Abstract
The research outlined in this thesis aimed to examine the relationship between belonging and ingroup favouritism within the minimal group paradigm (MGP). Three studies were conducted. The first two studies tested the extent to which distinct forms of ingroup favouritism led to increased belonging. Study 1 revealed that members of the Klee group noted an increase in belonging after evaluating ingroup members (Klee) more favourably than the outgroup (Kandinsky). Study 2 revealed similar effects regarding the distribution of white noise (a noxious stimulus); Klee group members that subjected the outgroup (Kandinsky) to more white noise than the ingroup (Klee) experienced increased belonging. Study 3 investigated the degree to which (a) ingroup favouritism was related to increased belonging and (b) threats to belonging were associated with ingroup favouritism. Threats to belonging were manipulated through feedback during a game of Cyberball. Participants who were included or excluded exhibited greater patterns of ingroup favouritism than those who were not provided with feedback. Participants whose belonging was initially threatened reported an increase in belonging after demonstrations of ingroup favouritism, suggesting that ingroup favouritism may help restore belonging after it has been experimentally reduced. Interestingly, participants who were included showed greater patterns of ingroup favouritism than those who were ostracised. Partial correlations from each study showed that the associations discovered between ingroup favouritism and belonging were not influenced by related variables such as personal self-esteem, group esteem, and group identity. Overall, the findings suggest that ingroup favouritism is directly related to increased belonging. The implications of these findings and recommendations for future research are discussed.