In-groups our more benevolent to their own members than with out-groups
In-groups tend to inflate their own value when comparing to out-groups. And perhaps even more than superiority, feelings about in-groups center on shared obligations, on willingness and expectation of mutuality. The essence of an in-group mind-set is nonrandom clustering producing higher-than-expected frequencies of positive interactions. The logical strategy in one-round Prisoner’s Dilemma is to defect. Cooperation flourishes when games have an uncertain number of rounds, and with the capacity for our reputations to precede us. Groups, by definition, have multiple-round games and the means to spread news of someone being a jerk.
This sense of obligation and reciprocity among in-groups is shown in economic games, where players are more trusting, generous, and cooperative with in-groupthan with out-group members (even with minimal group paradigms, where players know that groupings are arbitrary). Chimps even show this trust element where they have to choose between (a) being guaranteed to receive some unexciting food and (b) getting some fabulous food if another chimp will share it with them. Chimps opt for the second scenario, requiring trust, when the other chimp is a grooming partner. Moreover, priming people to think of a victim of violence as an Us, rather than a Them, increases the odds of their intervening. For example, fans at a soccer match are more likely to aid an injured spectator if he’s wearing home-team insignias.
References
- Sapolsky, Robert. (2017). Behave Chapter 11. Us Versus Them (p. 447). New York, NY: Penguin Random House.
Metadata
Type:🔴 Tags: Psychology / Social Psychology / Sociology Status:☀️