Social identity and intergroup bias in immigrant and non-immigrant children

Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1563, USA.
Developmental Psychology (Impact Factor: 3.21). 04/2007; 43(2):496-507. DOI: 10.1037/0012-1649.43.2.496
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Ethnic and American identity, as well as positivity and negativity toward multiple social groups, were assessed in 392 children attending 2nd or 4th grade in various New York City neighborhoods. Children from 5 ethnic groups were recruited, including White and Black Americans, as well as recent immigrants from China, the Dominican Republic, and the former Soviet Union. For ethnic minority children, greater positivity bias (evaluating one's ingroup more positively than outgroups) was predicted by immigrant status and ethnic identity, whereas negativity bias (evaluating outgroups more negatively than one's ingroup) was associated with increased age, immigrant status, and (among 4th graders only) ethnic identity. In addition, a more central American identity was associated with less intergroup bias among ethnic minority children.

Download full-text


Available from: Jennifer H Pfeifer, Sep 29, 2015
1 Follower
53 Reads
  • Source
    • "Because the study was cross-sectional, no definitive answers can be given about the direction of causality. Other cross-sectional studies show that immigrants who feel more attached to the host country show less ingroup bias (Nier et al., 2001; Pfeifer et al., 2007). Schaafsma et al. (2010) further argue that immigrants 5 with strong host country identification may feel less threatened by the majority group and therefore find friendships with majority group members to be less difficult than do immigrants who weakly identify with the host country . "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Immigrants who strongly identify with the host country have more native friends than immigrants with weaker host country identification. However, the mechanisms underlying this correlation are not well understood. Immigrants with strong host country identification might have stronger preferences for native friends, or they might be more often chosen as friends by natives. In turn, having native friends or friends with strong host country identification might increase immigrants’ host country identification. Using longitudinal network data of 18 Dutch school classes, we test these hypotheses with stochastic actor-oriented models. We find that immigrants’ host country identification affects friendship selections of natives but not of immigrants. We find no evidence of social influence processes.
    Social Networks 09/2015; 2016(Volume 44):179-189. DOI:10.1016/j.socnet.2015.08.001 · 2.93 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Accordingly, the common ingroup identity model (Dovidio et al., 2007; Gaertner et al., 1993; Gaertner, Dovidio, & Bachman, 1996) proposes that for contact to reduce prejudice it needs to be structured in such a way that it leads to identification with an inclusive superordinate category. In line with this reasoning, research has shown that superordinate identities improve outgroup attitudes among minority as well as majority group members (Nier et al., 2001; Pfeifer et al., 2007). This suggests that identification with the host society will improve the attitudes of ethnic minority youth towards majority group members. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study investigates among ethnic minority adolescents how friendships with ethnic minority and majority group peers are related to their attitudes towards the majority outgroup. Friendships with majority group peers are proposed to be indirectly related to outgroup attitudes through host society identification. Friendships with ethnic ingroup peers are proposed to be indirectly related to outgroup attitudes through ethnic ingroup identification. Hypotheses were tested longitudinally among ethnic minority adolescents (n = 244) who recently entered middle schools in the Netherlands. Lagged structural equation models showed that friendships with majority group peers were related to stronger identification with the host society which was in turn related to improved attitudes toward the majority outgroup. Ingroup friendships and ingroup identification was not related to outgroup attitudes. Additional analyses indicated that the relation between host society identification and majority group friendships was bidirectional.
    International Journal of Intercultural Relations 01/2015; 44:88-99. DOI:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2014.12.002 · 1.14 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "According to social identity theory, highly identified group members are motivated to think and behave as in-group members because they view their group as a reflection of the self (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). For example, compared to lower identifiers, children with higher in-group identification are more likely to be concerned about out-group threats and the continuity and value of their group (e.g., Nesdale et al., 2005; Pfeifer et al., 2007). This means that especially higher identifiers will respond to the acculturation strategies of threatening out-groups. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Using an experimental design, native majority group children (8-13 years, N = 842) evaluated acculturation strategies (assimilation, integration, and separation) adopted by immigrant and emigrant peers. There were medium to large effects of the perceived acculturation strategies on children's peer evaluations. Overall, assimilation was valued most, followed by integration and separation. These effects were in part mediated by perceived national belonging. In addition, the effects were stronger for lower status compared to higher status immigrant groups, and for children with higher compared to lower national identification. For emigrants, separation was valued most, followed by integration and assimilation. This indicates that the intergroup processes rather than migration per se are important for children's acculturation perceptions and evaluations.
    Child Development 04/2013; 85(1). DOI:10.1111/cdev.12111 · 4.92 Impact Factor
Show more