Social categorization and intergroup behaviour

Abstract

RPsumPLe but des ttudes Ctait de determiner les effets de la catkgorisation sociale sur le comportement inter-groupe, quand, dans la situation inter-group, on ne pouvait incriminer ni des calculs d'intCr&t individuel ni des attitudes hostiles prtexistantes en ce qui wncerne le comportement discriminatoire vis-A-vis d'un groupe exterieur. Ces conditions ttaient remplies dans le plan ex-p6rimental. L a premiere drie d'exptriences a demonstrk que les sujets favorisaient leur propre groupe dans la distribution de recompenses et de ptnalith dam une situation dans laquelle seule le variable de classifications trks peu importantes distinguait entre le propre groupe et le groupe ext6rieur. La deuxikme strie d'expiriences a montrk que:

Self-Ingroup Overlap in the Face of Mortality Salience

“…This perspective suggests that social identities serve as anxiety-buffering mechanisms because positive group-based self-esteem appeases existential concerns. Arndt, Greenberg, Schimel, Pyszczynski, and Solomon's (2002) It is worth noting that we employed the minimal group paradigm (Tajfel et al, 1971) in the classification of partici- (1996), the results in the present study support the assertion that minimal ingroups could serve the same worldview defense functions as salient ingroups. Furthermore, the fact that we used minimal groups has another implication for research on self-ingroup overlap.…”

“…We then used the typical minimal group procedure to make artificial laboratory groups (Tajfel et al, 1971). By using the minimal groups, we avoided potential confounds of participants' prior knowledge in the trait evaluation task.…”

“…By strengthening ties to the ingroup and perceiving it as a permanent entity, the participants should have attempted to reduce deathrelated anxiety. Support also comes from Harmon-Jones, Greenberg, Solomon, and Simon's (1996) work which addressed the cultural worldview defense in the context of minimal group paradigm (Tajfel, Billig, Bundy, & Flament, 1971). From a terror management perspective, their work has shown that mortality salience increases ingroup identification.…”

Conformorality. A Study on Group Conditioning of Normative Judgment

“…Earlier research in psychology has examined, on the one hand, the effects of authority on obedience and norm compliance (Milgram, 1963), in-group/out-group effects on moral behavior (Tajfel et al, 1971), and the consequences of emotional cues on people's normative judgments (Schnall et al, 2008;Wheatley and Haidt, 2005). On the other hand, research studies on humans and nonhuman primates have shown that both species tend to adjust their behavior and beliefs toward others in their social circles (Cialdini and Goldstein, 2004;Whiten, Horner and de Waal, 2005).…”

Sowing the seeds of stereotypes: Spontaneous inferences about groups.

“…Research using both the minimal group paradigm (Tajfel, 1970;Tajfel, Billig, Bundy, & Flament, 1971) and the illusory correlation paradigm (Hamilton & Gifford, 1976) demonstrated differentiation between groups for which there was no informational basis. Participants in those studies were given information about groups that they used to make group judgments.…”