User menu

Accès à distance ? S'identifier sur le proxy UCLouvain

What do you mean by "European"? Evidence of spontaneous ingroup projection

Primary tabs

Bianchi, Mauro [Lisbon University Institute, Portugal] Mummendey, Amelie [University Jena, Germany] Steffens, Melanie C. [University Jena, Germany] Yzerbyt, Vincent [UCL]

The ingroup projection model posits that group members project ingroup features onto a superordinate category. The present research aimed at isolating the cognitive underpinnings of this process. If ingroup projection is a spontaneous cognitive process, a superordinate category prime should facilitate the processing of the ingroup prototype rather than the outgroup prototype. Three studies support this hypothesis by comparing subliminal semantic priming in two different populations, an intra- versus intergroup situation, and with an ingroup prototype manipulated by changing the intergroup context. Results indicated that the superordinate category prime facilitated the processing of ingroup rather than outgroup traits (Experiment 1) and that these traits depended on the particular content of the ingroup prototype made salient by different contexts (Experiments 2 and 3). The findings indicate that the cognitive representation of the superordinate category is based on ingroup traits and that this representation is context dependent.

Document type Article de périodique (Journal article) – Article de recherche – Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Access type Accès restreint
Publication date 2010
Language Anglais
Journal information "Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin" - Vol. 36, no. 7, p. 960-74 (2010)
Peer reviewed yes
Publisher Sage Publications Inc (Thousand Oaks)
issn 0146-1672
e-issn 1552-7433
Publication status Publié
Affiliation UCL - SSH/IPSY - Psychological Sciences Research Institute
MESH Subject Stereotyping ; Social Identification ; Projection ; Prejudice ; Mass Behavior ; Italy ; Humans ; Group Processes ; Germany ; Europe ; Culture ; Cognition
Keywords ingroup projection ; stereotyping ; implicit measures ; semantic priming ; ingroup bias
Links
  1. Bargh, J.A. & Chartrand, T.L. (2000). The mind in the middle: A practical guide to priming and automaticity research. In H. T. Reis & C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (pp. 253-285). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  2. Bianchi Mauro, Machunsky Maya, Steffens Melanie C., Mummendey Amélie, Like Me or Like Us : Is Ingroup Projection Just Social Projection?, 10.1027/1618-3169.56.3.198
  3. Blair Irene V., The Malleability of Automatic Stereotypes and Prejudice, 10.1207/s15327957pspr0603_8
  4. Brewer Marilynn B., The Social Self: On Being the Same and Different at the Same Time, 10.1177/0146167291175001
  5. Brown Rupert, Hewstone Miles, An integrative theory of intergroup contact, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (2005) ISBN:9780120152377 p.255-343, 10.1016/s0065-2601(05)37005-5
  6. Devos Thierry, Banaji Mahzarin R., American = White?, 10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.447
  7. Dovidio John F., Gaertner Samuel L., Saguy Tamar, Another view of “we”: Majority and minority group perspectives on a common ingroup identity, 10.1080/10463280701726132
  8. Dovidio, J.F., Kawakami, K., Smoak, N. & Gaertner, S.L. (2009). The roles of implicit and explicit processes in contemporary prejudice. In R. E. Petty, R. H. Fazio, & P. Brinol (Eds.), Attitudes: Insights from the new implicit measures (pp. 165-192). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
  9. González Roberto, Brown Rupert, Generalization of positive attitude as a function of subgroup and superordinate group identifications in intergroup contact : Generalization of positive attitude, 10.1002/ejsp.140
  10. Haslam S. Alexander, Turner John C., Oakes Penelope J., McGarty Craig, Hayes Brett K., Context-dependent variation in social stereotyping 1: The effects of intergroup relations as mediated by social change and frame of reference, 10.1002/ejsp.2420220104
  11. Hopkins Nick, Murdoch Neil, The role of the ‘other’ in national identity: exploring the context‐dependence of the national ingroup stereotype, 10.1002/(sici)1099-1298(199909/10)9:5<321::aid-casp510>3.0.co;2-m
  12. Hopkins Nick, Regan Martin, Abell Jackie, On the context dependence of national stereotypes: Some Scottish data, 10.1111/j.2044-8309.1997.tb01149.x
  13. Krueger, J.I., Acevedo, M. & Robbins, J.M. ( 2006). Self as a sample. In F. Klaus & J. Peter (Eds.), Information sampling and adaptive cognition (pp. 353-377). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  14. Maass Anne, Salvi Daniela, Arcuri Luciano, Semin Gün R., Language use in intergroup contexts: The linguistic intergroup bias., 10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.981
  15. Machunsky Maya, Meiser Thorsten, Ingroup Projection as a Means to Define the Superordinate Category Efficiently: Response Time Evidence, 10.1521/soco.2009.27.1.57
  16. Mummendey, A., Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 48, 514 (2008)
  17. Mummendey Amélie, Wenzel Michael, Social Discrimination and Tolerance in Intergroup Relations: Reactions to Intergroup Difference, 10.1207/s15327957pspr0302_4
  18. Ratcliff Roger, Methods for dealing with reaction time outliers., 10.1037/0033-2909.114.3.510
  19. Rosch Eleanor, Mervis Carolyn B, Gray Wayne D, Johnson David M, Boyes-Braem Penny, Basic objects in natural categories, 10.1016/0010-0285(76)90013-x
  20. Sibley Chris G., Liu James H., New Zealand = bicultural? Implicit and explicit associations between ethnicity and nationhood in the New Zealand context, 10.1002/ejsp.459
  21. Stangor, C. & Schaller, M. ( 2000). Stereotypes as individual and collective representations . In C. Stangor (Ed.), Stereotypes and prejudice: Essential readings (pp. 64-82). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
  22. Strack Fritz, Deutsch Roland, Reflective and Impulsive Determinants of Social Behavior, 10.1207/s15327957pspr0803_1
  23. Tajfel, H. & Turner, J.C. ( 1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
  24. Turner, J.C. ( 1987). A self-categorization theory. In J. C. Turner, M. A. Hogg, P. J. Oakes, S. D. Reicher , & M. S. Wetherell (Eds.), Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory (pp. 68-88). Oxford , UK: Basil Blackwell.
  25. Tversky Amos, Kahneman Daniel, Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability, 10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9
  26. Waldzus Sven, Mummendey Amélie, Inclusion in a superordinate category, in-group prototypicality, and attitudes towards out-groups, 10.1016/j.jesp.2003.09.003
  27. Waldzus Sven, Mummendey Amélie, Wenzel Michael, When “different” means “worse”: In-group prototypicality in changing intergroup contexts, 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.05.006
  28. Wenzel Michael, Mummendey Amélie, Waldzus Sven, Superordinate identities and intergroup conflict: The ingroup projection model, 10.1080/10463280701728302
  29. Wenzel Michael, Mummendey Amélie, Weber Ulrike, Waldzus Sven, The Ingroup as Pars Pro Toto: Projection From the Ingroup Onto the Inclusive Category as a Precursor to Social Discrimination, 10.1177/0146167202250913
  30. Wittenbrink Bernd, Judd Charles M., Park Bernadette, Evidence for racial prejudice at the implicit level and its relationship with questionnaire measures., 10.1037/0022-3514.72.2.262
  31. Yzerbyt, V.Y., Intergroup relations
Bibliographic reference Bianchi, Mauro ; Mummendey, Amelie ; Steffens, Melanie C. ; Yzerbyt, Vincent. What do you mean by "European"? Evidence of spontaneous ingroup projection. In: Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 36, no. 7, p. 960-74 (2010)
Permanent URL http://hdl.handle.net/2078.1/34454