对被污名化的外群体而言,坏强于好:个体对群体泛化实验中群体间价态不对称的元分析检验。

IF 7.7 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Personality and Social Psychology Review Pub Date : 2019-02-01 Epub Date: 2018-02-23 DOI:10.1177/1088868317753504
Stefania Paolini, Kylie McIntyre
{"title":"对被污名化的外群体而言,坏强于好:个体对群体泛化实验中群体间价态不对称的元分析检验。","authors":"Stefania Paolini,&nbsp;Kylie McIntyre","doi":"10.1177/1088868317753504","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Theories of risk aversion, epistemic defense, and ingroup enhancement converge in predicting greater impact of negative (vs. positive) experiences with outgroup members on generalized evaluations of stigmatized outgroups. However, they diverge in predictions for admired outgroups. Past tests have focused on negative outgroups using correlational designs without a control group. Consequently, they have not distinguished between alternative explanations or ascertained the direction of causality/generalization, and they have suffered from self-selection biases. These limitations were redressed by a meta-analysis of experimental research on individual-to-group generalization with positive and negative outgroups (59 tests; 3,012 participants). Controlling for modest confounds, the meta-analysis found a generalization advantage of negative experiences for stigmatized outgroups and a generalization advantage of positive experiences for admired outgroups. These results highlight the centrality of valenced expectations about outgroups, consistent with epistemic defense and ingroup enhancement and inconsistent with risk aversion. Implications for positive changes in intergroup dynamics are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48386,"journal":{"name":"Personality and Social Psychology Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.7000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1088868317753504","citationCount":"52","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bad Is Stronger Than Good for Stigmatized, but Not Admired Outgroups: Meta-Analytical Tests of Intergroup Valence Asymmetry in Individual-to-Group Generalization Experiments.\",\"authors\":\"Stefania Paolini,&nbsp;Kylie McIntyre\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1088868317753504\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Theories of risk aversion, epistemic defense, and ingroup enhancement converge in predicting greater impact of negative (vs. positive) experiences with outgroup members on generalized evaluations of stigmatized outgroups. However, they diverge in predictions for admired outgroups. Past tests have focused on negative outgroups using correlational designs without a control group. Consequently, they have not distinguished between alternative explanations or ascertained the direction of causality/generalization, and they have suffered from self-selection biases. These limitations were redressed by a meta-analysis of experimental research on individual-to-group generalization with positive and negative outgroups (59 tests; 3,012 participants). Controlling for modest confounds, the meta-analysis found a generalization advantage of negative experiences for stigmatized outgroups and a generalization advantage of positive experiences for admired outgroups. These results highlight the centrality of valenced expectations about outgroups, consistent with epistemic defense and ingroup enhancement and inconsistent with risk aversion. Implications for positive changes in intergroup dynamics are discussed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48386,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Personality and Social Psychology Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1088868317753504\",\"citationCount\":\"52\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Personality and Social Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868317753504\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2018/2/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personality and Social Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868317753504","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/2/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 52

摘要

风险规避理论、认知防御理论和内群体增强理论在预测与外群体成员的消极(与积极)经历对被污名化的外群体的广义评价的更大影响方面趋于一致。然而,他们在对受人尊敬的外围群体的预测上存在分歧。过去的测试主要集中在负面外群体,使用相关设计,没有对照组。因此,他们不能区分不同的解释,也不能确定因果关系/概括的方向,而且他们遭受了自我选择偏见的折磨。通过对具有正外群和负外群的个体对群体概化实验研究的荟萃分析,纠正了这些局限性(59项试验;3012名参与者)。控制适度混淆,荟萃分析发现,负面经历对被污名化的外群体具有泛化优势,而积极经历对受赞赏的外群体具有泛化优势。这些结果突出了外群体价值预期的中心地位,与认知防御和内群体增强一致,与风险厌恶不一致。讨论了群体间动态积极变化的含义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Bad Is Stronger Than Good for Stigmatized, but Not Admired Outgroups: Meta-Analytical Tests of Intergroup Valence Asymmetry in Individual-to-Group Generalization Experiments.

Theories of risk aversion, epistemic defense, and ingroup enhancement converge in predicting greater impact of negative (vs. positive) experiences with outgroup members on generalized evaluations of stigmatized outgroups. However, they diverge in predictions for admired outgroups. Past tests have focused on negative outgroups using correlational designs without a control group. Consequently, they have not distinguished between alternative explanations or ascertained the direction of causality/generalization, and they have suffered from self-selection biases. These limitations were redressed by a meta-analysis of experimental research on individual-to-group generalization with positive and negative outgroups (59 tests; 3,012 participants). Controlling for modest confounds, the meta-analysis found a generalization advantage of negative experiences for stigmatized outgroups and a generalization advantage of positive experiences for admired outgroups. These results highlight the centrality of valenced expectations about outgroups, consistent with epistemic defense and ingroup enhancement and inconsistent with risk aversion. Implications for positive changes in intergroup dynamics are discussed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
19.00
自引率
1.90%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Title: Personality and Social Psychology Review (PSPR) Journal Overview: Official journal of SPSP, the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc. Premiere outlet for original theoretical papers and conceptual review articles in all areas of personality and social psychology Features stimulating conceptual pieces identifying new research directions and comprehensive review papers providing integrative frameworks for existing theory and research programs Topics Covered: Attitudes and Social Cognition: Examines the inner workings of the human mind in understanding, evaluating, and responding to the social environment Interpersonal and Group Processes: Explores patterns of interaction and interdependence characterizing everyday human functioning Intergroup Relations: Investigates determinants of prejudice, conflict, cooperation, and harmonious relationships between social groups Personality and Individual Differences: Focuses on causes, assessment, structures, and processes giving rise to human variation Biological and Cultural Influences: Studies the biological and cultural mediation of social psychological and personality processes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信