Abstract
This thesis assesses the relationship between belonging and intergroup evaluations. To this end three studies were conducted. In each study New Zealanders evaluated ingroup (i.e., New Zealanders) and outgroup members (i.e., Americans). Study one (n = 55), examined the association between group and outgroup evaluations and belonging in order to examine whether belonging was linked to intergroup evaluations independently of self- esteem. Study two (n = 183), tested whether group favouring evaluations led to increased belonging. Study three (n = 282), ruled out alternative explanations for the findings discerned in study two, and additionally examined the extent to which baseline levels of belonging were associated with the subsequent display of group favouring evaluations. Study one showed that the associated between ingroup favouring evaluations and belonging was not a function of either personal or collective self-esteem. Study two showed that participants who displayed ingroup favouritism reported enhanced levels of belonging. Study three replicated and extended the results of study two to the extent that it showed that increased patterns of belonging found in study two were not a consequence of identity salience and, (b) higher baseline levels of belonging were associated with higher levels of ingroup favouritism. Taken together these studies demonstrate a link between ingroup favouritism and increased belonging. Furthermore this association is not a function of either personal or collective self-esteem. It is especially noteworthy, that positive levels of belonging were correlated with positive evaluations of the ingroup (and not negative evaluations of the outgroup). This suggests that increased belonging is a consequence of ingroup favouritism rather than outgroup derogation. The ramifications of these finding together with suggestions for future research are discussed.