Love of one’s ingroup drives intergroup bias as much as hatred of outgroups

Evidence

As we noted earlier, Allport identified social categorization as a fundamental process, with general adaptive value, that predisposes people to be prejudiced. In addition, he recognized the primacy of ingroups and the contribution of “love-prejudice” as a fundamental contributor to intergroup bias, often as important and influential as “hate-prejudice” directed toward outgroup members. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 581

As we noted earlier, Allport identified social categorization as a fundamental process, with general adaptive value, that predisposes people to be prejudiced. In addition, he recognized the primacy of ingroups and the contribution of “love-prejudice” as a fundamental contributor to intergroup bias, often as important and influential as “hate-prejudice” directed toward outgroup members. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 581

Allport identified social categorization as a fundamental process, with general adaptive value, that predisposes people to be prejudiced. In addition, he recognized the primacy of ingroups and the contribution of “love-prejudice” as a fundamental contributor to intergroup bias, often as important and influential as “hate-prejudice” directed toward outgroup members. These ideas and observations have received strong empirical support over the past 50 years, and have been incorporated in new, elaborated frameworks, such as Social Identity Theory, Self-Categorization Theory, and Optimal Distinctiveness Theory, that have evolved to provide more comprehensive and sophisticated perspectives on these issues. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 581

Allport (1954/1979) also pin-pointed the function of ingroup and outgroup categorization, observing that “the category enables us quickly to identify a related object” (p. 21). With respect to the importance of ingroup identification and how it may be more fundamental to intergroup bias than even outgroup antipathy, Allport remarked that “there is good reason to believe that this love-prejudice is far more basic to human life than is … hate-prejudice. When a person is defending a categorical value of his own, he may do so at the expense of other people’s interests or safety. Hate prejudice springs from a reciprocal love prejudice underneath” (pp. 25–6). — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 536

Categorization

• XREF: Echoes the ‘love-prejudice’ idea that resurfaces in work on minimal group paradigms and robotic intergroup research. — connects to: Different outgroups are either disrespected, envied, liked, or disliked — Susan T. Fiske et al., A Model of (Often Mixed) Stereotype…, 4
• QUESTION: Does this distinction between love-prejudice and hate-prejudice have distinct neural or behavioral signatures worth chasing?
• DEFINE: Introduces the love-prejudice concept: bias arising from ingroup affection rather than outgroup hostility.
• corroborated: 9 independent passages support this claim — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 581; , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 581; , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 536