Ingroup-outgroup pairing, not either alone, drives identity shifts

Evidence

Across two studies, participants that had both their ingroup and outgroup made salient more strongly identified themselves as a member of their ingroup than did participants who only had their ingroup (Studies 1 & 2) or outgroup (Study 2) made salient. Thus, even with subliminal influences, these two factors in combination produced the greatest shift in participants’ social identification with their own group. This is quite different from other research examining subtle influences on the self (e.g., DeMarree et al., 2005; Gardner et al., 1999) which typically has shown that the mere activation of relevant concepts can produce assimilative shifts in self-views, and speaks to the relative uniqueness of social identity more broadly. Therefore, the present findings, that individuals’ conscious sense of connection or identification with an ingroup can be influenced by sources outside of awareness, are consistent with the growing body of research indicating that seemingly complex processes can occur nonconsciously (for a review, see Andersen, Moskowitz, Blair, & Nosek, 2007). — Brandon Randolph-Seng, Darcy A. Reich, and Kenneth G. DeMarree, On the Nonconscious Antecedents of…, 50

Categorization

• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Brandon Randolph-Seng, Darcy A. Reich, and Kenneth G. DeMarree, On the Nonconscious Antecedents of…, 50
• XREF: connects to: Conscious social identity can change while influences stay unconscious — Brandon Randolph-Seng, Darcy A. Reich, and Kenneth G. DeMarree, On the Nonconscious Antecedents of…, 37; Accepting relationships with out-group members model new identity structures for exiting extremists. — Amy Fisher-Smith, Charles R. Sullivan, John D. Macready, and Geoffrey Manzi, Identity Reconfiguration and the Core…, 475; Reframing outgroups as part of a shared superordinate identity reduces bias — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 564 (+6 more)

Related

• Conscious social identity can change while influences stay unconscious (similarity 0.89)
• Accepting relationships with out-group members model new identity structures for exiting extremists. (similarity 0.86)
• A common group identity mediates contact’s bias reduction rather than merely aiding it (similarity 0.86)
• Recognizing subgroup identities within a shared team identity reduces intergroup bias. (similarity 0.85)
• Identification with one’s group is strongest when both ingroup and outgroup are made salient (similarity 0.85)
• Distinguishing identification dimensions improves prediction of intergroup outcomes (similarity 0.85)
• Outgroup salience boosts conscious ingroup identification when the ingroup is already salient. (similarity 0.85)
• Reframing outgroups as part of a shared superordinate identity reduces bias (similarity 0.85)
• Recategorization into a common identity, not cooperation itself, reduces intergroup bias (similarity 0.85)
• Either ingroup or outgroup salience alone may suffice to increase social identification. (similarity 0.85)
• In-group identity is defined only through contrast with out-groups (similarity 0.83)
• Ingroup and outgroup salience combine to maximize identification only when both are activated. (similarity 0.82)
• Contact with one out-group improves attitudes toward unrelated out-groups (similarity 0.82)
• Stronger group identification correlates near zero with ingroup bias (similarity 0.82)
• Recategorizing out-groups within a shared superordinate category can reduce bias without erasing subgroup identities (similarity 0.82)

Broader Connections

• Recategorization into a common identity, not cooperation itself, reduces intergroup bias #corroborates (0.90) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 572
• A common group identity mediates contact’s bias reduction rather than merely aiding it #corroborates (0.85) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 572
• Reframing outgroups as part of a shared superordinate identity reduces bias #expands (0.80) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 564
• Dual identity merges sub-group distinctiveness with super-group inclusion to reduce conflict #expands (0.80)
• Recategorizing group boundaries can expand ingroup identity from us-them to we #expands (0.75) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 564
• Recognizing subgroup identities within a shared team identity reduces intergroup bias. #expands (0.72) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 577