Ingroup identification and intergroup conflict: When does ingroup love become outgroup hate?

By M. Brewer. 2001

363 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f20586d704aec978cf5cd7cd43c9ba729fe9426b

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

Ethnic group identification and group evaluation among minority and majority groups: testing the multiculturalism hypothesis. (2005, background): “To be sure, this can lead to group closure and segregation, but it does not have to involve out-group antagonism and intergroup conflicts (Brewer, 2001).”
An organizing framework for collective identity: articulation and significance of multidimensionality. (2004, methodology): “We consider these definitions to apply to collective identity as used here, consistent with a number of recent writers who advocate a shift in terminology from social identity to collective identity (e.g., Brewer & Gardner, 1996; Sedikides & Brewer, 2001; Simon, 1997; Simon & Klandermans, 2001).”
Making a Virtue of Evil: A Five‐Step Social Identity Model of the Development of Collective Hate (2008, background): “The idea is present in Allport’s classic text (Allport, 1954) and is central to a considerable number of more recent models (e.g. Blalock, 1967; Branscombe, Ellemers, Spears, & Doojse, 1999; Brewer, 2001; Duckitt, 2000, 2003; King & Wheelock, 2007; Stephan & Stephan, 2000).”
Disease avoidance and ethnocentrism: the effects of disease vulnerability and disgust sensitivity on intergroup attitudes (2006, background): “…have argued that positive in-group identification may precede out-group hostility as a fundamental psychological feature of intergroup attitudes and that it may be the dimension of intergroup bias most relevant to individual interests of survival and reproductive success (e.g., Brewer, 1999, 2001).”
Prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination: Theoretical and empirical overview (2010, background): “Thus, weaker emotions imply only mild forms of discrimination, such as avoidance, but stronger emotions imply stronger forms, such as movement against the outgroup, and these latter emotions could be used to justify outgroup harm that extends beyond ingroup benefit (Brewer, 2001).”
Arabs as Terrorists: Effects of Stereotypes Within Violent Contexts on Attitudes, Perceptions, and Affect (2013, background): “This is important given the strong influence of affect in prejudice and discriminatory behaviors such as intergroup aggression (e.g., Brewer, 2001; Mackie et al., 2000; Mummendey & Otten, 2004).”
When Group Memberships are Negative: The Concept, Measurement, and Behavioral Implications of Psychological Disidentification (2014, background): “While identification, solidarity, and psychological ingroup ties serve to uphold cooperative interdependence in groups (e.g., Brewer, 2001), psychological detachment can provide the basis for negative behaviors towards the ingroup.”
National Identity and Self-Esteem (2003, unknown): “62 Brewer 1999, 435.”
No Place for Nostalgia in Science: A Response to Arkes and Tetlock (2004, background): “More recently a number of social psychologists have suggested that various types of discrimination previously thought to arise from outgroup negativity may instead be a function of relative ingroup positivity (Brewer, 2001).”
Multicultural recognition and ethnic minority rights: A social identity perspective (2006, unknown): “It is also consistent with claims that the ingroup is psychologically primary (e.g., Brewer, 2001; Yzerbyt, Castano, Leyens, & Paladino, 2000).”
The dysfunctions of power in teams: A review and emergent conflict perspective (2017, background): “…in teams with low power dispersion (thereby supporting the general assumption that resource threats in general, and intergroup con ﬂ ict speci ﬁ cally, may have cohesive effects on teams with low power dispersed structures; Brewer, 2001; Campbell,1965; Staw et al.,1981; Stein, 1976; Tajfel, 1982).”
COMBINED EFFECTS OF ORGANIZATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL IDENTIFICATION ON THE RECIPROCITY DYNAMIC FOR PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES (2009, background): “Because people are more likely to believe that in the future they will receive less than they expected from those from whom they are distant, they can more easily rationalize failing to fully reciprocate received benefits (Brewer, 2001).”