Groups only compare themselves with relevant out-groups, not all available ones.

Evidence

Third, in-groups do not compare themselves with every cognitively available out-group: the outgroup must be perceived as a relevant comparison group. Similarity, proximity, and situational salience are among the variables that determine out-group comparability, and pressures toward in-group distinctiveness should increase as a function of this comparability. It is important to state at this point that, in many social situations, comparability reaches a much wider range than a simply conceived “similarity” between the groups. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2721

Categorization

• DEFINE: Clarifies that relational comparison, not bare similarity, governs when an out-group is relevant — central to social identity theory’s integrative contribution the reader is after.
• XREF: connects to: Outgroups are not typically salient when people think about their ingroup — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 453; In-group bias intensifies against similar rather than dissimilar out-groups — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2729

Broader Connections

• In-group bias intensifies against similar rather than dissimilar out-groups #corroborates (0.80) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2729
• Outgroups are not typically salient when people think about their ingroup #qualifies (0.72) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 453