TY - JOUR
T1 - Who do we inform? The role of status and target in intergroup whistle-blowing
AU - Hopman, E.P.C.
AU - van Leeuwen, E.A.C.
PY - 2009
Y1 - 2009
N2 - In two experiments (n = 87 and n = 90), we showed that strongly identifying members of a low status group are more likely to actively inform the ingroup rather than the outgroup about an outgroup transgression, and consider it as more loyal to the ingroup to do so. Moreover, strongly identifying members of a high status group are more likely to actively inform the outgroup rather than the ingroup about an outgroup transgression, and consider this to be more loyal to the ingroup. The results are in support of the notion that, depending on a group's existing status position, negative outgroup information can be used to enhance or confirm the ingroup's standing, affecting whether the ingroup or the outgroup will initially be informed about an outgroup transgression. Copyright © The Author(s), 2009.
AB - In two experiments (n = 87 and n = 90), we showed that strongly identifying members of a low status group are more likely to actively inform the ingroup rather than the outgroup about an outgroup transgression, and consider it as more loyal to the ingroup to do so. Moreover, strongly identifying members of a high status group are more likely to actively inform the outgroup rather than the ingroup about an outgroup transgression, and consider this to be more loyal to the ingroup. The results are in support of the notion that, depending on a group's existing status position, negative outgroup information can be used to enhance or confirm the ingroup's standing, affecting whether the ingroup or the outgroup will initially be informed about an outgroup transgression. Copyright © The Author(s), 2009.
U2 - 10.1177/1368430209337472
DO - 10.1177/1368430209337472
M3 - Article
SN - 1368-4302
VL - 12
SP - 605
EP - 618
JO - Group Processes and Intergroup Relations
JF - Group Processes and Intergroup Relations
ER -
