Group esteem threats may combine multiplicatively with realistic threats.

Evidence

We postulate that group esteem threats operate at the same level and in a similar fashion as realistic and symbolic threat, but it would be interesting to examine how group esteem threat may interact with and influence these other threats. For example, realistic threat accompanied by a loss of ingroup prestige may result in stronger negative attitudes than either threat alone. — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes, 140

Categorization

• SEED: Suggests an interaction-hypothesis design for the MOC: prestige-loss alongside realistic threat as an exacerbated-attitude condition.
• XREF: connects to: Intergroup threat arises when one group’s actions challenge another group’s goal attainment or well-being. — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup…, 17; Group-level threats trigger bias even absent direct threat to the self. — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup…, 28; Group threats act through intergroup emotions to reach outgroup attitudes. — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup…, 149 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Realistic threat is framed as physical survival of the in-group #expands (0.78)
• Symbolic threat targets ingroup values while realistic threat targets power and wellbeing #qualifies (0.76) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 1832
• Group threats act through intergroup emotions to reach outgroup attitudes. #expands (0.75) — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes, 149