The Influence Of Distinguishing Between In-Group And Out-group On Malevolent Creativity And Benevolent Creativity

Human beings are social animals and have lived in groups.Consequently,people have interacted with in-group members and out-group members from the dawn of our species to the present day.Across many different contexts,people act more conflicts and competitions towards out-group members but act more beneficent actions towards members of their own group.At present,studies have found that an individual`s malevolent creativity and benevolent creativity could be affected by cooperation,conflict,and competition.However,whether distinguishing between in-group and out-group could affect malevolent creativity,benevolent creativity,and neutral creativity directly is not known.Based on the previous studies,our study explores the influence of distinguishing between in-group and out-group on malevolent creativity and benevolent creativity.In experiment 1,60 participants were randomly divided into two groups and they were instructed to negotiate with an in-group or out-group member.The results showed that participants tended to generate more number and more original benevolent tactics but fewer and less original malevolent tactics when they negotiated with in-group members than when they negotiated with out-group members.Furthermore,the number(fluency)and originality score of benevolent tactics were greater than those of malevolent tactics when people negotiated with in-group members.There was no difference between benevolent creativity fluency and malevolent creativity fluency when people negotiated with out-group members,but more original malevolent tactics were reported than benevolent tactics.In experiment 2,after they were primed by the concept of in-group or out-group,34 participants were instructed to negotiate.The results showed that participants tended to generate more number and more original benevolent tactics but fewer and less original malevolent tactics when they were primed by the in-group concept than when they were primed by the out-group concept.Furthermore,participants would generate more number and more original benevolent creativity than malevolent creativity,when they were primed by the in-group concept.But there was no difference when they were primed by the out-group concept.In experiment 3,125 college students were taken as participants.After establishing a common group identity or don`t establish a common group identity,participants were instructed to negotiate with an in-group or out-group member.The condition for establishing a common group identity is that re-dividing the group and the members of different groups are formed into a new group.In this condition,participants` former in-group member became an out-group member because they were assigned to other groups,but the former out-group member became a new in-group member because they and participants formed a new group.The condition for not establishing a common group identity is that after participants were randomly divided into two groups,the group is fixed,and the group members will not change.The results showed that in the condition of not establishing common group identity,participants tended to generate more number and more original benevolent tactics but fewer and less original malevolent tactics when they negotiated with in-group members than when they negotiated with out-group members.In the condition of establishing a common group identity,there was no difference in benevolent creativity and malevolent creativity when they negotiated with new in-group member and when they negotiated with out-group member(former in-group member).When they negotiated with out-group members,participants tended to generate more number and more original malevolent creativity but less benevolent creativity when they in the condition of not establishing common group identity than when they in the condition of establishing common group identity.When they negotiated with in-group members,participants tended to generate more original benevolent creativity when they in the condition of not establishing common group identity than when they in the condition of establishing common group identity.Furthermore,in the condition of not establishing common group identity,participants tended to generate more number and more original benevolent tactics and more number neutral tactics than malevolent tactics when people negotiated with in-group members;and participants tended to generate more number neutral tactics than malevolent tactics and more original malevolent tactics than benevolent tactics when people negotiated with out-group members.However,whether negotiating with the in-group member or out-group member,participants tended to generate more number benevolent tactics and neutral tactics than malevolent tactics,when they in the condition of establishing a common group identity.In experiment 4,99 college students were taken as participants.After they were primed by two group identities,namely the main identity and the secondary identity.Participants were instructed to negotiate.The basis for the division of main identity and secondary identity is that when participants and the negotiator have the same main identity,the sense of in-group is the strongest;But when participants and the negotiator have the same secondary identity,the sense of in-group is also stronger,but slightly weaker than when the main identity is same.The common group identity in the experiment means that at least one of the participants` main identity and secondary identity is the same as the negotiator.The results showed that participants tended to generate more number benevolent tactics when their secondary identity is the same as the negotiator than when their secondary identity is not the same as the negotiator.And participants tended to generate more number benevolent tactics when their main identity is the same as the negotiator than when their main identity is not the same as the negotiator.Furthermore,participants tended to generate more original malevolent tactics and less original benevolent tactics when the main identity and the secondary identity of the participant were not the same as their negotiator than when the two identities of the participant or one of the two identities were the same as their negotiator.In summary,through four experiments,this study found that participants tended to generate more benevolent creativity when they negotiated with in-group members or when they were primed by in-group concept,and participants tended to generate more malevolent creativity when they negotiated with out-group members or when they were primed by the outgroup concept.Furthermore,establishing a common group identity or priming a common group identity could reduce participants` malevolent creativity.