Abstract:Picture Tyree and Jamal, who both view themselves as Black Americans. Whereas Jamal is very dark-skinned, Tyree's complexion is very light. This difference is also reflected in their daily life experiences. Most people agree that Jamal is Black; fewer people are that confident when judging Tyree. May these different perceptions and experiences influence how these two individuals generally think and feel about Black Americans relative to White Americans? The present research explores how categorizing oneself as… Show more
“…Specifically, empirical evidence in both experimental and in field studies shows that when in male-dominated work contexts women's gender identity was threatened, particularly low identifying women displayed Queen Bee responses (e.g., self-describe as highly masculine, oppose affirmative action and gender quota, display favouritism to promote a male over a female subordinate; Kaiser & Spalding, 2015). Similar moderation effects have been found for ethnic and racial minority groups (e.g., Bourguignon et al, 2020;Essien et al, 2020;Kirby et al, 2020, all in this issue; Derks et al, 2015) and among gay people (Bourguignon et al, 2020). Thus, in line with the social identity account, self-group distancing is a coping response most likely used by those for whom their stigmatized group membership was not that important in the first place-for them there is likely less to lose on dissociating from this social identity.…”
Despite equal rights, minority groups such as ethnic minorities, LGBTQ + people, and people with mental or physical disabilities face discrimination on a day‐to‐day basis in subtle and hard‐to‐recognize forms. As discrimination slips beneath the surface, it becomes difficult to fight the stigma using collective social identity coping mechanisms. Instead, individual mobility responses such as distancing the self from the stigmatized identity (“self‐group distancing”) become more viable as a way to improve one's individual standing. In this overview of the state of the art, we take a social identity lens to reflect on the current empirical knowledge base on self‐group distancing as a coping mechanism and provide a framework on what self‐group distancing is; when, where and why self‐group distancing likely occurs; and what its consequences are at the individual and the collective level. The contributions in this special issue provide novel insights into how these processes unfold, and serve as a basis to set a future research agenda, for example on what can be done to prevent self‐group distancing (i.e., interventions). Together, the insights highlight that while self‐group distancing may seem effective to (strategically and temporarily) alleviate discomfort or to improve one's own position, on a broader collective level and over time self‐group distancing tends to keep the current unequal social hierarchy in place.
“…Specifically, empirical evidence in both experimental and in field studies shows that when in male-dominated work contexts women's gender identity was threatened, particularly low identifying women displayed Queen Bee responses (e.g., self-describe as highly masculine, oppose affirmative action and gender quota, display favouritism to promote a male over a female subordinate; Kaiser & Spalding, 2015). Similar moderation effects have been found for ethnic and racial minority groups (e.g., Bourguignon et al, 2020;Essien et al, 2020;Kirby et al, 2020, all in this issue; Derks et al, 2015) and among gay people (Bourguignon et al, 2020). Thus, in line with the social identity account, self-group distancing is a coping response most likely used by those for whom their stigmatized group membership was not that important in the first place-for them there is likely less to lose on dissociating from this social identity.…”
Despite equal rights, minority groups such as ethnic minorities, LGBTQ + people, and people with mental or physical disabilities face discrimination on a day‐to‐day basis in subtle and hard‐to‐recognize forms. As discrimination slips beneath the surface, it becomes difficult to fight the stigma using collective social identity coping mechanisms. Instead, individual mobility responses such as distancing the self from the stigmatized identity (“self‐group distancing”) become more viable as a way to improve one's individual standing. In this overview of the state of the art, we take a social identity lens to reflect on the current empirical knowledge base on self‐group distancing as a coping mechanism and provide a framework on what self‐group distancing is; when, where and why self‐group distancing likely occurs; and what its consequences are at the individual and the collective level. The contributions in this special issue provide novel insights into how these processes unfold, and serve as a basis to set a future research agenda, for example on what can be done to prevent self‐group distancing (i.e., interventions). Together, the insights highlight that while self‐group distancing may seem effective to (strategically and temporarily) alleviate discomfort or to improve one's own position, on a broader collective level and over time self‐group distancing tends to keep the current unequal social hierarchy in place.
“…Thus, it is unclear whether and to what extent the magnitude and direction of intergroup evaluations among members of disadvantaged groups might depend on the types of implicit measures. Consequently, this limitation highlights the need for a meta-analysis synthesizing research on intergroup evaluations among disadvantaged groups across different implicit measures, which would allow for generalizations beyond one operationalization of the construct (see Essien & Degner, 2020).…”
The first author wishes to thank Marleen Stelter for her insights and helpful feedback on previous drafts of this manuscript and Carsten Sander for help with additional data preparation and literature search.
“…They may therefore be less identified with the group and find it easier to self‐distance, as we see in Cathy's account below. Consistent with the SIAH social mobility hypothesis, this process is aided by perceived permeability of group boundaries (Essien et al., 2020): I think it was good at the time (when psychosis worse) to be amongst others that experience the same thing and you know realise I'm not alone erm however some of the stories that I hear in there (HVN meetings) I just, you know, (1.0) I don't know, I haven't felt any benefit from keeping going. I haven't been going as often as I did Erm but erm yeah I know that from that group I know that people are in that state permanently and that's lots of sad stories.…”
People can derive health benefits from social group memberships. However, joining groups can be difficult for people experiencing psychosis due to the social impacts of the condition and public and internalised stigma. We interviewed a diverse group of 26 people experiencing psychosis and explored through thematic analysis their perceptions of how psychosis influenced social identity processes. Participants confirmed both the impact of psychosis on group processes and the value of group memberships for wellbeing. Empathy, understanding, and lack of judgement were perceived to be critical for group formation. Participants sought social validation in both pre‐existing and new relationships, including from others experiencing psychosis. A novel finding was the compartmentalising of the psychosis identity to facilitate periods of either greater connection or social mobility dependent on current mental state. Thus, this study suggests nuance to the application of the Social Cure for a highly stigmatised, yet fluctuating, condition such as psychosis.
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.
