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

Rebels with a cause? How norm violations shape dominance, prestige, and influence granting

Norms play an important role in upholding orderly and well-functioning societies. Indeed, violations of norms can undermine social coordination and stability. Much is known about the antecedents of norm violations, but their social consequences are poorly understood. In particular, it remains unclear when and how norm violators gain or lose influence in groups. Some studies found that norm violators elicit negative responses that curtail their influence in groups, whereas other studies documented positive consequences that enhance violators' influence. We propose that the complex relationship between norm violation and influence can be understood by considering that norm violations differentially shape perceptions of dominance and prestige, which tend to have opposite effects on voluntary influence granting, depending on the type of norm that is violated. We first provide correlational (Study 1) and causal (Study 2) evidence that norm violations are associated with dominance, and norm abidance with prestige. We then examine how dominance, prestige, and resultant influence granting are shaped by whether local group norms and/or global community norms are violated. In Study 3, protagonists who violated global (university) norms but followed local (sorority/fraternity) norms were more strongly endorsed as leaders than protagonists who followed global norms but violated local norms, because the former were perceived not only as high on dominance but also on prestige. In Study 4, popular high-school students were remembered as violating global (school) norms while abiding by local (peer) norms. In Study 5, individuals who violated global (organizational) norms while abiding by local (team) norms were assigned more leadership tasks when global and local norms conflicted (making violators "rebels with a cause") than when norms did not conflict, because the former situation inspired greater prestige. We discuss implications for the social dynamics of norms, hierarchy development, and leader emergence.

Can Peripheral Group Members Not Represent the In-Group? The Effect of Member Prototypicality on Intergroup Conflict

Group member prototypicality is a factor in intergroup conflict-not all group members fight for group interests. This study focuses on the role of peripheral group members and the factors that influence their participation. We conducted two studies to examine the effects of group acceptance and self-uncertainty on the relationship between prototypicality and intergroup conflict. Results indicate that group acceptance moderates the relationship between prototypicality and intergroup conflict. Self-uncertainty moderates the effect of the interaction between prototypicality and group acceptance on intergroup conflict. Our findings have theoretical and practical implications for intergroup conflict resolution.

The Cassandra Experience: A Mixed Methods Study on the Intragroup Cognitive Dissonance of Italian Expatriates During the First Wave of COVID-19

In March 2020, Italy was the first European country to be hit severely by the first wave of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to put in place moderate-high containment measures. 594 Italian expatriates participated in a cross-sectional mixed-methods survey focusing on the period that goes from the beginning of March 2020 to the beginning of April 2020. The survey aimed to describe the experiences of participants when it comes to conflicting beliefs and behavior with the Italian or host country communities in relation to COVID-19, using the Intragroup Cognitive Dissonance (ICD) framework. We explored: (1) COVID-19 risk perception (assessed for themselves, the Italian community, and the host country community); (2) COVID-19 risk meta-perception (participants' perception of the Italian and host country communities' risk perception); (3) intensity of emotions (assessed for themselves); (4) national group identification (assessed for themselves in relation to the Italian and host country communities) before and after the first wave of COVID-19 in Italy. An inductive thematic analysis of three open-ended questions allowed an in-depth understanding of the experiences of Italian expatriates. Results describe the ICD of participants with the Italian or host country communities, expressed as a difference between COVID-19 risk-perception and risk meta-perception. ICD predicts that when a dissonance of beliefs and behavior is experienced within an individual's group, a shift in identification with another more consonant group will happen, if identity enhancing strategies with the dissonant group are unsuccessful. Our findings showed that when the ICD was experienced with the host country community, this was solved through a disidentification strategy and mediated by negative emotions. Identity enhancing strategies with the host country community were unsuccessfully enacted as described by the qualitative answers of participants referring to episodes of racism, ridicule, and to a Cassandra experience: predicting a catastrophic future without being believed. Unexpectedly, participants experiencing the ICD with the Italian community did not enact a disidentification strategy. An increase in virtual contacts, enhanced sense of belonging, a stronger identification baseline, and different features of the two ICDs can be responsible for these results. This study sheds light on the relevance of ICD in natural settings and on international communities, during global crises.

Social Influence and Group Identity

This chapter reviews research on the group identity explanation of social influence, grounded in self-categorization theory, and contrasts it with other group-based explanations, including normative influence, interdependence, and social network approaches, as well as approaches to persuasion and influence that background group (identity) processes. Although the review primarily discusses recent research, its focus also invites reappraisal of some classic research in order to address basic questions about the scope and power of the group identity explanation. The self-categorization explanation of influence grounded in group norms, moderated by group identification, is compared and contrasted to other normative explanations of influence, notably the concept of injunctive norms and the relation to moral conviction. A range of moderating factors relating to individual variation, features of the intragroup and intergroup context, and important contextual variables (i.e., anonymity versus visibility, isolation versus copresence) that are particularly relevant to online influence in the new media are also reviewed.

The social psychology of whistleblowing: An integrated model

Whistleblowing is the disclosure of ingroup wrongdoing to an external agency and can have important functions for the regulation of moral and legal conduct. Organizational research has focused largely on the impact of individual and organizational factors, while overlooking the role of group memberships and associated social identities. Further, social psychologists have so far paid little attention to this phenomenon, or else have tended to subsume it within analysis of dissent. To address these lacunae, we present a psychological model of whistleblowing that draws on social identity theorizing (after Tajfel & Turner, 1979). This model describes when and how social identities and different forms of power motivate group members to respond to ingroup wrongdoing by engaging in whistleblowing. Our review of the literature points to the model’s ability to integrate existing evidence while providing direction for future research. We also discuss the model’s capacity to inform whistleblowing policy and procedures.

Language and Group Processes: An Integrative, Interdisciplinary Review

This article reviews research that examines the use of language in small interacting groups and teams. We propose a model of group inputs (e.g., status), processes and emergent states (e.g., cohesion, influence, and innovation), and outputs (e.g., group effectiveness and member well-being) to help structure our review. The model is integrated with how language is used by groups to both reflect group inputs but also to examine how language interacts with inputs to affect group processes and create emergent states in groups, and then ultimately helps add value to the group with outputs (e.g., performance). Using cross-disciplinary research, our review finds that language is integral to how groups coordinate, interrelate, and adapt. For example, language convergence is related to increased group cohesion and group performance. Our model provides the theoretical scaffolding to consider language use in interacting small groups and suggests areas for future research.

The Role of Social Identity and Communities of Practice in Mergers and Acquisitions

Globally, organizations spend billions on mergers and acquisitions (M&As) each year; however, it is commonly estimated that at least half of these ventures fail. Two factors that contribute to this high failure rate are the difficulty in merging diverse areas of organizational knowledge and developing employees’ organizational identification with the post-M&A organization. In this article, we recommend the strategic use of organizational communities of practice (CoPs), groups where people share knowledge, to improve knowledge sharing within the post-M&A organization. We also argue that CoPs can indirectly increase knowledge sharing by easing M&A-triggered social identity concerns and fostering post-M&A organizational identification. We develop conceptual propositions for the relationships between CoPs participation, organizational identification, and knowledge sharing in the post-M&A organization. We also argue that the extent to which CoPs participation can increase organizational identification and knowledge sharing will depend on the post-M&A organization’s overall business strategy and whether it is primarily concerned with explicit or tacit knowledge.

Collective Narcissism Predicts Hypersensitivity to In–group Insult and Direct and Indirect Retaliatory Intergroup Hostility

Results of five studies (N = 1596) linked collective narcissism—a belief in in–group exaggerated greatness contingent on external validation—to direct and indirect, retaliatory hostility in response to situations that collective narcissists perceived as insulting to the in–group but which fell well beyond the definition of an insult. In Turkey, collective narcissists responded with schadenfreude to the European economic crisis after feeling humiliated by the Turkish wait to be admitted to the European Union (Study 1). In Portugal, they supported hostile actions towards Germans and rejoiced in the German economic crisis after perceiving Germany's position in the European Union as more important than the position of Portugal (Study 2). In Poland, they supported hostile actions towards the makers of a movie they found offensive to Poland (Studies 3 and 5) and responded with direct and indirect hostility towards a celebrity whose jokes about the Polish government they found offensive (Study 4). Comparisons with self–positivity and in–group positivity indices and predictors of intergroup hostility indicated that collective narcissism is the only systematic predictor of hypersensitivity to in–group insult followed by direct and indirect, retaliatory intergroup hostility. Copyright © 2016 European Association of Personality Psychology

Beyond Cohesiveness

Despite a general consensus that cohesiveness promotes positive outcomes in group psychotherapy, the empirical evidence for this notion is limited. In this article the literature on group cohesiveness and its relation to clinical outcomes is reviewed. Three interrelated problems with this literature are highlighted: A lack of consensus as to how to conceptualize cohesiveness, inconsistent measurements of cohesiveness, and lack of attention to possible mediators of the cohesiveness-outcome relationship. The authors argue that the term cohesiveness is too vague and amorphous to be useful as a unitary construct and that the field could benefit by identifying more specific group processes that facilitate—or impede—clinical outcomes. They review social psychological research on group processes, and discuss how three constructs— group identification, independence, and homogeneity—might be applied to the clinical literature. Furthermore, in an attempt to stimulate a closer examination of mediational paths in the literature on group psychotherapy, they discuss possible mechanisms through which group processes affect clinical outcomes.

Superordinate and Subgroup Identification as Predictors of Intergroup Evaluation in Common Ingroup Contexts

We examined the combined effects of subgroup and superordinate group identification on intergroup evaluations within common ingroup identity contexts. In Studies 1 and 2 we observed a positive correlation between subgroup identification and intergroup bias, and a negative correlation between superordinate identification and bias. In Study 3 we replicated these effects using alternative measures and observed a common path underlying these relationships: the perceived psychological distance between the self and outgroup. In Studies 4 and 5 we replicated this path model and found that the relationship between superordinate identification and intergroup bias was contingent upon making the superordinate identity salient, but this was not the case for subgroup identification. We discuss the findings in the context of theoretical and applied development of the Common Ingroup Identity Model.

When and how groups utilize dissenting newcomer knowledge: Newcomers’ future prospects condition the effect of language-based identity strategies

Two experiments suggest that newcomers’ structural role (permanent vs. temporary appointment) in the groups they enter conditions the extent to which their use of language-based identity strategies (integrating vs. differentiating) influences groups’ willingness to accept them and utilize their dissenting task knowledge. For newcomers with permanent future prospects, the use of integrating pronouns leads to greater acceptance than the use of differentiating pronouns, and newcomer acceptance is in turn a key mediator of groups’ willingness to utilize their knowledge. For newcomers with temporary future prospects, however, the use of integrating pronouns (vs. differentiating pronouns) does not positively influence their acceptance, nor does newcomer acceptance determine the willingness of groups to utilize their knowledge. The theory supported by these studies advances group socialization literature by elucidating when and how groups are receptive to dissenting newcomers.

Horizontal Hostility: Multiple Minority Groups and Differentiation from the Mainstream

Three studies examined minority group members' attitudes toward other, similar minority groups. We predicted that minority group members would differentiate between multiple outgroups with asymmetric horizontal hostility(White & Langer, 1999), a pattern of expressing relatively unfavorable attitudes toward an outgroup that is similar to and more mainstream than the minority ingroup. We replicated White and Langer's pattern of horizontal hostility among members of minority political parties in Greece (Study 1). When the mainstream majority was made a salient part of the intergroup context, vegetarians' attitudes toward vegans became more positive, and vegans' attitudes toward vegetarians more negative (Study 2). In Study 3, mainstream salience made Dartmouth College students' relative evaluations of a similar, more mainstream college more negative, whereas priming a superordinate minority identity made them more positive. Results suggest that asymmetric horizontal hostility results from the motivation to differentiate one's minority ingroup from a similar, more mainstream group in comparative contexts anchored by the mainstream majority outgroup.

Predictors of Cultural Adjustment: Intergroup Status Relations and Boundary Permeability

We examined intergroup predictors of cultural adjustment among Asian international students in Australia. Sociostructural beliefs (status, legitimacy, and permeability) and initial adjustment were assessed ( N= 113) at Time 1, and measures of adjustment were obtained ( N= 80) at Time 2 eight weeks later. International students who perceived their cultural group to be relatively low in status experienced lower levels of psychological adjustment. Also, as expected, the effects of status were moderated by perceptions of both the permeability of intergroup boundaries and the legitimacy of the status differential. At high levels of legitimacy, perceptions of permeable group boundaries were associated with better psychological, sociocultural, and academic adjustment among international students perceiving their group to be low in status, but lower levels of adjustment among students who perceived their group to be high in status. At low levels of legitimacy, irrespective of group status position, perceived permeability was not related to adjustment.

Recategorization and Subgroup Identification: Predicting and Preventing Threats From Common Ingroups

Much work has supported the idea that recategorization of ingroups and outgroups into a superordinate category can have beneficial effects for intergroup relations. Recently, however, increases in bias following recategorization have been observed in some contexts. It is argued that such unwanted consequences of recategorization will only be apparent for perceivers who are highly committed to their ingroup subgroups. In Experiments 1 to 3, the authors observed, on both explicit and implicit measures, that an increase in bias following recategorization occurred only for high subgroup identifiers. In Experiment 4, it was found that maintaining the salience of subgroups within a recategorized superordinate group averted this increase in bias for high identifiers and led overall to the lowest levels of bias. These findings are discussed in the context of recent work on the Common Ingroup Identity Model.

Effects of physical atypicality on children's social identities and intergroup attitudes

Individuals vary in the degree to which they are representative, or typical, of their social groups. To investigate the effects of atypicality on intergroup attitudes, elementary-school-age children ( N = 97) attending a summer school program were assigned to novel color groups that included typical (blue or green) and atypical (light blue or light green) members. Children's state self-esteem, ingroup identification, and intergroup attitudes (e.g., trait ratings, evaluations, peer preferences) were assessed following several weeks in the classroom. Results indicated that atypicality primarily affected children's views of their ingroup. Among younger (but not older) children, atypical group members viewed themselves as more similar to — but less happy being a member of — their ingroup than typical group members.

When votes depend on who's listening: Voters' intragroup status and voting procedure predict representative endorsement in intergroup contexts

Three experiments investigated whether the selection of a representative in intergroup interdependence settings can reflect group members' strategic behaviour. We tested the impact of an individual's intragroup status (normative vs. pro-out-group deviant, Experiments 1-3) and of voting procedure (Experiments 2 and 3) on the choice of an in-group representative. Experiment 1 shows that normative members prefer normative representatives, whereas pro-out-group deviant members equally like normative and pro-out-group deviant representatives. Experiment 2 extends these results and shows that voting procedure (private vs. in-group audience) moderates this effect. Pro-out-group deviant members' preferences and behaviours appear more strategic and context-sensitive than normative ones. Specifically, pro-out-group deviants vote more for normative representatives than for pro-out-group deviants when facing an in-group audience, whereas the reverse pattern emerges in private. Experiment 3 shows that this moderation effect is specific to in-group audiences compared to out-group ones, reinforcing the idea that normative members 'stick to their guns'. Implications of these findings for leader endorsement and intergroup relations are discussed.

Labelling and discrimination: do homophobic epithets undermine fair distribution of resources?

This research investigated the behavioural consequences of homophobic epithets. After exposure to either a category or a homophobic label, heterosexual participants allocated fictitious resources to two different prevention programmes: one mainly relevant to heterosexuals (sterility prevention), the other to homosexuals (AIDS-HIV prevention). Responses on allocation matrices served to identify strategies that favoured the ingroup over the outgroup. Results indicated stronger ingroup-favouritism in the homophobic than in the category label condition. This study shows that discriminatory group labels have tangible effects on people's monetary behaviours in intergroup contexts, increasing their tendency to favour the ingroup when distributing resources.

Going to extremes: Social identity and communication processes associated with gang membership

Gang violence, endemic to many communities in the United States and around the world is a very significant social problem. Given that the messages conveyed by, and the rivalries associated with, gang identities readily invoke constructs and processes familiar to the social psychological study of social identity, intergroup relations, and communication (Lauger, 2012), it is surprising that social psychologists have not advanced such an analysis of gangs. In attempt to fill this void and set a research agenda, this theoretical article examines the role social identity and identity-related communication play in promoting affiliation with gangs, particularly among youth who confront uncertainties and strive for family-like protection. The article discusses messaging communicated by gang members and reasons why youth adopt antisocial (e.g., violent) rather than prosocial behaviors. It also explores ways to diminish the allure of gang membership and raises questions for future research.

Resounding Silences

In this article we suggest a mechanism for norm regulation that does not rely on explicit information exchange or costly reinforcement, but rather on the sensitivity of group members to social cues in their environment. We examine whether brief conversational silences can (a) signal a threat to one’s inclusionary status in the group and (b) motivate people to shift their attitudes to be in line with group norms. In two experiments—using videotaped and actual conversations, respectively—we manipulated the presence of a brief silence after group members expressed a certain attitude. As predicted, attitudes changed relative to the norm after such a brief silence. Those highly motivated to belong changed their attitude to become more normative, whereas those less motivated to belong shifted away from the group norm. The results suggest that social regulation may occur through very subtle means.

Overplaying the diversity card: When a superordinate group overrepresents the prevalence of a minority group

Despite the fact that groups and organizations often portray themselves as more diverse than they really are, the consequences of such practices for the minority who is overrepresented are not well understood. Focusing on Asian university students in Australia, we conducted three experiments to examine minority group members’ perceptions when the superordinate group (the university) overrepresents the minority group in advertising. Minority group members tended to be less favorable toward overrepresentation compared to other types of representation (Studies 1 and 2), an effect that was most pronounced for those who strongly identified with their minority group (Study 3). The negative effect of minority overrepresentation was not detected among majority group members. If anything, in Study 1, majority group members were more positive toward overrepresentation and were more willing to help the superordinate group in an overrepresentation than a no minority representation condition. Future research directions and practical implications are discussed.

Of saints and sinners: How appeals to collective pride and guilt affect outgroup helping

We examined how appeals to collective guilt and pride can motivate people to help members of a disadvantaged outgroup. Results from two experiments supported the prediction that appeals to collective pride are more effective than appeals to collective guilt in prompting high identifying group members’, but not low identifying group members’ willingness to help the outgroup. Study 2 demonstrated that, as expected, pride appeals generated more empathy for the disadvantaged group than guilt appeals, particularly among high identifiers, and empathy mediated the relationship between emotional appeals and helping. The results complement existing research on collective guilt by demonstrating how high identifiers can be persuaded to help members of a disadvantaged outgroup even in the context of historical harmdoings.

The many ways to be marginal in a group

Previous theory and research primarily address marginal group members on the path to achieve core membership status. The authors argue that these only represent one form of marginality and that there are many other ways to be marginal within the group. The authors develop a dynamic model in which marginality is conceptualized as resulting from group and individual negotiation about inclusion (the Marginality as Resulting From Group and Individual Negotiation About Inclusion [MARGINI] model), and where individual and group inclusion goals can converge (resulting in relatively stable forms of marginality) or diverge (resulting in less stable forms of marginality). When the marginal position is unstable, individuals can either be motivated to move toward or move further away from the group, and such changing inclusion goals are associated with different emotions and behaviors. The authors argue that one needs to understand the interplay between individual and group inclusion goals to predict and explain the full complexity and diversity of the behavior of marginal group members.

I Want to Be Like You

Entering a new group provides the potential of forming a new social identity. Starting from self-regulation models, we propose that goals (e.g., internal motivation to enter the group), strategies (e.g., approach and avoidance strategies), and events (e.g., the group’s response) affect the development of the social self. In two studies we manipulated the group’s response (acceptance vs. rejection) and assessed internal motivation as well as approach and avoidance strategies. It was expected, and we found, that when newcomers are accepted, their use of approach strategies (but not avoidance strategies) facilitates social identification. In line with self-completion theory, for highly internally motivated individuals approach strategies facilitated social identification even upon rejection. The results underline the active role of newcomers in their social identity development.

Rejected and excluded forevermore, but even more devoted: irrevocable ostracism intensifies loyalty to the group among identity-fused persons

When people are ostrasized (i.e., rejected and excluded) by either an outgroup or an ingroup, they may either withdraw or engage in compensatory activities designed to reaffirm their social identity as a group member. The authors proposed here that individual differences in identity fusion (an index of familial orientation toward the group) would moderate the tendency for people to display such compensatory activity. Consistent with this reasoning, the results of four experiments showed that irrevocable ostracism increased endorsement of extreme, pro-group actions (fighting and dying for the ingroup) among fused persons but not among nonfused persons. This effect emerged when an outgroup ostracized fused individuals due either to their nationality (Experiment 1) or their personal preferences (Experiment 2). Similarly, ostracism by the ingroup amplified the tendency for fused persons to both endorse extreme pro-group actions, refuse to leave the group (Experiment 3), and donate money to an ingroup member (Experiment 4). Finally, compensatory activities emerged even when ostracism was based on being "too good" for the group, suggesting that a desire for self-enhancement does not mediate such activities (Experiment 4).

Crossing party lines: Political identity and partisans’ reactions to violating party norms

The current studies examined the experiences of undergraduate political partisans who cross party lines to support a preferred, out-of-party candidate, and thus open themselves to the possibility of being misclassified as a member of a rival political party. Strongly identified partisans who endorsed an out-of-party candidate, and thus expected others to misclassify them, reported heightened threats to belonging and coherence (Study 1), unless they disclaimed rival party status by asserting their political affiliation. In Study 2, strongly identified partisans who could be misclassified were less confident in their choice of an out-of-party candidate compared to partisans who asserted their political affiliation. These results highlight the impact of identity misclassification concerns on strongly identified partisans whose personal preferences are inconsistent with party norms.

“We Drink, Therefore We Are”

We consider how ingroup norms, identification and individual attitudes interact when a behaviour (heavy alcohol consumption) is defining of an ingroup identity. We sampled 115 students at a UK university, measuring ingroup identification and attitudes to heavy drinking before manipulating the ingroup drinking norm (moderate vs. heavy). Heavy drinking intentions and tendencies to socially include/exclude two target students—one of whom drank alcohol regularly and one of whom did not—were measured. As predicted, participants with a positive attitude to heavy drinking and who identified strongly with the ingroup reported stronger intentions to drink heavily when the ingroup had a moderate, rather than a heavy drinking norm, indicating resistance to the normative information. A complementary pattern emerged for the social inclusion/exclusion measures. Implications for theory and interventions that focus on group norms are discussed.

Responses of group members to procedural discrimination

The current research examines how peripheral group members differ from prototypical group members in reacting to procedural discrimination (favoring self vs. favoring other procedures). Results of two experiments reveal that peripheral members react more negatively when the authority procedurally favors a prototypical member over them than when the authority favors them over a prototypical member. In contrast, reactions to procedural discrimination do not differ among prototypical members, and peripheral members paired with another peripheral member. The current research provides support for the literature on ingroup prototypicality, which argues that peripheral members are highly insecure about their inclusion in the group. It also furthers our insights into how group members’ responses to procedural experience are qualified by social identity concerns.

Group member prototypicality and intergroup negotiation: How one's standing in the group affects negotiation behaviour

How does a representative's position in the group influence behaviour in intergroup negotiation? Applying insights from the social identity approach (specifically self-categorization theory), the effects of group member prototypicality, accountability and group attractiveness on competitiveness in intergroup bargaining were examined. As representatives of their group, participants engaged in a computer-mediated negotiation with a simulated out-group opponent. In Experiment 1 (N=114), representatives with a peripheral status in the group sent more competitive and fewer cooperative messages to the opponent than did prototypical representatives, but only under accountability. Experiment 2 (N=110) replicated this finding, and showed that, under accountability, peripherals also made higher demands than did prototypicals, but only when group membership was perceived as attractive. Results are discussed in relation to impression management and strategic behaviour.