[2] Although, social categorization usually occurs spontaneously on the basis of proximity, similarities, or even shared fate, it is not completely uncontrollable or unalterable.
[1] In essence, these factors may indirectly reduce intergroup bias by facilitating a transformation of members' perceptions of group boundaries from 'us' and 'them' to a more inclusive 'we'.
[3] A large body of research in meaningful 'real-world' contexts lends support to the applicability of the common ingroup identity model.
These findings have been demonstrated among diverse groups including students attending a multiethnic high school,[4] banking executives who had experienced a corporate merger,[5] and in recently formed stepfamilies.
[6] Furthermore, studies have demonstrated that individuals express more positive attitudes towards racial outgroups when a common, superordinate identity is made salient.
In a field experiment conducted at the University of Delaware football stadium,[7] interviewers (either White or Black) approached White football fans wearing either a home team hat (the common ingroup identity condition) or an away team hat (the control condition).
[8] The potential of a common ingroup identity to facilitate helping naturalistic groups with history of conflict was tested at a University football game.
In this experiment, salient superordinate and subgroup identities were demonstrated to increase behavioral compliance with request for assistance from a person of different race, as explained above.
[9] In a laboratory experiment, racial outgroup members sharing common superordinate identity was explored.
[14] In a study conducted by Gruschow and Hong, recategorization was shown to change perceptions of prejudice towards the Black out-group.
"In-group favoritism strengthened group cohesion, feelings of solidarity, and identification with the most emblematic values of the U.S. nation, while outgroup discrimination induced U.S. citizens to conceive the enemy (al-Qaeda and its protectors) as the incarnation of evil, depersonalizing the group and venting their anger on it, and to give their backing to a military response, the eventual intervention in Afghanistan".
[15] Recently, a study has shown that common in-group identity may have the potential to ease tense relations between religious groups.