Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston — Social Cognition, Social Identity, and Intergroup Relations: A Festschrift in Honor of Marilynn B. Brewer

788 published claims from this book.

• Living abroad raises the likelihood of solving insight problems requiring reframing.
• A 44 percent response rate yielded only 66 usable employees
• A compelling mentor can reroute a career from applied to basic research
• A consensual status system can paradoxically protect group self-esteem from comparison
• A literature student switched careers to social psychology via intergroup topics
• A puzzling pause in infant suckling has no feeding function
• A remembered foreign experience matters as much as the experience itself for creative priming
• A single mentor diverted a brilliant woman toward a doctoral career
• A small core of posters dominate an online hate thread’s output.
• A society’s relational mobility explains cross-cultural differences in trust, well-being, and self-disclosure
• A state deliberately revived Hebrew to forge unified national identity
• A thread’s first message reveals what members think matters to the group
• A woman’s professional name change can coincide with a major publication milestone
• ABM simulations generate novel hypotheses testable through later lab experiments
• Accountability and majority status suppress in-group favoritism in reward allocation.
• Accountability suppresses ingroup favoritism, especially among majority members
• Acculturation shifts even basic perceptual tendencies toward the host culture’s style
• Acculturation strategies derive from combining two cultural orientations
• Acknowledging in-group responsibility for past atrocities increases infrahumanization of the victim group
• Activated needs for inclusion versus differentiation invert the correlation between subgroup and superordinate identification
• Activated needs for inclusion versus differentiation shift which nested group members identify with.
• Actual demographic overlap of one’s identity categories drives perceived overlap
• Adaptation priming alone increases generative creativity in drawings.
• Adaptation, not just time abroad, drives the creativity boost.
• Adopting a religious identity shifts the self from I to we and drives conformity.
• Advanced mind reading of false beliefs is probably unique to humans
• Affective commitment influences follower satisfaction more strongly than social categorization does
• Affective group attachment outweighs mere categorization as a causal mediator.
• Agent-based modeling bridges the gap between individual psychology and aggregate group outcomes
• Agent-based modeling reveals emergent group effects unpredictable from individual-level knowledge
• Agent-based models can test whether identity needs drive residential migration patterns
• Agent-based models reveal aggregate consequences no individual agent intends or foresees.
• Agent-based simulations can yield predictions untestable from individual-level data alone
• Aggression toward out-groups is not limited to subordinate-group targets
• Aggressive retribution spreads to all group members only when group is entitative
• Aligned identity attributes create stronger fault lines than cross-cutting ones
• All social categorizations are inherently nested up to the level of humanity.
• Alliances flourish where every group is a minority
• Allocating negative outcomes dampens the mere categorization effect on in-group favoritism
• American and East Asian collectivism differ in kind, not degree.
• American ethnic status hierarchies are consensually agreed upon across all groups
• American friends resemble each other more than Japanese ones due to relational mobility
• Americans trust shared categories while Japanese trust shared relationship links
• Among white supremacists, in-group favoritism directly drives out-group derogation
• An intense love of one’s own group need not produce outgroup hatred
• An interdependent self keeps members distinct while connected through stable relationships
• Anticipated accountability suppresses willingness to harm out-groups
• Antipathy between groups emerges spontaneously across all scales of social life.
• Archived interviews record precolonial memories of the last living members of 19 societies
• Asian selves are defined chiefly by their web of significant relationships
• Assortative matching arises without anyone preferring a similar partner
• Assortative mating arises from rank-sorting dynamics, not similarity preference
• Assortative mating emerges from everyone desiring the most attractive partner
• Attitude generalization, not in-group deprioritization, drives secondary transfer effects
• Attributing rejection to discrimination can damage self-esteem rather than protect it
• Attributional ambiguity in stigmatized groups produces chronic psychological distress.
• Automatic moral activation fails to drive behavior for people weakly attached to a group.
• Automatically activated group-loyalty principles may not translate into matching behavior for weakly attached individuals
• Awareness of one’s own multiple social categories predicts generalized tolerance beyond those categories
• Being the only member of one’s category makes behavior read as category-driven
• Belief in a controlling God rises when anxiety and low control combine.
• Belief in a controlling God rises when personal control is threatened.
• Bicultural individuals outperform monocultural peers on creative tasks
• Biculturals outperformed all other acculturation types on creative tasks.
• Birth timing and family support shaped an academic career’s opportunities
• Boards of directors are held responsible for employee misconduct regardless of actual control
• Both identity dimensions fully mediate the link between leadership and citizenship behavior
• Brewer’s relational vs. collective self distinction resolved gender and culture debates.
• Broad, deep reading is a prerequisite for good research
• Campbell’s original entitativity theory focused only on perceptual stimulus cues.
• Caregivers mentally simulate infants, treating them as human before they objectively qualify
• Casual friendship and shared circumstance can launch long-term scientific collaboration
• Category cues remain perceptually salient for race, age, and gender
• Centralized legal systems lower exchange costs and raise relational mobility
• Chronic perceived threat can reverse normal in-group bias dynamics in hate groups
• Claiming-discrimination social costs are perceived as higher in front of strangers
• Cognitive accessibility can measure morality shifting indirectly via lexical decision tasks.
• Collective in-group responsibility specifically reduces attribution of human emotions to victims
• Collective outcomes emerge from agent interactions and regularly contradict individual intentions.
• Collectivism differs qualitatively across cultures, not just in degree
• Collectivists describe roles while individualists describe group categories
• Comparing one’s group’s offenses to worse deeds of others is a moral defense
• Complete segregation emerges even when individuals only mildly avoid being a minority
• Complex bureaucracies evolve mechanisms that isolate rather than connect critical information
• Complex tasks get decomposed into chunks that mirror organizational structure
• Conflicting categorization schemes block information integration between agencies
• Conflicting groups can define their own identities negatively through the other’s failure
• Contact alone fails to reduce prejudice outside controlled conditions.
• Contact with cross-cutting others increases the cognitive complexity of one’s social identity.
• Contact with one out-group improves attitudes toward unrelated out-groups
• Context can shrink but never reverse the male-female dominance gap
• Contextual diversity alone cannot shape identity without individuals subjectively experiencing it.
• Convergence across methods, not any single study, establishes scientific claims
• Convergent evidence from diverse methods strengthens scientific claims
• Converging multiple research methods strengthens confidence in a finding
• Cooperative contact only reduces prejudice when it fosters interpersonal over task orientation.
• Cooperative social groups must balance growth benefits against interdependence costs at an optimal size
• Coordinated group living has been humanity’s primary survival strategy throughout evolution
• Creative output and creative process are distinct and should be studied separately
• Creativity priming only works for people who have actually lived abroad
• Cross-cultural immersion can produce broad psychological and professional benefits
• Cross-cultural living experience predicts integrative negotiation breakthroughs.
• Cross-domain theory transfer forces clarity on core assumptions and enables breakthroughs
• Cross-group friendship shapes positive intergroup attitudes more than casual contact does.
• Crossed categories reduce in-group bias and dependence on single identities
• Cultural adaptation fosters chronic multi-perspective awareness that raises creativity.
• Cultural adaptation physically rewires the brain and perception
• Cultural adaptation remakes identity and thereby raises habitual creativity.
• Cultural distance, not national borders, drives transformative experience
• Cultures differ in whether identity derives from relationships rather than from category membership
• Decentralized choice without global coordination yields suboptimal group outcomes
• Decision framing and group size shape cooperation in resource dilemmas
• Defensive moral disengagement after in-group wrongdoing is not universal or deterministic
• Defining identity by who one is not produces out-group hate, not just in-group love
• Defining oneself by what one is not can recategorize former out-groups as in-group members.
• Defining oneself through multiple social categories yields more positive out-group evaluation
• Dehumanization works by disabling the empathetic self-sanctions that normally block mistreatment.
• Dehumanizing victims lets perpetrators disengage self-sanctions for mistreatment
• Deploying an in-group frame alone may shift moral priorities, even without moral content.
• Depth of cultural immersion, not mere exposure, drives how much benefit accrues
• Detected ingroup harm triggers a moral shift elevating loyalty over harm principles
• Development from infancy is not only growing independence but growing interdependence
• Developmental processes are essential to explaining evolution itself
• Different group types serve distinct psychological needs in perceivers
• Differentiated bureaucracies suffer in-group bias and out-group derogation
• Differentiation meant to manage complexity can itself cause information failures
• Distinct group types evolved to fulfill distinct psychological needs
• Distinct minority group members show higher satisfaction and self-esteem than majorities.
• Divergent categorization schemes between groups block pooling of complementary information
• Diverse intergroup contact increases cognitive complexity of one’s multiple identities
• Dual cultural identification predicts faster promotion and better career reputation
• Dual identification occurs when both subgroup and superordinate group are moderately inclusive
• Dual identification requires the superordinate group to feel optimally distinct
• Dual identity merges sub-group distinctiveness with super-group inclusion to reduce conflict
• Early deprivation blocks abilities that normally build on earlier developmental achievements.
• Early developmental steps entrench long-evolved components in later capacities
• East Asian collectivism and Western social identity processes operate on different logics
• East Asian in-group bias operates via personal-network boundaries, not depersonalized categories
• Ecological factors explain how North American individualism produces symbolic collective identities
• Ecology explains why individualist societies form depersonalized symbolic group identities
• Embedding moral critiques of violence in news reports reduces in-group defensiveness
• Eminent advisors empower students by granting license to pursue passion projects
• Employment discrimination against minority men exceeds that against minority women
• Entitativity and similarity are empirically distinct group properties
• Entitativity research has measured cognition but not behavior.
• Entitativity research has measured perception but not its behavioral effects
• Ethnocentrism can coexist with indifference, not hostility, toward out-groups
• Ethnocentrism has a systematic syndrome of in-group versus out-group attitudes
• Ethnocentrism means rigidly accepting the culturally alike and rejecting the culturally unlike
• Evaluating a manager as supervisor activates self-focused fairness; as leader, group-focused fairness.
• Evolution shaped male but not female psychologies for intergroup aggression
• Evolutionary constraints make prejudice against out-group men context-dependent and costly to sustain
• Evolutionary parental investment differences explain men’s competitive and aggressive intergroup behavior
• Exceptional mentors grant autonomy to pursue passion and demand broad reading
• Excessive group inclusion triggers subgroup formation rather than full individuation
• Experimental group threat causally reduces perceived complexity of one’s own group memberships.
• Experimentally raising a group’s perceived entitativity increases members’ identification with it.
• Explicit organizational warnings against information sharing produced chilling effects that were then punished
• Exposure to minorities increases whites’ race-based self-definition
• Exposure to new ideas abroad enables significant rather than incremental creative leaps.
• Exposure to out-group misdeeds raises loyalty’s importance in moral judgment.
• Extended residence abroad has long preceded major artistic breakthroughs
• External competitive comparisons can boost internal cross-functional cooperation
• Extreme segregation can emerge without anyone desiring segregation
• Extremely small ingroups trigger antagonism toward them only under an aroused need for inclusion
• Face-to-face contact with out-group individuals can improve attitudes toward the whole group.
• Fair procedures convey respect and belonging rather than only instrumental benefits
• Fair procedures signal group membership value and shape self-esteem, not just resource stability
• Fair procedures signal that individuals are valued by the group
• Falling under a powerful mentor’s spell shifts a reformer’s focus from issues to maneuvers
• Fashion houses with foreign-experienced creative directors are rated more creative
• Fast-food and grocery employees show no organizational type differences on study outcomes
• Fear of death and self-uncertainty motivate people to join groups
• Female coalitional aggression takes a distinct clique form that is under-researched.
• Female professional competition unsettles male claims over the world
• First messages reveal which topics group members believe will interest their community
• Flexible prejudice mechanisms are not easily manipulated despite being changeable.
• Folk psychology and theory of mind overlap without being interchangeable or opposed.
• Folk psychology primarily coordinates group roles, not just predicts individual minds.
• Folk psychology’s primary function is coordinating group roles, not predicting individual minds.
• Follower compliance tracks how well a leader embodies the group prototype
• Followers are swayed most by leaders who embody the group’s valued traits.
• Followers identify with and extend effort for charismatic leaders.
• Followers transform leader identity into commitment mainly through emotional attachment, not categorization
• For white supremacists in-group love directly drives out-group hate
• Foreign cultural immersion is widely held to stimulate artistic creativity
• Foreign residence gave Obama the ability to see problems from multiple perspectives.
• Forum metadata on views and responses enables quantitative study of hate group engagement patterns
• Four acculturation types arise from the combination of heritage and host contact
• Freedom to choose groups makes people abandon failing groups for higher-status ones.
• Full acknowledgement of in-group atrocity raises guilt and willingness to pay reparations.
• Functional fixedness blocks creative solutions requiring atypical object use
• Gender bias against women is paternalistic proprietorship, not competitor elimination
• Gender predicts out-group aggression but not in-group favoritism
• General in-group identification does not predict moral disengagement toward victims
• Globalization’s uncertainty drives individuals toward religious identity as security
• Glorifying one’s own group drives dehumanization of victims and lowered justice demands.
• Good acts by out-group members get credited to luck, not character
• Gossip improves the accuracy of social impressions by widening information samples.
• Graduate training under a great mentor transforms one irreversibly, like formative years abroad.
• Graduate training under an eminent scholar can be an irrevocably transformative extended experience
• Greater social identity complexity predicts more tolerance toward out-groups
• Greater social identity complexity predicts reduced in-group bias in conflict settings
• Group agency makes entitative out-groups threatening but entitative in-groups attractive
• Group behavior arises from depersonalized self-representation as interchangeable category exemplars
• Group commitment shifts members from self-interest toward collective welfare
• Group differentiations are fluid and shaped by factors beyond actual membership
• Group distinctiveness can be reframed as complementary rather than threatening
• Group entitativity experiments manipulate board cohesion through shared social activities
• Group essence theories differ from similarity-based entitativity by treating groups as natural kinds
• Group identification in inclusive categories depends on which social comparison defines the category’s inclusiveness
• Group identification varies qualitatively across cultures, not just in degree
• Group identity mainly boosts discretionary extra-role effort, not required performance
• Group living evolves by suppressing self-interest into obligated interdependence
• Group living forges obligated interdependence that beats individual self-maximization
• Group living suppresses individual self-interest to enable resource efficiency and mutual dependence.
• Group members judge fairness by how everyone, not just themselves, is treated
• Group membership is chosen to balance simultaneous needs for inclusion and distinctiveness.
• Group membership makes collective moral failures threaten personal self-esteem.
• Group membership shapes how observers explain desirable behavior
• Group memberships satisfy conflicting needs for inclusion and distinctiveness
• Group outcomes can contradict individual behavioral propensities and escape lab study
• Group outcomes emerge from decentralized choices and can disappoint every member’s shared preference.
• Group processes cluster by size into dyads, demes, and macrodemes with distinct functions.
• Group self-correction toward moderate size emerges from expansion and contraction dynamics
• Group-relevant content draws more attention than unrelated content in supremacist forums
• Group-type distinctions are spontaneously activated cognitive structures, not mere rating tasks
• Groups are judged by fit with a superordinate prototype that favors the majority
• Groups are perceived as unitary mindful entities with intentions
• Groups are seen as groups when they act coherently toward goals
• Groups can be perceived as groups through agency and purpose
• Groups high in entitativity are processed like individual persons
• Groups perceived as highly unified are treated like individual persons in impression formation.
• Groups perceived as unified are processed like single persons
• Groups split favorably toward their own members and derogate outgroup attributes
• Groups systematically discuss shared knowledge while undervaluing their most distinctive information
• Groups systematically undervalue distinctive information that only one member holds
• Groups tolerate dissent unless it threatens identity-defining core beliefs
• Groups we agree with seem more unified than groups we oppose
• Groups whose identity means not being an out-group inevitably derogate that out-group
• Hardin’s commons parable now has over 10,000 scholarly citations
• Hate of the out-group can arise from mere self-definition by contrast, no competition needed
• Hate-site thread metadata enables quantifying what content audiences reward
• High category salience during contact boosts its prejudice-reducing effects
• High identity complexity requires recognizing one’s in-groups as distinct and non-overlapping
• High member interaction, shared attributes, and common goals increase perceived group entitativity.
• High relational mobility fosters self-other overlap friendships unlike ascribed networks
• High relational mobility makes people shift group loyalty opportunistically with status
• High stakes and good intentions do not overcome commons coordination failures
• High stakes and shared awareness do not prevent commons-style collective failures.
• Horizontal comparisons enable dual subgroup-superordinate identity where vertical ones force a choice
• How a perceiver construes a group determines which cues mark it as a group.
• How agents define neighborhood determines whether segregation emerges
• How authorities treat a group signals expected norms for member cooperation
• How much people identify with a group tracks its perceived entitativity
• Human development is growing interdependence, not independence.
• Human evolution’s selecting environment is recurring face-to-face group configurations
• Human group living is obligate, driven by morphology and ecology rather than choice
• Human recurrence comes from repeated assembly of cultural and genetic resources
• Human social motives evolved to keep groups bounded and optimally sized
• Human traits recur through repeated face-to-face group assembly, not just genes
• Human turn-taking flexibility far exceeds fixed animal signaling because it spans varied contexts.
• Humans are obligately interdependent and cannot survive without groups
• Humans are obligately interdependent, not naturally solitary
• Humans are obligatorily interdependent because their evolved traits require group living
• Humans evolved opposing drives for inclusion and exclusion that keep group sizes bounded
• Identification balances competing needs for inclusion and distinctiveness
• Identification with extreme groups may be unstable and needs-driven
• Identities defined by what one is not breed out-group hostility without competition
• Identity antagonism emerges specifically when an exclusive subgroup meets an activated inclusion need.
• Identity threat collapses complex multiple identities into one simplified category
• Immigrant enclaves satisfy inclusion needs before acculturation enables dual identity
• Immigrant identity conflicts can be framed as nested category structures
• Immigrants reject whichever identity fails their inclusion or differentiation needs
• Improving intergroup relations requires changing identity thinking, not identity categories.
• In-group bias arises from preferential in-group treatment rather than out-group hostility
• In-group bias mostly reflects positive self-regard, not hostility toward outsiders
• In-group entitativity breeds identification without needing out-group contrast
• In-group favoritism and out-group derogation are empirically unrelated phenomena
• In-group favoritism can arise without any contrasting out-group present.
• In-group favoritism is not gendered but out-group hostility is
• In-group glorification but not attachment predicts justifying harm against out-groups
• In-group glorification reduces justice responses only when the in-group is the perpetrator.
• In-group identity is defined only through contrast with out-groups
• In-group love and out-group hate are distinct with separate origins
• In-group minorities out-persuade in-group majorities on objective but undecided judgment tasks
• In-group positivity and out-group negativity are only weakly linked, even in hate groups.
• In-group positivity independently predicts out-group hostility beyond threat and emotion measures
• In-group pride need not involve hostility toward out-groups
• In-group successes are credited to character while out-group successes get situational excuses
• In-group trust bias is stronger in individualist than collectivist cultures
• In-group-out-group cognition is mainly a Western pattern, not universal
• In-groups acquire definition only through comparison and contrast with out-groups
• In-groups are seen as more entitative and out-groups as more homogeneous
• In-groups can cohere by homogeneity or by shared structure
• Inclusion and differentiation needs counterbalance each other in group identification
• Increasing cognitive complexity of one’s own identities reduces out-group prejudice without abandoning those identities
• Individual development emerges from recurrent relationships and heterogeneous resources.
• Individual preferences for optimal group size can undermine optimal outcomes collectively
• Individual-level theories cannot explain emergent group outcomes like traffic jams
• Individualism and collectivism differ chiefly in in-group identity and loyalty
• Individualism-collectivism does not cleanly predict social identity use
• Individually rational resource use leads to collective ruin when costs are shared
• Individuals hold multiple, flexibly deployable social self-categories simultaneously
• Individuals prefer superordinate identity when the subgroup is too small to satisfy inclusion needs.
• Individuals restrain resource use when they expect others to reciprocate, especially under scarcity
• Infants evolved to elicit parental attribution of intentionality
• Information consistent with listeners’ expectations spreads while discrepant facts get suppressed
• Information consistent with what recipients expect gets amplified while discrepant information gets dropped
• Ingroup favoritism operates through reward-giving rather than outgroup harm
• Institutional racism and sexism often stem from in-group favoritism rather than overt prejudice
• Institutions fail to address intractable problems because responsibility becomes diffusely delegated.
• Integrating home and host cultural identities boosts creative performance.
• Integrative complexity fully mediates biculturalism’s effect on performance and creativity.
• Integrative complexity names the capacity to hold competing perspectives and link them.
• Interagency cooperation failures are a generic problem in intergroup relations
• Interdependent individual actions produce collective outcomes no one deliberately chose
• Interdependent selves require effortful harmony work precisely because members stay distinct
• Intergroup aggression targets outgroup men while incorporating outgroup women
• Intergroup antipathy develops swiftly and almost inescapably across nearly all contact settings
• Intergroup behavior cannot be explained by individual psychology alone.
• Intergroup comparison drives all religious members, but fundamentalists pursue it to extremes.
• Intergroup comparison primarily serves to confirm one’s own group’s superiority
• Intergroup conflict was commoner in prehistoric societies than in historic ones
• Intergroup contact can reduce uncritical preference for one’s own group.
• Intergroup contact may differentiate perceptions of one’s own group, not just outsiders.
• Intergroup contact only reduces prejudice when it promotes person-based processing over category-based processing.
• Intergroup contact reduces prejudice best when group categories stay salient.
• Intergroup theories isolate single motives that actually operate together.
• Intergroup threat is not required to link in-group positivity with out-group hostility.
• Intergroup threats may not be necessary for ingroup love to drive outgroup hate
• Interracial intimacy triggers intense disgust among white supremacists
• Involuntary loss of majority status triggers outsized negative reactions
• Israel deliberately revived Hebrew as a spoken language to unify a diverse diaspora
• Japanese in-group favoritism depends on reciprocity, unlike Western positive distinctiveness.
• Justice discourse spans millennia across philosophy, law, and theology
• Justice perceptions act differently depending on which layer of self-identity is engaged
• Justice research conflates individual standing motives with collective group-integrity motives
• Knowing in-group peers befriend out-group others raises one’s perceived category complexity
• Knowing that ingroup friends interact with outgroup members reduces prejudice without any direct contact.
• Laboratory findings on cooperation face external-validity challenges from real-world elites
• Laboratory findings on cooperation may not transfer to real-world decision makers
• Large bureaucracies fail when distributed groups cannot pool critical information.
• Large bureaucracies risk isolated, forgotten information across distributed units
• Large samples produce significant correlations that explain little variance
• Leadership effects operate through individual perceptions rather than organizational-level membership
• Leadership is cognitively framed as a group-level rather than relational process
• Leadership-identity mediation findings were tested in grocery and fast-food settings
• Learning of one’s ingroup’s historical harm triggers outgroup dehumanization responses
• Learning one’s group harmed another group increases dehumanization of the victims
• Learning why cultural rituals differ breaks functional fixedness
• Learning why other cultures behave as they do enhances creative problem solving
• Legal institutions reduce costs of forming new exchange relationships, boosting mobility
• Lethal intergroup raids paid off evolutionarily despite high casualties
• Likert-scale measurement artifacts may explain away the null individualism-collectivism findings
• Liking one’s own group does not predict hostility toward other groups
• Living abroad boosts creativity but mere travel does not
• Living abroad boosts creativity by restructuring cognition toward flexible complexity.
• Living abroad improves flexible, multi-perspective problem-solving
• Living abroad improves making creative associations between unrelated concepts
• Living abroad increases insight into using objects for unintended purposes
• Living abroad raises insight-creativity performance from 42 to 60 percent
• Living abroad transforms thinking only through active adaptation
• Living abroad, but not traveling abroad, boosts creative problem-solving.
• Living in ethnically diverse neighborhoods raises cognitive identity complexity
• Low cohesion or threat makes groups rigid against minority dissent
• Lower relational mobility forces friendships across dissimilar others.
• Loyalty and authority crowd out harm and fairness after in-group atrocities
• Major world religions have outlasted political ideologies by over a millennium
• Majority care for group survival is what permits minority influence
• Majority group cohesion, not weakness, is the precondition for minority influence
• Majority members contrast with in-groups while minorities assimilate with them
• Making allocators accountable reduces in-group favoritism, especially among majority members
• Making negational identity salient shifts voting choices toward shared out-group members
• Male dominance motivation targets any group but acts mainly on subordinate out-groups
• Male intergroup violence evolved to secure reproductive resources via dominance
• Male intrasexual competition drives both perpetration and targeting of ethnic prejudice
• Male intrasexual competition extrapolates to explain men’s role in intergroup conflict
• Male intrasexual competition is more violent while female competition is reputational
• Male race bias peaks where aggression and dominance motives combine
• Male-coalition violence against outgroups yields huge reproductive fitness payoffs even when deadly
• Male-dominated violence scales from individual homicide up to interstate warfare.
• Males do not target outgroup females because females are contested resources, not competitors
• Males treat females as contested resources rather than competitors
• Managers identifying with two cultures are promoted faster than single-culture peers
• Marginalized scholars must accept powerful groups border-crossing into their terrain despite real risks.
• Mass pilgrimage strengthens pan-ethnic religious identity while boosting trade
• Maturation increases social interdependence as much as independence
• Members of stigmatized groups face chronic ambiguity between discrimination and personal failure causes
• Men and women express prejudice through different evolved strategies, fear versus aggression
• Men and women hold prejudice toward out-group men for different evolutionary reasons
• Men are both primary targets and primary agents of out-group hostility
• Men are both the main targets and main agents of out-group prejudice
• Men but not women increase in-group contributions when cues signal out-group competition
• Men express maximum out-group bias when dominance desire meets perceived formidability
• Men express more dominance-oriented racism and violent intergroup competition than women
• Men serve as both primary agents and targets of racial discrimination
• Men serve as the primary targets and agents of intergroup prejudice
• Men show higher xenophobia than women in national samples
• Men take risks to impress potentially available opposite-sex partners.
• Men’s intrasexual competition is more lethal than women’s, which tends to take reputational form.
• Men’s out-group bias requires perceived fighting ability, not just dominance motives.
• Men’s prejudice is approach-driven toward dominance while women’s is avoidance-driven
• Men’s race bias is driven by aggression combined with dominance motives, women’s is not
• Mentorship shifted a researcher from individual identity toward intergroup dynamics
• Mere arbitrary categorization creates fault lines blocking intergroup cooperation
• Mere arbitrary classification into categories produces in-group bias
• Mere categorization into a group triggers differentiation and discrimination
• Mere cultural exposure fails without active comparative cognitive work.
• Mere exposure to foreign cultures does not boost creativity; active comparison does.
• Mere exposure to foreign cultures is insufficient for creativity gains.
• Mere knowledge of a fellow in-group member’s contact with out-groups reduces prejudice.
• Mere worst-case thinking about rivals raises defensive resource allocations.
• Merely categorizing people into groups triggers biased evaluation, even on trivial features
• Merely experiencing foreign novelty without grasping its underlying reasons does not boost creativity
• Merely priming in-group membership may trigger morality principle shifts without moral content
• Merely recalling an adaptation experience boosts creative output
• Merely traveling abroad does not transform cognition, but deep adaptation does
• Methodological critique explains away the null cross-cultural finding.
• Migrants turn to religious reasoning where a broader labor critique is absent.
• Mind reading by simulation requires suppressing one’s own mental states
• Mind reading competence is learned through cultural scaffolding from birth
• Mind reading draws on stored folk psychological knowledge
• Minimal group experiments offered a laboratory testbed for contact research.
• Minimal group findings on discrimination depend on allocating benefits, not penalties.
• Minorities gain acceptance by foregrounding traits valued in the superordinate group
• Minorities influence attitudes more than majorities when no prior position exists
• Minority influence fails when a minority threatens the group’s survival
• Minority influence is delayed but persists and spreads to unaddressed beliefs
• Minority influence on majorities requires social legitimacy, which stigmatized groups cannot attain
• Minority influence requires majority acceptance of the minority as legitimate in-group
• Minority sources hold influence primacy when no strong prior position exists
• Minority status raises identity complexity only absent threat perceptions
• Minority-sourced persuasion produces lasting change and spillover to unaddressed beliefs, unlike majority pressure.
• Miscegenation topics draw more response from white supremacists than racial superiority claims.
• Misunderstood compliance procedures hardened into accumulated institutional beliefs that blocked sharing.
• Modern face-to-face group structures replicate ancient foraging configurations
• Moral disengagement is how individuals neutralize threats to the moral self
• Moral disengagement re-perceives immoral acts while morality shifting reframes them as moral
• Moral disengagement reinterprets facts while morality shifting redefines the moral frame itself
• Moral principle activation only shapes behavior when linked to the active self-concept
• Mortality reminders increase perceived in-group entitativity, buffering death anxiety.
• Most churchgoers endorse any religious-sounding statement regardless of its orientation
• Moving between dissimilar organizational cultures boosts individual creativity
• Multicultural priming outperforms colorblind framing at fostering perspective-taking
• Multiple balanced group memberships reduce intergroup hostility potential
• Multiple identity memberships reduce intergroup loyalty polarization and tension
• Multiple in-group categories can be cognitively represented in simplified or complex ways
• National belonging requires forgetting much of one’s country’s history
• National identities can become negatively interdependent and zero-sum
• Nations selectively forget negative historical events to sustain national identity
• Natural nested social categories can be operationalized through real-world group memberships
• Nazi degradation of prisoners functioned to protect perpetrators from psychological distress
• Nazi degradation of victims functioned to spare the perpetrators’ own psychological distress.
• Need satisfaction predicts simultaneous dual group identification in immigrants
• Negational identities produce both out-group derogation and in-group favoritism
• Negational identity is a strategy for escaping low status or low self-esteem
• Negational identity may stem from low-status individuals’ need to feel superior
• Negative allocation contexts can trigger unusually careful intergroup processing
• Negative first impressions resist correction simply because they end the interaction
• Nested categories fully converge when one is a subset of another
• Nested categorization contexts involve memberships in categories that sit inside larger superordinate categories
• New minorities resent their fall faster than new majorities relish their rise
• Newborns’ tongue protrusion is not selectively imitative but a general reflex.
• No single theory alone explains prejudice’s full nature
• No single theory can fully explain racism and ethnocentrism.
• North Americans are no less collectivistic than East Asians
• Northern Ireland’s conflict is ethnopolitical, not religious, in nature
• Numeric underrepresentation alone poorly captures what makes a minority group.
• Objective category overlap can diverge sharply from individuals’ subjective perceptions
• Objective category overlap in a population can be measured and varies
• Objective diversity only shapes identity if individuals subjectively experience it
• Older attribution models never studied category-based explanation directly
• One’s own current bodily state biases inferences about others’ needs
• Only emotional attachment to one’s group, not categorization or self-esteem, drives in-group favoritism
• Only highly inclusive superordinate categories trigger subgroup favoritism, a nonlinear effect
• Optimal distinctiveness equilibrium fails because popular groups attract overpopulation and destroy competitors.
• Optimal distinctiveness needs drive individuals to join or leave groups by size
• Optimal distinctiveness research mainly relied on self-reports and fixed experimental treatments
• Optimal identities satisfy inclusion and differentiation needs simultaneously
• Optimal intergroup contact unfolds through staged decategorization then recategorization
• Ordinary people readily attribute intentions and desires to groups
• Ordinary people readily attribute mental states to groups despite long-standing scholarly rejection
• Ordinary people readily attribute mental states to groups perceived as mind-like
• Organisms arise from epigenetic resources spanning RNA to social roles
• Organizational citizenship behavior distinctively excludes formally rewarded in-role behavior
• Organizational citizenship behavior spans altruism, civic virtue, sportsmanship, and conscientiousness
• Organizational divisions outlive the realities that justified them and block adaptation
• Organizational harm stems more from inattention than from evil intent
• Organizational identity fully mediates leadership’s effect on retention intentions
• Organizational identity only partially mediates leadership’s effect on satisfaction
• Organizational identity splits into just two dimensions, not the theorized three
• Organizations can stall vital information in short-term memory much like individual minds do.
• Origin myths function as coordination devices by creating a shared sacred past.
• Our own bodily states bias how we read other people’s minds
• Out-group bias expressions peak where dominance motives meet high self-assessed fighting ability.
• Out-group competition cues mobilize men’s in-group contributions more than women’s.
• Out-group derogation can arise from categorization alone, without any competition or threat
• Out-group hostility among men targets arbitrary status hierarchies, not specific ethnic enemies.
• Out-group members can be preferred information sources for factual questions
• Out-group minorities are admired for courage rather than derogated
• Out-group negativity toward minorities exceeds in-group positivity toward whites in online race discourse.
• Outdated institutional partitions persist by tradition long after their logic expires
• Outdated organizational partitions persist through tradition despite losing relevance
• Outgroup avoidance may function as protection against unfamiliar parasites and diseases.
• Ovulation-linked race bias amplifies most in women who feel vulnerable to sexual coercion.
• Parents’ simulated theory of mind about newborns is what brings infants into human community
• Past foreign experience alone does not produce creative benefit without identity integration.
• Patriotism and nationalism are distinct dimensions of group identification with opposing effects
• People adopt modeled behaviors only when they see similar others rewarded for them.
• People affirm collective traits they lack to stay connected yet distinct.
• People apply different evaluative frames to a manager as supervisor versus as leader.
• People apply distinct essence and agency theories when perceiving group entitativity
• People are driven by opposing needs for inclusion and distinctiveness
• People assume evil acts reveal an enduring core of evil in the actor
• People assume others have unified, coherent personalities and seek consistency in them.
• People choose social comparison partners only when similar on the judged feature
• People conserve shared resources when they expect others to reciprocate restraint.
• People default to explaining others’ acts through the actor’s disposition
• People differ in how they integrate their multiple group memberships into self-identity.
• People disengage moral self-sanctions through euphemism, justification, and dehumanization
• People downgrade the perceived unity of groups that rule against their views
• People explain actions via inner dispositions rather than situational dynamics
• People explain behavior by citing a person’s group membership, not just their traits
• People explain behavior by referencing an actor’s group membership rather than unique traits.
• People extend theory of mind to groups by looking for an executive brain-like function
• People feel emotions for group members and deny their group’s harmful acts
• People form in-groups from even trivial, arbitrary distinguishing features
• People gravitate toward subgroup over superordinate identities in nested categories
• People hold a high-entitativity subgroup responsible for the broader group’s acts
• People hold multiple self-categories whose relationship structures shape identification.
• People hold two distinct intuitive theories of what makes a group real
• People invoke category membership when explaining observed behavior, not just forming impressions
• People invoke category-based causal explanations mainly when category salience combines with stereotype fit
• People join entitative groups to restore a universal need for certainty
• People join groups out of inclusion needs, mortality awareness, and uncertainty reduction
• People minimize discrimination attributions for themselves while readily applying them to others
• People perceive groupness either through stable shared traits or through goal-driven process
• People perceive groups as less unified when those groups contradict their opinions
• People read other minds by applying learned implicit theories about behavior
• People represent their group memberships as arranged in overlapping or nested structures
• People retaliate harder against cohesive groups after one member harms them
• People seek comparison partners similar on the dimension being judged
• People simulate similar others’ minds but explain dissimilar others through general knowledge
• People sometimes read other minds by simulating the other’s perspective
• People threatened by their group’s moral failures deny, relabel, and relativize the facts
• People vary in how much their multiple group memberships overlap cognitively
• People verify group traits they lack to stay included yet distinct
• People who commit atrocities genuinely believe they are acting morally.
• People who fall to minority status then rise back gain innovative influence
• People’s memory errors reveal spontaneously used cognitive group-type categories.
• Perceived agency correlates with entitativity more strongly than homogeneity or essence does
• Perceived cohesion within a group triggers person-like processing of its members.
• Perceived entitativity arises from both cognitive information-processing and contextual-motivational variables.
• Perceived entitativity cues may not match a group’s actual entitativity.
• Perceived entitativity is the central causal mechanism through which homogeneity and essentialism drive stereotyping.
• Perceived entitativity makes outsiders blame whole groups for one member’s transgression
• Perceived group activity and entitativity mutually imply each other
• Perceived group agency drives opposite evaluations of in-groups and out-groups
• Perceived group entitativity mediates the effects of other group variables on stereotyping.
• Perceived group tightness drives collective blame for members’ misdeeds
• Perceived overlap complexity of ingroups predicts tolerance across cultures
• Perceived similarity to another person determines which mind-reading strategy is used
• Perceived threat amplifies both in-group favoritism and out-group hostility
• Perceived threat to group distinctiveness reduces social identity complexity
• Perceived threat to the group’s moral image triggers moral disengagement strategies and ranks closing.
• Perceived unity makes a group processed like an individual
• Perceived vulnerability to coercion predicts fear specifically of out-group men, not other targets.
• Perceivers also generate categorical explanations for whole-group behavior
• Perceivers assume persons are coherent entities and expect consistency in them
• Perceivers attribute intentions to groups only when groups show mind-like executive function.
• Perceivers can judge a group’s unity either by shared traits or by shared goals
• Perceivers can judge acts intentional even when causes are unconscious background factors.
• Perceivers read intentions into cohesive groups more than loose aggregates
• Perceivers simulate minds judged similar and theorize about minds judged different
• Perceiving a group as an entity precedes stereotyping and discrimination against it
• Perceiving a group as real precedes all other group-related judgments and biases
• Perceiving asymmetric category overlap requires cognitive effort that simple measures lack
• Perceiving ingroups as crosscutting reduces discrimination and improves outgroup attitudes
• Perceiving meaningful coworker subgroups reduces identification with the larger organization
• Perceiving one’s own multiple group memberships as non-overlapping fosters generalized tolerance
• Perceiving one’s own multiple identities as overlapping less predicts broader tolerance
• Perceiving others through multiple simultaneous categories yields more positive out-group evaluation
• Perceiving systemic discrimination harms well-being while situational bias protects it
• Personalized contact only reduces prejudice if group membership stays salient
• Personalized intergroup contact reduces prejudice by making category boundaries less meaningful.
• Physical resemblance triggers trait inferences while coordinated action triggers goal inferences
• Physical similarity cues traits while coordinated action cues shared goals
• Polarized social contexts may require focusing on similarity rather than overlap complexity
• Positive ingroup emotion and outgroup slurs are distinct constructs
• Positive social identity can be achieved without derogating out-groups
• Power distance moderates voice effects only in supervisor, not leader, evaluations.
• Prejudice defined as antipathy misses the teamwork that sustains gender inequality
• Prejudice may be epiphenomenal rather than causal to status hierarchies
• Prejudice may be epiphenomenal to status hierarchy formation rather than causal.
• Prejudice psychology splits by gender-specific threat and function.
• Prejudice-as-favoritism is gender-neutral but aggression targets men specifically
• Prejudice’s targets and agents differ systematically along gender lines
• Pride tracks intergroup status while respect measures one’s standing inside the group
• Priming a prior living-abroad experience causally boosts creative association.
• Priming living-abroad memory causally raises creative performance.
• Private inner life changed dramatically as humans moved from oral to book culture.
• Pro-white sentiment uniquely predicts both anti-minority negativity and racial slurs.
• Procedural justice research focuses on individual relational standing, not collective well-being
• Procedural justice research focuses on individual-authority exchange, not group-level justice
• Public institutional routines change incrementally rather than through wholesale overhauls
• Race dominates intergroup positivity and negativity in Stormfront discourse
• Racial discrimination in employment falls harder on subordinate men than subordinate women
• Racial earnings gaps are far larger among men than among women
• Racial mixing is framed as a realistic threat to group survival
• Rational individual self-interest can cumulatively destroy shared collective resources.
• Rational self-interest yields collectively disastrous resource depletion
• Reactivating living-abroad memories raises creative associational thinking.
• Reading about colonial harm reduces perceived emotional capacity of the harmed group
• Reading about in-group atrocities suppresses concern for harm and fairness
• Realistic and symbolic threats reliably predict prejudice across studies
• Recalling multicultural adaptation only boosts creativity in people who actually lived abroad.
• Recategorization interventions founder because people resist merging with threatening out-groups.
• Recategorization succeeds only if the superordinate category is perceived as distinctive
• Recategorizing out-groups within a shared superordinate category can reduce bias without erasing subgroup identities
• Relational fairness and collective justice stem from distinct self-concepts
• Religion endures as a force because it fuses meaning with collective identity.
• Religion offers a uniquely potent collective self because groups outlive believers and explain death.
• Religion persists because it supplies collective identity, not just beliefs
• Religion uniquely exceeds political ideologies in identity persistence and life meaning
• Religion uniquely fulfills both meaning-seeking and collective-identity functions at once
• Religion-driven intergroup conflict persists against secularization predictions.
• Religions institutionalize obligated interdependence that overrides ethnic and racial boundaries within the faith.
• Religions of descent fulfill collective identity needs as validly as religions of ascent
• Religious collectives outlast political meaning systems and still serve identity needs
• Religious commitment shifts members’ focus from self-interest to collective welfare.
• Religious community membership measurably improves well-being, health, cooperation, and trust.
• Religious dietary law requires trusting unknown co-religionists for food preparation
• Religious identification operates through importance, deference, commitment, and superiority.
• Religious involvement correlates with improved health, longevity, and prosocial behavior
• Religious members selectively adopt beliefs, keeping distinction within belonging
• Religious membership correlates with well-being, health, trust, and cooperation.
• Religious rituals maintain identity and build lasting community support networks
• Religious traditions arose where scarce resources forced group coordination
• Religious truth claims resist disconfirmation, which strengthens members’ faith and defensiveness.
• Religious unity across ethnic lines rests on rituals and language generating obligated interdependence
• Representing multiple group memberships as overlapping raises tolerance for diversity
• Reproductive investment asymmetry drives sex differences in mate selection and aggression
• Research neglects perceived entitativity of the intimacy and task groups people actually live in
• Researchers excluded the purity moral foundation from their empirical measures.
• Restraint in shared-resource use signals trust in others
• Rules of perceptual appearance are objective, not subjective-psychological in origin
• Sacred-language standardization builds cohesion across vast religious in-groups
• Salient group membership replaces personal identity with a collective self
• Satisfaction measures here target coworkers, job, leader, and environment
• Scarce resources in the Middle East favored religious traditions that enforce group coordination
• Secularization predictions have failed; religion remains politically potent
• Seeking the most attractive possible mate produces human-matching assortative mating without preference for similarity.
• Selection bias could explain why creative people live abroad, so experiments were needed.
• Selection shaped male-specific prejudice psychology but not female-specific intergroup aggression
• Selective forgetting of a nation’s negative history is required for national identity
• Selective forgetting of negative events sustains national identity formation
• Self-esteem needs can drive group members toward discrimination that shields high in-group status.
• Self-interest assumptions in social science derive from folk psychology, not scientific necessity
• Self-interest maximization is folk psychology, not settled biology
• Self-organized segregation needs no central coordinating agency
• Self-report surveys can manufacture false correlations when one person supplies all data.
• Serbs offset Srebrenica regret by citing their own historical suffering
• Service workers averaged six years tenure but only 2.5 with their leader
• Sexual selection feedback loops amplify male aggressiveness across generations
• Sexual selection makes men primary targets and agents of intergroup aggression.
• Sexual selection produces dimorphic male aggression through a mate-preference feedback loop
• Shared fate converts a stranger crowd into a functioning group.
• Shared fate instantly converts a random aggregate into a coordinated core group.
• Shared group membership enables depersonalized trust and cooperation
• Shared identity alone, not kinship or history, triggers exclusion
• Shared identity with the perpetrator is the critical precondition for moral disengagement
• Shared organizational identity produces the compliance outcomes credited to leadership skill
• Shared origin myths establish collective identity by creating a sacred narrative past
• Shared ritual creates religious unity that overrides racial and ethnic divisions
• Shifting comparison frames can motivate recategorization toward superordinate groups.
• Shifting from I to we drives conformity and self-exemplification.
• Simple individual-level rules can generate complex group-level behavior worth simulating.
• Simulation models can generate predictions that contradict intuitive expectations.
• Simultaneous categorization into nested categories produces dueling identities favoring one level
• Simultaneous subgroup and superordinate identification reduces intergroup conflict
• Social and identity benefits drive religious participation, not only faith
• Social categories vary in how much they overlap with each other
• Social comparison only informs when the comparator matches on the judged feature
• Social identity complexity governs who counts as an in-group member
• Social identity complexity is an individual difference tied to personally central categories.
• Social identity complexity is an individual-difference variable, not a manipulable experimental condition.
• Social identity complexity mediates how intergroup contact shapes out-group attitudes
• Social identity complexity splits into quantifiable overlap and perceived similarity components
• Social identity operates through three distinct selves, not one continuum
• Social interdependence rather than individual cognition should anchor social psychology
• Social perception alternates between top-down category-based and bottom-up personalized modes
• Solo-status group members are explained by their category when they dissent
• Standard tests of distinctiveness theory ignore how inclusion needs interact with status and self-esteem.
• Status hierarchies can emerge purely from individuals’ belonging, distinctiveness, and esteem needs
• Stereotypic role assignments trigger gender-based causal attributions especially for solo members
• Stigmatized individuals attribute outcomes to discrimination only when its probability is certain
• Stormfront can be studied by posting experimental messages directly on its forum.
• Stormfront drew over 150,000 members and 200,000 daily page views
• Stormfront, founded early on the web, still draws over 200,000 daily page views
• Stress depletes cognitive resources and narrows how people perceive their in-groups
• Structural differentiation, meant to manage complexity, scatters the very knowledge needed
• Subgroup identification need not oppose superordinate group identification when both are optimally distinct
• Subordinate groups can actively contribute to their own oppression by endorsing hierarchy-justifying ideologies.
• Subordinates actively cooperate in their own oppression
• Supernatural belief reduces death anxiety more powerfully than any secular identity.
• Superordinate inclusiveness stems from social comparisons about relative category size
• Survey correlations may be artifacts of a single source providing both predictors and outcomes
• Switching comparisons to rival organizations can shift members’ loyalty to the larger group
• The baby boom created an exceptional academic job market for women
• The commons dilemma generalizes to modern shared-resource conflicts.
• The commons dilemma generalizes to scarce shared resources beyond pasture
• The contact hypothesis grew out of the civil rights movement.
• The gender gap in competition stems from preference differences, not ability gaps.
• The Hajj strengthens pan-Muslim identity and boosts cross-national trade networks
• The individualist-collectivist split in self-description receives only mixed empirical support
• The Internet ended the social isolation that once constrained racists
• The Middle East’s scarcity drove religious development because scarcity demands group coordination.
• The mind is constituted by culture, not bare biology
• The Moral Foundations Questionnaire measures moral principles by ratings and agreement items.
• The private inner mind is a historically recent construct rather than a universal
• The private mind is a historically recent construct tied to literacy
• The same group can be perceived either categorically or dynamically
• The self divides into personal, relational, and collective layers
• The social self splits into individual, relational, and collective forms, not one continuum
• The socioecological approach treats mind and habitat as recursively co-created.
• The strongest advocates of multicultural creativity are themselves worldly expats
• The theory-theory holds that people infer others’ minds by applying learned implicit laws.
• Thirty years of commons governance research has not yet curbed global commons destruction.
• Thirty years of effort have barely slowed global commons degradation.
• Thread titles hide intergroup relevance that first message content reveals
• Thread titles often conceal a forum’s true intergroup relevance
• Threat to distinctiveness drives more complex identity structures, but evidence is sparse
• Threat to in-group moral image triggers defensive reinterpretation of atrocity reports.
• Threats to distinctiveness drive simplified views of one’s multiple group memberships
• Threats to individuation drive subgroup fission rather than total individuation
• Tolerating complexity in perceptions prevents prejudiced stereotyping
• ToM’s innate-ability evolutionary history rests on speculative just-so stories.
• Transformational and transactional leadership are measured via Bass’s MLQ instruments
• Transformational but not transactional leadership predicts satisfaction, OCB, and identity
• Transformational leadership builds organizational identity while transactional leadership does not
• Transformational leadership does not by itself predict follower commitment
• Transformational leadership predicts outcomes where transactional leadership does not
• Transformative growth can occur in ordinary places, not only exotic ones
• Trivial group assignments produce substantial discrimination in reward allocation.
• Trust in a leader shifts based on which self-identity is activated
• Two opposing needs for inclusion and differentiation jointly drive social identification.
• Two research fields can mutually advance through mapped points of contact.
• Uncertainty drives people to attach to highly entitative groups
• Uncritical in-group glorification, not mere attachment, drives justification of wrongdoing
• Unfalsifiable truth claims intensify group defense against outsiders.
• Unfalsifiable truth claims strengthen religious commitment and defensive fervor.
• Uniform individual preferences can impede the very outcomes those people desire.
• Uniform preferences can impede reaching the preferred outcome
• Unquantifiable protective work is disincentivized by career reward systems
• Valuing one’s in-group does not inevitably produce out-group discrimination
• Vertical comparisons create identity antagonism while horizontal ones allow dual identity
• Vicarious cross-cultural learning may substitute for lived foreign experience to aid creativity.
• Violating group identity obligations earns moral condemnation that consequence-based errors never provoke
• Violating identity-based moral loyalty is condemned far more harshly than violating practical consequences
• Voice influence on trust is moderated by power distance only for supervisor judgments.
• Volunteer organizations face for-profit problems like turnover and commitment
• Volunteer organizations face the same leadership problems as for-profit firms
• Western and East Asian collectivism are qualitatively different phenomena
• Western collectivism derives from categories; East Asian collectivism from relationships.
• Western secular bias makes religious conflict elsewhere seem inadmissible
• When group membership is inescapable, people must accommodate internal differences managefully.
• Whether a group has an executive unit changes how people explain its mistakes
• Whether people hold dual identities depends on the comparison type used to judge inclusiveness
• White racial identity strengthens through contrast with minority out-groups
• White supremacist forum content centers overwhelmingly on intergroup relations
• White supremacist forum members portray blacks as mindless soldiers, not strategic actors.
• White supremacist group identity is organized around out-group negativity, unlike typical intergroup bias
• White supremacist hostility targets fellow whites who defect from the group
• White supremacists define multiple distinct out-groups beyond ethnic minorities
• White supremacists frame themselves as persecuted underdog martyrs
• White supremacists mobilize far more around race-mixing threats than around supremacy claims.
• Whites who cannot celebrate their own status may define themselves by not being black.
• Witnessing in-group atrocities shifts moral priorities toward loyalty
• Witnessing in-group wrongdoing shifts accessible moral foundations toward loyalty and authority.
• Women are incorporated into winning groups rather than targeted because they are valued resources
• Women are not immune from intergroup prejudice despite lower average levels
• Women competing for male favor are inherently hostile to each other
• Women faced greater sexual assault threat from out-group than in-group males prehistorically
• Women show stronger same-race dating preferences than men in speed dating
• Workers exposed to diverse organizational cultures become more creative entrepreneurs
• Worst-case mental simulations about opponents increase security spending in security dilemmas
• Zero-sum conditions can turn in-group attachment into out-group hostility.