Theories of risk aversion, epistemic defense, and ingroup enhancement converge in predicting greater impact of negative (vs. positive) experiences with outgroup members on generalized evaluations of stigmatized outgroups. However, they diverge in predictions for admired outgroups. Past tests have focused on negative outgroups using correlational designs without a control group. Consequently, they have not distinguished between alternative explanations or ascertained the direction of causality/generalization, and they have suffered from self-selection biases. These limitations were redressed by a meta-analysis of experimental research on individual-to-group generalization with positive and negative outgroups (59 tests; 3,012 participants). Controlling for modest confounds, the meta-analysis found a generalization advantage of negative experiences for stigmatized outgroups and a generalization advantage of positive experiences for admired outgroups. These results highlight the centrality of valenced expectations about outgroups, consistent with epistemic defense and ingroup enhancement and inconsistent with risk aversion. Implications for positive changes in intergroup dynamics are discussed.

风险规避，认知防御和团体内增强的理论在预测与外来成员的负面（相对于正面）经历对受歧视的外来群体的总体评估产生更大影响方面趋于一致。然而，他们对受人尊敬的人群的预测存在分歧。过去的测试集中在没有对照组的情况下，使用相关设计对消极的人群进行了研究。因此，他们没有在替代解释之间区分开来，也没有确定因果关系/一般化的方向，并且他们遭受了自我选择的偏见。通过对个体与群体之间具有正向和负向概化的实验研究进行荟萃分析，纠正了这些局限性。阴性小组（59个测试； 3,012名参与者）。通过控制适度的混杂因素，荟萃分析发现，受耻辱的外出群体具有负面经验的普遍优势，而受到钦佩的外出群体则具有正面经验的普遍优势。这些结果凸显了对团体的期望价的中心性，这与认知防御和团体强化以及与风险规避不一致。讨论了团体间动力学的积极变化的含义。