Four threats
Stephan and Stephan (2000) brought scattered research on prejudice together under the concept of threat. Realistic threat, inherited from realistic conflict theory, is the perception that an outgroup will take jobs, resources, safety or political power. Symbolic threat is the perception that an outgroup's values, religion or morals undermine one's culture. Intergroup anxiety, introduced by Stephan and Stephan (1985), is the discomfort people feel about being rejected or making mistakes when interacting with outgroup members. Negative stereotypes, such as expecting outgroup members to be aggressive or dishonest, lead people to anticipate unpleasant interactions.
Evidence
Stephan and colleagues (1999) surveyed attitudes toward immigrants in the United States and Spain and found that all four threats predicted prejudice, with explanatory power rising substantially when they were considered together. Stephan and colleagues (2005) gave participants threatening information about a fictitious immigrant group and found that those who felt threatened developed more negative attitudes, providing causal evidence. Riek and colleagues (2006) meta-analyzed 95 studies and confirmed that five types of threat were all meaningfully related to outgroup attitudes. The theory is used to explain hostility in immigration, religious and ethnic relations, alongside concepts such as collective narcissism.
Revision and critiques
Stephan and colleagues (2009) revised the theory as intergroup threat theory, reducing the threats to realistic and symbolic types and distinguishing whether each targets the group as a whole or individual members. Intergroup anxiety and negative stereotypes were recast as antecedents of threat. Rios and colleagues (2018) reviewed experimental work showing that responses differ by type of threat and that stronger group identification amplifies threat effects. Critics note that threat and prejudice overlap in measurement and risk circular reasoning, so the theory is often discussed alongside interventions that reduce threat, such as the common ingroup identity model.
FAQ
- What is integrated threat theory in simple terms?
- The more people feel another group threatens their jobs, safety, culture or values, the more prejudiced they become toward that group.
- How do realistic and symbolic threats differ?
- Realistic threat is worry about material interests such as money, jobs and safety, while symbolic threat is worry that values, culture and identity will be undermined.
Sources reviewed: 2026-10-26
References
- Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (1985). Intergroup anxiety. Journal of Social Issues, 41(3), 157–175. Introduces intergroup anxiety, a component of the theory.
- Stephan, W. G., Ybarra, O., & Bachman, G. (1999). Prejudice toward immigrants. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(11), 2221–2237. Tests four threats as predictors of prejudice toward immigrants.
- Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (2000). An integrated threat theory of prejudice. In S. Oskamp (Ed.), Reducing Prejudice and Discrimination (pp. 23–45). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. The chapter that named and set out integrated threat theory.
- Stephan, W. G., Renfro, C. L., Esses, V. M., Stephan, C. W., & Martin, T. (2005). The effects of feeling threatened on attitudes toward immigrants. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 29(1), 1–19. Experimental evidence that threat worsens attitudes.
- Riek, B. M., Mania, E. W., & Gaertner, S. L. (2006). Intergroup threat and outgroup attitudes: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(4), 336–353. Meta-analysis of threat and outgroup attitudes.
- Stephan, W. G., Ybarra, O., & Morrison, K. R. (2009). Intergroup threat theory. In T. D. Nelson (Ed.), Handbook of Prejudice, Stereotyping, and Discrimination (pp. 43–59). New York: Psychology Press. The revised intergroup threat theory.
- Rios, K., Sosa, N., & Osborn, H. (2018). An experimental approach to intergroup threat theory: Manipulations, moderators, and consequences of realistic vs. symbolic threat. European Review of Social Psychology, 29(1), 212–255. Reviews experimental work on realistic and symbolic threat.