Groups are judged more threatening than the individuals composing them

Evidence

Research has indicated that groups are typically perceived to be more threatening and elicit more fear than individuals (Insko, Schopler, Hoyle, Dardis, & Graetz, 1990; Schopler et al., 1993), therefore, weakening social category boundaries could potentially reduce intergroup threat. For example, in the case of symbolic threat, people may be more willing to accept alternative values or points of view from individuals rather than from a group as a whole. — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes, 172

Categorization

• XREF: Directly relevant to the MOC thread about enemy-in-our-midst: the finding that categorical group targets attract more fear than individual actors suggests the feared object is the abstract category boundary, not any concrete person — consistent with boundary-blurring theories of threat. — connects to: Groups elicit more fear and appear more threatening than individuals. — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup…, 171; Culture cannot fully repress death terror, driving people to localize threats in fetishized evil. — Jeff Greenberg and Spee Kosloff, Terror Management Theory: Implications…, 54