The two faces of dominance: The differential effect of ingroup superiority and outgroup inferiority on dominant-group identity and group esteem Rosalind M. Chow a, * , Brian S. Lowery a , Eric D. Knowles b a Stanford Graduate School of Business, 518 Memorial Way, Stanford, CA 94305, USA b 3369 Social Ecology II, Department of Psychology and Social Behavior, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697, USA Received 6 March 2007; revised 5 August 2007 Available online 3 December 2007 Abstract The present paper provides evidence that dominant-group members distinguish dominance framed as ingroup superiority from dom- inance framed as outgroup inferiority, and that ingroup superiority enhances esteem for, and thus identification with, the group more than outgroup inferiority. In Experiment 1, Democrats report higher levels of party identification after being told that Democrats won an election than after being told that Republicans lost the election. These effects are attenuated among dominant group members whose values are in conflict with how dominance was achieved. In Experiments 2a and 2b, unearned dominance framed as ingroup superiority resulted in higher levels of White identification than unearned dominance framed as outgroup inferiority among Whites who did not value meritocracy. In contrast, Whites who valued meritocracy did not increase their levels of identification with the group. In Exper- iment 2b, this interactive effect on racial identification was mediated by esteem for the group. Ó 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. People would rather identify with winners than losers. For example, people wear their team’s apparel more after their team wins than after a loss (Cialdini et al., 1978). Indi- viduals are also more likely to use the pronoun we when describing the team after a win, and to distance themselves from a losing team by using they after a team loss (Cialdini et al., 1978). Importantly, not all victories are necessarily equal. There are two ways to describe victory: a team win or an opponent’s loss. Although the outcome is the same—vic- tory—the victors can perceive the victory as evidence of their team’s superiority, or the losing team’s inferiority. In addition, individuals’ values allow them to distinguish between victories that count and those that do not; a win considered legitimate in one value system might be consid- ered illegitimate in another. Research suggests that illegiti- mate dominance is more aversive when framed as ingroup privilege rather than outgroup disadvantage (Iyer, Leach, & Crosby, 2003; Powell, Branscombe, & Schmitt, 2005). We suggest that this pattern might be reversed when dom- inance is perceived to be legitimate. We predict that indi- viduals will have higher esteem for the ingroup and identify more strongly when dominance is framed as ingroup superiority as opposed to outgroup inferiority, but only when endorsed values do not challenge the legiti- macy of the dominance. The allure of dominant status Research indicates that, all else equal, individuals prefer being members of dominant groups (Ellemers, 1993; Elle- mers, Doojse, van Knippenberg, & Wilke, 1992; Ellemers, van Knippenberg, de Vries, & Wilke, 1988). There are numerous reasons to prefer membership in dominant groups to membership in subordinate groups. In addition to the obvious benefit of access to valued resources, when 0022-1031/$ - see front matter Ó 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2007.11.002 * Corresponding author. E-mail address: chow_rosalind@gsb.stanford.edu (R.M. Chow). www.elsevier.com/locate/jesp Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 44 (2008) 1073–1081