Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Defending or Challenging the Status Quo: Position Effects on Biased Intergroup Perceptions
Stockholm University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
2014 (English)In: The Journal of Social and Political Psychology, E-ISSN 2195-3325, Vol. 2, no 1, 77-97 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The default ideological position is status quo maintaining, and challenging the status quo is associated with increased efforts and risks. Nonetheless, some people choose to challenge the status quo. Therefore, to challenge the status quo should imply a strong belief in one’s position as the correct one, and thus efforts may be undertaken to undermine the position of others. Study 1 (N = 311) showed that challengers undermined, by ascribing more externality and less rationality, the position of defenders to a larger extent than defenders did of challengers’ position. Studies 2 (N = 135) and 3 (N= 109) tested if these effects were driven by the implied minority status of the challenging position. Results revealed no effects of experimentally manipulated numerical status, but challengers were again more biased than defenders. Study 3 also revealed that challengers felt more negatively toward their opponents (possibly due to greater social identification with like-minded others), and these negative emotions in turn predicted biased attributions. Results are important as they add to the understanding of how intergroup conflict may arise, providing explanations for why challengers are less tolerant of others’ point of view.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2014. Vol. 2, no 1, 77-97 p.
Keyword [en]
intergroup biases, status quo, position effects, numerical status
National Category
Psychology
Research subject
Psychology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-108462DOI: 10.5964/jspp.v2i1.158OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-108462DiVA: diva2:758639
Available from: 2014-10-27 Created: 2014-10-27 Last updated: 2017-12-05Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Social and cognitive biases in large group decision settings
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Social and cognitive biases in large group decision settings
2011 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

The present thesis consists of three studies on the effects of group membership in large group decisions. The overall aim was to contribute to understanding how individuals react when decisions are made in large groups. We explored consequences of procedural justice concerns within such groups. In Study I we investigated how different decision procedures and issue importance affect perceptions of others who agree and disagree with the individual on a potentially important issue.  Individuals attributed more positive reasons for attitudes of those who agree as opposed to disagree with themselves, whereas disagreers were attributed more negative reasons. The asymmetry was moderated by decision form, and issue importance. The attitudes concerned attitudes towards potential new policies. In Study II we investigated differences in participants’ perceptions of others depending on own position towards the new policy. Challengers of the status quo advocating a change in the existing policy, were more biased when judging others than were defenders of the status quo. This suggests that challengers are less tolerant of defenders’ point of view. This effect was not affected by perceptions of minority status among the challengers. In Study III we looked at individual group members’ cognitive restructuring of a preferred decision alternative, and how it differs between decision conditions when the decision-maker is affiliated to own ingroup or not. Results showed that individuals restructure the attractiveness of their preferred alternative in group decisions similarly to what has been previously found in individual decision-making. The magnitude of restructuring was greatest when ingroup members decided for the group. However, this effect was moderated by identification with the ingroup, such that those who identified themselves with the ingroup restructured their preferred alternative more when ingroup members decided as opposed to when outgroup authorities decided.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: Department of Psychology, Stockholm University, 2011. 65 p.
Keyword
large group decision-making, social identity, procedural justice, intergroup biases, attitudes, status quo position, cognitive restructuring, post-decision consolidation
National Category
Psychology
Research subject
Psychology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:su:diva-60314 (URN)978-91-7447-320-9 (ISBN)
Public defence
2011-09-29, David Magnussonsalen (U31), hus 8, Frescati Hagväg 8, Stockholm, 13:00 (English)
Opponent
Supervisors
Note

At the time of doctoral defense, the following paper was unpublished and had a status as follows: Paper 2: Submitted.

Available from: 2011-09-07 Created: 2011-08-15 Last updated: 2014-10-28Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Lindholm, Torun
By organisation
Department of Psychology
In the same journal
The Journal of Social and Political Psychology
Psychology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 84 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf