The Experts below are selected from a list of 165 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Joachim I Krueger - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
From social projection to social behaviour
European Review of Social Psychology, 2007Co-Authors: Joachim I KruegerAbstract:Social projection is a judgemental heuristic that allows people to make quick and reasonably accurate predictions about others. The first part of this paper presents a review of the status of projection as a highly (though not fully) automatic process, its separateness from superficially similar processes of self-stereotyping, and its implications for Intergroup Perception. The second part places social projection within the context of the theory of evidential decision making, which highlights the benefits and the liabilities of projection in social dilemma situations. The main benefit is that projection can enhance cooperation within a group by leading individuals to believe that their own behavioural choices will be reciprocated. However, when interpersonal social dilemmas are nested within Intergroup dilemmas, differential projection (i.e., strong ingroup projection paired with weak outgroup projection) yields collectively undesirable outcomes.
-
social categorization moderates social projection
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2002Co-Authors: Russell W Clement, Joachim I KruegerAbstract:When categorized into social groups, people view members of in-groups, but not members of out-groups, as being similar to themselves. In three experiments, social categorization moderated the spread of social projection in both minimal and value-tagged laboratory groups and regardless of whether individual perceivers judged both groups or only one. The categorization effect tracked changes in the perceiver's group status so that most perceivers projected only to present but not past in-groups. The lack of out-group projection supported an anchoring hypothesis, according to which self-referent information is engaged only when it is considered applicable to the judgment at hand. The induction hypothesis and the differentiation hypothesis, which predicted positive and negative out-group projection, respectively, were not supported. Implications for theories of Intergroup Perception and bias are discussed.
Wan Mei Choo - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
in group bias and fair mindedness as strategies of self presentation in Intergroup Perception
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1998Co-Authors: Ramadhar Singh, Wan Mei ChooAbstract:The authors reviewed the anomalies in tests of the in-group bias hypothesis and tested the hypothesis that Intergroup Perception is a compromise between the need to preserve a positive social identity and maintain a self-image of fair-mindedness. Given two response measures, participants may show discrimination along one but not the other. Evaluation of multiple groups may invoke recategorization: Contrast between out-group and in-group will serve the social identity need; assimilation of at least one out-group with the in-group will satisfy the fair-mindedness need. Participants age 11 and above showed in-group bias in competence but no discrimination in attraction; the 7-year-olds discriminated along both measures. The hypothesized recategorization effects emerged in a within-participants study. Nonnegative ratings of the out-group also illustrated fairness in the participants. These results portray in-group bias and fair-mindedness as strategies of self presentation in Intergroup Perception.
Ramadhar Singh - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Intergroup Perception as a compromise between in group bias and fair mindedness
Journal of Social Psychology, 2004Co-Authors: Ramadhar Singh, Ivy ChooAbstract:Previously, perceived competence of and attraction toward targets categorized by race showed in-group bias and no bias, respectively. Consequently, previous investigators regarded Intergroup Perception as a compromise between the norms of in-group bias and fair-mindedness. An alternative hypothesis for such findings is that attraction is not as relevant a dimension for Intergroup discrimination as is competence. To test contrasting predictions of these hypotheses, the present authors asked participants from the majority and minority groups in Singapore (ns = 320) to evaluate either competence of or attraction toward one of the five targets. Consistent with the hypothesis that Intergroup Perception is a compromise, both dimensions yielded a uniform but weak in-group bias. The participants' equating of the in-group with one out-group further illustrated fair-mindedness. The authors discussed implications of the findings.
-
in group bias and fair mindedness as strategies of self presentation in Intergroup Perception
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1998Co-Authors: Ramadhar Singh, Wan Mei ChooAbstract:The authors reviewed the anomalies in tests of the in-group bias hypothesis and tested the hypothesis that Intergroup Perception is a compromise between the need to preserve a positive social identity and maintain a self-image of fair-mindedness. Given two response measures, participants may show discrimination along one but not the other. Evaluation of multiple groups may invoke recategorization: Contrast between out-group and in-group will serve the social identity need; assimilation of at least one out-group with the in-group will satisfy the fair-mindedness need. Participants age 11 and above showed in-group bias in competence but no discrimination in attraction; the 7-year-olds discriminated along both measures. The hypothesized recategorization effects emerged in a within-participants study. Nonnegative ratings of the out-group also illustrated fairness in the participants. These results portray in-group bias and fair-mindedness as strategies of self presentation in Intergroup Perception.
Russell W Clement - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
social categorization moderates social projection
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2002Co-Authors: Russell W Clement, Joachim I KruegerAbstract:When categorized into social groups, people view members of in-groups, but not members of out-groups, as being similar to themselves. In three experiments, social categorization moderated the spread of social projection in both minimal and value-tagged laboratory groups and regardless of whether individual perceivers judged both groups or only one. The categorization effect tracked changes in the perceiver's group status so that most perceivers projected only to present but not past in-groups. The lack of out-group projection supported an anchoring hypothesis, according to which self-referent information is engaged only when it is considered applicable to the judgment at hand. The induction hypothesis and the differentiation hypothesis, which predicted positive and negative out-group projection, respectively, were not supported. Implications for theories of Intergroup Perception and bias are discussed.
Kurt Hugenberg - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Intergroup Perception and cognition an integrative framework for understanding the causes and consequences of social categorization
Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 2017Co-Authors: Kerry Kawakami, David M Amodio, Kurt HugenbergAbstract:Abstract The primary aim of this chapter is to provide a framework to understand and synthesize the processes of person construal—early Perceptions that lead to initial ingroup/outgroup categorizations—with the processes involved in Intergroup relations. To this end, we review research examining the initial Perception and categorization of ingroup and outgroup members and its downstream consequences. We first discuss bottom-up processes in person construal based on visual features (e.g., facial prototypicality and bodily cues), and then discuss how top-down factors (e.g., beliefs, stereotypes) may influence these processes. Next, we examine how the initial categorization of targets as ingroup or outgroup members influences identification, stereotyping, and group-based evaluations, and the relations between these constructs. We also explore the implications of the activation of these constructs for a range of social judgments including emotion identification, empathy, and Intergroup behaviors. Finally, we describe a variety of well established and more recent strategies to reduce Intergroup bias that target the activation of category-based knowledge, including Intergroup contact, approach orientations, evaluative conditioning, and perspective taking.