Intergroup Attitudes as a Function of Different Dimensions of Group Identification and Perceived Intergroup Conflict

Three-Dimensional Strength of Identification Across Group Memberships: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis

“…Ellemers et al (1999) reported findings indicating three factors of social identification; group self esteem, self categorization and commitment to the group. Recently, Jackson (2002) presented evidence for three factors very similar to those reported by Cameron (2004) self categorization (a cognitive component), evaluation of the group (an affective component) and perceptions of solidarity (ingroup Three-Dimensional Strength of Identification 4 ties component). While the factor structure of social identity does vary across these studies, the concept of multidimensionality is in line with Tajfel's (1978) original definition of the construct, which describes social identity as deriving from knowledge of group membership, and the value and emotional significance attached to that membership.…”

“…Deaux (1996) in a review of the social identification literature argues that cognitive processes, emotional associations and interdependence between group members are all important aspects of the social identification process (see Deaux, 1996, for more detail). Several authors have found empirical evidence for the multidimensional nature of social identification (Cameron & Lalonde, 2001;Ellemers, Kortekaas, & Ouwerkerk, 1999;Hinkle, Taylor, Fox-Cardamone, & Crook, 1989;Jackson, 2002;Jackson & Smith, 1999). Karasawa (1991) distinguished between identification with the group and identification with group members.…”

“…Cognitive centrality, is the cognitive prominence of a given group membership, and is similar to the self categorization dimensions which emerged in Ellmers et al's. (1999) and Jackson's (2002) findings. Ingroup affect, refers to the emotional evaluation of that group membership, encapsulating the affective dimension which has emerged in many studies (e.g.…”

“…Ingroup affect, refers to the emotional evaluation of that group membership, encapsulating the affective dimension which has emerged in many studies (e.g. Ellmers et al, 1999;Jackson, 2002;Hinkle 1989). Finally, Ingroup ties, refers to the perception of similarity and bonds with other group members, which again can be seen to have much in common with the findings of previous research (e.g.…”

Here or there? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility initiatives: Egocentric tendencies and their moderators

“…Satisfaction with group membership was measured by "I feel good about being a Californian/an American/a global citizen/a member of a US university," and "I am proud to be a ..." (Ellemers et al 1999;Luhtanen and Crocker 1992;Sellers et al 1998). The salience of the group membership was measured by "I often think of the fact that I am a ..." and "Being ... is an important part of my identity" (Jackson 2002). Solidarity with the group was measured by "I feel strong ties to ..." (Cameron 2004) and "I have a strong attachment to ..." (Sellers et al 1998).…”