Reducing Intergroup Bias

Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Reducing Intergroup Bias: The Common Ingroup Identity Model. Psychology Press.

Type

Book

Intellectual base

Review or monograph

Year

2000

DOI

10.4324/9781315804576

ISBN

9781317774952

DOI registrant

Taylor & Francis (Psychology Press)

Link

https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315804576

Cited from

psychology, rhetoric

Cited by

4 citations across 4 artifacts.

Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.

Primes

• Identification
  • The intervention this licenses is structural — organizers construct a superordinate identity and cross-cutting categories to widen the identification boundary, pulling in people whose existing self-concepts did not initially include the movement.

    This sourceShows that constructing a superordinate identity and using cross-cutting categories widens the in-group boundary — the structural intervention for broadening identification.

• In-Group / Out-Group
  • The same structural lever, boundary salience, runs in both directions, and recognizing it lets a reasoner anticipate both the de-biasing and the weaponizing uses of the partition from a single principle.

    This sourceDevelops the Common In-Group Identity Model and dual-identity extension: superordinate categorization reduces bias, but pairing it with preserved subordinate identification reduces both bias and distinctiveness-threat backlash.

• Social Identity Theory
  • Dual-identity models (e.g., Gaertner and Dovidio's (2000) Common In-Group Identity Model, Hornsey & Hogg's subgroup-model) offer a structural alternative to superordinate-identity suppression or subordinate-identity suppression: maintain both identities but structure them hierarchically and reduce threat between them.

    This sourceDevelops the Common In-Group Identity Model and dual-identity extension: superordinate categorization reduces bias, but pairing it with preserved subordinate identification reduces both bias and distinctiveness-threat backlash.

Mechanisms

• Shared Mission Framing
  • Its strength is that a credible common purpose lowers the sense that cooperation means losing yourself: a well-built "we" can convert opposed camps into subgroups of one broader membership, which is one of the most economical ways to reduce us-versus-them bias.

    This sourceExplains that recategorizing opposed groups as members of one more inclusive group can reduce intergroup bias.

Verification

Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.

Does it back the claim? Not recorded. Neither this nor any other of the 4 citations of this work carries a recorded support check.

Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.

See how references were verified.

Links previously used in the corpus

Before the registry existed this work was also linked 1 other way.

• https://search.worldcat.org/title/43707091 ×1

Registry ID ref:9bda31268142 · see in the full table