On the lacking visibility of management research from non-Western countries

Purpose

For a long time, researchers across the world have called for more generalizable frameworks in management research, which can be used to better understand local contexts and to extend established theories in Western countries. However, research from non-Western countries is barely visible in high-impact management journals. Although most researchers have tried to understand this lacking visibility from a more technological perspective, this study aims to analyze the extent to which group psychological processes influence the selection of international publication strategies by non-Western researchers in this study.

Design/methodology/approach

Hypotheses were based on social identity theory. In total, 169 management researchers from India were surveyed and their social identities and the international publication strategy were assessed.

Findings

It could be confirmed that higher identification with non-Western researchers is negatively related to the intention to publish internationally.

Social implications

The findings suggest that current approaches to increasing the low visibility of non-Western research require a general revision.

Originality/value

This study adds a new angle to the center–periphery debate by incorporating the influence of social identities on the selection of an international publication strategy. Research socialization in the periphery seems to increase the likelihood of choosing local publication outlets rather than aiming for international publications. Therefore, it is necessary to implement strategies that aim at the psychological inclusion of peripheral researchers to increase their visibility in international journals and on international platforms.

Social Identity Theory-a Foundation to Build Upon, Not Undermine

Schiffmann and Wicklund (1992) argue that social identity theory (SIT) excludes psychological variables and `is superfluous as an account of systematic social-psychological phenomena' (p. 29). They also claim that the theory is dependent upon experiments which confound categorization and similarity effects, and which are susceptible to alternative explanations in terms of demand characteristics. They conclude that even an improved version of SIT would be `little more than an imitation of existing theories, and should therefore be rejected in favour of them (p. 46). The present paper argues that SIT is not vulnerable to Schiffmann and Wicklund's criticisms, and that their conclusion is, at best, premature.

Social Identity Notions and Theories

According to Farsides (1993), Schiffmann and Wicklund's (1992) criticism of social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979, 1986) is untenable. In particular, their claim that social identity theory should be abandoned in favour of Tesser's (1980, 1986) self-evaluation maintenance model or Wicklund and Gollwitzer's (1981, 1982) symbolic self-completion theory is rejected by Farsides. In the reply to Farsides, it is shown that his argumentation is not conclusive. In the same vein, Schiffmann and Wicklund's (1992) claim to abandon social identity notions is pursued. Extra-theoretical reasons underlying adherence to these notions are discussed, and a direction for investigating social identity processes more productively is proposed.

Social identity theory's self-esteem hypothesis: a review and some suggestions for clarification

Distinctions are made between global and specific, personal and social, and trait and state self-esteem, and these are used to structure a review of over 40 studies concerning social identity theory's hypothesis that (a) intergroup discrimination elevates self-esteem and (b) low self-esteem motivates discrimination. It is observed that researchers have tended to employ measures of global personal trait self-esteem in their investigations of this self-esteem hypothesis, and it is argued that measures of specific social state self-esteem are more consistent with social identity theory's assumptions. Although no convincing evidence is found for the self-esteem hypothesis in its full and unqualified form, it is argued that this is due to a lack of specificity in its formulation and it is suggested that a more qualified and specific version of the hypothesis may be more appropriate.

Relations of self-esteem concerns, group identification, and self-stereotyping to in-group favoritism

In 2 studies, the author examined the effect of collective self-esteem (CSE; J. Crocker & R. Luhtanen, 1993) on people's willingness to display in-group favoritism. To test that self-esteem hypothesis, he measured public CSE, rather than private CSE, because the former parallels a threat to social identity, a state believed to motivate in-group favoritism. Furthermore, the author explored whether group identification and self-stereotyping moderated the effect of public CSE on in-group favoritism. The participants were 92 British and Dutch university employees. As expected, participants high in public CSE displayed more in-group favoritism than did those low in public CSE. Moreover, group identification and self-stereotyping appeared to moderate the effect of CSE.