Social identification dimensions as mediators of the effect of prototypicality on intergroup behaviours

Cameron (2004) proposed a three-dimensional model and measure of social identification consisting of cognitive centrality, in-group affect, and in-group ties. This approach has received growing theoretical and empirical support; however, little research has examined how these dimensions of social identification may relate differentially to intergroup outcome behaviors. The current research sought to address this question by examining the possible mediating role the dimensions of social identification on the relationship between prototypicality of group members and the intergroup outcome behaviors of in-group favoritism, out-group derogation, and collective self-esteem. The current study examined university students’ (N = 235) feelings towards students from their own and another local university. Structural equation modeling was used to identify the most appropriate and parsimonious models of these pathways. The results showed support for the utility of measuring social identification using a multidimensional approach with unique meditational pathways emerging for the distinct intergroup behaviors.

Demographic category membership and leadership in small groups : a social identity analysis

Developing the social identity theory of leadership (e.g., [Hogg, M. A. (2001). A social identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 184–200]), an experiment (N=257) tested the hypothesis that as group members identify more strongly with their group (salience) their evaluations of leadership effectiveness become more strongly influenced by the extent to which their demographic stereotype-based impressions of their leader match the norm of the group (prototypicality). Participants, with more or less traditional gender attitudes (orientation), were members, under high or low group salience conditions (salience), of non-interactive laboratory groups that had “instrumental” or “expressive” group norms (norm), and a male or female leader (leader gender). As predicted, these four variables interacted significantly to affect perceptions of leadership effectiveness. Reconfiguration of the eight conditions formed by orientation, norm and leader gender produced a single prototypicality variable. Irrespective of participant gender, prototypical leaders were considered more effective in high then low salience groups, and in high salience groups prototypical leaders were more effective than less prototypical leaders. Alternative explanations based on status characteristics and role incongruity theory do not account well for the findings. Implications of these results for the glass ceiling effect and for a wider social identity analysis of the impact of demographic group membership on leadership in small groups are discussed.