The Functional Flexibility Of In-group Derogation:Disease Threat And The Activation Of In-group Derogation

In-group derogation is a peculiar phenomenon that people like out-group members more than in-group members. Various theories tried to explain such phenomenon from different perspectives, but none of them successfully figured out the primary cause of the emergence of in-group derogation. Wu et al.(2015) put forward, from the angle of evolution, that in-group derogation is the reaction of behavior immune to the disease threat which is charactered with functional flexibility. However, there still leave several questions to be answered in Wu et al’s study. The current study designed three experiments on the basis of Wu et al’s study, firstly explored whether in-group derogation is the specific reaction to disease threat, and further explored the functional flexibility of in-group derogation when disease threat strengthened and the group-source of disease threat has changed.Experiment 1 investigated whether the in-group derogation is the specific reaction to disease threat and whether it will increase its effect when there are disease cues exist in the current environment. The results show that, participants in control condition(F(1, 116) = 12.26,p <.01,η_p~2 = 0.10) and in disease condition(F(1, 116) = 56.88,p <.001,η_p~2 =0.33) derogated in-group members more than out-group members, but the degree of derogation under disease condition is greater than under control disease(disease condition: M = 0.59, SD = 0.08 and control condition: M = 0.26, SD = 0.08).Experiment 2 investigated whether the in-group derogation will functionally increase its effect when participants’ physiologic immune function is weaker than usual. The results show that, no matter the participants were weaker in physiologic immune function(F(1, 119) = 37.97, p <.001, η_p~2 = 0.24) or healthy(F(1, 119) = 10.04, p <.01, η_p~2 = 0.08), they derogated in-group members more than out-group members, but the degree of derogation when participants’ physiologic immune function was weaker is greater than when participant were healthy(weaker in physiologic immune function: M = 0.33, SD = 0.05 and healthy: M = 0.15, SD = 0.05), and such increasing of derogation was not originate from the differences of participants’ perceived vulnerability of disease.Experiment 3 investigated the functional flexibility of in-group derogation when there were different cues which indicts that the in-group members are vulnerable to disease or the out-group members are vulnerable to disease. The results show that, participants in control condition(F( 2, 87) = 4.41, p <.05, η_p~2 = 0.05) and in-group members vulnerable to disease condition(F( 2, 87) = 33.64, p <.001, η_p~2 = 0.28) derogated in-group members more than out-group members, whereas the participants in out-group members vulnerable to disease condition showed no different attitude to in-group members and out-group members(F( 2, 87) = 2.71, p >.05, η_p~2 = 0.03). As to the degree of derogation, participants in control condition showed greater than in out-group member vulnerable to disease condition, but less than in in-group member vulnerable to disease condition(control: M = 0.256, SD = 0.102, in-group member vulnerable to disease: M = 0.611,SD = 0.102 and out-group member vulnerable to disease: M =-0.211,SD = 0.102).Three experiments in the current study consistently showed that, in-group derogation is a specific behavior immune reaction to disease, which is charactered by functional flexibility.