The relationship between ingroup positivity and outgroup negativity under threat

Ingroup bias, which refers to people’s tendency to evaluate and treat members of theiringroups better than members of outgroups, is a central feature of intergroup relations.Conceptually, ingroup bias can be comprised of ingroup positivity, outgroup negativity, orboth. However, research has often confounded these components on the assumption thatthey are reciprocally related. The aim of this research project was to examine the relativedominance of ingroup positivity versus outgroup negativity in ingroup bias and therelationship between them. Two approaches were employed. First, a series of laboratorystudies examined the effect of threat on implicit and explicit intergroup attitudes. In Study1, ingroup positivity and outgroup negativity were assessed in the domains of stereotyping,prejudice, and discrimination in a context where threat appeared to be salient. Analyseswithin and across measures revealed that ingroup positivity was more dominant thanoutgroup negativity, and that ingroup and outgroup attitudes were unrelated or positivelyrelated. Experiments that manipulated the salience of realistic threat (Studies 2 and 3),symbolic threat, (Studies 6 and 7), or both (Studies 4 and 5) similarly producednonsignificant or positive correlations between ingroup and outgroup attitudes. However,in Studies 4, 5, and 7, perceptions of symbolic threat significantly influenced intergroupattitudes. Overall, the findings of the laboratory studies suggest that although threat canshift outgroup attitudes, it does not necessarily lead to reciprocity between ingrouppositivity and outgroup negativity. The second approach employed in this dissertationinvolved content analysis of messages posted on an Internet hate site. In contrast to thelaboratory experiments, Studies 8 and 9 found that ingroup positivity significantly predictedoutgroup negativity. Implications of these findings are discussed, including the possibilitythat ingroup positivity will be linked to outgroup hostility when people are highly identifiedwith their ingroup and when the outgroup defines the ingroup. This dissertationcontributes to the intergroup relations literature by providing a more detailed account ofimplicit and explicit ingroup bias, and by identifying potential conditions leading to anegative relationship between ingroup and outgroup attitudes