Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

2000, Vol. 79, No. 6, 923-932

Copyright 2000 by the American Psychological Association, Inc.

0022-3514/00/55.00 DOI: 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.923

Derogation and Distancing as Terror Management Strategies:

The Moderating Role of Need for Closure and
Permeability of Group Boundaries
Mark Dechesne, Jacques Janssen, and Ad van Knippenberg

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

University of Nijmegen
Previous research has revealed that when individuals are confronted with criticism of a personally
relevant group, mortality salience can lead to either derogation of the source of criticism or distancing
from the group. In this article, the authors investigated closure as a potential moderator of these reactions.
In Study 1, mortality salience led to greater derogation of a critic of a relevant group among high-needfor-closure participants but led to distancing from the group among low need-for-closure participants.
Study 2 showed that when a relevant group was criticized, mortality salience led to greater derogation
among participants who were led to believe that the boundaries of that group were impermeable but led
to greater distancing among participants who were made aware of the permeable nature of the group
boundaries. These findings demonstrate that closure of group membership moderates reactions to
criticism of a personally relevant group after mortality salience.

Social groups and the values they convey enable individuals to

alleviate existential concerns by providing self-esteem resources
and by satisfying epistemic needs (Greenberg, Solomon, & Pyszczynski, 1997). Yet, given its arbitrary genesis and symbolic nature,
the sense of identity derived from group membership is also fragile
and thus requires continual maintenance and defense against threat
(e.g., Berger & Luckmann, 1966). When faced with existential
concerns and criticism of a personally relevant group, the individual must therefore determine whether group membership is worth
defending and should thus be used to reduce existential concerns
or if it should be abandoned to prevent the criticism from damaging one's beliefs and self-image. A considerable body of research
has demonstrated that reminding people of the transitory nature of
existence causes them to defend personally relevant groups against
threat (see Greenberg et al., 1997, for a review). Recently, however, it has also been found that reminders of death can lead to
distancing from particular groups. Particularly in circumstances
under which group membership reflects negatively on the self,
reminders of death have been found to lead to distancing from the
group (e.g., Dechesne, Greenberg, Arndt, & Schimel, in press;
Arndt, Greenberg, Schimel, Pyszczynski, & Solomon, 1999).

ify the conditions under which one strategy is preferred over the
other. In the following article, we suggest that reminders of mortality force the individual to decide whether a criticized group is
worthy of defense or whether it should instead be abandoned.
Furthermore, we suggest that this decision is largely determined by
the value attached to maintaining a social identity and the expectation of the possibility of abandoning a social identity. If such
value is high or such expectancy is low, we expect that reminders
of mortality will lead to greater defense of the identity. If, on the
other hand, such value is low or the expectancy is high, we expect
that reminders of mortality lead to distancing from the group. We
present two studies that were designed to assess the empirical
merits of this analysis. In both studies, we render the concepts of
value and expectancy into constructs that have previously received
attention in the literature on identity maintenance. In Study 1, we
focused on the concept of need for closure (e.g. Kruglanski &
Webster, 1996) to assess the potential moderating role of value
attached to identity maintenance in the reaction to identity threats
after mortality salience. In Study 2, we focused on the concept of
permeability of group boundaries (Tajfel, 1978) to investigate
whether contextually induced expectancies influence the preference for either one of the two terror management strategies.

Apparently, then, mortality salience can evoke two identity

management strategies: defense of one's group and distancing
from groups that reflect negatively on the self. Given the duplicity
of reactions after mortality salience, it becomes important to spec-

Terror Management Theory

The impact of existential concerns on social phenomena has
been investigated extensively within the framework of terror management theory (Greenberg, Pyszczynski, & Solomon, 1986;
Greenberg et al., 1997). The theory starts with the observation that
self-awareness constitutes a mixed blessing of human selfregulation wherein survival counts as a superordinate goal. On the
positive side, self-awareness enables us to adapt to changing
circumstances and anticipate future dangers. On the negative side,
however, it also enables humans to foresee the inevitability of the
end of life and therefore harbors the potential to undermine all
goal-related activities. According to terror management theory, the

Mark Dechesne, Jacques Janssen, and Ad van Knippenberg, Department

of Social Psychology, University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
We wish to thank Sander Koole and Michael Schreiber for their comments on previous versions of this article.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Mark
Dechesne, Department of Social Psychology, Section of Cultural Psychology and Psychology of Religion, University of Nijmegen, P.O. Box 9104,
6500 HE, Nijmegen, the Netherlands. Electronic mail may be sent to
dechesne@psych.kun.nl.
923

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

924

DECHESNE, JANSSEN, AND VAN KNIPPENBERG

reason why such disruptions rarely occur lies in the development

and maintenance of culture. It is through the meaning system
provided by a culture that individual behavior is upgraded to
meaningful action. Culture serves as a meaning giver by providing
a worldview and self-esteem. A worldview is composed of standards of values, a system of meaning that provides order, permanence and stability, and the promise of literal or symbolic immortality for those who live up to the standards (see, e.g., Pyszczynski,
Greenberg, & Solomon, 1999). Self-esteem is conceptualized as
the feeling that one is living up to the standards of value provided
by a worldview. Thus, according to terror management theory,
existential concerns are managed by systems of meaning that
provide permanence, order, and self-esteem.
The social psychological implication of this analysis is that if a
cultural worldview and self-esteem enable the individual to deal
with existential concerns, then the moral codes, symbols, and
social groups that convey and support one's worldview and selfimage should become especially important at times when confronted with existential concerns. When individuals are made
aware of the inevitability of death, they should therefore become
more vigilant in their defense against threats to personally relevant
moral codes, symbols, and groups.
Over the past decade, evidence has accumulated in support of
this hypothesis. Rosenblatt, Greenberg, Solomon, Pyszczynski, &
Lyon (1989), for example, found that mortality salience led to
increased punishment of a moral transgression and increased rewards for someone who defended the moral values of the participants. This effect has been replicated in Israel by Florian and
Mikulincer (1997) who used a larger variety of moral transgressions. Mortality salience was also found to increase sensitivity to
cultural icons. Participants who were reminded about death reported greater reluctance and greater distress when they were
ingeniously commissioned to use a crucifix and the American flag
inappropriately (Greenberg, Simon, Porteus, Pyszczynski, & Solomon, 1995). In the domain of intergroup perception, reminders
of death led to behavioral distancing from a foreigner (Ochsmann
& Mathy, 1994). Moreover, mortality salience has been found to
increase in-group bias in a minimal group setting (Harmon-Jones,
Greenberg, Solomon, & Simon, 1995) and out-group derogation
when the national identity of the participants was criticized (e.g.,
Greenberg, Pyszczynski, Solomon, Simon, & Breus, 1994). Taken
together, these findings support the contention that reminders of
death lead to increased defense of one's cultural identifications.
Recent research also indicates, however, that increased defense
of threatened moral codes and personally relevant groups may not
be the only social psychological implication of mortality salience.
Distancing emerged as an alternative terror management strategy
that people use for dealing with threats to personally relevant
groups. The hypothesis that mortality salience can lead to distancing from a group has been derived from the postulate within terror
management theory that reminders of mortality lead to an increased need for a positive self-image. Consistent with this general
view, research has revealed that reminders of death lead to the
intensification of activities and beliefs that enhance a favorable
self-image (Ben-Ari, Florian, & Mikulincer, 1999; Goldenberg,
McCoy, Pyszczynski, Greenberg, & Solomon, 2000). Importantly,
a second implication of this conceptualization of self-esteem is that
mortality salience should also lead to decreased interest in activities and decreased identification with groups if such activities and

groups fail to provide self-esteem. This implication has primarily

been investigated in the context of group affiliation. Specifically,
in two studies, Arndt et al. (1999) found that when Hispanic
culture was framed in a negative light, mortality salience led
Hispanics to distance themselves from Hispanic targets. In addition, Dechesne et al. (in press) found that participants who were
reminded about death increased optimism about the results of a
college football team before the season opening game, but after a
dramatic loss, reminders of death led to decreased identification.
Apparently, if group membership reflects negatively on the self,
mortality salience can also induce distancing from the group. It
becomes necessary, therefore, to specify the conditions under
which mortality salience leads to defense of or distancing from the
group.
Conditions Under Which Defense of the Group or
Distancing From the Group Occurs
The psychological function of distancing can be clarified on the
basis of the cutting off reflected failure concept (CORFing; Snyder, Lassegard, & Ford, 1986). Building on the work of Cialdini et
al. (1976), Snyder et al. (1986) argued and demonstrated empirically that people cut off their identification from groups that have
negative implications for the self in order to protect the self. One
can thus hypothesize that because satisfaction of epistemic needs
and positive self-esteem constitute the active ingredients for dealing with existential concerns, mortality salience leads to decreased
association with groups that fail to provide these tools. Defense of
the group constitutes a likely strategy in response to criticism of
the group when, despite the implied potential damage, maintenance of one's group membership is preferred over distancing. By
derogation, the source of criticism, the group, and thus the self,
remain intact. Thus, whereas increased distancing from and defense of the group after mortality salience constitute distinct strategies, both serve to protect the self from further harm. Those who
decide to maintain their identification will derogate the source of
negative information, and those who decide not to maintain their
group membership will distance themselves from the group after
being reminded about mortality.
Study 1
One domain wherein progress has been made regarding the
determinants of the maintenance of group membership is that of
individual differences in people's need for closure (reviewed in
Kruglanski & Webster, 1996). It has been argued that this need
encompasses a tendency to quickly "seize" information and to
"freeze" on, or maintain, this information (Kruglanski & Webster,
1996). Research has demonstrated that this tendency results in (a)
greater reluctance to accept information that undermines a worldview (Tetlock, 1998), (b) greater in-group bias (Shah, Kruglanski,
& Thompson, 1998), and (c) increased derogation of social deviants (Doherty, 1998). Most interesting for the present discussion,
high need for closure has been directly associated with a tendency
to "fight rather than switch" (Kruglanski & Webster, 1996). This
has been demonstrated in a study in which high need for closure
was found to be related to greater arguing with a different-minded
person when participants were able to form an opinion prior to the
argument (Kruglanski, Webster, & Klem, 1993). On the basis of

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

DEROGATION AND DISTANCING

this research, it can be hypothesized that when individuals who

desire closure are reminded about death and confronted with
negative information about a personally relevant group, they will
maintain identification with the group and thus defend it. The
tendency to switch rather than fight, on the other hand, involves
greater ambiguity and uncertainty given that this tendency encompasses the separation of the group and the self. Individuals who
lack the need for closure may be more willing to accept such
ambiguity and uncertainty than those who do need it and may
therefore be less likely to maintain affiliation with groups that
reflect negatively on the self. In conditions under which the self is
threatened as a result of negative information about a personally
relevant group and in which the need for self-protection is enhanced by reminders of mortality, low-need-for-closure individuals may thus prefer distancing from such a group as their primary
terror management strategy.
Our first study was conducted to test the hypothesis that mortality salience increases (a) defense of a personally relevant group
among high-need-for-closure individuals and (b) distancing among
low-need-for-closure individuals. To measure the participant's desire for closure, we made use of the Personal Need for Structure
Scale (Thompson, Nacarata, & Parker, as cited in Neuberg &
Newsom, 1993) that has been previously argued to constitute an
operational measure of need for closure (Kruglanski et al., 1997).
To manipulate mortality salience, we made use of a subliminal
priming technique developed by Arndt, Greenberg, Pyszczynski,
Solomon, and Simon (1997). This manipulation was preferred over
the more common obtrusive and conscious mortality-salienceinducing task (e.g. Rosenblatt et al., 1989) because research by
Dechesne, Janssen, and Van Knippenberg (1999) has revealed that
the scores on the Personal Need for Structure Scale affect the time
spent on this task. Subliminal priming ensured a fixed exposure
time of the mortality salience manipulation among all participants.
Finally, with university students as participants, criticism of the
local university constituted the impetus in the experiment to either
distance from or defend a group. University affiliation was chosen
because a single-item pretest asking participants whether they
identified with the University of Nijmegen revealed that most
students from the population from which the sample was taken
identified moderately to highly with it. Moreover, university affiliation provides a source of existential meaning given the history
and status of the university and science in general, and research has
indicated that it provides a source for indirect self-enhancement
(Cialdini & Richardson, 1980). In addition, university affiliation is
not fundamentally rooted in one's constitution. Distancing remains, therefore, a viable terror management strategy.
A week prior to the actual experiment, participants filled out the
Personal Need for Structure Scale, on the basis of which they were
classified in either high- or low-need-for-closure conditions. The
actual experiment consisted of the death manipulation and the
presentation and judgment of an opinion that emphasized the
dullness and lack of quality of the local university. This opinion
was followed by a measure of identification with the university to
register distancing and a measure of evaluation of the opinion to
register derogation. Our hypotheses are based on our earlier argument. Those who desire closure were expected to increase defense
of the university when mortality was made salient. Those who
lacked this desire were expected to exhibit increased distancing
from the university as a result of mortality salience.

925

Method
Participants. Participants were 106 students of the University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, the Netherlands. They were granted 5 Dutch guilders
(approximately US$2.25) for their participation.
Procedure. Participants were recruited a week prior to the actual study
after an unrelated experiment. When participants had finished that unrelated experiment and returned to the main room, they were asked if they
would be interested in a study that consisted of directly filling out a
personality questionnaire and completing some questions a week later. If
they agreed, participants were led to an individual cubicle where they filled
out the Personal Need for Structure Scale and answered questions about
their experience with participating in experiments and about their age,
gender, and major. After completion, the experimenter made an appointment for the second part of the experiment. Seven participants did not keep
this appointment. Their data were discarded.
Those who did return a week later were welcomed by the experimenter
and guided to an individual cubicle. Upon arrival, participants were invited
to seat themselves in front of a microcomputer that guided them through
the experiment and generated the experimental tasks. The procedure of the
experiment was based on typical mortality salience research by Greenberg
and colleagues (e.g., Greenberg et al., 1994; Greenberg, Simon, Solomon,
Chatel, & Pyszczynski, 1992). The microcomputer first informed participants that the experiment consisted of several tasks that measured wordassociation strength and judgment. The word-association task began after
a brief introduction and three practice trials. This task actually served to
subliminally prime death-construct accessibility. Arndt et al. (1997) have
provided details on the empirical validation of this procedure, and Koole
and Dechesne (1999) have provided a Dutch version. The task consisted of
using specified keys on the keyboard to indicate whether two words that
appeared after each other on the screen were related. The 10 word pairs that
composed the task were unrelated to the actual purpose of the study. For
each word pair, a third word was flashed for 34 ms between the supraliminally presented words. In this way, the second supraliminally presented
word served as a mask for the subliminal prime. In the mortality salience
condition, participants were primed with death (dood in Dutch), and
control participants were primed with xxxx.
The judgment task followed directly after the mortality salience manipulation. Participants were informed that the Department of the Psychology
of Culture and Religion was participating in a nationwide survey on
opinions about universities. They were further informed that they would be
able to read an opinion about the University of Nijmegen that stemmed
from this survey and were asked several questions about their identification
with their university and about their judgment of the presented opinion.
The opinion stated the following:
My opinion about the University of Nijmegen? Well, I am glad I don't
study there. Studying in [...] is much more fun. I think few people
know where Nijmegen is, let alone that they have a university. By the
way, I recently read an article reporting that Nijmegen is one of the
worst universities in the Netherlands. I can imagine. Everything there
is listless and dull. Nothing ever happens. For those who are content
with a boring life, Nijmegen is the ultimate place to live. For those
who are smart and ambitious, it's better to study somewhere else. The
University of Nijmegen does not matter.
To assess the participants' response, an identification measure directly
followed upon this opinion. This measure was developed by Ellemers, Van
Knippenberg, De Vries, and Wilke (1988) and is composed of five identification statements that were applied in our experiment to university
affiliation (e.g., 'It is important for me to be part of the University of
Nijmegen.'; 'I enjoy being part of the University of Nijmegen.'). Thereafter, an evaluation measure followed that asked participants to indicate the
extent to which the person who gave the opinion was biased, used viable
arguments, and was likable. In addition, participants were asked to rate the

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

926

DECHESNE, JANSSEN, AND VAN KNIPPENBERG

general quality of the opinion and the desirability of meeting the person
who expressed it. These five items constitute the typical measure for
worldview defense in terror management research (see, e.g., Greenberg et
al., 1992). Participants could indicate their level of agreement to the
statements of both identification and evaluation measures on 9-point scales
(1 = not at all; 9 = completely). The final part of the study consisted of
several questions regarding the death (mortality salience condition) or xxxx
(control condition) item that flashed on the screen in between the appearance of each word in the word pair. Participants were asked how many
words they had seen during the presentation of each word pair, whether
they had seen a third word between the words, and if so, to write down this
word, and finally, to guess the word that was flashed within each word pair
by selecting one of five possible words.
These checks completed the study. Afterward, participants were instructed to return to the experimenter's room, where they were debriefed,
given their credit, and thanked for their contribution.

Table 1
Means for the Need for Closure X Mortality Salience
Interaction on University Affiliation
Mortality salience
Need for closure

death prime

xxxx prime

High
SD
N
Low
SD
N

5.07a
1.41
20
4.26b
1.31
25

5.37a
1.25
29
5.70a
1.30
22

Note. Score could range from 1 (indicating no affiliation) to 9 (indicating

full affiliation). Means that do not share a common subscript differ at p <
.05 from adjacent row and column.

Results
Subliminality check and pre-analysis. The data of three participants were not further analyzed. One participant's data were
discarded because the participant correctly indicated that death
was flashed between the supraliminally presented words.1 Two
other participants' data were discarded because the participants
indicated after the experiment that Dutch was not their native
language, which likely made them insensitive to any subliminally
presented Dutch word. The 96 remaining participants were classified in low- or high-need-for-closure conditions on the basis of a
median split {Mdn = 56).
Relative preference for distancing or derogation. To examine
the relative preference for the strategies of distancing or derogation, we first conducted a 2 (mortality salience: death prime vs.
xxxx prime) X 2 (need for closure: high vs. low need for closure)
between-subjects X 2 (identification vs. evaluation) withinsubjects multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) on the
identification and evaluation measures. This analysis yielded an
interaction of mortality salience and the within-subjects factor,
F(2, 91) = 5.95,p < .005, and the expected three-way interaction,
F(2, 91) = 4.32, p < .02. We subsequently analyzed the nature of
this latter interaction by performing separate 2 (mortality salience) X 2 (need for closure) between-subjects univariate analyses of variance (ANOVAs) on the identification and evaluation
measures.
Distancing. This 2 X 2 ANOVA performed on the university
identification measure yielded significant effects of mortality salience, F(l, 92) = 10.34, p < .002, and of the Mortality Salience X Need for Closure interaction, F(l, 92) = 4.51, p < .04.
The means for this interaction are displayed in Table 1. To support
the hypothesis that among low-need-for-closure participants, distancing constitutes the primary terror management strategy when
the individual is confronted with negative information about a
personally relevant group, two significant simple effect tests were
crucial. The first, assessing differences in identification between
the mortality salience and control conditions among low-needfor-closure participants indeed reached significance at F(l,
92) = 14.54, p < .001 (M = 4.26 vs. M = 5.70, respectively).
Low-need-for-closure participants identified less with the university when they were reminded about death. A similar comparison
among high-need-for-closure participants was not significant at
F(l, 92) = 0.85, ns (M = 5.07 vs. M = 5.37). The second
difference that would provide support for our hypothesis was

between low- and high-need-for-closure participants in the mortality salience condition. A simple effect test on these specific
scores yielded a significant result, F(l, 92) = 5.44, p < .03,
indicating that low-need-for-closure participants identified less
with the university in the mortality salience condition (M = 4.26)
than high-need-for-closure participants in the mortality salience
condition (M = 5.07). In the control condition, need-for-closure
differences were not found, F(l, 92) = 0.34, ns (M = 5.70 for
low-need-for-closure participants vs. M = 5.37 for high-need-forclosure participants). The general pattern clearly supports our
hypothesis. Decreased identification was found in the mortality
salience condition but only among low-need-for-closure participants. For them, distancing appeared to be the primary terror
management strategy.
Derogation. In contrast to distancing, we expected greater
derogation of the critic of the university as a result of mortality
salience among only high-need-for-closure participants. Our analysis started with a 2 (death prime) X 2 (need for closure) ANOVA
on the evaluation scores, which revealed only a marginally significant two-way interaction, F(l, 92) = 3.69, p < .06 (see Table 2
for means). To test whether high-need-for-closure participants
increase defense of their group when mortality is made salient, we
conducted simple tests. In accordance with our prediction, highneed-for-closure participants in the death condition were significantly less positive about the opinion and the person who gave it
1
We also analyEed the additional checks to assess the subliminal nature
of the prime. When asked to indicate how many words appeared on the
screen during the word association task, 7 of the 99 participants answered
that they had seen more than two words during a single trial. Surprisingly,
when asked directly whether they had seen more than two words, 9
additional participants answered affirmatively. The 16 participants who
answered that they saw more than two words, all indicated that the third
word was different from the two target words. As noted above, only one of
these participants was able to write down the correct word. A Pearson
chi-square analysis performed on the question asking participants to choose
the correct word out of five possible options revealed no significant
differences between conditions, ^ ( 4 , N = 98) = 3.77, p > .43 (one
participant was left out of this analysis because he did not choose between
the possible options). In sum, although several participants answered that
they had seen more than the two optimally presented words, there was no
indication of awareness of the exact prime.

DEROGATION AND DISTANCING

Table 2
Means for the Need for Closure X Mortality Salience
Interaction on Evaluation of Opinion

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Mortality salience
Need for closure

death prime

xxxx prime

High
SD
N
Low
SD
N

3.45a
0.86
20
3-84a,b
0.63
25

4.05b
0.99
29
3-77a,b
0.86
22

Note. Lower scores indicate greater dislike for the target, with 1 = total
dislike and 9 = total liking. Means that do not share a common subscript
differ at p < .05 from adjacent row and column.

than high-need-for-closure control participants, F(l, 92) = 5.77, p

< .02 (M = 3.45 vs. M = 4.05, respectively). For low-need-forclosure participants, this increased defense of the group was not
found, /-(I, 92) = 0.09, ns (M = 3.84 vs. M = 3.77). Although
high-need-for-closure participants were less positive in the mortality salience condition compared with their low-need-for-closure
counterparts, this difference was not significant, F(\, 92) = 1.94,
p < .17 (M = 3.45 vs. M = 3.84, respectively). The weakness of
this comparison may have been due to the fact that high-need-forclosure participants had a more positive opinion of the person than
low-need-for-closure participants in the control condition, although this effect was also nonsignificant, F(l, 92) = 1.75, p <
.20 (M = 4.05 vs. M 3.77, respectively). In general, we conclude
that the data regarding the evaluation measure corroborate the
hypothesis. Mortality salience was found to increase negative
evaluations of the critic of the local university but only among
high-need-for-closure participants. The data suggest that defense
of one's group constitutes the primary terror management strategy
for high-need-for-closure individuals.

Discussion
The present findings corroborate our contentions that mortality
salience can lead to both distancing from one's group and derogation of the critic when dealing with criticism of a personally
relevant group, and individual differences in need for closure
constitute a determinant of the strategy that will be used. Lowneed-for-closure participants distanced themselves from the group,
and high-need-for-closure participants defended the group when
they were reminded of death. Our interpretation on the basis of
terror management theory is that group membership becomes more
important when mortality is made salient. Criticism regarding a
personally relevant group will therefore have a greater impact.
Distancing is used to reduce the impact of the opinion on other
aspects of the self. Distancing from one's group is the preferred
strategy of low-need-for-closure individuals because of their
greater tolerance for the ambiguity associated with the separation
between the self and the group. High-need-for-closure participants
desire maintenance of group membership, and derogation enables
them to deny the validity of less positive opinions regarding one's
group.

927

A factor that may potentially limit the validity of the conclusions that can be drawn from the present study is that we used an
individual difference measure to create high- and low-need-forclosure conditions. As a result of this procedure, need for closure
may have been confounded with the subsequent dependent variables. Indeed, if need for closure encompasses a desire for maintenance of group membership, then it might be expected that a
stronger need for closure was already associated with greater
identification with the group prior to the death prime and exposure
to criticism of the group. If this had been the case, then the level
of identification rather than need for closure might have moderated
the effects. The results of Study 1, however, speak to such a
confound. In the xxxx control condition, high- and low-need-forclosure participants did not significantly differ in their affiliation
with the university nor in their evaluation of the critic. These
results thus suggest that need for closure and identification with
the university constitute independent constructs. Yet, this conclusion must be drawn tentatively because the two measures were
separated by comments critical of the university. To rule out the
potential confound of need for closure and identification entirely,
we conducted a separate survey asking 109 students of the University of Nijmegen to fill out the Personal Need for Structure
Scale and the identification measure used in Study 1. Analysis of
this survey yielded a very weak correlation, r(109)= .005, thus
suggesting that need for closure was unrelated to identification
with the university at the beginning of Study 1.
Another issue involves the exclusive focus of Study 1 on criticism of the group. We opted for this exclusive focus because we
suspected that only negative information would evoke the derogation and distancing responses found in the mortality salience
condition. We did not actually investigate it, however. A potential
alternative explanation for our claim that mortality salience in
interaction with negative information evokes the responses would
therefore be that mortality salience in itself, independent of the
valence of information, mobilizes these responses. It is imaginable
that when people are confronted with death, they become aware of
the futile nature of all their investments in the world and, consequently, will lower their identifications. From this point of view, it
can be predicted that low-need-for-closure individuals who are
confronted with death will abandon all identifications independent
of their valence, and high-need-for-closure and mortalityconcerned individuals will decrease their evaluation of any
opinion.
Previous research reduces the viability of this hypothesis. Many
studies have shown that mortality salience only leads to negative
evaluations of targets who criticize the worldview of the participants (as reviewed in Greenberg et al., 1997). In addition,
Dechesne et al. (in press) found that distancing from a sports team
after mortality was made salient only occurred after the team
dramatically lost a game but not in a preseason experimental
session. Finally, in a recent study we directly assessed the effects
of mortality salience on reactions to praise of the local university
(Dechesne, Janssen, & Van Knippenberg, 1999). In contrast to the
findings of Study 1, reminders of mortality led to greater identification with the university. The evaluation of the person who
praised the university was unaffected by the mortality salience
manipulation. These findings suggest that only when a personally
relevant group is threatened does mortality salience impose the
choice between derogation or distancing.

928

DECHESNE, JANSSEN, AND VAN KNIPPENBERG

Study 1 thus revealed that those participants who were motivated to reach closure derogated a person who criticized a personally relevant group after they were reminded about death, whereas
those who lacked such motivation distanced themselves from the
group under the condition of mortality salience. The value that
participants attached to the goal of maintaining a particular identification thus appeared to be a determinant of the terror management strategy that was used.

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Study 2
Apart from these individual differences in value attached to
maintenance of group membership, there may be other parameters
of such commitment. Specifically, the literature on motivated
social cognition (see, e.g., Pittman, 1998; Kruglanski, 1996; Kuhl,
1986, for reviews) suggests that commitment to a particular goal is
not only determined by the value that the individual attaches to a
particular goal but also by the expectancy that a given strategy is
possible. In the present context, this analysis implies that people
adopt derogation or distancing as terror management strategy, not
only as a function of the value that the individual attaches to
maintaining or abandoning a criticized group. It is perhaps also a
function of expectations relating to the actual possibility of maintaining or abandoning a criticized group. In Study 1, both maintaining and abandoning group membership constituted plausible
options. Yet, there may be factors that substantially reduce or
enhance expectancies regarding the possibility of maintaining or
abandoning group membership.
The structural properties of the group seem to constitute a
particularly powerful determinant of such expectancies. There are
groups that by virtue of their makeup can necessitate individuals to
maintain their identification. Examples of such groups include
nations and families. Although, in theory, it is possible to shift to
alternative groups, the category of groups that includes families
and nations may be such a fundamental part of one's self-structure
that for the majority of people such affiliation would be virtually
impossible to abandon. In contrast, experimentally created groups,
such as in the minimal group paradigm, are temporary and easy to
break with. In conceptual terms, the extent to which the individual
is able to distance from a particular identification depends on the
permeability of group boundaries (Tajfel, 1978). Permeable group
boundaries allow shifts in identification, whereas impermeable
boundaries do not. By integrating this work on permeability of
group boundaries and motivated social cognition, we can make the
argument that in the context of group affiliation, permeability
constitutes an essential determinant of the expectancies regarding
commitment to maintaining affiliation with a threatened group and
the subsequent strategies that people adopt. When the boundaries
of the group are believed to be impermeable, the expectancy
regarding the possibility of abandoning the criticized group is null,
and, consequently, none can adopt the strategy of distancing. In
contrast, when the boundaries of the group are believed to be
permeable, the expectancy regarding the possibility of abandoning
the group is substantial, thus making distancing a viable strategy to
react to group threats. Research has already indicated that the
permeability of group boundaries has important implications for
identity management and maintenance strategies. In support of the
foregoing analysis, impermeability has been found to increase
preference for collective identity enhancement compared with

individual mobility options when group-status is threatened (Ellemers et al., 1988; Jackson, Sullivan, Harnish, & Hodge, 1996).
We conducted Study 2 to investigate whether permeability of
group boundaries moderates the strategies that people adopt when
reminded about death and confronted with negative information
about a personally relevant group. We hypothesized that groups
with impermeable boundaries would be maintained if criticized,
and mortality salience would therefore lead to defense of the
group. In contrast, groups with permeable boundaries allow distancing, and criticism in combination with mortality salience was
therefore predicted to elicit this tendency. The major addition of
Study 2 was thus the manipulation of permeability. To this end, we
made use of a priming technique that is only practicable if the
boundaries of the criticized group have both permeable and impermeable aspects. University affiliation involves considerable
commitment both in terms of hours spent per day and the duration
of affiliation, which varies from at least 4 years for most to a
lifetime for some. At the same time, however, it requires little
more than a phone call to the administration to abandon this
commitment. We therefore again used university affiliation.
In the study, participants were made aware of the permeability
or impermeability of university affiliation, confronted with death
and criticism about the university, and asked to evaluate the critic
and indicate affiliation level. It was expected that those who were
made aware of the impermeability of university affiliation and who
were confronted with death and criticism of the university would
express greater dislike for the critic as compared with nonmortality-salience participants. In contrast, those who were made
aware of the permeability of university affiliation, reminded about
death, and confronted with negative information about the university would induce distancing compared with their non-mortalitysalient counterparts.

Method
Participants. Participants were 79 students from the University of
Nijmegen, who contributed on a voluntary basis and who were either
given 5 Dutch guilders (US$2.25) or research requirement credit for their
contribution.
Procedure and materials. The procedure and materials were similar to
Study 1 with the following exceptions. First, this study was completed in
a single session. More important, instead of a measure of need for closure,
a manipulation of impermeability was included. This manipulation consisted of (a) a cover story, (b) a "newspaper" article supposedly taken from
a nationally renowned newspaper, and (c) a memory task that was included
at the end of the study. The cover story informed participants that they
would engage in a memory task that involved an article about universities.
They then read the article, which informed impermeable-condition participants of the following:
Survey: University Change Cause of Many Concerns (taken from
NRC Handelsblad, 14 March 1998)
The choice for a university appears definite in practice. This conclusion constitutes the core of an Inter-University Research Institute
report that was commissioned by the Ministry of Education, Culture,
and Science. Cutbacks in the academic system and the shortened study
length have added to the irreversibility of university affiliation choice.
A survey held among 600 students who changed universities also
indicates that changing over often leads to many personal problems.
Getting acquainted with the city, finding suitable housing, and making
new friends often entails more difficulties than expected. Further-

929

DEROGATION AND DISTANCING

more, differences in courses and education systems between universities often lead to considerable delay. Many students underestimate
the lasting consequences of their choice of a university.

Table 3
Means for the Permeability X Mortality Salience Interaction on
University Affiliation

The article for permeable-condition participants read as follows:

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Survey: University Change No Cause of Concern (taken from NRC

Handelsblad, 14 March 1998)
The choice of a university appears to be easily reversible in practice.
This conclusion constitutes the core of an Inter-University Research
Institute report that was commissioned by the Ministry of Education,
Culture, and Science. Cutbacks in the academic system and the
shortened study length have not added to the irreversibility of university affiliation choice. A survey held among 600 students who
changed universities also indicates that changing over often entails
few personal problems. Getting acquainted with the city, finding
suitable housing, and making new friends often occurs smoothly.
Furthermore, correspondence in courses and education systems between universities prevent considerable delay. Many students overestimate the lasting consequences of their choice of university.
The permeability manipulation was directly followed by the subliminal
deathxxxx priming procedure, which, in turn, was followed by the text
proclaimed by the university critic (described in Study 1) and the critic
evaluation and university identification measures. In contrast to Study 1,
participants first filled out the evaluation measure and then the identification measure. The final part of the experiment consisted of a recognition
task whereby participants were asked to indicate whether they recognized
a word that appeared on the screen from the newspaper article. As in the
previous study, upon completion, participants returned to the main room,
where they were debriefed, given their credit, and thanked for their
contribution.

Results
Subliminality check. Three participants indicated that they had
seen death as a third word within each word pair.2 Their data were
not further analyzed. The results of the 76 remaining participants
were subjected to 2 (mortality salient vs. control) X 2 (permeability vs. impermeability of boundaries) ANOVAs on the identification and evaluation measure.
Relative preference for distancing or derogation. We performed a 2 (mortality salience: death prime vs. xxxx prime)
X 2 (permeability: permeability vs. impermeability) betweensubjects X 2 (identification vs. evaluation) within-subjects
MANOVA on the identification and evaluation measures to assess
the relative preference for the two strategies. This analysis yielded
an interaction of permeability and the within-subjects factor, F(2,
71) = 4.34, p < .02, and a significant three-way interaction, F(2,
71) = 4.67, p < .02. To further explore the nature of the threeway interaction, we analyzed the identification and evaluation
measures separately using a 2 (mortality salience) X 2 (permeability) between-subjects univariate ANOVA.
Distancing. This 2 X 2 ANOVA performed on the identification measure revealed a marginally significant main effect of
permeability, F(l, 72) = 3.49, p < .07, that was qualified by a
Mortality Salience X Permeability interaction, F(l, 72) = 6.51, p
< .02. The means are displayed in Table 3. We used simple effect
tests to explore the nature of this pattern. In accordance with the
hypothesis, decreased identification due to mortality salience was
found among only those who were primed with the permeable
aspects of university affiliation, F(l, 72) = 7.10, p < .02 (M

Mortality salience
Permeability

Death prime

xxxx prime

Impermeable
SD
N
Permeable
SD
N

5.96a
1.44
19
4.60b
1.50
17

5.61a
1.30
20
5.82a
1.10
20

Note. Score could range from 1 (indicating no affiliation) to 9 (indicating

full affiliation). Means that do not share a common subscript differ at p <
.05 from adjacent row and column.

= 4.60 in the death condition vs. M = 5.82 in the control

condition) but not among impermeable-prime participants, F(l,
72) = 0.61, ns (M = 5.96 for mortality salience participants vs. M
= 5.61 for control participants). In addition, lower identification
was found among the permeable compared with the impermeable
group in the mortality salience condition, F(l, 72) = 8.93, p <
.004 (M = 4.60 vs. M = 5.96, respectively), but not in the control
condition, F(l, 72) = 0.25, ns (M = 5.82 vs. M = 5.61, respectively). Thus, significantly lower identification compared with the
other three conditions was found in the permeable-death condition, providing support for the hypothesis that distancing due to
mortality salience and negative identity-relevant information only
occurs when the identification at stake is permeable.
Derogation. A Permeability X Mortality Salience ANOVA on
the evaluation measure yielded a main effect of permeability, F(l,
72) = 5.81, p < .02, and a marginally significant two-way interaction, F(l, 72) = 3.46, p < .07 (see Table 4 for means). Our
hypothesis was that criticism of the university in combination with
mortality salience will lead to greater derogation of the critic if
university affiliation is presented as impermeable. Lower evaluation of the critic was therefore expected in the impermeable-death
condition compared with the other three conditions. Simple effect
tests yielded results that corroborate this hypothesis. Compared to
xxxx control participants, mortality salient participants expressed
greater dislike for the critic in the impermeable condition, F(l,
72) = 4.34, p < .05 (M = 2.62 for mortality salience participants
vs. M = 3.36 for control participants), but not in the permeable
condition, F(l, 72) = 0.15, ns (Af = 3.69 vs. M = 3.50, respectively). In addition, separate comparisons between permeability
conditions in the death and control condition yielded a significant
effect in the death condition, F(l, 72) = 8.93, p < .004 (M = 2.62
in the impermeable condition vs. M = 3.69 in the permeable
condition), but not in the control condition, F(l, 72) = 0.16, ns (M

2
As in Study 1, the other checks indicated that participants were
unaware of the manipulated words. When directly asked whether they had
seen more than two words during each trial, 8 of the 78 participants
answered affirmatively. Only 3 of these participants were able to write
down the correct word. A Pearson chi-square analysis on the multiplechoice question revealed no statistical differences between conditions,
^ ( 4 , N = 79) = 0.20, p = 1.00.

930

DECHESNE, JANSSEN, AND VAN KNIPPENBERG

Table 4

Means for the Need for Closure X Mortality Salience

Interaction on Evaluation of Opinion

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Mortality salience
Permeability

death prime

xxxx prime

Impermeable
SD
N
Permeable
SD
N

2.62a
0.89
19
3.69b
1.20
17

3.36b
1.07
20
3.50,,
1.19
20

Note. Lower scores indicate greater dislike for the target, with 1 = total
dislike and 9 = total liking. Means that do not share a common subscript
differ at p < .05 from adjacent row and column.

= 3.36 vs. M = 3.50). We can conclude, then, that increased

dislike for a critic after mortality salience is only found when
the boundaries of the cultural identification are considered
impermeable.

Discussion
Study 2 provides clear support for the hypothesis that permeability of group boundaries moderates the response to criticism of
a group when participants are confronted with death. Those made
aware of the more temporal and permeable nature of university
affiliation and reminded about death responded with lower identification with the university when it was criticized. In contrast,
those made aware of the more enduring and impermeable nature of
university affiliation and confronted with the prospect of mortality
responded with greater dislike of a critic of the university.
General Discussion
The leitmotif running across the present studies was the specification of the nature of derogation and distancing processes found
in previous research on the effects of mortality salience. The focus
of both studies was on the potential moderation of closure. In
Study 1, those who were motivated to uphold existing structures,
or to maintain closure, were found to exhibit lower evaluations of
a critic on the local university after they were reminded about
death. However, the evaluations of those who were not motivated
to maintain closure were unaffected by the death manipulation. In
contrast, the latter group of participants was found to have lower
levels of identification after being criticized and reminded about
death compared with high-need-for-closure participants in the
death condition and low-need-for-closure participants in the control condition. Study 2 yielded a similar pattern of results, using
the extent to which group boundaries are closed, rather than
individual motivation to maintain closure, as the independent
variable. Participants who were made aware of the impermeability
of university affiliation responded with greater dislike of a critic of
their university when they were reminded about death, whereas
participants who were made aware of the permeability of this
affiliation did not. Rather, these latter participants responded to the
criticism with lower identification after they were reminded about
death.

Thus, in general, the extent to which individuals are either

motivated or forced to perceive a group as closed appears to
determine the strategy used when confronted with criticism of a
particular cultural identification and when mortality is made salient. Derogation is associated with high closure whereas distancing is associated with low closure. Throughout the article, we have
explained these findings by positing that mortality salience increases the need for group membership to alleviate mortality
concerns, which also makes the individuals more sensitive to
criticism of such groups. Derogation of threats to a personally
relevant group and distancing from a criticized group constitute
strategies that serve to protect the ego from harm. Defense of the
group through derogation of criticism of the group allows the
individuals to maintain the identification. Distancing from the
group reduces the damage by decreasing the impact of the criticism. Whether one engages in derogation or distancing depends on
the willingness or necessity to maintain the identification. Maintenance is associated with derogation, and neglect is associated
with distancing.
The present findings suggest that need for closure and impermeability of group boundaries have converging implications for
responses to criticism under mortality salience. This is particularly
interesting given that these independent measures constitute dissimilar constructs and stem from different traditions. Whereas the
need-for-closure construct or conceptually similar constructs such
as need for structure have generally been applied to cognitive
categorization strategies (e.g., Tetlock, 1998; McGregor &
Holmes, 1999; Bar-Tal, Kishon-Rabin, & Tabak, 1997; Schaller,
Boyd, Yohannes, & O'Brien, 1995), the concept of impermeability
has been used in the prediction of identity management strategies
(e.g., Ellemers et al., 1988; Ellemers, Wilke, & Van Knippenberg,
1993; Jackson et al., 1996). From a social psychological perspective, these strategies may actually constitute different sides of the
same coin. Specifically, both increase awareness of the boundaries
of social and cultural groups (need for closure because one desires
to maintain identification with the group, and impermeability
because one is forced to maintain identification with the group). In
this respect, the present results are consistent with previous findings by Shah et al. (1998) in their integration of social processes
such as in-group bias and individual motivational processes such
as need for closure.
One potential new direction for research that could be based on
the present findings would be to investigate impermeability and
need for closure when these two concepts are combined in a single
study. Our hunch is that, in general, higher need for closure implies
greater preference for identification with groups that have impermeable rather than permeable boundaries. The relation between
permeability and need for closure may also be reversed. Individuals who grow up in a closed environment may get used to stability
and order and eventually develop a need for it. To use the terminology of Gibson (1986), permeability and need for closure may
"afford" each other.
A second set of concepts that was highlighted in the present
studies was between derogation and distancing. We have treated
these processes as antagonistic with regard to the implications for
identity management. The findings corroborate this assumption.
When mortality was made salient, the participants engaged in
either defense or distancing but never in both. Yet, our analysis
does not necessarily imply that identification with a group and

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

DEROGATION AND DISTANCING

evaluation of a critic of that group are negatively correlated.
Clearly, a certain amount of commitment to a group is required to
feel affected by criticism of that group. However, that is not to say
that increased identification always leads to decreased liking for a
critic of one's group or, conversely, that decreased identification
leads to increased liking for such a critic. Rather, we have suggested that maintaining identification after a personally relevant
group is criticized requires greater effort when people are reminded about death because criticism undermines a positive selfimage, the need for which is intensified by reminders of mortality.
From this perspective, greater derogation of a critic of a personally
relevant group after reminders of mortality is interpreted as an
indication of increased effort to keep the level of identification
stable rather than to increase it. Conversely, decreasing identification with a criticized group after reminders of mortality allows one
to keep the liking for the critic stable rather than to increase the
liking for the critic. This analysis thus suggests that a negative
correlation is to be found between the changes in identification
with a personally relevant group and the changes in evaluation of
the critic of that group as a result of mortality salience but not
necessarily between the absolute values of the identification and
evaluation measures. Because of the between-subjects designs
used in both studies, we cannot empirically assess this suggested
dynamic relation between identification and derogation. Future
research could be conducted to explore this issue further.
Investigation of the correlation between changes in identification and evaluation as a result of mortality salience may also
provide an indication of the use of terror management strategies
other than for the purposes of derogation and distancing. If this
correlation appears to be strong, as we have assumed throughout
the article, then the two strategies investigated in the present
research may constitute the predominant strategies that people
adopt to deal with threats to their group after being reminded of
mortality. If, on the other hand, this correlation appears to be weak,
it would suggest that additional terror management strategies may
be used.
To conclude, the present findings demonstrate that at least two
processes are involved when people are confronted with criticism
of a personally relevant group and faced with the prospect of
mortality: derogation of the critic and distancing from the group.
The presence of personal need for closure and the impermeability
of group boundaries was shown to induce derogation of the critic
after mortality salience, and the absence of these features was
shown to induce distancing from the group after mortality salience.
Future inquiries should focus on whether reactions other than
distancing and defense may be involved in terror management and
whether other determinants of terror management strategies can be
identified.

References
Amdt, J., Greenberg, J., Pyszczynski, T., Solomon, S., & Simon, L. (1997).
Subliminal presentation of death reminders leads to increased defense of
the cultural worldview. Psychological Science, 8, 379-385.
Arndt, J., Greenberg, J., Schimel, J., Pyszczynski, T., & Solomon, S.
(1999). Distancing from the ingroup: The effects of mortality salience
and positive and negative primes on Hispanic ethnic identification.
Unpublished manuscript, University of Missouri, Columbia.
Bar-Tal, Y., Kishon-Rabin, L., & Tabak, N. (1997). The effect of need and

931

ability to achieve cognitive structuring on cognitive structuring. Journal

of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1158-1176.
Ben-Ari, O. T., Florian, V., & Mikulincer, M. (1999). The impact of
mortality salience on reckless driving: A test of terror management
theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 35-45.
Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A
treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.
Cialdini, R., Borden, R., Thome, A., Walker, M , Freeman, S., & Sloan, L.
(1976). Basking in reflected glory: Three (football) field studies. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 366-375.
Cialdini, R., & Richardson, K. (1980). Two indirect tactics of image
management: Basking and blasting. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 57, 626-631.
Dechesne, M., Greenberg, J., Arndt, J., & Schimel, J. (in press). Terror
management and the vicissitudes of sports fan affiliation: Effects of
mortality salience on optimism and identification. European Journal of
Social Psychology.
Dechesne, M., Janssen, J., & Van Knippenberg, A. (1999). Worldview
allegiance vs. egotism in the face of existential threat: Need for closure
as moderator of terror management strategies. Manuscript submitted for
publication, University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Doherty, K. (1998). A mind of her own: Effects of need for closure and
gender on reactions to nonconformity. Sex Roles, 38, 801-819.
Ellemers, N., Van Knippenberg, A., De Vries, N., & Wilke, H. (1988).
Social identification and permeability of group boundaries. European
Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 497-513.
Ellemers, N., Wilke, H., & Van Knippenberg, A. (1993). Effects of the
legitimacy of low group or individual status on individual and collective
status-enhancement strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 766-778.
Florian, V., & Mikulincer, M. (1997). Fear of death and the judgment of
social transgressions: A multidimensional test of terror management
theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 369-380.
Gibson. J. (1986). The ecological approach to visual perception. Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Goldenberg, J. L., McCoy, S. K., Pyszczynski, T., Greenberg, J., &
Solomon, S. (2000). The body as a source of self-esteem: The effect of
mortality salience on identification with one's body, interest in sex, and
appearance monitoring. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 118-130.
Greenberg, J., Pyszczynski, T., & Solomon, S. (1986). The causes and
consequences of a need for self-esteem: A terror-management theory. In
R. Baumeister (Ed.), Public self and private self (pp. 189-212). New
York: Springer-Verlag.
Greenberg, J., Pyszczynski, T., Solomon, S., Simon, L., & Breus, M.
(1994). The role of consciousness and the specificity to death of mortality salience effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67,
627-637.
Greenberg, J., Simon, L., Porteus, J., Pyszczynski, T., & Solomon, S.
(1995). Evidence of a terror management function of cultural icons: The
effects of mortality salience on the inappropriate use of cherished
cultural symbols. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 12211228.
Greenberg, J., Simon, L., Solomon, S., Chatel, D., & Pyszczynski, T.
(1992). Terror management and tolerance: Does mortality salience always intensify negative reactions to others who threaten the worldview.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 212-220.
Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., & Pyszczynski, T. (1997). Terror management
theory of self-esteem and cultural worldviews: Empirical assessments
and conceptual refinements. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 29, pp. 61141). New York: Academic Press.
Harmon-Jones, E., Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., & Simon, L. (1996). The
effects of mortality salience on intergroup bias between minimal groups.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 677-681.

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

932

DECHESNE, JANSSEN, AND VAN KNIPPENBERG

Jackson, L., Sullivan, L., Harnish, R., & Hodge, C. (1996). Achieving
positive social identity: Social mobility, social creativity, and permeability of group boundaries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 241-254.
Koole, S., & Dechesne, M. (1999). Terror as ego-threat: Evidence that
reminders of death undermine implicit self-esteem. Unpublished manuscript, University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Kruglanski, A. (1996). Motivated social cognition: Principles of the interface. In E. Higgins & A. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 493-520). New York: Guilford Press.
Kruglanski, A., Atash, M., DeGrada, E., Mannetti, L., Pierro, A., &
Webster, D. (1997). Psychological theory testing versus psychometric
nay-saying: Comment on Neuberg et al.'s (1997) critique of the Need for
Closure Scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1005
1016.
Kruglanski, A., & Webster, D. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind:
"Seizing" and "freezing. " Psychological Review, 103, 263-283.
Kruglanski, A., Webster, D., & Klein, A. (1993). Motivated resistance and
openness to persuasion in the presence or absence of prior information.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 861-876.
Kuhl, J. (1986). Motivation and information processing: A new look at
decision making, dynamic change, and action control. In R. Sorrentino
& E. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (pp. 404-434). New York: Guilford Press.
McGregor, I., & Holmes, J. (1999). How storytelling shapes memory and
impressions of relationship events over time. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 76, 403-419.
Neuberg, S., & Newsom, J. (1993). Personal need for structure: Individual
differences in the desire for simpler structure. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 65, 113-131.
Ochsmann, R., & Mathy, M. (1994). Depreciating of and distancing from
foreigners: Effects of mortality salience. Unpublished manuscript, Universitat Mainz, Mainz, Germany.

Pittman, T. (1998). Motivation. In D. Gilbert & S. Fiske (Eds.), The

handbook of social psychology (pp. 549-590). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Pyszczynski, T., Greenberg, J., & Solomon, S. (1999). A dual-process
model of defense against conscious and unconscious death-related
thought: An extension of terror management theory. Psychological Review, 106, 835-845.
Rosenblatt, A., Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., Pyszczynski, T., & Lyon, D.
(1989). Evidence for terror management theory: I. The effects of mortality salience on reactions to those who violate and uphold cultural
values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 681-690.
Schaller, M., Boyd, C , Yohannes, J., & O'Brien, M. (1995). The prejudiced personality revisited: Personal need for structure and formation of
erroneous group stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 544-555.
Shah, J., Kruglanski, A., & Thompson, E. (1998). Membership has its
(epistemic) rewards: Need for closure effects on in-group bias. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 383-393.
Snyder, C , Lassegard, M., & Ford, C. (1986). Distancing after group
success and failure: Basking in reflected glory and cutting off reflected
failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 382-388.
Tajfel, H. (1978). Social categorization, social identity and social comparison. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups: Studies in
the social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 61-76). London:
Academic Press.
Tetlock, P. (1998). Close-call counterfactuals and belief-system defenses:
I was not almost wrong but I was almost right. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 75, 639-652.

Received November 8, 1999

Revision received May 15, 2000
Accepted May 26, 2000