This study focused on social projection (SP) to outgroups. Two studies were conducted to show that SP to outgroups was greater than to ingroups when an issue is more relevant to the outgroup than to the ingroup and vice versa. These experiments were conducted for students of different schools (N1 = 92, N2 = 203). The results confirmed that students overestimated agreement with working adults when the topic was more relevant to working people. Also, when the topic was relevant to students, they overestimated agreement of other students relative to the working adults. These results suggested the relevance of the opinion was more important than perceived social distance when Japanese students refer to others.

The supposed universality of the incidence and prevalence of schizophrenia has been seriously challenged. It is now widely accepted that the life-time prevalence and incidence of this disorder vary considerably in time and place. As a result, there has been renewed interest in environmental causation of schizophrenia. There are few extant formulations that have successfully integrated the available new evidence into a coherent theory for its causation. The outgroup intolerance hypothesis is an attempt to integrate this evidence. It proposes that schizophrenia is the result of a mismatch between the social brain as shaped by evolution and the new social conditions of the post-neolithic. The hypothesis can provide an explanation for (i) the higher risk to migrants, (ii) the ethnic density phenomenon, (iii) the increased risk to individuals who have grown up in cities and (iv) the putative low risk in hunter-gatherer societies. Evidence is presented from a range of disciplines and sources including epidemiology, psychopathology, social psychology and clinical trials in support of this hypothesis. A range of testable predictions follow from the hypothesis.

Infrahumanization research has verified that in intergroup contexts, there is a strong tendency to attribute secondary emotions, which are uniquely human, to the ingroup, while limiting that attribution in outgroups. Experiments have shown it to be as common as ingroup bias. However, it is not yet known what characteristics may mitigate this trend. This paper presents two studies. The first analyzes the impact of helping behavior on attributions of human traits to two fictitious groups. The second study's objective was to determine if members of the Spanish ingroup would infrahumanize an Ethiopian outgroup less when that outgroup performs prosocial behavior towards another group. Infrahumanization was determined by a lexical decision task, using the names of ingroup and outgroup members as priming. The results demonstrate that describing a fictitious group in altruistic terms increases their human profile (experiment one) and reduces infrahumanization (experiment two).