the effect of mood on cognition are consistent with the hypothesis that social attitudes modulate mimicry via their effects on inhibitory mechanisms.”
From Social attitudes modulate automatic imitation (2010) · cites this paper as Stroessner, Mackie & Michalsen, 2005
Positive mood, associated with pro-social attitudes, can impair inhibitory control (Stroop performance), increase distractibility, and impair self-other distinction.
“Positive mood, which is associated with prosocial attitudes, can lead to poor performance on Stroop inhibition tasks (Phillips, Bull, Adams & Fraser, 2002), increased distractibility (Dreisbach & Goschke, 2004), and impairment of the ability to distinguish self from others (Stroessner, Mackie & Michalsen, 2005).”
From Social attitudes modulate automatic imitation (2010) · cites this paper as Stroessner, Mackie & Michalsen, 2005
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Social attitudes modulate automatic imitation
Leighton, J., Bird, G., Orsini, C., & Heyes, C. (2010) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2010.07.001 · Cited by 181 · see citing works
- Authors
- Stroessner, S. J., Mackie, D. M., & Michalsen, V.
- Affiliations
- Columbia University (US)
- University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
- The Graduate Center, CUNY (US)
- Corresponding author
- Stroessner, Steven J.
- Venue
- Group Processes & Intergroup Relations
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-01
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 5-25
- ISSN
- 1368-4302 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7188
- OpenAlex
- W2164972970
- Cited by
- 20
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 1.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hal.science
- Locations
- Group Processes & Intergroup Relations (publishedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Social Science Open Access Repository (GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences) (submittedVersion)
- Trinity's Access to Research Output (TARA) (Trinity College Dublin) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (9709797)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
- Keywords
- positive mood, perceived variability, intergroup similarity, group perception, intergroup context, information processing
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
