Prejudiced attitudes, group norms, and discriminatory behaviour

Most current attitude research focuses on range of non-social attitudinal targets, including health-related and consumer outcomes. In this paper, a program of research that considers the relations among intergroup attitudes, group norms, and behavior will be described. The first study examined the effect of ingroup norms relating to multiculturalism on the extent to wich participants hehaviourally enacted their attitudes. Consistent with social identity theory, attitudebehaviour consistency in relation was influenced by ingroup norms, particularly when national identity was salient. The results of a large scale field study that essential replicated this pattern of results will also be discussed.

Attitude-behaviour consistency: the role of group norms, attitude accessibility, and mode of behavioural decision-making

The interplay between two perspectives that have recently been applied in the attitude area-the social identity approach to attitude-behaviour relations (Terry & Hogg, 1996) and the MODE model (Fazio, 1990a)-was examined in the present research. Two experimental studies were conducted to examine the role of group norms, group identification, attitude accessibility, and mode of behavioural decision-making in the attitude-behaviour relationship. In Study I (N = 211), the effects of norms and identification on attitude-behaviour consistency as a function of attitude accessibility and mood were investigated. Study 2 (N = 354) replicated and extended the first experiment by using time pressure to manipulate mode of behavioural decision-making. As expected, the effects of norm congruency varied as a function of identification and mode of behavioural decision-making. Under conditions assumed to promote deliberative processing (neutral mood/low time pressure), high identifiers behaved in a manner consistent with the norm. No effects emerged under positive mood and high time pressure conditions. In Study 2, there was evidence that exposure to an attitude-incongruent norm resulted in attitude change only under low accessibility conditions. The results of these studies highlight the powerful role of group norms in directing individual behaviour and suggest limited support for the MODE model in this context. Copyright (C) 2003 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.

On being loud and proud: Non-conformity and counter-conformity to group norms

Most experiments on conformity have been conducted in relation to judgments of physical reality; surprisingly few papers have experimentally examined the influence of group norms on social issues with a moral component. In response to this, participants were told that they were either in a minority or in a majority relative to their university group in terms of their attitudes toward recognition of gay couples in law (Expt 1: N = 205) and a government apology to Aborigines (Expt 2: N = 110). In both experiments, it was found that participants who had a weak moral basis for their attitude conformed to the group norm on private behaviours. In contrast, those who had a strong moral basis for their attitude showed non-conformity on private behaviours and counter-conformity on public behaviours. Incidences of nonconformity and counter-conformity are discussed with reference to theory and research on normative influence.

Normative influence and rational conflict decisions: Group norms and cost-benefit analyses for intergroup behavior

The present paper articulates a model in which ingroup and outgroup norms inform 'rational' decision-making (cost-benefit analysis) for conflict behaviors. Norms influence perceptions of the consequences of the behavior, and individuals may thus strategically conform to or violate norms in order to acquire benefits and avoid costs. Two studies demonstrate these processes in the context of conflict in Quebec. In the first study, Anglophones' perceptions of Francophone and Anglophone norms for pro-English behaviors predicted evaluations of the benefits and costs of the behaviors, and these cost-benefit evaluations in turn mediated the norm-intention links for both group norms. In the second study, a manipulated focus on supportive versus hostile ingroup and outgroup norms also predicted cost-benefit evaluations, which mediated the norm-intention relationships. The studies support a model of strategic conflict choices in which group norms inform, rather than suppress, rational expectancy value processes. Implications for theories of decision-making and normative influence are discussed.

Social identity, self-categorization, and the communication of group norms

We articulate the role of norms within the social identity perspective as a basis for theorizing a number of manifestly communicative phenomena. We describe how group norms are cognitively represented as context-dependent prototypes that capture the distinctive properties of groups. The same process that governs the psychological salience of different prototypes, and thus generates group normative behavior, can be used to understand the formation, perception, and diffusion of norms, and also how some group members, for example, leaders, have more normative influence than others. life illustrate this process across a number of phenomena and make suggestions for future interfaces between the social identity perspective and communication research. We believe that the social identity approach represents a truly integrative force for the communication discipline.

The impact of individualist and collectivist group norms on evaluations of dissenting group members

Two experiments were conducted to investigate the impact of individualist and collectivist norms on evaluations of dissenting group members. In the first experiment (N = 113), group norms prescribing individualism or collectivism were manipulated and participants were asked to evaluate a group member who expressed an attitude dissenting from or concordant with the group. In line with predictions, group members with concordant attitudes were evaluated more positively than group members with dissenting attitudes when norms prescribed collectivism. However, for high identifiers, we found an attenuation of the preference for Concordant over dissenting attitudes when norms prescribed individualism. These findings were replicated in a second experiment (N= 87), where dissent was operationalized in a way that did not reveal the content of the attitude. The discussion focused on the importance of individualist norms for broadening latitudes of acceptable group member behavior. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Differentiation between and within groups: The influence of individualist and collectivist group norms

The power of individualist and collectivist group norms to influence intergroup and inter-individual differentiation was examined in three studies. Study I revealed that intergroup differentiation was lower when group norms prescribed individualism than when they prescribed collectivism. However inter-individual differentiation was higher when group norms endorsed individualism than when they promoted collectivism. In Studies 2 and 3 we found evidence for the moderating effect of group salience on the relationship between norms and differentiation. Specifically, the effect that individualist group norms reduced intergroup differentiation but enhanced inter-individual differentiation was more pronounced when group salience was high rather than low. This finding demonstrates that conformity to a group norm prescribing individualism influences the manner in which positive differentiation is expressed. The discussion focuses on the caveats of introducing individualist group norms when attempting to reduce intergroup differentiation. Copyright (c) 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.