Constantina Badea

The bases of identification: When optimal distinctiveness needs face social identity threat

Three studies were conducted to examine the predictions that (a) in-group identification depends on optimal distinctiveness needs (Study 1), and (b) that social identity threat overrides the predictive value of these needs to determine identification (Studies 2 and 3). In Study 1, need for assimilation and need for differentiation were assessed among natural groups. We found support for the optimal distinctiveness theory (ODT) prediction that there is a curvilinear relationship between identification and optimal distinctiveness needs satisfaction. In Studies 2 and 3, interactive effects of the extent to which groups satisfy assimilation and differentiation needs (groups are either too small, of moderate size, or too large) and social identity threat were examined. In the no identity threat condition identification was higher in moderately sized groups (where both needs are balances) compared to groups were either assimilation or differentiation dominates. However, when facing an identity threat, identification was highest in very small groups, providing evidence that social identity concerns override individual need satisfaction. Discussion focuses on comparing and integrating ODT and social identity theory.

Why Do People Perceive Ingroup Homogeneity on Ingroup Traits and Outgroup Homogeneity on Outgroup Traits

People tend to perceive ingroup homogeneity on ingroup stereotypical traits and outgroup homogeneity on outgroup stereotypical traits (e.g., Kelly, 1989; Simon, 1992a; Simon & Pettigrew, 1990). If it is assumed that people use homogeneity ratings to indicate the extent to which groups possess traits, then this stereotype effect may be interpreted as an expression of perceived trait possession (i.e., ingroups possess ingroup stereotypical traits and outgroups possess outgroup stereotypical traits). If it is further assumed that research participants abide by the conversational norm of appropriate quantity (e.g., Bless, Strack, & Schwarz, 1993), then this stereotype effect should be significantly reduced following prior expressions of perceived trait possession. A literature review and two minimal group experiments (Ns = 75, 104) supported this prediction. This evidence is discussed in relation to the outgroup homogeneity effect and self-categorization theory.

Low status groups show in-group favoritism to compensate for their low status and compete for higher status

The present research investigated the intergroup allocation behavior of members of low-status groups. In two studies where status relations were either relatively illegitimate (Study 1, N = 139) or legitimate (Study 2, N = 114), undergraduate students completed a minimal group resource allocation task that took into account the intergroup status hierarchy. In both studies, members of low-status groups showed two forms of in-group favoritism. They selected resource allocation choices that (a) compensated for their low status and led to intergroup fairness (compensatory favoritism) and (b) competed with the out-group for status and led to positive distinctiveness for the in-group (competitive favoritism). These results suggest that members of low-status groups use in-group favoritism to make their group (a) as good as the high-status out-group and (b) better than the high-status out-group. The findings support the idea that in-group favoritism can serve different functions.

They’re All the Same!. . . but for Several Different Reasons A Review of the Multicausal Nature of Perceived Group Variability

Researchers studying people’s perceptions of variability among members of social groups, or perceived group variability, have tended to focus on the ways in which perceivers’ group affiliations lead to in-group and out-group homogeneity effects, including the other-race effect. However, recent advances have highlighted the role of additional influences. In this review, we consider the influence of (a) the perceiver’s group affiliation, (b) the group’s objective variability, (c) the group’s social position, and (d) the group’s central tendency on trait dimensions. We focus on recent research in these areas that has highlighted the strategic, context-dependent, and symbolic nature of perceived group variability. We conclude that future research needs to adopt a multicausal approach in order to provide a more complete and comprehensive account of perceived group variability.

Distance culturelle, perception du multiculturalisme et préjugés envers les immigrés en France

Resume Nous presentons deux etudes realisees en France aupres de membres du groupe majoritaire francais. Dans une premiere etude, correlationnelle, nous les avons interroges sur leur perception de distance culturelle entre les differents groupes d’immigres et le groupe majoritaire, sur leur adhesion au multiculturalisme et a l’assimilation, sur les prejuges a l’egard de chaque groupe minoritaire et sur la perception du multiculturalisme comme etant une menace a l’identite nationale. Dans une deuxieme etude, nous avons manipule experimentalement la distance culturelle. En accord avec notre hypothese, les Francais qui percoivent le multiculturalisme comme menacant expriment plus de prejuges envers les immigres que les Francais qui le percoivent moins menacant. Les resultats montrent aussi une interaction entre la distance culturelle, la perception de la menace du multiculturalisme et l’adhesion aux modeles d’integration. Les Francais qui adherent davantage au multiculturalisme et qui percoivent ce modele comme menacant expriment plus de prejuges, qu’ils percoivent une grande distance culturelle ou non. En revanche, les Francais qui adherent davantage a l’assimilation et qui percoivent le multiculturalisme comme une menace ont plus de prejuges lorsqu’ils percoivent une grande distance culturelle plutot que lorsqu’ils percoivent une faible distance culturelle.

What Did You Just Call Me? European and American Ratings of the Valence of Ethnophaulisms

Previous work has examined the relative valence (positivity or negativity) of ethnophaulisms (ethnic slurs) targeting European immigrants to the United States. However, this relied on contemporary judgments made by American researchers. The present study examined valence judgments made by citizens from the countries examined in previous work. Citizens of 17 European nations who were fluent in English rated ethnophaulisms targeting their own group as well as ethnophaulisms targeting immigrants from England. American students rated ethnophaulisms for all 17 European nations, providing a comparison from members of the host society. Ratings made by the European judges were (a) consistent with those made by the American students and (b) internally consistent for raters’ own country and for the common target group of the English. Following discussion of relevant methodological issues, the authors examine the theoretical significance of their results.

Revisiting the measurement of anomie

Sociologists coined the term “anomie” to describe societies that are characterized by disintegration and deregulation. Extending beyond conceptualizations of anomie that conflate the measurements of anomie as ‘a state of society’ and as a ‘state of mind’, we disentangle these conceptualizations and develop an analysis and measure of this phenomenon focusing on anomie as a perception of the ‘state of society’. We propose that anomie encompasses two dimensions: a perceived breakdown in social fabric (i.e., disintegration as lack of trust and erosion of moral standards) and a perceived breakdown in leadership (i.e., deregulation as lack of legitimacy and effectiveness of leadership). Across six studies we present evidence for the validity of the new measure, the Perception of Anomie Scale (PAS). Studies 1a and 1b provide evidence for the proposed factor structure and internal consistency of PAS. Studies 2a-c provide evidence of convergent and discriminant validity. Finally, assessing PAS in 28 countries, we show that PAS correlates with national indicators of societal functioning and that PAS predicts national identification and well-being (Studies 3a & 3b). The broader implications of the anomie construct for the study of group processes are discussed.

Regaining In-Group Continuity in Times of Anxiety About the Group’s Future: A Study on the Role of Collective Nostalgia Across 27 Countries

Collective nostalgia for the good old days of the country thrives across the world. However, little is known about the social psychological dynamics of this collective emotion across cultures. We predicted that collective nostalgia is triggered by collective angst as it helps people to restore a sense of in-group continuity via stronger in-group belonging and out-group rejection (in the form of opposition to immigrants). Based on a sample (N = 5,956) of individuals across 27 countries, the general pattern of results revealed that collective angst predicts collective nostalgia, which subsequently relates to stronger feelings of in-group continuity via in-group belonging (but not via out-group rejection). Collective nostalgia generally predicted opposition to immigrants, but this was subsequently not related to in-group continuity.

Cultural Values Moderate the Impact of Relative Deprivation

Relative deprivation (RD) is the judgment that one or one’s ingroup is worse off compared with some relevant standard coupled with feelings of dissatisfaction, anger, and resentment. RD predicts a wide range of outcomes, but it is unclear whether this relationship is moderated by national cultural differences. Therefore, in the first study, we used national assessments of individual-collectivism and power distance to code 303 effect sizes from 31 different countries with 200,578 participants. RD predicted outcomes ranging from life satisfaction to collective action more strongly within individualistic nations. A second survey of 6,112 undergraduate university students from 28 different countries confirmed the predictive value of RD. Again, the relationship between individual RD and different outcomes was stronger for students who lived in more individualistic countries. Group-based RD also predicted political trust more strongly for students who lived in countries marked by lower power distance. RD effects, although consistent predictors, are culturally bounded. In particular, RD is more likely to motivate reactions within individualistic countries that emphasize individual agency and achievement as a source of self-worth.

Multiculturalism and Attitudes Toward Immigrants: The Impact of Perceived Cultural Distance

Multiculturalism can be construed in different ways with different effects on majority members’ attitudes toward immigrant-origin groups. Thinking about why the broad goals of multiculturalism are important for society might reduce feelings of outgroup threat and less prejudicial attitudes. In contrast, thinking about how exactly these goals can be accomplished might evoke feelings of threat that lead to prejudice. The aim of this experimental research conducted in France and the Netherlands was to examine the effect of these two construals of multiculturalism of attitudes toward immigrants and whether these effects depend on perceived cultural distance. The findings show that a focus on why multiculturalism is important for society is more beneficial for attitudes toward immigrant-origin groups for people perceiving relatively high cultural distance. In contrast, a focus on how the goals of multiculturalism can be accomplished has a more detrimental effect on attitudes for people perceiving relatively low cultural distance.