Brad Pinter

Beyond the group mind: a quantitative review of the interindividual-intergroup discontinuity effect.

This quantitative review of 130 comparisons of interindividual and intergroup interactions in the context of mixed-motive situations reveals that intergroup interactions are generally more competitive than interindividual interactions. The authors identify 4 moderators of this interindividual-intergroup discontinuity effect, each based on the theoretical perspective that the discontinuity effect flows from greater fear and greed in intergroup relative to interindividual interactions. Results reveal that each moderator shares a unique association with the magnitude of the discontinuity effect. The discontinuity effect is larger when (a) participants interact with an opponent whose behavior is unconstrained by the experimenter or constrained by the experimenter to be cooperative rather than constrained by the experimenter to be reciprocal, (b) group members make a group decision rather than individual decisions, (c) unconstrained communication between participants is present rather than absent, and (d) conflict of interest is severe rather than mild.

Interindividual-intergroup discontinuity reduction through the anticipation of future interaction.

Consistent with the role of a long-term perspective in reducing the tendency of intergroup relations to be more competitive than interindividual relations in the context of noncorrespondent outcomes, an experiment demonstrated that anticipated future interaction reduced intergroup but not interindividual competitiveness. Further results indicated that the effect was present only for groups composed of members high in abstractness (Openness-Intellect on the Big 5 Inventory and Intuition on the Myers-Briggs Type Inventory) who trusted their opponents.

Interindividual-Intergroup Discontinuity as a Function of Trust and Categorization: The Paradox of Expected Cooperation

Two experiments used a 3-choice variation of the prisoners dilemma game to explore the paradoxical implications of expected cooperation of other groups and individuals for competitiveness and cooperativeness. Experiment 1 found that an experimental manipulation of opponent trustworthiness influenced the tendency of both groups and individuals to cooperate but had no significant effect on the tendency of groups and individuals to compete--possibly because of the perceived unfairness of competing with a trustworthy other. Experiment 2 found that an experimental manipulation of categorization increased the tendency of same-category groups and individuals to cooperate (as in Experiment 1) and also increased the tendency of same-category groups, but not individuals, to compete (unlike in Experiment 1). It was further found that the tendency of same-category groups to compete more than same-category individuals was relatively stronger for participants high in guilt proneness.

Clarifying the Role of the “Other” Category in the Self-Esteem IAT

A. Karpinski (2004) recently criticized Implicit Association Test (IAT) measures of self-esteem, arguing that their measurements of self-associations are compromised by their contrasting self with a putatively extremely negative second category, the nonspecific other. The present data show, to the contrary, that the nonspecific other category in the self-esteem IAT is near neutral in valence. Validity of the self-esteem IAT is most appropriately assessed by examining its correlations with conceptually related measures. That has been done in several previous studies that are reviewed here. The nonspecific other category is only one of several choices for representing the concept of other in self-esteem IATs. Choice of the appropriate other category to contrast with self in self-esteem IATs should be guided by the needs of the research question being addressed.

Reduction of interindividual-intergroup discontinuity: the role of leader accountability and proneness to guilt.

Two experiments contrasted interactions between group leaders with interactions between individuals in a mixed-motive setting. Consistent with the idea that being accountable to the in-group implies normative pressure to benefit the in-group, Experiment 1 found that accountable leaders were more competitive than individuals. Consistent with the idea that being unaccountable to the in-group implies normative pressure to be cooperative and that high guilt proneness provides motivation to be moral, Experiment 2 found that when guilt proneness was high, unaccountable leaders were less competitive than accountable leaders and did not differ significantly from individuals. In other words, the robust interindividual-intergroup discontinuity effect was eliminated when groups had unaccountable leaders who were high in guilt proneness.

A comparison of minimal group induction procedures

For 40 years researchers have studied minimal groups using a variety of induction procedures which, surprisingly, have never been formally evaluated. This article reports two experiments that compared minimal group induction procedures based on: (1) memorization of novel ingroup names; (2) an imagination instruction; (3) random assignment; and (4) false feedback from painting preferences. The memorization procedure produced the largest ingroup favoritism effects on implicit measures of attraction and identification, whereas all procedures produced comparable ingroup favoritism effects on explicit measures of attraction and identification and bonus money allocation. The memorization procedure is recommended as a practical and effective minimal group induction procedure, particularly in cases in which implicit assessments are of primary interest.

Two Sides to Self-protection: Self-improvement Strivings and Feedback from Close Relationships Eliminate Mnemic Neglect

People selectively forget feedback that threatens central self-conceptions, a phenomenon labeled mnemic neglect. Such forgetting serves to protect the self-system, but its rigid application may be associated with liabilities such as failing to learn about ones weaknesses. Two experiments tested the extent to which mnemic neglect is rigid or flexible. In Experiment 1, where self-improvement strivings were primed, mnemic neglect was absent: threatening and non-threatening feedback was recalled equally. In Experiment 2, participants received feedback either from a stranger or a close relationship. Participants recalled poorly threatening stranger feedback but recalled well threatening close-relationship feedback. Self-protection is flexible and strategic. Individuals recall well self-threatening feedback when they are concerned with self-improvement and when the feedback has ramifications for long-term relationships.

Exploring Implicit Partisanship: Enigmatic (But Genuine) Group Identification and Attraction

Briefly studying names of four members of a hypothetical group produces identification with and attraction to that group, a finding labeled implicit partisanship (IP; Greenwald, Pickrell, & Farnham, 2002). The original demonstration of IP used human groups in a competitive context. Experiments I and 2 varied these procedures by using, respectively, a cooperative intergroup context and non-human group members (fictitious car brands). Neither of these variations eliminated the IP effect, indicating unanticipated robustness. Experiment 3 revealed a substantial reduction of the IP effects magnitude when the studied names represented a rival university. The reduction of IP through identity opposition supports the interpretation that spontaneous group identification effects carry psychological significance that is comparable to that of more ordinary group identifications.

Self-Interest Masquerading as Ingroup Beneficence: Altruistic Rationalization and Interindividual–Intergroup Discontinuity

An altruistic rationalization explanation of the interindividual–intergroup discontinuity effect proposes that intergroup interactions are more competitive than interactions between individuals because group membership creates an opportunity to rationalize selfishly motivated competitiveness as being enacted for the ingroup’s sake. To test this explanation, we compared participants whose decisions did not influence the earnings of other participants, and who therefore had no opportunity for altruistic rationalization of competitiveness, with participants whose decisions did influence the earnings of other participants, and who therefore did have an opportunity for altruistic rationalization. Competition in a prisoner’s dilemma game was greater when opportunities for altruistic rationalization were present, but this effect was significant only for participants who were low in dispositional proneness to guilt, a trait that motivates prosocial behavior. In other words, we found that dispositionally selfish individuals were most likely to become more competitive when opportunities for altruistic rationalization were present. These findings provide evidence for an additional mechanism driving the discontinuity effect.

Uncovering the Multifaceted-Self in the Domain of Negative Traits On the Muted Expression of Negative Self-Knowledge

The multifaceted-self effect is the ascription of more traits to self than others. Consensus is that this effect occurs for positive, but not negative, traits. We propose that the effect also occurs for negative traits when they can be endorsed with low intensity (“I am a little bit lazy”), thereby circumventing self-protection concerns. In Experiment 1, the multifaceted-self effect occurred for positive, but not negative, traits on a high-intensity trait-endorsement measure. However, it occurred irrespective of trait valence on a low-intensity trait-endorsement measure. In Experiment 2, the multifaceted-self effect occurred for positive, but not negative, traits on a strong trait-endorsement measure. However, it occurred irrespective of trait valence on a diminuted trait-endorsement measure—a finding conceptually replicated in Experiment 3. In Experiment 4, participants spontaneously adopted diminutive terms (“a little bit”) when describing their negative traits. Individuals reconcile negative self-knowledge with self-protection concerns by expressing it in muted terms.