Intergroup representations mediating contact and bias come in four distinct structural forms

Evidence

The Common Ingroup Identity Model identifies potential antecedents and outcomes of recategorization, as well as mediating processes. Figure 5.1 summarizes the general framework and specifies the causes and consequences of a common ingroup identity. Specifically, it is hypothesized that the different types of intergroup interdependence and cognitive, perceptual, linguistic, affective, and environmental factors can either independently or in concert alter individuals’ cognitive representations of the aggregate. These resulting cognitive representations (i.e., one group, two subgroups within one group, two groups, or separate individuals) are then proposed to result in the specific cognitive, affective, and overt behavioral consequences. Thus, the antecedent factors are proposed to influence members’ cognitive representations of the memberships that in turn mediate the relationship, at least in part, between the antecedent factors and the cognitive, affective, and behavioral consequences. In addition, we proposed that common ingroup identity may be achieved by increasing the salience of existing common superordinate memberships (e.g., a school, a company, a nation) or by introducing factors (e.g., common goals or fate) that are perceived to be shared by the memberships. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 566

Categorization

• DEFINE: Useful taxonomy of the four possible cognitive representations of group relations (one group, subgroups-in-one, two groups, separate individuals) that the model pivots on.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 566