Openness to criticism and dissenting opinions is enormously important to group decision-making. Past research has found that people are more persuaded by criticism of their group when it comes from fellow ingroup members rather than outgroup members. But this ingroup advantage is not boundless. Three experiments demonstrate that the ingroup advantage related to openness to criticism is erased when perceivers feel their group is under threat. The results further suggest that the psychological mechanism underlying defensive responses to criticism is attributional-Threat elicits greater suspicion of ingroup critics' motives, which eliminates the ingroup critic's advantage relative to outgroup critics. A final experiment tests an intervention designed to increase openness to criticism and finds that reminders of the importance of dissent and free speech emerge as an effective remedy to increase the persuasiveness of criticism despite high threat.

The experiment reported investigated the phenomenological consequences of Easterners' and Westerners'perspectives on the self Two findings are consistent with the notion that Asians are more likely than Westerners to experience the self from the perspective of the generalized other First, Eastern participants were more likely than Western participants to have third-person (as opposed to first-person) memories when they thought about situations in which they would be at the center of a scene. Second, Easterners and Westerners engaged in different sorts of projections when they read the emotional expressions of other people. Westerners were more biased than Easterners toward egocentric projection of their own emotions onto others, whereas Easterners were more biased than Westerners toward relational projection, in which they projected onto others the emotions that the generalized other would feel in relation to the participant. Implications for how phenomenological experiences could reinforce different Eastern and Western ideologies about the self and the group are discussed.

In the present research, consisting of 2 correlational studies (N = 616) including a representative U.S. sample and 2 experiments (N = 350), the authors investigated how stereotypes and emotions shape behavioral tendencies toward groups, offering convergent support for the behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes (BIAS) map framework. Warmth stereotypes determine active behavioral tendencies, attenuating active harm (harassing) and eliciting active facilitation (helping). Competence stereotypes determine passive behavioral tendencies, attenuating passive harm (neglecting) and eliciting passive facilitation (associating). Admired groups (warm, competent) elicit both facilitation tendencies; hated groups (cold, incompetent) elicit both harm tendencies. Envied groups (competent, cold) elicit passive facilitation but active harm; pitied groups (warm, incompetent) elicit active facilitation but passive harm. Emotions predict behavioral tendencies more strongly than stereotypes do and usually mediate stereotype-to-behavioral-tendency links.

People are more resistant to criticisms of their group when those criticisms are made by an outgroup rather than an ingroup member, a phenomenon referred to as the intergroup sensitivity effect (ISE). The current study compared four competing models of how argument quality would moderate the ISE, with a view to establishing the complex interrelationships between source and message effects in group-directed criticism. Quality of the argument affected responses to ingroup critics, but not to outgroup critics. For outsiders who wish to promote positive change and reform in a group culture, this leads to a somewhat depressing conclusion: their message is likely to be rejected regardless of whether it is objectively 'right', well-considered, well-justified, or well-argued.

Five studies merged the priming methodology with the bystander apathy literature and demonstrate how merely priming a social context at Time 1 leads to less helping behavior on a subsequent, completely unrelated task at Time 2. In Study 1, participants who imagined being with a group at Time 1 pledged significantly fewer dollars on a charity-giving measure at Time 2 than did those who imagined being alone with one other person. Studies 2-5 build converging evidence with hypothetical and real helping behavior measures and demonstrate that participants who imagine the presence of others show facilitation to words associated with unaccountable on a lexical decision task. Implications for social group research and the priming methodology are discussed.

Social identities are associated with normative standards for thought and action, profoundly influencing the behavioral choices of individual group members. These social norms provide frameworks for identifying the most appropriate actions in any situation. Given the increasing complexity of the social world, however, individuals are more and more likely to identify strongly with multiple social groups simultaneously. When these groups provide divergent behavioral norms, individuals can experience social identity conflict. The current manuscript examines the nature and consequences of this socially conflicted state, drawing upon advances in our understanding of the neuropsychology of conflict and uncertainty. Identity conflicts are proposed to involve activity in the Behavioral Inhibition System, which in turn produces high levels of anxiety and stress. Building upon this framework, four strategies for resolving identity conflict are reviewed.

Three studies consider a basis for intergroup helping. Specifically, they show that group members may help others to disconfirm a stereotype of their own group as mean. Study 1 shows that Scots believe they are seen as mean by the English, resent this stereotype, are motivated to refute it, and believe out-group helping is a particularly effective way of doing so. Study 2 shows that increasing the salience of the English stereotype of the Scottish as mean leads Scots to accentuate the extent to which Scots are depicted as generous. Study 3 shows that increasing the salience of the stereotype of the Scots as mean results in an increase in the help volunteered to out-group members. These results highlight how strategic concerns may result in out-group helping. In turn, they underscore the point that helping others may be a means to advance a group's interest.

Three experiments examine the extent to which newcomers are able to influence their groups relative to old-timers. Specifically, how group members respond to criticisms of their group was assessed as a function of the intragroup position of the speaker. When criticizing their workplace (Experiment 1; N = 116), their profession (Experiment 2; N = 106), or an Internet community (Experiment 3; N = 189), newcomers aroused more resistance than old-timers, an effect that was mediated by perceptions of how attached critics were to their group identity. Experiment 3 also showed that newcomers could reduce resistance to their criticisms by distancing themselves from a group of which they were previously members. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

Research on group criticism has demonstrated that criticisms are received less defensively when made by an ingroup member than when made by an outsider (the intergroup sensitivity effect). Three experiments tested the extent to which this effect is driven by social identity concerns or by judgments of how experienced the source of the criticism is. In Experiments 1 and 2, Australians who criticized Australia (ingroup critics) were met with less defensiveness than were foreigners who criticized Australia (outgroup critics), regardless of the amount of experience the foreigner had with Australia. Furthermore, the effects of speaker type on evaluations were mediated by perceptions of the extent to which the criticisms were intended to be constructive but not by perceptions of experience. Finally, Experiment 3 indicated that although experience does not help outgroup critics, a lack of experience can hurt ingroup critics. Recommendations are provided as to how people can reduce defensiveness when making group criticisms.

Traditionally, group research has focused more on the motivations that make people conform than on the motivations and conditions underpinning deviance and dissent. This has led to a literature that focuses on the value that groups place on uniformity and paints a relatively dark picture of dissent and deviance: as reflections of a lack of group loyalty, as signs of disengagement, or as delinquent behavior. An alternative point of view, which has gained momentum in recent years, focuses on deviance and dissent as normal and healthy aspects of group life. In this review, we focus on the motivations that group members have to deviate and dissent, and the functional as well as the dysfunctional effects of deviance and dissent. In doing so we aim for a balanced and complete account of deviance and dissent, highlighting when such behaviors will be encouraged as well as when they will be punished.

Research has shown that social identity threat can have a broad variety of negative consequences. However, not much is known about the consequences of social identity threat on interpersonal relationships. In the present research, we hypothesize that experiencing social identity threat decreases people's social approach motivation toward other people related to the stereotyped domain. Specifically, we manipulated social identity threat by activating negative stereotypes about women in math. As math is an important aspect of the academic self-concept, female university students who are confronted with a negative math stereotype should experience threat toward their identity as university students. We then tested whether this threat affected female students' motivation to approach other university students and whether the effect was mediated by a reduced sense of belonging to the university. Data from 478 participants, assessed in three experimental (Study 1a: N = 79, Study 1b: N = 164, Study 2: N = 100) and one correlational study (Study 3: N = 135), mainly supported these hypotheses. We conclude that social identity threat can be detrimental to the quality of people's social lives. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Two studies tested the prediction that group identification (importance of the group in the self-concept) moderates the impact of perceived discrimination on self-evaluative emotions (depression and self-esteem). In Study 1, women low in gender identification experienced less depressed emotion and higher self-esteem if a negative evaluation was due to sexism than when it was not. The self-evaluative emotions of women high in gender identification were not buffered by attributions to sexism. In Study 2, ethnic identification and depressed emotions were positively related when Latino-Americans read about pervasive prejudice against the ingroup but were negatively related when they read about prejudice against an outgroup. Both studies demonstrated that for highly group identified individuals, prejudice against the ingroup is a threat against the self. Thus, the self-protective strategy of attributing negative feedback to discrimination may be primarily effective for individuals who do not consider the group a central aspect of self.

Three studies support the vicarious dissonance hypothesis that individuals change their attitudes when witnessing members of important groups engage in inconsistent behavior. Study 1, in which participants observed an actor in an induced-compliance paradigm, documented that students who identified with their college supported an issue more after hearing an ingroup member make a counterattitudinal speech in favor of that issue. In Study 2, vicarious dissonance occurred even when participants did not hear a speech, and attitude change was highest when the speaker was known to disagree with the issue. Study 3 showed that speaker choice and aversive consequences moderated vicarious dissonance, and demonstrated that vicarious discomfort--the discomfort observers imagine feeling if in an actor's place--was attenuated after participants expressed their revised attitudes.

We investigated the interplay between the source of criticism and the attributional content of their message on behavioral responses to group-based criticism. Studies 1 and 2 revealed that outgroup critics were more effective when their criticism included internal attributions (to the ingroup's character) rather than external attributions (the ingroup's circumstances), whereas there was no effect of attributional content for ingroup critics (a significant Source x Content interaction). Study 3 explored the role of audiences in responses to outgroup criticism. The results indicated that the positive effects of internal versus external attributions were only evident when an outgroup audience was witness to participants' responses. Furthermore, these effects were mediated through concerns about the ingroup's image. Together, these patterns suggest that responses to criticism depend not just on the identity of the critic but also on what the critic says and who is watching. People may be surprisingly responsive to outgroup criticism-particularly when inaction might lead others to perceive them as

The present paper explores the combined effects of individual- and group-directed feedback on perceived need for individual and collective change. Valence of feedback about individual and group performance (positive versus negative) was manipulated orthogonally. The results revealed that responses to various combinations of two-level feedback were moderated by group identification. With respect to the perceived need for collective change, high-identifiers (but not low-identifiers) were motivated by discrepant feedback: When group feedback was negative but individual feedback was positive, high identifiers perceived collective change to be more important than low-identifiers. With respect to the perceived need for individual change, low-identifiers (but not high-identifiers) were discouraged by the discrepant feedback: When group feedback was positive but individual feedback was negative, low-identifiers perceived individual change to be less important than high-identifiers. These data highlight the interplay between individual and collective feedback, and suggest that the meaning of feedback at each level (individual or group) is framed by the feedback received at the other level. Moreover, group identification seems to play a crucial role in reconciling differences between one's individual self and the performance of one's group. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc.

This research examines how group status affects the impact of individual power positions on promotion versus prevention choices in group decision making. We consider that high power not only implies control, but also indicates responsibility for the achievement of group goals. We argue that the nature of these goals depends on the current status of the group. In Experiment 1, individuals who were accorded high power showed more promotion-oriented decisions in the low group status condition while decisions were more prevention oriented under high group status. Experiment 2 replicated these effects, and further demonstrated that they only emerge when those in power are explicitly made accountable for the achievement of group goals. These results are discussed in relation to regulatory focus theory, power theories, and the role of social identities and group goals in group dynamics.

Social identity complexity defines people's more or less complex cognitive representations of the interrelationships among their multiple ingroup identities. Being high in complexity is contingent on situational, cognitive, or motivational factors, and has positive consequences for intergroup relations. Two survey studies conducted in Northern Ireland examined the extent to which intergroup contact and distinctiveness threat act as antecedents, and outgroup attitudes as consequences, of social identity complexity. In both studies, contact was positively, and distinctiveness threat negatively, associated with complex multiple ingroup perceptions, whereas respondents with more complex identity structures also reported more favorable outgroup attitudes. Social identity complexity also mediated the effects of contact and distinctiveness threat on attitudes. This research highlights that the extent to which individuals perceive their multiple ingroups in more or less complex and differentiated ways is of central importance to understanding intergroup phenomena.

Recent research has documented the intergroup sensitivity effect (ISE) whereby people respond more favorably to internal versus external criticism of their group. The present studies examine the reactions of bystanders who do not belong to the criticized group and whose reactions are therefore more likely to be informed by social conventions than by defensiveness. Studies 1 and 2 presented British participants with criticisms of Australians, manipulating their ostensible source. These British bystanders exhibited the ISE, responding more favorably to the speaker and comments when the critic was Australian rather than non-Australian. These responses were driven by the perceived motives of speakers rather than their level of experience with the group (Study 2). Study 3 provides direct evidence that internal criticism is more conventionally acceptable than is external criticism.

The authors extend previous research on the effects of metastereotype activation on outgroup helping by examining in more detail the role of group impression management motives and by studying direct helping (i.e., helping the outgroup believed to hold a negative view of the ingroup). Data from three experiments provided full support for the communicative nature of direct outgroup helping by demonstrating that outgroup helping in response to a negative metastereotype was predicted by participants' concern for the image of their ingroup, but not by their self-image concerns. Moreover, group image concerns predicted outgroup helping but not ingroup helping and predicted outgroup helping only when a negative metastereotype was activated, compared with a positive metastereotype, or a (negative or positive) autostereotype. The results also ruled out an alternative explanation in terms of denying the self-relevance of the metastereotype.

In recent years, the relationship between group identification and individual mental health has attracted the attention of researchers. Through referring to the relevant literatures, we demonstrate that identification with different types of groups, including nations, countries, schools or families, and number of identified groups are significantly associated with individuals’ mental health. On the one hand, motivation to identify with groups and group evaluation moderate the association between group identification and individuals’ mental health. On the other hand, the relationship between group identification and individuals’ mental health are mediated by self-esteem, social support, perceived personal control and attribution styles. In the future, multiple methods should be used in the further study on moderating variables and mechanisms for the relationship between group identification and individual mental health.

近年来, 群体认同与个体心理健康的关系得到了研究者的关注。本研究通过对相关文献的梳理与归纳发现：民族、国家、学校、家庭等不同种类群体的认同, 群体认同数量与个体心理健康的关系显著; 群体认同与个体心理健康之间的关系受群体认同动机和个体对群体评价的调节, 并依赖于自尊、社会支持、控制知觉、归因方式等因素的中介; 未来应利用多种方法继续研究群体认同与个体心理健康关系的调节变量与作用机制。

Extant research suggests that targets' emotion expressions automatically evoke similar affect in perceivers. The authors hypothesized that the automatic impact of emotion expressions depends on group membership. In Experiments 1 and 2, an affective priming paradigm was used to measure immediate and preconscious affective responses to same-race or other-race emotion expressions. In Experiment 3, spontaneous vocal affect was measured as participants described the emotions of an ingroup or outgroup sports team fan. In these experiments, immediate and spontaneous affective responses depended on whether the emotional target was ingroup or outgroup. Positive responses to fear expressions and negative responses to joy expressions were observed in outgroup perceivers, relative to ingroup perceivers. In Experiments 4 and 5, discrete emotional responses were examined. In a lexical decision task (Experiment 4), facial expressions of joy elicited fear in outgroup perceivers, relative to ingroup perceivers. In contrast, facial expressions of fear elicited less fear in outgroup than in ingroup perceivers. In Experiment 5, felt dominance mediated emotional responses to ingroup and outgroup vocal emotion. These data support a signal-value model in which emotion expressions signal environmental conditions.