Minority influence and social categorization

In this article, a theoretical distinction is proposed between representative outgroup minorities (representative of a minority category in the society, e.g. gays) and dissident outgroup minorities (defined as a minority subgroup within a larger outgroup category). Two studies are reported comparing the social influence of dissident outgroup minorities with that of ingroup minorities (belonging to the subject's own social category). It was predicted that a position advocated by a dissident outgroup minority would be more readily accepted than that of an ingroup minority, but that the ingroup minority would be more likely to elicit the generation of new, alternative solutions. A first experiment in which subjects were either exposed to an ingroup minority, an outgroup minority, or no influence source confirmed these predictions. In a second experiment, subjects were either exposed to a majority or to a minority source either belonging to the subject's own social category or to the outgroup. The results indicate that the position of an ingroup majority was readily accepted whereas the otherwise identical message of an outgroup majority was rejected; neither ingroup nor outgroup majority stimulated the development of alternative proposals. Again, in line with Nemeth' (1986a) theory, the position of an ingroup minority was rejected but stimulated the generation of new, alternative proposals. The differential role of social category membership in minority and majority influence and the applicability of Nemeth' (1986a) theory to the attitude change area are discussed.     

The social functions of ingroup bias: Creating,confirming, or changing social reality

We describe our motivational analysis of ingroup bias. Central to our approach are two functions of ingroup bias: an identity function (the creation and expression of one's social identity) and an instrumental function (the facilitation of intergroup competition and social change). We present a research programme on the determinants of these two functions in which we have focused on socio-structural factors (group status and status stability), psychological factors (group identification and threat), and strategic considerations concerning the audience to which ingroup bias is communicated. In addition, we relate the different functions of ingroup bias to different forms of ingroup bias (symbolic versus material forms of ingroup bias; ingroup favouritism versus outgroup derogation). Our conclusions centre on the social and diverse nature of motivations underlying ingroup bias, and the integration of identity and instrumental perspectives on this phenomenon.     

On the asymmetry in the cognitive construal of ingroup and outgroup: A model of egocentric social categorization

A model of egocentric social categorization (ESC-model) is presented. It predicts an asymmetry in the cognitive construal of ingroups and outgroups which is traced back to an egocentrism in the cognitive differentiation of the social world. The more specific assumptions are: (1) At the most basic level of cognitive differentiation, the perceiver distinguishes between the categories ME and NOT-ME. (2) This basic level categorization predicates an asymmetry in the cognitive construal of ingroup and out-group as social categories: The ingroup is construed as a heterogeneous aggregate of separate entities and the outgroup as a homogeneous social category. (3) Egocentric social categorization thus facilitates self-definition in terms of personal identity relative to self-definition in terms of social identity. The ESC-model is highly relevant to research on perceived ingroup and outgroup homogeneity. Moreover, it alerts researchers to the possibility of ‘quasi-intergroup’ situations in which the outgroup, but not the ingroup, is a salient entity. This article also discusses the relationship between the ESC-model and self-categorization theory and points out some prospects for future research.     

The other side of we: when outgroup members express common identity

Previous research on the common ingroup identity model has focused on how one's representations of members of the ingroup and outgroup influence intergroup attitudes. Two studies reported here investigated how learning how others, ingroup or outgroup members, conceive of the groups within a superordinate category affects intergroup bias and willingness to engage in intergroup contact. Across both studies, high school students who learned that other ingroup members categorized students at both schools within the common identity of "students" showed less intergroup bias in evaluations and greater willingness for contact. However, consistent with the hypothesized effects of identity threat, when participants read that outgroup members saw the groups within the superordinate category, they exhibited a relatively negative orientation, except when ingroup members also endorsed a superordinate identity (Study 1). This result occurred even when the relative status of the groups was manipulated (Study 2).     

The ingroup as pars pro toto: projection from the ingroup onto the inclusive category as a precursor to social discrimination

In an approach to intergroup discrimination and tolerance, it is assumed that the outgroup's difference from the ingroup is evaluated with reference to the prototype of the higher-order category that includes both groups. Two correlational studies yielded evidence that (a) group members tend to perceive their ingroup as relatively prototypical for the inclusive category (projection), (b) members highly identified with both ingroup and inclusive category (dual identity) tend to project most, and (c) relative prototypicality is related to negative attitudes toward the outgroup. The latter relation was further specified in Study 3, manipulating the valence of the inclusive category. Projection was related to more negative attitudes toward the outgroup when the inclusive category was primed positively but to more positive attitudes when it was primed negatively. The meaning of dual identities for intergroup relations is discussed.     

Effects of trustors' social identity complexity on interpersonal and intergroup trust

Although previous literature has revealed the effect of a single social identity on trust, only few studies have examined how multiple social identities affect trust in others. The present research examined the effects of trustors' social identity complexity on their level of trust toward another person (interpersonal trust), outgroup members (outgroup trust), and ingroup members (ingroup trust). Study 1, which was a correlational study, indicated that trustors' social identity complexity was positively related to their interpersonal and outgroup trust. Three experimental studies were performed to identify causal relationships. Study 2 found that activating trustors' high social identity complexity produced high levels of interpersonal trust, and Studies 3 and 4 found that this effect was more pronounced when the trustee was an outgroup member (outgroup trust) rather than an ingroup member (ingroup trust). The implications of these results for social harmony are discussed.     

Relevance of social categories,depersonalization and group processes: two field tests of self‐categorization theory

Two field studies investigated whether, as predicted by self‐categorization theory (Turner, 1987 ), the relationship between comparative fit of an ingroup‐outgroup categorization and group phenomena is mediated by depersonalization of self‐perception, and moderated by category accessibility. In the first study participants were football fans, and in the second they were employees in an organization. In each study, two experimental conditions were created, whereby the accessibility and salience of the ingroup‐outgroup categorization were varied. New measures of comparative fit and depersonalization were developed, based on meta‐contrast ratios. Outcome variables were ingroup bias (Studies 1 and 2), ingroup entitativity, organizational citizenship behaviours, job satisfaction and turnover intentions (Study 2). Consistent with self‐categorization theory, results showed (a) that comparative fit determined ingroup bias and other criterion variables through the mediating process of depersonalization, and (b) that this process was active only when the category was highly accessible. The moderational role of accessibility concerned the relationship between depersonalization and outcome variables, not the link between fit and depersonalization. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Perceptions of dual identity and separate groups among secular and religious Israeli Jews

The authors examined the effects of perceptions of dual identity and separate groups on tendencies to handle intergroup conflict through problem solving and contention. Among secular Israeli Jews, regression analyses revealed a significant interaction between perceptions of dual identity and perceptions of separate groups: Only under high perception of dual identity was the perception of separate groups associated with contention. Among religious Israeli Jews, problem solving and contention were unrelated to either dual identity or to perceptions of separate groups. The results are discussed in terms of the common ingroup identity model (S. L. Gaertner, M. C. Rust, J. F. Dovidio, B. A. Bachman, & P. A. Anastasio, 1994) and in the context of the conflict between religious and secular Jews in Israel.     

WHY RIGHTS? WHY ME?

That Jews are concerned about human rights is distinct from why Jews should be concerned about rights in the first place. This project analyzes the reasons Jews in the twentieth century put forward to convince co‐religionists to take rights seriously. Focusing on the content of these arguments facilitates dividing the proffered rationales into three broad categories—the temporal, the innate, and the philosophical. Analysis of each category reveals subdivisions, reflecting the many ways Jews try to persuade each other to care about human rights. This taxonomy, unlike others, highlights the different ways in which Jews conceptualize the burning ethical questions of our day: of how and why to be Jewish and modern. These rationales therefore are understood to function as moral reasons and, as such, can be assessed by their relative claims.     

Perceptions of Dual Identity and Separate Groups Among Secular and Religious Israeli Jews

Abstract

The authors examined the effects of perceptions of dual identity and separate groups on tendencies to handle intergroup conflict through problem solving and contention. Among secular Israeli Jews, regression analyses revealed a significant interaction between perceptions of dual identity and perceptions of separate groups: Only under high perception of dual identity was the perception of separate groups associated with contention. Among religious Israeli Jews, problem solving and contention were unrelated to either dual identity or to perceptions of separate groups. The results are discussed in terms of the common ingroup identity model (S. L. Gaertner, M. C. Rust, J. F. Dovidio, B. A. Bachman, & R A. Anastasio, 1994) and in the context of the conflict between religious and secular Jews in Israel.     

Crossed categorization in common ingroup contexts

In three experiments, the authors tested the hypothesis that a common ingroup context would moderate evaluations of crossed category targets. In Experiment 1, the typical additive pattern of evaluation across artificial crossed category groups became a social inclusion pattern in a common ingroup context. In Experiment 2, the authors manipulated the importance of real crossed category targets. When the crossed groups were of low importance, the effects of imposing a common ingroup replicated those observed in Experiment 1. For important crossed groups, however, the additive pattern remained. In Experiment 3, the authors measured perceived importance of the crossed groups to social identity prior to introducing a common ingroup context. The effects of a common categorization on evaluations were again moderated by perceived importance. These findings are discussed in the context of integrating crossed categorization and common ingroup identity models of multiple categorization.     

Legitimacy of regulatory authorities as a function of inclusive identification and power over ingroups and outgroups

To insure compliance with rules and laws, regulatory authorities are usually in a position of power over a heterogeneous population or multiple groups. Power may thus need to be analysed as a tripartite relationship between authority, ingroup and outgroup. Based on the social identity approach and related justice theories, it is argued that social identification with an inclusive category that includes ingroup, outgroup and authority determines how group members react to the authority's power use and perceived legitimacy. Two studies were set in the context of the Australian tax system. Study 1 used an experimental design with a student sample; Study 2 was survey with a random sample of Australian citizens. Participants who identified less strongly with the inclusive category (Australians) attributed more legitimacy to the tax authority, when it exercised effective power over the outgroup (Study 1), or when it appeared lenient towards the ingroup (Study 2). In contrast, participants who identified strongly with the inclusive category attributed more legitimacy to the tax authority when it used its powers consistently towards both groups. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

On the consequences of deindividuation manipulations for the strategic communication of self: Identifiability and the presentation of social identity

According to traditional models of deindividuation, lowered personal identifiability leads to a loss of identity and a loss of internalized control over behaviour This account has been challenged by arguing that manipulations of identifiability affect the relative salience of personal or social identity and hence the choice of standards to control behaviour The present study contributes to an extension of this argument according to which identifiability manipulations do not only affect the salience of social identity but also the strategic communication of social identity. Reicher and Lvine (1993) have shown that subjects who are more identifiable to a powerful outgroup will moderate the expression of those aspects of ingroup identity which differ from the outgroup position and which would be punished by the outgroup. Here we seek to show that in addition, subjects who are more identifiable to a powerful outgroup will accentuate the expression of those aspects of ingroup identity which differ from the outgroup position but which would not be punished by the outgroup. This is because, when identifiable, subjects may use such responses as a means of publicly presenting their adherence to group norms and hence as a means of establishing their right to group membership. A study is reported in which 102 physical education students are either identifiable (I) or not identifiable (NI) to their academic tutors. They are asked to respond on a number of dimensions where pilot interviews show the ingroup stereotype to differ from outgroup norms. Expressions of difference from the outgroup position would lead to punishment on some of these dimensions (P items) but would not lead to punishment for others (NP items) The predicted interaction between identifiability and item type is highly significant. As expected, for NP items identifiability accentuates responses which differentiate the ingroup stereotype from outgroup norms. All these results occur independently of shifts in the salience of social identity. The one unexpectedfinding is that, for P items, identifiability does lead to decreased expression of the ingroup stereotype, but the diference does not reach significance. Nonetheless, overall the results do provide further evidence for the complex effects of identifiability on strategic considerations underlying the expression of social identity in intergroup contexts.     

Multicultural recognition and ethnic minority rights: A social identity perspective

Questions of multiculturalism give rise to lively and important debates in many countries and in many spheres of life. Diversity is considered desirable and necessary for the development of secure ethnic identities and positive self-feelings, but is also challenged for being inequitable and a threat to social cohesion. It is argued that the social identity perspective offers a useful framework for examining some of the key social psychological correlates and consequences of multicultural recognition. This perspective draws attention to status positions, ingroup identification, beliefs about the nature of ethnic groups, and perceptions of the social system. The first empirical section deals with the endorsement of multiculturalism in relation to majority – minority group status and the perceived nature of minority groups. Subsequently, the endorsement of multiculturalism is examined in relation to perceived structural discrimination, and the importance of social cohesion and stability. In the third empirical part the focus is on consequences of multicultural recognition for ingroup identification and self-esteem. As a set, the various empirical and theoretical arguments suggest that there is not one best approach to managing cultural diversity. Rather, it is important to concentrate on when and why specific effects occur, which means that more systematic attention should be paid to forms of multiculturalism, different groups, and to various conditions and circumstances.     

Categorizing at the group‐level in response to intragroup social comparisons: a self‐categorization theory integration of self‐evaluation and social identity motives

Two experiments examined how people respond to upward social comparisons in terms of the extent to which they categorize the self and the source of comparison within the same social group. Self‐evaluation maintenance theory (SEM) suggests that upward ingroup comparisons can lead to the rejection of a shared categorization, because shared categorization makes the comparison more meaningful and threatening. In contrast, social identity theory (SIT) suggests that upward ingroup comparisons can lead to the acceptance of shared categorization because a high‐performing ingroup member enhances the ingroup identity. We attempted to resolve these differing predictions using self‐categorization theory, arguing that SEM applies to contexts that make salient one's personal identity, and SIT applies to contexts that make collective identity salient. Consistent with this perspective, the level of identity activated in context moderated the effect of an upward ingroup comparison on the acceptance of shared social categorization. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

On the (dis-)confirmability of stereotypic attributes

Two experiments investigated the linguistic abstractness and confirmability of elements contained in ingroup and outgroup stereotypes. The first experiment shows that positive elements of the ingroup stereotype (Italians) and negative elements of the outgroup stereotype (Jews, Germans) tended to be particularly abstract. Also, negative elements contained in the outgroup stereotypes required relatively little evidence to be considered ‘true’ but much disconfirming evidence to be rejected as ‘false’. No such bias emerged for ingroup stereotypes. The second experiment compared the abstraction of four outgroup stereotypes (Jews, Blacks, homosexuals, career women) finding the greatest abstraction for the oldest stereotype (Jews), and least abstraction for the most recent stereotype (career women) with the remaining two groups (Blacks, homosexuals) occupying an intermediate position. Results are interpreted as suggesting that stereotypes may become more abstract over time as they lose the concrete elements that are easier to disconfirm while maintaining the abstract elements that are more resistant to change. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The impact of differentially valued overlapping categorizations upon the differentiation between positively,negatively, and neutrally evaluated social groups

The present study attempted to determine whether the impact of overlapping cate-gorizations upon intergroup differentiation should be attributed to cognitive category differentiation processes or whether motivational social identity processes do also inter-vene. Experimentally created groups were placed in one of four overlapping categor-ization conditions: the overlapping category was either absent or it was affectively positive, negative, or neutral. These groups were also differentially evaluated by providing them with positive, negative, or no feedback. Subjects estimated then the performance of the two groups in an experimental task. Thereupon, their self-esteem and their liking of the groups were also measured. The presence of an overlapping category had no impact upon the performance evaluations of positively evaluated groups. Negatively evaluated groups favoured the outgroup but the presence of an overlapping category led to a reduction of this perceived ingroup inferiority. The groups of the no-feedback condition exhibited ingroup favouritism. The presence of a positive and of a neutral overlapping category reduced this bias but the presence of a negatively evaluated overlapping category strongly enhanced it. The impact of overlapping categories upon the liking measure was less pronounced. Group members' self-esteem was influenced by the experimentally manipulated factors, but these effects did not really support social identity theory. The theoretical implications of the data are discussed.     

Prototypicality of arguments and conformity to ingroup norms

Social categorization is claimed to elicit a tendency to conform to ingroup norms, which may result in attitude change after exposure to information on the opinions of other ingroup members. It was hypothesized that the degree to which arguments represented ingroup norms, i.e., were prototypical, would affect their potential influence on attitudes, such that prototypical arguments would be perceived as being of higher quality and would elicit more attitude change. Moreover, prototypical arguments were expected to elicit more argument elaboration. Two experiments were designed to test these predictions. In Experiment 1 subjects were exposed to both a set of pro and a set of contra arguments, while one of the sets was allegedly prototypical of ingroup attitudes. In Experiment 2 subjects were exposed to either prototypical or a-prototypical pro or contra arguments allegedly originating from in- or outgroup. In both studies conformity to ingroup norms was observed. In addition, prototypical ingroup arguments elicited higher quality ratings in the first study. Indications of higher elaboration of prototypical ingroup arguments were found.     

Making sides and taking sides: an analysis of salient images and category constructions for pro- and anti-Gulf War respondents

This paper reports supportive evidence for a modified self-categorisation model of mass social influence, whereby category definitions are determined rhetorically and the character of collective action is shaped through category arguments. The study was conducted shortly after the Gulf War and was concerned with the respective constructions of pro- and anti-war respondents. Respondents were first asked to recall the images of the war which had most impact on them. They were then shown 29 images of the war and asked to rate the impact of each one as well as explain why they had given such impact ratings. Finally, they were asked to select the five images which had most impact on them. The results indicated that different subjects indicated very different views of the categories opposing each other despite the fact that they were characterising the same event. Moreover, the constructions of pro- and anti-war subjects matched those previously having been shown to characterise the rhetoric of pro- and anti-war leaders. Thus pro-war subjects recalled and rated highly those images that were consistent with a construction of the war as opposing the civilised world (ingroup) to Saddam Hussein (outgroup). Anti-war subjects recalled and rated highly those images that were consistent with a construction of the war as opposing ordinary people (ingroup) to business and political leaders prosecuting the war (outgroup). Copyright © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

From Mecca with tolerance: religion,social recategorisation and social capital

Does participation in mass religious rituals promote intergroup conflict or does it promote intergroup tolerance? We assess these claims by examining the effects of the annual pilgrimage to Mecca (the hajj) on sociopolitical views of Muslims in Russia’s North Caucasus. Participant observation during the hajj and a quasi-experimental focus group study of pilgrims and non-pilgrims produced paradoxical findings. While the hajj strengthened their ingroup pride as Muslims, the pilgrims came through as more outgroup-tolerant and prosocial than the non-pilgrims. We develop a synthetic theoretical solution: in high-identity-value, high-diversity common group settings social recategorisation and social capital become transitive – that is, inclusive views and social capital effects within an ingroup extend to outgroups. This means that intergroup conflict could be reduced by not only maximising contact across conflicting groups, but also by bringing together as many subgroups as possible within each conflicting group in settings where their common identity is positively affirmed in a non-discriminatory fashion.