Craig McGarty

Self and Collective: Cognition and Social Context

The relationship between the self and the collective is discussed from the perspective of self-categorization theory. Self-categorization theory makes a basic distinction between personal and social identity as different levels of self-categorization. It shows how the emergent properties of group processes can be explained in terms of a shift in self perception from personal to social identity. It also elucidates how self-categorization varies with the social context. It argues that self-categorizing is inherently variable, fluid, and context dependent, as sedf-categories are social comparative and are always relative to a frame of reference. This notion has major implications for accepted ways of thinking about the self: The variability of self-categorizing provides the perceiver with behavioral and cognitive flexibility and ensures that cognition is always shaped by the social context in which it takes place.

Aligning Identities, Emotions, and Beliefs to Create Commitment to Sustainable Social and Political Action

In this article the authors explore the social psychological processes underpinning sustainable commitment to a social or political cause. Drawing on recent developments in the collective action, identity formation, and social norm literatures, they advance a new model to understand sustainable commitment to action. The normative alignment model suggests that one solution to promoting ongoing commitment to collective action lies in crafting a social identity with a relevant pattern of norms for emotion, efficacy, and action. Rather than viewing group emotion, collective efficacy, and action as group products, the authors conceptualize norms about these as contributing to a dynamic system of meaning, which can shape ongoing commitment to a cause. By exploring emotion, efficacy, and action as group norms, it allows scholars to reenergize the theoretical connections between collective identification and subjective meaning but also allows for a fresh perspective on complex questions of causality.

Transforming "Apathy Into Movement": The Role of Prosocial Emotions in Motivating Action for Social Change

This article explores the synergies between recent developments in the social identity of helping, and advantaged groups’ prosocial emotion. The authors review the literature on the potential of guilt, sympathy, and outrage to transform advantaged groups’ apathy into positive action. They place this research into a novel framework by exploring the ways these emotions shape group processes to produce action strategies that emphasize either social cohesion or social change. These prosocial emotions have a critical but underrecognized role in creating contexts of in-group inclusion or exclusion, shaping normative content and meaning, and informing group interests. Furthermore, these distinctions provide a useful way of differentiating commonly discussed emotions. The authors conclude that the most “effective” emotion will depend on the context of the inequality but that outrage seems particularly likely to productively shape group processes and social change outcomes.

Group-based guilt as a predictor of commitment to apology

Whether the Australian government should officially apologize to Indigenous Australians for past wrongs is hotly debated in Australia. The predictors of support amongst non-Indigenous Australians for such an apology were examined in two studies. The first study (N=164) showed that group-based guilt was a good predictor of support for a government apology, as was the perception that non-Indigenous Australians were relatively advantaged. In the second study (N=116) it was found that group-based guilt was an excellent predictor of support for apology and was itself predicted by perceived non-Indigenous responsibility for harsh treatment of Indigenous people, and an absence of doubts about the legitimacy of group-based guilt. National identification was not a predictor of group-based guilt. The results of the two studies suggest that, just as individual emotions predict individual action tendencies, so group-based guilt predicts support for actions or decisions to be taken at the collective level.

The effects of salient group memberships on persuasion

Previous theories of both social influence and persuasion have maintained a dichotomy between influence which is seen as thoughtful, grounded in objective reality and is longlasting, and influence which is impressionistically based and involves more superficial processing. Many theorists have suggested that groups are influential by means of the latter form of influence. Itfollowsfrom such a perspective that differences in the persuasive power of ingroups and outgroups should be mediated by peripheral cues rather than the persuasive nature of the message. In two experiments (Ns = 129 and 90) it was found that outgroups were less persuasive than ingroups when group memberships were made salient by having subjects commit themselves to groups. This is inconsistent with the traditional view but consistent with self-categorization theory. There was also evidence of more accurate recall by subjects in the salient ingroup condition. These effects are evidence against the view that group-based processing involves peripheral processing of the message.

The Group as a Basis for Emergent Stereotype Consensus

The fact that stereotypes are shared within groups is essential to stereotype definition and operationalization. Nonetheless, stereotype consensus remains under-researched and under-explained. To address this problem we present a theoretical analysis of the process through which stereotype consensus develops. Derived from self-categorization theory, this argues that consensus is produced by shared social identification and the collective co-ordination of perception and behaviour that flows from it. This analysis is examined in a review of relevant research and in studies where dynamic processes of category representation and social influence are shown to contribute to consensual stereotypes of both out-groups and ingroups.

The role of efficacy and moral outrage norms in creating the potential for international development activism through group-based interaction

This paper adopts an intergroup perspective on helping as collective action to explore the ways to boost motivation amongst people in developed countries to join the effort to combat poverty and preventable disease in developing countries. Following van Zomeren, Spears, Leach, and Fischers (2004) model of collective action, we investigated the role of norms about an emotional response (moral outrage) and beliefs about efficacy in motivating commitment to take action amongst members of advantaged groups. Norms about outrage and efficacy were harnessed to an opinion-based group identity (Bliuc, McGarty, Reynolds, & Muntele, 2007) and explored in the context of a novel group-based interaction method. Results showed that the group-based interaction boosted commitment to action especially when primed with an (injunctive) outrage norm. This norm stimulated a range of related effects including increased identification with the pro-international development opinion-based group, and higher efficacy beliefs. Results provide an intriguing instance of the power of group interaction (particularly where strengthened with emotion norms) to bolster commitment to positive social change.

Social identity and the romance of leadership: The importance of being seen to be 'doing it for us'

Previous research by Meindl (e.g. 1993) on the ‘romance of leadership’ suggests that individuals in leadership roles are perceived to be more charismatic to the extent that the organization they lead undergoes a crisis turnaround (e.g. moving from loss to profit) rather than a crisis decline (e.g. moving from profit to loss). Building on a social identity approach to leadership and previous research by Haslam and Platow (in press-a), this paper argues that this pattern should be tempered by the degree to which a leader’s behavior serves to affirm and promote an ingroup identity shared with followers. Consistent with this analysis, an experimental study (N = 120) revealed that, independent of organizational performance, a (male) leader was seen as more charismatic in an intergroup context when his previous behavior had been identity-affirming or even-handed rather than identity-negating. Even-handed leaders also tended to be seen as particularly charismatic when they were associated with crisis turnaround, while identity-affirming leaders were protected from negative attributions in the context of crisis decline. These results suggest that social identity and self-categorization processes have a complex role to play in the emergence and perception of charismatic leadership.

Social identities facilitate and encapsulate action-relevant constructs: A test of the social identity model of collective action

Three studies explore the recently elaborated social identity model of collective action (SIMCA) and an alternative, the encapsulated model of social identity in collective action (EMSICA). These models both afford a central role to the function of social identities in promoting collective action, through affective reactions to injustice and group efficacy, but in different ways. Combined analyses of three samples (N = 305) using multigroup structural equation modelling showed that both SIMCA and EMSICA fit the data well but that the path from group efficacy to action was of small size. Results showed that social identity processes can both facilitate and encapsulate other action-relevant constructs, and highlight the importance of considering multiple causal pathways to action.

A 100 years of certitude? Social psychology, the experimental method and the management of scientific uncertainty

For at least 100 years the experimental method has been used to add scientific rigour to the process of conducting social psychological research. More specifically, experiments have been used to reduce methodological uncertainty surrounding the causal relationships between variables. In this way the method has proved particularly useful in demonstrating the impact of social contextual variables over-and-above individual differences. However, problems with the method have arisen because over time experimentalists have tended (1) to define uncertainty too narrowly, (2) to emphasize uncertainty reduction, but (3) to neglect the equally important process of uncertainty creation. This has contributed to the normalization of social psychology as a science but also made the discipline more conservative and circumscribed. It is argued that experimentalists need to address broader metatheoretical and political uncertainties in order to rediscover the experiments potency as a tool of revolutionary and progressive science.