Outgroups are seen as homogeneous while ingroups are seen as varied

Evidence

Categorization exaggerates between-group differences and minimizes withingroup differences (Tajfel, 1970). Minimizing within-group differences especially occurs for outgroups. People typically see outgroups as less variable than average (i.e., as “all alike”), and to a lesser extent see ingroups as more variable than average (i.e., “we” are varied); this sets the stage for prejudgments of outgroup members (see Judd & Park, ch. 8 this volume). Sometimes ingroup homogeneity also occurs, especially for minorities and on dimensions important to one’s identity (e.g., Simon, 1992). Perceived homogeneity on either side sharpens the interpretation of differences between groups. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 309

Categorization exaggerates between-group differences and minimizes withingroup differences (Tajfel, 1970). Minimizing within-group differences especially occurs for outgroups. People typically see outgroups as less variable than average (i.e., as “all alike”), and to a lesser extent see ingroups as more variable than average (i.e., “we” are varied); this sets the stage for prejudgments of outgroup members (see Judd & Park, ch. 8 this volume). Sometimes ingroup homogeneity also occurs, especially for minorities and on dimensions important to one’s identity (e.g., Simon, 1992). Perceived homogeneity on either side sharpens the interpretation of differences between groups. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 309

Categorization

• XREF: Core mechanism underlying contact theory’s premise that individuated contact should reduce perceived outgroup homogeneity.
• corroborated: 3 independent passages support this claim — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 309; , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 309