Work

Measuring the Measures

Year: 2007

Type: article

Study designs: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis

Abstract: We meta-analytically synthesized the intergroup variability literature (177 effect sizes, from 173 independent samples, and 12,078 participants) to test the potential moderating effect of 11 measures of perceived variability. Aggregating across the measures, we detected a small but reliable tendency to perceive more variability among ingroup than outgroup members and such outgroup homogeneity was stronger among non-minimal than minimal groups. Furthermore, analyses that distinguished among the 11 measures revealed systematic discrepancies among the patterns of perception detected by those measures. Those systematic discrepancies further varied across social contexts defined by relative group status, with some measures yielding ingroup homogeneity and others outgroup homogeneity. We discuss the possibility that the measures of variability require different mental activities that interact with contextually induced cognitive and motivational processes to yield disparate intergroup perceptions.

Source: Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

DOI: 10.1177/1368430207075153

Authors: Jennifer G. Boldry, Lowell Gaertner, Jeff Quinn

Institutions: Montana State University, University of Tennessee at Knoxville, Duke University

Language: English

Topic: Social and Intergroup Psychology

Subfield: Sociology and Political Science

Field: Social Sciences

Domain: Social Sciences

Open Access status: green

OpenAlex ID: W2090173822

FWCI: 8.576

Cites: 130

Cited by: 127

Related to: 10