Dataset Information

Does a Common Ingroup Identity Reduce Weight Bias? Only When Weight Discrimination Is Salient.

ABSTRACT: Compared to many other forms of social bias, weight bias is pervasive, socially accepted, and difficult to attenuate. According to the common ingroup identity model, strategies that expand group inclusiveness may promote more positive intergroup attitudes and behaviors, particularly when people are aware of unjust treatment of others included within their shared identity. Considering that most people are not aware of the social justice issue of weight discrimination, we hypothesized that a common ingroup identity would be effective in reducing weight bias primarily when unfair weight-based treatment was made salient (i.e., that fat people experience discrimination in employment). Participants were randomly assigned to conditions following a 3 (discrimination salience: weight discrimination, height discrimination, control) × 2 (group identity: common ingroup, control) design and completed an evaluative measure of weight bias. Results revealed a significant interaction, showing that when weight discrimination was salient, participants in the common ingroup identity condition reported less weight bias than participants in the group identity control condition. When a common ingroup identity was emphasized, weight bias was lower when weight discrimination was salient compared to when height discrimination was salient and the control condition in which nothing about discrimination was mentioned. These results were not moderated by participant weight. This study demonstrates that a common ingroup identity can be effective in reducing weight bias if a cue is provided that fat people experience disparate and unjust outcomes in employment. Given the serious consequences of weight bias for health and well-being, and the relative ease of implementing this prejudice-reduction intervention, the common ingroup identity model has potential application for reducing weight bias in a range of real-world settings. However, these findings should be considered preliminary until they are replicated in well-powered and pre-registered future research.

SUBMITTER: Brochu PM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6985568 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Does a Common Ingroup Identity Reduce Weight Bias? Only When Weight Discrimination Is Salient.

Brochu Paula M PM Banfield Jillian C JC Dovidio John F JF

Frontiers in psychology 20200121

Compared to many other forms of social bias, weight bias is pervasive, socially accepted, and difficult to attenuate. According to the common ingroup identity model, strategies that expand group inclusiveness may promote more positive intergroup attitudes and behaviors, particularly when people are aware of unjust treatment of others included within their shared identity. Considering that most people are not aware of the social justice issue of weight discrimination, we hypothesized that a commo ...[more]

PMID: 32038393

Similar Datasets

Project description:To maintain a positive overall view of their group, people judge likeable ingroup members more favourably and deviant ingroup members more harshly than comparable outgroup members. Research suggests that such derogation of deviant ingroup members aims to restore the image of the group by symbolically excluding so-called 'black sheeps'. We hypothesized that information about a harm-doer's group membership influences observers' justice-seeking reactions. Motives for punishment vary based on whether the goal is to punish past harm-doing (i.e., retributive motives), help harm-doers recognize the harm inflicted and reintegrate into society (i.e., restorative motives), or control harm-doer's future behaviour through incapacitating practices and exclusion from society (i.e., utilitarian motives). We hypothesized that immoral behaviours by ingroup rather than outgroup members jeopardize the group's reputation and therefore activate utilitarian (i.e., exclusion-oriented) motives for punishment. Study 1 (N = 187) confirmed that people displayed more utilitarian motives and less restorative motives when sanctioning an ingroup as opposed to an outgroup harm-doer. Study 2 (N = 122) manipulated typicality to the ingroup. Participants displayed stronger utilitarian (i.e., exclusion-oriented) punishment motives when the harm-doer was presented as a typical ingroup rather than an outgroup member. Study 3 (N = 292) replicated the findings of Studies 1 and 2 and further showed that people displayed stronger utilitarian punishments against an ingroup offender through the experience of increased identity threat. Contrary to our expectations, observers' ingroup identification did not moderate the effect of group membership or typicality to the ingroup on justice reactions. Yet, ingroup identification influenced both experienced identity threat (i.e., mediator) and utilitarian motives for punishment with high identifiers experiencing higher threat and displaying stronger utilitarian punishment motive. We discuss the results in terms of people's concern for the protection of their group identity.

Dataset Information

Does a Common Ingroup Identity Reduce Weight Bias? Only When Weight Discrimination Is Salient.

Publications

Does a Common Ingroup Identity Reduce Weight Bias? Only When Weight Discrimination Is Salient.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets