Exportar Publicação

Alexandre, J., Waldzus, S. & Wenzel, M. (2016). Complex inclusive categories of positive and negative valence and prototypicality claims inasymmetric intergroup relations. British Journal of Social Psychology. 55 (3), 457-483

J. C. Alexandre et al.,  "Complex inclusive categories of positive and negative valence and prototypicality claims inasymmetric intergroup relations", in British Journal of Social Psychology, vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 457-483, 2016

@article{alexandre2016_1732212095016,
	author = "Alexandre, J. and Waldzus, S. and Wenzel, M.",
	title = "Complex inclusive categories of positive and negative valence and prototypicality claims inasymmetric intergroup relations",
	journal = "British Journal of Social Psychology",
	year = "2016",
	volume = "55",
	number = "3",
	doi = "10.1111/bjso.12148",
	pages = "457-483",
	url = "http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjso.12148/abstract"
}

TY  - JOUR
TI  - Complex inclusive categories of positive and negative valence and prototypicality claims inasymmetric intergroup relations
T2  - British Journal of Social Psychology
VL  - 55
IS  - 3
AU  - Alexandre, J.
AU  - Waldzus, S.
AU  - Wenzel, M.
PY  - 2016
SP  - 457-483
SN  - 0144-6665
DO  - 10.1111/bjso.12148
UR  - http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjso.12148/abstract
AB  - Based on the premise that groups’ social standing and regard depend on theirprototypicality for superordinate categories, minorities can be understood to sufferfrom the fact that they are considered as less prototypical than majorities. Previousresearch has shown that complex (vs. simple) representations of superordinatecategories can reduce majority members’ tendency to perceive their in-group as moreprototypical than the out-group. The current research tested whether such complexrepresentations also increase minorities’ own perceived relative in-group prototypicality(RIP), leading to more balanced prototypicality judgments from both majorities andminorities. In Study 1 (N = 76), an experiment with two arti?cial groups of unequal status,a complex representation of a superordinate category increased the comparatively lowRIP of the lower status subgroup. Consistently, in Study 2 (N = 192), a correlational studywith natural groups, the relation between perceived complexity of the superordinatecategory and RIP was positive for members of the lower status group but negative formembers of the higher status comparison group. In Study 3 (N = 160), an experimentwith natural groups, a more complex representation of the superordinate category ledlower and higher status groups to perceive greater equality in terms of relativeprototypicality not only for a positive but also for a negatively valued superordinatecategory. These results have important implications for the understanding of socialchange: As superordinate identity complexity implies that included subgroups are moreequally prototypical, it offers a normative alternative that helps minorities to challengeasymmetric status relations vis-?a-vis majorities, but also promotes hope that majoritiesshow bipartisanship in supporting such social change
ER  -