The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Social Projection to Ingroups and Outgroups: A Review and Meta-Analysis
Abstract
Social projection is the tendency to expect similarities between oneself and others. A review of the literature and a meta-analhsis reveal that projection is stronger when people make judgments about ingroups than when they make judgments about outgroups. Analysis of moderator variablesjfirther reveals that ingroup projection is stronger for laboratory groups than for real social categories. The mode of analyst's (i.e., nomothetic vs. idiographic) and the order of judgments (i.e., self or group judged first) have no discernable effects. Outgroup projection is positive, but small in size. Together, these findings support the view that projection can serve as an egocentric heuristic for inductive reasoning. The greater strength of ingroup projection can contribute to ingroup-favoritism, perceptions of ingroup homogeneity, and cooperation with ingroup members.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Fisher, R. A. (1936) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.1.3923.554-a · Cited by 4,980
Meta-Analysis: Recent Developments in Quantitative Methods for Literature Reviews
Rosenthal, R., & DiMatteo, M. R. (2001) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.59 · Cited by 1,780
One Hundred Years of Social Psychology Quantitatively Described
Richard, F. D., Bond, C. F., & Stokes-Zoota, J. J. (2003) · Review of General Psychology · doi:10.1037/1089-2680.7.4.331 · Cited by 1,558
Individual Self, Relational Self, Collective Self
(2015) · doi:10.4324/9781315783024 · Cited by 810
The power of statistical tests in meta-analysis
Hedges, L. V., & Pigott, T. D. (2001) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.6.3.203 · Cited by 716 · cited 2×
“Approaching social projection from a Brunswikian perspective, Hoch (1987) suggested that participants be used as the units of analysis, which requires idiographic analyses.”
Beware of samples! A cognitive-ecological sampling approach to judgment biases.
Fiedler, K. (2000) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037//0033-295x.107.4.659 · Cited by 482
Arndt, J., Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., Pyszczynski, T., & Schimel, J. (1999) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.1.19 · Cited by 150
Longitudinal Changes in the Accuracy of New Group Members' In-Group and Out-Group Stereotypes
Ryan, C. S., & Bogart, L. M. (2001) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1006/jesp.2000.1439 · Cited by 33
Cited by
Cabral, R. R., & Smith, T. B. (2011) · Journal of Counseling Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0025266 · Cited by 651
The social distance theory of power
Magee, J. C., & Smith, P. K. (2013) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1177/1088868312472732 · Cited by 620
Zou, X., Tam, K.-P., Morris, M. W., Lee, S.-L., Lau, I. Y.-M., & Chiu, C.-Y. (2009) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0016399 · Cited by 369
Westfall, J., Van Boven, L., Chambers, J. R., & Judd, C. M. (2015) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691615569849 · Cited by 363
How we see ourselves and how we see others
Pronin, E. (2008) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1154199 · Cited by 353
Metadata
- Authors
- Robbins, J. M., & Krueger, J. I.
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-02
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 32-47
- ISSN
- 1088-8683 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7957
- OpenAlex
- W2127378423
- Cited by
- 552
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 53.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Social Projection to Ingroups and Outgroups: A Review and Meta-Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s15327957pspr0901_3
- The paper
- Robbins, J. M., & Krueger, J. I. (2005). Social Projection to Ingroups and Outgroups: A Review and Meta-Analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0901_3
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
