scholarly journals Do demand characteristics contribute to minimal ingroup preferences?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerry Brew ◽  
Taylar Clark ◽  
Jordan Feingold-Link ◽  
Hilary Barth
Keyword(s):  
Social Preferences ◽  
Ingroup Bias ◽  
Demand Characteristics ◽  
Minimal Group ◽  
Group Condition ◽  
Group Assignment ◽  
Potential Demand ◽  
Ingroup Outgroup ◽  
Ingroup Preferences ◽  
Experimental Demand

“Minimal group” paradigms investigate social preferences arising from mere group membership. We asked whether demand characteristics contribute to children’s apparent minimal group bias in a preregistered experiment (N = 160). In a “group” condition, we attempted to replicate findings of bias following assignment to minimal groups. A second closely-matched “no-group” condition retained potential demand characteristics while removing group assignment. Parallel bias in the no-group condition would suggest that demand characteristics contribute to findings of apparent ingroup bias. Three main findings emerged. First, in the group condition, ingroup preference emerged in one of three bias measures only. Second, this preference emerged although participants evaluated ingroup/outgroup photos varying in race/ethnicity between trials. Third, the measure that yielded ingroup preferences in the group condition produced no parallel bias in the no-group condition, consistent with the view that mere membership in a group, not experimental demand, leads to minimal ingroup preferences.

scholarly journals Ingroup/Outgroup Attitudes and Group Evaluations: The Role of Competition in British Classroom Settings

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Virginia L. Lam ◽  
Jodi-Ann Seaton
Keyword(s):  
Age Groups ◽  
Self Esteem ◽  
Intergroup Bias ◽  
Ingroup Bias ◽  
Negative Bias ◽  
Group Setting ◽  
Minimal Group ◽  
Ingroup Outgroup ◽  
Two Age Groups

Children’s intergroup bias is one of the consequences of their readiness to categorise people into ingroups and outgroups, even when groups are assigned arbitrarily. The present study examined the influence of intergroup competition on children’s ingroup and outgroup attitudes developed within the minimal-group setting in British classrooms. One hundred and twelve children in two age groups (6-7- and 9-10-year-olds) were assessed on classification skills and self-esteem before being allocated to one of two colour “teams.” In the experimental condition, children were told that the teams would have a competition after two weeks and teachers made regular use of these teams to organise activities. In the control condition, where no competition ensued, teachers did not refer to “teams.” Then children completed trait attributions to their own-team (ingroup) and other-team (outgroup) members and group evaluations. It was found that children developed positive ingroup bias across conditions, but outgroup negative bias was shown only by 6-7-year-olds in the experimental condition, particularly if they lost the competition, where they evaluated their team more critically. Better classification skills were associated with less negativity towards the outgroup in the experimental condition. Findings are discussed in relation to relevant theoretical premises and particulars of the intergroup context.

scholarly journals Do demand characteristics contribute to minimal ingroup preferences?

2021 ◽  
Vol 204 ◽  
pp. 105043
Author(s):  
Kerry Brew ◽  
Taylar Clark ◽  
Jordan Feingold-Link ◽  
Hilary Barth
Keyword(s):  
Demand Characteristics ◽  
Ingroup Preferences

Political Competition, Partisanship and Interpersonal Trust in Electoral Democracies

2016 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan E. Carlin ◽  
Gregory J. Love
Keyword(s):  
Party System ◽  
Social Preferences ◽  
Political Competition ◽  
Interpersonal Trust ◽  
The United States ◽  
Behavioral Experiments ◽  
Minimal Group ◽  
System A ◽  
The Social ◽  
Osama Bin Laden

How does democratic politics inform the interdisciplinary debate on the evolution of human co-operation and the social preferences (for example, trust, altruism and reciprocity) that support it? This article advances a theory of partisan trust discrimination in electoral democracies based on social identity, cognitive heuristics and interparty competition. Evidence from behavioral experiments in eight democracies show ‘trust gaps’ between co- and rival partisans are ubiquitous, and larger than trust gaps based on the social identities that undergird the party system. A natural experiment found that partisan trust gaps in the United States disappeared immediately following the killing of Osama bin Laden. But observational data indicate that partisan trust gaps track with perceptions of party polarization in all eight cases. Finally, the effects of partisanship on trust outstrip minimal group treatments, yet minimal-group effects are on par with the effects of most treatments for ascriptive characteristics in the literature. In sum, these findings suggest political competition dramatically shapes the salience of partisanship in interpersonal trust, the foundation of co-operation.

scholarly journals Social Judgments as a Measure of Right Mindfulness

SAGE Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 215824401668681
Author(s):  
Robert Lindsay Hakan ◽  
Julia M. Neal ◽  
John Lothes
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Significant Relationship ◽  
Social Judgment ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Social Judgments ◽  
Demand Characteristics ◽  
Mindful Attention ◽  
Potential Demand ◽  
Mindful Attention Awareness Scale

Mindfulness should be associated with decreased automatic responding and with increased empathy and compassion. Therefore, given an opportunity to express judgments about other people, a highly mindful person should be less inclined to express negative and unnecessary judgments. The present study provided participants the opportunity to express judgments about photographs of other people in a procedure that attempted to control for potential demand characteristics associated with self-report measures of mindfulness. Expressed judgments were panel rated, and the derived judgment scores were regressed with participant scores on the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) and the Five Facets of Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ). Results demonstrated no overall significant relationship between judgments and MAAS or FFMQ total scores. However, a significant relationship between judgment scores and the “act with awareness” and the “non-judgment” facets of the FFMQ was observed. Judgment scores were also related to self-reported involvement in mindfulness activities such as meditation and yoga. These results suggest that self-reported mindfulness may not completely align with behaviors that logically reflect right mindfulness. Moreover, social judgment may be a useful overt measure related to mindfulness. The results also provide empirical evidence of the very strong social tendency to negatively and often derogatorily judge other people.

scholarly journals A Conceptual Replication of the Male Warrior Hypothesis Using the Outgroup Threat Priming Method

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Kunihiro Yokota ◽  
Sho Tsuboi ◽  
Nobuhiro Mifune ◽  
Hitomi Sugiura
Keyword(s):  
Ingroup Bias ◽  
Minimal Group ◽  
Group Situation

A conceptual replication of Yuki and Yokota’s (2009) study to test the validity of the male warrior hypothesis was conducted. They reported that ingroup bias was triggered by the perceptual cue of outgroup threat, based on the use of a priming method in a minimal group situation among men only. In this study, the stimulus of outgroup threat priming and the measurement of ingroup bias were modified to test the effect of outgroup threat priming on ingroup bias. The results revealed the failure to replicate and thus no bias generated by priming among men.

scholarly journals The Effects of Minimal Group Membership on Young Preschoolers’ Social Preferences, Estimates of Similarity, and Behavioral Attribution

Collabra ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadja Richter ◽  
Harriet Over ◽  
Yarrow Dunham
Keyword(s):  
Social Preferences ◽  
Group Membership ◽  
Social Judgments ◽  
Group Boundaries ◽  
Minimal Group ◽  
Group Members ◽  
And Behavior ◽  
Study Participants ◽  
Explicit Measures ◽  
Social Assortment

We investigate young children’s sensitivity to minimal group membership. Previous research has suggested that children do not show sensitivity to minimal cues to group membership until the age of five to six, contributing to claims that this is an important transition in the development of intergroup cognition and behavior. In this study, we investigated whether even younger children are sensitive to minimal cues to group membership. Random assignment to one of either of two color groups created a temporary, visually salient minimal group membership in 3 and 4-year-old study participants. Using explicit measures, we tested whether children preferred minimal group members when making social judgments. We find that, in the absence of any knowledge regarding the two groups, children expressed greater liking for ingroup than outgroup targets. Moreover, children estimated that ingroup members would share their preferences. Our findings demonstrate that from early in development, humans assess unknown others on the basis of minimal cues to social similarity and that the perception of group boundaries potentially underlies social assortment in strangers.

Inequality in the minimal group paradigm: How relative wealth and its justification influence ingroup bias

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Robert Connor ◽  
Daniel Stancato ◽  
Ugur Yildirim ◽  
Serena CHEN
Keyword(s):  
Wealth Distribution ◽  
Wealth Inequality ◽  
Ingroup Bias ◽  
Causal Factors ◽  
Minimal Group Paradigm ◽  
Financial Decision Making ◽  
Minimal Group ◽  
Financial Decision ◽  
Moderating Role

This article details a registered report for a well-powered (N = 1500) experiment examining the influence of wealth inequality between groups on ingroup bias, as well as the potential moderating role of justification for the wealth distribution. Using the Minimal Group Paradigm, in which participants are assigned to groups with anonymous others and asked to allocate resources to ingroup or outgroup members, we randomly assigned participants to a relatively disadvantaged or a relatively advantaged group. Group assignments were ostensibly based on chance (weak justification), performance on a financial decision-making task (strong justification), or an ambiguous combination of the two (ambiguous justification). As expected, we found evidence for an inequity aversion hypothesis, with disadvantaged participants displaying heightened ingroup bias compared to their advantaged counterparts. Interestingly, however, our predictions regarding the moderating role of justification were not supported, with disadvantaged participants displaying the highest ingroup bias when the inequality was ambiguously justified. We discuss implications of these results for understanding the causal factors underlying ingroup bias.

Predicting intergroup fairness and ingroup bias in the minimal group paradigm

1990 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 221-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Platow ◽  
Charles G. McClintock ◽  
Wim B. G. Liebrand
Keyword(s):  
Ingroup Bias ◽  
Minimal Group Paradigm ◽  
Minimal Group
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document