Explaining Normative Versus Nonnormative Action: The Role of Implicit Theories

The current research investigates what motivates people to engage in normative versus nonnormative action. Prior research has shown that different emotions lead to different types of action. We argue that these differing emotions are determined by a more basic characteristic, namely, implicit theories about whether groups and the world in general can change. We hypothesized that incremental theories (beliefs that groups/the world can change) would predict normative action, and entity theories (beliefs that groups/the world cannot change) as well as group identification would predict nonnormative action. We conducted a pilot in the context of protests against a government plan to relocate Bedouin villages in Israel and a main study during the Israeli social protests of the middle class. Results revealed three distinct pathways to collective action. First, incremental theories about the world predicted hope, which predicted normative action. Second, incremental theories about groups and group identification predicted anger, which also predicted normative collective action. Lastly, entity theories about groups predicted nonnormative collective action through hatred, but only for participants who were highly identified with the group. In sum, people who believed in the possibility of change supported normative action, whereas those who believed change was not possible supported nonnormative action.     

How exposure to real conspiracy theories motivates collective action and political engagement? Τhe moderating role of primed victimhood and underlying emotional mechanisms in the case of 2018 bushfire in Attica

Conspiracy theories concern milestone events, mobilizing various explanations. However, there is still emerging research on how conspiracy beliefs mobilize normative and nonnormative collective action, as well as political engagement and what the emotional underpinnings of such effects are. We conducted two experimental studies (Study 1, N = 301 and Study 2, N = 328) on exploring the relationship between exposure to conspiracy theories and normative, nonnormative collective action and political engagement, moderated by primed victimhood and mediated by fear/anxiety and anger emotional indices. Results in Study 1 showed that exposure to conspiracy theories decreases normative collective action, but increases nonnormative collective action, negative emotions of anger and fear/anxiety and political engagement. In Study 2 we confirmed findings of Study 1, but these effects were moderated by primed victimhood. Study 2 also showed that anger index, but not fear/anxiety index, significantly mediated the moderating interaction effect between exposure to conspiracy theories and primed victimhood on the (non)normative collective action and political engagement. Results are discussed in light of the broader impact of circulation of conspiracy theories and their effective tackle amidst societal traumas.     

Relation of Economic Depression to Delinquency,Crime, and Drunkenness in Massachusetts

Abstract

Two experiments using the same paradigm were conducted to examine when members of a disadvantaged group will accept their situation, take individual action, or engage in collective action. In both experiments, Canadian undergraduate subjects received feedback that they had been unsuccessful in their attempt to gain entrance into a high status group. Experiment 1 involved a justice manipulation in which the main hypothesis was that collective action would be associated with procedural injustice, whereas distributive injustice would lead to individualistic action. The main hypothesis of Experiment 2 was that collective action would be instigated by those who are extremely close to gaining entry to the high status group. Although only partial support was obtained for the hypotheses, it was possible to specify conditions that discriminate between individual and collective action.     

Anger toward God: social-cognitive predictors, prevalence, and links with adjustment to bereavement and cancer

A recent model of collective action distinguishes 2 distinct pathways: an emotional pathway whereby anger in response to injustice motivates action and an efficacy pathway where the belief that issues can be solved collectively increases the likelihood that group members take action (van Zomeren, Spears, Fischer, & Leach, 2004). Research supporting this model has, however, focused entirely on relatively normative actions such as participating in demonstrations. We argue that the relations between emotions, efficacy, and action differ for more extreme, nonnormative actions and propose (a) that nonnormative actions are often driven by a sense of low efficacy and (b) that contempt, which, unlike anger, entails psychological distancing and a lack of reconciliatory intentions, predicts nonnormative action. These ideas were tested in 3 survey studies examining student protests against tuition fees in Germany (N = 332), Indian Muslims' action support in relation to ingroup disadvantage (N = 156), and British Muslims' responses to British foreign policy (N = 466). Results were generally supportive of predictions and indicated that (a) anger was strongly related to normative action but overall unrelated or less strongly related to nonnormative action, (b) contempt was either unrelated or negatively related to normative action but significantly positively predicted nonnormative action, and (c) efficacy was positively related to normative action and negatively related to nonnormative action. The implications of these findings for understanding and dealing with extreme intergroup phenomena such as terrorism are discussed.     

The role of social identity in the explanation of collective action: An intergroup perspective on the Yellow Vests movement

Social psychologists have developed influential theoretical models to understand intergroup conflicts, radicalism, and collective action. November 2018 saw the emergence of a new powerful movement in France named the Yellow Vests. Born on social media, the movement has sustained an unprecedented period of intense protests and violent clashes with the police, challenging the French government. As such, this movement offers an ideal context to examine the real-world relevance of current social-psychological theorizing. Using a social identity and self-categorization perspective, two correlational studies (three samples, N = 1,849) tested the role of self-categorization as a group member, or social identity, in accounting for individual participation in normative and nonnormative collective action. Using different operationalizations of identification, both studies confirm a powerful role of identification as a Yellow Vest and provided evidence that the effect of social media use on collective action is fully mediated by self-categorization as a Yellow Vest. An alternative model suggesting that social media use mediated the relation between social identity and collective action was not supported by the data.     

Individual versus collective responses to membership in a low-status group: the effects of stability and individual ability

To test predictions of social identity theory (SIT; M. A. Hogg & D. Abrams, 1988; H. Tajfel & J. C. Turner, 1979) and the 5-stage model (FSM; D. M. Taylor & D. J. McKirnan, 1984) concerning reactions to membership in a low-status group, the authors led 112 pupils to believe that another (anonymous) class outperformed their class. In an overall permeable and legitimate intergroup context, the authors manipulated the stability of the low group status and the individual ability of the group members. Contrary to SIT and FSM, the pupils generally favored collective normative action. Individual mobility was preferred only by group members, especially boys, with high individual ability who thought that the low status of their group was stable. The results support FSM assumptions (a) that individual ability is a powerful determinant of intergroup behavior but (b) that one should consider its impact in combination with perceived stability.     

The day after an electoral defeat: counterfactuals and collective action

An intriguing question for scholars of collective action is how participants of unsuccessful actions become re-engaged in future collective activities. At an individual level, previous research has shown that after negative outcomes counterfactual thoughts ('if only?…?') may serve to prepare for future action. In the current research, we investigated whether counterfactuals may also prepare for future action at a collective level. After a defeat of their party at the regional elections, 163 political activists rated their agreement with?abstract?(as opposed to?concrete) and?party-focused?(as opposed to?other-focused) counterfactuals about how the elections outcome might have been better. Results showed that abstract counterfactuals, dealing with the core elements of the elections, supported collective action intention better than concrete ones. Consistent with the recent developments of dual-pathway models of collective action, counterfactuals predicted collective action intention through the mediation of group efficacy and group identification. In particular, while both party- and other-focused abstract counterfactuals increased group efficacy, only other-focused abstract counterfactuals increased group identification. Discussion focuses on how the investigation of counterfactuals can enlarge our knowledge of the socio-cognitive antecedents of collective action.     

Individual Versus Collective Responses to Membership in a Low-Status Group: The Effects of Stability and Individual Ability

Abstract

To test predictions of social identity theory (SIT; M. A. Hogg & D. Abrams, 1988; H. Tajfel & J. C. Turner, 1979) and the 5-stage model (FSM; D. M. Taylor & D. J. McKirnan, 1984) concerning reactions to membership in a low-status group, the authors led 112 pupils to believe that another (anonymous) class outperformed their class. In an overall permeable and legitimate intergroup context, the authors manipulated the stability of the low group status and the individual ability of the group members. Contrary to SIT and FSM, the pupils generally favored collective normative action. Individual mobility was preferred only by group members, especially boys, with high individual ability who thought that the low status of their group was stable. The results support FSM assumptions (a) that individual ability is a powerful determinant of intergroup behavior but (b) that one should consider its impact in combination with perceived stability.     

Political Action in Conflict and Nonconflict Regions in Indonesia: The Role of Religious and National Identifications

This study examined the relationship between group identification and political action in Indonesia. We made four contributions to the literature. First, we studied political action on behalf of religious groups and examined the role of religious identification alone and in combination with national identification. Second, we analyzed political action in a non‐Western country where social cleavages occur primarily along religious lines and where a conflict and nonconflict region can be studied. Third, we compared Muslims and Christians, whose majority and minority status varies across the two regions, and fourth, we investigated both normative and nonnormative forms of political action (protest and violence). In line with the dual‐identification model of politicization, we found that religious identification increased support for protest (but not violence) in the conflict region only and particularly among high national identifiers. In the nonconflict region, religious identification was not related to violence, and it was related to lower support for protest among high national identifiers. The patterns were largely similar for Muslims and Christians, but some differences were found depending on the majority‐minority status. We conclude that particularities of the intergroup context should be taken into consideration when studying politicization.     

Seeking a Variable Standard of Individual Moral Responsibility in Organizations

Relatively few authors attempt to assess individuals’ moral responsibility for collective action within organizations. I draw on fairly technical recent work by Seamus Miller, Christopher Kutz, and Tracy Isaacs in the field of collective responsibility to see what normative lessons can be prepared for people considering entry into large hierarchical, compartmentalized organizations like businesses or the military. I will defend a view shared by Isaacs that group members’ responsibility for collective action depends on intentions to contribute to particular collective actions, against Miller and Kutz’s more inculpating standards. Miller and Kutz fail to achieve their goal of articulating a variable standard for measuring individual responsibility within organizations, for reasons suggesting we might not be able to do better with their theoretical commitments than a threshold warning for all potential entrants to be wary of the groups they enter. Isaacs sketches an approach that is more successful at creating a variable standard for assessing high echelon actors; I build on and refine her theory to argue that organization members can be held responsible for their unique interpretations of the organization mission and unique contributions to their role duties. High echelon actors may share personal responsibility for their subordinates’ behavior when they have created the conditions for those actions through their unique orders.     

不同类型集群行为的差异比较

集群行为是个体以群体成员身份参与的以改善群体地位为目标的行动。近年来, 西方心理学在集群行为领域的研究开始呈现差异化分析比较的研究趋势。根据行为模式是否符合社会规范, 可将集群行为分为常规集群行为与违规集群行为。根据参与群体的社会地位, 可将集群行为分为弱势群体集群行为与优势群体集群行为。根据集群行为的成就, 可将结果分为“成功”与“失败”两类。不同类型集群行为所涉及的心理机制、前因变量及发展趋势具有很大差异。今后的研究应探明不同类型集群行为间的内在联系, 重视文化背景因素并加强与其他学科研究成果的结合。     

With infinite utility,more needn't be better

Plausibly, only moral agents can bear action-demanding duties. This places constraints on which groups can bear action-demanding duties: only groups with sufficient structure—call them ‘collectives’—have the necessary agency. Moreover, if duties imply ability then moral agents (of both the individual and collectives varieties) can bear duties only over actions they are able to perform. It is thus doubtful that individual agents can bear duties to perform actions that only a collective could perform. This appears to leave us at a loss when assigning duties in circumstances where only a collective could perform some morally desirable action and no collective exists. But, I argue, we are not at a loss. This article outlines a new way of assigning duties over collective acts when there is no collective. Specifically, we should assign collectivization duties to individuals. These are individual duties to take steps towards forming a collective, which then incurs a duty over the action. I give criteria for when individuals have collectivization duties and discuss the demands these duties place on their bearers.     

Recognizing discrimination explicitly while denying it implicitly: Implicit social identity protection

Past research suggests that members of devalued groups recognize their groups are discriminated against. Do the implicit responses of members of these groups demonstrate the same pattern? We argue that they do not and that this is due to a motivated protection of members of devalued groups' social identity. Study 1 demonstrates that, at an explicit level African-Canadians recognize that their group is discriminated against, but at an implicit level African-Canadians think that most people like their group to a greater extent than do European-Canadians. Study 2 replicates this implicit finding with Muslim participants while demonstrating that, when affirmed, this group difference disappears. Study 3 demonstrates that implicit normative regard can predict collective action over and above implicit attitudes and explicit normative regard. The implications for changing the status quo are discussed.     

The effect of intergroup contact on solidarity‐based collective action is mediated by reductions in SDO

This paper explores the impact of positive and negative intergroup contact on advantaged group members’ willingness to engage in collective action on behalf of disadvantaged outgroups, and the mediational role of social dominance orientation (SDO) in this process. SDO captures an individual’s ideological support for inequality. If contact is going to promote collective action to reduce inequality among the advantaged group, it must be expected to influence their ideological beliefs about hierarchy. In Study 1, only positive, and not negative contact was found to be associated with Whites’ support for the Black Lives Matter movement, mediated by reductions in SDO. In Study 2, both positive and negative contact were associated, respectively, with more or less support for collective action to protect the rights of European immigrants during Brexit negotiations. While positive contact was associated with reduced SDO and more support for collective action among British nationals, negative contact was associated with increased SDO and lower support for collective action.     

Negative expectancies for the group's outcomes undermine normative collective action: conflict between Christian and Muslim groups in Lebanon

In this extension of the social identity model of collective action (SIMCA; Van Zomeren, Postmes, & Spears, 2008), group expectancies are an intervening construct for the impact of group identification, perceived group inefficacy, and perceived group injustice on normative collective action. In addition to the SIMCA path from greater group identification to more action, Hypothesis 1 was that greater identification fosters less negative group expectancies, which, in turn, promote action. Hypothesis 2 was that the SIMCA path from greater perceived group inefficacy to less action is mediated by negative group expectancies. These hypotheses were for low- and high-status groups, as was the expectation for the SIMCA path from greater perceived group injustice to more action. For the low-status group, Hypothesis 3 was that perceived injustice also undermines action by fostering more negative group expectancies. During severe ethno-religious group conflict in Lebanon, university students reported on SIMCA factors and their group expectancies. Results were in line with SIMCA and Hypotheses 2 and 3, and partly with Hypothesis 1. Group expectancies are discussed in relation to likelihood of amelioration, perceived instability, and emotions. Types of expectancies are discussed, as is the relation of expectancies to normative and non-normative collective action.     

Sex,sex roles,and response styles for negative affect: Selectivity in a free recall task

Study 1 examined how responses to negative affect may be influenced by sex differences in response styles [S. Nolen-Hoeksema (1987), “Sex Differences in Unipolar Depression: Evidence and Theory,” Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 101, pp. 259–282] and situational norms. Male and female experimental subjects were led to experience negative affect by reading and rating sad stories, and were then given either nonnormative or normative feedback. Nonnormative subjects were informed that their story ratings were more negative than other participants' ratings. Normative subjects were informed that their ratings were similar to others' ratings. For nonnormative subjects, men recalled less negative material than women, suggesting that response styles are most apparent when negative affect is considered inappropriate. As both sex and sex role orientation are predictive of response styles, Study 2 examined the hypothesis that both sex and sex role orientation are predictive of recall in a manner similar to sex in Study 1. Male and female subjects high and low in masculinity and femininity were assigned to negative-nonnormative and neutral affect conditions. In addition to a marginally significant sex effect consistent with Study 1, results revealed that high-masculinity individuals tended to recall more positive material in the negative-nonnormative condition than in the neutral affect condition. In contrast, low-masculinity individuals recalled less positive material in the negative-nonnormative condition than in the neutral affect condition. The implications of this research for the impact of negative affect on recall are addressed.     

The mobilizing and protective role of national identification in normative and non‐normative collective action

In the context of the financial crisis in Europe and drawing on social identity and perceived disadvantage literature, this research explored national identification, perceived prejudice, perceived ostracism, and anger as predictors of intentions to engage in normative collective action and support for non‐normative and destructive action. Correlational data were collected in Greece (N = 218), Portugal (N = 312), and Italy (N = 211) during the financial crisis that affected several European countries in the early 2010s. Hierarchical regressions showed that national identification, above and beyond all other variables, positively predicted normative collective action intentions, and negatively predicted support for non‐normative action. That is, people who were identified more strong with their national identity were more likely to report that they will engage in collective action to enhance the position of their (national) in‐group, and less likely to support destructive collective action. Mediation analyses revealed that in the case of Portugal and Italy, national identification associated negatively with anger, while anger positively predicted normative collective action. The findings of this research point to the importance of national identification as a factor, that, on the one hand motivates people's mobilization toward supporting the rights of the ingroup but on the other hand impedes the more negative and destructive side of collective action. The contextual and instrumental role of national identity in contexts of threat is discussed.     

Collective action and subordinate group identity in a simulated society game

Abstract: This research examined the effects of upward mobility and resource disparity on subordinates’ collective action and group identity in a context of intergroup negotiation by using a simulated society (SIMSOC) game. According to the social identity theory, it was hypothesized that when individual mobility opportunities for a subordinate group increase, the members of the subordinate group are less likely to participate in collective actions and to appreciate the merits of their own group identity. Four hundred and fifty‐four undergraduates participated in 12 separate SIMSOC games. For each game, approximately 40 undergraduates were divided into dominant and subordinate groups. Each of the four combinations of high/low levels of upward mobility and large/small resource disparity was played out three times. Subordinates in the low‐mobility condition acted collectively more frequently and evaluated their own group more positively than those in the high‐mobility condition. A signifificant positive correlation between the frequency of subordinates’ collective action and in‐group favoritism was found.     

Creative innovation or crazy irrelevance? The contribution of group norms and social identity to creative behavior

This paper develops an analysis of innovative behavior and creativity that is informed by the social identity perspective. Two studies manipulated group norms and analyzed their impact on creative behavior. The results of Study 1 show that when people are asked to make a creative product collectively they display conformity to ingroup norms, but that they deviate from ingroup norms when group members make the same products on their own. A parallel result was found in group members’ private perceptions of what they consider creative. In Study 2, the social identity of participants was made salient. Results showed conformity to group norms even when group members worked on their own creations. Findings suggest that innovative behavior is informed by normative context, and that in contexts in which people operate as members of a group (either physically through collective action, or psychologically through social identity salience) innovation will respect normative boundaries.     

Three Dogmas of Normativity

In this article, I identify and critically examine 3 dogmas of normativity that support a commonly accepted ‘Passivist View' of rational agency. I raise some questions about these dogmas, suggest what we should believe in their place, and moot an alternative ‘Activist View' of what it is to be a rational agent that grows out of rejection of the 3 dogmas. Underwriting the dogmas and the Passivist View, I suggest, is a deeply held but mistaken assumption that the normative domain is fundamentally akin to the nonnormative domain. Once we allow that the normative may be fundamentally unlike the nonnormative in certain key ways, a shift in our thinking about what it is to be rational becomes possible. I end by considering some implications of this paradigm shift in rationality from the passive to the active for various applied matters.