H) Assimilation & Diversity: An Integrative Model of Subgroup Relations
Abstract
- Paper extends principles of Social Identity Theory (SIT) to address structural
differentiation within groups
- Subgroup identity threat (SGIT) plays a critical role in the nature of subgroup
relations (SR)
- SGIT is suggested to be biggest obstacle to social harmony
- Threats to social identity produce defensive reactions that result in conflict
- Social harmony best achieved by maintaining subgroup identities & locating them
within the context of a binding superordinate identity
Intro
- Groups in society are a diversity of subgroups defined by intragroup role
assignments or social category memberships
- Argued that an intergroup orientation exists only bc the groups share properties
at a more inclusive level
- Intergroup relations (IR) = a matter of subgroup relations within a
superordinate identity group
- Paper looks at the psychological processes emerging in this context
- Aims to present an integrative framework for understanding dynamics of subgroup
relations & identification
Key Ideas/propositions:
- Minimising distinctiveness threat is a prerequisite for harmonious subgroup
relations
- Superordinate identity should be viewed as a source of positive identity that
does NOT conflict/contradict important attributes of subgroup identity
- Social harmony most likely to be achieved by maintaining subgroup identities (not
weakening), provided they’re nested within a coherent superordinate identity
Social Identity Theory (SIT)
- Model with most to contribute regarding category membership and identity threat
- Original SIT focused on the relation between people striving for self esteem via
evaluating a positive social identity and people’s beliefs about the nature of IR
- Later, self-categorisation theory (SCT), added how social categorisation produced
group prototype-based depersonalisation that underpinned group behaviour
- SIT argues that people are motivated to identify themselves in group terms for:
1) Subjective uncertainty reduction
2) Enhancement of self-esteem
- People are motivated to avoid uncertainty about who they are, and how
they/others should behave
- Social categorisation satisfies this motivation - produces a social field that’s
structured & meaningful
- self-categorisation: the self in relation to other people
- Self-categorisation prescribes one’s perceptions, attitudes, feelings, behaviours
- Uncertainty motivates self categorisation & causes groups to
preserve/enhance their distinctiveness
, - This self-enhancement motive (self-esteem) imbues social categorisation with
valence (the intrinsic attractiveness (positive valence) or aversiveness (negative
valence) of social categories)
- Groups struggle over status and compete for positive social identity and self-esteem
for their members (in order to differentiate)
- SIT argues that people have attitudes and beliefs about the nature of the relation
between groups = ‘social beliefs’
- These beliefs focus on:
- The permeability of intergroup boundaries
- The relative status of groups
- The legitimacy & stability of such status relations
- These beliefs reflect a dynamic ideological contest between groups to justify or
challenge the norm/status quo
- Belief systems determine the strategies used by group members to pursue self-
enhancement & uncertainty reduction
- SIT recognises that intergroup comparisons often occur within the context of
higher order similarity (thus acknowledging subgroups)
- Turner et al put forward 3 levels of self-categorisation important to the self-
concept:
1) Human Identity
- The superordinate level of the self as human being
2) Social Identity
- The intermediate level of the self as a member of a social ingroup as
defined against other groups of people
3) Personal Identity
- The subordinate level of personal self-categorisations based on
interpersonal comparisons
Threat and Intersubgroup Relations
- Important to the SIT’s IR perspective is the need for positive intergroup
distinctiveness
- Strategies to achieve positive intergroup distinctiveness:
- Aggressive intergroup behaviours e.g. prejudice, stereotyping; (characterised by
fear, anxiety)
- Unaggressive intergroup behaviours, e.g. ingroup solidarity, harmless
competition; (relaxed & celebratory behaviours)
- Threat may be an important factor which motivates people to seek differentiation
in different ways (e.g. destructive vs relaxed)
- The search for distinctiveness becomes aggressive when it’s within the context
of identity threat
- In the absence of identity threat, distinctiveness is maintained through more harmless
strategies
- Argued threat to identity may be a cause of subgroup conflict within a
superordinate group context
- Social identity threat provokes behaviours that protect/enhance social identity
Abstract
- Paper extends principles of Social Identity Theory (SIT) to address structural
differentiation within groups
- Subgroup identity threat (SGIT) plays a critical role in the nature of subgroup
relations (SR)
- SGIT is suggested to be biggest obstacle to social harmony
- Threats to social identity produce defensive reactions that result in conflict
- Social harmony best achieved by maintaining subgroup identities & locating them
within the context of a binding superordinate identity
Intro
- Groups in society are a diversity of subgroups defined by intragroup role
assignments or social category memberships
- Argued that an intergroup orientation exists only bc the groups share properties
at a more inclusive level
- Intergroup relations (IR) = a matter of subgroup relations within a
superordinate identity group
- Paper looks at the psychological processes emerging in this context
- Aims to present an integrative framework for understanding dynamics of subgroup
relations & identification
Key Ideas/propositions:
- Minimising distinctiveness threat is a prerequisite for harmonious subgroup
relations
- Superordinate identity should be viewed as a source of positive identity that
does NOT conflict/contradict important attributes of subgroup identity
- Social harmony most likely to be achieved by maintaining subgroup identities (not
weakening), provided they’re nested within a coherent superordinate identity
Social Identity Theory (SIT)
- Model with most to contribute regarding category membership and identity threat
- Original SIT focused on the relation between people striving for self esteem via
evaluating a positive social identity and people’s beliefs about the nature of IR
- Later, self-categorisation theory (SCT), added how social categorisation produced
group prototype-based depersonalisation that underpinned group behaviour
- SIT argues that people are motivated to identify themselves in group terms for:
1) Subjective uncertainty reduction
2) Enhancement of self-esteem
- People are motivated to avoid uncertainty about who they are, and how
they/others should behave
- Social categorisation satisfies this motivation - produces a social field that’s
structured & meaningful
- self-categorisation: the self in relation to other people
- Self-categorisation prescribes one’s perceptions, attitudes, feelings, behaviours
- Uncertainty motivates self categorisation & causes groups to
preserve/enhance their distinctiveness
, - This self-enhancement motive (self-esteem) imbues social categorisation with
valence (the intrinsic attractiveness (positive valence) or aversiveness (negative
valence) of social categories)
- Groups struggle over status and compete for positive social identity and self-esteem
for their members (in order to differentiate)
- SIT argues that people have attitudes and beliefs about the nature of the relation
between groups = ‘social beliefs’
- These beliefs focus on:
- The permeability of intergroup boundaries
- The relative status of groups
- The legitimacy & stability of such status relations
- These beliefs reflect a dynamic ideological contest between groups to justify or
challenge the norm/status quo
- Belief systems determine the strategies used by group members to pursue self-
enhancement & uncertainty reduction
- SIT recognises that intergroup comparisons often occur within the context of
higher order similarity (thus acknowledging subgroups)
- Turner et al put forward 3 levels of self-categorisation important to the self-
concept:
1) Human Identity
- The superordinate level of the self as human being
2) Social Identity
- The intermediate level of the self as a member of a social ingroup as
defined against other groups of people
3) Personal Identity
- The subordinate level of personal self-categorisations based on
interpersonal comparisons
Threat and Intersubgroup Relations
- Important to the SIT’s IR perspective is the need for positive intergroup
distinctiveness
- Strategies to achieve positive intergroup distinctiveness:
- Aggressive intergroup behaviours e.g. prejudice, stereotyping; (characterised by
fear, anxiety)
- Unaggressive intergroup behaviours, e.g. ingroup solidarity, harmless
competition; (relaxed & celebratory behaviours)
- Threat may be an important factor which motivates people to seek differentiation
in different ways (e.g. destructive vs relaxed)
- The search for distinctiveness becomes aggressive when it’s within the context
of identity threat
- In the absence of identity threat, distinctiveness is maintained through more harmless
strategies
- Argued threat to identity may be a cause of subgroup conflict within a
superordinate group context
- Social identity threat provokes behaviours that protect/enhance social identity
