ACCESS // OPEN

01MIND ARCHIVE // OPEN ACCESS

SPIN.OPEN.DOUBT.

One spin opens a file from psychology, philosophy, logic, or society. Read it with suspicion.

01204 case files02ES + EN034 fronts
02

IDEA ROTOR

CURATED RANDOM
FILE SELECTED: In-Group Favoritism, 2 min.
FRONTS / 04

Fronts

LOCAL
ARCHIVE

00 / 204

Local archive

This browser remembers what you opened and saved.

0 / 204 opened
Nothing leaves this browser.

FILE SELECTED // FILE 00

Mind & biases2 MINBrief fileContext-dependent

In-Group Favoritism

A minimal boundary divides “us” from “them.” Sometimes that alone shifts the allocation.

01 / SUMMARY

In short

Group membership can favor evaluations or resources for people who share the category. Minimal-group experiments show that even arbitrary divisions can matter, although they do not always create hostility.

03 / SCENE

In the wild

People randomly assigned to teams with no shared history may allocate slightly more points to their own team.

04 / LIMIT

The limit

Favoring one's group does not necessarily mean disliking another, and the effect's strength depends on norms and context.

FINAL NOTE

What remains

When allocating opportunities, hide irrelevant affiliations and publish shared criteria before seeing candidates.

Source trail

Editorial review: 2026-08-06

Open another thread