Recent research shows individuals' identification with in-groups to be psychologically important and socially consequential. However, there is little agreement about how identification should be conceptualized or measured. On the basis of previous work, the authors identified 5 specific components of in-group identification and offered a hierarchical 2-dimensional model within which these components are organized. Studies 1 and 2 used confirmatory factor analysis to validate the proposed model of self-definition (individual self-stereotyping, in-group homogeneity) and self-investment (solidarity, satisfaction, and centrality) dimensions, across 3 different group identities. Studies 3 and 4 demonstrated the construct validity of the 5 components by examining their (concurrent) correlations with established measures of in-group identification. Studies 5-7 demonstrated the predictive and discriminant validity of the 5 components by examining their (prospective) prediction of individuals' orientation to, and emotions about, real intergroup relations. Together, these studies illustrate the conceptual and empirical value of a hierarchical multicomponent model of in-group identification.
In three studies, we showed that increased in-group identification after (perceived or actual) group devaluation is an assertion of a (preexisting) positive social identity that counters the negative social identity implied in societal devaluation. Two studies with real-world groups used order manipulations to show that the (perceived or actual) devaluation of an in-group led individuals to increase their identification with this in-group. Group devaluation most strongly and consistently increased individuals' satisfaction, rather than solidarity, centrality, or the other components of Leach et al.'s (2008) measure of identification. A third study showed that giving Black Britons the opportunity to identify with this in-group immediately after evidence of its societal devaluation reduced feelings of vulnerability (but not rejection). Although there was consistent evidence of the (perceived or actual) group devaluation → group identification link, the group identification → (perceived) group devaluation link was much stronger. Implications for theory and research are discussed.
The present study explores the relative absence of expressive cues and the effect of contextual cues on the perception of emotions and its effect on attitudes. The visibility of expressive cues was manipulated by showing films displaying female targets whose faces were either fully visible, covered by a niqab, or partially visible (control condition). Targets expressed anger, shame, and happiness in the three different face conditions. Results show that perception of emotions is mainly affected by an absence of expressive cues: Covering the lower part of the face results in the perception of less happiness in happy videos and of more intense negative emotions in both happy and shame videos. This bias toward the perception of more negative emotions in covered faces mediates a negative attitude toward niqabs.
In two studies we examined whether forging a psychological bond with a nation’s colonization past facilitates the experience of positive and negative group-based self-conscious emotions as a function of a positive or negative manipulation of this past. Because people need to belong, we hypothesized that stronger family involvement in a nation’s colonization past (i.e. involved ancestors) evokes stronger a positive self-conscious emotions after positive descriptions of the nation’s colonizing past, and stronger negative self-conscious emotions after negative descriptions. In Study 1, we found support for these hypotheses in a real-life setting in which Dutch people actually found out whether their ancestors were involved in the colonization of Indonesia or not. In Study 2, we manipulated family involvement and valence of the past. Results offered support for the tested hypotheses. Implications of the results are discussed in relation to theories on identity and emotion.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.