Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations
This Article
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stone, C. H.
Right arrow Articles by Crisp, R. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Superordinate and Subgroup Identification as Predictors of Intergroup Evaluation in Common Ingroup Contexts

Catriona H. Stone

University of Exeter

Richard J. Crisp

University of Kent, r.crisp{at}kent.ac.uk

We examined the combined effects of subgroup and superordinate group identification on intergroup evaluations within common ingroup identity contexts. In Studies 1 and 2 we observed a positive correlation between subgroup identification and intergroup bias, and a negative correlation between superordinate identification and bias. In Study 3 we replicated these effects using alternative measures and observed a common path underlying these relationships: the perceived psychological distance between the self and outgroup. In Studies 4 and 5 we replicated this path model and found that the relationship between superordinate identification and intergroup bias was contingent upon making the superordinate identity salient, but this was not the case for subgroup identification. We discuss the findings in the context of theoretical and applied development of the Common Ingroup Identity Model.

Key Words: common ingroup identity • distinctiveness threat • identification

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, Vol. 10, No. 4, 493-513 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1368430207081537


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Small Group ResearchHome page
J. W. Jackson
Reactions to Social Dilemmas as a Function of Group Identity, Rational Calculations, and Social Context
Small Group Research, December 1, 2008; 39(6): 673 - 705.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
A. Gomez, J. F. Dovidio, C. Huici, S. L. Gaertner, and I. Cuadrado
The Other Side of We: When Outgroup Members Express Common Identity
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, December 1, 2008; 34(12): 1613 - 1626.
[Abstract] [PDF]