In-group Favoritism
In-group Favoritism - Related Videos
08:01
Visualizing Proteins and Macromolecular Complexes by Negative Stain EM: from Grid Preparation to Image Acquisition
0 Views •
Cited by 137 •
2011
Visualizing protein samples by negative stain electron microscopy (EM) has become a popular structural analysis method. It is useful for quantitative structural analysis, such as calculating a 3D reconstruction of the molecules being studied, and also for qualitative examination of the quality of protein preparations. In this article we present detailed protocols for preparing the EM grids, staining the sample and visualizing the sample in an electron microscope. Novice users can follow these...
07:20
Human Colonoid Monolayers to Study Interactions Between Pathogens, Commensals, and Host Intestinal Epithelium
0 Views •
Cited by 45 •
2019
Here, we present a protocol to culture human enteroid or colonoid monolayers that have intact barrier function to study host epithelial-microbiota interactions at the cellular and biochemical level.
08:25
Advanced 3D Liver Models for In vitro Genotoxicity Testing Following Long-Term Nanomaterial Exposure
0 Views •
Cited by 21 •
2020
This procedure was established to be used for developing advanced 3D hepatic cultures in vitro, which can provide a more physiologically relevant assessment of the genotoxic hazards associated with nanomaterial exposures over both an acute or long-term, repeated dose regimes.
09:15
Creating the Minimal Group Paradigm
0 Views •
2023
Source: Julian Wills & Jay Van Bavel—New York University The study of intergroup relations, such as prejudice, conflict, and discrimination, has always been a central topic in social psychology. Does discrimination stem from competition with other groups, a history of conflict, or derogatory stereotypes? Despite an abundance of real-world examples, the ingredients that lead to intergroup discrimination are often unclear. To help solve this problem, a group of psychologists created "minimal...
01:31
In- and Out-Groups
0 Views •
2020
People all belong to a gender, race, age, and social economic group. These groups provide a powerful source of our identity and self-esteem (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) and serve as our in-groups. An in-group is a group that we identify with or see ourselves as belonging to. A group that we don’t belong to, an out-group, is a group that we view as fundamentally different from us. For example, if you are female, your gender in-group includes all females, and your gender out-group includes all...
FAQs
Social categorization organizes people, including the self, into perceived groups. Once these categories become meaningful, group membership can influence self-esteem, norms, attention, and judgments. Those changes may shift how people evaluate others, decide whom to trust, or distribute resources, creating different treatment of in-group and out-group members even when the category itself has little objective importance.
The process does not always require longstanding relationships, shared history, or substantial differences between groups. Psychology research shows that even arbitrarily formed categories can make group membership relevant to judgments and allocation decisions. This finding helps isolate the influence of categorization itself and demonstrates how quickly perceived group boundaries can affect social evaluation and behavior.
These processes can reinforce one another. Group membership may connect social evaluation with self-esteem, make group-specific norms more influential, direct attention toward category-relevant information, and shape judgments about other people. Together, they help explain why favoritism can appear in evaluation, trust, and resource allocation rather than being limited to a single type of interpersonal decision.
A basic research approach compares responses to people identified as belonging to an in-group with responses to out-group members. Researchers can examine evaluations, trust, and resource allocation after participants are placed into social categories, including arbitrary ones. Comparing these outcomes helps determine whether group classification changes treatment and clarifies how categorization relates to broader intergroup bias.
This area connects individual judgments with major intergroup processes. Findings can contribute to explanations of prejudice, cooperation, and conflict by showing how perceived group membership influences social treatment. The same framework also helps psychologists examine how people respond across group boundaries, making it relevant to both everyday interactions and research on relationships between social groups.
Applications extend to diversity initiatives, organizational decision-making, and education. Researchers can use the underlying findings to identify situations in which group boundaries may produce unfair treatment and to design interventions aimed at promoting fairer treatment across those boundaries. The topic is therefore relevant wherever evaluation, trust, cooperation, or resource decisions involve people from different social groups.