Following the best of us to help them: Group member prototypicality and collective action

Abstract

While considering the role of group-level factors as predictors of collective action, research has overlooked the role of group prototypes in determining willingness to engage in collective action. To begin to investigate this area, we conducted two correlational studies ( Ns = 141 and 98) in high schools examining the association between prototypical ingroup members’ desire to engage in collective action and participants’ collective action on behalf of a disadvantaged group (immigrants). Results showed a positive association between these two variables. We also investigated boundaries of this effect, finding that the association emerged when participants lacked personal experiences with the disadvantaged group (cross-group friendships; Study 1) or identified more with their ingroup, an effect also found when including a behavioral measure of collective action (Study 2). Intentions to follow the prototypical ingroup member emerged as the mediator (Study 2). It is worth noting that our methodology allowed us to assess prototypicality in a naturalistic context by calculating a metacontrast ratio for each group member, in line with self-categorization theory’s conceptualization of prototypicality. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications, with reference to the role of prototypicality as a means of social influence and to developing social norms in the context of collective action.

Sport identification, moral perceptions and collective action: A study with young football players

“…The present results integrate and extend scarce research on collective action in young samples (e.g., Di Bernardo et al, 2021; McKeown & Taylor, 2022; Taylor & McKeown, 2021; Vezzali et al, 2021). Consistent with the developmental intergroup perspective, which places importance on group processes and adherence to group norms (Abrams & Rutland, 2008), we showed that a positive social identity is associated with moral considerations and indirectly to relevant social outcomes, such as helping disadvantaged people.…”

(Not so) powerful allies? Decision makers’ reactions to advantaged group allies in collective action

“…Again, their effectiveness may be undermined by the fact that advantaged groups are usually motivated to maintain their privilege and the status quo and to resist attempts at social change (Osborne et al., 2019; Phillips & Lowery, 2018). This might lead to the perception that group members showing solidarity with disadvantaged groups and mobilizing for social change are not prototypical members of the group, thus limiting their influence (Di Bernardo et al., 2023; Knippenberg, 2019). Interestingly, research has found that advantaged group allies themselves show low levels of identification with their privileged ingroup (Lowery et al., 2006).…”

The role of common ingroup identity in promoting social change among tribes in Nigeria

“…Further, we did not assess the content of identity (such as its complexity or the values and moral traits characterizing it), which can instead be to understand how it relates to collective action (van Zomeren et al, 2018). For instance, a possible explanation for the key role played by common identification in the pursuit of social change can be found in the metacontrast principle (Turner et al, 1987), which can be used to calculate the degree of perceived prototypicality of the different subordinate identities (for an example of the use of the metacontrast principle applied to collective action, see Di Bernardo et al, 2023). It could be plausible that focusing on a broader social identity, individuals would be willing to engage in collective action only for highly prototypical subgroups.…”