2005
DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.292
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Experimentally manipulated high in‐group status can buffer personal self‐esteem against discrimination

Abstract: We present an experiment in which the relative status of an in-group and the discriminatory nature of a decision maker's intergroup behaviour (in-group-favouring/out-group-favouring/even-handed) were independently manipulated to observe their effects on self-esteem. Adopting a Social Identity Theory framework, and following from previous empirical work, we predicted that discrimination against one's in-group would lead to lower self-esteem among members of a low-status group but not among members of a high-sta… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
9
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
2
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These results are consistent with previous work from a social identity perspective that points to a connection between empowerment, social identity and feelings of wellbeing and satisfaction (Ashforth 2001;Haslam et al 2005 ;Platow, Byrne and Ryan 2005) as well as with the gerontological literature which has made connections between care-home autonomy, increased satisfaction and longer life (Barkay and Tabak 2002 ;Kasser and Ryan 1999;Lidz, Fischer and Arnold 1992). Nevertheless, the particular contribution of the present research is that it has established new theoretical and practical links between these two approaches.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…These results are consistent with previous work from a social identity perspective that points to a connection between empowerment, social identity and feelings of wellbeing and satisfaction (Ashforth 2001;Haslam et al 2005 ;Platow, Byrne and Ryan 2005) as well as with the gerontological literature which has made connections between care-home autonomy, increased satisfaction and longer life (Barkay and Tabak 2002 ;Kasser and Ryan 1999;Lidz, Fischer and Arnold 1992). Nevertheless, the particular contribution of the present research is that it has established new theoretical and practical links between these two approaches.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…This suggestion mirrors earlier research in which evaluative out-group favouritism produced self-esteem decreases (Hunter, Platow, Bell, Kypri, & Lewis, 1997). Although we may have expected that relatively high in-group status could buffer against such out-group favouritism (Platow, Byrne, & Ryan, 2005), our status manipulation clearly was not strong enough to overcome this negative differentiation. Although the current research cannot differentiate these processes, the logic of each follows from our broader theoretical analysis.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…This withholding of empowerment help under social identity threat stems from the role of in-group status in shaping self-definition and buttressing self-worth (Platow et al, 2005). In outlining his arguments, Nadler (2002), adopted the social identity assumption that, under specific circumstances (Bettencourt, Dorr, Charlton, & Hume, 2001), group members will pursue behavioural strategies that maximize the likelihood of retaining their group's relatively high status, especially when it is under threat.…”
Section: On the Role Of Intergroup Relationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Subsequently arguing from a social identity theory perspective (Tajfel & Turner, 1979), Nadler (2002Nadler & Halabi, 2006) made a nearly identical argument to Jackson and Esses (2000), but recognized that status differences between groups are neither solely nor always based on material differences. Intergroup status differences, within social identity theory, reflect relative rank-orderings along any valued prestige dimension, including relative task performance (Turner & Brown, 1978), abilities (Ellemers, van Knippenberg, de Vries, & Wilke, 1988), opportunities (Platow, Byrne, & Ryan, 2005), as well as economic advantage (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). Moreover, any threat, material or not, by the out-group to the status of the in-group can be grounds for withholding empowerment help (in Nadler's words, autonomous help) within Nadler's social identity theory analysis of helping.…”
Section: On the Role Of Intergroup Relationsmentioning
confidence: 99%