• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

最小群体范式中的组间歧视:分类、互惠还是恐惧?

Intergroup discrimination in the minimal group paradigm: categorization, reciprocation, or fear?

作者信息

Gaertner L, Insko C A

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Texas A&M University, College Station 77843-4235, USA.

出版信息

J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000 Jul;79(1):77-94. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.79.1.77.

DOI:10.1037//0022-3514.79.1.77
PMID:10909879
Abstract

H. Tajfel's (1970) minimal group paradigm (MGP) research suggests that social categorization is a sufficient antecedent of ingroup-favoring discrimination. Two experiments examined whether discrimination in the MGP arises from categorization or processes of outcome dependence, that is, ingroup reciprocity and outgroup fear. Experiment 1 unconfounded categorization from outcome dependence. Categorized men discriminated only when dependent on others. Categorized women discriminated regardless of the structure of dependence. Experiment 2 examined dependence on the ingroup versus the outgroup as the locus of male-initiated discrimination. Consistently with an ingroup reciprocity effect, men discriminated when dependent on ingroup, but not outgroup, members. Sex differences are discussed in regard to women's heightened ingroup dependence produced by biological or environmental constraints.

摘要

亨利·塔吉菲尔(1970年)的最小群体范式(MGP)研究表明,社会分类是内群体偏爱歧视的一个充分前提。两项实验考察了MGP中的歧视是源于分类还是结果依赖过程,即内群体互惠和外群体恐惧。实验1将分类与结果依赖区分开来。被分类的男性只有在依赖他人时才会产生歧视。被分类的女性无论依赖结构如何都会产生歧视。实验2考察了作为男性发起歧视场所的对内群体与外群体的依赖。与内群体互惠效应一致,男性在依赖内群体成员而非外群体成员时会产生歧视。针对生物学或环境限制导致女性对内群体的依赖性增强这一情况,讨论了性别差异。

相似文献

1
Intergroup discrimination in the minimal group paradigm: categorization, reciprocation, or fear?最小群体范式中的组间歧视:分类、互惠还是恐惧?
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000 Jul;79(1):77-94. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.79.1.77.
2
Do unto others as they do unto you: reciprocity and social identification as determinants of ingroup favoritism.以其人之道还治其人之身:互惠与社会认同作为内群体偏袒的决定因素。
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2005 Jun;31(6):831-45. doi: 10.1177/0146167204271659.
3
On the immediate consequences of intergroup categorization: activation of approach and avoidance motor behavior toward ingroup and outgroup members.关于群体间分类的直接后果:对 ingroup 和 outgroup 成员的趋近与回避运动行为的激活。 (注:这里“ingroup”和“outgroup”在心理学等领域常分别译为“内群体”和“外群体” ,但原文未翻译这两个词直接保留英文表述,按要求应如此处理)
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2008 Jun;34(6):755-68. doi: 10.1177/0146167208315155. Epub 2008 Apr 3.
4
Ingroup favoritism in cooperation: a meta-analysis.内群体偏好合作:一项元分析。
Psychol Bull. 2014 Nov;140(6):1556-81. doi: 10.1037/a0037737. Epub 2014 Sep 15.
5
When does activating diversity alleviate, when does it increase intergroup bias? An ingroup projection perspective.激活多样性何时会减轻、何时会增加群体间偏见?一种内群体投射视角。
PLoS One. 2017 Jun 5;12(6):e0178738. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0178738. eCollection 2017.
6
Striving for success in outgroup settings: effects of contextually emphasizing ingroup dimensions on stigmatized group members' social identity and performance styles.在外群体环境中追求成功:情境性强调内群体维度对受污名化群体成员社会认同和表现风格的影响。
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2006 May;32(5):576-88. doi: 10.1177/0146167205283336.
7
[Intergroup threat and intragroup interdependence: multiplicity of psychological processes behind ingroup favoritism, and their distinct elicitors].[群体间威胁与群体内相互依赖:内群体偏袒背后心理过程的多样性及其不同诱因]
Shinrigaku Kenkyu. 2009 Aug;80(3):246-51. doi: 10.4992/jjpsy.80.246.
8
I (dis)like the way you (dis)like them: The role of extended contact on social distance and attitudes towards the ingroup.我(不)喜欢你(不)喜欢他们的方式:扩展接触对社会距离和内群体态度的影响。
Br J Soc Psychol. 2021 Jan;60(1):95-120. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12381. Epub 2020 Apr 20.
9
Social identity in adolescence.青少年期的社会认同
J Adolesc. 2001 Oct;24(5):597-609. doi: 10.1006/jado.2000.0392.
10
[Minority versus majority: intergroup discrimination in the minimal group paradigm].[少数群体与多数群体:最小群体范式中的群体间歧视]
Shinrigaku Kenkyu. 1994 Dec;65(5):346-54. doi: 10.4992/jjpsy.65.346.

引用本文的文献

1
Egalitarian norms can deflate identity-bias link in real-life groups.平等主义规范可以削弱现实生活群体中身份偏见的联系。
PLoS One. 2025 Aug 28;20(8):e0330484. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0330484. eCollection 2025.
2
Unequal resource division occurs in the absence of group division and identity.在没有群体划分和身份认同的情况下会出现资源分配不均的情况。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2025 Feb 18;122(7):e2413797122. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2413797122. Epub 2025 Feb 12.
3
Our ways will not change: Future collective continuity increases present prosocial considerations.
我们的方式不会改变:未来的集体延续性会增加当下的亲社会考量。
Br J Soc Psychol. 2025 Jan;64(1):e12847. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12847.
4
Attitude Formation in More- and Less-Complex Social Environments.在复杂程度较高和较低的社会环境中态度的形成。
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2025 Oct;51(10):1987-2001. doi: 10.1177/01461672241235387. Epub 2024 Mar 29.
5
Intergroup bias in punishing behaviors of adults with autism spectrum disorder.自闭症谱系障碍成年人惩罚行为中的群体间偏见。
Front Psychiatry. 2022 Aug 19;13:884529. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.884529. eCollection 2022.
6
ARRMA: An Integrative Theoretical and Mathematical Model of Assumed and Actual Dyadic Behavior.ARRMA:假设和实际二元行为的综合理论与数学模型。
Front Psychol. 2022 Jun 7;13:834796. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.834796. eCollection 2022.
7
Together We can Figure It out: Groups Find Hospitality Robots Easier to Use and Interact With Them More than Individuals.我们携手定能解决问题:研究团队发现,与独自使用相比,人们更易于操作并能与酒店服务机器人进行更多互动。
Front Robot AI. 2021 Oct 25;8:730399. doi: 10.3389/frobt.2021.730399. eCollection 2021.
8
The Emergence of Lying for Reputational Concerns in 5-Year-Olds.5岁儿童出于声誉考虑而说谎的现象初现。
Front Psychol. 2021 Sep 22;12:700695. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.700695. eCollection 2021.
9
Tracking multiple perspectives: Spontaneous computation of what individuals in high entitative groups see.追踪多个视角:高同质性群体中个体所见的自发计算。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2021 Jun;28(3):879-887. doi: 10.3758/s13423-020-01857-x. Epub 2021 Jan 19.
10
Neural processes for live pro-social dialogue between dyads with socioeconomic disparity.具有社会经济差异的二人组之间进行现场亲社会对话的神经过程。
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2020 Oct 8;15(8):875-887. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsaa120.