The (Il)legitimacy of ingroup bias - From social reality to social resistance

By Russell Spears, Jolanda Jetten, Bertjan Doosje. 2001

154 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7ba7dd1fe9bf77c6fe3393853972e7c94cd32e84

How researchers see this paper

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

Citations in the corpus

Beyond dependence: An identity approach to social power and domination (2006, background): “Many social theorists have rejected the attribution of this neglect to false consciousness, describing the concept as elitist and unfalsifiable (e.g. Beetham, 1991; Clegg, 1989; Haugaard, 2001; Mumby, 1997; Scott, 1990; Willis, 1977; for a social psychological critique, see Spears et al., 2001).”
A quarter century of system justification theory: Questions, answers, criticisms, and societal applications (2018, background): “Although Spears et al. (2001) argued, on the basis of social identity theory, that it is very rare for the disadvantaged to internalize a sense of inferiority, studies using the Implicit AssociationTest (IAT) andother implicit methods that mitigate social desirability concerns to at least some…”
Group virtue: the importance of morality (vs. competence and sociability) in the positive evaluation of in-groups. (2007, background): “As such, ingroup competence is widely considered “status defining”—the basis of a status distinction that favors the in-group over an out-group (for reviews, see Bettencourt et al., 2001; Spears et al., 2001).”
Ethnic group identification and group evaluation among minority and majority groups: testing the multiculturalism hypothesis. (2005, background): “People appear to take socially defined reality into account while giving group ratings (Spears, Jetten, & Doosje, 2001; Spears & Manstead, 1989).”
Identity Dynamics in Occupational Dirty Work: Integrating Social Identity and System Justification Perspectives (2006, background): “…the homogeneity and positive distinctiveness of their group, to be frustrated at their group’s plight and feel hostility toward out-groups, to police their group for signs of disloyalty, and to fight on behalf of their group (see Branscombe and Ellemers 1998, Spears et al. 2001 for reviews).”
Social Identity, System Justification, and Social Dominance: Commentary on Reicher, Jost et al., and Sidanius et al. (2004, background): “First, as we mentioned previously, social identity theory lacks a sophisticated analysis of group power (Sidanius et al., 2004; Spears et al., 2001).”
The psychology of system justification and the palliative function of ideology (2002, background): “Jost, 2001; Jost & Banaji, 1994; Jost & Burgess, 2000) is that such evidence may reflect demand characteristics or impression management rather than genuine internalization on the part of low status group members (e.g., Mullen et al., 1992; Scott, 1990; Spears et al., 2001).”
The effects of being categorised: The interplay between internal and external social identities (2003, unknown): “Importantly, in the anonymous condition, that is when there was no threat of having one’s identity claims disregarded as invalid or not credible, people felt more free to describe themselves in ways that challenge externally imposed category boundaries (see also Spears et al., 2001).”
Intergroup structure and identity management among ethnic minority and majority groups: the interactive effects of perceived stability, legitimacy, and permeability (2008, background): “Tajfel (1981) has argued that the sociostructural characteristics of intergroup relations will not be independent of each other.”
Self and social identity. (2002, background): “Although generally speaking, group members prefer their group to be positively distinct from other groups (Mummendey & Schreiber 1983), for committed group members it may be of paramount importance to establish a distinctive group identity per se (Spears et al. 2001b).”