Perceiving people as group members: The role of fit in the salience of social categorizations

Abstract

It was hypothesized that the perceived social category membership of others becomes salient as a description and explanation of their behaviour where their attitudes ‘fit’ the social categorization. Fit is defined as the degree to which the attributes of others are perceived to correlate with group membership in a normatively consistent direction. In Expt 1 subjects viewed tape—slide presentations of six‐person groups where gender composition (‘solo’ or ‘collective’) and the pattern of agreement (‘deviance’ or ‘conflict’) were manipulated in a 2 × 2 design to produce a correlation between gender and attitudes in the solo/deviance and collective/conflict conditions. In Expt 2, subjects viewed videos of a group of three arts and three science students in which the normative consistency of an arts target person (‘consistent’ or ‘inconsistent’) and the pattern of agreement (‘consensus' or ‘conflict’ or ‘deviance’) were manipulated in a 2 × 3 design to produce a normative correlation between faculty membership and attitudes in the consistent/conflict condition. Salience was measured by stereotyping in terms of, and attributions to, social category memberships. The results of both experiments were largely consistent with predictions.

Work Group Diversity and Group Performance: An Integrative Model and Research Agenda.

“…When people differ on more than one dimension, differences may either converge (i.e., be correlated) or cross-cut each other (i.e., be unrelated). When differences converge (e.g., all the male members of a work group are relatively young while all the female members are relatively old), social categorization (i.e., younger men vs. older women) is more likely then when differences along the dimensions cross-cut each other (e.g., older and younger group members are equally likely to be either male or female; Homan & van Knippenberg, 2003;Marcus-Newhall, Miller, Holtz, & Brewer, 1993;Oakes, Turner, & Haslam, 1991).…”

Rhetoric but whose reality? The influence of employability messages on employee mobility tactics and work group identification

“…And here studies investigating this aspect of social categorization theory have shown that it is only possible to exert influence over how others pursue a particular version of self esteem where the communicator and receiver are seen to belong to a common social membership. (Balaam and Haslam, 1998;Mackie et al, 1990;McGarty et al, 1993;1994;Oakes et al, 1991). Only those with whom we believe we share a common self definition will be seen as credible to inform us about relevant aspects of social reality and thus reduce our uncertainty.…”

The impact of salient self‐identities on relative deprivation and action intentions

“…Variations in the salience of personal versus group self-categorizations can have marked effects on attitudes and behaviour (Oakes and Turner, 1986;Oakes, Turner and Haslam, 1991;Turner et al, 1987). However, the specific conditions under which personal or group self-identities become salient and the interrelationship between these determinants remains unclear Hogg and McGarty, 1990).…”