From the individual to the group: The enhancement of linguistic bias

Abstract

The present contribution tested the general hypothesis that individual tendencies in the choice of terms at different levels of abstraction are enhanced when the same descriptions are formulated by a group. We compared the level of abstraction of individual and collective written judgements about applicants for a job position and found that the selection linguistic bias collectively expressed by hiring committees became more extreme in the direction established by initial individual judgements. Negative terms used to describe rejected applicants became more abstract, and those used to describe selected applicants became more concrete from individual to collective judgements. Conversely, positive terms employed to describe rejected applicants were more concrete in collective than individual judgements. Implications of these findings for the notion of language as a tool that enables coupling between group-shared knowledge and group goals activated by the task at hand are discussed.

Can We Identify with a Nation Low in Morality? The Heavy Weight of (Im)Morality in International Comparison

“…Reicher, 2004). In this vein, we believe that the present studies respond to recent claims that theoretical explanations of social behaviors should take into account the meanings associated with any social identity and the socially shared environmental constraints (Fiedler, 2014;Menegatti & Rubini, 2012;Reicher, 2004). To conclude, it is important to underline that ingroup identification and social comparison are central to the understanding of political relationships among different countries (e.g., Huddy, 2013).…”

Counter-stereotypes reduce emotional intergroup bias by eliciting surprise in the face of unexpected category combinations

“…The inter-coder agreement was acceptable for both categories of traits, r (111) = .83, p < .005; r (111) = .75, p < .005. The proportions of the two categories of traits were arcsine transformed to normalize the data and remove intercell dependency (for similar ways of handling proportions, see Menegatti & Rubini, 2012, Rubini & Kruglanski, 1997Semin, Rubini, & Fiedler, 1995).…”

The Beneficial Role of Multiple Categorization and Intergroup Contact in Reducing Linguistic Out-Group Derogation

“…It is well established that individuals generally tend to describe others with positive language, whereas they significantly vary the use of negative terms to achieve discrimination (see Maass, 1999;Menegatti & Rubini, 2012;Rubini & Menegatti, 2008. This happens because negative rather than positive terms are more diagnostic and informative about others' traits and behaviors (Jones & Davis, 1965).…”