Groups are perceived as more threatening than individuals, so dissolving category boundaries lowers threat.

Evidence

Although this picture of the outcomes of threats is almost exclusively negative, it may be well to bear in mind that threats can sometimes have positive consequences. Threats may serve to improve sub-group relations within a larger group. For instance, threats to a superordinate group (e.g., Americans) can reduce prejudice toward those who are ordinarily seen as outgroup members (e.g., perceptions of African Americans by European Americans and vice versa), thus leading all members of the superordinate category to unite in the face of a common threat (Dovidio, ten Vergert, Stewart, Gaertner, Johnson, Esses, Riek, & Pearson, 2004). — Walter G. Stephan, Oscar Ybarra, Kimberly Rios Morrison, Intergroup Threat Theory, 24 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

It is less clear whether more social, rather than physical, threats engender conservative shift. Initial research examining reactions to majority-minority racial demographic shifts revealed that Whites considering a future White minority perceived the shift as a threat to their racial group’s societal status, and this perception led them to express more negative racial attitudes and emotions (Craig & Richeson, in press; Outten, Schmitt, Miller, & Garcia, 2012). We propose that in addition to affecting intergroup relations, perceived threat to the societal status of one’s in-group, like other perceived threats, can engender greater political conservatism. In a study consistent with this idea, Thórisdóttir and Jost (2011) found that threats to personal well-being, their political party, or the economic system all led center-right politicians to take more conservative stances. — Maureen A. Craig and Jennifer A. Richeson, On the Precipice of a…, 12 (#expands, via linked claim)

There is evidence that a common identity can increase bias in some instances. According to Mummendy and Wenzel (1999), group members project the attributes of their subgroup onto the superordinate identity, resulting in members of each subgroup perceiving themselves as more typical of the superordinate group than members of the other subgroup. This leads to perceiving members of the other subgroup as norm violators and poor exemplars of the superordinate category, which results in elevated levels of bias (Waldzus, Mummendey, Wenzel, & Weber, 2003). This could be due to common identity creating more comparisons between the included subgroups, resulting in members ofthe subgroups feeling a loss of distinctiveness. — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes, 176 (#builds-on, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Recategorization into a common identity can backfire and increase subgroup bias via distinctiveness loss. — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup…, 176; Perceived threat to in-group status evokes greater political conservatism. — Maureen A. Craig and Jennifer A. Richeson, On the Precipice of a…, 12; Common external threats can reduce prejudice among ordinary outgroups — Walter G. Stephan, Oscar Ybarra, Kimberly Rios Morrison, Intergroup Threat Theory, 24

Related

• Common external threats can reduce prejudice among ordinary outgroups (similarity 0.88)
• Recategorizing outgroup members as ingroup members diminishes perceived threat. (similarity 0.87)
• Groups are judged more threatening than the individuals composing them (similarity 0.86)
• Changing how people categorize others can reduce intergroup threat. (similarity 0.85)
• Recategorization into a common identity can backfire and increase subgroup bias via distinctiveness loss. (similarity 0.84)
• Groups elicit more fear and appear more threatening than individuals. (similarity 0.84)
• A shared superordinate identity can backfire by fueling subgroup in-group projection. (similarity 0.84)
• Anticipatory loss of group standing drives outgroup discrimination (similarity 0.84)
• Different outgroup types provoke distinct kinds of threat (similarity 0.84)
• Perceived threat to in-group status evokes greater political conservatism. (similarity 0.83)
• Status-threat alleviation should cancel the shift-conservatism effect, isolating threat as the mediator. (similarity 0.83)
• Threats can produce targeted or generalized conservative shifts depending on type (similarity 0.83)
• Recategorization can backfire by making subgroups vie to embody the shared identity. (similarity 0.83)
• Group-status threat is the proposed causal mediator of shift-induced conservatism. (similarity 0.83)
• Superordinate identities reduce bias and can mitigate perceived threat between groups. (similarity 0.82)

Broader Connections

• Common external threats can reduce prejudice among ordinary outgroups #corroborates (0.78) — Walter G. Stephan, Oscar Ybarra, Kimberly Rios Morrison, Intergroup Threat Theory, 24
• Perceived threat to in-group status evokes greater political conservatism. #expands (0.75) — Maureen A. Craig and Jennifer A. Richeson, On the Precipice of a…, 12