Vincenzo Iacoviello

Individualistic tendencies: When group status makes the difference

In three studies, the authors investigated whether individualistic tendencies are contingent upon ingroup social status. Ingroup status was created using experimental procedures, and individualistic tendencies were assessed as preference for individualistic over collectivistic advertisement messages or preference for scarce over available products. It was predicted and found that (a) members of high-status groups emphasize individualistic tendencies compared to members of low-status groups, and that (b) this difference increases as a function of ingroup identification. Among highly identified participants, high-status group members held onto their individualistic tendencies, whereas low-status group members resolutely reduced these tendencies. The discussion addresses the role of group status in the emergence of individualistic self-conceptions and worldviews.

Self-Depersonalization and Ingroup Favoritism in Minimal Group Hierarchies

Research suggests that members of low-status groups are more likely than members of high-status groups to show self-depersonalization and to favor ingroup members over outgroup members. The present research tests two alternative explanations of this status asymmetry: One explanation is based on the motive for achieving a positive social identity, and the other explanation is based on the willingness to cope with a social identity threat. Three minimal group experiments examine these two explanations. Supporting the identity motive explanation, the findings show that self-depersonalization (Studies 1–3) and ingroup favoritism (Study 3) are less prominent in the high-status group than in the low-status and the status-unspecified groups. Moreover, the results do not support the identity threat explanation because self-depersonalization and ingroup favoritism were not weaker in the low-status group than in the status-unspecified group.

The identification-similarity relationship as a function of ingroup status: A social identity perspective

ABSTRACT This research examined the role of ingroup status in the relationship between ingroup identification and self-ingroup similarity. Studies 1a-1b showed that this relationship was stronger in low-status groups than in high-status groups, suggesting that high identifiers from the low-status group seek collective support by assimilating to the ingroup, whereas low identifiers get rid of the unsatisfactory group membership by distancing themselves from the ingroup. Two further studies showed that the identification-similarity relationship vanished when the low-status group members were given the opportunity to rely on a social creativity strategy (group affirmation in Study 2, alternative dimension of intergroup comparison in Study 3). Finally, Study 4 showed that the identification-similarity relationship was weaker in the high-status group than in both low-status and status-unspecified groups, providing stronger support for an identity motive explanation than for an identity threat explanation.

I’ll emulate you…only if you want me to: the impact of ingroup norms and status on the identification-assimilation relationship

High identifiers are generally more willing to affiliate to their group and, as a result, perceive themselves and behave as prototypical members of their group. But is this always the case? The present research investigates the when and the why of the positive relationship between ingroup identification and assimilation by focusing on the role of the content of the injunctive ingroup norm (collectivistic vs. individualistic) and the ingroup status. Two experiments showed a positive identification-assimilation relationship in the low-status group when the ingroup norm was collectivistic, but not when the norm was individualistic. Moreover, the relationship was unreliable in the high-status group, regardless of the content of the norm. In a third study, these findings were extended to a more general measure of group affiliation (i.e., the need to belong). This research suggests that the greater tendency of high identifiers to assimilate to their group–and, more generally, to affiliate to groups–is accounted for by conformity motivations and strategies aimed at coping with an unfavorable social identity.

Quota women are threatening to men: Unveiling the (counter)stereotypization of beneficiaries of affirmative action policies

Two studies carried out among Albanian public-sector employees examined the impact of different types of affirmative action policies (AAPs) on (counter)stereotypical perceptions of women in decision-making positions. Study 1 (N = 178) revealed that participants – especially women – perceived women in decision-making positions as more masculine (i.e., agentic) than feminine (i.e., communal). Study 2 (N = 239) showed that different types of AA had different effects on the attribution of gender stereotypes to AAP beneficiaries: Women benefiting from a quota policy were perceived as being more communal than agentic, while those benefiting from weak preferential treatment were perceived as being more agentic than communal. Furthermore, we examined how the belief that AAPs threaten men’s access to decision-making positions influenced the attribution of these traits to AAP beneficiaries. The results showed that men who reported high levels of perceived threat, as compared to men who reported low levels of perceived threat, attributed more communal than agentic traits to the beneficiaries of quotas. These findings suggest that AAPs may have created a backlash against its beneficiaries by emphasizing gender-stereotypical or counterstereotypical traits. Thus, the framing of AAPs, for instance, as a matter of enhancing organizational performance, in the process of policy making and implementation, may be a crucial tool to countering potential backlash.

“I Want, Therefore I Am” – Anticipated Upward Mobility Reduces Ingroup Concern

Empirical findings suggest that members of socially disadvantaged groups who join a better-valued group through individual achievement tend to express low concern for their disadvantaged ingroup (e.g., denial of collective discrimination, low intent to initiate collective action). In the present research, we investigated whether this tendency occurs solely for individuals who have already engaged in social mobility, or also for individuals who psychologically prepare themselves, that is ‘anticipate’, social mobility. Moreover, we examined the role of group identification in this process. In two studies, we looked at the case of ‘frontier workers’, that is people who cross a national border every day to work in another country where the salaries are higher thereby achieving a better socio-economic status than in their home-country. Study 1 (N = 176) examined attitudes of French nationals (both the socially mobile and the non-mobile) and of Swiss nationals toward the non-mobile group. As expected, results showed that the mobile French had more negative attitudes than their non-mobile counterparts, but less negative attitudes than the Swiss. In Study 2 (N = 216), we examined ingroup concern at different stages of the social mobility process by comparing the attitudes of French people who worked in Switzerland (mobile individuals), with those who envisioned (anticipators), or not (non-anticipators), to work in Switzerland. The findings revealed that anticipators’ motivation to get personally involved in collective action for their French ingroup was lower than the non-anticipators’, but higher than the mobile individuals’. Moreover, we found that the decrease in ingroup concern across the different stages of social mobility was accounted for by a lower identification with the inherited ingroup. These findings corroborate the deleterious impact of social mobility on attitudes toward a low-status ingroup, and show that the decrease in ingroup concern already occurs among individuals who anticipate moving up the hierarchy. The discussion focuses on the role of the discounting of inherited identities in both the anticipation and the achievement of a higher-status identity.