Comments on the motivational status of self-esteem in social identity and intergroup discrimination

The background and development of motivational hypotheses in social identity theory are examined, revealing two general motives for intergroup discrimination: a desire for cognitive coherence, or good structure; and a need for positive self-esteem. The latter (self-esteem hypothesis: SEH) has received most attention. Both the theoretical and empirical bases of the SEH are largely rooted in research using the minimal group paradigm. However, it remains unclear whether self-esteem is to be considered primarily as a cause or an effect of discrimination. When real social groups are considered the SEH appears to provide only a partial explanation, and a variety of more or less powerful alternative social motives may underlie discriminatory behaviour. We explore some social-structural, individual and interpersonal limits to the SEH, and we call for an awareness of these motives and a re-examination of the good-structure thesis. The SEH, as it stands, provides only a partial contribution to our understanding of the relationship between social identity and discriminatory intergroup behaviour.     

Stimulus generalization following extra-dimensional training in educationally subnormal (severely) children.

The use of discrimination learning paradigms in the study of attentional transfer is discussed. The technique of go/no-go discrimination learning followed by stimulus generalization testing is contrasted with the more familiar simultaneous learning paradigm followed by a shift in the relevant cues. In the former paradigm the effect of training a discrimination on one dimension on the slope of the stimulus generalization gradient on an independent gradient dimension (extra-dimensional training) is assessed. A steepening of the gradient relative to appropriate control procedures is taken as evidence of positive attentional transfer. The relevance of the technique to the detailed study of attentional transfer in educationally subnormal (severely) (ESN(S)) children is considered. In Expt. I nine ESN(S) children were trained in a go/no-go discrimination involving stimuli differing in orientation, and were generalization tested on a dimension that was orthogonal, namely hue. Of the six subjects who learnt the discrimination five showed clear decremental gradients on the hue dimension. In contrast a Pseudo-Discrimination group (PD) of eight subjects matched to those in the TD group showed no gradients. These subjects were not trained in the orientation discrimination, but were reinforced for responding on 50 per cent of each of the S+ and S- stimulus presentations. They thus received equal exposure to, but no differential training on, the orientation dimension. An S+ only group of four subjects who received no exposure to the orientation stimuli showed no gradients when stimulus generalization testing on the hue continuum was carried out. The result is discussed in terms of transfer deriving from stimulus control by relational aspects of the stimuli; in terms of control by constant irrelevant stimuli; and in terms of the study of stimulus control in ESN(S) children. In Expt. II the influence of the codability of the colours on the location of the peak of the stimulus generalization gradients in the TD group is investigated.     

From uncertain boundaries to uncertain identity: Effects of entitativity threat on identity–uncertainty and emigration

When people feel uncertain about their national identity, they may want to emigrate from their nation. This uncertainty can arise when people are exposed to an alternative historical narrative about their own national (ingroup) origins promoted by a neighboring nation (outgroup). Drawing on uncertainty–identity theory we propose that the conditions that promote this process would include when: (a) a revised history threatens the entitativity of national identity, (b) people identify strongly with their nation, (c) a neighboring nation is numerically large enough to transform its own view into a new shared reality, and (d) a new interpretation of history is considered credible. We conducted an experiment in the context of historical disputes between China (outgroup) and Korea (ingroup) (N = 160). We measured Korean identification and manipulated a type of identity threat (valence threat vs. entitativity threat), relative group size (not salient vs. salient), and source credibility (low vs. high). Then, we measured identity–uncertainty and emigration as dependent variables. As predicted, hierarchical regression analyses yielded a significant four‐way interaction on identity–uncertainty. Simple slopes analyses revealed that entitativity (vs. valence) threat significantly increased identity–uncertainty among high identifiers when the outgroup's relative size was salient and its view was credible. Further, the elevated identity–uncertainty strengthened intentions to emigrate from the ingroup. Implications for intergroup communications and identity validation are discussed.     

Subgroup differentiation as a response to an overly‐inclusive group: a test of optimal distinctiveness theory

Optimal distinctiveness theory (ODT; Brewer, 1991, 1993a,b) argues that people can respond to membership of an overly inclusive group by engaging in a drive for subgroup distinctiveness. To test this, 280 subgroup members (humanities and maths‐science students) rated the extent to which they perceived their superordinate group (University of Queensland) to be inclusive. After performing a task designed to activate their superordinate category membership, participants completed a questionnaire assessing inter‐subgroup attitudes. Consistent with ODT, ratings of superordinate inclusiveness explained a moderate amount of variance in subgroup bias (5–8 per cent), such that the more inclusive the superordinate category was seen to be, the more bias was demonstrated. The results are discussed in terms of their relevance for ODT and their implications for promoting subgroup harmony. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The social identity theory of leadership: Theoretical origins,research findings,and conceptual developments

Over the past decade the social identity theory of leadership (Hogg, 2001a; Hogg & van Knippenberg, 2003) has reinvigorated social psychological research on leadership by reconnecting leadership to the social psychology of influence, and by explicitly elaborating on the (social) identity function, and associated social cognitive and social interactive processes, associated with leadership. The main tenet is that group prototypical leaders are better supported and more trusted, and are perceived as more effective by members than are less prototypical leaders; particularly when group membership is a central and salient aspect of members’ identity and members identify strongly with the group. This hypothesis has attracted unequivocal support across numerous studies, research teams, and research paradigms. In this article we describe the social identity theory of leadership and its conceptual origins, and overview the state of evidence. The main focus of the article is on new conceptual developments and associated empirical advances; including the moderating roles of uncertainty, group innovation and creativity, deviance, “norm talk”, charisma, fairness, as well as the extension of the social identity theory of leadership to an intergroup context. Throughout we identify directions for future empirical and conceptual advances.     

Self-uncertainty,social identity prominence and group identification

Drawing on uncertainty-identity theory (Hogg, 2007) and referring to the concept of social identity complexity, we conducted two experiments to test the hypothesis that people would identify most strongly with their group if they felt both self-uncertain and that their group's identity was prominent relative to other identities, either because it was distinct from other identities or because they had few other identities. Self-uncertainty was primed in both experiments after participants had been primed to consider their group's attributes to overlap with or be distinct from the attributes of other identities of theirs (Experiment 1, N = 90) or to consider few or multiple other identities they had (Experiment 2, N = 87). As predicted, group identification was strongest under high uncertainty and when identity distinctiveness or few other identities had been primed. Implications of this research for how we conceptualize identity complexity are discussed.