Intergroup threat effects are recursive and mutually amplifying between groups.

Evidence

It is important to keep in mind that threats occur in the ongoing relations between groups. Therefore, their antecedents and consequences are interactive and recursive. That is, the behavior of each group affects the responses and perceptions of the other group. For instance, if people respond to threats by acting aggressively toward the outgroup, the outgroup will be forced to respond. — Walter G. Stephan and Oscar Ybarra and Kimberly Rios Morrison, Intergroup Threat Theory, 538

Categorization

• DEFINE: Establishes the recursive feedback-loop structure central to the newest version of the theory.
• XREF: connects to: Threat amplifies preexisting intergroup responses rather than creating them — Walter G. Stephan, Oscar Ybarra, Kimberly Rios Morrison, Intergroup Threat Theory, 23; Different outgroup types provoke distinct kinds of threat — Walter G. Stephan, Oscar Ybarra, Kimberly Rios Morrison, Intergroup Threat Theory, 9; Escalating threat levels themselves stem from structures of mutual mistrust. — Diego Gambetta, Trust - Making and Breaking Cooperative…, 1268 (+1 more)

Related

• Perceived threats escalate through interactive feedback loops between groups (similarity 0.88)
• Threat amplifies preexisting intergroup responses rather than creating them (similarity 0.88)
• Perceived outgroup threats damage intergroup relations even without hostility (similarity 0.84)
• Different outgroup types provoke distinct kinds of threat (similarity 0.83)
• Escalating threat levels themselves stem from structures of mutual mistrust. (similarity 0.83)
• Different threat types trigger distinct emotions that shape reactions (similarity 0.83)
• Group threats act through intergroup emotions to reach outgroup attitudes. (similarity 0.83)
• Intergroup threat and negative outgroup attitudes relate bidirectionally, not one-way. (similarity 0.82)
• Control motivation but not implicit death cognition drives threat-based ingroup defense. (similarity 0.82)
• Intergroup threat arises when one group’s actions challenge another group’s goal attainment or well-being. (similarity 0.81)
• Each intergroup threat type predicts its own distinct emotional and behavioral response. (similarity 0.81)
• Perceived threat amplifies both in-group favoritism and out-group hostility (similarity 0.80)
• Meta-analysis across studies quantifies how distinct intergroup threat types relate to outgroup attitudes. (similarity 0.80)
• External threat makes groups punish their own deviants harder (similarity 0.80)
• Groups are judged more threatening than the individuals composing them (similarity 0.80)

Broader Connections

• Escalating threat levels themselves stem from structures of mutual mistrust. #expands (0.88) — Diego Gambetta, Trust - Making and Breaking Cooperative…, 1268
• Threat amplifies preexisting intergroup responses rather than creating them #expands (0.85) — Walter G. Stephan, Oscar Ybarra, Kimberly Rios Morrison, Intergroup Threat Theory, 23
• Groups internalize external threat as an oath to preserve cohesion after danger recedes #corroborates (0.75) — Fredric Jameson, Marxism and Form, 509
• Different outgroup types provoke distinct kinds of threat #complicates (0.72) — Walter G. Stephan, Oscar Ybarra, Kimberly Rios Morrison, Intergroup Threat Theory, 9