Dragging down and dragging up: How relative group status affects responses to common fate

The authors examined whether status differences moderate the effects of common fate on subgroup relations. University students (N = 103) were led to believe that their subgroup was performing well (high status) or poorly (low status) relative to another subgroup. They were then told that the combined performances of the subgroups would have shared implications for their subgroup's welfare. (common fate) or that there would be a direct link between their subgroup's performance and its welfare (no common fate). High-status (but not low-status) group members responded to the common fate situation by (a) decategorizing and (b) showing benevolence to the out-group. Results are discussed with respect to their implications for managing subgroup relations.

Linking superiority bias in the interpersonal and intergroup domains

The author conducted 2 studies to explore the link between superiority bias in the interpersonal and intergroup domains. Australian university students evaluated the extent to which various personality traits were more or less applicable to themselves than to other Australian university students in general. They then evaluated the extent to which the same traits were more or less applicable to Australians than to people from other countries in general. As expected, the more participants evaluated themselves as superior to other university students, the more they evaluated Australians as a whole as superior to people from other countries. This link between interpersonal and intergroup superiority biases explained 22.1% of variance in Study 1 and 33.6% of variance in Study 2. The author interprets the results of the 2 studies as support for fundamental principles of social identity theory: (a) that self-concept consists of not only one's personal self but also the social groups to which one belongs and (b) that people are motivated to view both levels of self in a relatively positive fashion.

I'm a hypocrite, but so is everyone else: Group support and the reduction of cognitive dissonance

The impact of social support on dissonance arousal was investigated from a social identity view of dissonance theory. This perspective is seen as augmenting current conceptualizations of dissonance theory by predicting when normative information will impact on dissonance arousal and by indicating the availability of identity-related strategies of dissonance reduction. An experiment was conducted to induce feelings of hypocrisy under conditions of behavioral support or nonsupport. Group salience was either high or low, or individual identity was emphasized. As predicted, participants with no support from the salient in-group exhibited the greatest need to reduce dissonance through attitude change and reduced levels of group identification. Results were interpreted in terms of self being central to the arousal and reduction of dissonance.

Predicting the Paths of Peripherals: The Interaction of Identification and Future Possibilities

Two studies investigated how both degree of identification and the individual's position within the group influence aspects of group loyalty. The authors considered ingroup position in terms of both the individual's current position within a group and expectations concerning the likelihood that one's position might change., in the future. Peripheral group members learned that their acceptance by other group members would improve in the future or that they could expect rejection by other group members. Various indices of group loyalty (ingroup homogeneity, motivation to work for the group, and evaluation of a motivated group member) showed that when group members anticipated future rejection, the lower the identification the less loyal they were. In contrast, those who expected future acceptance were more loyal (more motivated to work for the group) the lower their identification. Current group behavior depends on both intragroup future expectations and level of identification.

Whitegoods (Aboriginal Affairs)

Despite all the rhetopic there has been little recognition of the way in which different cultural frameworks should set political goals and aspirations.

Trust me, I'm your boss: Trust and power in supervisor-supervisee communication

This study examined employees' perceptions of trust, power and mentoring in manager-employee relationships in a variety of sectors, including health care, education, hospitality and retail. The main theoretical frameworks used were communication accommodation theory and social identity theory, in examining the manager-employee relationships from an in-group/out-group perspective. Computer-aided content analyses revealed a number of emergent communication and relationship themes that impact upon the level of 'in-groupness' and therefore trust in supervisor-supervisee relationships. While it may be illusory to believe that any organization can enjoy complete trust among its workforce, it is clear that certain communication characteristics can result in greater trust in manager-employee relationships, even within the context of organizational constraints. It is argued that the results of the study could be used to inform human resource management academics of key aspects of managerial communication that should be further researched, and also provide insights into the main communication skills that managers should focus upon to improve trust in the workplace.

Leaders and their treatment of subgroups: implications for evaluations of the leader and the superordinate group

This experiment examined members' evaluations of a group leader and the group in contexts where a superordinate group comprised two subgroups and the group leader was aligned with one or other subgroup. The design varied group leader (ingroup, outgroup) and leader behavior (ingroup favoring, outgroup favoring) as well as the broader comparative context (intragroup, intergroup). Across a number of measures, results indicated a consistent Group Leader x Leader Behavior interaction that was independent of comparative context. Although group members were most satisfied with an ingroup leader who favored the ingroup, ingroup leaders were perceived positively irrespective of their behavior Outgroup leaders who unexpectedly favored the other subgroup were also perceived positively. However, outgroup leaders who favored their own subgroup were perceived as less fair and as more biased than other leaders. They also engendered less identification with the superordinate group and a less unified perception of the group. Results demonstrate the importance of social identity concerns to leadership in nested group contexts and emphasize the fact that perceptions of leader fairness and concern for the common group mediate responses to the superordinate category. Copyright (C) 2003 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.

Responses to a merger: The effects of premerger group status and integration pattern

Adopting a social identity perspective, the research was designed to examine the interplay between premerger group status and integration pattern in the prediction of responses to a merger. The research employed a 2 (status: high versus low) x 3 (integration pattern: assimilation versus integrational equality versus transformation) between-participants factorial design. We predicted that integration pattern and group status would interact such that the responses of the members of high status group would be most positive under conditions of an assimilation pattern, whereas members of low status groups were expected to favour an integration-equality pattern. After working on a task in small groups, group status was manipulated and the groups worked on a second task. The merger was then announced and the integration pattern was manipulated (e.g., in terms of the logo, location, and decision rules). The main dependent variables were assessed after the merged groups had worked together on a third task. As expected, there was evidence that the effects of group status on responses to the merger were moderated by integration pattern. Field data also indicated that both premerger status and perceived integration pattern influenced employee responses to an organisational merger.

Why does dissimilarity matter? Exploring self-categorization, self-enhancement, and uncertainty reduction

Although relational demographers have based their arguments on self-categorization theory, they have paid little attention to the underlying processes associated with this theory. The authors examined whether demographic dissimilarity affects individuals' identification with groups by affecting the group's prototype valence and clarity and the individual's perceptions of self-prototypicality. The data showed that the proportion of women and non-Australians in 34 work groups negatively influenced prototype valence, prototype clarity, and self-prototypicality for all members of the group. These results provide support for the continued use of self-categorization theory by relational demographers.

The individual within the group: Balancing the need to belong with the need to be different

Many theorists have wrestled with the notion of how people balance their need to be included in social groups with their need to be different and distinctive. This question is particularly salient to researchers from the social identify perspective, who have traditionally viewed individual differentiation within groups as being inimical to group identification. In this article we present a number of strategies that people can use to balance their need to belong and their need to be different, without violating social identity principles. First, drawing from optimal distinctiveness theory, we discuss 4 ways in which the need for belonging and the need to be different can be resolved by maximizing group distinctiveness. We then discuss 4 ways in which it is possible to achieve individual differentiation within a group at the same time demonstrating group identification. These strategies are discussed and integrated with reference to recent empirical research and to the social identity perspective.

Corporate sponsorship of a cause: the role of identification in purchase intent

Nonprofit organizations (NPOs) have attracted significant levels of support from corporate sponsors over the past decade. Despite this significant and continuing interest, very little is known about how consumers perceive and respond to corporate sponsors of NPOs. Drawing on social identity theory, the authors propose that willingness to purchase sponsoring firms' products be related to consumers' identification with an NPO. Possible antecedents of identification with an NPO are also modeled, including the prestige of an NPO, consumers' affiliation with an NPO, and their motivation to support a cause. As predicted, the results find a positive relationship between consumers' identification with an NPO and their intentions to purchase sponsors' products. The results also suggest an important role for identification with an NPO in mediating the relationships between the antecedents studied here and consumers' purchase intentions. Finally, the moderating effects of biodata (life experiences) on several modeled relationships are examined. (C) 2003 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

A self-categorization explanation for the third-person effect

Three studies tested a self-categorization theory explanation for the third-person effect. In Study 1 (N = 49) undergraduate students judged the influence of the National Enquirer, Wall Street Journal, and TV show Friends on themselves, relative to low- and high-status outgroup members, and other undergraduate students. The profile of first- and third-person perceptions was largely consistent with predictions, and the size of the third-person effect decreased as perceived similarity to target others increased-but only for media that were normative for comparison others. Study 2 (N = 49) provided evidence for this process with different media and showed that the profile of first- and third-person perceptions matched closely with perceived norms of media consumption-but not the social desirability of those media. Study 3 (N = 64) showed that the third-person effect for the same media and target other shifts with the frame of reference in which the judgment is made. Taken together, the findings are consistent with self-categorization theory and difficult to reconcile with other explanations.

Uncertainty reduction, self-enhancement, and ingroup identification

Two experiments tested the prediction that uncertainty reduction and self-enhancement motivations have an interactive effect on ingroup identification. In Experiment 1 (N = 64), uncertainty and group status were manipulated, and the effect on ingroup identification was measured. As predicted, low-uncertainty participants identified more strongly with a high- than low-status group, whereas high-uncertainty participants showed no preference; and low-status group members identified more strongly under high than low uncertainty, whereas high-status group members showed no preference. Experiment 2 (N = 210) replicated Experiment 1, but with a third independent variable that manipulated how prototypical participants were of their group. As predicted, the effects obtained in Experiment 1 only emerged where participants were highly prototypical. Low prototypicality depressed identification with a low-status group under high uncertainty. The implications of these results for intergroup relations and the role of prototypicality in social identity processes are discussed.

Keeping it in-house: How audience affects responses to group criticism

It is often assumed that group-directed criticism is best kept 'in-house', but the effects of audience on responses to criticism have not been directly examined. Consistent with predictions, ingroup members who criticized the group to an outgroup audience were seen to be making a less appropriate choice of audience (Experiments 2 and 3), aroused more negative feelings (Experiment 1), were downgraded more strongly on personality traits (Experiment 2), and were seen to be doing more damage to the group (Experiment 2) than were ingroup members who kept their criticisms in-house. Experiment 3 showed that, whereas moderate identifiers agreed with the comments less and showed weaker friendly intentions toward the critic when an outgroup audience as compared to an ingroup audience was chosen, high identifiers agreed with the criticisms just as strongly-and showed more friendly intentions toward the critic-when they were made to an outgroup as compared to an ingroup audience. Results are discussed in light of the broader literature on identity threat. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.