Russell Spears

Toward an integrative Social Identity model of Collective Action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives.

An integrative social identity model of collective action (SIMCA) is developed that incorporates 3 socio-psychological perspectives on collective action. Three meta-analyses synthesized a total of 182 effects of perceived injustice, efficacy, and identity on collective action (corresponding to these socio-psychological perspectives). Results showed that, in isolation, all 3 predictors had medium-sized (and causal) effects. Moreover, results showed the importance of social identity in predicting collective action by supporting SIMCAs key predictions that (a) affective injustice and politicized identity produced stronger effects than those of non-affective injustice and non-politicized identity; (b) identity predicted collective action against both incidental and structural disadvantages, whereas injustice and efficacy predicted collective action against incidental disadvantages better than against structural disadvantages; (c) all 3 predictors had unique medium-sized effects on collective action when controlling for between-predictor covariance; and (d) identity bridged the injustice and efficacy explanations of collective action. Results also showed more support for SIMCA than for alternative models reflecting previous attempts at theoretical integration. The authors discuss key implications for theory, practice, future research, and further integration of social and psychological perspectives on collective action.

Breaching or Building Social Boundaries? SIDE-Effects of Computer-Mediated Communication

Computer-mediated communication (CMC) is sometimes heralded for its power to break down social boundaries and to liberate individuals from social influence, group pressure, and status and power differentials that characterize much face-to-face interaction. We review research conducted within the framework of the social identity model of deindividuation effects (SIDE) demonstrating that this is not always the case. When communicators share a common social identity, they appear to be more susceptible to group influence, social attraction, stereotyping, gender typing, and discrimination in anonymous CMC. Although CMC gives us the opportunity to traverse social boundaries, paradoxically, it can also afford these boundaries greater power, especially when they define self- and group identity.

Guilty by association: When one's group has a negative history

The impact of the history of ones own groups treatment of another group on feelings of collective guilt and behavioral reactions to this guilt were examined in 2 studies. In a laboratory experiment, it was shown that it is possible to elicit feelings of group-based guilt and that those are distinct from feelings of personal guilt. In a 2nd study, a field experiment, low-identified group members acknowledged the negative aspects of their own nations history and felt more guilt compared with high identifiers when both negative and positive aspects of their nations history were made salient. Perceptions of intragroup variability and out-group compensation closely paralleled the interactive pattern on guilt. Links between social identity theory and the experience of specific emotions are discussed.

Panacea or Panopticon? The Hidden Power in Computer-Mediated Communication

This article examines how interaction by means of computer-mediated communication (CMC) affects the operation of both status differentials and power relations. The authors attempt to provide a corrective to the dominant assessment, particularly within social psychological analyses, that CMC tends to equalize status, decentralize and democratize decision making, and thus empower and liberate the individual user. This emphasis contrasts with sociological critiques employing the Foucauldian metaphor of the panopticon, claiming that power relations can actually be reinforced in CMC. The authors argue that prevailing conceptualizations of influence and power within social psychology have tended to prefigure the more optimistic account, and outline a theoretical framework in which processes of “panoptic power” in CMC are given a more concrete social psychological foundation.

Computer-mediated communication, de-individuation and group decision-making

Abstract This paper discusses social psychological processes in computer-mediated communication (CMC) and group decision-making, in relation to findings that groups communicating via computer produce more polarized decisions than face-to-face groups. A wide range of possible explanations for such differences have been advanced, in which a lack of social cues, disinhibition, “de-individuation” and a consequent tendency to antinormative behaviour are central themes. In these explanations, both disinhibition and greater equality of participation are thought to facilitate the exchange of extreme persuasive arguments, resulting in polarization. These accounts are briefly reviewed and attention is drawn to various problematic issues. We provide an alternative model and explanation based on social identity (SI) theory and a re-conceptualization of de-individuation, which takes into account the social and normative factors associated with group polarization. Predictions from both sets of explanations are explored empirically by means of an experiment manipulating the salience of the discussion group, and de-individuation operationalized as the isolation and anonymity of the participants. In this experiment we were able to partial out the effects of the CMC technology which have confounded comparisons with face-to-face interaction in previous research. The results challenge the explanations based on persuasive arguments, while being consistent with our SI model. We discuss our approach in relation to other very recent research in group computer-mediated communication and offer a reinterpretation of previous findings.

Paralanguage and social perception in computer‐mediated communication

It is widely held that computer‐mediated communication (CMC) filters out many of the social and affective cues associated with human interaction with consequent effects on communication outcomes an...

Social Influence in Computer-Mediated Communication: The Effects of Anonymity on Group Behavior

Two studies examined hypotheses derived from a Social Identity model of Deindividuation Effects (SIDE) as applied to social influence in computer-mediated communication (CMC) in groups. This model predicts that anonymity can increase social influence if a common group identity is salient. In a first study, group members were primed with a certain type of social behavior (efficiency vs. prosocial norms). Consistent with the model, anonymous groups displayed prime-consistent behavior in their task solutions, whereas identifiable groups did not. This suggests that the primed norm took root in anonymous groups to a greater extent than in identifiable groups. A second study replicated this effect and showed that nonprimed group members conformed to the behavior of primed members, but only when anonymous, suggesting that the primed norm was socially transmitted within the group. Implications for social influence in small groups are discussed.

Seeing one thing and doing another : Contrast effects in automatic behavior

Research on automatic behavior demonstrates the ability of stereotypes to elicit stereotype-consistent behavior. Social judgment research proposes that whereas traits and stereotypes elicit assimilation, priming of exemplars can elicit judgmental contrast by evoking social comparisons. This research extends these findings by showing that priming exemplars can elicit behavioral contrast by evoking a social comparison. In Study 1, priming professor or supermodel stereotypes led, respectively, to more and fewer correct answers on a knowledge test (behavioral assimilation), but priming exemplars of these categories led to the reverse pattern (behavioral contrast). In Study 2, participants walked away faster after being primed with an elderly exemplar. In Study 3, the proposition that contrast effects reflect comparisons of the self with the exemplar was supported.

Rebels with a Cause: Group Identification as a Response to Perceived Discrimination from the Mainstream

Two studies involving people with body piercings tested the hypothesis that perceived discrimination increases group identification. In Study 1, group identification mediated the positive relationship between perceived discrimination and attempts to differentiate the ingroup from the mainstream. In Study 2, perceived discrimination against people with body piercings was manipulated and was found to increase group identification. Support was found for the prediction that group identification mediates the relationship between perceptions of discrimination and collective self-esteem. Results demonstrate the importance of group identification for both the meaning of group membership and its consequences for well-being among members of disadvantaged groups.

Knowing Me, Knowing You: Anonymity Effects on Social Identity Processes within Groups

The Social Identity Model of Deindividuation Effects (SIDE) proposes that depersonalization of self and others is responsible for the effects of visual anonymity on group behavior. The authors investigated these mediating processes by assessing the effects of group-based self-categorization and stereotyping of others on group attraction within visually anonymous or video-identifiable groups communicating via computer. Structural equation modeling showed that visual anonymity increased group-based self-categorization, which directly increased attraction to the group and indirectly increased group attraction by enhancing group-based stereotyping of others. Visual anonymity had no effect on self-categorization in terms of a wider social category (nationality). Predictions derived from alternative perspectives that visual anonymity decreases group attraction by increasing impersonal task focus or by attenuating evaluation concerns were not supported.