Intergroup Threat And Cognitive Switch:The Effect Of Group Identification

Cognitive switch is one of core executive functions. Cognitive switch also referred to as “task switching” or “attention switching”, refers to the ability to shift back and forth between multiple tasks or mental sets. To change mental sets, human beings need to inhibit(or deactivate) their previous mental sets and load into working memory(or activate) a different mental sets. It is in this sense that cognitive switch requires and builds on inhibitory control and working memory. Research has found that intergroup threat would influence individual executive functions. But most research of intergroup threat deplete executive functions are based on Stroop task--a prototypical inhibition task, which one needs to inhibit or override the tendency to produce a more dominant or automatic response. These findings suggest that being the targets of intergroup threat can deplete inhibitory control ability of members whom belongs to threatened group. At this study, we mainly examine the effect of intergroup threat on cognitive switch.Group identification moderates the consequences of perceiving intergroup threat. Previous research suggested that group identification(importance of the group in the self-concept) is not in the same way for all members of one group.There is substantial evidence that individual differences in group identification are an important predictor of cognition, affect, and behavior in intergroup situations.Those who high in group identification would expend more resources resisting stigmatizing messages. And, interracial study found that highly identified individuals more likely to show greater depletion in an interracial interaction.Specifically, the more central the group is to the self-concept, the more perceiving intergroup threat should have negative consequences for cognitive switch.Based on the studies described above, we had reasonable grounds to predict that the cognitive switch might be affected by intergroup threat. Two different types of intergroup threat were introduced according to Intergroup Threat Theory; ourexpectation was that participants would experience greater depletion following an intergroup threat versus a control condition. Furthermore, building on previous findings, we also hypothesized that this effect would be moderated by participants’ levels of group identification, with greater depletion occurring for participants in the intergroup threat condition who reported higher levels of group identification.We conduct four experiment to confirm our hypothesis. In experiment 1a we manipulate symbolic intergroup threat, use Classic cognitive switch task paradigm to examine whether symbolic intergroup threat could deplete cognitive switch ability and whether this depletion would be moderated by participants’ level of group identification. The results of this study offer preliminary support for the hypothesis that participants experienced greater cognitive switch cost following symbolic threat condition, and this effect was moderated by participants’ levels of group identification, with greater depletion occurring for participants in the intergroup threat condition who reported higher levels of group identification. Experiment 2a manipulate realistic intergroup threat to repeat the result of experiment 1a. Aim to examine whether symbolic intergroup threat could deplete cognitive switch ability and whether this depletion would be moderated by participants’ level of group identification. The results of this study offer support for the study 1 that participants experienced greater cognitive switch cost following intergroup threat condition, and this effect was moderated by participants’ levels of group identification, with greater depletion occurring for participants in the intergroup threat condition who reported higher levels of group identification. But both in experiment 1a&2a, the material of cognitive switch task are pure cognitive materials, so in experiment 1b, we apply emotional face picture as cognitive switch task material and manipulate symbolic intergroup threat. In experiment 2b, we apply emotional words as cognitive switch task material and manipulate realistic intergroup threat. Aim at confirm the result of experiment 1a&2a‘s spread validity.Participants were randomly divide into intergroup threat condition and control condition. Firstly, participants were asked to take part in two separate and unrelated experiments being conducted in the lab. The so-called first experiment was described as the survey about their feeling about an article. Participants were asked to read an article and answer some questions. In actuality, this is threat induction and manipulation check. Upon completion of these measures, participants were invited to participate in a purportedly unrelated ‘‘second study” to fill their remaining time.The described goal of this study was to classify the figure and the number. In actuality, participants completed cognitive switch task. In experiment 1, each trial contained a geometrical figures(square, diamond, triangle, or circle) with a digit(one, two, three, or four) placed in the center. Either the figure or the digit had to be classified, depending on the color of the stimulus. When the stimulus was red, the digit had to be classified(If the digit was odd, participants should press “F”; if the digit was even, and participants should press “J”); when it was blue, the surrounding figure had to be classified(if the figure was quadrilateral, participants should press“F”; if the figure was non-quadrilateral, and participants should press “J”). Each participant should complete one single task and one mixed task. Single task including four digit classify trials and four figure classify trials, all the trials are presented sequentially(AAAABBBB). Mixed task including eight exercise trials and thirty-two real trials, half are digit classify trials and others are figure classify trials, all the trials presented randomly(ABBAAAAB…). The difference in reaction time between single and mixed trials represents the extent of cognitive switch cost.In experiment 1b,2a &2b,.In this study, each participant should complete eight exercise trials and thirty-two real trials, all the trials presented sequentially(ABBAABBA…). The difference in reaction time between repeat trials and switch trials represents the extent of cognitive switch cost. Finally, participants completed group identification scale. After providing demographic information the experiment was concluded and all participants were thanked and being explained of the authenticity of the materials, and received their rewards.This study found that intergroup threat has passive effect on cognitive switch,and this effect is moderated by group member’s level of group identification for the first.