Common Ingroups and Complex Identities: Routes to Reducing Bias in Multiple Category Contexts

Richard J. Crisp, Rhiannon N. Turner, Miles Hewstone

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

18 Citations (Scopus)
279 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

We tested the hypothesis that evaluative bias in common ingroup contexts versus crossed categorization contexts can be associated with two distinct underlying processes. We reasoned that in common ingroup contexts, self-categorization, but not perceived complexity, would be positively related to intergroup bias. In contrast, in crossed categorization contexts, perceived complexity, but not self-categorization, would be negatively related to intergroup bias. In two studies, and in line with predictions, we found that while self-categorization and intergroup bias were related in common ingroup contexts, this was not the case in crossed categorization contexts. Moreover, we found that perceived category complexity, and not self-categorization, predicted bias in crossed categorization contexts. We discuss the implications of these findings for models of social categorization and intergroup bias.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)32-46
Number of pages15
JournalGroup Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice
Volume14
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2010

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Applied Psychology
  • Social Psychology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Common Ingroups and Complex Identities: Routes to Reducing Bias in Multiple Category Contexts'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this