Intergroup threats may not be necessary for ingroup love to drive outgroup hate

Evidence

Previous researchers such as Brewer (2001) have theorized that ingroup and out-group attitudes become negatively correlated under zero-sum conditions. When the welfare of the in-group can only be achieved at the expense of the out-group, in-group positivity can lead to out-group hostility. Intergroup threats posed by an out-group, either realistic or symbolic, can lead group members to perceive zero-sum conditions. In Study 2, threat was not required for reciprocity between in-group and out-group attitudes to occur; reciprocity between ingroup positivity and out-group negativity emerged irrespective of whether threat was present or absent. This finding does not support the view that the relationship between in-group positivity and out-group negativity is pronounced under threat. — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 1109

Categorization

Category: Contrarian or Surprising Claims

• XREF: Complicates Brewer’s classic optimal distinctiveness/zero-sum framing of intergroup relations — a groundwork contrast for any social-psych review.
• SEED: Essay angle: the assumption that threat mediates the ingroup-love-outgroup-hate link may be wrong for hate-group members, where positivity toward whites and negativity toward minorities correlate even without threat — suggesting hate can be intrinsic to identity formation, not merely defensive.

Related

• Intergroup threat is not required to link in-group positivity with out-group hostility. (similarity 0.95)
• Zero-sum conditions can turn in-group attachment into out-group hostility. (similarity 0.85)
• Perceived outgroup threats damage intergroup relations even without hostility (similarity 0.84)
• Liking one’s own group does not predict hostility toward other groups (similarity 0.84)
• In-group positivity and out-group negativity are only weakly linked, even in hate groups. (similarity 0.84)
• Hate of the out-group can arise from mere self-definition by contrast, no competition needed (similarity 0.84)
• Perceived threat amplifies both in-group favoritism and out-group hostility (similarity 0.84)
• In-group love and out-group hate are distinct with separate origins (similarity 0.84)
• Intergroup threat and negative outgroup attitudes relate bidirectionally, not one-way. (similarity 0.84)
• Out-group derogation can arise from categorization alone, without any competition or threat (similarity 0.83)
• Ingroup identification is necessary but not sufficient for outgroup hatred (similarity 0.82)
• In-group favoritism can arise without any contrasting out-group present. (similarity 0.82)
• Group threats act through intergroup emotions to reach outgroup attitudes. (similarity 0.82)
• Ethnocentrism can coexist with indifference, not hostility, toward out-groups (similarity 0.82)
• Negative stereotypes both accompany intergroup threats and independently predict outgroup attitudes (similarity 0.82)