When Group Memberships are Negative: The Concept, Measurement, and Behavioral Implications of Psychological Disidentification

Abstract

This research introduces a multi-component model of ingroup disidentification that distinguishes three disidentification components (detachment, dissatisfaction, and dissimilarity). In Studies 1a (N = 168) and 1b (N = 215), the authors developed a measurement scale that assesses these components, and examined alternative factorial structures. Study 2 (N = 115) provides evidence that the disidentification scale performs better at distinguishing between disidentification and nonidentification than an established identification scale. Using additional data from Studies 1b and 2, Studies 3a and 3b examined emotions and behavioral intentions as correlates of disidentification and revealed that the disidentification components predict negative ingroup-directed behavioral intentions (active harm, passive harm, and passive facilitation) and identity concealment over and above measures of identification. Theoretical implications for research on social stigma and social change are discussed.

The Social Identity Model of Cessation Maintenance: Formulation and initial evidence

“…Ex-smokers may have a clear identity construed as similarity to other ex-smokers and hold a prototype of what constitutes an ex-smoker constructed as a negation of addiction identities (e.g. 'dis-identification' see Becker & Tausch, 2014). Such identities are nourished by sources of social support like the experiences of ex-smokers in their social circles.…”

Perceived Status and National Belonging: The Case of Russian Speakers in Finland and Estonia

“…If immigrants and other minority members perceive that their ingroup is treated with less respect than it deserves, they will be less motivated to belong to the social system that they perceive to be unfair (cf., group engagement model, Tyler & Blader, 2003). In this case, they are likely to react to this rejection by distancing themselves psychologically from the national majority group and society which it represents (for studies on national disidentification, see Jasinskaja-Lahti et al, 2009, andVerkuyten, 2012; for a distinction between dis-and nonidentification, see Becker & Tausch, 2014).…”

Keeping up appearances: Strategic information exchange by disidentified group members

“…As disidentification and social identification are driven by feelings of coherence versus contradiction to the group [22,23,43–45], the relationship with the group was manipulated using a similarity versus difference manipulation on a relevant topic. Participants were informed that the university is proposing to introduce a “veggie day” in the university cafeteria and that the university is collecting the opinion of several students on this matter.…”

“…Thus, it is expected that identified group members act in the interest of the group (i.e., share more information) in information exchange. Disidentified group members, on the other hand, demonstrate anti-normative behaviour [21,30,31], and even negative behaviour that harms the group interest directly [22,23]. Therefore, it is expected that disidentified group members would be motivated to undermine the process of information exchange.…”