Talk:In-group favoritism

message: Shouldn't this be merged with Nepotism? Robertsteadman 13:41, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  "a syndrome" ? You mean that nepotism is a medical condition?
KevinFrom (talk) 15:20, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 04:08, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: Hi all, I would like to propose a move of the trust in strangers section to the Trust (social sciences) page. There are two reasons why I think this would be meritous. Firstly, I think this topic extends beyond the scope of this page. For example, while social identity based trust may be related to an ingroup favouritism effect, it is also studied in relation to reciprocity expectations. Secondly, I feel the content is unnecessarily hidden away here. Why not report this research directly on the trust page? It seems highly relevant to me.
On that last point, I do accept that others may disagree with me and feel that this content too niche for that trust article. In which case other possible destinations for this content may be the ingroups and outgroups page or the social identity approach page. This would also satisfactorily address my first concern.
What do others think? Cheers Andrew (talk) 04:55, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi all. I have followed through with this move. People can check out the outcome here if they like. Cheers Andrew (talk) 06:50, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed Content Move – Trust in strangers

message: Hi again, I would also like to propose a move of the common ingroup identity model section to its own page. This is because there is a vast quantity of research pertaining to the common ingroup identity moded and in my mind only a concerted article can do justice to this content. On top of this, the common ingroup identity model is directly related to a variety of topics (e.g. prejudice, discrimination, racism, and intergroup conflict). It thus does not make sense for the common ingroup identity model to be only indirectly accessed through the ingroup favouritism page.
Again though, what do others think? Cheers Andrew (talk) 04:55, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi all. I have followed through with this move. People can check out the new page here if they like. Cheers Andrew (talk) 06:28, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed Content Move – Common ingroup identity model

message: Hi all. I would like to propose a merge of this article and the group-serving bias article. Specifically, the merging of the group serving bias article into this article. This seems like an obvious move to me as the topics appear identical. It would also treat the quality concerns over at that second article. Does anyone have any thoughts or objections? Cheers Andrew (talk) 09:35, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger Proposal: Group-serving bias

message: This isn't a satisfactory title - its meaning isn't clear without reference to something else. Could someone fix it?Notreallydavid (talk) 12:05, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Versus out-group negativity 

message: Hello! My two partners and I are students at Carnegie Mellon University taking a class on organizational communication. For this class, we are to select a Wikipedia topic and edit that page. My group and I chose this article on In-group favoritism to improve. Here are the topics we would like to primarily focus on:
* Biological basis for in-group favouritism (De Dreu)  -  Source: “Oxytocin modulates coorperations within and competition between groups: an integrative review and research agenda” http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0018506X11002868
* Social identity theory - michael hogg review  - Source: “A Tale of Two Theories: A Critical Comparison of Identity Theory with Social Identity Theory” by Michael Hogg http://www.jstor.org/stable/2787127?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents; “The theory of planned behaviour: self-identity, social identity and group norms” by Michael Hogg http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1348/014466699164149/epdf  
If anyone has any questions or concerns regarding these additions, please message me directly.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rchlkm (talk • contribs) 23:55, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing: Carnegie Mellon University on In-Group Favoritism 

message: Fascinating stuff. More please.--Penbat (talk) 17:45, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:   Biological basis 

message: While I will try my best to continue to update this article, and respond to comments left on this article's talk page (as well as my talk page), I will no longer be working on it as part of the class assignment mentioned above.
There are certain points that I had planned to write about, but was unable to complete. If someone else would be interested in taking up this work, I shall leave the sources I was referring to as well as a brief description of the work I had planned based on these sources:
1. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejsp.2420220202/abstract
This is a meta-analysis of research into the determinants of the extent or magnitude of the in-group bias effect, specifically salience, relevance, and status as determinants of this effect. This could be added under the Explanations section, perhaps under a ‘determinants’ subsection.
     
2. http://psr.sagepub.com/content/4/2/157.short 
This is a meta-analysis on the relation between ingroup bias and self-esteem. I was planning on using this to expand upon the ‘self-esteem’ subsection, as I felt using a comprehensive source referring to the outcomes of multiple studies would be more appropriate than citing the outcomes of individual studies. 
     
 3. http://science.sciencemag.org/content/321/5897/1844.full 
This is a study into the evolutionary forces behind ingroup favoritism, and how the introduction of an arbitrary symbolic marker can serve to stimulate the formation of cultural groups and leads to favoritism within said groups. I thought this could be used as the starting point on a section on the ‘cultural and environmental basis; in that the presence of these arbitrary markers can serve as the basis for distinct cultural groups, and the presence of strong incentives to bias interactions towards others with the same marker (a factor of the social environment) lead to subjects showing strong in-group favoritism .
As mentioned above, we had plans to expand upon the relation between social identity theory (SIT), referring to the Michael Hobbs review article, and in-group bias. 
Furthermore, a few of the peer review comments of my fellow classmates have suggested that academic studies on real-life examples of such groups, such as nationalist groups, be included.
Svayamm (talk) 05:21, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, I'm a student at LSE and similarly to yourself I've chosen this topic to work on as part of my assignment, I'm particularly interested in the evolutionary basis and will try and pick up from where you left off. Zikai417 (talk) 14:26, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further changes that can be made 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on In-group favoritism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160307202800/http://www.mit.edu/~westj/articles/JeremyWest_RacialBiasPolice.pdf to http://www.mit.edu/~westj/articles/JeremyWest_RacialBiasPolice.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:29, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I found this article on in-group favoritism by chance. It made me wonder if there should be some mention of Robert Merton's Self fulfilling prophecy (1948) and Matthew Effect (1968) concepts in the Main Article. Personally, I think that they apply. 
If a "leader" predicts that someone will be highly successful, the leader then helps to promote that someone in order to show the world how good he or she (the leader) is at identifying talent and as yet unrecognized successful people.  Furthermore, those within the successful "group" get richer and support each other (promotions, recommendations, publications, research grants, etc.) so that the rich get richer: "For to every one who has will more be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away." -- Matthew, 25:29. AdderUser (talk) 18:31, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Robert Merton - "Self Fulfilling Prophecy" and "Matthew Effect" 

message: — Assignment last updated by Ca$hley (talk) 03:02, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Neuroscience