CATEGORY DIFFERENTIATION AND INTERGROUP EVALUATIVE BIAS

社会心理学倾向于认为，减少群体间敌意的最有效方法是细分社会类别。然而，这种策略是有问题的，这既是因为社会类别是自然和有用的感知工具，也是因为许多群体成员希望保留他们作为特定社会群体的一部分的身份。我们认为，在某些条件下，强类别边界和和谐的集团间关系可能同时存在。这在很大程度上取决于如何看待群体差异的背景或框架。我们提出了四组研究，旨在探索两个总体目标。第一个目标是了解类别分化和组间评估偏差之间关系的本质。也就是说，我们打算探索这两个概念在什么情况下是相关的和不相关的，以及关系的因果方向。第二个目标是探索社会互动的多文化意识形态框架，以此作为减少群体间冲突的替代手段。研究采用了多种方法，包括对意识形态取向的实验室操作，对自然发生的意识形态干预的评估，以及对具有代表性的国家样本的大规模调查评估。了解这种干预是否以及在何种情况下可有效地打击偏见和敌意，将对社会心理学和整个社会产生重大贡献。

Social psychology has tended to assume that the most effective means for reducing intergroup hostility is to breakdown social categories. This strategy is problematic, however, both because social categories are natural and useful perceptual tools, and because many group members want to retain their identity as part of their specific social group. We suggest that it may be possible under certain conditions for strong category boundaries and harmonious intergroup relations to simultaneously exist. This depends critically on the context or framing of how to think about group differences. We propose four sets of studies designed to explore two general goals. The first goal is to understand the nature of the relationship between category differentiation and intergroup evaluative bias. That is, we intend to explore the conditions under which these two constructs are and are not related, as well as the causal direction of the relationship. The second goal is to explore a multicultural ideological framing of social interactions as an alternative means for reducing intergroup conflict. A variety of methodologies are utilized including laboratory manipulations of ideological orientation, evaluation of naturally occurring ideological interventions, and a large scale survey assessment of a representative national sample. Knowing whether and under what circumstances such an intervention might be effective in combating prejudice and hostility would result in a substantial contribution both to social psychology and to society at large.