IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nathum/v4y2020i3d10.1038_s41562-019-0766-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Inaccurate group meta-perceptions drive negative out-group attributions in competitive contexts

Author

Listed:
  • Jeffrey Lees

    (Harvard University)

  • Mina Cikara

    (Harvard University)

Abstract

Across seven experiments and one survey (n = 4,282), people consistently overestimated out-group negativity towards the collective behaviour of their in-group. This negativity bias in group meta-perception was present across multiple competitive (but not cooperative) intergroup contexts and appears to be yoked to group psychology more generally; we observed negativity bias for estimation of out-group, anonymized-group and even fellow in-group members’ perceptions. Importantly, in the context of US politics, greater inaccuracy was associated with increased belief that the out-group is motivated by purposeful obstructionism. However, an intervention that informed participants of the inaccuracy of their beliefs reduced negative out-group attributions, and was more effective for those whose group meta-perceptions were more inaccurate. In sum, we highlight a pernicious bias in social judgements of how we believe ‘they’ see ‘our’ behaviour, demonstrate how such inaccurate beliefs can exacerbate intergroup conflict and provide an avenue for reducing the negative effects of inaccuracy.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffrey Lees & Mina Cikara, 2020. "Inaccurate group meta-perceptions drive negative out-group attributions in competitive contexts," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(3), pages 279-286, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:nathum:v:4:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1038_s41562-019-0766-4
    DOI: 10.1038/s41562-019-0766-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-019-0766-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41562-019-0766-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jay J. Van Bavel & Katherine Baicker & Paulo S. Boggio & Valerio Capraro & Aleksandra Cichocka & Mina Cikara & Molly J. Crockett & Alia J. Crum & Karen M. Douglas & James N. Druckman & John Drury & Oe, 2020. "Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(5), pages 460-471, May.
    2. Minson, Julia A. & Bendersky, Corinne & de Dreu, Carsten & Halperin, Eran & Schroeder, Juliana, 2023. "Experimental studies of conflict: Challenges, solutions, and advice to junior scholars," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    3. Kai Ruggeri & Bojana Većkalov & Lana Bojanić & Thomas L. Andersen & Sarah Ashcroft-Jones & Nélida Ayacaxli & Paula Barea-Arroyo & Mari Louise Berge & Ludvig D. Bjørndal & Aslı Bursalıoğlu & Vanessa Bü, 2021. "The general fault in our fault lines," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 5(10), pages 1369-1380, October.
    4. Justus Enninga & Ryan M. Yonk, 2023. "Achieving Ecological Reflexivity: The Limits of Deliberation and the Alternative of Free-Market-Environmentalism," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-14, April.
    5. Eugen Dimant, 2020. "Hate Trumps Love: The Impact of Political Polarization on Social Preferences," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 029, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    6. Mimi E. Lam, 2021. "United by the global COVID-19 pandemic: divided by our values and viral identities," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-6, December.
    7. Stone, Daniel & Lees, Jeffrey Martin, 2024. "Is SRC truly polarizing?," OSF Preprints jwmvf, Center for Open Science.
    8. Chapkovski, Philipp & Zakharov, Alexei, 2023. "Does voluntary disclosure of polarizing information make polarization deeper? An online experiment on Russo-Ukrainian War," MPRA Paper 116305, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Emile Bruneau & Andrés Casas & Boaz Hameiri & Nour Kteily, 2022. "Exposure to a media intervention helps promote support for peace in Colombia," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(6), pages 847-857, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:nathum:v:4:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1038_s41562-019-0766-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.