Black sheep effect

EDIT

Assessment | Biopsychology | Comparative | Cognitive | Developmental | Language | Individual

differences | Personality | Philosophy | Social |
Methods | Statistics | Clinical | Educational | Industrial | Professional items | World psychology |

Social
psychology: Altruism · Attribution · Attitudes · Conformity · Discrimination · Groups · Interper
sonal relations · Obedience · Prejudice · Norms · Perception · Index · Outline

This article is in need of attention from a psychologist/academic expert on the subject.

Please help recruit one, or improve this page yourself if you are qualified.
This banner appears on articles that are weak and whose contents should be approached with
academic caution

In the English language, black sheep is an idiom used to describe an odd or disreputable
member of a group, especially within a family. The term stems from the genetic effect
in sheep whereby a recessive gene occasionally manifests in the birth of a sheep with black
rather than white coloring; these sheep stand out in the flock.

The term has typically been given negative implications, implying waywardness. [1] It derived
from the atypical and unwanted presence of other black individuals in flocks of white sheep.

In psychology, the black sheep effect refers to the tendency of group members to judge likeable
ingroup members more positively and deviant ingroup member more negatively than
comparable outgroup members.[2]

New members of a group must prove themselves to the full members, or “old-timers”, to become
accepted. Full members have undergone socialization and are already accepted within the group.
They have more privilege than newcomers but more responsibility to help the group achieve its
goals. Marginal members were once full members but lost membership because they failed to
live up to the group’s expectations. They can rejoin the group if they go through re-socialization.
In a Bogart and Ryan study, the development of new members' stereotypes about in-groups and
out-groups during socialization was surveyed. Results showed that the new members judged
themselves as consistent with the stereotypes of their in-groups, even when they had recently
committed to join those groups or existed as marginal members. They also tended to judge the
group as a whole in an increasingly less positive manner after they became full members. [3]

Depending on the self-esteem of an individual, members of the in-group may experience

different private beliefs about the group’s activities but will publicly express the opposite—that
they actually share these beliefs. One member may not personally agree with something the
group does, but to avoid the black sheep effect, they will publicly agree with the group and keep
the private beliefs to themselves. If the person is privately self-aware, he or she is more likely to
comply with the group even if they possibly have their own beliefs about the situation.[4]

In situations of hazing within fraternities and sororities on college campuses, pledges may
encounter this type of situation and may outwardly comply with the tasks they are forced to do
regardless of their personal feelings about the Greek institution they are joining. This is done in
an effort to avoid becoming an outcast of the group.[3] Outcasts who behave in a way that might
jeopardize the group tend to be treated more harshly than the likeable ones in a group, creating a
black sheep effect. Full members of a fraternity might treat the incoming new members harshly,
causing the pledges to decide if they approve of the situation and if they will voice their
disagreeing opinions about it.

In 1988, Marques, Yzerbyt and Leyens conducted an experiment where Belgian students rated
the following groups according to trait-descriptors (e.g. sociable, polite, violent, cold): unlikeable
Belgian students, unlikeable North African students, likeable Belgian students, and likeable
North African students. The results provided support that the favorability is the highest for
likeable ingroup members and the lowest for unlikeable ingroup members, whereas the
favorability of unlikeable and likeable outgroup members is between the both former
ones.[2] These extreme judgements of likeable and unlikeable (i.e., deviant) ingroup members,
relatively to comparable outgroup members is called "black sheep effect". This effect has been
shown in various intergroup contexts and under a variety of conditions, and in many experiments
manipulating likeability and norm deviance.[5][6][7][8]

Explanations

A prominent explanation of the black sheep effect derives from the social identity approach
(social identity theory[9] and self-categorization theory[10]). Group members are motivated to
sustain a positive and distinctive social identity and, as a consequence, group members
emphasize likeable members and evaluate them more positive than outgroup members,
bolstering the positive image of their ingroup (ingroup bias). Furthermore, the positive social
identity may be threatened by group members who deviate from a relevant group norm. To
protect the positive group image, ingroup members derogate ingroup deviants more harshly than
deviants of an outgroup (Marques, Abrams, Páez, & Hogg, 2001).[11]

In addition, Eidelman and Biernat showed in 2003 that personal identities are also threatened
through deviant ingroup members. They argue that devaluation of deviant members is an
individual response of interpersonal differentiation.[12] Khan and Lambert suggested in 1998
that cognitive processes like assimilation and contrast, which may underline the effect, should be
examined.[7]

Limitations

Even though there is widely support for the black sheep effect, the opposite pattern has been
found, for example, that White participants judge unqualified Black targets more negative than
comparable White targets (e.g. Feldman, 1972;[13] Linville & Jones, 1980).[14] Consequentely,
there are several factors which influence the black sheep effect. For instance, the higher
the identification with the ingroup, and the higher the entitativity of the ingroup, the more the
black sheep effect emerges.[15][16] Even situational factors explaining the deviance have an
influence whether the black sheep effect occurs.[17]

Origin
In most sheep, a white fleece is not albinism but a dominant gene that actively switches color
production off, thus obscuring any other color that may be present.[citation needed] As a result, a black
fleece in most sheep is recessive, so if a white ram and a white ewe are each heterozygous for
black, in about 25% of cases they will produce a black lamb. In fact in most white sheep breeds
only a few white sheep are heterozygous for black, so black lambs are usually much rarer than
this.

Idiomatic usage
The term originated from the occasional black sheep which are born into a flock of white sheep
due to a genetic process of recessive traits. Black wool was considered commercially undesirable
because it could not be dyed.[1] In 18th and 19th century England, the black color of the sheep
was seen as the mark of the devil.[18] In modern usage, the expression has lost some of its
negative connotations, though the term is usually given to the member of a group who has
certain characteristics or lack thereof deemed undesirable by that group.[19] Jessica
Mitford described herself as "the red sheep of the family", a communist in a family of
aristocratic fascists.[20]

The idiom is also found in other languages,

e.g. French, Serbian, Bulgarian, Hebrew, Portuguese, Bosnian, Greek, Turkish, Dutch, Afrikaans
, Swedish, Danish, Spanish, Czech, Slovak, Romanian and Polish. During the Second Spanish
Republic a weekly magazine named El Be Negre, meaning 'The Black Sheep', was published
in Barcelona.[21]

The same concept is illustrated in some other languages by the phrase "white crow": for
example belaya vorona (белая ворона) in Russian and kalag-e sefid (‫ )کالغ سفید‬in Persian.

See also
• Black swan theory
• Scapegoat
• Stereotyping
• The Ugly Duckling