Abstract
The majority of social psychological research has been concerned with exploring intergroup interactions and the factors that influence conflict between groups. Early work in this field indicated that the mechanisms at play within a single in-group are incredibly complex and warrant further investigation. Research on the Black Sheep Effect (BSE) posits that group threat and strong in-group identification are key factors influencing negative attitudes towards members of one’s own in-group. The two studies presented here attempt to extend the theory of the BSE in an intragroup setting, and hypothesised that similar mechanisms would impact intragroup judgements. Using the New Zealand national in-group, Study 1 examined the extent to which manipulated Covid-19 threat (High vs Low vs Baseline) impacted on evaluations of norm adherent (NA) or norm violating (NV) in-group targets in the context of Covid-19 safety norms. NV targets were judged more negatively, regardless of threat condition. Regression analysis revealed that the only significant predictor of evaluative judgements was norms. Study 2 examined the extent to which manipulated information about national Covid-19 norm support (Strong vs Weak vs Control) impacted on evaluations of NA or NV in-group targets. As in Study 1, those who violated Covid-19 protocol were judged more negatively, regardless of norm manipulation. Regression analysis revealed that the most significant predictor of evaluative judgements was personal norms, and a post hoc analysis revealed that the data from Study 1 supported this finding. These studies identified key differences between the findings presented in the BSE literature and the conflicting results of inter and intragroup research, highlighting the key role that social and personal norms play in explaining responses to norm violating in-group members. Together the findings indicate the importance of further research in intragroup contexts to identify how group functioning changes without a comparative out-group.