Derogating black sheep: Individual or group protection?

By Scott Eidelman, M. Biernat. 2003

145 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/674e110aafc326b40983ac74f7094be671f8fa7f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

For Members Only (2014, background): “…members who clearly violate group standards of performance are thought to be motivated by a desire to preserve the positive image of the group and, by extension, to protect the esteem of the derogator (Castano, Paladino, Coull, & Yzerbyt, 2002; Eidelman & Biernat, 2003; Marques et al., 1998).”
Contagion or restitution? When bad apples can motivate ethical behavior (2009, background): “…unfavorable in-group members (e.g., poor performers) more negatively than Contagion or Restitution 11 unfavorable out-group members (Branscombe et al. 1993; Marques et al., 1988), either to protect the group image or to distance themselves from the unfavorable members (Eidelman & Biernat, 2003).”
Vicarious Shame and Guilt (2005, background): “Furthermore, research on the black sheep effect (e.g. Eidelman & Biernat, 2003; Marques, Yzerbyt, & Leyens, 1988) suggests that individuals derogate group members who fail to comply with the norms of the group.”
Ashamed to be an American? The role of identification in predicting vicarious shame for anti-Arab prejudice after 9–11 (2005, background): “sheep effect often only measures attitudes toward the in-group member, recent work shows that individuals will respond to a negative in-group member either by derogating the person or by disidentifying from the group, depending on which option they are given first ( Eidelman & Biernat, 2003 ).”
Revisiting followership through a social identity perspective: the role of collective follower emotion and action (2013, background): “These motivations have, as Eidelman and Biernat (2003) and Ellemers et al. (2002) found, to be both an individual protection strategy to distance the individual from the unfavorable ingroup members (differential derogation) and a means to preserve the salient group identity.”