In-group favoritism and out-group derogation are empirically unrelated phenomena

Evidence

Contrary to the assumptions of many theorists and researchers within the field of intergroup relations (e.g., Alexander, 1979; Kurzban & Leary, 2001; Sumner, 1906), Brewer (1979) made the early and critical observation that in-group favoritism is distinct from out-group denigration or aggression. Brewer (2007) has reiterated: “Despite widespread belief that in-group positivity and out-group derogation are reciprocally related, empirical research demonstrates little consistent relationship between the two. Indeed, results from both laboratory experiments and field studies indicate that variations in in-group positivity and social identification do not systematically correlate with the degree of bias or negativity toward out-groups” (p. 730). — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 1176

Categorization

• XREF: Directly complicates the classic prejudice literature the reader is reassessing (e.g., Allport’s contact/ingroup frameworks assume in-group love drives out-group hate); it decouples two things often conflated in the Islamophobia/antisemitism thread. — connects to: Racist discourse tends to favor the ingroup and derogate the outgroup — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 1062; Cross-partisan exposure backfires because the outgroup posts encountered are mostly derogatory — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof: Why Misinformation Infects…, 458
• DEEPTHINKING: A genuine paradigm separation: if in-group positivity does not correlate with bias toward out-groups, then prejudice reduction cannot be achieved merely by strengthening in-group identity, and prejudice is not a single continuum.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 1176