Public transgressions by group members threaten the public image of a group when outside observers perceive them as representative of the group in general. In three studies, we tested the effectiveness of rejection of a deviant group member who made a racist comment in public, and compared this to several other strategies the group could employ to protect their image. In Study 1 (N = 75) and Study 2 (N = 51), the group was judged less racist after rejecting the deviant than after claiming a non-racist position or not responding to the transgression. Perceived typicality of the deviant partially mediated this effect in Study 2. In Study 3 (N = 81), the group was judged least racist after forcing the deviant to apologize and as most racist after denying the severity of the transgression. Results also showed a negative side-effect of rejection. Perceived exclusion of the deviant contributed to a perception of the group as disloyal to its members, which resulted in a less favorable overall group evaluation. Potential benefits and risks of rejection, denial, and apologies are further discussed in the General Discussion. Copyright (C) 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Dealing with deviants: The effectiveness of rejection, denial, and apologies on protecting the public image of a group / van Leeuwen E; van den Bosch M; Castano E; Hopman P. - In: EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY. - ISSN 0046-2772. - STAMPA. - 40:(2010), pp. 282-299. [10.1002/ejsp.622]
Dealing with deviants: The effectiveness of rejection, denial, and apologies on protecting the public image of a group
Castano E;
2010
Abstract
Public transgressions by group members threaten the public image of a group when outside observers perceive them as representative of the group in general. In three studies, we tested the effectiveness of rejection of a deviant group member who made a racist comment in public, and compared this to several other strategies the group could employ to protect their image. In Study 1 (N = 75) and Study 2 (N = 51), the group was judged less racist after rejecting the deviant than after claiming a non-racist position or not responding to the transgression. Perceived typicality of the deviant partially mediated this effect in Study 2. In Study 3 (N = 81), the group was judged least racist after forcing the deviant to apologize and as most racist after denying the severity of the transgression. Results also showed a negative side-effect of rejection. Perceived exclusion of the deviant contributed to a perception of the group as disloyal to its members, which resulted in a less favorable overall group evaluation. Potential benefits and risks of rejection, denial, and apologies are further discussed in the General Discussion. Copyright (C) 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
11572_289445.pdf
Accesso chiuso
Licenza:
Tutti i diritti riservati
Dimensione
239.4 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
239.4 kB | Adobe PDF | Richiedi una copia |
I documenti in FLORE sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.