Changes in social identity when joining a new group: The role of individual-level and group-level adaptation processes

While classic intergroup theories have specified the processes explaining situational shifts in social identification, the processes whereby social identities change more profoundly and become integrated within the self have to be proposed. To this aim, the present studies investigate the processes by which group members integrate a new social identity as they are joining a new group. Combining a social identity approach and stress and coping models, this research tests if social factors (i.e., needs satisfied by fellow group members, social support), have an impact on the adaptation strategies group members use to deal with the novelty of the situation and to fit into their new group (seeking information & adopting group norms vs. disengaging). These strategies, in turn, should predict changes in level of identification with the new social group over time, as well as enhanced psychological adjustment. These associations are tested among university students over the course of their first academic year (Study 1), and among online gamers joining a newly established online community (Study 2). Path analyses provide support for the hypothesised associations. The results are discussed in light of recent theoretical developments pertaining to intraindividual changes in social identities and their integration in the self.

Effective leadership in salient groups:revisiting leader-member exchange theory from the perspective of the social identity theory of leadership

Two studies compared leader-member exchange (LMX) theory and the social identity theory of leadership. Study 1 surveyed 439 employees of organizations in Wales, measuring work group salience, leader-member relations, and perceived leadership effectiveness. Study 2 surveyed 128 members of organizations in India, measuring identification not salience and also individualism/collectivism. Both studies provided good support for social identity predictions. Depersonalized leader-member relations were associated with greater leadership effectiveness among high-than low-salient groups (Study 1) and among high than low identifiers (Study 2). Personalized leadership effectiveness was less affected by salience (Study 1) and unaffected by identification (Study 2). Low-salience groups preferred personalized leadership more than did high-salience groups (Study 1). Low identifiers showed no preference but high identifiers preferred depersonalized leadership (Study 2). In Study 2, collectivists did not prefer depersonalized as opposed to personalized leadership, whereas individualists did, probably because collectivists focus more on the relational self.