ArticlePloS one2025
Egalitarian norms can deflate identity-bias link in real-life groups.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Social identity theory posits that group membership influences individual behavior by fostering a sense of belonging and promoting normative conformity within groups. While much research has shown a link between ingroup identification and ingroup bias, the role of ingroup norms in moderating this association remains less explored. Specifically, how varying norms (egalitarianism vs. favoritism) affect bias in individuals with high ingroup identification requires further investigation. To address this gap, we examined whether ingroup norms alter the strength of the identification-bias relationship in two studies (N = 322). We investigated how non-WEIRD real-life group members' ingroup bias was driven by their identification levels and perceived ingroup norm in Study 1 with a correlational design, and we experimentally manipulated ingroup norms in a simulated group discussion in Study 2. Both studies demonstrated that under a favoritism norm, participants with high ingroup identification showed greater ingroup bias, whereas this bias was deflated under an egalitarianism norm. However, contrary to our hypothesis, we did not find evidence that participants with high ingroup identification showed lower ingroup bias under the egalitarianism norm. We discuss these findings and suggest that fostering egalitarian norms within groups may reduce ingroup bias and discrimination, offering insight for interventions aimed at promoting intergroup harmony.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.