Closing ranks: Ingroup norm conformity as a subtle response to threatening climate change
Abstract
We tested the hypothesis that climate change threat increases group-based cognition and action tendencies. As ingroups can provide extended primary control, we expected climate change threat to increase conformity with ingroup norms and group protective behavior. In three studies ( N = 404), we experimentally manipulated climate change threat (Studies 1–3) and group norm content (Studies 2 and 3). We found that participants under climate change threat more strongly derogated group members who acted against the group’s interests (Study 1). When a specific group norm was made salient, both manipulated (Study 3) and perceived climate change threat (Studies 2 and 3) increased ingroup norm conformity. Importantly, this effect occurred for norms of radical left-wing behavior. This suggests that climate change threat does not necessarily induce a conservative shift. Instead, it elicits group-based defenses whose expression depends on which ingroup and which of its norms are salient.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Cites
Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., & Pyszczynski, T. (1997) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60016-7 · Cited by 1,505 · see citing works
Hogg, M. A. (2007) · Advances in experimental social psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(06)39002-8 · Cited by 990 · see citing works
The Ideological-Conflict Hypothesis: Intolerance Among Both Liberals and Conservatives
Brandt, M. J., Reyna, C., Chambers, J. R., Crawford, J. T., & Wetherell, G. (2014) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0963721413510932 · Cited by 432 · see citing works
Jonas, E., Martens, A., Niesta Kayser, D., Fritsche, I., Sullivan, D., & Greenberg, J. (2008) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0013593 · Cited by 189 · see citing works
Adherence to climate change‐related ingroup norms: Do dimensions of group identification matter?
Masson, T., & Fritsche, I. (2014) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.2036 · Cited by 150 · see citing works
Self-citationSocial Identities, Group Norms, and Threat: On the Malleability of Ingroup Bias
Giannakakis, A. E., & Fritsche, I. (2011) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167210386120 · Cited by 110 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Smith, L. K. M., Ross, H. C., Shouldice, S. A., & Wolfe, S. E. (2022) · WIREs Climate Change · doi:10.1002/wcc.776 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
- Authors
- Barth, M., Masson, T., Fritsche, I., & Ziemer, C.-T.
- Affiliations
- Leipzig University (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Barth, Markus
- Venue
- Group Processes & Intergroup Relations
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2017-10-26
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 497-512
- ISSN
- 1368-4302 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7188
- OpenAlex
- W2765388964
- Cited by
- 51
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 5.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Group Processes & Intergroup Relations (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Climate Change Communication and Perception
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
- Keywords
- climate change threats, group norms, political ideology, climate change denial
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