Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gagnon, A.
Right arrow Articles by Bourhis, R. Y.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Gagnon, A.
Right arrow Articles by Bourhis, R. Y.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 22, No. 12, 1289-1301 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/01461672962212009
© 1996 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

Discrimination in the Minimal Group Paradigm: Social Identity or Self-Interest?

Andre Gagnon

Universite du Qjubec en Abitibi-Temiscamingue andre-gagnon{at}uqat.uquebec.ca

Richard Y. Bourhis

Universiti du Queibec a Montreal bourhis.richard{at}uqam.ca

Social identity theory (SIT) proposes that discrimination reflects competition for a positive social identity. In contrast, the behavioral interaction model (BIM) proposes that self-interest and interdependence of fate are at the root of discrimination. Using the minimal group paradigm, 94 undergraduates were randomly categorized as group members in a 2 (Interdependence: autonomous/interdependent) x 2 (In-group Identification: low/high) factorial design. Before distributing resources, autonomous participants were told they would personally receive the maximum number of points in the experiment independently of others' allocations. Interdependent participants received points depending on allocations made by in-group and out-group others. Contrary to BIM, autonomous individuals discriminated as much as interdependent respondents, and discrimination was unrelated to expectation of in-group reciprocity. In line with SIT, high in-group identifiers discriminated more than low in-group identifiers.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Group Processes Intergroup RelationsHome page
J. Sidanius, H. Haley, L. Molina, and F. Pratto
Vladimir's Choice and the Distribution of Social Resources: A Group Dominance Perspective
Group Processes Intergroup Relations, April 1, 2007; 10(2): 257 - 265.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
K. Stroebe, H. F.M. Lodewijkx, and R. Spears
Do Unto Others as They Do Unto You: Reciprocity and Social Identification as Determinants of Ingroup Favoritism
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, June 1, 2005; 31(6): 831 - 845.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Human RelationsHome page
D. Geddes and A. M. Konrad
Demographic Differences and Reactions to Performance Feedback
Human Relations, December 1, 2003; 56(12): 1485 - 1513.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
C. E. Amiot and R. Y. Bourhis
Discrimination and the Positive-Negative Asymmetry Effect: Ideological and Normative Processes
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, May 1, 2003; 29(5): 597 - 608.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
R. J. Crisp, M. Hewstone, and M. Rubin
Does Multiple Categorization Reduce Intergroup Bias?
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, January 1, 2001; 27(1): 76 - 89.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol RevHome page
C. L. Aberson, M. Healy, and V. Romero
Ingroup Bias and Self-Esteem: A Meta-Analysis
Personality and Social Psychology Review, May 1, 2000; 4(2): 157 - 173.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
S. Perreault and R. Y. Bourhis
Ethnocentrism, Social Identification, and Discrimination
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, January 1, 1999; 25(1): 92 - 103.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Group Processes Intergroup RelationsHome page
M. J. Platow, S. Reid, and S. Andrew
Leadership Endorsement: The Role of Distributive and Procedural Behavior in Interpersonal and Intergroup Contexts
Group Processes Intergroup Relations, July 1, 1998; 1(1): 35 - 47.
[Abstract]

Home page
 Group Processes Intergroup RelationsHome page
S. Perreault and R. Y. Bourhis
Social Identification, Interdependence and Discrimination
Group Processes Intergroup Relations, July 1, 1998; 1(1): 49 - 66.
[Abstract]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol RevHome page
M. Rubin and M. Hewstone
Social Identity Theory's Self-Esteem Hypothesis: A Review and Some Suggestions for Clarification
Personality and Social Psychology Review, February 1, 1998; 2(1): 40 - 62.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
R. Singh, W. M. Choo, and L. L. Poh
In-Group Bias and Fair-Mindedness as Strategies of Self-Presentation in Intergroup Perception
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, February 1, 1998; 24(2): 147 - 162.
[Abstract]