In this experiment, group identification is examined as a potential moderator of the documented racial bias in a shoot–no shoot paradigm. Target race (Black or White) was manipulated within-subjects, and (White) participants’ strength of racial ingroup identification was employed as a continuous predictor. Using signal detection analyses, it was found that the criterion to shoot Black targets decreased as an increasing function of racial ingroup identification. This relationship held even after controlling for gender, social dominance orientation, a measure of cultural stereotyping, and the amount of contact with Blacks. Theoretical implications are discussed.
BarretoM.EllemersN. (2000). You can’t always do what you want: Social identity and self-presentational determinants of the choice to work for a low-status group. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 891–906.
2.
CairnsE.KenworthyJ. B.CampbellA.HewstoneM. (2006). The role of in-group identification, religious group membership, and intergroup conflict in moderating in-group and out-group affect. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 701–716.
3.
CorrellJ.ParkB.JuddC.WittenbrinkB. (2002). The police officer’s dilemma: Using ethnicity to disambiguate potentially threatening individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1314–1329.
4.
CorrellJ.ParkB.JuddC.WittenbrinkB. (2007). The influence of stereotypes on decisions to shoot. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 102–1117.
5.
CorrellJ.ParkP.JuddC.WittenbrinkB.SadlerM.KeeseeT. (2007). Across the thin blue line: Police officers and racial bias in the decision to shoot. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 1006–1023.
6.
CorrellJ.UrlandG.ItoT. (2006). Event-related potentials and the decision to shoot: The role of threat perception and cognitive control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 120–128.
7.
CoullA.YzerbytV.CastanoE.PaladinoM.LeemansV. (2001). Protecting the ingroup: Motivated allocation of cognitive resources in the presence of threatening ingroup members. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 4, 327–339.
8.
CrispR. J.StoneC. H.HallN. R. (2006). Recategorization and subgroup identification: Predicting and preventing threats from common ingroups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 230–243.
9.
DoosjeB.EllemersN.SpearsR. (1995). Perceived intragroup variability as a function of group status and identification. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 410–436.
10.
DuntonB. C.FazioR. H. (1997). An individual difference measure of motivation to control prejudiced reactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 316–326.
11.
EllemersN.SpearsR.DoosjeB. (1997). Sticking together or falling apart: In-group identification as a psychological determinant of group commitment versus individual mobility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 617–626.
GovorunO.PayneK. (2006). Ego depletion and prejudice: separating automatic and controlled components. Social Cognition, 24, 111–136.
14.
HutchisonP.AbramsD. (2003). Ingroup identification moderates stereotype change in reaction to ingroup deviance. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 497–506.
15.
JettenJ.SpearsR.MansteadA. (1997). Distinctiveness threat and prototypicality: Combined effects on intergroup discrimination and collective self-esteem. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27, 635–657.
16.
LeonardelliG.BrewerM. (2001). Minority and majority discrimination: When and why. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 468–485.
17.
LindemanM. (1997). Ingroup bias, self-enhancement and group identification. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27, 337–355.
18.
PayneB. (2001). Prejudice and perception: the role of automatic and controlled processes in misperceiving a weapon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 181–192.
19.
PayneK. (2006). Weapon bias: split-second decisions and unintended stereotyping. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 287–291.
20.
PerucheB. M.PlantE. A. (2006). The correlates of law enforcement officers’ automatic and controlled race-based responses to criminal suspects. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 28, 193–199.
21.
PickettC.BonnerB.ColemanJ. (2002). Motivated self-stereotyping: Heightened assimilation and differentiation needs result in increased levels of positive and negative self-stereotyping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 543–562.
22.
PrattoF.SidaniusJ.StallworthL.MalleB. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763.
23.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behaviour. In WorchelS.AustinW. G. (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson.
24.
TauschN.TamT.HewstoneM.KenworthyJ. B.CairnsE. (2007). Individual-level and group-level mediators of contact effects in Northern Ireland: The moderating role of social identification. British Journal of Social Psychology, 46, 541–556.
25.
TurnerJ. C.HoggM. A.OakesP. J.ReicherS. D.WetherellM. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
26.
WannD.BranscombeN. (1995). Influence of level of identification with a group and physiological arousal on perceived intergroup complexity. British Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 223–235.
