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 Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
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 Similar articles in ISI 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 arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Boldry, J. G.
Right arrow Articles by Gaertner, L.
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. 9, No. 3, 377-400 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/1368430206064640
© 2006 SAGE Publications

Separating Status from Power as an Antecedent of Intergroup Perception

Jennifer G. Boldry

Montana State University

Lowell Gaertner

University of Tennessee

Status and power covary such that higher status groups are typically higher power groups. This research explored the effect of status on intergroup perception controlling for power. Experiment 1 manipulated the relative status of social groups and explicitly provided the groups equal power. Experiment 2 manipulated status and power orthogonally. Multiple measures yielded consistent patterns indicating that status affected perceived group centrality and variability independent of power. The patterns were consistent with a strategic intergroup comparison account as suggested by social identity theory. Specifically, the effect of status on intergroup perception varied with the relevance and valence of the dimension of comparison in a manner that balanced social reality with a positive social identity.

Key Words: group perception • group variability • heterogeneity • homogeneity • in-group homogeneity • ingroup homogeneity • intergroup perception • outgroup homogeneity • out-group homogeneity • power • status

References

  • Bardach, L., & Park, B. (1996). The effect of in-group and out-group status on memory for consistent and inconsistent behavior of an individual . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 169–178 .[Abstract]
  • Barth, E. A., & Noel, D. L. (1972). Conceptual frameworks for the analysis of race relations: An evaluation . Social Forces, 50, 333–348 .[CrossRef]
  • Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good . Review of General Psychology, 5, 323–370 .[CrossRef]
  • Bettencourt, B. A., Dorr, N., Charlton, K., & Hume, D.L. (2001). Status differences and ingroup bias: A meta-analytic examinations of the effects of status stability, status legitimacy, and group permeability . Psychological Bulletin, 127, 520–542 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Boldry, J. G., & Kashy, D. A. (1999). Intergroup perception in naturally occurring groups of differential status: A social relations perspective . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1200–1212 .[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Brauer, M. (2001). Intergroup perception in the social context: The effects of social status and group membership on perceived out-group homogeneity and ethnocentrism . Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 15–31 .
  • Brewer, M. B. (1979). Ingroup bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive–motivational analysis . Psychological Bulletin, 86, 307–334 .[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Brown, R., & Wootten-Millward, L. (1993). Perceptions of group homogeneity during group formation and change . Social Cognition, 11, 126–149 .[ISI]
  • Cabecinhas, R., & Amancio, L. (1999). Asymmetries in the perception of others as a function of social position and context . Swiss Journal of Psychology, 58, 40–50 .[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Carli, L. L, & Eagly, A. H. (1999). Gender effects on social influence and emergent leadership. In G. N. Powell (Ed.), Handbook of gender and work(pp. 203–222). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .
  • Christensen, P. N., Boldry, J. G., & Kashy, D. A. (2004). Group-based self-evaluation outside the laboratory: Effects of global versus contextual status . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 985–994 .[Abstract]
  • Doosje, B., Haslam, S. A., Spears, R., Oakes, P. J., & Koomen, (1998). The effect of comparative context on central tendency and variability judgments and the evaluation of group characteristics . European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 173–184 .[CrossRef]
  • Doojse, B., Spears, R., & Koomen, W. (1995). When bad isn't all bad: Strategic use of sample information in generalization and stereotyping . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 642–655 .[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Ellemers, N., Van Knippenberg, A., De Vries, N., & Wilke, H. (1988). Social identification and permeability of group boundaries . European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 497–413 .[ISI]
  • Ellemers, N., Van Knippenberg, A., & Wilke, H. (1990). The influence of permeability of group boundaries and stability of group status on strategies of individual mobility and social change . British Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 233–246 .
  • Ellemers, N., & Van Rijswijk, W. (1997). Identity needs versus social opportunities: The use of group-level and individual-level identity management strategies . Social Psychology Quarterly, 60, 52–65 .[CrossRef]
  • Ellemers, N., Van Rijswijk, W., Roefs, M., & Simons, C. (1997). Bias in intergroup perceptions: Balancing group identity with social reality . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 186–198 .[Abstract]
  • Fiske, S. T. (1993). Controlling other people: The impact of power on stereotyping . American Psychologist, 48, 621–628 .[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Fiske, S. T., & Depret, E. (1996). Control, interdependence, and power: Understanding social cognition in its social context. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European Review of Social Psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 31–61). Chichester, UK: Wiley .
  • Guinote, A., Judd, C. M., & Brauer, M. (2002). Effects of power on perceived and objective group variability: Evidence that more powerful groups are more variable . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 708–721 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Hall, J. (1971, November). Decisions, decisions, decisions . Psychology Today, 51–54 and 86–88 .
  • Hewstone, M., Rubin, M., & Willis, H. (2002). Intergroup bias . Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 575–604 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Ito, T. A., Larsen, J. T., Smith, N. K., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1998). Negative information weighs more heavily on the brain: The negativity bias in evaluative categorizations . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 887–900 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk . Econometrica, 47, 263–291 .[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Kelley, H. H., & Thibaut, J. W. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. New York: Wiley Interscience .
  • Linville, P. W., Fischer, G. W., & Salovey, P. (1989). Perceived distributions of the characteristics of in-group and out-group members: Empirical evidence and a computer simulation . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 165–188 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Lorenzi-Cioldi, F. (1993). They all look alike and so do we... sometimes: Perceptions of in-group and out-group homogeneity as a function of sex and context . British Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 111–124 .[ISI]
  • Lorenzi-Cioldi, F. (1998). Group status and perceptions of homogeneity. In Stroebe, W. and Hewstone, M. (Eds.), European Review of Social Psychology, 9, 31–75. New York: John Wiley and Sons .
  • Lorenzi-Cioldi, F., Deaux, K., & Dafflon, A. (1998). Group homogeneity as a function of relative social status . Swiss Journal of Psychology, 57, 255–273 .
  • Lorenzi-Cioldi, F., Eagly, A. H., & Stewart, T. (1995). Homogeneity of gender groups in memory . Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 193–217 .[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Mullen, B., Brown, R., & Smith, C. (1992). Ingroup bias as a function of salience, relevance, and status: An integration . European Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 103–122 .
  • Neuberg, S. L., & Fiske, S. T. (1987). Motivational influences on impression formation: Outcome dependency, accuracy driven attention, and individuating processes . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 431–444 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Park, B., & Judd, C. M. (1990). Measures and models of perceived group variability . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 173–191 .[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Park, B., & Rothbart, M. (1982). Perception of out-group homogeneity and levels of social categorization: Memory for the subordinate attributes of in-group and out-group members . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 1051–1068 .[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Quattrone, G. A., & Jones, E. E. (1980). The perception of variability within in-groups and out-groups: Implications for the law of small numbers . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 38, 141–152 .[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Rubin, M., Hewstone, M., & Voci, A. (2001). Stretching the boundaries: Strategic perceptions of intragroup variability . European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 413–429 .[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Sachdev, I., & Bourhis, R. Y. (1991). Power and status differentials in minority and majority group relations . European Journal of Social Psychology, 21, 1–24 .
  • Sedikides, C. (1997). Differential processing of ingroup and outgroup information: The role of relative group status in permeable boundary groups . European Journal of Social Psychology, 27, 121–144 .[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press .
  • Simon, B. (1992). Intragroup differentiation in terms of ingroup and outgroup attributes . European Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 407–413 .
  • Tajfel, H., Billig, M., Bundy, R. P., & Flament, C. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behaviour . European Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 149–178 .
  • Tajfel H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In S. Worchel, & W. G. Austin (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole .

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
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
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 Similar articles in ISI 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 arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Boldry, J. G.
Right arrow Articles by Gaertner, L.
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?