How to be “groupy” matters: Groups with shared traits and shared goals engender distinct patterns of social judgments

Abstract

By bringing in the Big-Two model of social perception, the present research extended previous literature regarding how people perceive homogeneous and cohesive groups from the process level to the content level. We compared the effects of intragroup similarity and interaction on warmth and competence judgments about groups. The similarity or interaction (high or low) of the novel groups (Study 1) and an international group (Study 2) was manipulated by descriptions. Participants were asked to rate the target groups on warmth- and competence-related traits. Consistent with our hypotheses, similarity polarized both warmth and competence judgments, whereas interaction polarized warmth judgments but enhanced competence judgments. The current research not only advances group perception research but also provides practical implications for improving group image and intergroup relations.

Consequences of perceiving organization members as a unified entity: Stronger attraction, but greater blame for member transgressions.

“…Given that more-entitative groups appear more competent, and given that people value competence in business organizations, we predict that people will be attracted to entitative business organizations. Consistent with this prediction, research shows that people react positively to entitativity in some types of social groups (Dang, Liu, Ren, & Gu, 2018;Dang & Liu, 2020). For example, people rate ally nations (Castano, Sacchi, et al, 2003), their own ingroups (Castano, Yzerbyt, et al, 2003), and even trash-collecting robots (Fraune et al, 2020) more positively when they perceive these groups as more entitative.…”

“…A final limitation is that all studies were conducted with American participants and organizations. Although groups may be perceived as more entitative overall outside of individualistic cultural contexts (see Haslam et al, 2013), entitativity perceptions influence how people perceive groups in both individualistic and collectivistic cultures (e.g., Dang & Liu, 2020; Fraune et al, 2020). Thus, we expect our results to generalize outside of the U.S. Our effects might be even larger in some collectivistic contexts; our theorizing hinged on people’s tendency to perceive interacting group members as a single entity, and this tendency is even stronger in Japan than in the U.S. (Kurebayashi et al, 2012).…”

“…After reading a brief description of Holiday Inn and rating their familiarity with it, participants read a news article—bogus but realistically formatted—that highlighted Holiday Inn’s “top-notch service and efficiency” and attributed the company’s success to “innovative use of the franchise system.” Depending on randomly assigned condition, the article characterized Holiday Inn proprietors as either exhibiting or not exhibiting interactivity , the behaviors that turn a collection of individuals into a unified entity: information sharing, strong interpersonal bonds, mutual coordination, and shared norms rules and norms (Brewer et al, 2004; Crump et al, 2010; Dang & Liu, 2020; Ip et al, 2006). Varying descriptions of interactivity is a common approach to manipulating entitativity (Crump et al, 2010; Dang, Liu, Ren, & Su, 2018; Dang & Liu, 2020; Effron & Knowles, 2015; Effron et al, 2018; Newheiser et al, 2012).…”

“…Depending on randomly assigned condition, the article characterized Holiday Inn proprietors as either exhibiting or not exhibiting interactivity, the behaviors that turn a collection of individuals into a unified entity: information sharing, strong interpersonal bonds, mutual coordination, and shared norms rules and norms (Brewer et al, 2004;Crump et al, 2010;Dang & Liu, 2020;Ip et al, 2006). Varying descriptions of interactivity is a common approach to manipulating entitativity (Crump et al, 2010;Dang, Liu, Ren, & Su, 2018;Dang & Liu, 2020;Effron & Knowles, 2015;Effron et al, 2018;Newheiser et al, 2012).…”

“…It is well established that people associate entitativity with competence (e.g., Clark & Thiem, 2015; Clark & Wegener, 2009; Dang, Liu, Ren, & Su, 2018; Dang & Liu, 2020; Newheiser & Dovidio, 2015; Vanbergen et al, 2020). The reason is that a collection of individuals becomes an entitative group by coordinating their behavior toward shared goals (e.g., Brewer et al, 2004; Crump et al, 2010; Denson et al, 2006; Ip et al, 2006; Yzerbyt et al, 2000).…”