Australia Day or Invasion Day? Perspectives on the Continuing Impact of Colonialism Underlies Public Contestations Around Australia's National Day

The ways in which collective memories are constructed in the present is important in explaining how people choose to commemorate their nation's history. The present research focused on the context of Australia Day, a controversial national holiday that falls on January 26, which is a date that marks the beginning of colonization. We conducted field surveys of community members participating in an Invasion Day protest pushing for Indigenous rights (n = 219) and community members enjoying the public holiday in a public park (n = 174). We found that greater recognition of colonial history explained protesters' (vs. nonprotesters') greater support for changing the date of Australia Day. Further, protesters' lower levels of perceived continuity and higher levels of desired continuity of First Australian culture was linked to greater support for changing the date of Australia Day compared to the nonprotesters. These findings suggest that creating consensus over contested collective memories of a nation's history requires greater recognition of the ongoing impact of past atrocities.     

Negotiating inclusion: Revealing the dynamic interplay between individual and group inclusion goals

We aim to improve our understanding of how perceptions of social inclusion come about, unfold over time, and relate to individual and group outcomes. To do so, we draw on the MARGINI model, which offers a novel theoretical account of inclusion by delineating that inclusion is the result of a dynamic interplay between the individual's motivation to be included in the group (individual inclusion goal) and the group's willingness to include the individual (group inclusion goal). In a longitudinal field study (3 waves) following project teams (n = 304, divided into 46 teams) working on an eight-week consultancy project, we found that individual and group inclusion goals (a) mutually influenced each other over time and (b) in conjunction determined group members' individual outcomes as well as overall group performance. Together, this research sheds new light on the dynamics and effects of inclusion on individuals and groups.     

Cyber-dehumanization: Violent video game play diminishes our humanity

Across two studies we show that engaging in violent video game play diminishes perceptions of our own human qualities. In addition, when other players are the targets of this violence it reduces our perceptions of their humanity also. In Study 1, we demonstrate that playing Mortal Kombat against another player reduces the perceived humanity of the self as well as the humanity of one's opponent (compared to playing a non-violent game). In Study 2 we replicate this effect on perceived humanity of the self when playing a violent game with a co-player. However, we find no dehumanization of co-players who are not the targets of violence. We demonstrate these effects cannot be reduced to mood, self-esteem, gender, or other characteristics of the game such as excitement and enjoyment. The findings provide a broader perspective from which to view previous work on the adverse effects of violent video games.     

Sugaring o'er the devil: Moral superiority and group identification help individuals downplay the implications of ingroup rule‐breaking

We examined how a group's claim to moral superiority influences evaluations of rule‐breaking by ingroup members. Moral superiority was manipulated among researchers (Study 1) and British citizens (Study 2), after which group members were presented with ingroup rule‐breakers: a researcher violating ethical rules (Study 1) and British soldiers abusing Iraqi prisoners (Study 2). In both studies, higher and lower identifiers in the control condition perceived the rule‐breaking as equally damaging, evaluated the rule‐breakers equally negatively and recommended equally harsh punishments. When the group had taken the moral high ground, lower identifiers perceived the rule‐breaking as more damaging than did higher identifiers. In addition, higher identifiers evaluated the rule‐breakers less negatively and recommended more lenient punishments. Results of mediation analyses demonstrated that negative evaluations of, and recommended punishment for, the rule‐breakers were explained by the perceived damage that their behaviour caused to the ingroup. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Group commitment in the face of discrimination: The role of legitimacy appraisals

In contrast to everyday use of the term discrimination, we propose that discrimination can be appraised as either illegitimate or legitimate, and a comprehensive analysis of responses to discrimination needs to account for both ways of experiencing discrimination. We examine how perceived pervasiveness of discrimination and legitimacy appraisals affect group commitment among women in academia (Study 1) and tobacco smokers facing an upcoming smoking ban (Study 2). We found support for our hypothesis that legitimacy of discrimination appraisals moderates the effect of pervasiveness of discrimination. In both studies, group identification and collective action intentions were undermined most when the ingroup claimed that discrimination against them was legitimate and discrimination was perceived as pervasive. In both studies, group identification mediated the effects on collective action intentions. The results highlight the important role of legitimacy appraisals in understanding disadvantaged group members' responses to discriminatory treatment. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Emotional responses to behavioral economic incentives for health behavior change

Many people aim to change their lifestyle, but have trouble acting on their intentions. Behavioral economic incentives and related emotions can support commitment to personal health goals, but the related emotions remain unexplored. In a regret lottery, winners who do not attain their health goals do not get their prize but receive feedback on what their forgone earnings would have been. This counterfactual feedback should provoke anticipated regret and increase commitment to health goals. We explored which emotions were actually expected upon missing out on a prize due to unsuccessful weight loss and which incentive-characteristics influence their likelihood and intensity. Participants reported their expected emotional response after missing out on a prize in one of 12 randomly presented incentive-scenarios, which varied in incentive type, incentive size and deadline distance. Participants primarily reported feeling disappointment, followed by regret. Regret was expected most when losing a lottery prize (vs. a fixed incentive) and intensified with prize size. Multiple features of the participant and the lottery incentive increase the occurrence and intensity of regret. As such, our findings can be helpful in designing behavioral economic incentives that leverage emotions to support health behavior change.     

Our Followers Are Lions,Theirs Are Sheep: How Social Identity Shapes Theories About Followership and Social Influence

Two studies examine how self‐categorization theory can be used to refine our understanding of people's implicit theories about followership and social influence. Results from Study 1 show that perceivers regard followers of a group they themselves identify strongly with (rather than not at all) to be more representative of the prototype of effective followers (displaying enthusiasm, industry, good citizenship) and to be less representative of the antiprototype of effective followers (displaying conformity, incompetence, and insubordination). Results are replicated in a second experiment in which we compare the views of those self‐categorizing as either Republican or Democrat responding to followers of the Republican and Democratic Party. Results of Study 2 replicate those of Study 1 and also reveal qualitative differences in the preferred influence strategy for dealing with followers. Specifically, respondents seek to engage in persuasion when trying to change the behavior of ingroup followers, while resorting to coercion when trying to change the behavior of outgroup followers. Our results are the first to provide evidence that perceivers' theories about what followers are like and how they are influenced most effectively are structured by perceivers' identification (and dis‐identification) with the particular groups that leaders are championing.     

How the disadvantaged appraise group-based exclusion: The path from legitimacy to illegitimacy

Although many forms of differential treatment based on group membership are perceived to be legitimate, disadvantaged group members’ responses to discrimination have been studied primarily in contexts in which such treatment is appraised as illegitimate. This has resulted in an impoverished understanding of differential group-based treatment and a failure to illuminate the processes by which discrimination can shift from being seen as legitimate to being viewed as illegitimate. We discuss the determinants of disadvantaged group members’ legitimacy appraisals and the de-legitimisation process, whereby forms of discrimination appraised as legitimate come to be increasingly perceived as illegitimate. Whether group-based exclusion is addressed collectively or individually depends on socio-structural factors such as the pervasiveness of discrimination, impermeability of intergroup boundaries, and the availability of cognitive alternatives to the status quo. We conclude that understanding the antecedents and consequences of legitimacy appraisals is necessary to develop a comprehensive account of disadvantaged group members’ experiences of group-based discrimination.     

Minority goals for interaction with the majority: Seeking distance from the majority and the effect of rejection on identification

Four studies investigated the conditions under which minority group members respond to group‐based discrimination with increased identification with their group. We propose that minorities' interaction goals should serve as a moderator: seeking distance from the majority might keep minority identification alive in the face of perceived discrimination. These predictions were tested correlationally in Study 1 among Chinese immigrants in Australia (sample 1a) and children of rural migrant workers in a Chinese city (sample 1b). In Studies 2 and 3, perceived discrimination was manipulated among Romanian immigrants in France and Polish immigrants in Scotland. In Study 4, both minority goals and perceived discrimination were manipulated among a sample of international students in Australia. Results showed that only for those who were inclined to seek distance from the majority, minority group identification increased when discrimination was high compared with low. Discussion focuses on the way that seeking distance might be an important strategy for coping with discrimination. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Distinctiveness threat and prototypicality: combined effects on intergroup discrimination and collective self-esteem

The combined influence on ingroup bias of threat to group distinctiveness and prototypicality as a group member was examined in two studies. It was predicted, in line with social identity theory, that threat to group distinctiveness would lead to more ingroup bias. In addition, on the basis of self-categorization theory it was predicted that protypical and peripheral group members would react differently to a threat to their group distinctiveness. Only group members who define themselves as prototypical group members should be motivated to defend their threatened distinctiveness by engaging in increased ingroup bias. This hypothesis was first supported in a modified minimal group setting in which threat was operationalized as overlapping group boundaries. These results were then replicated in a second study, using better-established groups, for whom distinctiveness threat was manipulated in terms of intergroup similarity. Moreover, some support was found in Study 2 for the prediction that the opportunity to engage in intergroup differentiation can, under restricted conditions, enhance group-related self-esteem. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd