Who is to blame?

Zagefka, Hanna, Binder, Jens, Brown, Rupert and Hancock, Landon (2013) Who is to blame? Social Psychology, 44 (6). pp. 398-407. ISSN 1864-9335

[img]
Preview
PDF
Download (259kB) | Preview

Abstract

Contradictory evidence can be found in the literature about whether ingroup identification and perceived relative deprivation are positively or negatively related. Indeed, theoretical arguments can be made for both effects. It was proposed that the contradictory findings can be explained by considering a hitherto unstudied moderator: the extent to which deprivation is attributed to the ingroup. It was hypothesized that identification would only have a negative impact on deprivation, and that deprivation would only have a negative impact on identification, if ingroup attributions are high. To test this, we experimentally manipulated attributions to the ingroup among British student participants (N = 189), who were asked about their perceived deprivation vis-à-vis German students, yielding support for the hypotheses.

Item Type: Article
Schools and Departments: School of Psychology > Psychology
Subjects: B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology
H Social Sciences > HM Sociology > HM1001 Social psychology
Depositing User: Rupert Brown
Date Deposited: 17 Feb 2015 07:03
Last Modified: 24 Mar 2017 15:47
URI: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/52951

View download statistics for this item

📧 Request an update