Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science

Living Edition
| Editors: Todd K. Shackelford, Viviana A. Weekes-Shackelford

Salience of Category

  • Janine Bosak
  • Frank Asbrock
  • Bertolt Meyer
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_2425-1



A person’s social category is salient when he or she is perceived, or perceives himself or herself, as a group member rather than as a unique individual. Category salience implies that the impression of and the behavior towards the person shift from the interpersonal level to the intergroup level.


Psychological theory and research has extensively focused on the process of social categorization, its antecedents, and consequences. A person’s social category is salient when he or she is perceived, or perceives himself or herself, as a group member (e.g., a “woman” or a “manager”) rather than as a unique individual. Category salience implies that the impression of and the behavior towards the person shift from the interpersonal level to the intergroup level. Without category salience, intergroup behavior is not possible – behavior between groups can only be shown if people categorize each other into...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Abrams, D., & Hogg, M. A. (2010). Social identity and self-categorization. In J. F. Dovidio, M. Hewstone, P. Glick, & V. M. Esses (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination (pp. 179–193). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aronson, J., Quinn, D. M., & Spencer, S. J. (1998). Stereotype threat and the academic underperformance of minorities and women. In J. K. Swim & C. Stangor (Eds.), Prejudice: The target’s perspective (pp. 83–103). San Diego: Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asbrock, F. (2010). Stereotypes of social groups in Germany in terms of warmth and competence. Social Psychology, 41, 76–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Becker, J. C. (2012). The system stabilizing role of identity management strategies: Social creativity can undermine collective action for social change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 647–662.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Becker, J. C., & Asbrock, F. (2012). What triggers helping versus harming of ambivalent groups? Effects of the relative salience of warmth versus competence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 19–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bell, S., Villado, A., Lukasik, M., Belau, L., & Briggs, A. (2011). Getting specific about demographic diversity variable and team performance relationships: A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 37, 709–743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blanton, H., George, G., & Crocker, J. K. (2001). Contexts of system justification and system evaluation: Exploring the social comparison strategies of the (not yet) contented female worker. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 4, 126–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bosak, J., & Sczesny, S. (2008). Am I the right candidate? Self-ascribed fit of women and men to a leadership position. Sex Roles, 58, 682–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bosak, J., Sczesny, S., & Eagly, A. H. (2008). Communion and agency judgments of women and men as function of role information and response format. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 1148–1155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bosak, J., Sczesny, S., & Eagly, A. H. (2012). The impact of social roles on trait judgments: A critical re-examination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 429–440.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Bruner, J. S. (1957). Going beyond the information given. In J. S. Bruner, E. Brunswik, L. Festinger, F. Heider, K. F. Muenzinger, C. E. Osgood, & D. Rapaport (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to cognition (pp. 41–69). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Reprinted in Bruner, J.S. [1973]. Beyond the Information Given pp. 218–238. New York: Norton).Google Scholar
  12. Carton, A. M., & Cummings, J. N. (2012). A theory of subgroups in work teams. Academy of Management Review, 37, 441–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2007). The BIAS map: Behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 631–648.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., Kwan, V. S., Glick, P., Demoulin, S., & Leyens, J. P. (2009). Stereotype content model across cultures: Towards universal similarities and some differences. British Journal of Social Psychology, 48, 1–33.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Diehl, M. (1990). The minimal group paradigm: Theoretical explanations and empirical findings. European Review of Social Psychology, 1, 263–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109, 573–598.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. B. (2000). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In T. Eckes & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 123–174). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  18. Finkelstein, L. M., Burke, M. J., & Raju, M. S. (1995). Age discrimination in simulated employment contexts: An integrative analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 652–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fiske, S. T., & Neuberg, S. L. (1990). A continuum of impression formation from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 23, 1–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Reducing intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  22. Gaertner, S., Guerra, R., Rebelo, M., Dovidio, J., Hehman, E., & Deegan, M. (2016). The common ingroup identity model and the development of a functional perspective: A cross-national collaboration. In J. Vala, S. Waldzus, & M. M. Calheiros (Eds.), The social developmental construction of violence and intergroup conflict (pp. 105–120). Cham: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. González, R., & Brown, R. (2003). Generalization of positive attitude as a function of subgroup and superordinate group identification in intergroup contact. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 195–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. González, R., & Brown, R. (2006). Dual identities and intergroup contact: Group status and size moderate the generalization of positive attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 753–767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hall, N. R., & Crisp, R. J. (2005). Considering multiple criteria for social categorization can reduce intergroup bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1435–1444.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Hehman, E., Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., Mania, E. W., Guerra, R., Wilson, D. C., & Friel, B. M. (2012). Group status drives majority and minority integration preferences. Psychological Science, 23, 46–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Heilman, M. E. (1980). The impact of situational factors on personnel decisions concerning women: Varying the sex composition of the applicant pool. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 26, 386–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hilliard, L. J., & Liben, L. S. (2010). Differing levels of gender salience in preschool classrooms: Effects on children’s gender attitudes and intergroup bias. Child Development, 81, 1787–1798.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Homan, A. C., van Knippenberg, D., van Kleef, G. A., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2007). Bridging faultlines by valuing diversity: Diversity beliefs, information elaboration, and performance in diverse work groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1189–1199.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Horwitz, S., & Horwitz, I. (2007). The effects of team diversity on team outcomes: A meta-analytic review of team demography. Journal of Management, 33, 987–1015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hoyt, C. L., & Murphy, S. E. (2016). Managing to clear the air: Stereotype threat, women, and leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 27, 387–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jehn, K. A., & Bezrukova, K. (2010). The faultline activation process and the effects of activated faultlines on coalition formation, conflict, and group outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 112, 24–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Joshi, A., & Roh, H. (2009). The role of context in work team diversity research: A meta-analytic review. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 599–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  35. Kauff, M., & Wagner, U. (2012). Valuable therefore not threatening: The influence of diversity beliefs on discrimination against immigrants. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3, 714–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kauff, M., Issmer, C., & Nau, J. (2013). Pro-diversity beliefs and everyday ethnic discrimination on grounds of foreign names. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 23, 536–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lau, D., & Murnighan, J. (1998). Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 23, 325–340.Google Scholar
  38. Macrae, C. N., Bodenhausen, G. V., Milne, A. B., & Jetten, J. (1994). Out of mind but back in sight: Stereotypes on the rebound. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 808–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Martiny, S. E., & Rubin, M. (2016). Towards a clearer understanding of social identity theory’s self-esteem hypothesis. In S. McKeown, R. Haji, & N. Ferguson (Eds.), Understanding peace and conflict through social identity theory: Theoretical, contemporary and worldwide perspectives (pp. 19–32). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  40. Marx, D. M., Ko, S. J., & Friedman, R. A. (2009). The “Obama effect”: How salient role model reduces race-based performance differences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 953–956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Meyer, B. (2017). Team diversity: A review of the literature. In E. Salas, R. Rico, & J. Passmore (Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell handbook of the psychology of team working and collaborative processes (pp. 151–176). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Meyer, B., & Glenz, A. (2013). Team faultline measures: A computational comparison and a new approach to multiple subgroups. Oranizational Research Methods, 16, 393–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Meyer, B., Shemla, M., & Schermuly, C. C. (2011). Social category salience moderates the effect of diversity faultlines on information elaboration. Small Group Research, 42, 257–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Meyer, B., Glenz, A., Antino, M., Rico, R., & González-Romá, V. (2014). Faultlines and subgroups: A meta-review and measurement guide. Small Group Research, 45, 633–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mummendey, A., & Wenzel, M. (1999). Social discrimination and tolerance in intergroup relations: Reactions to intergroup difference. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 158–174.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Oakes, P. J. (1987). The salience of social categories. In J. C. Turner, M. A. Hogg, P. J. Oakes, S. D. Rieche, & M. S. Wetherell (Eds.), Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory (pp. 117–141). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  47. Oakes, P. J., Turner, J. C., & Haslam, S. A. (1991). Perceiving people as group members: The role of fit in the salience of social categorizations. British Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 125–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Retelsdorf, J., Schwartz, K., & Asbrock, F. (2015). “Michael can't read!” Teachers’ gender stereotypes and boys’ reading self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, 186–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sachdev, I., & Bourhis, R. Y. (1991). Power and status differentials in minority and majority group relations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sackett, P. R., DuBois, C. L. Z., & Noe, A. W. (1991). Tokenism in performance evaluation: The effects of work group representation on male-female and white-black differences in performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 263–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Shemla, M., Meyer, B., Greer, L. L., & Jehn, K. A. (2016). A review of perceived diversity in teams: Does how members perceive their team’s composition affect team processes and outcomes? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37, 89–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Shih, M., Pittinsky, T. L., & Ambady, N. (1999). Stereotype susceptibility: Identity salience and shifts in quantitative performance. Psychological Science, 10, 81–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Simon, B., & Ruhs, D. (2008). Identity and politicization among Turkish migrants in Germany: The role of dual identification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1354–1366.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Steffens, M. C., Reese, G., Ehrke, F., & Jonas, K. J. (2017). When does activating diversity alleviate, when does it increase intergroup bias? An ingroup projection perspective. PLoS One, 12, e0178738.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  55. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
  56. Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundy, R. P., & Flament, C. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 149–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Taylor, S. E., Fiske, S. T., Etcoff, N. L., & Ruderman, A. J. (1978). Categorical and contextual bases of person memory and stereotyping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 778–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Thatcher, S. M. B., & Patel, P. (2012). Group faultlines: A review, integration, and guide to future research. Journal of Management, 38, 969–1009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Thatcher, S., Jehn, K. A., & Zanutto, E. (2003). Cracks in diversity research: The effects of diversity faultlines on conflict and performance. Group Decision and Negotiation, 12, 217–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  61. Ufkes, E. G., Calcagno, J., Glasford, D. E., & Dovidio, J. F. (2016). Understanding how common ingroup identity undermines collective action among disadvantaged-group members. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 63, 26–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. van Dijk, H., van Engen, M. L., & van Knippenberg, D. (2012). Defying conventional wisdom: A meta-analytical examination of the differences between demographic and job-related diversity relationships with performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 119, 38–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. van Knippenberg, D., & Schippers, M. (2007). Work group diversity. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 515–541.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Homan, A. C. (2004). Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1008–1022.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 504–535.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Verkuyten, M., & Martinovic, B. (2016). Dual identity, in-group projection, and out-group feelings among ethnic minority groups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 46, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wenzel, M., Mummendey, A., & Waldzus, S. (2008). Superordinate identities and intergroup conflict: The ingroup projection model. European Review of Social Psychology, 18, 331–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Williams, K. Y., & O’Reilly, C. A., III. (1998). Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 20, pp. 77–140). Greenwich: JAI.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dublin City UniversityDublinIreland
  2. 2.Chemnitz University of TechnologyChemnitzGermany

Section editors and affiliations

  • Carey Fitzgerald
    • 1
  1. 1.University of South Carolina – BeaufortBlufftonUSA