Rupert Brown

SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY: PAST ACHIEVEMENTS, CURRENT PROBLEMS AND FUTURE CHALLENGES

This article presents a critical review of Social Identity Theory. Its major contributions to the study of intergroup relations are discussed, focusing on its powerful explanations of such phenomena as ingroup bias, responses of subordinate groups to their unequal status position, and intragroup homogeneity and stereotyping. In addition, its stimulative role for theoretical elaborations of the Contact Hypothesis as a strategy for improving intergroup attitudes is noted. Then five issues which have proved problematic for Social Identity Theory are identified: the relationship between group identification and ingroup bias; the self-esteem hypothesis; positive – negative asymmetry in intergroup discrimination; the effects of intergroup similarity; and the choice of identity strategies by low-status groups. In a third section a future research agenda for the theory is sketched out, with five lines of enquiry noted as being particularly promising: expanding the concept of social identity; predicting comparison choice in intergroup settings; incorporating affect into the theory; managing social identities in multicultural settings; and integrating implicit and explicit processes. The article concludes with some remarks on the potential applications of social identity principles. Copyright

An integrative theory of intergroup contact

Publisher Summary This chapter begins with a re-presentation of Allports classic hypothesis and shows—with reference to recent cross-sectional and longitudinal surveys— laboratory experiments, and meta-analysis, that many of his original propositions have capably withstood the test of time. It examines Brewer and Millers, and Gaertner and Dovidios attempts to extend the contact hypothesis, in both of which categorization processes play a key role. This approach sets the stage for the model, first published in 1986 by Hewstone and Brown. In that model, emphasis was given on identifying the conditions that would allow the generalization of attitudes and behavior change beyond the specific context in which the contact occurs. The chapter discusses the developments of contact theory that occurred in the 1980s and reviews the empirical research instigated by the Hewstone–Brown model. It also reviews the progress to date and attempts a theoretical integration of these models in the light of the large volume of research that they have stimulated.

Does contact reduce prejudice or does prejudice reduce contact? A longitudinal test of the contact hypothesis among majority and minority groups in three European countries.

A widely researched panacea for reducing intergroup prejudice is the contact hypothesis. However, few longitudinal studies can shed light on the direction of causal processes: from contact to prejudice reduction (contact effects) or from prejudice to contact reduction (prejudice effects). The authors conducted a longitudinal field survey in Germany, Belgium, and England with school students. The sample comprised members of both ethnic minorities (n = 512) and ethnic majorities (n = 1,143). Path analyses yielded both lagged contact effects and prejudice effects: Contact reduced prejudice, but prejudice also reduced contact. Furthermore, contact effects were negligible for minority members. These effects were obtained for 2 indicators of prejudice: negative intergroup emotions and desire for social distance. For both majority and minority members, contact effects on negative emotions were stronger when outgroup contacts were perceived as being typical of their group. Contact effects were also mediated by intergroup anxiety. This mediating mechanism was impaired for minority members because of a weakened effect of anxiety on desire for social distance. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

Neosexism: Plus Ça Change, Plus C'est Pareil

A scale designed to tap into a new type of gender prejudice, called neosexist beliefs, is proposed. Two studies investigating antecedents and consequences of neosexism were conducted. In the first study, a predictive model was tested with a sample of 130 male students. It was found, according to hypotheses, that considerations of collective interest (CI) and old-fashioned sexism had an impact on neosexism. However, only the latter and CI triggered opposition to affirmative action (AA). The second study evaluated the effects of CI and neosexism among a sample of 149 male workers employed in a firm where an exhaustive AA program was implemented. For example, it was found that support for the program in place and evaluations of womens qualifications were influenced both by neosexism and by CI. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Nationalism and patriotism: National identification and out‐group rejection

It is argued that the differentiation between nationalism and patriotism proposed in the literature can be seen as analogous to judgments based on different types of comparisons: intergroup comparisons with other nations are associated with intergroup behaviour that corresponds to nationalism, whereas temporal or standard comparisons are linked with behaviour that corresponds to patriotism. Four studies (N = 103, 107, 96 and 105) conducted in Germany and Britain examined the hypothesis that national identification and in-group evaluation only show a reliable relationship with out-group rejection under an intergroup comparison orientation. Participants were primed with either an intergroup comparison, a temporal comparison or no explicit comparison orientation. A subsequent questionnaire assessed in-group (own country) identification, in-group evaluation (i.e. national pride) and rejection of national out-groups. Across all four studies, both in-group identification and in-group evaluation show a stronger correlation with out-group derogation if participants were primed with an intergroup comparison orientation compared to temporal and control conditions. Results are discussed with regard to nationalism and patriotism as well as Hinkle and Browns (1990) model on relational vs. autonomous orientations.

Changing attitudes through intergroup contact: the effects of group membership salience

Two studies were conducted to test the hypothesis that heightened membership salience, achieved by increasing the prototypicality of particular outgroup members during cooperative intergroup contact, facilitates the generalization of positive attitudes toward the outgroup as a whole. The first study (N = 64) utilized an experimental paradigm in which the perceived typicality of a target outgroup member and the perceived homogeneity of the outgroup as a whole were manipulated. Consistent with our hypothesis, results indicated that positive attitudinal generalization was facilitated by encounters with typical outgroup members. The effects of membership prototypicality were further examined in a second study (N = 293) where a survey was administered in six European Community countries. Results supported the hypothesis that membership salience moderates the impact of contact on a generalized measure of favourable orientation towards another country. Copyright (C) 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

National identification and anti-immigrant prejudice: Individual and contextual effects of national definitions

In this study, we examined the relationship between national identification and anti-immigrant prejudice in a multilevel analysis of ISSP survey data from 37,030 individuals in 31 countries. We argue that this relationship depends on how national groups are defined by their members. Across the 31 national samples, the correlation between national identification and prejudice ranged from weakly negative (-.06) to moderately positive (.37). The relationship was significantly stronger in countries where people on average endorsed a definition of national belonging based on language, and weaker where people on average defined the nation in terms of citizenship. These effects occurred at a national rather than individual level, supporting an explanation in terms of the construction of nationality that prevails in a given context. Endorsement of the ancestry-based criteria for nationality was positively associated with prejudice, but only at the individual level.

On Positive Psychological Outcomes: What Helps Groups With a History of Conflict to Forgive and Reconcile With Each Other?

Three studies examined the roles of traditional and novel social psychological variables involved in intergroup forgiveness. Study 1 (N = 480) revealed that among the pro-Pinochet and the anti-Pinochet groups in Chile, forgiveness was predicted by ingroup identity (negatively), common ingroup identity (positively), empathy and trust (positively), and competitive victimhood (the subjective sense of having suffered more than the outgroup, negatively). Political ideology (Right vs. Left) moderated the relationship between empathy and forgiveness, trust and forgiveness, and between the latter and competitive victimhood. Study 2 (N = 309), set in the Northern Irish conflict between Protestants and Catholics, provided a replication and extension of Study 1. Finally, Study 3 (N = 155/108) examined the longitudinal relationship between forgiveness and reconciliation in Northern Ireland, revealing that forgiveness predicted reconciliation intentions. The reverse direction of this relationship was also marginally significant. Results are discussed in terms of their theoretical and practical implications.

Group Identification: The Same Thing to All People?

The hypothesis derived from Social Identity Theory that strength of group identification would be positively correlated with intergroup differentiation is tested. Data was obtained from 55 workers in a bakery using semistructured interviews. Analysis showed clear differentiation between the factory departments by subgroups of workers along dimensions of perceived contribution to the running of the factory and expressed friendliness towards out-groups. However, multiple regression analyses revealed that the relationship between group identification and intergroup differentiation was not consistently positive but varied between subgroup and between attitude dimensions. The most reliable predictor of differentiation, consistent with Realistic Conflict Theory, was perceived conflict between ingroup and outgroups.

What do I Care? Perceived Ingroup Responsibility and Dehumanization as Predictors of Empathy Felt for the Victim Group

This research examined the effects of reminders of ingroup responsibility for past wrongdoings on perception of ingroup responsibility and victim dehumanization as predictors of empathy. Two experiments set in different intergroup contexts found that reminders of ingroup responsibility generated empathy through perception of ingroup responsibility and deflected empathy through subtle victim dehumanization. In Experiment 1, set in the context of indigenous—non-indigenous relations in Chile (N = 124), it was found that reminders of ingroup (vs. individual) responsibility generated empathy by increasing a perception of ingroup responsibility and deflected it through decreased attribution of secondary emotions to the victim group. Experiment 2 replicated the effects in a different context, the recent 1992—1995 war in Bosnia (N = 158). Reminders of ingroup responsibility (vs. no reminders) generated empathy by increasing a perception of ingroup responsibility and deflected it through decreased attribution of secondary emotions to the victim group. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.