Search

The article discusses various reports within the issue, including one by Guy, Kashima, Walker et al. on knowledge and attitudes about climate change, one by Van der Linden on how affect and cognition relate to climate change perceptions and one by Leviston, Price and Bishop on the role of affect in climate change responses.

The present research examined whether reactions to procedural discrimination (favoring self vs. favoring other procedures) are qualified by whether the authority is an ingroup or an outgroup member. We argue that because we tend to demonstrate ingroup bias in an intergroup context, we should react more positively when we are favored over an outgroup other than when an outgroup other is favored over us. Furthermore, we reason that because compared with outgroup authorities, ingroup authorities are perceived to be more related to us, we should react more strongly to procedural discrimination exercised by the ingroup authority. Across the two studies, results support our predictions. Results are discussed with reference to the social identity perspective and the group-value model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research examines whether evaluations of positive deviates (i.e. high achieving group members) are influenced by the attributions they make for their performance. We argue that ingroup positive deviates who make group attributions help enhance the ingroup's image and thus attract favorable evaluations. In Experiment 1, ingroup positive deviates who made group attributions were generally evaluated more favorably than ingroup positive deviates who made individual attributions. There was also evidence that the positive deviates' attribution style influenced group and self-evaluations. Evaluations of outgroup positive deviates were not influenced by their attribution style. In Experiment 2, an ingroup positive deviate who was successful and attributed that success to the group was upgraded relative to an ingroup positive deviate who made individual attributions. Group evaluations were also higher when the positive deviate made group attributions. This pattern did not emerge when the positive deviate failed. The results are discussed from a social identity perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This experiment examined members' evaluations of a group leader and the group in contexts where a superordinate group comprised two subgroups and the group leader was aligned with one or other subgroup. The design varied group leader (ingroup, outgroup) and leader behavior (ingroup favoring, outgroup favoring) as well as the broader comparative context (intragroup, intergroup). Across a number of measures, results indicated a consistent Group Leader × Leader Behavior interaction that was independent of comparative context. Although group members were most satisfied with an ingroup leader who favored the ingroup, ingroup leaders were perceived positively irrespective of their behavior. Outgroup leaders who unexpectedly favored the other subgroup were also perceived positively. However, outgroup leaders who favored their own subgroup were perceived as less fair and as more biased than other leaders. They also engendered less identification with the superordinate group and a less unified perception of the group. Results demonstrate the importance of social identity concerns to leadership in nested group contexts and emphasize the fact that perceptions of leader fairness and concern for the common group mediate responses to the superordinate category. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]