China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Stereotyping and The Development of Clinicians’ Professional Identities
Published in Kenneth I. Mavor, Michael J. Platow, Boris Bizumic, Self and Social Identity in Educational Contexts, 2017
Bryan Burford, Harriet E. S. Rosenthal-Stott
The creation of a team (or other collection of individuals) consisting of members of distinct outgroups (e.g., operating room teams) can result in the adoption of a common superordinate identity; for example, ‘operating room team member’ or, more generally, ‘healthcare professional’. A common ingroup identity can facilitate leadership and reduce conflict (Brewer, 2000; Gaertner et al., 2000; Haslam and Platow, 2001). However, a common ingroup identity may also have the ironic effect of increasing intergroup bias. If different subordinate groups hold different stereotypes of the superordinate group – for example, Democrats and Republicans having different stereotypes of ‘American’ – then the effectiveness of the common identity is reduced when the superordinate identity is salient compared to when it is not (Rutchick and Eccleston, 2010). In the clinical context, this may mean that if doctors and nurses do not share a common view of ‘healthcare professional’ or physicians and surgeons do not share a common view of ‘doctors’, then the common ingroup identity will not have the desired effect of reducing intergroup conflict.
Us versus Them: The Debates on the Legislation of Same-Sex Marriage (1994 – 2015) in Taiwan
Published in Journal of Homosexuality, 2022
Extending from the previous research in support for same-sex marriage, we further linked implicit psychological states to the themes identified in the arguments because little attention has been paid to individuals’ implicit psychological states regarding homosexuality and same-sex marriage. In this study, we observed that news using first plural pronouns, probably reflecting the shared identity of individuals regardless of their sexual orientations, tends to emphasize that same-sex marriage is the basic human right, which, in turn, supports same-sex marriage. In addition, news using differentiation words tends to show heterosexual preference and reduces support for same-sex marriage. These two sets of findings are in line with the common ingroup identity model (CIIM, Gaertner, Dovidio, Anastasio, Bachman, & Rust, 1993). By applying CIIM in this context and transforming the cognitive representation of the memberships from two groups (heterosexuals vs. homosexuals) into one group (human beings), individuals’ intergroup bias could be reduced and a favorable attitude toward same-sex marriage could be shown. By insisting on the categorization of heterosexuals vs. homosexuals, ingroup bias (such as heterosexual preference) is shown, and support for same-sex marriage is reduced.
When “They” Become “Us”: The Effect of Time and Ingroup Identity on Perceptions of Gay and Lesbian Group Members
Published in Journal of Homosexuality, 2019
Amber K. Lupo, Michael A. Zárate
Contact with outgroup members may facilitate social categorization processes that lead to recategorizing these individuals into a collective ingroup. Individuals are motivated to maintain positive perceptions of their ingroup and its members (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). Favorable ingroup perceptions are then extended to former outgroup members. The “common ingroup identity” model proposes that contact with the outgroup leads to reduced prejudice when cognitive representations of the outgroup are integrated into a more inclusive, superordinate ingroup (Dovidio & Gaertner, 2000). For example, one can categorize individuals into separate racial ingroups and outgroups or into an “American” superordinate group. Research consistently demonstrates that experimental manipulations that induce positive outgroup contact and perceptions of an inclusive group identity reduce outgroup bias (Dovidio, Gaertner, Isen, & Lowrance, 1995; Dovidio, Gaertner, & Saguy, 2009; Gaertner et al., 1999). This model predicts that heterosexuals’ attitudes toward gay and lesbian individuals will be more positive when group boundaries shift to include the gay and lesbian outgroup into a common ingroup.
Subverting Heteronormativity: An Intervention to Foster Positive Attitudes Toward Homosexuality Among Indian College Students
Published in Journal of Homosexuality, 2019
Kanika K. Ahuja, Megha Dhillon, Anisha Juneja, Siksha Deepak, Garima Srivastava
Several kinds of cognitive and emotional processes have been hypothesized as operating during contact. In a meta-analytic study, Pettigrew and Tropp (2008) found that contact can reduce prejudice by enhancing knowledge about the outgroup, reducing anxiety about intergroup contact, and increasing empathy. Gaertner, Dovidio, Anastasio, and Rust (1993) proposed that contact facilitates more harmonious relations in part because it can contribute to the development of a common ingroup identity. This involves a recategorization of outgroup members. Thus intergroup bias can be decreased if people can be induced to shift their representations away from two separate groups (“us”: heterosexuals and “them”: gay and lesbian) to a more inclusive common identity (“we”: e.g., young/students). From Brewer and Miller’s (1984) point of view, contact can reduce bias because it contributes to the processes of de-categorization and personalization. In de-categorization, ingroup and outgroup identities become less salient, and there is an awareness of the individual’s distinctiveness (for example, being brave, outspoken). Of these distinct qualities people may also identify some that are self-relevant (e.g., feels hurt like me). The latter is called personalization. These processes are most likely to occur when contact takes place under appropriate conditions, as we hope was the case in the present study. De-categorization and personalization are likely to undermine the validity of outgroup stereotypes and reduce intergroup bias as also reduce out group homogeneity (Brewer & Miller, 1984; Miller, Brewer, & Edwards, 1985).