Sumner saw outgroup hostility as a natural product of ingroup superiority

Evidence

Whereas social categorization can initiate intergroup biases, the type of bias due largely to categorization alone primarily represents a pro-ingroup orientation (i.e., preference for ingroup members, or love-prejudice in Allport’s words, rather than an anti-outgroup orientation, i.e., hateprejudice) usually associated with hostility or aggression. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 555 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Sumner held that felt superiority makes intergroup hostility an inevitable outcome of contact; Ingroup preference psychologically precedes outgroup hostility, which stems from other sources. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 427; Ingroup attachment does not necessarily produce outgroup hostility — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 427 (+11 more)

Broader Connections

• Sumner held that felt superiority makes intergroup hostility an inevitable outcome of contact #corroborates (0.95)
• Most ingroup bias overvalues the ingroup rather than devaluing the outgroup #complicates (0.78) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 555
• Ingroup favoritism usually lacks explicit hostility toward outgroups #complicates (0.78)
• Perceived illegitimacy of advantage triggers dominant-group hostility #complicates (0.75) — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt, 807
• Structured group interests, not personalities, drive intergroup hostility #complicates (0.75) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 651