Psychological Sclence OnlineFirst,published on January 28,2014 as dol:10.1177/0956797613516802 Research Article PSYCHO The Ontogeny of the Motivation That The Author(s)2014 Underlies In-Group Bias 0.1177 567y761351602 SAGE David Buttelmann'2 and Robert Bohm2> Business and Economics,RWTH Aachen University Abstract r bias toward membe s of thei own group over members of other groups in a variety of een argue rlying this in-group one: dem ated ir n hias ar hildren and infar othin is knon out the s of thi bias.Using a novel game,we found that in-group love is already present in children of preschool age and can motivate group-biased behavior across chilhood.n contrast,out-group hate develops only after a child's sixth birthday and the mnnmnaianorngop nool age onward. Keywords n bis,ny chiod developmnrp dyn Received /2/Revision accepted 11/21/13 Whether in-group love,out-group hate,or both are the e th or engagement and cohesion within the in-group and hatred of and con is the recipients'group memberships (Allport,1954; tempt toward the out-group are inseparable motivation Brewer Caporael emerge simultaneousl (Sherif,1966;Sumner 1906 0 ave arguec nat in-group sand inte ups)in social decision-making situations (Brewer, the in-group.whereas attitudes toward the out-grour 1979:Hewstone,Rubin,Willis,2002:Taifel Turner, may range from hatred to indifference and may even be 1986).Given its severe negative consequences for human positive (although at a lower leve than toward the in aing and m imizing intergroup group: Supporting the latter favoring one's in-group over out-groups increases the in- help the in-group rather than an option that (in addition) group's absolute velfare.On the other hand,such favo actively hurts the out-group (De Dreu et al..2010:Halevy it-groups, Bornstein,Sagiv,2008:Halevy,Weisel,Bornstein that lead to these ences of in- Corr nding author: mpm group bate (or out-group derogation:Brewer, 1999 1,201 Psychological Science 1–7 © The Author(s) 2014 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0956797613516802 pss.sagepub.com Research Article When humans are faced with the challenge of allocating resources among other persons, they often base their decisions on specific characteristics of the possible recip￾ients. One of the most important of these characteristics is the recipients’ group memberships (Allport, 1954; Brewer & Caporael, 2006). People tend to prefer the members of their own groups (in-groups) and to dis￾criminate against the members of other groups (out￾groups) in social decision-making situations (Brewer, 1979; Hewstone, Rubin, & Willis, 2002; Tajfel & Turner, 1986). Given its severe negative consequences for human societies, understanding and minimizing intergroup dis￾crimination is an important challenge not only for the social sciences but also for other fields. On one hand, favoring one’s in-group over out-groups increases the in￾group’s absolute welfare. On the other hand, such favor￾itism decreases the welfare of the out-groups, both absolutely and relative to the in-group. The motivations that lead to these often interrelated consequences of in￾group bias and intergroup discrimination have been labeled in-group love (or in-group favoritism) and out￾group hate (or out-group derogation; Brewer, 1999). Whether in-group love, out-group hate, or both are decisive for engagement in intergroup discrimination is an old debate. Some authors have argued that loyalty to and cohesion within the in-group and hatred of and con￾tempt toward the out-group are inseparable motivations that emerge simultaneously (Sherif, 1966; Sumner, 1906). Other authors have argued that in-group bias and inter￾group discrimination require positive attitudes toward the in-group, whereas attitudes toward the out-group may range from hatred to indifference and may even be positive (although at a lower level than toward the in￾group; Allport, 1954). Supporting the latter view, recent research has shown that group members prefer a behav￾ioral option that displays merely an altruistic desire to help the in-group rather than an option that (in addition) actively hurts the out-group (De Dreu et al., 2010; Halevy, Bornstein, & Sagiv, 2008; Halevy, Weisel, & Bornstein, 516802PSSXXX10.1177/0956797613516802Buttelmann, BöhmThe Ontogeny of In-Group Bias research-article2014 Corresponding Author: David Buttelmann, University of Erfurt, Nordhaeuser Strasse 63, D-99089 Erfurt, Germany E-mail: david.buttelmann@uni-erfurt.de The Ontogeny of the Motivation That Underlies In-Group Bias David Buttelmann1,2 and Robert Böhm2,3 1 Kleinkindforschung in Thüringen Research Group, University of Erfurt; 2 Center for Empirical Research in Economics and Behavioural Sciences, University of Erfurt; and 3 School of Business and Economics, RWTH Aachen University Abstract Humans demonstrate a clear bias toward members of their own group over members of other groups in a variety of ways. It has been argued that the motivation underlying this in-group bias in adults may be favoritism toward one’s own group (in-group love), derogation of the out-group (out-group hate), or both. Although some studies have demonstrated in-group bias among children and infants, nothing is known about the underlying motivations of this bias. Using a novel game, we found that in-group love is already present in children of preschool age and can motivate in-group-biased behavior across childhood. In contrast, out-group hate develops only after a child’s sixth birthday and is a sufficient motivation for in-group-biased behavior from school age onward. These results help to better identify the motivation that underlies in-group-biased behavior in children. Keywords in-group favoritism, out-group derogation, in-group bias, ontogeny, childhood development, intergroup dynamics, cognitive processes, decision making, social cognition Received 8/23/13; Revision accepted 11/21/13 Psychological Science OnlineFirst, published on January 28, 2014 as doi:10.1177/0956797613516802 Downloaded from pss.sagepub.com by Cai Xing on February 13, 2014