Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
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
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Buhl, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, Vol. 2, No. 1, 51-58 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/1368430299021004
© 1999 SAGE Publications

Positive-Negative Asymmetry in Social Discriniination: Meta-Analytical Evidence

Thomas Buhl

Lehrstuhlfir Methodenlehre und Evaluationsforschung, Friedrich-Schiller-Universitat Jena, Germany, http://thulbO3.biblio.uni-jena.de/uv/verz.htm

The aim of this paper is to supply quantitative information that is useful for planning studies that investigate social discrimination on differently valued scales with newly created groups. Meta-analyses of the amount of in-group favoritism were conducted with the valence of the scale as moderator (k = 52). Additionally, the experimental effect of valence on the size of in-group bias was analyzed (k = 26). In-group favoritism in the minimal group paradigm is greater when participants are asked to make evaluations on positively valued attributes or to allocate positive resources than when they are asked to make evaluations on negatively valued attributes or to allocate negative resources. Nevertheless, there is also in-group favoritism in the negative domain. The analyses indicate that the difference between positive and negative valence conditions is especially striking when resources are allocated between in-group and out-group or when minority members are making decisions.

Key Words: meta-analysis • positive-negative asymmetry • social discrimination


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


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Group Processes Intergroup RelationsHome page
C. L. Aberson and S. C. Haag
Contact, Perspective Taking, and Anxiety as Predictors of Stereotype Endorsement, Explicit Attitudes, and Implicit Attitudes
Group Processes Intergroup Relations, April 1, 2007; 10(2): 179 - 201.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Group Processes Intergroup RelationsHome page
J. Sidanius, H. Haley, L. Molina, and F. Pratto
Vladimir's Choice and the Distribution of Social Resources: A Group Dominance Perspective
Group Processes Intergroup Relations, April 1, 2007; 10(2): 257 - 265.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Group Processes Intergroup RelationsHome page
M. Verkuyten and L. Hagendoorn
In-Group Favoritism and Self-Esteem: The Role of Identity Level and Trait Valence
Group Processes Intergroup Relations, October 1, 2002; 5(4): 285 - 297.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
A. Mummendey, S. Otten, U. Berger, and T. Kessler
Positive-Negative Asymmetry in Social Discrimination: Valence of Evaluation and Salience of Categorization
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, November 1, 2000; 26(10): 1258 - 1270.
[Abstract] [PDF]