Ingroup identification strength moderates whether group-level or individual-level threats drive attitudes.

Evidence

However, these relationships would probably be moderated by the strength of the individuals’ ingroup identification. Bizman and Yinon (2001) have found that high identifiers react more strongly to group-level realistic threats than low identifiers, whereas low-identifiers’ attitudes are more influenced by intergroup anxiety, which can be seen as an individual-level threat. — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes, 151

Bizman and Yinon (2001) have found that high identifiers react more strongly to group-level realistic threats than low identifiers, whereas low-identifiers’ attitudes are more influenced by intergroup anxiety, which can be seen as an individual-level threat. This difference between individual-level and group-level threats could also be explored in future integrated models of intergroup threat. — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes, 151

The stronger the identification with the ingroup, the stronger the reactions to group esteem threats (Branscombe et al., 1999). According to Branscombe and Wann (1994), members who weakly identify with a group facing esteem threat may not be sufficiently motivated to maintain a positive group image by derogating the threatening outgroup. Ingroup identification also seems to increase commitment to the ingroup in the face of esteem threats. — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes, 58

Categorization

• SHARE: Niche but useful moderating result separating high vs. low identifiers across threat locus - could go to someone modeling threat-perception across identity-strength strata.
• XREF: Connects to the MOC’s threat-perception architecture: identification strength as a moderator variable. — connects to: Perceived outgroup threats damage intergroup relations even without hostility — Walter G. Stephan, Oscar Ybarra, Kimberly Rios Morrison, Intergroup Threat Theory, 38; Group members’ responses to threats to group image depend on how strongly they identify — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt: International…, 1052; Perceived threat amplifies both in-group favoritism and out-group hostility — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 1103 (+8 more)
• corroborated: 4 independent passages support this claim — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup…, 151; Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup…, 58

Related

• Ingroup identification causally precedes intergroup threat (similarity 0.92)
• Threats can increase ingroup identification, not merely follow from it (similarity 0.86)
• Stronger group identification correlates near zero with ingroup bias (similarity 0.85)
• Similarity of an outgroup raises bias only among highly identified ingroup members. (similarity 0.84)
• Perceived outgroup threats damage intergroup relations even without hostility (similarity 0.84)
• Either ingroup or outgroup salience alone may suffice to increase social identification. (similarity 0.84)
• Group members’ responses to threats to group image depend on how strongly they identify (similarity 0.84)
• Threat effects on attitudes are stronger for low-status than high-status outgroups (similarity 0.84)
• Perceived threat amplifies both in-group favoritism and out-group hostility (similarity 0.83)
• Negative stereotypes both accompany intergroup threats and independently predict outgroup attitudes (similarity 0.83)
• Group-based identity forces precede realistic and symbolic threat perception (similarity 0.83)
• Strong ingroup identification may increase intragroup focus rather than outgroup hostility (similarity 0.83)
• Threat from similar outgroups drives more bias than threat from dissimilar ones. (similarity 0.83)
• Conscious social identity can change while influences stay unconscious (similarity 0.82)
• Distinguishing identification dimensions improves prediction of intergroup outcomes (similarity 0.82)

Broader Connections

• Group members’ responses to threats to group image depend on how strongly they identify #corroborates (0.96) — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt, 1052
• Ingroup identification only predicts bias under specific moderating conditions #expands (0.85) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 448
• Group-level threats and individual-level threats trigger systematically different responses #expands (0.78) — Walter G. Stephan, Oscar Ybarra, Kimberly Rios Morrison, Intergroup Threat Theory, 23
• Group identification predicts negative attitudes toward outsiders #qualifies (0.75) — Bob Altemeyer, The Authoritarian Specter, 1060
• Perceived threat amplifies both in-group favoritism and out-group hostility #qualifies (0.72) — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 1103
• Emotional identification with a group, not mere membership, drives group-based fear and anger #expands (0.72) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2267
• Ingroup identification can moderate or mediate how deprivation produces prejudice #corroborates (0.71) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 464