People sacrifice real profit just to outrank a comparable out-group.

Evidence

MD was the most influential strategy in the choices. Furthermore, when the subjects could choose in-group favoritism (MD+MIP) and/or a fairness strategy, they were both more discriminatory and less fair toward the relevant than the irrelevant comparison group. Other measures of ingroup favoritism produced an interaction between reward level and type of out-group: more discrimination against the relevant than the irrelevant group with high rewards, and less with low rewards. … Indeed, insofar as the subjects used the MD strategy, they sacrificed “objective” personal and group gain for the sake of positive in-group distinctiveness. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2731

Categorization

• DEEPTHINKING: The finding that subjects choose maximum difference over maximum in-group profit — actively losing money to ensure the other group fares worse — is a striking, arguably paradigm-shifting demonstration that status-seeking drives more human behavior than rational self-interest. It resists casual summary.
• XREF: Connects to the gunner’s comparison in the user’s book library — e.g., the moral status competition dynamics in Vidal’s Eighteen Seventy or the status hierarchies in Naqvi’s Home Boy.