The Psychology of Prejudice: Ingroup Love or Outgroup Hate?

Journal of Social Issues, Fall, 1999 by Marilynn B. Brewer

Perceived positive interdependence with the outgroup also threatens intergroup differentiation. To the extent that feelings of secure inclusion, ingroup loyalty, and optimal identity are dependent upon the clarity of ingroup boundaries and intergroup distinctions, shared experiences and cooperation with the outgroup threaten the basis for social identification. Particularly for individuals who are exclusively vested in a single group identity, the threat of lost distinctiveness may override the pursuit of superordinate goals and lead to resistance to cooperation (collaboration) even at the cost of ingroup self-interest.

Common Values and Social Comparison

Shared goals may promote intergroup conflict in another way when they are combined with shared values. When two groups are pursuing the same goals or outcomes (including nonmaterial goods and positive values such as world peace and democracy), the potential for competition is enhanced. According to social identity theory, ingroups strive not only for differentiation from outgroups but for positive distinctiveness (Turner, 1975), seeking ingroup-outgroup comparisons that favor the ingroup over other groups. Thus, groups value those characteristics or achievements with respect to which they see themselves as better than the outgroup and also strive to achieve or maintain positive comparisons on dimensions that they value.

Different groups can all achieve positive distinctiveness if they value different things. As long as the ingroup feels superior on dimensions that are important to the group's identity, members can tolerate or acknowledge outgroup superiority on dimensions of lesser importance (Mummendey & Schreiber, 1983; Mummendey & Simon, 1989). However, when groups hold common values and adopt a common measure of relative worth, the search for positive distinctiveness is inevitably a competitive one (Mummendey & Wenzel, 1999). When superordinate goals make mutual social comparison salient, the potential for outgroup derogation and conflict is enhanced (Deschamps & Brown, 1983). Ingroups that are relatively advantaged seek to maintain or exaggerate the positive comparisons that favor their own group (Mullen, Brown, & Smith, 1992) while ingroups that are less advantaged seek to minimize the relative difference or suffer relative deprivation and resentment toward the outgroup (Smith, Spears, & Oyen, 1994; Vanneman & Pettigr ew, 1972).

Power Politics

Moral superiority, fear and distrust of outgroups, and social comparison are all processes that emerge from ingroup maintenance and favoritism and can lead to hostility and conflict between groups even in the absence of realistic conflict over material resources or power. When groups are political entities, however, these processes may be exacerbated through deliberate manipulation by group leaders in the interests of mobilizing collective action to secure or maintain political power. Social differentiation provides the fault lines in any social system that can be exploited for political purposes. When trust is ingroup-based, it is easy to fear control by outsiders; perceived common threat from outgroups increases ingroup cohesion and loyalty; appeals to ingroup interests have greater legitimacy than appeals to personal self-interest. Thus politicization, an important mechanism of social change, can be added to the factors that may contribute to a positive correlation between ingroup love and outgroup hate.