Recategorization into a common identity can backfire and increase subgroup bias via distinctiveness loss.

Evidence

There is evidence that a common identity can increase bias in some instances. According to Mummendy and Wenzel (1999), group members project the attributes of their subgroup onto the superordinate identity, resulting in members of each subgroup perceiving themselves as more typical of the superordinate group than members of the other subgroup. This leads to perceiving members of the other subgroup as norm violators and poor exemplars of the superordinate category, which results in elevated levels of bias (Waldzus, Mummendey, Wenzel, & Weber, 2003). This could be due to common identity creating more comparisons between the included subgroups, resulting in members ofthe subgroups feeling a loss of distinctiveness. — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes, 176

According to Mummendy and Wenzel (1999), group members project the attributes of their subgroup onto the superordinate identity, resulting in members of each subgroup perceiving themselves as more typical of the superordinate group than members of the other subgroup. This leads to perceiving members of the other subgroup as norm violators and poor exemplars of the superordinate category, which results in elevated levels of bias (Waldzus, Mummendey, Wenzel, & Weber, 2003). This could be due to common identity creating more comparisons between the included subgroups, resulting in members ofthe subgroups feeling a loss of distinctiveness. — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes, 176

Categorization

• XREF: Powerful connection to the MOC thread: a supposed boundary-erasing intervention (common superordinate identity) backfires precisely because the identity’s remaining distinctiveness is threatened — the stronger the identity’s dependence on its distinct exclusions, the more recategorization triggers subgroup infighting. Strong candidate for the DEEPTHINKING/integration of this thread. — connects to: Groups are perceived as more threatening than individuals, so dissolving category boundaries lowers threat.; Recategorization into a common identity, not cooperation itself, reduces intergroup bias — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 572; Recategorizing out-groups within a shared superordinate category can reduce bias without erasing subgroup identities — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 732 (+6 more)
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Blake M. Riek, Eric W. Mania, and Samuel L. Gaertner, Intergroup Threat and Outgroup…, 176
• recurring: this claim recurs 2 times within its source

Broader Connections

• Recategorization into a common identity, not cooperation itself, reduces intergroup bias #qualifies (0.90) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 572
• Eliminating group salience backfires because identity is meaningful and perceptually unavoidable #corroborates (0.85)
• Recategorizing out-groups within a shared superordinate category can reduce bias without erasing subgroup identities #qualifies (0.80) — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 732
• Threat to distinctiveness drives more complex identity structures, but evidence is sparse #corroborates (0.75) — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 580