Group Devaluation and Group Identification

Abstract

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 development of group influence on in-group identification: A multilevel approach

“…Identification with various types of groups can be conceptualized by a dimension that captures the extent to which individuals perceive themselves and other in-group members as a category (i.e., self-definition), and a dimension that captures the extent to which individuals' are psychologically invested in the ingroup (i.e., self-investment). Moreover, the differential influence of the group on individuals' self-definition and self-investment provides further evidence of the validity of the distinction between these two dimensions of identification (see also Leach, Rodriguez Mosquera, Vliek, & Hirt, 2010;Shepherd, Spears, & Manstead, 2013).…”

“…MPlus (Muthén & Muthén, 1998-2010 was used to perform a multigroup (between-studies) multilevel confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) that specified the two-dimensional model of in-group identification at both the individual (Level 1) and the group level (Level 2). In the model, the individual self-stereotyping and in-group homogeneity components loaded on a self-definition factor, and the solidarity and satisfaction components loaded on a self-investment factor.…”

Detecting and Experiencing Prejudice

“…Individuals draw closer to their group when they encounter prejudice or discrimination (Branscombe et al, 1999;Jetten, Branscombe, Schmitt, & Spears, 2001;Knowles & Gardner, 2008), and this has been shown to protect self-esteem (Bourguignon, Seron, Yzerbyt, & Herman, 2006), prevent depression (Sani, Herrara, Wakefield, Boroch, & Gulyas, 2012), and reduce destructive behavior in response to exclusion (Stock, Gibbonds, Walsh, & Gerrard, 2011). Importantly, individuals only increase group identification after encountering prejudice if they are already highly identified with their group (McCoy & Major, 2003;Wann & Branscombe, 1990), clarifying that identification is better seen as a resource than as a coping strategy (Leach, Rodriguez Mosquera, Vliek, & Hirt, 2010). Recent knowledge regarding some of the mechanisms underlying this protective effect clarifies that group identification promotes social support seeking (Haslam, O'Brien, Jetten, Vormedal, & Penna, 2005) and exposure to a positive definition of the group from the "inside," which helps combat more external negative views (Crabtree, Haslam, Postmes, & Haslam, 2010).…”

Collective identity assets for psychological well-being in Slovene minority and Italian majority adolescents in Italy

“…Research stemming from the social identity theory has comprehensively shown that ethnic identity becomes salient for minority members when interacting with the majority group (Smith & Leach, 2004;Waters, 1990). Therefore, the strong ethnic identity among Slovenes may reflect a tendency to stress their distinctiveness from the majority outgroup, and to maintain a clear sense of self within an inclusive group of moderate size and a positive self-view (Branscombe, Schmitt, & Harvey, 1999;Leonardelli & Brewer, 2001;Pickett & Leonardelli, 2006), as well as being a counter-reaction to perceived marginalization, discrimination and hostility (Leach, Rodriguez Mosquera, Vliek, & Hirt, 2010;Verkuyten & Nekuee, 1999). Interestingly, the Slovene ethnic identity did not contribute to well-being as much as the Italian national identity.…”