The strategic role of language abstraction in achieving symbolic and practical goals

REFERENCES

• Albarello, F., & Rubini, M. (in press). The role of reduced humanity in producing linguistic discrimination. Personality and Social Psychological Bulletin. doi:10.1177/0146167214561195
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison–Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Amiot, C. E., & Bourhis, R. Y. (2005). Discrimination between dominant and subordinate groups: The positive–negative asymmetry effect and normative processes. British Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 289–308. doi:10.1348/014466604X17605
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Assilaméhou, Y., & Testé, B. (2013a). How you describe a group shows how biased you are: Language abstraction and inferences about a speaker’s communicative intentions and attitudes toward a group. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 32, 202–211. doi:10.1177/0261927X12456382
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Assilaméhou, Y., & Testé, B. (2013b). The effects of linguistic abstraction on evaluations of the speaker in an intergroup context: Using the linguistic intergroup bias makes you a good group member. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 113–119. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2012.08.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bettencourt, B. A., Charlton, K., Dorr, N., & Hume, D. L. (2001). Status differences and in-group bias: A meta-analytic examination of the effects of status stability, status legitimacy, and group permeability. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 520–542. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.127.4.520
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bettencourt, B. A., Miller, N., & Hume, D. L. (1999). Effects of numerical representation within cooperative settings: Examining the role of salience in ingroup favouritism. British Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 265–287. doi:10.1348/014466699164167
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blanz, M., Mummendey, A., & Otten, S. (1997). Normative evaluations and frequency expectations regarding positive versus negative outcome allocations between groups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27, 165–176. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199703)27:2<165::AID-EJSP812>3.0.CO;2-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boldry, J. G., & Kashy, D. A. (1999). Intergroup perception in naturally occurring groups of differential status: A social relations perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1200–1212. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1200
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brehm, J. (1956). Postdecision changes in the desirability of alternatives. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 52, 384–389. doi:10.1037/h0041006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brewer, M. B. (1999). The psychology of prejudice: Ingroup love and outgroup hate? Journal of Social Issues, 55, 429–444. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00126
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brewer, M. B. (2001). Ingroup identification and intergroup conflict: When does ingroup love become outgroup hate? In R. D. Ashmore, L. Jussim, & D. Wilder (Eds.), Social identity, intergroup conflict, and conflict reduction (pp. 17–41). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brewer, M. B., & Brown, R. J. (1998). Intergroup relations. In D. T. Gilbert & S. T. Fiske (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, 4th ed., pp. 554–594). Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, R. J. (2000). Social identity theory: Past achievements, current problems and future challenges. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 745–778. doi:10.1002/1099-0992(200011/12)30:6<745::AID-EJSP24>3.0.CO;2-O
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, R., & Hewstone, M. (2005). An integrative theory of intergroup contact. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 37, pp. 255–343). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burguet, A., & Girard, F. (2008). La Coupe du Monde de Football 2006: Analyse de la production des biais linguistiques intergroupes [The FIFA Worldcup 2006: An analysis of intergroup linguistic biases]. Cahiers Internationaux de Psychologie Sociale, 79, 85–95.
   Google Scholar
• Byrne, D. (1997). An overview (and underview) of research and theory within the attraction paradigm. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 14, 417–431. doi:10.1177/0265407597143008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell, D. T. (1958). Common fate, similarity, and other indices of the status of aggregates of persons as social entities. Behavioral Science, 3, 14–25. doi:10.1002/bs.3830030103
   Google Scholar
• Clark, C. L., Shaver, P. R., & Abrahams, M. F. (1999). Strategic behaviors in romantic relationship initiation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 709–722. doi:10.1177/0146167299025006006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crisp, R. J., & Hewstone, M. (2007). Multiple social categorization. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 39, pp. 163–254). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Crisp, R. J., Hewstone, M., & Cairns, E. (2001). Multiple identities in Northern Ireland: Hierarchical ordering in the representation of group membership. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 501–514. doi:10.1348/014466601164948
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crisp, R. J., Hewstone, M., & Rubin, M. (2001). Does multiple categorization reduce intergroup bias? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 76–89. doi:10.1177/0146167201271007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dambrun, M., Taylor, D. M., McDonald, D. A., Crush, J., & Méot, A. (2006). The relative deprivation–gratification continuum and the attitudes of South Africans toward Immigrants: A test of the V-curve hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 1032–1044. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.6.1032
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Dreu, C. K. W. (2010). Social value orientation moderates ingroup love but not outgroup hate in competitive intergroup conflict. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13, 701–713. doi:10.1177/1368430210377332
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Poot, C. J., & Semin, G. R. (1995). Pick your verbs with care when you formulate a question! Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 14, 351–368. doi:10.1177/0261927X950144002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diehl, M. (1990). The minimal group paradigm: Theoretical explanations and empirical findings. European Review of Social Psychology, 1, 263–292. doi:10.1080/14792779108401864
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, K. M., & Sutton, R. M. (2003). Effects of communication goals and expectancies on language abstraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 682–696. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.682
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duck, S. (1995). Talking relationships into being. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12, 535–540. doi:10.1177/0265407595124006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Echterhoff, G., Higgins, E. T., Kopietz, R., & Groll, S. (2008). How communication goals determine when audience tuning biases memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 3–21. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.137.1.3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellemers, N., Doosje, B. J., Van Knippenberg, A., & Wilke, H. (1992). Status protection in high status minority groups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 123–140. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420220203
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. California, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fiedler, K. (2008). The implicit meta-theory that has inspired and restricted LCM research: Why some studies were conducted but others not. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 27, 182–196. doi:10.1177/0261927X07313656
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiedler, K., Semin, G. R., & Bolten, S. (1989). Language use and reification of social information: Top-down and bottom-up processing in person cognition. European Journal of Social Psychology, 19, 271–295. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420190403
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiedler, K., Semin, G. R., & Finkenauer, C. (1993). The battle of words between gender groups a language-based approach to intergroup processes. Human Communication Research, 19, 409–441. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1993.tb00308.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiedler, K., Semin, G. R., Finkenauer, C., & Berkel, I. (1995). Actor-observer bias in close relationships: The role of self-knowledge and self-related language. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 525–538. doi:10.1177/0146167295215010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finkenauer, C., & Righetti, F. (2011). Understanding in close relationships: An interpersonal approach. European Review of Social Psychology, 22, 316–363. doi:10.1080/10463283.2011.633384
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiske, S. T. (1992). Thinking is for doing: Portraits of social cognition from Daguerreotype to laser photo. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 766–778. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.63.6.877
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franco, F., & Maass, A. (1996). Implicit vs. explicit strategies of intergroup discrimination: The role of intentional control in biased language use and reward allocation. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 15, 335–359. doi:10.1177/0261927X960153007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franco, F. M., & Maass, A. (1999). Intentional control over prejudice: When the choice of the measure matters. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 469–477. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199906)29:4<469::AID-EJSP938>3.0.CO;2-S
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., Anastasio, P. A., Bachevan, B. A., & Rust, M. C. (1993). The common ingroup identity model: Recategorisation and the reduction of intergroup bias. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (vol. 4, pp. 1–26). Chichester: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Gardham, K., & Brown, R. (2001). Two forms of intergroup discrimination with positive and negative outcomes: Explaining the positive-negative asymmetry effect. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 23–34. doi:10.1348/014466601164678
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geschke, D., Sassenberg, K., Ruhrmann, G., & Sommer, D. (2010). Effects of linguistic abstractness in the mass media: How newspaper articles shape readers’ attitudes towards migrants. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, 22, 99–104. doi:10.1027/1864-1105/a000014
   Google Scholar
• Gil de Montes, L., Semin, G. R., & Valencia, J. F. (2003). Communication patterns in interdependent relationships. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 22, 259–281. doi:10.1177/0261927X03255381
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorham, B. W. (2006). News media’s relationship with stereotyping: The linguistic intergroup bias in response to crime news. Journal of Communication, 56, 289–308. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00020.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guimond, S., & Dambrun, M. (2002). When prosperity breeds intergroup hostility: The effects of relative deprivation and relative gratification on prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 900–912. doi:10.1177/014616720202800704
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halevy, N., Weisel, O., & Bornstein, G. (2012). In-group love” and “out-group hate” in repeated interaction between groups. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 25, 188–195. doi:10.1002/bdm.726
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansen, J., & Wänke, M. (2010). Truth from language and truth from fit: The impact of linguistic concreteness and level of construal on subjective truth. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1576–1588. doi:10.1177/0146167210386238
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris, S. E. (1993). The language of bias: The effect if social categorization on the linguistic intergroup bias (Unpublished master’s thesis). Michigan State Universisty, East Lansging, MI.
   Google Scholar
• Haslam, N. (2006). Dehumanization: An integrative review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 252–264. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hewstone, M., Rubin, M., & Willis, H. (2002). Intergroup bias. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 575–604. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135109
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hornsey, M. J., Spears, R., Cremers, I., & Hogg, M. A. (2003). Relations between high and low power groups: The importance of legitimacy. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 216–227. doi:10.1177/0146167202239047
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howard, J., & Rothbart, M. (1980). Social categorization and memory for ingroup and outgroup behaviour. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 301–310. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.38.2.301
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsu, L-H. (2011). Linguistic intergroup bias tells ingroup/outgroup orientation of bicultural Asian Americans. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 35, 853–866. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2011.06.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutter, R. R., & Crisp, R. J. (2005). The composition of category conjunctions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 647–657. doi:10.1177/0146167204271575
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isenberg, D. J. (1986). Group polarization: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 1141–1151. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.50.6.1141
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James, W. A. (1890). The principles of psychology. New York, NY: Holt.
   Google Scholar
• Jiga-Boy, G. M., Clark, A. E., & Semin, G. R. (2013). Situating construal level: The function of abstractness and concreteness in social contexts. Social Cognition, 31, 201–221. doi:10.1521/soco.2013.31.2.201
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, J. M. (1972). Prejudice and racism. Reading, MA: Addison–Wesley Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Jost, J. T., & Burgess, D. (2000). Attitudinal ambivalence and the conflict between group and system justification motives in low status groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 293–305. doi:10.1177/0146167200265003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karasawa, M., Karasawa, K., & Hirose, Y. (2004). Homogeneity perception as a reaction to identity threat: Effects of status difference in a simulated society game. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 613–625. doi:10.1002/ejsp.219
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karpinski, A., & von Hippel, W. (1996). The role of the linguistic intergroup bias in expectancy maintenance. Social Cognition, 14, 141–163. doi:10.1521/soco.1996.14.2.141
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kenworthy, J. B., Hewstone, M., Levine, J. M., Martin, R., & Willis, H. (2008). The phenomenology of minority-majority status: Effects on innovation in argument generation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 624–636. doi:10.1002/ejsp.521
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krauss, R. M., & Fussell, S. R. (1996). Social psychological models of interpersonal communication. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglansky (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 655–701). New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Kruglanski, A. W. (2011). Lay epistemic theory. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of the theories of social psychology (pp. 201–223). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Kruglanski, A. W., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., & De Grada, E. (2006). Groups as epistemic providers: Need for closure and the unfolding of group-centrism. Psychological Review, 113, 84–100. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.113.1.84
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kruglanski, A. W., Shah, J. Y., Fishbach, A., Friedman, R., Chun, W. Y., & Sleeth-Keppler, D. (2002). A theory of goal systems. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 331–378). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kunkel, A. D., Wilson, S. R., Olufowote, J., & Robson, S. (2003). Identity implications of influence goals: Initiating, intensifying, and ending romantic relationships. Western Journal of Communication, 67, 382–412. doi:10.1080/10570310309374780
   Google Scholar
• Leonardelli, G. J., & Brewer, M. B. (2001). Minority and majority discrimination: When and why. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 468–485. doi:10.1006/jesp.2001.1475
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lücken, M., & Simon, B. (2005). Cognitive and affective experiences of minority and majority members: The role of group size, status, and power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 396–413. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2004.08.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maass, A. (1999). Linguistic intergroup bias: Stereotype perpetuation through language. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 31, pp. 79–121). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Maass, A., Castelli, L., & Arcuri, L. (2000). Measuring prejudice: Implicit versus explicit techniques. In D. Capozza & R. J. Brown (Eds.), Social identity processes: Trends in theory and research (pp. 96–116). London: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Maass, A., Ceccarelli, R., & Rudin, S. (1996). Linguistic intergroup bias: Evidence for ingroup–protective motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 512–526. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.71.3.512
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maass, A., Corvino, P., & Arcuri, L. (1994). Linguistic intergroup bias and the mass media. Revue de Psychologie Sociale, 1, 31–43.
   Google Scholar
• Maass, A., Milesi, A., Zabbini, S., & Stahlberg, D. (1995). The linguistic intergroup bias: Differential expectancies or ingroup protection? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 116–126. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.68.1.116
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maass, A., Montalcini, F., & Biciotti, E. (1998). On the (dis-)confirmability of stereotypic attributes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 383–402. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199805/06)28:3<383::AID-EJSP870>3.0.CO;2-Q
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maass, A., Salvi, D., Arcuri, L., & Semin, G. R. (1989). Language use in intergroup contexts: The linguistic intergroup bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 981–993. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.981
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maass, A., & Schaller, M. (1991). Intergroup biases and the cognitive dynamics of stereotype formation. European Review of Social Psychology, 2, 189–209. doi:10.1080/14792779143000060
   Google Scholar
• Mackie, D. M. (1986). Social identification effects in group polarization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 720–728. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.50.4.720
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mackie, D. M., Devos, T., & Smith, E. R. (2000). Intergroup emotions: Explaining offensive action tendencies in an intergroup context. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 602–616. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.4.602
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Madera, J. M., Hebl, M. R., & Martin, R. C. (2009). Gender and letters of recommendation for academia: Agentic and communal differences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1591–1599. doi:10.1037/a0016539
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marques, J. M., & Yzerbyt, V. Y. (1988). The black sheep effect: Judgemental extremity towards ingroup members in inter- and intra-group situations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 287–292. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420180308
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menegatti, M., Mariani, M. G., & Rubini, M. (2012). Discriminazione di genere nella selezione del personale: Il ruolo implicito dell’astrazione linguistica [Gender discrimination in personnel selection: The implicit role of language abstraction]. Psicologia Sociale, 7, 231–240. doi:10.1482/37696
   Google Scholar
• Menegatti, M., & Rubini, M. (2012). From the individual to the group: The enhancement of linguistic bias. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 36–40. doi:10.1002/ejsp.856
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menegatti, M., & Rubini, M. (2013). Convincing similar and dissimilar others: The power of language abstraction in political communication. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 596–607. doi:10.1177/0146167213479404
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menegatti, M., & Rubini, M. (2014). Initiating, maintaining, or breaking up? The motivated use of language abstraction in romantic relationships. Social Psychology, 45, 408–420. doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000200
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moscatelli, S., Albarello, F., Prati, F., & Rubini, M. (2014). Badly off or better off than them? The impact of relative deprivation and relative gratification on intergroup discrimination. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 248–264. doi:10.1037/a0036704
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moscatelli, S., Albarello, F., & Rubini, M. (2008). Linguistic discrimination in minimal groups: The impact of status differentials. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 27, 140–154. doi:10.1177/0261927X07313652
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moscatelli, S., & Rubini, M. (2011). The impact of group entitativity on linguistic discrimination: Ingroup favoritism and outgroup derogation in the explanation of negative outcome allocations. Social Psychology, 42, 292–299. doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000071
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moscatelli, S., & Rubini, M. (2013). The impact of group entitativity on negative outcome allocations. The Journal of Social Psychology, 153, 149–160. doi:10.1080/00224545.2012.712068
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moscatelli, S., & Rubini, M. (2014). Different size, different language? Linguistic ingroup favoritism and outgroup derogation by majority and minority groups. Manuscript submitted for publication.
   Google Scholar
• Moscovici, S., & Zavalloni, M. (1969). The group as a polarizer of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 12, 125–135. doi:10.1037/h0027568
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mullen, B., Brown, R., & Smith, C. (1992). Ingroup bias as a function of salience, relevance, and status: An integration. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 103–122. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420220202
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mummendey, A., Otten, S., Berger, U., & Kessler, T. (2000). Positive – negative asymmetry in social discrimination: Valence of evaluation and salience of categorization. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1258–1270. doi:10.1177/0146167200262007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mummendey, A., Simon, B., Dietze, C., Grünert, M., Haeger, G., Kessler, S., … Schäferhoff, S. (1992). Categorization is not enough: Intergroup discrimination in negative outcome allocation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 125–144. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(92)90035-I
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ng, S. H., & Chan, K. K. (1996). Biases in the description of various age groups: A linguistic category model analysis. Bulletin of the Hong Kong Psychological Society, 36, 5–20.
   Google Scholar
• Otten, S., & Mummendey, A. (2000). Valence-dependent probability of ingroup favouritism between minimal groups: An integrative view of the positive-negative asymmetry in social discrimination. In D. Capozza & R. J. Brown (Eds.), Social identity processes: Trends in theory and research (pp. 33–49). London: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Otten, S., Mummendey, A., & Blanz, M. (1996). Intergroup discrimination in positive and negative outcome allocations: Impact of stimulus valence, relative group status, and relative group size. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 568–581. doi:10.1177/0146167296226003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Otten, S., & Wentura, D. (1999). About the impact of automaticity in the minimal group paradigm: Evidence from affective priming tasks. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 1049–1071. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199912)29:8<1049::AID-EJSP985>3.0.CO;2-Q
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Papastamou, S., & Mugny, G. (1985). Rigidity and minority influence: The influence of the social in social influence. In S. Moscovici, G. Mugny, & E. van Avermaet (Eds.), Perspectives on minority influence (pp. 113–136). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Parker, M. T., & Janoff-Bulman, R. (2013). Lessons from morality-based social identity: The power of outgroup “hate”, not just ingroup “love”. Social Justice Research, 26, 81–96. doi:10.1007/s11211-012-0175-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prati, F., Menegatti, M., & Rubini, M. (in press). Reducing linguistic outgroup derogation: A matter of multiple categorization and intergroup contact. Journal of Language and Social Psychology.
   Google Scholar
• Reichl, A. J. (1997). Ingroup favouritism and outgroup favouritism in low status minimal groups: Differential responses to status-related and status-unrelated measures. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27, 617–633. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199711/12)27:6<617::AID-EJSP829>3.0.CO;2-T
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubini, M., Graziani, A. R., & Moscatelli, S. (2009). Outside the laboratory: The linguistic intergroup bias in a natural multiple-comparison setting. In E. P. Lamont (Ed.), Social psychology: New research (pp. 165–185). New York, NY: Nova Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Rubini, M., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1997). Brief encounters ending in estrangement: Motivated language use and interpersonal rapport in the question-answer paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1047–1060. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.5.1047
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubini, M., & Menegatti, M. (2008). Linguistic bias in personnel selection. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 27, 168–181. doi:10.1177/0261927X07313653
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubini, M., & Menegatti, M. (2014). Hindering women’s careers in academia: Gender linguistic bias in personnel selection. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33, 632–650. doi:10.1177/0261927X14542436
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubini, M., Moscatelli, S., Albarello, F., & Palmonari, A. (2007). Group power as a determinant of interdependence and intergroup discrimination. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 1203–1221. doi:10.1002/ejsp.391
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubini, M., Moscatelli, S., & Palmonari, A. (2007). Increasing group entitativity: Linguistic intergroup discrimination in the minimal group paradigm. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 10, 280–296. doi:10.1177/1368430207075156
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubini, M., & Semin, G. R. (1994). Language use in the context of congruent and incongruent in-group behaviours. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 355–362. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1994.tb01031.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubini, M., & Sigall, H. (2002). Taking the edge off of disagreement: Linguistic abstractness and self–presentation to a heterogeneous audience. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 343–351. doi:10.1002/ejsp.94
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sachdev, I., & Bourhis, R. Y. (1984). Minimal majorities and minorities. European Journal of Social Psychology, 14, 35–52. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420140104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sachdev, I., & Bourhis, R. Y. (1985). Social categorization and power differentials in group relations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 15, 415–434. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420150405
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sachdev, I., & Bourhis, R. Y. (1987). Status differentials and intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 17, 277–293. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420170304
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sachdev, I., & Bourhis, R. Y. (1991). Power and status differentials in minority and majority group relations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21, 1–24. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420210102
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheepers, D., Spears, R., Doosje, B., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2005). The social functions of ingroup bias: Creating, confirming, or changing social reality. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (17, pp. 359–396). Abingdon: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Scheepers, D., Spears, R., Doosje, B., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2006). Diversity in in-group bias: Structural factors, situational features, and social functions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 944–960. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.6.944
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmid, J., & Fiedler, K. (1996). Language and implicit attributions in the nuremberg trials analyzing prosecutors’and defense attorneys’closing speeches. Human Communication Research, 22, 371–398. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1996.tb00372.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmid, J., & Fiedler, K. (1998). The backbone of closing speeches: The impact of prosecution versus defence language on juridical attribution. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1140–1172. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1998.tb01672.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Semin, G. R. (2000a). Language as a cognitive and behavioral structuring resource: Question-answer exchanges. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (pp. 75–104). Chichester: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Semin, G. R. (2000b). Agenda 2000–Communication: Language as an implementation device for cognition. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 595–612. doi:10.1002/1099-0992(200009/10)30:5<595::AID-EJSP23>3.0.CO;2-A
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Semin, G. R. (2007a). Grounding communication: Synchrony. In A. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 630–649). New York, NY: Guilford Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Semin, G. R. (2007b). Linguistic markers of social distance and proximity. In K. Fiedler (Ed.), Social communication (pp. 389–408). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Semin, G. R. (2011). Culturally situated linguistic ecologies and language use: Cultural tools at the service of representing and shaping situated realities. Advances in Culture and Psychology, 1, 217–249.
   Google Scholar
• Semin, G. R., & de Poot, C. J. (1997). The question-answer paradigm: You might regret not noticing how a question is worded. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 472–480. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.3.472
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Semin, G. R., & Fiedler, K. (1988). The cognitive functions of linguistic categories in describing persons: Social cognition and language. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 558–568. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.4.558
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Semin, G. R., & Fiedler, K. (1991). The linguistic category model, its bases, applications, and range. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 1–30). Chichester: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Semin, G. R., & Fiedler, K. (1992). The inferential properties of interpersonal verbs. In G. R. Semin & K. Fiedler (Eds.), Language, interaction and social cognition (pp. 58–78). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Semin, G. R., Higgins, T., Gil de Montes, L. G., Estourget, Y., & Valencia, J. F. (2005). Linguistic signatures of regulatory focus: How abstraction fits promotion more than prevention. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 36–45. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.89.1.36
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Semin, G. R., & Marsman, J. G. (1994). ‘Multiple inference–inviting properties’ of interpersonal verbs: Event instigation, dispositional inference, and implicit causality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 836–849. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.67.5.836
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Semin, G. R., Rubini, M., & Fiedler, K. (1995). The answer is in the question: The effect of verb causality on locus of explanation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 834–841. doi:10.1177/0146167295218006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sherman, S. J., & Gorkin, L. (1980). Attitude bolstering when behavior is inconsistent with central attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, 388–403. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(80)90030-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sigall, H., Mucchi Faina, A., & Mosso, C. (2006). Minority influence is facilitated when the communication employs linguistic abstractness. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 9, 443–451. doi:10.1177/1368430206064644
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simon, B., Aufderheide, B., & Kampmeier, C. (2001). The social psychology of minority-majority relations. In M. B. Brewer & M. Hewstone (Eds.), Self and social identity (pp. 278–297). Malden: Blackwell Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, L., Greenberg, J., & Brehm, J. (1995). Trivialization: The forgotten mode of dissonance reduction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 247–260. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.68.2.247
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, H. J., Cronin, T., & Kessler, T. (2008). Anger, fear, or sadness: Faculty members’ emotional reactions to collective pay disadvantage. Political Psychology, 29, 221–246. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00624.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, E. R., & Semin, G. R. (2004). Socially situated cognition: Cognition in its social context. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 36, pp. 53–117). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sutton, R. M. (2010). The creative power of language in social cognition and intergroup relations. In H. Giles, S. Reid, & Harwood, J. (Eds.), Dynamics of intergroup communication (pp. 105–115). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundy, R. P., & Flament, C. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 149–178. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420010202
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
   Google Scholar
• Tanabe, Y., & Oka, T. (2001). Linguistic intergroup bias in Japan. Japanese Psychological Research, 43, 104–111. doi:10.1111/1468-5884.00166
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tetlock, P. E. (1984). Cognitive style and political belief systems in the British House of commons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 365–375. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.46.2.365
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner, J. C. (1975). Social comparison and social identity: Some prospects for intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 5, 1–34. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420050102
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. PacificGrove, CA: Brooks/Cole Hogg.
   Google Scholar
• Voci, A., & Hewstone, M. (2003). Intergroup contact and prejudice toward immigrants in Italy: The mediational role of anxiety and the moderational role of group salience. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 6, 37–54. doi:10.1177/1368430203006001011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von Hippel, W., Sekaquaptewa, D., & Vargas, P. (1997). The linguistic intergroup bias as an implicit indicator of prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 490–509. doi:10.1006/jesp.1997.1332
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webster, D. M., Kruglanski, A. W., & Pattison, D. A. (1997). Motivated language use in intergroup contexts: Need-for-closure effects on the linguistic intergroup bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1122–1131. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.5.1122
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wigboldus, D. H. J., & Douglas, K. M. (2007). Language, stereotypes, and intergroup relations. In K. Fiedler (Ed.), Social communication (pp. 79–106). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wigboldus, D. H. J., Semin, G. R., & Spears, R. (2000). How do we communicate stereotypes? Linguistic bases and inferential consequences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 5–18. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.78.1.5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wigboldus, D. H. J., Semin, G. R., & Spears, R. (2006). Communicating expectancies about others. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 815–824. doi:10.1002/ejsp.323
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wigboldus, D. H. J., Spears, R., & Semin, G. R. (2005). When do we communicate stereotypes? Influence of the social context on the linguistic expectancy bias. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 8, 215–230. doi:10.1177/1368430205053939
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. New York, NY: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar