我们中的一员,却是他们中的全部!"("我们中的一员,却是他们中的全部!")。偏差行为背景下个人和群体层面的群体偏袒

IF 2.8 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL European Journal of Social Psychology Pub Date : 2024-09-13 DOI:10.1002/ejsp.3103
Zahra Khosrowtaj, Sarah Teige‐Mocigemba, Vincent Yzerbyt
{"title":"我们中的一员,却是他们中的全部!\"(\"我们中的一员,却是他们中的全部!\")。偏差行为背景下个人和群体层面的群体偏袒","authors":"Zahra Khosrowtaj, Sarah Teige‐Mocigemba, Vincent Yzerbyt","doi":"10.1002/ejsp.3103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Past research hints both at more extreme judgements of ingroup deviants and at attributional biases in the case of Muslims, immigrants and refugees. We examined two recently observed patterns in the context of intergroup violence: harsher judgements on the individual level (black sheep effect) and milder judgements on the cultural level when a perpetrator stems from the ingroup. We further investigated whether these patterns were affected by (a) the outgroup being salient (Experiment 1), (b) the comparison context (Experiments 2–3) and (c) participants perceiving the ingroup as high versus low in entitativity (Experiment 3). Experiments 1 (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 437), 2 (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 283) and 3 (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 703) revealed the presence of robust effects on cultural level with participants treating the ingroup culture more leniently than the outgroup culture. Moreover, on the individual level, Experiments 2 and 3 found an overall black sheep effect that was especially prevalent in an intergroup context. Outgroup salience and ingroup entitativity did not affect participants’ judgements on individual and cultural levels. This protection of the ingroup both on an individual and on a cultural level may hint at a derogation of the outgroup. We discuss implications and insights for future research.","PeriodicalId":48377,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Psychology","volume":"189 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘(N)One of us but all of them!’ Ingroup favouritism on individual and group levels in the context of deviant behaviour\",\"authors\":\"Zahra Khosrowtaj, Sarah Teige‐Mocigemba, Vincent Yzerbyt\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ejsp.3103\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Past research hints both at more extreme judgements of ingroup deviants and at attributional biases in the case of Muslims, immigrants and refugees. We examined two recently observed patterns in the context of intergroup violence: harsher judgements on the individual level (black sheep effect) and milder judgements on the cultural level when a perpetrator stems from the ingroup. We further investigated whether these patterns were affected by (a) the outgroup being salient (Experiment 1), (b) the comparison context (Experiments 2–3) and (c) participants perceiving the ingroup as high versus low in entitativity (Experiment 3). Experiments 1 (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 437), 2 (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 283) and 3 (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 703) revealed the presence of robust effects on cultural level with participants treating the ingroup culture more leniently than the outgroup culture. Moreover, on the individual level, Experiments 2 and 3 found an overall black sheep effect that was especially prevalent in an intergroup context. Outgroup salience and ingroup entitativity did not affect participants’ judgements on individual and cultural levels. This protection of the ingroup both on an individual and on a cultural level may hint at a derogation of the outgroup. We discuss implications and insights for future research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48377,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Social Psychology\",\"volume\":\"189 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Social Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.3103\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.3103","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

过去的研究表明,在穆斯林、移民和难民的案例中,对内群体异类的判断更为极端,并存在归因偏差。我们研究了最近在群体间暴力背景下观察到的两种模式:当施暴者来自内群体时,在个人层面上会有更严厉的判断(害群之马效应),而在文化层面上会有较温和的判断。我们进一步研究了这些模式是否会受到以下因素的影响:(a) 外群体的显著性(实验 1);(b) 对比情境(实验 2-3);(c) 参与者认为内群体的权利性高还是低(实验 3)。实验 1(样本数=437)、实验 2(样本数=283)和实验 3(样本数=703)显示,在文化层面上,参与者对内群文化的态度比对外群文化的态度更为宽松,从而产生了强有力的影响。此外,在个人层面上,实验 2 和 3 发现了一种总体上的害群之马效应,这种效应在群际背景下尤为普遍。外群体的显著性和内群体的权利性并不影响参与者在个人和文化层面上的判断。这种在个人和文化层面上对内群体的保护可能暗示着对外群体的贬低。我们将讨论对未来研究的影响和启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
‘(N)One of us but all of them!’ Ingroup favouritism on individual and group levels in the context of deviant behaviour
Past research hints both at more extreme judgements of ingroup deviants and at attributional biases in the case of Muslims, immigrants and refugees. We examined two recently observed patterns in the context of intergroup violence: harsher judgements on the individual level (black sheep effect) and milder judgements on the cultural level when a perpetrator stems from the ingroup. We further investigated whether these patterns were affected by (a) the outgroup being salient (Experiment 1), (b) the comparison context (Experiments 2–3) and (c) participants perceiving the ingroup as high versus low in entitativity (Experiment 3). Experiments 1 (N = 437), 2 (N = 283) and 3 (N = 703) revealed the presence of robust effects on cultural level with participants treating the ingroup culture more leniently than the outgroup culture. Moreover, on the individual level, Experiments 2 and 3 found an overall black sheep effect that was especially prevalent in an intergroup context. Outgroup salience and ingroup entitativity did not affect participants’ judgements on individual and cultural levels. This protection of the ingroup both on an individual and on a cultural level may hint at a derogation of the outgroup. We discuss implications and insights for future research.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
7.70%
发文量
84
期刊介绍: Topics covered include, among others, intergroup relations, group processes, social cognition, attitudes, social influence and persuasion, self and identity, verbal and nonverbal communication, language and thought, affect and emotion, embodied and situated cognition and individual differences of social-psychological relevance. Together with original research articles, the European Journal of Social Psychology"s innovative and inclusive style is reflected in the variety of articles published: Research Article: Original articles that provide a significant contribution to the understanding of social phenomena, up to a maximum of 12,000 words in length.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information ‘(N)One of us but all of them!’ Ingroup favouritism on individual and group levels in the context of deviant behaviour Never again: Lessons of genocide in survivor testimonies from the Holocaust, Nanjing massacre and Rwandan genocide Age of the examiner and older people's memory performances: A test of the stereotype threat theory using variations on negative age stereotypes across 18 European countries Do women only apply when they are 100% qualified, whereas men already apply when they are 60% qualified?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1