'You can criticise because you care': Identification, constructiveness, and the intergroup sensitivity effect

Group criticisms judged to be reasonable in the mouth of an ingroup member are aggressively rejected when they stem from an outgroup member (the intergroup sensitivity effect). Mediational analyses suggest that this phenomenon is underpinned by an attributional bias; criticisms from insiders are more likely to be perceived as being motivated for constructive reasons than are criticisms from outsiders, thus arousing lower levels of defensiveness. But what if group members were to receive information that called into question the ingroup critic's commitment to the group? For example, if the ingroup critic was known to be a low identifier with their group, or used language to suggest that they were psychologically distancing themselves from their group, we might expect that ingroup critics will be downgraded as strongly as outgroup critics. Furthermore, it might be possible for people to turn an outgroup criticism into an ingroup criticism by making salient their shared identity at the superordinate level. Three experiments are described that provide support for each of these propositions.

'You can criticise because you care': How attributions affect responses to ingroup and outgroup critics

There are times when people feel compelled to stand up and articulate their group's shortcomings, an act that carries with it enormous social risks. Indeed, a mechanistic reading of social identity theory might lead one to believe that ingroup critics are doomed to face hostility because they are attacking a fundamental part of people's self-concept. But often ingroup critics are doing more than attacking their group — they are trying to incite positive change. Criticism is the cornerstone of protest, and it is difficult to imagine how a group can be reinvigorated, reinvented, or reformed without some process of critical self-reflection. Thus, although the ingroup critic might create tension within the group, it is possible that internal criticism could be seen by other group members as beneficial in terms of promoting positive change and stimulating innovation, creativity, and flexibility in decision making. In this talk I examine the 'identity rules' that ingroup critics need to follow to avoid defensiveness, and look at empirical evidence of how factors such as language, the intergroup context, and choice of audience shape people's attributions regarding criticism and their subsequent evaluations of critics.

Willingness to pay for conservation of the Asian elephant in Sri Lanka: A contingent valuation study

Results from a CVM survey of willingness to pay for the conservation of the Asian elephant of a sample of urban residents in three selected housing schemes in Colombo, the capital of Sri Lanka, are reported. Face– to–face surveys were conducted using an interview schedule. A non-linear logit regression model was constructed to analyse the respondents’ responses for the payment principle questions and to identify the factors that influence their responses. We investigate whether urban residents’ WTP for the conservation of elephants is sufficient to compensate farmers for the damage caused by elephants, and consequently to raise farmers’ tolerance of the presence of elephants on the farming fields. We find that beneficiaries (the urban residents) could compensate losers (the farmers in the HEC affected areas) and be better off than in the absence of elephants in Sri Lanka. This suggests that there is a strong economic case for the conservation of the wild elephant population in Sri Lanka. However, we have insufficient data to determine Sri Lanka’s optimal elephant population in the Kaldor-Hicks sense.

Willingness of Sri Lankan farmers to pay for a scheme to conserve elephants: An empirical analysis

This paper explores the feasibility of adopting an integrated economic approach to raise farmers’ tolerance of the presence of elephants on their farming lands. Responses to this approach were sought from a sample of farmers in the areas affected by human elephant conflict in the northwestern province of Sri Lanka. Results from a contingent valuation survey of their willingness to pay for a scheme to conserve elephants are also reported. Two separate logit regression analyses were undertaken to examine the factors that influence the farmers’ responses for the payment principle question and their opinions on the integrated economic approach. Although found that the majority of the respondents expressed their willingness to pay for the proposed scheme and supported for the implementation of the integrated approach, we have insufficient data yet to determine if their support and financial contribution would be sufficient to set up this programme and also to predict its economic viability. Nevertheless, the overall finding of this study provides an improved economic assessment of the farmers’ attitudes towards the wild elephant in Sri Lanka. At the same time the study shows that, contrary to commonly held assumptions, farmers in this developing country, do support wildlife conservation.