You are on page 1of 1028

Group&Processes

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF

Intergroup Relations
Editorial Board
Editors
John M. Levine Michael A. Hogg
University of Pittsburgh Claremont Graduate University

Managing Editor
Danielle L. Blaylock
Claremont Graduate University

Associate Editors
Linda Argote Norbert L. Kerr
Carnegie Mellon University Michigan State

Marilynn B. Brewer Richard L. Moreland


Ohio State University University of Pittsburgh

John F. Dovidio Cecilia L. Ridgeway


Yale University Stanford University
1& 2

G&
ENCYCLOPEDIA OF

roup Processes
Intergroup Relations

JOHN M. LEVINE MICHAEL A. HOGG editors


University of Pittsburgh Claremont Graduate University
Copyright © 2010 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical,
including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the
publisher.
For information:
SAGE Publications, Inc.
2455 Teller Road
Thousand Oaks, California 91320
E-mail: order@sagepub.com
 
SAGE Publications Ltd.
1 Oliver’s Yard
55 City Road
London EC1Y 1SP
United Kingdom
 
SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ltd.
B 1/I 1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area
Mathura Road, New Delhi 110 044
India

SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Pte. Ltd.


33 Pekin Street #02-01
Far East Square
Singapore 048763
 
Printed in the United States of America

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data


 
Encyclopedia of group processes and intergroup relations/John M. Levine, Michael A. Hogg, editors.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-1-4129-4208-9 (cloth)
1. Social groups—Encyclopedias. 2. Intergroup relations—Encyclopedias. I. Levine, John M. II. Hogg, Michael A.,
1954-

HM716.E53 2010
302.303—dc22 2009026419

This book is printed on acid-free paper.


 
09   10   11   12   13   10   9   8   7   6   5   4   3   2   1

Publisher: Rolf A. Janke


Acquisitions Editor: Michael Carmichael
Editorial Assistant: Michele Thompson
Developmental Editors: Diana E. Axelsen, Carole A. Maurer
Reference Systems Manager: Leticia Gutierrez
Reference Systems Coordinator: Laura Notton
Production Editor: Kate Schroeder
Copy Editors: Bonnie Freeman, Jamie Robinson
Typesetter: C&M Digitals (P) Ltd.
Proofreaders: Kris Bergstad, Sandy Zilka Livingston, Penny Sippel
Indexer: Joan Shapiro
Cover Designer: Candice Harman
Marketing Manager: Amberlyn McKay
Contents

Volume 1
List of Entries   vii
Reader’s Guide   xi
About the Editors   xxi
Contributors   xxiii
Introduction   xxxiii

Entries
A 1 F 269
B 53 G 293
C 67 H 395
D 185 I 411
E 235 J 489

Volume 2
List of Entries   vii

Entries
K 507 S 723
L 511 T 897
M 549 U 941
N 591 V 947
O 613 W 953
P 635 X 959
R 675
Index   963
List of Entries

Action Research Collectivism/Individualism


Affect Control Theory Common-Identity/Common-Bond Groups
Affirmative Action Common Ingroup Identity Model
Ageism Common Knowledge Effect
Allport, Gordon Commons Dilemma
Ambivalent Sexism Communication Networks
Anticonformity Compliance
Anti-Semitism Computer-Mediated Communication
Apartheid Computer Simulation
Asch, Solomon Conformity
Assimilation and Acculturation Conservatism
Attachment Theory Conspiracy Theories
Attitudes Toward Women Scale Contingency Theories of Leadership
Attribution Biases Cooperation and Competition
Authoritarian Personality Cooperative Learning
Aversive Racism Cross-Categorization
Crowding
Banality of Evil Crowds
Black Sheep Effect Cults
Boundary Spanning Culture
Brainstorming Culture of Honor
Bystander Effect
Decategorization
Categorization Dehumanization/Infrahumanization
Charismatic Leadership Deindividuation
Children: Stereotypes and Prejudice Delphi Technique
Children’s Groups Depersonalization
Civil Rights Legislation Desegregation
Civil Rights Movement Deutsch, Morton
Cliques Deviance
Coalitions Discrimination
Cognitive Consistency Distributive Justice
Collaboration Technology Diversity
Collective Guilt Dogmatism
Collective Induction Dominance Hierarchies
Collective Movements and Protest Dyads
Collective Self Dynamical Systems Approach

vii
viii List of Entries

Emergent Norm Theory Hate Crimes


Entitativity Hidden Profile Task
Escalation of Commitment Holocaust
Essentialism Homophily
Ethnicity Homophobia
Ethnocentrism
Ethnolinguistic Vitality Identification and Commitment
Eugenics Identity Control Theory
Evolutionary Psychology Ideology
Experimentation Idiosyncrasy Credit
Extended Contact Effect Illusion of Group Effectivity
Illusory Correlation
Fads and Fashions Immigration
False Consensus Effect Implicit Association Test (IAT)
Families Implicit Prejudice
Faultlines Inclusion/Exclusion
Feminism Informational Influence
Festinger, Leon Ingroup Allocation Bias
Free Riding Initiation Rites
Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis Innovation
Institutionalized Bias
Gangs Interactionist Theories of Leadership
Gender and Behavior Interaction Process Analysis
Gender Roles Interdependence Theory
Genocide Intergroup Anxiety
Graduated Reciprocation in Tension Reduction Intergroup Contact Theory
(GRIT) Intergroup Emotions Theory
Great Person Theory of Leadership Intergroup Empathy
Group Boundaries Intergroup Violence
Group Cohesiveness Interindividual–Intergroup Discontinuity
Group Composition Islamophobia
Group Development
Group Dissolution J-Curve Hypothesis
Group Ecology Jigsaw Classroom Technique
Group Emotions Job Design
Group Formation Juries
Group Learning Justice
Group Memory Just World Hypothesis
Group Mind
Group Motivation Köhler Effect
Group Performance
Group Polarization Language and Intergroup Relations
Group Position Theory Leader Categorization Theory
Group Potency Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory
Group Problem Solving and Decision Making Leadership
Group Socialization Legitimation
Group Structure Leniency Contract
Group Task Levels of Analysis
Groupthink Lewin, Kurt
List of Entries ix

Linguistic Category Model (LCM) Realistic Group Conflict Theory


Linguistic Intergroup Bias (LIB) Reference Groups
Looking-Glass Self Referent Informational Influence Theory
Loyalty Relational Cohesion Theory
Relational Model of Authority in Groups
Mediation Relative Deprivation
Mergers Research Methods and Issues
Minimal Group Effect Reverse Discrimination
Minority Coping Strategies Right Wing Authoritarianism
Minority Groups in Society Ringelmann Effect
Minority Influence Roles
Modern Forms of Prejudice Role Transitions
Modern Racism Romance of Leadership
Modern Sexism Rumor
Moscovici, Serge
Multiculturalism Scapegoating
Multiple Identities Schisms
Mutual Intergroup Differentiation Model Self-Categorization Theory
Self-Esteem
Nationalism and Patriotism Self-Fulfilling Prophecy
Need for Belonging Self-Managing Teams
Need for Closure Self-Stereotyping
Need for Power Sensitivity Training Groups
Negotiation and Bargaining Sexism
Normative Influence Sexual Harassment
Norms Shared Mental Models
Obedience to Authority Sherif, Muzafer
Opinion Deviance Slavery
Optimal Distinctiveness Social Class
Organizations Social Comparison Theory
Ostracism Social Compensation
Outgroup Homogeneity Effect Social Darwinism
Social Decision Schemes
Path–Goal Theory of Leadership Social Deviance
Perceived Group Variability Social Dilemmas
Personality Theories of Leadership Social Dominance Theory
Personnel Turnover Social Entrainment
Pluralistic Ignorance Social Exchange in Networks and Groups
Power Social Facilitation
Power–Dependence Theory Social Identity Model of Deindividuation Effects
Prejudice Social Identity Theory
Prisoner’s Dilemma Social Identity Theory of Leadership
Procedural Justice Social Impact Theory
Process Consultation Social Loafing
Process Gain and Loss Socially Shared Cognition
Protestant Work Ethic Social Mobility
Social Networks
Racial Ambivalence Theory Social Relations Model
Racism Social Representations
x List of Entries

Socioemotional and Task Behavior Team Negotiation


Sociometer Model Team Performance Assessment
Sociometric Choice Team Reflexivity
Sports Teams Teams
Stanford Prison Experiment Territoriality
Status Terrorism
Status Characteristics/Expectation States Theory Terror Management Theory
Status Construction Theory Therapy Groups
Stepladder Technique Tokenism
Stereotype Threat Transactional Leadership Theories
Stereotyping Transactive Memory Systems
Stigma Transformational Leadership Theories
Subjective Group Dynamics Trust
Subtyping
Sucker Effect Ultimate Attribution Error
Support Groups Uncertainty-Identity Theory
Survey Methods
Symbolic Interactionism Vertical Dyad Linkage Model
Symbolic Racism Virtual/Internet Groups
SYMLOG
System Justification Theory Weightism
System Theory Work Teams

Tajfel, Henri Xenophobia


Team Building
Reader’s Guide

Cognitions and Feelings Group Polarization


Affect Control Theory Group Position Theory
Ageism Group Potency
Ambivalent Sexism Group Problem Solving and Decision Making
Anti-Semitism Groupthink
Attachment Theory Hidden Profile Task
Attitudes Toward Women Scale Homophobia
Attribution Biases Identity Control Theory
Aversive Racism Ideology
Brainstorming Illusion of Group Effectivity
Categorization Illusory Correlation
Children: Stereotypes and Prejudice Implicit Association Test (IAT)
Cognitive Consistency Implicit Prejudice
Collective Guilt Informational Influence
Collective Induction Intergroup Anxiety
Collective Self Intergroup Emotions Theory
Collectivism/Individualism Intergroup Empathy
Common Knowledge Effect Islamophobia
Conservatism Justice
Conspiracy Theories Language and Intergroup Relations
Cross-Categorization Leader Categorization Theory
Culture Linguistic Category Model (LCM)
Culture of Honor Linguistic Intergroup Bias (LIB)
Decategorization Modern Forms of Prejudice
Dehumanization/Infrahumanization Modern Racism
Deindividuation Modern Sexism
Depersonalization Multiple Identities
Distributive Justice Need for Closure
Dogmatism Outgroup Homogeneity Effect
Entitativity Perceived Group Variability
Essentialism Pluralistic Ignorance
Ethnocentrism Prejudice
False Consensus Effect Procedural Justice
Group Cohesiveness Protestant Work Ethic
Group Emotions Racial Ambivalence Theory
Group Learning Racism
Group Memory Relational Cohesion Theory
Group Mind Rumor

xi
xii Reader’s Guide

Self-Categorization Theory Group Structure


Self-Esteem Inclusion/Exclusion
Self-Fulfilling Prophecy Ingroup Allocation Bias
Self-Stereotyping Interdependence Theory
Sexism Interindividual–Intergroup Discontinuity
Shared Mental Models Jigsaw Classroom Technique
Social Comparison Theory Justice
Social Decision Schemes Mediation
Social Dominance Theory Minimal Group Effect
Socially Shared Cognition Minority Influence
Social Representations Moscovici, Serge
Sociometer Model Need for Power
Stereotype Threat Negotiation and Bargaining
Stereotyping Norms
Subtyping Opinion Deviance
Symbolic Racism Power
System Justification Theory Power–Dependence Theory
Team Reflexivity Prisoner’s Dilemma
Transactive Memory Systems Procedural Justice
Ultimate Attribution Error Relational Cohesion Theory
Weightism Relational Model of Authority in Groups
Xenophobia Relative Deprivation
Schisms
Sensitivity Training Groups
Conflict and Cooperation Within Groups Sexual Harassment
Anticonformity Sherif, Muzafer
Asch, Solomon Social Decision Schemes
Black Sheep Effect Social Dilemmas
Cliques Sports Teams
Coalitions Stanford Prison Experiment
Collaboration Technology Subjective Group Dynamics
Commons Dilemma Tajfel, Henri
Conformity Team Negotiation
Cooperation and Competition Therapy Groups
Cooperative Learning Trust
Deutsch, Morton Virtual/Internet Groups
Deviance Work Teams
Distributive Justice
Dominance Hierarchies
Emergent Norm Theory Group Decision Making
Escalation of Commitment Anticonformity
Evolutionary Psychology Asch, Solomon
Faultlines Brainstorming
Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis Cliques
Graduated Reciprocation in Tension Reduction Coalitions
(GRIT) Collective Induction
Group Cohesiveness Common Knowledge Effect
Group Emotions Computer Simulation
Group Problem Solving and Decision Making Conformity
Reader’s Guide xiii

Delphi Technique Group Performance and Problem Solving


Dominance Hierarchies Boundary Spanning
Escalation of Commitment Brainstorming
Graduated Reciprocation in Tension Reduction Charismatic Leadership
(GRIT) Collaboration Technology
Group Cohesiveness Communication Networks
Group Composition Computer-Mediated Communication
Group Emotions Contingency Theories of Leadership
Group Memory Cooperative Learning
Group Mind Deindividuation
Group Motivation Delphi Technique
Group Performance Distributive Justice
Group Polarization Diversity
Group Problem Solving and Decision Making Dominance Hierarchies
Group Structure Dynamical Systems Approach
Group Task Emergent Norm Theory
Groupthink Escalation of Commitment
Hidden Profile Task Faultlines
Idiosyncrasy Credit Free Riding
Inclusion/Exclusion Gender and Behavior
Informational Influence Gender Roles
Juries Great Person Theory of Leadership
Leniency Contract Group Boundaries
Mediation Group Cohesiveness
Minority Influence Group Composition
Moscovici, Serge Group Development
Need for Closure Group Dissolution
Negotiation and Bargaining Group Ecology
Normative Influence Group Emotions
Norms Group Formation
Obedience to Authority Group Learning
Opinion Deviance Group Mind
Power Group Motivation
Power–Dependence Theory Group Potency
Reference Groups Group Problem Solving and Decision Making
Referent Informational Influence Theory Group Socialization
Relational Cohesion Theory Group Structure
Relational Model of Authority in Groups Group Task
Shared Mental Models Groupthink
Sherif, Muzafer Hidden Profile Task
Social Decision Schemes Identification and Commitment
Social Networks Illusion of Group Effectivity
Status Inclusion/Exclusion
Status Characteristics/Expectations Initiation Rites
States Theory Innovation
Status Construction Theory Interactionist Theories of Leadership
Team Negotiation Interaction Process Analysis
Trust Job Design
Work Teams Justice
xiv Reader’s Guide

Köhler Effect Transformational Leadership Theories


Leader Categorization Theory Trust
Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory Vertical Dyad Linkage Model
Leadership Virtual/Internet Groups
Loyalty Work Teams
Mergers
Negotiation and Bargaining
Norms Group Structure
Obedience to Authority Affirmative Action
Organizations Apartheid
Path–Goal Theory of Leadership Assimilation and Acculturation
Personality Theories of Leadership Attachment Theory
Personnel Turnover Boundary Spanning
Power Cliques
Power–Dependence Theory Coalitions
Procedural Justice Common-Identity/Common-Bond Groups
Process Consultation Communication Networks
Process Gain and Loss Computer-Mediated Communication
Relational Cohesion Theory Crowding
Relational Model of Authority in Groups Crowds
Ringelmann Effect Deviance
Roles Diversity
Role Transitions Dominance Hierarchies
Romance of Leadership Dynamical Systems Approach
Self-Managing Teams Emergent Norm Theory
Shared Mental Models Faultlines
Social Compensation Gender and Behavior
Social Entrainment Gender Roles
Social Exchange in Networks and Groups Group Boundaries
Social Facilitation Group Cohesiveness
Social Identity Model of Deindividuation Effects Group Composition
Social Identity Theory Group Development
Social Identity Theory of Leadership Group Dissolution
Social Impact Theory Group Formation
Social Loafing Group Position Theory
Socially Shared Cognition Group Socialization
Socioemotional and Task Behavior Group Structure
Sports Teams Homophily
Status Inclusion/Exclusion
Status Characteristics/Expectations States Theory Initiation Rites
Status Construction Theory Job Design
Stepladder Technique Legitimation
Sucker Effect Mergers
Team Building Norms
Team Negotiation Opinion Deviance
Team Performance Assessment Organizations
Team Reflexivity Ostracism
Teams Personnel Turnover
Transactional Leadership Theories Relational Cohesion Theory
Transactive Memory Systems Roles
Reader’s Guide xv

Role Transitions Minority Groups in Society


Schisms Multiple Identities
Shared Mental Models Mutual Intergroup Differentiation Model
Slavery Nationalism and Patriotism
Social Class Need for Belonging
Social Mobility Optimal Distinctiveness
Social Networks Perceived Group Variability
Social Relations Model Reference Groups
Sociometric Choice Referent Informational Influence Theory
Sports Teams Self-Categorization Theory
Status Self-Esteem
Status Characteristics/Expectation States Theory Self-Stereotyping
Status Construction Theory Social Identity Model of Deindividuation Effects
Stepladder Technique Social Identity Theory of Leadership
SYMLOG Sociometer Model
System Theory Subjective Group Dynamics
Team Building Symbolic Interactionism
Territoriality Tajfel, Henri
Tokenism Uncertainty-Identity Theory
Virtual/Internet Groups
Work Teams
Influence and Persuasion
Anticonformity
Identity and Self Asch, Solomon
Assimilation and Acculturation Bystander Effect
Black Sheep Effect Charismatic Leadership
Categorization Cognitive Consistency
Collective Guilt Collective Induction
Collective Movements and Protest Collective Movements and Protest
Collective Self Common Knowledge Effect
Collectivism/Individualism Compliance
Common-Identity/Common-Bond Groups Conformity
Common Ingroup Identity Model Contingency Theories of Leadership
Cross-Categorization Culture
Deindividuation Deviance
Depersonalization Dominance Hierarchies
Ethnicity Dynamical Systems Approach
Ethnolinguistic Vitality Emergent Norm Theory
Extended Contact Effect Fads and Fashions
Gender and Behavior False Consensus Effect
Gender Roles Festinger, Leon
Group Position Theory Gender and Behavior
Identification and Commitment Great Person Theory of Leadership
Identity Control Theory Group Cohesiveness
Ingroup Allocation Bias Group Mind
Interindividual–Intergroup Discontinuity Group Polarization
Looking-Glass Self Group Problem Solving and Decision Making
Loyalty Groupthink
Minimal Group Effect Hidden Profile Task
Minority Coping Strategies Identification and Commitment
xvi Reader’s Guide

Idiosyncrasy Credit Transformational Leadership Theories


Inclusion/Exclusion Trust
Informational Influence Vertical Dyad Linkage Model
Innovation
Interactionist Theories of Leadership
Leader Categorization Theory Intergroup Relations in Society
Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory Affirmative Action
Leadership Ageism
Leniency Contract Allport, Gordon
Lewin, Kurt Ambivalent Sexism
Loyalty Anti-Semitism
Mediation Apartheid
Minority Influence Assimilation and Acculturation
Moscovici, Serge Attitudes Toward Women Scale
Need for Closure Authoritarian Personality
Need for Power Aversive Racism
Negotiation and Bargaining Banality of Evil
Normative Influence Black Sheep Effect
Norms Children: Stereotypes and Prejudice
Obedience to Authority Civil Rights Legislation
Opinion Deviance Civil Rights Movement
Ostracism Collective Guilt
Path–Goal Theory of Leadership Collective Movements and Protest
Personality Theories of Leadership Common Ingroup Identity Model
Pluralistic Ignorance Conspiracy Theories
Power Cooperative Learning
Reference Groups Cults
Referent Informational Influence Theory Desegregation
Relational Cohesion Theory Deviance
Ringelmann Effect Discrimination
Romance of Leadership Distributive Justice
Rumor Diversity
Sherif, Muzafer Ethnicity
Social Compensation Ethnocentrism
Social Decision Schemes Ethnolinguistic Vitality
Social Exchange in Networks and Groups Eugenics
Social Facilitation Evolutionary Psychology
Social Identity Model of Deindividuation Effects Extended Contact Effect
Social Identity Theory Feminism
Social Identity Theory of Leadership Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis
Social Impact Theory Gangs
Social Loafing Genocide
Status Graduated Reciprocation in Tension Reduction
Status Characteristics/Expectation States Theory (GRIT)
Status Construction Theory Group Emotions
SYMLOG Group Position Theory
Team Negotiation Hate Crimes
Terrorism Holocaust
Therapy Groups Homophobia
Transactional Leadership Theories Ideology
Reader’s Guide xvii

Immigration Symbolic Racism


Ingroup Allocation Bias System Justification Theory
Institutionalized Bias Tajfel, Henri
Intergroup Anxiety Territoriality
Intergroup Contact Theory Terrorism
Intergroup Emotions Theory Terror Management Theory
Intergroup Empathy Tokenism
Intergroup Violence Weightism
Islamophobia Xenophobia
J-Curve Hypothesis
Jigsaw Classroom Technique
Justice Methodology
Just World Hypothesis Action Research
Language and Intergroup Relations Ambivalent Sexism
Linguistic Category Model (LCM) Attitudes Toward Women Scale
Linguistic Intergroup Bias (LIB) Authoritarian Personality
Mergers Computer Simulation
Minimal Group Effect Experimentation
Minority Coping Strategies Implicit Association Test (IAT)
Minority Groups in Society Interaction Process Analysis
Modern Forms of Prejudice Levels of Analysis
Modern Racism Modern Racism
Modern Sexism Modern Sexism
Multiculturalism Need for Closure
Mutual Intergroup Differentiation Model Need for Power
Nationalism and Patriotism Research Methods and Issues
Prejudice Right Wing Authoritarianism
Procedural Justice Social Relations Model
Protestant Work Ethic Sociometric Choice
Racial Ambivalence Theory Survey Methods
Racism SYMLOG
Realistic Group Conflict Theory
Relative Deprivation
Right Wing Authoritarianism Organizations
Scapegoating Affirmative Action
Schisms Assimilation and Acculturation
Self-Categorization Theory Boundary Spanning
Self-Fulfilling Prophecy Charismatic Leadership
Sexism Cliques
Sexual Harassment Coalitions
Sherif, Muzafer Collaboration Technology
Slavery Collective Self
Social Class Communication Networks
Social Darwinism Computer-Mediated Communication
Social Deviance Contingency Theories of Leadership
Social Dominance Theory Cooperation and Competition
Social Identity Theory Culture
Stereotype Threat Deviance
Stigma Distributive Justice
Subjective Group Dynamics Diversity
xviii Reader’s Guide

Dominance Hierarchies Schisms


Dynamical Systems Approach Self-Managing Teams
Escalation of Commitment Sexual Harassment
Faultlines Social Compensation
Free Riding Social Exchange in Networks and Groups
Gender and Behavior Social Facilitation
Gender Roles Social Impact Theory
Great Person Theory of Leadership Social Loafing
Group Boundaries Socially Shared Cognition
Group Cohesiveness Social Networks
Group Composition Socioemotional and Task Behavior
Group Ecology Status
Group Learning Status Characteristics/Expectation States Theory
Group Motivation Status Construction Theory
Group Performance Sucker Effect
Group Socialization System Theory
Group Structure Team Building
Group Task Team Negotiation
Homophily Team Performance Assessment
Identification and Commitment Team Reflexivity
Ideology Teams
Initiation Rites Tokenism
Innovation Transactional Leadership Theories
Interactionist Theories of Leadership Transformational Leadership Theories
Job Design Trust
Justice Vertical Dyad Linkage Model
Leader Categorization Theory Virtual/Internet Groups
Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory Work Teams
Leadership
Loyalty
Mergers Theory
Multiple Identities Affect Control Theory
Negotiation and Bargaining Allport, Gordon
Norms Ambivalent Sexism
Obedience to Authority Asch, Solomon
Organizations Attachment Theory
Path–Goal Theory of Leadership Authoritarian Personality
Personality Theories of Leadership Aversive Racism
Personnel Turnover Charismatic Leadership
Power Cognitive Consistency
Power–Dependence Theory Contingency Theories of Leadership
Procedural Justice Deutsch, Morton
Process Consultation Dynamical Systems Approach
Process Gain and Loss Emergent Norm Theory
Protestant Work Ethic Eugenics
Relational Cohesion Theory Evolutionary Psychology
Relational Model of Authority in Groups Festinger, Leon
Roles Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis
Role Transitions Great Person Theory of Leadership
Romance of Leadership Group Position Theory
Reader’s Guide xix

Identity Control Theory System Justification Theory


Interactionist Theories of Leadership System Theory
Interdependence Theory Tajfel, Henri
Intergroup Contact Theory Terror Management Theory
Intergroup Emotions Theory Transactional Leadership Theories
Justice Transformational Leadership Theories
Just World Hypothesis Uncertainty-Identity Theory
Leader Categorization Theory Vertical Dyad Linkage Model
Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory
Lewin, Kurt
Modern Forms of Prejudice Types of Groups and Subgroups
Modern Racism Children’s Groups
Modern Sexism Cliques
Moscovici, Serge Coalitions
Mutual Intergroup Differentiation Model Collective Movements and Protest
Need for Belonging Common-Identity/Common-Bond Groups
Need for Closure Communication Networks
Need for Power Computer-Mediated Communication
Optimal Distinctiveness Cooperative Learning
Path–Goal Theory of Leadership Crowds
Personality Theories of Leadership Cults
Power–Dependence Theory Dominance Hierarchies
Racial Ambivalence Theory Dyads
Realistic Group Conflict Theory Ethnicity
Referent Informational Influence Theory Families
Relational Cohesion Theory Gangs
Relational Model of Authority in Groups Jigsaw Classroom Technique
Right Wing Authoritarianism Juries
Self-Categorization Theory Minority Groups in Society
Sherif, Muzafer Organizations
Social Decision Schemes Reference Groups
Social Dominance Theory Schisms
Social Identity Model of Deindividuation Effects Self-Managing Teams
Social Identity Theory Sensitivity Training Groups
Social Identity Theory of Leadership Sports Teams
Social Impact Theory Stepladder Technique
Sociometer Model Support Groups
Status Characteristics/Expectation States Teams
Theory Therapy Groups
Status Construction Theory Tokenism
Subjective Group Dynamics Virtual/Internet Groups
Symbolic Interactionism Work Teams
About the Editors

John M. Levine is a professor of psychology and Kingdom and at the University of Queensland in
senior scientist in the Learning Research and Australia. He is a fellow of the Society for
Development Center at the University of Pittsburgh Personality and Social Psychology, the Society of
and Honorary Professor of Social Psychology at Experimental Social Psychology, the Society for
the University of Kent in the United Kingdom. He the Psychological Study of Social Issues, the
did his undergraduate work at Northwestern Western Psychological Association, and the
University and received his PhD in psychology Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia. He
from the University of Wisconsin. Levine’s research received his PhD from Bristol University and has
focuses on small group processes, including inno- taught at Bristol University, Macquarie University,
vation in work teams, group reaction to deviance the University of Melbourne, the University of
and disloyalty, majority and minority influence, Queensland, and Princeton University, and he
and group socialization. He has published widely has been a visiting professor at the University of
on these and related topics. Levine has served as California in Los Angeles, Santa Cruz, and Santa
associate editor of the Journal of Research in Barbara and at City University, Hong Kong. His
Personality, both associate editor and editor of research on group processes, intergroup rela-
the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, tions, social identity, and self-conception is
and executive committee chair of the Society of closely associated with the development of social
Experimental Social Psychology. He is a fellow of identity theory. He has published extensively on
the Society of Experimental Social Psychology, the these and related topics. A former associate edi-
Society for Personality and Social Psychology, tor of the Journal of Experimental Social
the American Psychological Society, and the Psychology, he is foundation coeditor with
Midwestern Psychological Association. Dominic Abrams of the journal Group Processes
and Intergroup Relations and senior consultant
Michael A. Hogg is professor of social psychol- editor for the Sage Social Psychology Program.
ogy at Claremont Graduate University in Los Current research foci include leadership, devi-
Angeles and an honorary professor of social psy- ance, uncertainty reduction, extremism, and sub-
chology at the University of Kent in the United group relations.

xxi
Contributors

Susanne Abele Bruce J. Avolio Alison J. Bianchi


Miami University University of Nebraska University of Iowa

Christopher L. Aberson Mahzarin R. Banaji Amy Blackstone


Humboldt State University Harvard University University of Maine

Dominic Abrams Andrew Baron Steven L. Blader


University of Kent at Harvard University New York University
Canterbury
Robert S. Baron Robert D. Blagg
Laura Aikens University of Iowa Claremont Graduate University
University of Georgia
Laura Barron Irene V. Blair
Kira M. Alexander Rice University University of Colorado
University of Pittsburgh
Brock Bastian Danielle L. Blaylock
Catherine E. Amiot University of Melbourne Claremont Graduate
Université du Québec à University
Montréal Andrew S. Baum
University of Texas at Michelle C. Bligh
Grace L. Anderson Arlington Claremont Graduate
University of California, University
Santa Barbara Julia C. Becker
University of Marburg, Ana-Maria Bliuc
Linda Argote Germany University of Sydney
Carnegie Mellon University
Lane Beckes Brittany Bloodhart
Arthur Aron University of Minnesota Pennsylvania State University
State University of New York
at Stony Brook Van Beck Hall Renata Bongiorno
University of Pittsburgh Murdoch University
Holly Arrow
University of Oregon / London Bradford S. Bell Joseph A. Bonito
Business School Cornell University University of Arizona

Blake E. Ashforth Jennifer L. Berdahl Martin J. Bourgeois


Arizona State University University of Toronto Florida Gulf Coast University

xxiii
xxiv Contributors

Richard Y. Bourhis Adrienne R. Carter-Sowell Karen M. Douglas


Université du Québec à Purdue University University of Kent
Montréal
Bettina J. Casad John F. Dovidio
Katie M. Bowen California State Polytechnic Yale University
University of Chicago University, Pomona
John Duckitt
Clint Bowers Jennifer A. Chatman University of Auckland
University of Central Florida University of California,
Berkeley Jennifer L. Dunn
Nyla R. Branscombe Southern Illinois University
University of Kansas Jacqueline M. Chen Carbondale
University of California, Santa
Marilynn B. Brewer Barbara Alice H. Eagly
Ohio State University Northwestern University
Margaret S. Clark
Celia A. Brownell Yale University Shaha El-Geledi
University of Pittsburgh Université du Québec à
Alain Clémence Montréal
Camille Buckner University of Lausanne
Marymount University Dina Eliezer
J. Christopher Cohrs University of California, Santa
Jerry M. Burger University of Jena Barbara
Santa Clara University
Brian Colwell Naomi Ellemers
Peter Burke University of Missouri Leiden University
University of California,
Riverside D’Lane R. Compton Nicholas Emler
University of New Orleans University of Surrey
Shauna Burke
University of Western Ontario Joel Cooper Ralph Erber
Princeton University DePaul University
Gary M. Burlingame
Brigham Young University Christian S. Crandall Victoria Esses
University of Kansas University of Western
David F. Caldwell Ontario
Santa Clara University William D. Crano
Claremont Graduate Mark A. Ferguson
Jan Cannon-Bowers University University of Kansas
University of Central Florida
Richard J. Crisp Thomas A. Finholt
Allison Cantwell University of Kent University of Michigan
University of California,
Riverside John Darley Gregory W. Fischer
Princeton University Duke University
Peter J. Carnevale
University of Southern Carsten K. W. De Dreu Donelson R. Forsyth
California University of Amsterdam University of Richmond

Albert Carron C. Nathan DeWall Susan Fussell


University of Western Ontario University of Kentucky Cornell University
Contributors xxv

Samuel L. Gaertner Craig Haney Crystal L. Hoyt


University of Delaware University of California, Santa University of Richmond
Cruz
Amber M. Gaffney Jeffrey R. Huntsinger
Claremont Graduate Uriel J. Haran Loyola University Chicago
University Tepper School of Business
Chester A. Insko
Donna Garcia Chad Hartnell University of North Carolina
University of Western Ontario Arizona State University at Chapel Hill

Alexandra Gerbasi Simon Pierre Harvey Elizabeth Jacobs


California State University, Université du Québec à Loyola University Chicago
Northridge Montréal
Cathryn Johnson
Daniel Gigone Nick Haslam Emory University
Montana State University University of Melbourne
John T. Jost
Howard Giles S. Alexander Haslam New York University
University of California, Santa University of Exeter
Barbara Charles M. Judd
Michelle Hebl University of Colorado Boulder
Francesca Gino Rice University
University of North Carolina Lee Jussim
P. J. Henry Rutgers University
Peter Glick DePaul University
Lawrence University Tatsuya Kameda
John P. Hewitt Hokkaido University
George R. Goethals University of Massachusetts at
University of Richmond Amherst Martin F. Kaplan
Northern Illinois University
Kenneth Goh Miles Hewstone
Carnegie Mellon University University of Oxford Steven J. Karau
Southern Illinois University
Paul S. Goodman Michael A. Hogg
Carnegie Mellon University Claremont Graduate University Alian S. Kasabian
California State Polytechnic
Stephanie A. Goodwin Zachary P. Hohman University, Pomona
Purdue University Claremont Graduate University
Yoshihisa Kashima
Jeff Greenberg Andrea B. Hollingshead University of Melbourne
University of Arizona University of Southern
California Janice R. Kelly
Martin S. Greenberg Purdue University
University of Pittsburgh John G. Holmes
University of Waterloo Jared B. Kenworthy
Ana Guinote University of Texas at
University College London Ann E. Hoover Arlington
Purdue University
David L. Hamilton Norbert L. Kerr
University of California, Santa Matthew Hornsey Michigan State University,
Barbara University of Queensland University of Kent
xxvi Contributors

Nicolas Kervyn Edward J. Lawler Stephen Loughnan


Catholic University of Louvain Cornell University University of Melbourne

Jaeshin Kim Andrea Lawson Robert B. Lount , Jr.


University of Massachusetts, University of Western Ohio State University
Amherst Ontario
Jeffrey W. Lucas
William Klein Colin Wayne Leach University of Maryland
University of Pittsburgh University of Connecticut,
University of Sussex Anne Maass
Richard Klimoski University of Padova
George Mason University Naomi Lee
Georgetown University Diane M. Mackie
Jeffrey C. Kohles University of California, Santa
California State University, San Jürgen Leibold Barbara
Marcos Georg-August University
Göttingen Namrata Mahajan
Steve W. J. Kozlowski Claremont Graduate University
Michigan State University Edward P. Lemay
University of New Hampshire Angela T. Maitner
David Krackhardt
University of Kent
Carnegie Mellon University
Shana Levin
Claremont McKenna College Brenda Major
Roderick M. Kramer
University of California, Santa
Stanford University
John M. Levine Barbara
Arie W. Kruglanski University of Pittsburgh
University of Maryland, Elizabeth Mannix
College Park George Levinger Cornell University
University of Massachusetts,
Gillian Ku Amherst John Markoff
London Business School University of Pittsburgh
Jacques-Philippe Leyens
Manwai C. Ku Université of Louvain at Mitchell Lee Marks
Stanford University Louvain-La-Neuve San Francisco State University

Matthew B. Kugler E. Allan Lind José M. Marques


Princeton University Duke University University of Porto

Kathy J. Kuipers Patricia W. Linville Robin Martin


University of Montana Duke University Aston University

Jonathon LaPaglia Glenn E. Littlepage Miriam Matthews


University of Minnesota Middle Tennessee State Claremont Graduate
University University
Dora C. Lau
Chinese University of Hong Zayra N. Longoria Allan Mazur
Kong Purdue University Syracuse University

Patrick R. Laughlin Fabio Lorenzi-Cioldi Debra Theobald McClendon


University of Illinois University of Geneva Brigham Young University
Contributors xxvii

Craig McGarty Ian Newby-Clark Michale J. Platow


Murdoch University University of Guelph Australian National University

Jamie G. McMinn Leonard S. Newman Tom Postmes


Westminster College Syracuse University University of Groningen

Marisa Mealy Bernard Nijstad Anthony R. Pratkanis


Central Connecticut State University of Amsterdam University of California
University
Julia D. O’Brien Felicia Pratto
Avital Mentovich University of Maryland University of Connecticut
New York University
Katharine Ridgway O’Brien Radmila Prislin
Charles E. Miller Rice University San Diego State University
Northern Illinois University
Shigehiro Oishi Marina Rachitskiy
Norman Miller University of Virginia University of Surrey
University of Southern
California Greg R. Oldham Lisa Slattery Rashotte
University of Illinois at University of North Carolina,
Ella Miron-Spektor Urbana-Champaign Charlotte
Carnegie Mellon
Michael A. Olson Stephen Reicher
Fathali M. Moghaddam University of Tennessee University of St. Andrews
Georgetown University
Sabine Otten Scott A. Reid
Susan Albers Mohrman University of Groningen University of California, Santa
University of Southern Barbara
California Ernest S. Park
Cleveland State University C. Lausanne Renfro
Benoît Monin New Mexico State University
Stanford University Craig D. Parks
Washington State University Cecilia L. Ridgeway
Margo Monteith Stanford University
Purdue University Paul B. Paulus
University of Texas at Jason E. Rivera
Richard L. Moreland Arlington Claremont Graduate
University of Pittsburgh University
Samuel Pehrson
Keith Murnighan University of Limerick Dawn T. Robinson
Northwestern University University of Georgia
Müjde Peker
David G. Myers University of Kent Kristie M. Rogers
Hope College Arizona State University
Thomas Fraser Pettigrew
Paul R. Nail University of California, Santa Adam Rutland
University of Central Arkansas Cruz University of Kent

Todd D. Nelson Nia L. Phillips Claudia A. Sacramento


California State University University of Kansas Aston University
xxviii Contributors

Eduardo Salas Stacey Sinclair Colleen H. Stuart


University of Central Florida Princeton University University of Toronto

Fabio Sani Robert E. Slavin Jenny C. Su


University of Dundee Johns Hopkins University University of Minnesota

Leonard Saxe Eliot R. Smith Jerry Suls


Brandeis University Indiana University University of Iowa

Toni Schmader J. Allegra Smith Robbie M. Sutton


University of Arizona University of Colorado University of Kent

Christiane Schoel Joanne R. Smith Janet K. Swim


University of Mannheim University of Exeter Pennsylvania State University

Janet Ward Schofield John J. Sosik Donald M. Taylor


University of Pittsburgh Pennsylvania State University McGill University
at Great Valley
Deborah J. Terry
David A. Schroeder
University of Queensland
University of Arkansas Marija Spanovic
University of Southern Yvonne Thai
Nicholas G. Schwab California University of California,
University of Wyoming
Riverside
Charles Stangor
David O. Sears University of Maryland R. Scott Tindale
University of California, Los Loyola University Chicago
Angeles Rebecca Starkel
Loyola University Chicago Justine Tinkler
William T. Self Stanford University
University of California, Garold Stasser
Berkeley Miami University Sarah Sachiko Martin
Townsend
Gün R. Semin Sofia Stathi University of California, Santa
Free University Amsterdam University of Kent Barbara

Viviane Seyranian Barry Staw Linda R. Tropp


Claremont Graduate University Haas School of Business University of Massachusetts,
Amherst
Daniel B. Shank Sarah Stawiski
University of Georgia Loyola University Chicago Lisa Troyer
University of Connecticut
Kim Shapcott Walter G. Stephan
University of Western New Mexico State University Franziska Tschan
Ontario University of Neuchâtel
Jan E. Stets
Anna C. Sheveland University of California, Marlene E. Turner
University of Maryland Riverside San Jose State University

Jeffry A. Simpson Danu Anthony Stinson Rhiannon N. Turner


University of Minnesota University of Waterloo University of Leeds
Contributors xxix

Thomas R. Tyler Alberto Voci Gwen M. Wittenbaum


New York University University of Padova Michigan State University

Kaat Van Acker Joel Vuolevi Anna Woodcock


Katholieke Universiteit Leuven Free University Amsterdam Purdue University

Ilja van Beest Ulrich Wagner Anita Williams Woolley


Leiden University Philipps-University Marburg Carnegie Mellon University

Joseph A. Vandello Iain Walker Stephen C. Wright


University of South Florida Murdoch University Simon Fraser University

Eric van Dijk Fred O. Walumbwa C. Wesley Younts


Leiden University Arizona State University University of Connecticut

Paul A. M. van Lange Laurie R. Weingart Mary E. Zellmer-Bruhn


Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Carnegie Mellon University University of Minnesota

Mark van Vugt Michael A. West Stephanie Zerwas


University of Kent Aston University University of North Carolina

Graham M. Vaughan Tim Wildschut Andreas Zick


University of Auckland University of Southampton University of Bielefeld

Theresa K. Vescio Kipling D. Williams Philip G. Zimbardo


Pennsylvania State University Purdue University Stanford University

Penny S. Visser James H. Wirth Sabrina Zirkel


University of Chicago Purdue University Mills College
Introduction

Scarcely anyone would quarrel with the assertion of particular structural features (e.g., norms or
that humans are social animals or with the corol- roles); group members’ agreement on shared goals;
lary assumption that, in order to understand peo- patterns of interaction between members (e.g.,
ple’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, it is communication, reciprocal influence, coordinated
necessary to understand the role that groups play action); members’ emotional bonds to the group as
in human affairs. We all are members of large a whole and/or one another (cohesiveness); and
social categories based on such criteria as race, members’ identification with the group. Which
gender, ethnicity, and nationality, and most of us criterion, then, is the most important? As suggested
also belong to a range of groups and organiza- by the eminent group theorist Joseph McGrath,
tions (e.g., families, friendship cliques, work this question assumes that the goal is to distinguish
teams, religious congregations, political parties). groups from all other social aggregates (non-
These various social aggregates (which will be col- groups), which may be a futile exercise. He argues,
lectively referred to as “groups”) profoundly and we agree, that it is more productive to construe
affect our well-being and life trajectory through groupness as a continuum, such that a given social
their impact on such basic needs as physical sur- aggregate is more or less “groupy” depending on
vival, belongingness and intimacy, accurate knowl- how many of the above criteria it satisfies.
edge about the world, and sense of self and The second definitional issue is raised by the title
identity. The groups that people belong to vary on of the encyclopedia. What do we mean by “group
several dimensions, including size, voluntariness processes” and “intergroup relations”? In general,
of membership, composition (the types of people the term group processes refers to what happens
who belong), structure (e.g., norms, roles, status within groups, that is to how members of a group
systems), collective goals, level of conflict, reward- think, feel, and act toward others who belong to
ingness, relations with outgroups, and so on. the same group. Topics that are typically subsumed
Notwithstanding this diversity, groups matter, under the heading of group processes include the
and matter a great deal, to their members. impact of member diversity on team performance,
Before discussing the goals and organization of the development and operation of group norms,
this encyclopedia, two definitional issues need to be the conditions under which numerical minorities
considered. First, what do we mean by a group? As can produce innovation, the characteristics of
suggested above, groups can vary in many ways, effective leaders, the factors that influence whether
and so providing a succinct definition is no easy negotiators reach mutually acceptable agreements,
task. In fact, some observers have suggested, only the conditions under which team members fail to
partly in jest, that there are as many definitions of work hard on collective tasks, and the causes of
groups as there are researchers who study them. poor decision making in groups that are under
Rather than adding our imprimatur to one of these stress. Defining intergroup relations is more com-
definitions, we will mention some of the major plex. In most cases, this term refers to what hap-
criteria that group researchers have emphasized in pens between groups, that is to how members of a
defining groups (all of which are used, either group think, feel, and act toward others who
explicitly or implicitly, by some authors in this belong to a different group. Topics that are typi-
encyclopedia). These criteria include the presence cally subsumed under the heading of intergroup

xxxi
xxxii Introduction

relations include the role of categorization in ste- what were formerly two distinct perspectives on
reotyping and prejudice, the impact of social roles groups.
on gender stereotypes, the function that language When we (John Levine and Michael Hogg) were
serves in maintaining stereotypes, the conditions approached by Michael Carmichael of Sage with
under which members of stigmatized groups engage the idea of editing an Encyclopedia of Group
in collective action against those who discriminate Processes and Intergroup Relations, we were ini-
against them, the circumstances under which inter- tially reluctant to take on a task of this magnitude.
group contact does and does not reduce prejudice, Nevertheless, a combination of M. Carmichael’s
and the justifications that dominant groups use to persistence and charm and our propensity to over-
rationalize discrimination against subordinate commit ourselves eventually led to a round of
groups. However, the term intergroup relations is handshakes and then a contract. We knew that the
not restricted solely to what happens between only way to make the venture a success was to con-
groups. It can also apply to what happens within vince other overcommitted colleagues to help. We
groups (i.e., to how members of a group think, feel, had three criteria for choosing associate editors—
and act toward others who belong to the same disciplinary background (we wanted people from
group) as long as these responses are influenced by the three key disciplines of social psychology, soci-
the broader context of intergroup relations. An ology, and organizational behavior), substantial
example is the black sheep effect, in which group expertise and visibility in their respective fields, and
members respond more negatively toward ingroup excellent judgment. With only a little arm twisting,
members who deviate from group norms (and we were able to assemble a Dream Team of associ-
more positively toward ingroup members who con- ate editors, which included Linda Argote, Marilynn
form to these norms) when the ingroup feels threat- Brewer, Jack Dovidio, Norb Kerr, Dick Moreland,
ened by an outgroup than when it does not. and Cecilia Ridgeway. With their help and
Moreover, the term intergroup relations can also guidance, we developed a set of approximately
apply to some forms of self-directed thought, feel- 300 topics for inclusion in the encyclopedia and
ing, and action. An example is the phenomenon of then selected experts to write the relevant entries.
stereotype threat, in which group members who Almost all of these people accepted our invitations,
are reminded that outgroups hold negative stereo- and those who did produced excellent entries.
types of their ability in certain domains then per- Either we or one of the associate editors evaluated
form poorly in these domains. each entry and provided feedback to the author(s).
Many entries were revised to increase their acces-
sibility to the general reader. The invitation and
Development of the Encyclopedia
reviewing process was orchestrated by our superb
Over the past 75 years, there has been a tremen- managing editor, Danielle (Dani) Blaylock, who
dous amount of theoretical and empirical work on was a PhD student at Claremont Graduate
group processes and intergroup relations by schol- University and is now a postdoctoral fellow at
ars from various disciplines. Until recently, these Queens University in Belfast, Ireland.
two lines of work were quite distinct, and few
efforts were made to bring them together in a single
Intended Audience
volume (or, as in the present case, pair of volumes).
This situation began to change in the 1980s due in In choosing topics for inclusion, selecting authors,
large part to the influence of the social identity and editing entries, we were mindful that the ency-
approach to groups championed by Henri Tajfel clopedia is not intended for professionals or
and John Turner. A major indicator of and impe- experts with extensive knowledge of social psy-
tus for the integration of group processes and inter- chology, sociology, or organizational behavior.
group relations was the establishment of a journal Instead, it is intended for general readers who
by this name in 1998, co-founded by Dominic want state-of-the-art information about group
Abrams and Michael Hogg. In an important sense, processes and intergroup relations that is presented
then, this encyclopedia is a reflection of the grow- in a clear and accessible manner. Our instructions
ing (though still far from complete) integration of to authors were designed to achieve these goals.
Introduction xxxiii

We stated that, “The main target audience is Influence and Persuasion


undergraduate students in various disciplines (e.g.,
Intergroup Relations in Society
psychology, sociology, business, political science,
education), but the encyclopedia should also prove Methodology
useful to graduate students and faculty as well as
Organizations
high school students . . . entries must accurately
convey what behavioral scientists know about Theory
how people think, feel, and act toward ingroup
Types of Groups and Subgroups
and outgroup members . . . entries must be written
so that readers with little or no behavioral science
background can understand what is being said.”
Thanks to the hard work of the authors and the Acknowledgments
editorial team, we believe that these goals were We owe a great debt to the people at Sage who
accomplished. encouraged and assisted us at each stage of the
project. We thank Michael Carmichael for his
enthusiastic support at the beginning and Rolf
Organization of the Entries Janke for clearing obstacles that arose as we went
The entries are listed in alphabetical order, begin- along. Diana Axelsen did an excellent job of keep-
ning with Action Research and ending with ing our feet to the fire when progress lagged, Kate
Xenophobia. The lengths of the entries reflect our Schroeder was extremely patient during the
judgment regarding topic breadth and importance. copyediting phase (as were our two fine copy
The longest entries are approximately 4,000 editors—Bonnie Freeman and Jamie Robinson),
words, and the shortest are about 1,500 words. and Carole Maurer made the “end game” as pleas-
Many of the shorter entries provide detailed dis- ant as possible. Finally, Leticia Gutierrez and
cussions of topics that are only briefly covered in Laura Notton were very helpful with the Sage
the longer entries. To help readers locate the top- Reference Tracking system, which greatly facili-
ics in which they are most interested, we prepared tated our work.
a Reader’s Guide (see below) that organizes the We also want to thank the people who worked
entries into 12 general categories. Note that many most closely with us during the process of edit-
entries appear in more than one category. At the ing the encyclopedia. They include our associate
end of each entry, readers will find cross-references editors—Linda, Marilynn, Jack, Norb, Dick, and
to other entries and a short list of Further Readings. Cecilia—who devoted a great deal of time to the
project, and our managing editor—Dani—who
Reader’s Guide Headings
was efficient and good humored even when we
were not. Finally, we want to express our gratitude
Cognitions and Feelings to the authors of the entries. They met or exceeded
our expectations for both the quality and clarity of
Conflict and Cooperation Within Groups their entries, and we appreciate their efforts.
Group Decision Making Last but not least, we thank Jan and Alison for
their patience and support as we worked on the
Group Performance and Problem Solving encyclopedia.
Group Structure
John M. Levine
Identity and Self Michael A. Hogg
A
the role of the researcher. It also shows how action
Action Research research differs from traditional scientific research,
exploring the common elements and core processes
Action research is a process of participatory of action research as well as the nature of the
inquiry aimed at generating knowledge to guide knowledge that is created and applied.
action in pursuit of the participants’ goals. It can
be compared with traditional scientific research,
History and Forms of Action Research
which seeks to find the “truth” through methods
that are highly controlled by the researcher. Action Action researchers trace their philosophical roots
research, in contrast, seeks to generate knowledge to Aristotle’s notion of goal-directed action (praxis)
that solves specific problems and enables the as one of the key activities of human beings, dis-
actors in the situation to achieve their goals. It is tinct from theorizing (theoria), and crafting things
carried out collaboratively by these actors, includ- (poiesis). They also refer to his notion of practical
ing researchers, who engage in a mutual inquiry wisdom (phronesis), that is, the ability to reflect
process that takes into account the perspectives, and determine the appropriate ends to which to
knowledge, and purposes of all involved. Thus the direct one’s life. This combination of reflecting on
conduct of action research is heavily dependent on appropriate purposes and learning how to achieve
the process through which the various people them is central to all forms of action research.
involved in the action research project interact to Action research involves groups, or communities,
create new ways of understanding their situation of individuals reflecting and learning for action.
and new paths forward. Action research may Individuals represented in the action research group
include traditional, scientific data-gathering and may have different perspectives and goals, thus,
analysis approaches. But it is more generally char- effective action research requires group processes
acterized by inquiry approaches that build on for reflection, learning, and consensus building.
and create the knowledge of practice. It employs The modern philosophical roots of action
different knowledge-generating approaches— research may be traced to John Dewey’s early
approaches that place practitioners and their 20th-century discussions of learning through a
knowledge front and center. The ultimate test of cycle of reflective thinking about problems, formu-
the knowledge that is generated through action lating hypotheses about what might solve them,
research is whether the action taken because of and testing them through practical action. The
the knowledge accomplishes the purposes of the term action research as an approach to social sci-
participants. ence research is often traced to the field research
This entry provides a short history that illus- tradition begun by Kurt Lewin during the Second
trates the varieties of action research and discusses World War. In this approach, people in various

1
2 Action Research

real-life settings such as work organizations par- Differences From Traditional


ticipate in research to discover better ways to Social Science Research
accomplish their goals. This action research tradi-
There are several ways in which action research dif-
tion emphasizes the formulation of theory that can
fers from more traditional research. These include
be tested and refined through experiments whose
the purpose of the research—whether the researcher
results have an impact on practice—so that the
is out to discover scientific “truth,” or whether the
requirements of practice are met and systematic
researcher aims to help people accomplish their
knowledge is furthered. Lewin’s belief that the best
purposes. Other differences concern where the
way to understand something is to change it has
research is conducted, and the methodologies that
been echoed by action researchers ever since.
are used. These differences have implications for the
Lewin’s approach sponsored the development
relationship between the researcher and the people
of the sociotechnical systems (STS) tradition for
in the real-life settings being studied.
improving work systems. Early STS research dis-
covered that productivity is enhanced by leader-
Purposes
ship styles and work systems that empower
employees to be actively involved in making deci- Traditional social science research is based on a
sions about how to run their own work units. search for the “truth” about the phenomena being
These core STS ideas were expanded and refined investigated—whether they are aspects of the
through many action research projects in which physical world, investigated by hard scientists, or
the participants in a work setting such as a factory aspects of the social world, investigated by social
or a mine collaboratively designed their own work scientists. Scientific truths, as scientists have been
setting to be technically and socially effective. able to discover them, are embodied in theories
Researchers involved in this stream of action that yield predictions for further investigations to
research provide theoretical input and a process confirm and expand theoretical understanding. In
for design and planning. They study the group traditional social science research, the quest is to
processes through which the diverse members of find the truth about the social behavior of indi-
the setting—managers, supervisors, and workers— viduals, groups, organizations, and societal institu-
develop a new way of working together, the tions. The social entities being studied are treated
choices they make about how to organize them- as the objects of the research and it is considered
selves, and the outcomes of putting these choices poor form to engage with them, as the scientist is
into action. expected to remain disinterested in outcomes and
Since the 1980s, the Norwegian democratic dia- purposes and to retain objectivity in explaining
logue approach has emphasized the gathering of behavior.
various stakeholders (including management, the Purposes are central to action research, as the
workforce, government, and unions) in confer- quest of action research is to create knowledge that
ences in which they can speak with each other as can help participants accomplish their purposes.
equals about how to move forward on issues such Various traditions of action research differ in the
as work organization. The underlying principle is extent to which they emphasize the use of aca-
to move from traditional adversarial approaches demic theoretical knowledge in the processes
to cooperation through democratic dialogue, and through which purposes are defined and action is
the purpose is to build relationships and establish crafted. At one extreme are action researchers who
a new way of making decisions that take the inter- believe there is no generalizable truth, and that all
ests of all parties into account. At about the same knowledge is created in specific situations. Their
time, throughout the world, social justice has purpose is not to discover truth, but to introduce
become the focus of action research activities that frameworks for interaction that enable partici-
emphasize gender and race issues, and of emanci- pants to gather information, make choices, and
patory work in poor nations that is based on take action to accomplish their purposes. This is
empowering ordinary people by helping them the position of the Norwegian democratic dialogue
develop the capabilities to generate their own advocates. The action researcher’s role in the con-
knowledge as a basis for action. versation is as a member of the group who brings
Action Research 3

knowledge of how to set up dialogues, reflection, successive setting presented different challenges and
and learning. Yet even these action researchers are different opportunities for learning. The partici-
guided by their own values and purposes, such as pants in each setting were interested in creating
achieving democratic dialogue or emancipation. their own solutions, yet the action researcher
Other action researchers, such as STS research- brought useful experience and knowledge from
ers, have as their purpose contributing to knowl- previous research. For the action researcher in a
edge that is generalizable across settings, in addition new setting to establish enough trust for the other
to helping participants in an action setting learn participants to learn from this previous work, he
how to generate actionable knowledge. These or she has to be open to the uniqueness of each
researchers bring relevant theoretical constructs and setting and of the group of participants engaged in
the cumulative knowledge of the social sciences— the participative design process—and open to dif-
sometimes called content knowledge—to bear in ferent design choices and resulting action. Only in
the processes by which participants define and this way can the research be truly participative and
solve problems. The researchers’ knowledge of the researcher learn how the unique factors of the
theory and the participants’ knowledge of practice setting contribute to general knowledge.
are combined to yield solutions to problems and
designs for action. Through the action research,
Research Methodologies
the practical knowledge of the participants and the
theoretical knowledge of the social sciences are Beyond differences concerning randomization
both expanded. These action researchers bring versus in situ focus, action research methodologies
expertise to diagnose problems and to intervene in differ from traditional social science research in
a way that helps participants solve them. They other ways, including the amount of control the
may train, educate, and facilitate the group, thus researcher has over the research and the data-
assuming a central position in the group. gathering methods. Traditional researchers con-
duct research in a carefully controlled manner to
Research Conducted In Situ eliminate alternative explanations for the results
that they find. This generally means that the
Traditional researchers carrying out studies in objects of the research are unaware of the purpose
the field try to avoid focusing on only one organiza- of the research, the research questions, and the
tion. They seek random selection of the populations hypotheses being tested. This is believed to be nec-
being studied—sometimes into treatment and con- essary so that they do not behave in a manner that
trol groups—in order to randomly distribute exter- distorts the findings—either by trying to act in a
nal factors that might otherwise distort the findings. manner that fits the expectations of the researcher
Action research, in contrast, always is situated in or by trying to prove the opposite. Highly con-
and generates knowledge about a particular social trolled approaches fit a model where the researcher
system that has expressed interest in engaging in is seen as having a privileged knowledge-creating
action research—for example, a work unit, an role in society and is given permission to study oth-
industry, a community, or a subpopulation. It ers. People and organizations may agree to be part
focuses on creating the knowledge-generating and of such research to further science, but often do
action-taking capability in that particular system. not believe that it will yield knowledge useful to
An action research project enables researchers to their personal purposes.
learn about one system, and to test and expand The members of the action research community
theory in only that system. Action researchers who are, in contrast, co-investigators. Purposes are
are interested in building widely applicable knowl- transparent and they are codetermined by the
edge do so through a succession of action research action researcher and other participants. The
projects in different settings. For example, STS research questions are often co-defined by the par-
researchers created cumulative knowledge about ticipants, because these questions have to do with
the participative design of manufacturing systems their real-life situation. If there are hypotheses
for high performance through a succession of action guiding the research, these also will be formulated
research interventions in different factories. Each and influenced both by the researchers’ knowledge
4 Action Research

from theory and the other participants’ knowledge including the feelings and experiences of partici-
from practice. Finding common purposes and pants and the meanings they attribute to their
hypotheses to guide the inquiry and action plan- interactions.
ning process entails finding a process to come to Interpretation of these rich and diverse data is
agreement despite differing experience bases, central to the inquiry process. The group members
knowledge, and preferences. attach meaning not only to systematically collected
The action researcher is one of the participants data but also to their interactions, including those
in this community of co-investigators. Like all par- between the researcher and the practitioners.
ticipants in any group, action researchers face Academic interpretation is only one perspective in
challenges in defining and achieving perceived the process of attributing meaning. Given that the
legitimacy for their role in the group. The group group is working to agree on different ways of
members are being guided to behave in ways they operating and different outcomes, the academic
may not be used to—putting aside rank and biases interpretation may have the least impact because
and listening to and building on the perspectives of the participants’ criteria are usefulness and rele-
all. The members of the group may only appreciate vance. Both the process and content knowledge
the power of a truly participative inquiry process brought to the group’s collective sense-making
after experiencing it. Only then may they under- process by the action researcher will be interpreted
stand collaboration and appreciate the researcher’s in conjunction with the full set of knowledge
contribution. brought by the members of the group.
The action researcher who claims to have con-
tent expertise relevant to the group’s purpose, and
Common Elements in Action Research
who aims to further that knowledge through the
action research, faces the additional challenge of The broad assortment of approaches that are
achieving legitimacy and trust for that expert role labeled action research share some defining attri-
within the group. Theoretical knowledge is likely butes: a discourse-based learning cycle, an expanded
to be rejected unless the researcher engages with definition of knowledge, and an inherently politi-
the group, and accepts the importance of combin- cal nature. Each of these places strong require-
ing theoretical knowledge with the group mem- ments on the action research group’s interaction
bers’ knowledge of practice, to yield an approach patterns.
that is tailored to the situation and purposes at
hand. A Discourse-Based Learning Process
Traditional social science research is often char-
acterized by data-gathering methods such as sur- Action research is a discourse-based inquiry and
veys, questionnaires, and structured observations reflection process through which stakeholders and
that are coded, counted, and analyzed statistically participants in the real-life situation come together
to discover patterns of relationships between vari- to make choices, plan, and take action. If the
ables predetermined by the researchers. For exam- action research group is able to establish itself as
ple, researchers may be interested in whether the an ongoing learning community, the action and its
purposes of low-status group members are less consequences feed back into the learning of that
likely to be voiced and achieved in an action plan- community, establishing a cycle of experiencing,
ning process; they may measure the status of each reflecting, planning, and action taking. Common
member and ask the group members individually steps include:
to what extent they felt their ideas were taken into
account. Although such traditional methods may •• establishing the group to collectively engage in
be part of an action research project, action communication designed to raise consciousness
researchers generally feel that these methods are and increase mutual understanding and to create
insufficient to capture the complexity of human a sense of common purpose
interaction. These researchers are likely to intro- •• inquiring by gathering relevant data and
duce a variety of ways of understanding the system knowledge from each other and other sources,
and to encourage the consideration of rich data, sometimes including scientific knowledge and a
Action Research 5

formal data-gathering process applying formal orientation and collectively describe and create
scientific approaches their real-life situation as they would like it to be.
•• interpreting and reflecting on the meaning of the Different action research groups and their mem-
information and knowledge assembled, and its bers may begin the process with different compe-
relationship to purposes tencies in and orientations to these different kinds
•• deciding on and planning action focused on of knowledge. In work settings, managers and
solving the problems being addressed and technical employees may be heavily steeped in
achieving the purposes that the group has technical knowledge, and may see relational and
collectively defined reflective knowledge as unimportant to achieving
•• reflecting on the results of the action that feed their purposes. First-line employees, however, may
back into an ongoing inquiry, reflection, and orient themselves to these latter forms of knowl-
action-taking cycle edge, which determine their trust in the process
and focus them on creating a workplace where
A major role of the action researcher is to facili- they experience meaningful interpersonal relation-
tate that process while modeling it, thereby increas- ships and where their purposes are taken seriously.
ing the capacity of the group to develop knowledge. Inherent in effective action research is developing
When this capacity has been developed, all mem- an appreciation for these different forms of knowl-
bers will function as action researchers. edge that allow a community of participants to
move forward together.
An Expanded Nature of Knowledge
Political Processes
Scientific knowledge deals with the theoretical
Integral to action research is the capacity of the
connections between variables—and is aimed at
group to create power dynamics where the mem-
answering questions such as whether carrying out a
bers of the action research group are all heard, and
particular action will lead to a particular outcome. A
their knowledge, preferences, and perspectives are
more diverse set of knowledge is required to define
taken into account. Words like participative,
effective practice, and making decisions regarding
equal, democratic, social justice, and emancipation
practice requires the group to interpret patterns of
are used by action researchers in different kinds of
information and pull together diverse knowledge
settings. All of these terms carry the notion that the
sets. Even with a firm grasp of what is objectively
formerly disempowered will become empowered
known, and even with deep know-how about how
to influence the choices made and directions taken.
to achieve particular outcomes, the group is still
Achieving this requires a process where those with
faced with the challenge of how diverse participants
formerly privileged knowledge and power, includ-
who may not start out knowing or trusting each
ing the action researchers themselves, do not
other can find consensus about how to proceed.
dominate the process. Ultimately the choice of
Beyond objective knowledge, two other kinds action is politically determined. The goal of action
of knowledge are required for effective action research is to ensure that the political process is
research. One is the knowledge participants participatory and builds on the knowledge and
develop of each other—relational knowledge— purposes of the members.
that enables them to understand and feel empa-
thy for the others’ points of view. This is the Susan Albers Mohrman
knowledge that allows the group members to go See also Cooperative Learning; Group Learning; Lewin,
beyond their experience of the world and engage Kurt; Process Consultation
in reflection and action planning that incorpo-
Further Readings
rates the views and purposes of others. The sec-
ond kind of knowledge is the reflective knowledge Adler, N., Shani, A. B., & Styhre, A. (Eds.). (2003).
that comes from a truly collaborative inter- Collaborative research in organizations. Thousand Oaks,
change, and that equips the group to be critical CA: Sage.
of the status quo and to reformulate purpose. It Argyris, C. (1970). Intervention theory and method:
enables the group to get beyond a problem-solving Behavioral science view. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
6 Affect Control Theory

Greenwood, D. J., & Levin, M. (1998). Introduction to identities, behaviors, settings, and emotions. The
action research: Social research for social change. labels in turn evoke affective meanings that are
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. shared with a larger culture. These affective
Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science: Selected meanings are conceptualized and measured using
theoretical papers. New York: Harper & Row. three universal dimensions of meaning that
Pasmore, W. (1988). Designing effective organizations: Charles Osgood found to account for a substan-
The sociotechnical systems perspective. New York: tial amount of the variation in the lexicons of
John Wiley. over 20 language cultures. First, evaluation is a
Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (Eds.). (2001). Handbook of
measure of a concept’s goodness or badness mea-
action research: Participative inquiry & practice.
sured on a continuum from bad, awful to good,
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
nice. Second, potency is a measure of a concept’s
Shani, A. B., Mohrman, S. A., Pasmore, W. A., Stymne,
power and ranges on a continuum from power-
B., & Adler, N. (Eds.). (2007). Handbook of
collaborative management research. Thousand Oaks:
less, weak, small to powerful, strong, big. Third,
CA: Sage.
activity is a measure of a concept’s liveliness or
quietness and ranges from slow, quiet, old to
fast, loud, young. ACT refers to the affective
meanings measured on these dimensions as senti-
Affect Control Theory ments. Sentiments are trans-situational, general-
ized affective responses to specific symbols that
Affect control theory (ACT) is a mathematical are widely shared in a culture (or subculture).
theory of social interaction developed by David These three fundamental dimensions of mean-
Heise in the 1970s. Based on symbolic interac- ing serve as cultural abbreviations that describe
tionist ideas, ACT explains how interpersonal important affective information about all elements
interactions are constrained by the symbolic cul- of an interaction—identities, behaviors, emotions,
ture contained in language and the meanings it and settings. These dimensions are core to our
associates with things. The theory describes how understanding of intra- and intergroup processes.
actors cognitively and affectively negotiate these The evaluation (good–bad) dimension helps char-
cultural meanings to maintain a “working defini- acterize processes like status and affiliation at the
tion” of the situation. It also makes predictions interpersonal level and solidarity and cohesion at
about behaviors, emotions, and identity attribu- the group level. The potency dimension character-
tions that occur in culturally situated interactions. izes power relations between social actors and
Thus affect control theory helps us understand between social groups. The activity dimension
both inter- and intragroup processes. characterizes the expressiveness of identities and
ACT proposes that interactions confirming cul- interpersonal behaviors as well as feelings of
tural meanings require minimal cognitive process- excitement or quiet.
ing because such situations feel normal and The three dimensions of meaning operate cross-
expected. In contrast, when an interaction does culturally, but the sentiments associated with par-
not confirm standard cultural meanings, people ticular labels are specific to a culture or subculture.
attempt to cognitively interpret it, while being sig- ACT researchers have empirically compiled senti-
naled by their emotions that the situation is unex- ments associated with hundreds of identities,
pected. A core proposition in the theory is the behaviors, setting, emotions, and traits into cul-
control principle, which says that people attempt tural dictionaries. Cultural dictionaries have been
to restore the meanings in a situation after devia- compiled for the United States, Canada, Japan,
tion from the cultural standard, typically by gener- China, Germany, and Northern Ireland, and in the
ating new social behaviors. future this work will be extended to include other
cultures. All elements of an interaction (identities,
behaviors, settings, emotions, traits) are indexed
Cultural Sentiments
along the same three dimensions of meaning. This
ACT assumes that individuals understand social provides a common metric for use in the theory’s
events by labeling their elements—including equations that describe social interaction. Every
Affect Control Theory 7

label evokes culturally specific amounts of good- sheriff is engaging in an interaction that suggests
ness, powerfulness, and activity. In the U.S. cul- that the view of this outlaw should be better than
tural dictionary, for example, the identity of the typical cultural view of an outlaw. This incon-
outlaw is quite bad, slightly powerful, and some- gruence in the direction of increased goodness
what active. The behavior reward is extremely means the outlaw will experience positive emo-
good, quite powerful, and slightly active. tions, such as being thankful or relieved in response
to the interaction.
Second, actors experiencing this deflection,
Interaction
which was initially signaled by emotions, will try
Although all social concepts evoke cultural senti- to restore the normative definition to the situation
ments, the meaning of a particular element of an through additional interaction. The theory predicts
interaction may change as the interaction develops. that actors will strive to restore the definition of
ACT proposes that individuals label elements of a the situation even if the emotion experienced was
social interaction with concepts common to their positive. Thus, in the example of the outlaw who
culture, and those concepts have sentiments associ- rewarded the sheriff, the outlaw could yell at the
ated with them. In addition, these concepts provide a sheriff or the sheriff could convict the outlaw to
reference point throughout the interaction, allowing restore cultural sentiments. ACT suggests that
any observer of the interaction to determine if the behavioral responses are often the easiest method
interaction deviates from culturally normal behavior. for controlling the inconsistencies created during
ACT contains equations that specify how each social interaction.
element of an interaction will contribute to altering Third, for interactants who cannot restore the
the sentiments of those elements. For example, if an definition of the situation behaviorally and for
outlaw rewards a sheriff, observers will change their observers who are not participating in the interac-
impressions of that particular outlaw, that particular tion, the situation can be resolved cognitively. For
sheriff, and that particular rewarding behavior. On a mild deflection, accepting the transient impres-
the evaluation dimension the outlaw will no longer sion may restore a working definition of the situa-
be seen as bad, but much closer to neutral, and the tion (in this case, deciding that this outlaw is not
rewarding will be seen as only slightly good. The ele- as bad as other outlaws). For more extreme deflec-
ment’s altered sentiments in a situation are referred tions, relabeling elements of the situation is another
to as transient impressions. possibility (e.g., the actor is not an outlaw but
Differences between the cultural sentiments and merely a rival, or the behavior was not really
the transient impressions reveal the degree to rewarding but taunting). ACT does not make spe-
which a situation is culturally normative. In affect cific predictions about when a behavioral or cogni-
control theory, differences are called deflection; tive approach to resolving the incongruency will
higher levels of deflection suggest less culturally take precedence, but it does suggest that a working
normative events. An example of such an event is definition of the situation must be restored for
an outlaw rewarding a sheriff, because according individuals to make sense of their interactions and
to the affect control equations it is not normal for the larger social world.
a bad person to do something good for a good
person. The theory suggests that when an interac-
Mathematical Foundation
tion is not harmonious with cultural expectations,
people experience unusual emotional, behavioral, ACT is a mathematical model with the theoretical
and cognitive responses. principals encoded in equations. Impression-formation
First, actors will experience this deflection, or equations specify the transient impressions of ele-
incongruence in meaning, emotionally—with larger ments after an interaction occurs. Similarly, labeling
incongruencies generally producing more intense equations can indicate how elements of interaction
emotions. An actor’s emotion will be positive or could be redefined by an observer. Behavior-prediction
negative depending on both how positive the event equations lead to predictions of what actions interac-
is and whether the incongruence is more positive tants might take to restore a working definition to the
than that actor’s identity. An outlaw rewarding a situation. Emotion equations predict emotions the
8 Affirmative Action

interactants are likely to experience as the result of an Smith-Lovin, L., & Heise, D. R. (1988). Analyzing social
interaction. interaction: Advances in affect control theory. New
All of the ACT equations are generated from York: Gordon & Breach.
empirical data for a particular culture. These equa-
tions as well as the cultural dictionaries have been
implemented in computer programs such as
INTERACT (http://www.indiana.edu/~socpsy/
Affirmative Action
ACT), which allows simulations and predictions of
interactions with all the ACT equations. These Affirmative action refers to efforts to provide
predictions can then be used to make specific equal opportunities for all in employment and
hypotheses about emotional, behavioral, and cog- education. This entry focuses on affirmative action
nitive reactions that are then subject to empirical in the United States because it has been the pri-
testing. mary site for social science research on the issue.
Researchers have made fruitful use of affect con- Affirmative action policies and programs take
trol theory to study stereotyping and intergroup measures to increase the representation of women
relations, the dynamics of therapeutic support and racial/ethnic minorities in employment and
groups, leadership structures within task groups, higher education through the use of targeted
political identification and action, and responses recruiting and training, formalizing personnel
to injustice. This research relies on a variety of practices, preferential treatment in hiring and edu-
methodological approaches, including laboratory cational admissions, and sometimes the use of
experiments, formal cross-cultural comparisons, quotas. The motivation for affirmative action is to
ethnographic studies, and survey research. redress historical inequalities between social
groups by “leveling the playing field” for groups
that are disadvantaged by past and current dis-
Dawn T. Robinson and Daniel B. Shank
crimination. Affirmative action has led to impor-
tant changes in intergroup relations, and its
See also Leadership; Social Identity Theory; Support history serves to highlight both the effectiveness
Groups; Symbolic Interactionism and limitations of laws aimed at changing existing
relations between social groups that differ in
power and status.
Further Readings
Heise, D. R. (1979). Understanding events: Affect and the
construction of social action. New York: Cambridge
History
University Press. Throughout its 45-year history, affirmative action
Heise, D. R. (2007). Expressive order: Confirming
has been met with controversy and debate. While
sentiments in social actions. New York: Springer.
presidential committees since the 1940s had been
INTERACT: http://www.indiana.edu/~socpsy/ACT/
wrestling with nondiscrimination clauses in federal
interact.htm
contracts, the first mention of the term affirmative
MacKinnon, N. J., & Bowlby, J. W. (2000). The affective
action came in 1961 from Executive Order 10925
dynamics of stereotyping and intergroup relations.
Advances in Group Processes, 17, 37–76.
issued by President John F. Kennedy. Executive
Osgood, C. E., May, W. E., & Miron, M. S. (1975). Order 10925 was the first legal mandate requiring
Cross-cultural universals of affective meaning. Urbana: organizations that do business with the federal
University of Illinois. government (federal contractors) to “take affirma-
Ridgeway, C., & Smith-Lovin, L. (1994). Structure, tive action” to ensure that hiring and promotion
culture, and interaction: Comparing two generative practices are free of discrimination. Following the
theories. Advances in Group Processes, 11, Civil Rights Act of 1964, President Lyndon B.
213–239. Johnson issued Executive Order 11246 (E011246)
Robinson, D. T., & Smith-Lovin, L. (2006). Affect in 1965, creating the first affirmative action policy
control theory. In P. J. Burke (Ed.), Social psychology. to be enforced enough to provoke controversy and
Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press. debate. E011246 applies to the federal government
Affirmative Action 9

and to federal contractors with a contract of at training, formalizing job posting procedures to
least $50,000 and 50 or more employees. promote equal access to hiring information, and in
Initially, the policy was targeted at eliminating certain cases, giving additional weight or assigning
discriminatory barriers for racial/ethnic minor- extra points to race- and gender-disadvantaged
ities, but it was modified in 1967 to protect applicants in hiring and admissions decisions.
groups based on color, religion, sex, and While much of the controversy surrounding
national origin. While E011246 only requires affirmative action has focused on the use of quo-
that the federal government and the businesses tas, the law forbids the use of quotas except in
that contract with the government have affir- circumstances in which courts order it as a remedy
mative action plans, many noncontracting for cases of blatant discrimination. In 1978, the
organizations have adopted policies that Supreme Court ruled against the use of explicit
enhance diversity and provide evidence against quotas in the case of the Regents of the University
potential discrimination lawsuits. of California v. Bakke. In this case, Allan Bakke, a
Affirmative action can be distinguished from White applicant who was not admitted to the
equal opportunity policies that simply prohibit medical school at the University of California,
discrimination by its call for actions to eliminate Davis, sued when several minority applicants were
barriers to equal opportunity. The presumption accepted to the medical school despite having
behind affirmative action is that even race- and lower grades and test scores than he did. In this
gender-neutral policies can operate in ways that case, the university was reserving 16% of admis-
advantage some groups over others. As Johnson sions spots for minority applicants and evaluating
relayed in his speech justifying E011246, “You the qualifications of the White students separate
do not wipe away the scars of centuries by saying: from the minority students. The Supreme Court
‘now, you are free to go where you want, do as ruled that this was unconstitutional, but in addi-
you desire, and choose the leaders you please’ . . . tion wrote that schools could treat the minority
and still justly believe you have been completely status of applicants as one among other character-
fair.” This inequality in access may be the result istics in making admissions decisions. This ruling,
of current and past discrimination, institutional then, made explicit quotas illegal but certain forms
forms of racism and sexism that bias measures of preferential treatment permissible.
of merit, and/or the tendency of people to hire Since the Bakke case, there have been a num-
those they know or who have similar back- ber of other important legal cases that have lim-
grounds. ited the methods by which colleges and universities
To ensure that equal opportunity exists, affir- can implement affirmative action plans. Appellate
mative action policies require employing organi- courts ruled that the admissions plans for the
zations and schools to allocate resources toward University of Texas Law School and the University
(1) evaluating workforce and enrollment statis- of Georgia violated the equal protection clause of
tics and (2) taking proactive measures to bal- the 14th Amendment. In a landmark case in
ance the representation of women and racial/ 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the
ethnic minorities with respect to their availabil- University of Michigan’s point system for under-
ity for hire or admission. In evaluating statistics, graduate admissions made race too prominent of
employers and educational institutions evaluate a factor, but the law school’s practice of consid-
the proportion of qualified women, African ering race, but not assigning a specific weight to
Americans, Native Americans, Latinos/as, and it, was permissible. This case was important
Asian Americans and compare this proportion because the justices affirmed that broad social
to the number employed or admitted and retained. value can be gained from diversity in the class-
When any target group is underrepresented relative room. In addition to the court rulings, California
to their availability, federal contractors are required and Washington have passed propositions ban-
to develop affirmative action plans that include ning any form of preferential treatment based on
goals and timetables for making good-faith efforts race, color, sex, or national origin, and Florida
to remedy the problem. Goals for meeting affirma- has banned race-based preferential treatment in
tive action plans include targeted recruitment and college admissions.
10 Affirmative Action

Impact of Affirmative Action people of color, which in turn reduced the earnings
on Workplace Composition gap between Whites and people of color. In addi-
tion, federal contractors have granted more promo-
Has affirmative action been effective at increasing tions to people of color than have noncontractors.
the number of women and people of color in the Early studies comparing federal contractors to
workplace? To answer this question, many studies noncontractors underestimated the effectiveness of
have compared the proportion of women and peo- affirmative action because many noncontractors
ple of color in the federal workforce, where affir- implement voluntary affirmative action plans.
mative action is required, to that in the private More recent studies have accounted for this by
workforce, where affirmative action is not required. comparing the workplace composition of firms
Several studies have consistently shown that the that report having an affirmative action plan to
percentage of women, Hispanics, and Blacks in the those that report not having one. The results are
government workforce is higher than the percent- consistent with previous research, showing that
age in the private workforce. In addition, research organizations with an affirmative action plan have
studies have shown that women and minorities are more women and minorities, a higher proportion
more likely to advance to management in the public of women and minorities in high prestige jobs, and
sector, and that occupational advance has led to a smaller earnings gap.
smaller race- and gender-related earnings gaps in One of the major controversies surrounding the
the public sector. While these studies suggest that debate about affirmative action involves the claim
affirmative action may increase workplace diver- of reverse discrimination. Opponents of affirma-
sity, the broader differences between private and tive action argue that in giving advantages to
public sector jobs make it difficult to draw conclu- women and people of color, qualified White men
sions about the independent effect of affirmative are discriminated against. To assess the validity of
action. this argument, some researchers have looked for
There are other studies that more successfully evidence that when women and minorities are
isolate the impact of affirmative action by compar- hired through affirmative action plans, their quali-
ing the growth of women and minority employ- fications for the job are less than what is needed to
ment among organizations with federal contracts perform well. Economists have approached this
to that among similar organizations with no affir- question by examining whether the redistribution
mative action requirements. Studies of changes in of workers has come at the expense of quality and
the period in which affirmative action was most productivity. While the difficulties in assessing pro-
stringently enforced (1974–1980) showed the ductivity across organizations limits the available
employment of Black men and women growing at evidence, econometric studies conducted during
a faster rate and the employment of White men the late 1970s and late 1980s, when affirmative
growing at a slower rate among federal contrac- action was most strictly enforced, showed that the
tors than among similar establishments without industries under the most pressure to comply with
federal contracts. Studies also showed that compli- affirmative action plans were no less productive
ance reviews are an important form of enforce- than other industries. In addition, company-level
ment. Federal contractors that had undergone a analyses showed that affirmative action obliga-
compliance review had twice as much Black male tions and changes in workplace composition had
employment growth as such businesses that had no negative effect on company profits. In fact,
not been the subject of a compliance review. more recent research has shown that companies
Another important factor in understanding the that employ the highest proportion of women and
impact of affirmative action is employment growth minorities enjoy higher returns on their stocks
more generally. Federal contractors that had many than the market average, while those that employ
job openings were more likely to increase their the lowest proportion of women and minorities
representation of Black employees than contractors had stocks that underperformed relative to the
with less growth in the early years of affirmative market average.
action. A number of studies have also shown that One of the most commonly relied upon ways
affirmative action raised the occupational levels of that opponents of affirmative action assess whether
Affirmative Action 11

affirmative action results in reverse discrimination deal of controversy and has been criticized in a
is to compare the qualifications of employees who number of publications for its methods and the
benefit from affirmative action to the qualifica- author’s interpretations. In any case, research has
tions of those who do not. While this approach shown that even when students do not finish law
enjoys the most media attention, it is poor science school, simply attending increases annual earnings
because measures of merit are often intrinsically and thus serves to boost the life outcomes of peo-
tied to institutional forms of sexism and racism. ple of color.
Subjective measures are subject to implicit and One of the factors that the Supreme Court has
explicit race and gender bias, while objective mea- taken into account in ruling on affirmative action
sures like standardized testing have been shown to is the social value gained by diversity. A large body
be culturally biased and poor predictors of perfor- of research has shown that diversity leads to posi-
mance. Research using data from employers in tive learning outcomes for both Whites and people
Atlanta, Los Angeles, Boston, and Detroit has of color. Research has shown that interactions in
revealed that among employers most committed to diverse settings improve the ability to take the per-
affirmative action plans, women and minorities spective of others, and that heterogeneous groups
had lower average qualifications than White males, outperform homogeneous groups when members
but their performance on the job was no different. perceive their contribution to be important. In
addition to the direct benefit of diversity, ethnic
minorities are more likely than Whites to use their
Impact of Affirmative Action
education to benefit society—professionally and
on Diversity in Higher Education
through civic engagement. Thus, increasing the
Affirmative action in education has been even representation of minorities in higher education
more controversial than in employment, experi- institutions has been shown to have long-term
encing more legal challenges on charges of reverse positive social outcomes.
discrimination. The appellate and supreme courts
have ruled in favor of plaintiffs charging reverse
Impact of Affirmative Action
discrimination, and in so doing have effectively
on Intergroup Relations
eliminated quotas and severely limited race-based
preferences in college admissions. Because affirmative action is unique in its proactive
Research has suggested that prior to the current approach to reducing inequality, there are a num-
restrictions, affirmative action led to more diver- ber of important ways in which attitudinal responses
sity in higher education. Recent empirical research to the law and its impact expand our understand-
analyzing student data from 28 elite colleges and ing of intergroup relations. Attitudes about affir-
universities in 1951, 1976, and 1989 showed that mative action vary significantly according to how it
race-based affirmative action significantly increased is defined. Research has shown that people tend to
the number of Blacks admitted to and attending be the most supportive of outreach programs and
elite institutions. In addition, findings showed that formalized job postings, while there is greater resis-
ethnic minorities graduated at the same rate as tance to preferential treatment practices. Attitudes
Whites. Another recent study of the University of about affirmative action also vary according to the
Michigan Law School showed similar findings. As gender, race, political ideologies, and prejudice lev-
in the employment arena, the evidence—that stu- els of individuals. Research has shown that women,
dents admitted as a result of race- and gender- people of color, political liberals, and those who
sensitive policies graduate at the same rate as those hold the least prejudiced attitudes tend to be more
admitted without affirmative action—seriously supportive of affirmative action. The popular press
hampers claims of reverse discrimination. While has characterized affirmative action as a racially
most studies have provided this evidence, one polarizing policy that divides Whites and Blacks.
study has found that Blacks admitted to elite law Research has shown that Whites do tend to be less
schools entered with lower average credentials supportive of affirmative action than are Blacks,
than White students and were less likely to gradu- but the extent of polarization has been exagger-
ate and pass the bar. This study has sparked a great ated. Both Blacks and Whites tend to oppose quota
12 Affirmative Action

systems and support outreach programs. Though concern, showing that when affirmative action is
Whites resist preferential treatment practices more mentioned to people prior to their being asked to
than do minorities, there is a significant proportion evaluate women and men job applicants, women
of Whites and minorities who support and oppose are rated as less competent. In addition, laboratory
such forms of affirmative action. research has shown that when people believe they
People express opposition to special preferences have been granted preferential treatment or are led
in hiring and admissions because such preferences to believe others believe this, their general and
are perceived to violate norms of fairness and jus- task-specific performance is lower. Recent research
tice. While attitudinal survey research has shown has linked this disempowering effect to resistance
that people who oppose affirmative action believe it to affirmative action, showing that when political
is unjust, it has also shown that such a concern ideology, support for gender-based affirmative
affects opposition differently depending on the race action, symbolic racism, and perceived discrimina-
and gender of the group benefiting from the policies, tion are accounted for, racial minorities are more
as well as the race and gender of the respondents. likely to oppose special hiring preferences for their
For example, concerns about justice drive resistance own group when they have a close friend who is
to race-based affirmative action more than sex- White. This finding suggests that when the percep-
based affirmative action. In other words, people’s tion of the dominant society is close to home,
social locations and attitudes about other groups resistance to affirmative action is greater.
have greater explanatory power regarding resistance The history and impact of affirmative action
to affirmative action than do people’s adherence to serve to highlight the nature of modern race and
fairness and justice norms. One study also found gender relations. Efforts to eliminate barriers to
that prejudice levels mediated people’s tendency to equal opportunity have improved the educational
misconstrue affirmative action programs as justice and labor market outcomes of women and minor-
violating when they were explicitly designed not to ities. In spite of these gains, affirmative action
advantage certain groups over others. faces a formidable battle in winning over the sup-
In moving beyond explanations rooted in prin- port of those who stand to gain from the current
ciples of fairness, social psychologists have developed system of inequality. So long as Whites and males
a number of different theories for under­standing oppose equalizing policies like affirmative action,
variations in attitudes about affirmative action. those who benefit from the policies also incur the
Scholars who place primary importance on the role costs by being perceived as less worthy than others
of racial prejudice have theorized that individualist of their successes. This lag in attitudinal change is
values, which lead to resentment against Blacks for both a reason for affirmative action and an unfor-
their struggles to succeed economically (symbolic tunate consequence of laws aimed at forcing
racism), conflicting interests between social groups, changes in existing status hierarchies.
and the preference for social dominance, drive
resistance to affirmative action. All of these theories Justine E. Tinkler
differ in important ways, but they share the basic
notion that dominant groups oppose affirmative See also Civil Rights Legislation; Discrimination; Group
action because it threatens their privileges. These Position Theory; Justice; Racism; Sexism; Symbolic
Racism
theories provide the most purchase for understand-
ing why Whites and males resist affirmative action,
but the theories do not adequately address why Further Readings
groups that stand to benefit from affirmative action Bobo, L., & Kluegel, J. R. (1993). Opposition to race-
policies sometimes also oppose them. targeting: Self-interest, stratification ideology, or racial
Given the controversy surrounding affirmative attitudes? American Sociological Review, 58,
action and the widely publicized complaints about 443–464.
reverse discrimination, those who benefit from affir- Bowen, W. G., & Bok, D. (1998). The shape of the river:
mative action may be concerned about perceptions Long-term consequences of considering race in
that their success is not merit based. A number of college and university admissions. Princeton, NJ:
laboratory studies have provided support for this Princeton University Press.
Ageism 13

Crosby, F. J. (2004). Affirmative action is dead: Long live jokingly presented) is “I’m sorry to hear you’re
affirmative action. New Haven, CT: Yale University another year older” and that it is bad to get old.
Press.
Crosby, F. J., Iyer, A., & Sincharoen, S. (2006).
Understanding affirmative action. Annual Review of Forms of Ageism
Psychology, 57, 585–611. Ageism takes many forms. It affects how some
Leonard, J. S. (1990). The impact of affirmative action people speak to older adults. This language style,
regulation and equal employment law on black though grounded in good intentions, is experi-
employment. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 4,
enced by many older people as patronizing and
47–63.
condescending. On the basis of stereotypes about
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S.
the loss of cognitive abilities as we age, younger
265 (1978).
adults will often be overly polite, speak louder and
slower, exaggerate their intonation, speak in a
higher pitch, and use simple sentences. This “baby
talk” has been found to be the same type of speech
Ageism style that people use to talk to children, pets, and
even inanimate objects. Interestingly, some older
When we perceive other people, there are three adults don’t mind being spoken to in this way.
primary criteria upon which we automatically and Research has shown that older adults who are not
initially categorize them: race, gender, and age. functioning at a healthy level (physically, emotion-
This categorization process follows from the natu- ally, or cognitively) actually prefer this speech style
ral tendency of the mind to categorize objects in because it communicates a feeling that the younger
its environment to facilitate everyday cognition person perceives them as needing to be taken care
and action. The categorization of others on these of, and this dependency relationship is comforting
dimensions becomes so well learned that it is to the older adult. Older adults who are healthy,
automatic in social perception. Unfortunately, however, may find such speech styles offensive.
while categorizing people according to these char- Research has indicated that people have very
acteristics does indeed facilitate social cognition, it negative attitudes toward aging and adults over
is also the first step in stereotyping of, and preju- 55, and particularly over 75. However, when
dice toward, groups. While researchers have long asked about their attitudes toward their elderly
studied racism and sexism, they know compara- boss, or grandfather, or neighbor, respondents in
tively little about prejudice against someone based research studies have a positive attitude toward the
on their age, referred to as ageism. While it is cer- specific older adult. This led to confusion among
tainly true that people have prejudices and stereo- some early researchers who were not really sure if
types about virtually any age group, the vast prejudice against older adults existed. As it turns
majority of research on age prejudice has focused out, it does, and people have many different and
on the most common form of ageism: prejudice at times contradictory views of the older adult (for
toward older people, particular those over 74 example, sometimes as a “sage” or “perfect grand-
years of age. parent,” and sometimes as “impaired” or a
One reason that ageism has been underinvesti- “shrew” or “curmudgeon”). One contributing rea-
gated by researchers is that it is institutionalized son for this may be that we tend to think about
within American and many other Western cultures. stereotyped outgroups along two dimensions:
In other words, negative views of older people are warmth and competence. We tend to view older
very much a part of our everyday shared experi- people with whom we are familiar (such as family,
ences and lives, and older adults tend to buy into friends, coworkers) as warmer but less competent
the truth underlying the stereotypes, that those than other older people. Research indicates that
who experience ageism are not perceived as “vic- we regard other elderly people as cold and either
tims.” An example of how ageism is institutional- incompetent or competent.
ized can be found in greeting card stores. In the These divergent ways of treating older people
birthday card section, the basic message (though according to age stereotypes also can be linked to
14 Ageism

two different types of ageism. With benevolent age- that such a fate will befall them, and their anxiety
ism, the perceiver believes that older people need recedes.
help and are dependent, and that younger people Though more research is needed on the motiva-
have an obligation to care for older people. The tions behind age stereotypes and prejudice, this
motivation and attitude toward older people is theory has the most current empirical support and
kind, helpful, and positive. In contrast, malignant is highly regarded by many ageism researchers.
ageism rests on the belief that older people are
worthless, negative, and a burden on society. The
Internalization of Ageism
motivation and attitude of these perceivers are quite
negative and hostile toward older adults. These If a whole society is communicating to you that old
very different attitudes toward older people can age is bad, that it is something to be feared, that
lead to different perceptions of their warmth and your cognitive and physical abilities are declining
competence, and those perceptions, in turn, can with every day, and that your worth to society is
lead to very different beliefs, stereotypes about, and fairly low (because you are no longer working),
behavior toward elderly people. you, as an older person, may start to believe it.
This can have negative effects on self-concept and
self-esteem and may even influence a person’s lon-
Motivation for Ageism
gevity. One study found that older adults who had
A fundamental question is, “Why are people age- more positive self-perceptions of aging lived an
ist?” Older people are a unique group for prejudice average of 7.5 years longer than those with a more
researchers to study because, just by living long negative view of their aging. Interestingly, research
enough, these people move from the ingroup to a has shown that the self-esteem of older people is
stereotyped outgroup. Given this fact, why would not affected by ageism in society and age stereo-
a younger person be motivated to insult and deni- types and prejudice. In fact, some studies have
grate a group to which he or she will eventually shown the self-esteem of older adults to be double
belong? Though there are many potential, contrib- that of those of high school age. Again, if older
uting motivations, one theory has shown substan- adults believe that the ageist behavior of others is
tial and compelling empirical evidence supporting not prejudicial, but rather is merely communicat-
the idea that ageism is motivated by fear. Terror ing a societal, commonly understood “truth”
management theory suggests that culture and reli- about older adults, then older adults may not per-
gion are creations that impose meaning and order ceive anything negative about their ageist treat-
on our world. This order helps us keep at bay our ment by younger people.
feelings of fear about our mortality and the ran- This is an important point to discuss in a bit
dom nature of the universe. According to the the- more detail. Researchers have found utility in distin-
ory, as we go through childhood, we associate guishing between the “young–old” (ages 55–74)
good behavior with being rewarded and protected and the “old–old” (ages 75 and higher). Most of the
by our parents. This good feeling about ourselves, negative stereotypes about aging and older people
our self-esteem, therefore forms a buffer against are derived from our perceptions of the old–old.
fears of our eventual death. Research on terror These two groups of older adults react to ageist
management theory consistently has shown that treatment very differently. In a recent survey of over
when people are reminded about their mortality, 850 older adults, respondents were asked about
they feel more anxiety. Because older people their experiences with ageism and how it made
remind us of our mortality, we may avoid or even them feel. The young–old noted several incidents of
denigrate them to help us deny the possibility that ageist behavior directed at them, and it made them
we too will eventually get old (and die). Several very angry (because they do not think of themselves
studies therefore have shown that older people are as “old”). The old–old, however, were either unwill-
stereotyped and discriminated against by younger ing to admit they’d experienced ageism, or they just
people so they can cognitively distance themselves did not interpret that behavior as ageist (because, as
from their elders and blame them for their “sorry mentioned earlier, they perceived it as reflecting a
state” (being old). In so doing, young people deny true state of affairs—they were dependent and they
Allport, Gordon 15

were failing in their cognitive and physical abilities). becoming more ageist. Recent research suggests that
If they did mention they experienced ageism, they as Eastern cultures become more industrialized, and
said they were not bothered by it. more like the West—due to trade, tourism, and
increasing global connectedness—they may tend to
adopt more Western views of death, aging, and the
Pervasiveness of Ageism
role of the older person in society.
Research has found that ageism is so pervasive in
society that even those who work in helping profes-
Reducing Ageism
sions show ageist attitudes. In medical schools, little
training has typically been devoted to gerontology How then can ageism be reduced? From an early
or geriatrics, because it is not seen as an exciting age, children must learn that getting older does not
field in which to specialize. Older people are viewed mean one will eventually be a witch or a bad or
by some doctors as rigid, depressed, senile, or grumpy person (as most fairy tales suggest). Society
untreatable. Some doctors view treating older needs to educate children, employers, policymak-
patients as futile or as a waste of time, because they ers, and health care professionals about the perva-
are going to die soon anyway. Indeed, studies have siveness of ageism and how it has very real, harmful
shown that some doctors are less willing to pursue effects on older adults. Opportunities for older
expensive treatments and aggressive procedures or people to contribute to their community should be
therapies with older patients, and are more likely to created, and contact between younger and older
order pain medication to stabilize them until they people should be encouraged. Older people should
die. Other studies have shown that doctors regard be regarded with respect. In so doing, society will
the same disease (e.g., cancer) as a surprise and a enhance the quality of life for older adults and
tragedy in a 5-year-old but not in an older adult. enhance intergenerational interactions.
Researchers have referred to this as “healthism.”
Todd D. Nelson
Some mental health professionals may shy away
from accepting older clients because they view See also Discrimination; Perceived Group Variability;
older people as not really having serious problems, Prejudice; Stereotyping; Stigma; Terror Management
but rather as just feeling lonely and wanting to talk Theory
to someone. On a positive note, these biases in the
medical and psychological professions are indeed
Further Readings
changing as increasing attention is devoted to train-
ing doctors and psychologists in gerontology, in Bugental, D. B., & Hehman, J. A. (2007). Ageism: A
response to the growing demand for such training review of research and policy implications. Social
brought about by the retiring baby boomers. Issues and Policy Review, 1, 173–216.
At the extreme, malignant ageism can result in Martens, A., Godenberg, J. L., & Greenberg, J. (2005). A
exploitation, neglect, or abuse of older adults, and terror management perspective on ageism. Journal of
even in violent behavior toward them that leads to Social Issues, 61(2), 223–240.
their injury or death. Unfortunately, this type of Nelson, T. D. (2002). Ageism: Stereotyping and prejudice
abuse is on the rise, and it tends to be overlooked against older persons. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Nelson, T. D. (Ed.). (2005). Ageism: Prejudice against
because (1) physicians have, until only fairly
our feared future self. Journal of Social Issues, 61(2),
recently, been less acquainted with this form of
207–221.
abuse and (2) the elderly victim is too embar-
rassed or afraid to report it. Elder abuse is not
restricted to the United States, as researchers have
uncovered such abuse in Japan, Puerto Rico, and
other cultures.
Allport, Gordon
Though ageism is most prevalent in the United (1897–1967)
States (with exceptions such as traditional Hawaiians,
who revere their elders) and other Western nations, Gordon Willard Allport is renowned for his work
other countries around the world are increasingly on the psychology of prejudice and his formulation
16 Allport, Gordon

of the highly influential contact hypothesis. His The Nature of Prejudice


work pioneered a focus on the cognitive anteced-
Allport’s 1954 book, The Nature of Prejudice,
ents of prejudice; it demonstrated how social psy-
contains his most influential theoretical contribu-
chological research can address important social
tion to social psychology. Focusing on intergroup
issues and have a tangible impact on policy and
conflict and in particular on interracial relations in
practice. This entry looks at his life and works.
the United States, the book provides a broad per-
Allport was born in Montezuma, Indiana, in
spective on defining, explaining, and reducing
1897. His father was a physician, and his mother
prejudice.
was a former schoolteacher. When he was 6 years
Allport was one of the first theorists to focus on
old, his family moved near Cleveland, Ohio, where
the cognitive antecedents and processes that con-
he spent all his school years. Allport had three
tribute to expressions of prejudice. He argued that
older brothers, one of whom, Floyd, was also a
stereotyping and categorization per se are func-
social psychologist and contributed to the estab-
tional aspects of people’s thinking processes, but
lishment of modern experimental social psychol-
that when combined with social inequalities they
ogy. Gordon Allport completed his bachelor’s
can propagate biased attitudes and evaluations of
degree at Harvard in 1919, and he then spent a
others. Thus, through social comparison with out-
year teaching English and sociology at Robert
groups, people locate themselves and their group
College, in Istanbul, Turkey. Returning to Harvard,
in the world. Allport’s analysis suggests that
he was awarded a PhD in 1922; his doctoral dis-
although the cognitive mechanisms involved in
sertation was entitled “An Experimental Study of
social categorization and stereotyping may some-
the Traits of Personality: With Special Reference to
times lead to negative intergroup attitudes, this is
the Problem of Social Diagnosis.”
not inevitably the case.
Following completion of his PhD, Allport was
This led to the important observation that if
awarded a fellowship to study in Europe. He spent
more general psychological processes relating to
one year in Berlin and Hamburg, Germany, where
categorization are involved in the formation of
he was introduced to the Gestalt theory of mind.
negative intergroup attitudes, then encouraging
He then spent a year in England at Cambridge
people to shift their conceptualizations of group
University before returning to United States and
membership from strictly defined criteria, such as
eventually becoming a faculty member of Harvard
race, to more inclusive categories, like common
University from 1930 to his death in 1967. Allport
humanity, may weaken antagonistic relations and
also served as president of the American Psycho­
prejudice between ethnic groups.
logical Association.
The Contact Hypothesis
Allport’s Work
A milestone theoretical contribution of The
Opposed to the strictly one-sided psychoanalytic Nature of Prejudice was Allport’s formulation of
and behaviorist approaches to the study of personal- the contact hypothesis. Allport considered whether
ity, Allport emphasized the uniqueness of the indi- simply bringing together members of groups that
vidual and argued that problems need to be treated differ in terms of race, religion, or national origin
in terms of present circumstances instead of child- could reduce stereotyping and prejudice. He
hood experiences. His theoretical views on person- argued that, in many cases, contact on its own
ality resulted in two books, Personality: A might not be sufficient to improve intergroup
Psychological Interpretation (1937) and Pattern attitudes. Rather, there are prerequisite situa-
and Growth in Personality (1961). In The Individual tional conditions that enable intergroup contact
and His Religion (1950), Allport discussed the experiences to result in positive attitude change.
development of religious attitudes and ideologies, as The “four necessary conditions” Allport identi-
well as the relationship between religion and inter- fied were equal status during contact, the exis-
group attitudes and behavior. This work led to what tence of common goals, cooperation in achieving
is perhaps Allport’s most important contribution to such goals, and institutional support (e.g., laws,
social psychology. authorities, customs).
Ambivalent Sexism 17

Over the past 50 years, a great deal of research Pettigrew, T. F. (1999). Gordon Willard Allport: A
has been devoted to testing and amending the basic tribute. Journal of Social Issues, 55, 415–427.
principles of the contact hypothesis, and contact is Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic
now one of the most widely used psychological test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of
interventions for reducing prejudice and improv- Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751–783.
ing intergroup relations. Much of this research
initially focused on extending Allport’s four key
conditions for positive contact outcomes, leading
some to suggest that the approach had too many Ambivalent Sexism
such conditions to prove workable.
A recent meta-analysis conducted by Thomas Ambivalent sexism, a subtle but effective method
Pettigrew and Linda Tropp directly addressed this of keeping the gender equality gap from shrink-
criticism. The meta-analysis identified 515 studies ing, contains two complementary belief systems
conducted between 1949 and 2000 with 713 sam- about women that have the contrasting valences
ples and a total of 38 participating nations. The of subjective benevolence and hostility. Benevolent
result of this meta-analysis was a robust and statis- sexism masks the more overt hostile sexism by
tically significant negative effect of contact on giving seemingly caring reasons for discriminatory
prejudice, an effect that remained even for contact behaviors toward women. Thus, ambivalent sex-
that did not meet any of Allport’s initial four condi- ism can be a difficult prejudice to root out.
tions. Contemporary research on contact has, Historical conceptions of sexism assume the
therefore, begun to examine other issues, including hostile belief that women are inferior to men and
which forms of contact best reduce prejudice. For unfit for positions of leadership, especially those
instance, researchers have found that a unique involving power over men. In this view, women
form of contact, cross-group friendship, is more who adhere to traditional roles are undervalued
effective at improving outgroup attitudes than less and viewed with contempt, while those who chal-
intimate forms of contact. They also have discov- lenge such ascribed codes of behavior are resented
ered that indirect forms of contact, where contact as overstepping natural and cultural boundaries.
is experienced vicariously through others or through While this notion of sexism has prevailed for a long
simply imagining a positive outgroup encounter, period of time, a more recent conceptualization
can have a positive effect on outgroup attitudes. reveals that traditional beliefs about women may
More than 50 years after the first publication of be more complicated than previously assumed.
The Nature of Prejudice, its core ideas continue to Rather than depicting women in only openly
inspire and guide scholars and policymakers focused hostile ways, more recent depictions show that
on the assessment, explanation, and attenuation of most people (both men and women alike) tend to
prejudice, and this is Allport’s enduring legacy. hold dual conceptions about women: benevolent
and hostile sexism. Acting together, these aspects
Richard J. Crisp and Sofia Stathi
of ambivalent sexism reward women for avoiding
situations that make them seem nonfeminine and
See also Discrimination; Intergroup Contact Theory; for choosing situations that make them seem femi-
Prejudice
nine. Or, as Glick and Fiske have described, the
two components act as “carrot and stick” to
Further Readings encourage women to “remain in their place.”
Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Garden Women receive rewards (i.e., the carrot) when they
City, NY: Doubleday. follow the rules, but are punished (i.e., receive the
Dovidio, J. F., Glick, P. G., & Rudman, L. (Eds.). (2005). stick) when they do not.
On the nature of prejudice: Fifty years after Allport.
Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Components
Pettigrew, T. F. (1998). Intergroup contact: Theory,
research and new perspectives. Annual Review of Hostile sexism is the belief that women are by
Psychology, 49, 65–85. nature inferior and thus unfit for and incapable of
18 Ambivalent Sexism

holding positions of authority, especially over system. Benevolent sexism is patronizing care
men. Hostile sexists tend to see a power struggle taken of someone assumed to be unable to make
between the sexes and express resentment of decisions or act as an independent adult; it is
women for manipulating men—whether by blud- related to paternalism and the presumed benevo-
geoning men with “feminist demands” or control- lent authority parents exercise over their chil-
ling men through sexual seduction. Accordingly, dren. This implicitly treats women as children,
hostile sexists (both men and women) may experi- advocating that men be guardians of women’s
ence anger toward “feminist” women who chal- minds and bodies, exerting a protective influence
lenge prescribed gender roles and/or shirk “their over women because of their alleged vulnerabil-
moral and biological duty” of acting as a subordi- ity. In a complementary fashion, hostile sexism
nate to a presumably stronger male counterpart. reinforces patriarchal assumptions that men
Because laws, organizational policies, and norms should be in charge. However, hostile sexism
of social desirability often serve to protect women, more directly asserts women’s presumed inferior-
expressions of hostile sexism may have diminished ity (e.g., viewing them as too emotional to
in recent years. lead).
Benevolent sexism also works against the pro- A second component reflects biological and
motion of women as equals, but in a very different social gender differentiation. Men’s physical
way. This construct idealizes women as mothers, power is often equated with social power. Sex is
wives, and caregivers. In addition, benevolent sex- a fundamental biological and social category
ism assumes that women both have a purity that that tends to foster sharp social distinctions in
men do not and also need protection, as they are most societies (e.g., gender stereotypes), form-
too weak and good to defend themselves against ing the basis for a division of labor. Women
those who might otherwise do them wrong. Rather (due to their greater biological ties to reproduc-
than lowering the status of women by directly tion) are associated with nurturing and domes-
characterizing them as less competent, benevolent tic life, whereas men are associated with more
sexism subtly reinforces the idea that women are powerful societal roles and leadership positions.
more fragile and should be protected and provided These roles reinforce both benevolent sexism
for by men. In return, women are expected to con- (e.g., viewing women as warm and expressive—
fine themselves to a social sphere in which they can traits linked to the nurturing role) and hostile
nurture the next generation, serve as counterparts sexism (e.g., viewing women as less competent
to their adoring husbands, and create comfortable because they less often occupy leadership
homes. roles).
Hostile and benevolent sexism work to balance A third component of ambivalent sexism is het-
each other and together function (more effectively erosexuality, the premise that both sexes need a
than hostility would alone) to relegate women to a heterosexual romantic relationship to be fulfilled.
second-class status. Benevolent sexism may be Sexuality affords women a dual role. On one hand,
more palatable to most people (especially women) women may be viewed as good wives and mothers,
than hostile sexism because it appears to reflect or agents and targets of intimacy and affection
good intentions rather than antagonism. That is, (i.e., benevolence). On the other hand, women
women who allow themselves to be patronized may be viewed as seductresses, using their sexual
reap some benefits and earn the adoration of their power to take control over men and attempting to
male protectors, while women who do not con- emasculate them (i.e., hostile). The presumption
form to the model are subjected to the negative that women use sex as a tool by which to control
consequences provided by hostile sexism, includ- men elicits hostile resentment and attitudes that
ing censure, hate, and resentment. sexually demean women. However, because sex is
rewarding and fosters emotional intimacy, subjec-
tively benevolent views romanticize women (e.g.,
Sources
as fair and pure princesses). Thus, ambivalent sex-
Three structural foundations underlie ambivalent ism encourages polarized categorizations of some
sexist beliefs. The first is acceptance of a patriarchal women as “sluts” and others as “angels.”
Anticonformity 19

Measuring Ambivalent Sexism potential limits everyone in society. When women


are forced out of the workforce by prejudice,
The most commonly used measure of ambivalent
beaten in their homes for expressing ideas contrary
sexism is the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory, which
to those of their husbands, and treated as second-
separately assesses each component of sexism. The
class citizens on the basis of gender, an environ-
measure was created by Glick and Fiske in 1996,
ment is created where neither women nor men can
and since then it has been widely validated in more
thrive. While the process of change involves a cul-
than 25 countries (e.g., the U.S., Turkey, Brazil,
tural shift in attitudes toward women, recognizing
the Netherlands) with samples ranging from 200
the consequences of sexist behavior is an impor-
to 2,000. The measure goes beyond previous
tant first step in achieving equality. Ambivalent
boundaries by examining sexism as more than the
sexism complicates the prospects for exposing the
traditional, hostility-based view in which sexist
negative effects of sexism because of its subjec-
behaviors are solely motivated by a dislike of
tively positive component, which leads many peo-
women. Thus, an example of benevolent sexism is:
ple to view sexism as not as bad as other forms of
“Many women have a quality of purity that few
prejudice. Specifically, women are more accepting
men possess.” And an example of hostile sexism is:
of benevolent sexism (due to its apparent favorabil-
“Women seek to gain power by getting control
ity toward women) and, in turn, are more willing
over men.” The ambivalent nature of sexism can
to accept hostile sexism because it is “softened” by
be seen in the duality of women’s roles expressed
benevolent sexism.
here. Women are described as both pure beings
and power-hungry creatures. Michelle Hebl and Katharine Ridgway O’Brien
Research using the measure has shown that the
constructs of benevolent sexism and hostile sexism See also Discrimination; Leadership; Prejudice; Racism;
are positively correlated with each other (correla- Sexism
tions range across samples from .37 to .74), and
tend to be more highly correlated in women than in Further Readings
men. Hostile sexism is also correlated with other
measures, such as “protestant work ethic” and Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism
“social dominance,” while benevolent sexism has inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent
been correlated with “right wing authoritarian- sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
70, 491–512.
ism.” When hostile sexism is statistically controlled,
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance:
benevolent sexism is often no longer a significant
Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary
predictor for constructs like modern sexism or tra-
justifications for gender inequality. American
ditional sexism. Such an effect may be taken as
Psychologist, 56, 109–118.
further evidence that benevolent sexism is a unique
construct that gives sexist behaviors a protectionist
aura. In these studies, men tend to score higher Anticonformity
than women on the hostile components of sexism,
but there are rarely gender differences on the
Anticonformity refers to behavior that is deliber-
benevolent sexism component, with both groups at
ately designed to go against the position advocated
least partially endorsing this behavior.
by one or more others. Also known as counterfor-
mity, anticonformity most typically occurs in
group settings when an individual rebels against
Consequences
the dominant or majority opinion. It conjures up
The consequences of ambivalent sexism can be the image of the maverick or deviant who pur-
severe. As with most forms of subtle discrimina- posefully disagrees publicly with the positions of
tion, the slow buildup of unfair treatment over others in the group, even when he or she agrees
time exacerbates the impact of any one sexist inter- privately with these same positions.
action. Any belief system that systematically keeps Anticonformity stands in contrast to two other
one group from living and working at its full important types of response to social pressure:
20 Anticonformity

conformity and independence. Conformity and and social influence was measured by the change
anticonformity are essentially opposites. Whereas in participants’ ratings toward or away from the
with conformity, an individual is motivated to rating given by the “partner.” Argyle found that
cooperate, follow, and fit in with the group, with most participants, 58%, were uninfluenced by
anticonformity, he or she is motivated to disagree their partner; they showed independence by stick-
with, disrupt, and oppose the group. In research ing with their original opinion. Another 35%
settings, conformity is usually measured by move- showed conformity by moving toward the part-
ment toward the majority opinion, and anticon- ner’s position. The remaining 8% of participants,
formity by movement away from it. Independence however, showed anticonformity; they became
can look like anticonformity, but its motives are even more extreme in their disagreement with their
different. With independence, the goal is simply partner.
to be true to one’s self, regardless of how one’s In the early 1960s, Richard Crutchfield and
views might be received by others. The term non- Richard Willis published the earliest theoretical
conformity encompasses both anticonformity and work on the distinction between anticonformity,
independence. conformity, and independence. Working indepen-
A real-life example of anticonformity was widely dently, both proposed that although anticonfor-
reported in the American media during the mity and conformity are opposites in terms of
Christmas season in 1994. A man from Little underlying motives and measurement, they are,
Rock, Arkansas, was served with a court injunc- ironically, quite similar conceptually in that both
tion, raised at the behest of his neighbors, ordering are determined by the group’s position. Thus, both
him to remove some of the over 3 million lights are properly regarded as forms of dependent
from the Christmas display at his home. The dis- behavior. Both stand in contrast to independence,
play was attracting too many sightseers and too therefore, where the individual is not influenced
much traffic to his exclusive residential neighbor- one way or the other by social forces. Crutchfield
hood for his neighbors’ liking. The man could have and Willis concluded that anticonformity, confor-
conformed to his neighbors by removing some of mity, and independence should not be conceptual-
his lights. He could have shown independence by ized and measured merely by different degrees of
neither adding nor removing any lights. Instead, positive or negative movement along a single-
the man chose to anticonform. Soon after the dimension line segment, the standard practice of
injunction was served, he defied it by increasing Argyle and other early researchers. Rather, the
the number of lights in his display. This entry three responses should be seen as falling at the
examines the origins of anticonformity, describes vertices of a triangle.
some theories, and offers a few examples.
Theories of Anticonformity
Background and History
Social scientists have proposed a number of motives
In 1957, British psychologist Michael Argyle pub- that attempt to explain why anticonformity may
lished what was probably the first study to demon- occur in certain situations. One motive, first for-
strate anticonformity under controlled conditions. mally identified by Jack Brehm, is known as psy-
Argyle asked male students to evaluate a painting chological reactance. It is based on an individual’s
by Marc Chagall, Poète Allongé, which was cho- perceived rights and freedoms. When people are
sen deliberately because of its “unusual and members of a group, they can come to believe that
ambiguous character.” Participants were told that their rights as individuals are being eliminated or
they were working with a student partner, when in threatened with elimination. Under such condi-
fact their partner was Argyle’s confederate. In one tions, Brehm proposed, people may react by taking
condition, each student learned that his opinion of steps to restore their freedom.
the painting had been rejected by his partner (e.g., One clear way to reclaim a freedom is to do the
“What you say is trivial, for the picture is so mean- opposite of what the source of the threat suggests;
ingful as a whole”). Participants were then given that is, to anticonform. So if people in a neighbor-
an opportunity to rate the painting a second time, hood group say to one of their members, “Surely,
Anticonformity 21

you must agree with us that we have too much and opposition to the Nazis, in perhaps the only
traffic at night in our neighborhood. You need to way available to him under the circumstances, his
take down some of your Christmas lights,” the offer reflects anticonformity.
target individual might respond in words or deeds, This example is important because it illustrates
“Who gave you the right to tell me what to do on that although anticonformity is usually measured
my own property? Actually, I think my display by movement away from a group’s position, it
would benefit by adding even more lights.” Another can sometimes be indicated, ironically, by move-
example of anticonformity consistent with reac- ment toward the group, provided that such
tance motivation is known as the Romeo and Juliet movement is excessive. This brand of anticonfor-
effect. As in Shakespeare’s tragic drama, attempts mity was first identified by Willis and dubbed
by parents in Western cultures to restrict their overconformity.
teenagers’ freedom to date may backfire, leading
to increased dating. The Anticonformist
Other recognized motives for anticonformity
include the desires to (a) promote change and Anticonformity refers to a type of behavior. Yet, a
innovation; (b) establish or project one’s indi- person who consistently engages in anticonformity
viduality or uniqueness; (c) avoid bad group deci- across time and settings can be regarded as a type
sions (i.e., groupthink); (d) avoid the appearance of person—the anticonformist. Most evidence sup-
of sycophancy; (e) disconfirm another’s negative porting the existence of anticonformists is anec-
expectations regarding one’s skills, attributes, or dotal. Nevertheless, there have been a few
abilities; and (f) distance oneself or group from systematic attempts to identify the characteristics
dissimilar, disliked, or unattractive others. and etiology of anticonformists. One provocative
An example of this distancing occurred in the account was offered by historian of science, Frank
1930s following the rise of Nazism. Prior to Sulloway. Based on archival records, Sulloway
World War II, a type of swastika had been the found significant evidence that innovators, icono-
official insignia of the U.S. Army’s 45th Infantry clasts, and rebels in the history of science, religion,
Division. The swastika of the 45th was chosen and politics tend to be later-borns.
initially because it had been an ancient cosmic and To explain these findings, Sulloway proposed
religious symbol in many cultures (e.g., Navajo that because of firstborns’ typical role as surrogate
Indian culture). After a mirror-image swastika parents, and through the normal process of sibling
was adopted by Hitler and the Nazis in 1935, competition for parental attention, firstborns gen-
however, ranking officers in the 45th Division felt erally identify with their parents. Firstborns, there-
obliged to change their insignia in order to dissoci- fore, are predisposed to conformity and
ate the 45th from anything related to Nazism. The conventionality. Later-born children, in contrast,
division’s swastika was replaced in 1939 by a are outsiders to an established group from birth—
thunderbird. their parents and older siblings. Thus, they are
primed to rebel against the establishment, particu-
larly against the seemingly arbitrary authority that
Anticonformity by Overconformity is typically exerted over them by elder siblings, and
Another probable example of anticonformity based hence tend toward anticonformity.
on disassociation from the Nazis was demon- The primary force that drives change in history,
strated by Freud following the Nazi annexation of therefore, is not located between families divided
Austria in 1938. According to a biographer, the by social class, as Marx proposed. Rather,
82-year-old Freud was allowed to emigrate to Sulloway argued, it is located within families
England, but only after he had signed an affidavit divided by birth order, a function of small-group
stating that he had been under no pressure from dynamics.
Nazi authorities. After signing, Freud offered to add Paul R. Nail
“I can recommend the Gestapo to anyone,” but his
offer was turned down. Given that the intent of See also Conformity; Groupthink; Innovation; Minority
Freud’s offer was to register his disagreement with Influence; Self-Fulfilling Prophecy; Social Deviance
22 Anti-Semitism

Further Readings of 1096, the expulsion of Jews from England in


1290, the Spanish Inquisition, the expulsion from
Argyle, M. (1957). Social pressure in public and private
Spain in 1492 and from Portugal in 1497, and the
situations. Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology, 54, 172–175.
Holocaust of Nazi Germany.
Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. Anti-Semitism seems to be prototypical of a
New York: Academic Press. number of prejudices. It encompasses nearly every
Crutchfield, R. S. (1962). Conformity and creative aspect of prejudice toward an outgroup. Anti-
thinking. In H. E. Gruber, G. Terrell, & Semitism has many individual-level facets, ranging
M. Wertheimer (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to from subtle anti-Semitic stereotyping and antipa-
creative thinking (pp. 120–140). New York: Atherton. thies to blatant expressions of anti-Semitic racism
Nail, P. R., MacDonald, G., & Levy, D. A. (2000). and discrimination. In many societies, the collec-
Proposal of a four-dimensional model of social tive memory has retained anti-Semitic racial stere-
response. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 454–470. otypes (Jewish character or appearance), religious
Sulloway, F. J. (1996). Born to rebel: Birth order, family stereotypes (Anti-Christ), secular stereotypes (prof-
dynamics, and creative lives. New York: Pantheon. iteer), and political anti-Semitic stereotypes (Jewish
Willis, R. H. (1963). Two dimensions of conformity- conspiracy). Some modern expressions of anti-
nonconformity. Sociometry, 26, 499–513. Semitism, which have been a subject of contro-
versy since the 1990s, are Islamist anti-Semitism
and a critique of Israeli policies that is fed by anti-
Semitic prejudices.
Anti-Semitism
Anti-Semitism is prejudice toward Jews and Jewish
Psychological Foundations
culture. From a social psychological perspective, it Stereotypes and images of the “collective Jew” are
is a devaluation of the group of Jews and their very persistent. Cultures transport and transfer
culture or a devaluation of a Jewish person, anti-Semitic stereotypes and myths through social
because she or he is a member of the social cate- representations that are part of the collective
gory. A common definition refers to anti-Semitism memory. The social psychology of anti-Semitism
as hostile beliefs—expressed by attitudes, myths, focuses on individual causes within social contexts,
ideology, folklore and imagery, discrimination, reaching from prejudices to genocide.
and violence—which destroy the worth of Jews Early psychodynamic approaches attribute its
and Jewish culture. In its most comprehensive causes to intrapsychic crises and conflicts, resulting,
sense, it is hostility toward Jews as “Jews,” and for example, from feelings of guilt or infirm ego
thus an expression of devaluation and of inequal- strengths. The Frankfurt School’s project on the
ity between groups. Anti-Semitism is expressed by authoritarian personality by Theodore Adorno and
individuals, groups, or institutions against Jewish his colleagues had a particularly significant influ-
people, groups, or culture through the categoriza- ence on research on anti-Semitism. This personality
tion of Jews as negatively different or Jewish cul- approach refers to psychodynamic processes and
ture as strange. Jews are seen not as individuals explains anti-Semitism by reference to the individ-
but as a collective that brings problems to a com- ual trait of an authoritarian personality, which is
munity, often in a secret way. developed through punitive socialization and char-
The group-focused nature of anti-Semitism acterized by obedience. The researchers believed
links it to other expressions of prejudice, such as that this personality primes individuals to be per-
anti-immigrant prejudice, prejudice against suaded by propaganda and anti-Semitism. Several
Muslims, and sexism, all within a syndrome of studies have shown that authoritarianism predicts
group-focused enmity. The special importance of anti-Semitism. Current studies also demonstrate
anti-Semitism is derived from two features. First, that dominance-orientated people are prone to be
anti-Semitism has occurred worldwide for centu- anti-Semitic. Social dominance theory criticizes the
ries. Second, its most destructive expression has psychodynamic approach of the Frankfurt School.
been reflected in persecution: the German Crusade Authoritarianism is a pathological condition that
Anti-Semitism 23

does not explain institutional behavior and ideo- to a “group of regulars.” People gain
logical processes in society. Prejudices are legiti- recognition by others through expressing the
mizing ideologies for social hierarchies between normatively “correct” opinion of the group.
groups within a society, and people who are high
4. Anti-Semitism fulfills a knowledge function. It
in social dominance orientation are motivated to
explains what is going on, and why things
keep groups like Jews in lower status positions.
happen. For example, a belief in Jewish
The social identity approach taken by Henri
conspiracy explains why some groups suffer.
Tajfel and his colleagues gives a clearer picture of
Myths about the Zionist threat and the
the link between individual and contextual causes
conspiracy of Judaism that wants to rule the
of prejudices. From this perspective, anti-Semitism
world are extreme examples. These functions
is explained as a group-focused devaluation in the
are fed by anti-Semitic stereotypes, which bind
context of intergroup relations. The social-cognitive
these beliefs together and relate them to other
categorization of Jews and Jewish culture as an
prejudices.
outgroup is thought to be responsible for the devel-
opment of some anti-Semitic sentiments. Primary 5. Anti-Semitism may alleviate feelings of guilt
reference groups (ingroups), which define the social about matters of historical fact. An often-
identity of an individual group member, communi- reported expression of anti-Semitic sentiments is
cate anti-Semitism. Members of an ingroup differ- blaming the victims.
entiate themselves from Jews and Jewish culture
and demand conformity to the ingroup’s norms In addition to such cultural and individual causes,
and ideologies. The ingroup’s social-cognitive char- several other contextual factors permit or promote
acterization of Jews as an outgroup is thought to be anti-Semitism. Studies show that stereotypical
responsible for the development of anti-Semitic media presentations of Jews and Jewish culture
beliefs and attitudes. Anti-Semitic sentiments in over time, a denial of collective anti-Semitism by
extremist groups clearly show this dynamic, but it political and cultural elites, and lack of contact
can also be detected in anti-Semitism of peer groups and experiences with Jews and Jewish culture also
or familial socialization. are critical causes of anti-Semitism. The power of
The satisfaction of several overlapping needs the old anti-Semitism can be evoked by those who
and motives by anti-Semitism is linked to its group- rely on threats to groups and sentiments that can
focused nature. Five such needs and motives are: be linked to stereotypes kept in the historical
memory. Studies in Europe show that anti-Semitism
1. Anti-Semitism functions to reinforce self-esteem is a regular part of right wing populism, together
derived from group membership. Anti-Semitism with xenophobia and authoritarian orientations.
can strengthen social identities, such as those These attitudes are especially exerted by populists
defined by the ideology of a homogeneous who make use of freedom of speech and rely on
nation. Difference and differentiation can have the assumption that the majority feels and thinks
a detrimental effect on self-esteem through the same way. Right wing populists frequently
social identity processes, and may trigger challenge and break laws against anti-Semitism,
prejudices—especially if social identities are felt and anti-Semitic racism is a core element of right
to be threatened. Anti-Semitic stereotypes of wing extremism. However, groups and individuals
Jewish conspiracies keep such threats alive. who are aware of the norm against anti-Semitism
also sometimes fall back on anti-Semitic stereo-
2. Anti-Semitism fulfills the function of
types, for example, in the manner in which they
legitimizing devaluation of those who compete
criticize Israeli policies.
or are perceived to compete with the ingroup,
contributing to the suppression of outgroups
and the superiority of the ingroup. Racist New Anti-Semitism
images of Jews serve this function.
Current research on anti-Semitism is characterized,
3. Anti-Semitism can bind individuals to groups in particular, by controversies about the difference
and their opinions. Anti-Semitism links people between the old and new forms of anti-Semitism.
24 Anti-Semitism

The old or classical anti-Semitism is an overt The German study group on “group-focused
devaluation of Jews that refers to negative, racist enmity” proposes that the presence of one or more
stereotypes (e.g., racist images or stereotypes asso- of the following four criteria indicates that a c�����
riti-
ciated with the Anti-Christ or Devil) and is often cism of Israel may be considered anti-Semitic:
tabooed and outlawed. The new anti-Semitism is
based on traditional anti-Semitic stereotypes that 1. The denial of the right of Israel to exist and the
are expressed in claims about current societal right of its self-defense (i.e., anti-Zionism);
events such as a worldwide Jewish conspiracy or
2. a historical comparison between Israeli policy
Israeli terror, which is interpreted to be Jewish. For
concerning Palestine and the persecution of Jews
example, the new anti-Semitism is represented by
in Nazi Germany;
a specific Islamist, anti-Zionist anti-Semitism
founded on myths of conspiracy. Several studies 3. the evaluation of Israeli policy with double
show that since 2000 (the Second Intifada), anti- standards (i.e., political measures are criticized
Semitism has been on the increase in Muslim com- in Israel but not in other countries); and
munities. Large parts of this Islamist anti-Semitism
4. the transference of anti-Semitic stereotypes to
are being justified by claims that Muslims are vic-
Israel and, in turn, the transformation of Israel
tims of Israeli policies, which are represented and
into the myth of “the collective Jew.”
mythologized as Jewish. Another facet of the new
anti-Semitism is the “secondary anti-Semitism,”
occurring in Germany and other European coun- If criticism of Israel does not meet any of these
tries, that involves denying historical anti-Semitic criteria, it is not considered anti-Semitic. Criticism
events, such as the genocide at Auschwitz, and of Israeli policies in Palestine is possible with-
demanding a Schlussstrich (“final closure”) to the out anti-Semitic sentiment, but analyses show
history of the Holocaust. Other facets of the new that it seems to be very difficult to criticize Israel
anti-Semitism are the positions that Jews benefited without referring to one of these components of
from exploiting their suffering during the Holocaust anti-Semitism.
and that other communities suffered more from
World War II than the Jews did. These arguments
Implications
entail denying the persecution of the Jews and their
status as victims. Polls show that this secondary The group-focused enmity criteria mentioned ear-
anti-Semitism is increasingly spreading into the lier give a basis for detecting new expressions of
mainstream of many civil societies. anti-Semitism from a nonideological point of view.
Often anti-Semitism is hidden by a critique of Unfortunately, the discourse on anti-Semitism has
Israel. This new expression of anti-Semitism is always been charged by ideological positions. This
found in right wing populism, Islamist propa- partly explains why current surveys show that it is
ganda, and sometimes left wing ideologies. Israeli difficult for people to speak about Jews and Jewish
policies against Palestinians are sometimes defined culture without referring to stereotypes. In many
as “Jewish” and are thus attributed to religious societies, such anti-Jewish sentiments are misused
rather than nationalistic causes. This anti-Semitic for propaganda. In Europe, anti-Semitism has
critique is linked to two other themes: first, a com- become a critical part of right wing populism.
parison of Israeli policies to the crimes of the Nazis Additional elements tied to anti-Semitism are
in the Third Reich; and second, a separatist ideol- anti-immigrant prejudices and authoritarian orienta-
ogy categorizing Jews as a strange community that tions, which are often precursors of attacks on Jews,
is not part of society. A topic causing serious dis- synagogues, and Jewish schools. In many European
putes and ideological debate is the question of cities, Jewish buildings still have to be protected by
which criticisms of Israeli politics represent anti- police. Also, innumerable efforts are being made to
Semitism. For example, some argue that any criti- combat traditional and modern anti-Semitism.
cism of Israel represents anti-Semitism, whereas Above all, programs focus on the education of
others claim that virtually no criticism of Israel has schoolchildren and young adults, but anti-Semitism
anti-Semitic roots. is still prevalent among elderly people. However,
Apartheid 25

although many organizations and countries sup-


port campaigns against anti-Semitism, evidence Apartheid
about the effectiveness of these approaches is rare.
Social psychological research offers evidence Apartheid is an Afrikaner word that means “sep-
showing that actions that promote positive inter- arateness” or “apartness.” It represents a cluster
group contacts and self-esteem, lower intergroup of policies that were designed to achieve “total
threats, and strengthen empathy and perspective separation” between races in South Africa, the
taking can reduce prejudices like anti-Semitism. effect of which was to preserve the economic and
However, evidence is needed to establish the effec- political privilege of the White minority. The
tiveness of such interventions specifically with application of apartheid led to a vast program of
anti-Semitism. In addition to analysis of interven- social engineering that lent constitutional legiti-
tionist approaches, more substantive research on macy to the subjugation of the non-White major-
other aspects of anti-Semitism is needed. Although ity. In this entry, the theory, practice, demise, and
many scientists agree that anti-Semitism still exists legacy of apartheid will be discussed, with a focus
and poses a severe threat to democracy, some fun- on its effects on intergroup thoughts, feelings, and
damental questions have to be answered. For behaviors.
example, rising anti-Semitism in Eastern Europe
has to be explained more exactly. The rise and dis-
Historical and Theoretical Context
semination of anti-Semitic stereotypes, anti-
Semitism in elderly people, Islamist anti-Semitism, Apartheid in South Africa cannot be understood
the anti-Semitism of elites, and many more phe- without being placed in its historical context.
nomena need to be understood. And over and For centuries, descendents of the Dutch settlers
over again, we have to explain the unexplainable: (the Afrikaners) coexisted uneasily with native
Auschwitz. African tribes who were being displaced by
Afrikaner territorial expansion. Afrikaners also
Andreas Zick found themselves increasingly in competition
with the British, who began to assume political
See also Authoritarian Personality; Dehumanization/
Infrahumanization; Genocide; Prejudice; Racism;
and economic control of much of southern
Scapegoating; Social Dominance Theory; Social Africa. The tension between the two imperial
Identity Theory forces reached a head during the Boer Wars,
which entrenched British influence and extin-
guished the political independence of the
Further Readings Afrikaner republics. The period after this defeat
was marked by the growth of a distinct Afrikaner
Fein, H. (Ed.). (1987). The persisting question:
identity, which gradually reasserted itself cul-
Sociological perspectives and social contexts in
turally, linguistically, and politically under
modern anti-Semitism. Berlin: de Gruyter.
British rule.
Laqueur, W. (2006). The changing face of anti-Semitism:
As South Africa became increasingly urban-
From ancient times to the present day. Oxford, UK:
Oxford University Press.
ized, Afrikaners began drifting into the cities,
Newman, L. S., & Erber, R. (Eds.). (2002).
where they perceived themselves to be the vic-
Understanding genocide: The social psychology of the tims of British racism and cultural imperialism.
Holocaust. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. A new class of urban Afrikaner poor emerged
Strauss, H. A., & Bergmann, W. (Eds.). (1987). Error that had to compete with cheap labor from Black
without trial: Psychological research on anti-Semitism. migrants. Traditional racial hierarchies were
Berlin: de Gruyter. realigning around class, and many poor White
Zick, A., & Küpper, B. (2005). Transformed anti- Afrikaners found their traditional privileges to
Semitism—a report on anti-Semitism in Germany. be under threat. The fear was that British capi-
Journal für Konflikt- und Gewaltforschung/ talist imperialism would result in Afrikaners
International Journal of Conflict and Violence being “lumped together” with other minority
Research, 7, 50–92. ethnic groups and afforded the same kind of
26 Apartheid

second-class citizenship that Black, Colored, and How It Worked


Indian South Africans had received. Political
sympathies began drifting toward segregation- In practice, the policy of apartheid comprised two
ists, who worked to revive the fortunes of the separate programs: “grand apartheid” and “petty
Afrikaners relative to the British colonizers and apartheid.” Grand apartheid involved an ambi-
the ethnic minorities. tious and brutal process of social engineering.
The policy that became known as apartheid Black immigration into White areas was halted,
was designed to entrench Afrikaner power relative and many Black migrants considered “surplus” to
to these two traditional threats. The model for economic requirements were deported to “home-
race relations in South Africa (and many other lands.” Mass relocations of ethnic minorities in
nations) in the early 20th century was a British South Africa resulted in hundreds of thousands of
imperialist model, in which Blacks and Whites people being forcibly removed from their homes.
were geographically segregated within a single The “homelands” offered Blacks were dispropor-
polity. Whites ruled over Blacks politically, and tionately small and arid.
Blacks were expected to assimilate to White cul- Slums that had grown up after World War II
ture in order to become competitive within the were demolished and replaced with “townships,”
socioeconomic system. where Blacks had no permanent property rights.
Apartheid theorists in the 1940s argued that Many of the townships were placed just inside
this horizontal system of White supremacy was Black homeland borders, and White-run industrial
unsustainable because it would breed frustration, plants were relocated just outside the borders. This
violence, and rebellion from the ethnic minorities. was designed to encourage Blacks to migrate to the
Under apartheid, Afrikaners, Anglos, Coloreds, homelands, at the same time as offering South
and various Black tribes would be given separate African industrialists access to “foreign” labor
homelands, which would coexist within the nation that was not entitled to the same rights offered to
of South Africa. By giving each ethnic group its those in Afrikaner areas.
own political and cultural space, it was argued that Services for Black people were boosted in the
racial conflict would be reduced because each eth- Black homelands but dramatically cut in “White
nic group would be free to develop its own politi- areas,” a strategy designed to coax Blacks to settle
cal and cultural identity independent of the in the Black homelands. This epic program of
others. relocation required that Blacks be under close sur-
As an intellectual abstraction, apartheid is con- veillance and that their movements be closely
sistent with “dual identity” models of intergroup regulated. Black workers needed permits to leave
relations, whereby subcultures are encouraged to the homelands to seek work and to live in Black
foster a distinct identity while at the same time townships: Hundreds of thousands of Blacks were
embracing what they share at the superordinate imprisoned for not having a pass or for traveling
(national) level. Indeed, much of the rhetoric that to a place without permission. Institutions were
was used to promote apartheid focused on its manipulated to prevent the desegregation of the
potential to liberate Afrikaners from British dom- races. For example, school curricula were rede-
ination and to reduce interracial conflict. signed to actively discourage economic assimila-
In reality, though, the implementation of apart- tion of Blacks. Interracial marriage and even
heid reinforced the type of horizontal White sexual relations between races were prohibited
supremacy it defined itself against. Rather than by law.
reducing racial conflict, it dramatically deepened Those Black and Colored South Africans who
inequities between White and Black South Africans, remained in White areas were segregated from the
and intensified the frustration, violence, and rebel- White population. This policy—known as petty
lion that it was designed to diminish. Rather than apartheid—involved racial segregation of services
allowing for subcultures to flourish, apartheid and facilities such as parks, public transportation,
became an intellectual masquerade that allowed and restaurants. The policy was essentially a for-
both Afrikaners and British descendents to main- malized version of the segregation policies that
tain their traditional racial privilege. existed in many countries in the early- to mid-20th
Apartheid 27

century, such as those used in the United States From the mid-1970s, a number of insurrections
during the Jim Crow era. “Grand apartheid” was broke out in poor Black townships. These expres-
the most dramatic and distinctive manifestation of sions of people power were often poorly organized
the policy of total separation, but for outsiders, it and easily crushed. But images of Black protest
was “petty apartheid” that came to symbolize the and heavy-handed attempts by police to quell the
injustices of South African race relations. Although revolts increased pressure on the international
the complexities of grand apartheid were difficult community to coerce South Africa into reform. In
to capture and communicate to international audi- the 1970s, economic sanctions and sporting boy-
ences, the “White only” signs associated with petty cotts turned South Africa into a pariah state. A
apartheid provided images that pricked the con- gulf developed between mainstream Whites within
sciences of liberal Whites around the world. and outside South Africa. To outsiders, apartheid
South Africa’s policy of institutionalized segre- was illegitimate, irredeemable, and morally repug-
gation (masquerading as the defense of cultural nant. In contrast, many Afrikaners perceived
identity) emerged at about the same time that rac- themselves to be a misunderstood last line of
ist practices were being actively contested and defense against chaos, communism, terrorism, and
overthrown in many parts of the Western world. godlessness. The apartheid debate became severely
As a result, South African apartheid became a polarized within and outside South Africa.
high-profile cause among international activists In the 1980s, the energies of the ANC gradually
who campaigned for civil liberties and the disman- moved from armed resistance to collective protest
tling of institutionalized racism. and mobilization. South Africa experienced an
unprecedented wave of marches, riots, and boycotts,
this time with significant support from Indian South
Opposition and Demise
Africans and international media and activists. In the
For Black South Africans, the introduction of face of social and economic decline, the National
apartheid resulted in economic marginalization, Party diluted some of the more interventionist aspects
disempowerment, humiliation, and organized of apartheid, before formally negotiating ways to
resistance. Intellectuals such as Steve Biko drew resolve the 40-year conflict. In 1994, multiracial elec-
inspiration from the Black Power movement in the tions were held for the first time, and Mandela
United States and worked to develop Black pride became the first Black president of South Africa.
and nonviolent opposition to apartheid in Black Since then, apartheid has been morally and
South Africans. Advocates of Black consciousness intellectually discredited within South Africa as
reinforced the notion that Blacks must stop their well as outside it. Morally, it is considered indis-
psychological subservience to and economic depen- putable that governments need to protect the rights
dency on Whites, and that Blacks should ultimately of all its citizens, not just those of racial elites. The
rule South Africa. The psychological transforma- intellectual case for apartheid has been dismantled by
tion was buttressed by a military operation, largely social psychological work on the contact hypothesis,
coordinated by the African National Congress which argues that intergroup relations are best man-
(ANC). Led by Nelson Mandela, the ANC coordi- aged when members of different cultures are allowed
nated underground cells of militia who carried out to interact with equal status, and with support from
sabotage attacks and assassinations. norms and institutional authorities that protect
In response, White South Africa was galvanized against racism. Today, the term apartheid lives on as
in their antipathy toward what they perceived to a metaphor that is occasionally invoked to describe
be agents of terrorism and communism. An army and condemn any policy that is seen to segregate and
of police, intelligence agents, and conscripts was promote inequities between social groups.
built up to crush resistance. A covert civil war
developed between Black militias and the Matthew J. Hornsey
Broederbond, a secretive society of pro-Afrikaner
advocates who engaged in their own military See also Aversive Racism; Civil Rights Movement;
resistance with the blessing of the South African Desegregation; Discrimination; Intergroup Contact
government. Theory; Minority Groups in Society; Prejudice; Racism
28 Asch, Solomon

Further Readings Asch was not the first psychologist to be inter-


Beinart, W., & Dubow, S. (Eds.). (1995). Segregation and ested in how people perceive others, but his
apartheid in twentieth-century South Africa. London: approach was radically different from that of
Routledge. previous researchers. Earlier scholars were inter-
Goboda-Madikizela, P. (2002). A human being died that ested primarily in percetual accuracy—whether
night: A South African woman confronts the legacy of people could accurately guess the personalities
apartheid. New York: Houghton Mifflin. of other individuals, whereas Asch was more
Harvey, R. (2003). The fall of apartheid: The inside story interested in process—in learning how people
form Smuts to Mbeki. New York: Palgrave form impressions of others. He conducted
Macmillan. research designed to answer three questions
Louw, P. E. (2004). The rise, fall, and legacy of apartheid. about impression formation, which were derived
Westport, CT: Praeger. from Gestalt theory. First, when people receive
Mandela, N. (1995). Long walk to freedom: The items of information about an individual, do
autobiography of Nelson Mandela. London: Abacus. they form a coherent and unified impression of
that individual? Second, do some items of infor-
mation organize the overall impression? And
third, do early items influence how later items
Asch, Solomon are interpreted?
(1907–1996)
Fundamental Questions
Solomon Asch was born in 1907 in Warsaw, To answer his first question, Asch gave par-
Poland, and emigrated in 1920 to the United States. ticipants the following list of traits characterizing
He remains one of the most influential social psy- a fictitious “person X”: intelligent, a hard-
chologists of the 20th century. His research on worker, skillful, warm, determined, practical,
impression formation and social influence consti- and cautious. Participants then wrote a sketch of
tuted innovations that revolutionized the field of person X and answered questions about other
social psychology. The questions he sought to characteristics (e.g., generous, friendly) of that
answer, namely how people form impressions of person. Asch found that participants formed a
others and when they are influenced by others, coherent and positive impression of person X
continue to inspire research to this day. based on the traits they were given.
His ideas about impression formation and To answer his second question, Asch gave par-
social influence, borrowed from the domain of ticipants another list of traits with a single change:
vision, are examined in this entry and illustrated warm was replaced by cold. This time participants
with some of his most famous experiments. The formed a negative impression of person X. When
importance of his work for the subfield of group Asch replaced the traits warm and cold with blunt
processes and the more general field of social psy- and polite, nothing happened. Thus, in regard to
chology is also discussed. his second question, Asch found that certain traits
(warm and cold ) were central for organizing par-
ticipants’ impressions of person X, whereas other
Impression Formation
traits (blunt and polite) were not.
Asch’s research was based on German Gestalt To answer his third question, Asch gave partici-
theory, which can be translated as the theory of pants one of two lists in which the order of the
the “whole.” According to Gestalt theory, when traits was reversed (either intelligent, hard-worker,
we see a face, we do not first perceive one eye, impulsive, critical, envious or envious, critical,
then the other eye, then the mouth, and so on. impulsive, hard-worker, intelligent). He found that
Instead, we immediately see the entire face (a participants’ impressions of person X were more
gestalt), and this face is more than the sum of its favorable when they received the first list than the
parts (e.g., if an eye and the mouth changed second, revealing a primacy effect in which early
places, we would perceive a very different face). traits in the list guided participants’ interpretation
Asch, Solomon 29

of later traits (e.g., impulsive may be understood to States were more likely to agree with the sentence
mean spontaneous in the first list and aggressive in when it was attributed to Jefferson than to Lenin.
the second list). One could interpret this result as evidence that
admiration for Jefferson generalized to the sen-
tence when it was attributed to him, whereas dis-
Explaining Attitudes
dain for Lenin generalized to the (same) sentence
The results Asch obtained suggest that people when it was attributed to him.
have implicit theories about others. For instance, This is not the best explanation for what Asch
we may believe that if someone is warm, then he found, however. Rather than terminating his study
or she is also generous. Such implicit theories may after participants expressed their level of agree-
help to explain certain stereotypes. For example, ment with the sentence, Asch also asked them the
we may believe that if X is a gypsy, then he or she meaning of the sentence. He found that this mean-
is also a musician. Asch’s theory-driven approach ing differed depending on the ostensible author.
to impression formation did not go unchallenged. When Jefferson was the author, rebellion was
For example, Norman Anderson argued that interpreted to mean peaceful political change.
when forming an overall impression of an indi- When Lenin was the author, rebellion was inter-
vidual, people use a data-driven approach in preted to mean violent revolution. In line with the
which they evaluate each trait associated with the Gestalt perspective, Asch concluded that changing
individual (intelligent, hardworking, etc.) and the ostensible author of the sentence did not
then combine (e.g., through adding or averaging) change participants’ attitude toward the statement,
these evaluations. but rather the meaning of the statement.
The controversy between theory-driven and
data-driven impression formation went on for
some years, but was finally resolved by Susan Fiske Surprising Results
and Steven Neuberg in 1990. According to these In all the experiments summarized so far, the
scholars, people’s first tendency is to place others stimuli that participants judged were rather ambig-
into a familiar category (e.g., French). If the cate- uous (i.e., there were no clear-cut right and wrong
gorization does not fit the evidence, and if people answers). In subsequent studies, Asch sought to
are motivated to obtain a better fit and have the determine whether he could obtain the same results
cognitive capacity (and time) to do so, they will go using unambiguous stimuli. In these studies, he
through additional steps. First, they will try to showed two cards to participants. One card con-
confirm their initial categorization. If this fails, tained three lines of different lengths (a, b, and c).
they will try to recategorize the person in a way The other card contained a single (standard) line
that makes sense of most of his or her characteris- that was the same length as one of the lines on the
tics. Finally, if this fails, they will default to “piece- first card. Participants’ task was easy: They simply
meal integration,” which involves simply adding had to say which line on the first card was the
or averaging all of the person’s characteristics. same length as the standard line. The stimuli were
unambiguous, as indicated by the fact that partici-
pants tested alone hardly ever made errors.
Social Influence
Asch was interested, however, in whether par-
Social influence is another domain in which Asch ticipants tested in a group situation where other
had an indelible impact. Imagine a sentence assert- people made incorrect judgments about the line
ing that a little rebellion now and then is a good lengths would still answer correctly. So, he created
thing and is as necessary in the political world as a situation in which a single naïve participant was
storms are in the physical world. In addition, confronted by several people (experimental con-
imagine that this sentence is attributed either to federates) who gave unanimously incorrect answers
U.S. President Thomas Jefferson (the real author) on several trials of the line judgment task. Asch
or to Vladimir Lenin, one of the leaders of the expected that the incorrect majority would have
Communist Revolution in Russia. Not surpris- little or no influence on participants’ judgments,
ingly, Asch found that participants in the United but his prediction turned out to be wrong.
30 Assimilation and Acculturation

Participants conformed to the erroneous majority Leyens, J.-Ph., & Corneille, O. (1999). Asch’s social
answer about one third of the time. This finding psychology: Not as social as you may think.
surprised Asch, but turned out to be one of the Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3,
most influential findings in social psychology. 345–357.
Asch did subsequent experiments to clarify the
conditions under which people do and do not con-
form to group pressure. For instance, he varied the
number of confederates and their level of unanim-
ity. He found, for example, that the presence of a
Assimilation and
single confederate who gives correct answers sub- Acculturation
stantially reduces the group’s tendency to yield to
the majority. Later research by others demon- During much of the 19th and early 20th centuries,
strated that conformity can also be affected by such the term assimilation was used to describe the
factors as the publicness of participants’ responses process by which immigrants inevitably gave up
and their liking for other group members. The their culture of origin for the sake of adopting the
impact of these variables has often been explained mainstream language and culture of their adopted
in terms of two motives: the desire to respond accu- country. However, by the late 20th century, the
rately and the desire to be liked. Asch’s research on term acculturation was adopted by scholars to
conformity also inspired other important work on describe the more fundamental process of bidirec-
social influence. Two examples are Stanley tional change that occurs when two ethnocultural
Milgram’s studies on obedience to authority and groups come into sustained contact with each
Serge Moscovici’s research on minority influence. other. From this latter perspective, assimilation is
only one of the many acculturation strategies that
immigrant and national minorities may adopt as
His Legacy they strive to adapt to mainstream society.
The enduring legacy of Asch’s work is due to sev- Such strategies have become more and more
eral factors. His theoretical perspective was ele- necessary as immigration, legal or illegal, has
gant, and his results were clear-cut. More important, become increasingly common across the globe.
the two phenomena he studied—impression for- Through immigration and the recognition of the
mation and social influence—are everyday occur- rights of indigenous and national minorities, most
rences and play a major role in interpersonal and 19th-century nation-states have been transformed
intergroup relations. Although Asch was not a from being more or less unicultural to being mul-
highly prolific writer during his lifetime, the fact ticultural, multi-ethnic, and multilingual states.
that his 1952 textbook is still widely cited provides Following the height of nation building in 19th-
strong evidence for his influence in the field. century Europe, the term host majority was
ascribed to the “core founding members” of a
Jacques-Philippe Leyens nation who constituted the dominant ancestral
community in control of the state.
See also Anticonformity; Conformity; Informational Traditionally, host majorities expected immi-
Influence; Minority Influence; Normative Influence; grants to assimilate to the culture and values of the
Obedience to Authority receiving society. Host majorities have found it
easier to assimilate immigrants when their cultural
differences were reduced to exotic manifestations
Further Readings such as ethnic restaurants, music, and dance.
Asch, S. E. (1952). Social psychology. Oxford, UK: However, host societies have found it difficult to
Prentice Hall. share jobs, housing, and welfare with immigrants,
Levine, J. M., & Russo, E. M. (1987). Majority and whom they often see as unentitled to compete for
minority influence. In C. Hendrick (Ed.), Review of such limited resources and as contributing to the
personality and social psychology: Group processes growing cultural and physical insecurity of the soci-
(Vol. 8, pp. 13–54). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. ety. At stake is whether or not host communities
Assimilation and Acculturation 31

wish to accept, nurture, assimilate, or reject the majority, which by ignorance, indifference, or
distinctiveness of immigrants as members of cul- design has sought to subjugate immigrant or indig-
tural communities. Ultimately, will dominant enous communities through forced assimilation,
majority members allow immigrant minorities not segregation, cultural genocide, ethnic cleansing, or
only to maintain their distinctive culture and lan- extermination.
guage, but also to transform the institutions, cul-
ture, and values of the host society?
From Uni-Dimensional to
This entry examines various models of accul-
Bi-Dimensional Models of Acculturation
turation and how strategies of acculturation may
be linked to political views, socioeconomic charac- In Western societies, much of the early accultura-
teristics, and personality traits. tion research focused on the adaptation strategies
of immigrant minorities as they interacted with
the dominant host majority. This almost exclusive
Acculturation and Deculturation
focus on the acculturation process of immigrants
From the cross-cultural psychology perspective, imposed a form of “collective dispositional bias,”
acculturation implies that both immigrants and which often blamed immigrants for not suffi-
host majority members are influenced and trans- ciently or successfully adapting to the culture,
formed by their intercultural contact and are habits, and values of the receiving society.
expected to modify some aspects of their respective Furthermore, traditional models of immigrant
cultures. Host majority members enjoy some con- acculturation were uni-dimensional, as they pro-
trol over the degree of contact they have with posed that during immigrants’ lifetime, they shifted
immigrants and may experience acculturation from exclusive grounding in their culture of origin
either through direct interpersonal contacts in to a bicultural phase reflecting maintenance of the
school and at work or through indirect contacts heritage culture and adoption of the host culture,
via mass media portrayals. However, relative to to complete assimilation to the dominant host
dominant majorities, cultural minorities are more majority culture.
likely to be transformed by such intergroup con- Criticisms of the uni-dimensional model led to
tacts. Immigrants and national minorities have in the development of bi-dimensional models of
common their vulnerability to the tolerance or acculturation. In his bi-dimensional model, John
intolerance of dominant host majorities, whose Berry proposed that the maintenance of the immi-
demographic strength, prestige, and institutional grant culture and adoption of the host majority
power within the national state can result in much culture could be portrayed as independent dimen-
acculturative pressure. sions instead of contrasting points on a single con-
The following types of minorities are likely to tinuum of cultural change. Thus, whether
experience much acculturation pressure: first- and immigrants achieve competence in the host major-
second-generation immigrants, sojourners, refu- ity language could have little to do with their
gees, asylum seekers, and national minorities. An maintenance of their heritage language. An adap-
extreme case of acculturation pressure was that of tation of the Berry model asserts that immigrants
South and North American aboriginals in the 17th and national minorities may endorse five accul-
through 19th centuries, as they had no control turation orientations, including the assimilationist
over the unwanted, massive, and sustained immi- strategy proposed in traditional uni-dimensional
gration of Northern Europeans whose demo- models. Immigrants with an integrationist orienta-
graphic, economic, technological, and military tion want to maintain certain aspects of their cul-
supremacy physically decimated their indigenous ture of origin while also adopting key features of
communities while causing acculturation pressures the culture of the host community. Those with a
that often resulted in outright deculturation. The separatist perspective seek to maintain their lan-
term deculturation is used to describe the cultural, guage and culture of origin while rejecting key
linguistic, religious, psychological, and health aspects of the host community culture. Immigrants
breakdown that occurs in minority communities who adopt the assimilationist strategy want to
that experience sustained contact with a dominant abandon their culture and/or language of origin
32 Assimilation and Acculturation

for the sake of adopting the culture and/or lan- origin, type, and rate of immigration accepted
guage of the host community. The marginalized within their boundaries, public policies designed to
feel alienated from their culture of origin and expe- facilitate the integration of immigrants and national
rience sustained rejection by members of the minorities within mainstream society remain the
dominant host majority, a double jeopardy often exception rather than the rule. State integration
leading to anomie. Immigrants may also endorse policies consist of the approaches adopted by
an individualist acculturation orientation as they national, regional, and municipal governments to
define themselves and others on the basis of their help immigrants and host communities adapt to
personal characteristics and achievements rather the growing ethnic, linguistic, and religious diver-
than on their group membership. Such individual- sity of modern states.
ists are not concerned with maintaining the immi- The IAM proposes four clusters of ideologies that
grant culture or adopting the host culture, as they can shape the integration policies adopted by demo-
are more involved with achieving their personal cratic governments of multiethnic states. As a heu-
goals in their country of adoption. ristic for analyzing integration policies, these four
clusters can be placed along a continuum ranging
from the pluralism and civic ideologies at one end of
The Interactive Acculturation Model
the continuum to the assimilationist and ethnist ide-
It is only in the last decade that researchers have ologies at the other end. Depending on political,
focused their attention on the acculturation orien- economic, demographic, and military events occur-
tations held by host communities, which by virtue ring at the national and international levels, state
of their dominant position and control of immigra- integration policies can shift from one ideological
tion and integration policies have a substantial orientation to the other. The IAM proposes that
impact on the acculturation orientations adopted adoption of state integration policies may reflect
by immigrant and national minorities. The interac- and also shape host community acculturation orien-
tive acculturation model (IAM) was proposed by tations, as well as more general opinions concerning
Richard Bourhis to better account for the inter- the ideal or preferred ways of integrating minorities
group processes that characterize relations between within mainstream society. Political tensions may
host majority members and cultural minorities. emerge between factions of the host majority hold-
The IAM framework includes the following ing rival ideological views on immigration and inte-
elements: (a) immigration and integration policies gration issues. The polarization of ideological
that can affect the climate of intergroup relations positions regarding such issues may lead to the for-
between immigrant and host communities, mation of political parties whose main platform is
(b) acculturation orientations adopted by host to change state policies on immigration and integra-
community members toward specific groups of tion issues. While left wing parties may endorse
immigrants, (c) acculturation orientations adopted public policies at the pluralist pole of the ideological
by immigrants within their country of adoption, continuum, right wing nationalist or religious par-
and (d) interpersonal and intergroup relational ties may advocate integration policies situated at the
outcomes that are the product of combinations of assimilationist or ethnist side of the continuum.
immigrant and host community acculturation ori- The IAM proposes that the acculturation ori-
entations. As a complement to other acculturation entations of dominant host majority members can
frameworks, the IAM focuses on the cultural have a major impact on the acculturation orienta-
adoption strategies of immigrant and host major- tions of immigrant minorities. Dominant host
ity members rather than on their dual group identi- community members may endorse five accultura-
ties or desires for intergroup contact. tion orientations they wish immigrants to adopt:
The IAM takes into account how public policies integrationism, assimilationism, segregationism,
regarding immigration and integration relate to exclusionism, or individualism. These accultura-
the acculturation orientations endorsed by host tion orientations are measured using the validated
majority and immigrant group members. While Host Community Acculturation Scale (HCAS).
most democratic states have formulated and Integrationism is endorsed by host community
applied immigration policies regulating the national members who accept that immigrants maintain
Assimilation and Acculturation 33

some aspects of their heritage culture, and also conflictual relational outcomes. Intergroup rela-
accept and value that immigrants adopt impor- tional outcomes include cross-cultural and bilin-
tant features of the host majority culture. gual communications, interpersonal and
Integrationists value a stable biculturalism/bilin- intergroup misunderstanding, prejudice and ste-
gualism among immigrant communities, which, reotyping, social and institutional discrimination
in the long term, may contribute to cultural and in employment, housing, education and interper-
linguistic pluralism as an enduring feature of the sonal relations. Harmonious relational outcomes
host society. Assimilationism corresponds to the include optimal intergroup understanding and
traditional concept of absorption, whereby host can be expected when immigrants and host
community members expect immigrants to relin- community members both adopt the integration-
quish their language and cultural identity for the ist and individualist acculturation orientations.
sake of adopting the dominant culture and lan- Problematic relational outcomes are expected
guage of the host majority. Segregationism is when the acculturation orientations of host
exemplified by host community members who majority members and immigrants are partially
accept immigrants’ maintenance of their heri- concordant or discordant. For instance, problem-
tage culture, as long as the immigrants keep atic outcomes, including intergroup misunder-
their distance from host members, as they do standing and miscommunication, may emerge
not wish immigrants to transform, dilute, or when immigrants endorse integrationism while
“contaminate” the host culture and value sys- host community members endorse assimilation-
tem. Host community members who adopt this ism for immigrants. Problematic outcomes may
orientation discourage cross-cultural contacts also emerge when host majorities represent immi-
with immigrants, prefer immigrants to remain grants as endorsing mainly separatism, while
together in separate urban or regional enclaves, immigrants perceive the host majority to be
and are ambivalent regarding the status of mainly segregationist or exclusionist. Conflictual
immigrants as rightful members of the host soci- relational outcomes including discrimination,
ety. Exclusionism is adopted by members of the hate crimes, and intergroup violence can be expected
host majority who deny immigrants the right to from host majority members who endorse segrega-
adopt features of the host community culture. tionism or exclusionism, especially for immigrants
Exclusionists also deny immigrants the choice to perceived as threatening. Faced with systemic dis-
maintain their heritage language, culture, or crimination and hostility from host majority mem-
religion and believe that some immigrants have bers who are segregationist and exclusionist,
customs and values that can never be socially immigrants who adopt separatism or marginaliza-
incorporated within the host community main- tion may eventually resort to outright conflict
stream. Individualism is an orientation endorsed strategies through civil disobedience, rioting, crim-
by host community members who define them- inal activity, armed struggle, or terrorism.
selves and others as individuals rather than as
members of group categories such as immigrants
Studies of Host Community
or host community members. Because it is per-
Acculturation Orientations
sonal qualities and individual achievements that
count most, individualists will tend to interact Numerous empirical acculturation studies have
with immigrants in the same way they would with been conducted with dominant host community
other individuals who happen to be members of undergraduates, thus controlling for the educa-
the host community. tional and socioeconomic status of respondents in
The IAM proposes that acculturation orienta- urban centers such as Los Angeles, Montreal, Paris,
tions endorsed by host community members may Brussels, Geneva, and Tel Aviv. These studies have
be concordant or discordant with those held by shown that individualism and integrationism are
members of specific immigrant communities. The the most strongly endorsed acculturation orienta-
degree of concordance between the acculturation tions toward immigrants. Endorsement of welcom-
orientations of host community members and immi­ ing acculturation orientations such as individualism
grants may result in harmonious, problematic, or and integrationism may reflect the meritocratic
34 Assimilation and Acculturation

and individualistic university organizational cul- of threat and cultural insecurity toward devalued
ture, which favors the equal treatment of individu- immigrants as a way of maintaining mobilization
als, regardless of race, color, or creed. Studies have in favor of their respective nationalistic causes.
shown that assimilationism, segregationism, and Right wing nationalist parties gain much of their
exclusionism are the least endorsed acculturation support from host majority electorates by nurtur-
orientations among college students, though in ing feelings of symbolic and realistic threats espe-
recent years endorsement of segregationism by cially from the presence of “devalued” immigrants
students has increased somewhat in both Québec whose demographic presence is often portrayed as
and France. overwhelming and out of control.
Overall, undergraduates endorsed more wel- Even though host majorities may endorse each
coming acculturation orientations toward “valued” acculturation orientation to a different degree
immigrants than toward “devalued” immigrants or cross-culturally, the social psychological profile of
national minorities. For instance, undergraduate each acculturation orientation remains similar
students in Tel Aviv more strongly endorsed the regardless of the national background of respondents.
individualism and integrationism orientations Study results obtained in Montreal, Los Angeles,
toward Jewish immigrants from Russia and Ethiopia Paris, Geneva, Brussels, and Tel Aviv suggest that
than toward the devalued Israeli Arab national this is the case. Individualism and integrationism
minority in Israel. Conversely, Jewish undergradu- are two “live and let live” acculturation orienta-
ates more strongly endorsed the segregationism and tions the correlates of which were quite similar
exclusionism orientations toward Israeli Arabs cross-culturally. Individualists and integrationists
than toward Jewish immigrants from Russia and felt comfortable with immigrants, wanted close
Ethiopia. relations with both valued and devalued immi-
Does left wing versus right wing political affili- grants, including as best friends, and felt that
ation influence acculturation orientations toward immigrants in general wanted good relations with
devalued groups? In Israel, left wing Labour iden- members of the host majority. Individualists and
tifiers more strongly endorsed the individualism integrationists did not endorse the authoritarian or
and integrationism orientations toward Israeli social dominance orientation and ethnocentric ide-
Arabs than did Likud party identifiers. Conversely, ologies, and they were more likely to identify with
Likud Party identifiers more strongly endorsed the “left of center” political parties in their respective
segregationism and exclusionism orientations sociopolitical settings.
toward Israeli Arabs than did Labour party identi- Assimilationists, segregationists, and exclusion-
fiers. Most important, right wing Likud Party ists all rejected immigrants and their culture,
identifiers were unique in more strongly endorsing endorsed the social dominance orientation and
the segregationism and exclusionism orientations authoritarian and ethnocentric ideologies, and
than the individualism and integrationism orienta- were more likely to identify with right wing politi-
tions toward Israeli Arabs. Political parties are cal parties. Importantly, they were more likely to
created and remain popular to the degree that they feel that their ingroup identity was threatened by
offer “solutions” to the fears and aspirations of the presence of immigrants, especially “devalued”
their electorate. The right wing Likud Party plat- ones. They were also more likely to feel insecure
form nurtures a sense of threat to the vitality and culturally, linguistically, and economically as mem-
national security of the Jewish majority in Israel. bers of their own group, while wishing to avoid
Threats felt from the presence of Israeli Arabs immigrants as colleagues at work, as neighbors, or
make it particularly difficult for Likud Party sym- as best friends. In each cultural setting, specific social
pathizers to accept any type of relationship with psychological variables differentiated the assimila-
Israeli Arabs, and “justifies” keeping Arabs segre- tionist, segregationist, and exclusionist acculturation
gated and excluded from the Jewish dominant orientations. Taken together, these social psycho-
majority. logical correlates of acculturation orientations
Right wing nationalist parties in other settings, attest to the construct validity of the HCAS and
such as France and Québec, also nurture feelings also support some basic premises of the IAM.
Assimilation and Acculturation 35

Studies of Immigrant foreign diplomas are not recognized in the country


Acculturation Orientations of settlement. Immigrant women who seek more
egalitarian sex roles in their country of settlement
Empirical cross-cultural studies have examined are more likely to experience acculturative stress
acculturation orientations endorsed by immigrants than men, especially when sex roles in the country
and national minorities using variants of the of origin were quite traditional. While accultura-
Immigrant Acculturation Scale (IAS) developed by tive stress is more likely to be experienced by
John Berry and his colleagues. In many cultural immigrants who settle at an older age in their
settings, immigrants endorse integrationism to a country of adoption, personality factors such as
greater degree than assimilationism and separat- introversion or extraversion, internal or external
ism, and marginalization is rarely endorsed. locus of control, and degree of self-efficacy have
Exceptions to these findings are Turks in Germany, also been linked to acculturative stress.
lower economic status Turks in Canada, and some As developed by Colleen Ward, ethnocultural
indigenous minorities in various parts of the world, identity conflict (EIC) stems from identity conflict
who endorse separatism more than integrationism. occurring when the multiple social identities devel-
Overall, feelings of being the victim of prejudice oped as a result of emigration become incompati-
and discrimination are the most important corre- ble with each other. EIC can be prevalent for
lates of separatism and marginalization. While immigrant youth, who experience difficulties in
newly established immigrants may at first adopt harmonizing the traditional values of their parents
integrationism or assimilationism, sustained expe- with the modern values of their host majority age
rience of discrimination and exclusion in the host peers. Infrequent contact with host majority peers,
society may shift acculturation orientations to interethnic tensions, threats to cultural continuity,
separatism or marginalization. Acculturation ori- and perceived discrimination are aggravating fac-
entations can also be endorsed differently in the tors that contribute to EIC. Furthermore, immi-
public and private domains. In the public domain, grants who endorse the separation, assimilation,
immigrants may endorse linguistic integration and marginalization acculturation orientations are
through bilingualism and assimilation at work, more likely to experience EIC than those who
whereas in the private domain they may practice endorse integrationism.
separatism through religiously and ethnically Despite the pressures of acculturative stress and
endogamous marriages. ethnocultural identity conflict, immigrants can be
Acculturative stress may be experienced as a quite resilient in their psychological and sociological
result of intercultural contacts that highlight differ- adaptation to their country of adoption. While psy-
ences between the heritage culture of immigrants chological adaptation refers to good mental health
and that of the dominant host majority. This is more and a sense of well-being, sociocultural adaptation
likely to occur when the “cultural distance” between involves a set of social competencies that enable
the heritage culture of immigrants and that of the minority individuals to live successfully in their
receiving society is large. As proposed by Anthony intercultural world. Studies with immigrants showed
Richmond, immigrants may suffer more accultura- that the relationship between psychological and
tive stress when their migration was involuntary sociocultural adaptations increased over time and
(reactive emigration) than in cases where individuals tended to be stronger in cases where the cultural
voluntarily chose to emigrate to a country to which distance between the immigrant culture and that of
they were attracted (proactive emigration). For most the host community was small rather than large.
immigrants, acculturative stress is related to the The complementary link between psychological and
experience of culture loss and anxieties about how sociocultural adaptation was stronger for immi-
to adapt to the country of settlement. grants with the integrationism and assimilationism
While higher education is associated with less orientations than for those with the separation and
acculturative stress, immigrants who suffer an marginalization acculturation orientations.
important drop in occupational status can suffer A recent comparative study of immigrant youth
much acculturative stress, especially when their from 13 countries showed that better psychological
36 Assimilation and Acculturation

and sociocultural adaptation was related to relational outcomes by adopting separatism


endorsement of the integrationism orientation but rather than integrationism or assimilationism.
not very related to endorsement of assimilationism Finally, marginalization is the acculturation ori-
and separatism, and least related to the marginal- entation associated with the least desirable psycho-
ization acculturation orientation. Results also logical and sociocultural correlates. Marginalization
showed that perceived discrimination against is associated with neuroticism, anxiety, closed-
ingroup members was the single strongest predic- mindedness, and unsociability. Similarly, a link has
tor of poor psychological and sociocultural adapta- been found between marginality, alienation, ano-
tion. The 13-country study showed that immigrant mie, deviance, and psychosomatic stress. Being a
youth who endorsed the integration orientation victim of discrimination was found to be the single
experienced less ethno-cultural identity conflict, most important predictor of marginalization.
less anxiety and depression, and fewer psychoso-
matic symptoms than their peers who endorsed
Conclusion
assimilationism, separatism, and especially the
marginalization acculturation orientation. Immi­ Much fundamental and applied research remains
grant endorsement of integrationism was also to be done to do justice to the complexity and
shown to be positively correlated with the traits of subtlety of immigrant–host community relations in
extraversion, emotional stability, sociability, agree- multi-ethnic settings. In line with the interactive
ableness, sensation seeking, and open-mindedness. acculturation model (IAM), more empirical studies
In addition, endorsement of integrationism was are needed to explore how concordant and discor-
found to be related to higher self-esteem, which in dant acculturation orientations between immigrant
turn was a strong predictor of immigrant adapta- and host communities can result in harmonious,
tion. Immigrant youth who endorsed integration- problematic, or conflictual relational outcomes,
ism were those whose social identification was not only in regard to intercultural communication
dual, who were more likely to be bilingual, and and prejudicial attitudes but also in behavioral
who had both ingroup and outgroup peer con- outcomes such as prosocial behaviors, employ-
tacts. Conversely, separatism was positively cor- ment equity, discrimination, intergroup conflicts,
related with neuroticism, anxiety, impulsivity, and hate crimes.
sensation seeking, and aggressiveness, and nega- Emerging research is currently exploring the
tively correlated with extraversion, sociability, acculturation orientations of immigrant communi-
self-assurance, and self-esteem. ties toward coexisting, competing, or rival “other”
Studies found that assimilationism is positively immigrant communities, either long established
related to task-coping and emotion-coping orien- following earlier immigration cycles or more
tations, and thus contributes to the reduction of recently arrived as a result of current immigration
emotional distress associated with stressful situa- waves. Likewise, in culturally divided societies,
tions. Personality traits that were associated with acculturation orientations endorsed by national
assimilationism were agreeableness and sociabil- minorities toward the dominant majority are being
ity, as well as neuroticism, anxiety, closed-mind- explored. More acculturation research should be
edness, and field dependence. In immigrants’ conducted with sojourners, refugees, and asylum
quest to endorse integrationism and assimila- seekers as they adapt to increasingly multi-ethnic
tonism, they may also adopt the less desirable and multilingual receiving societies. Multiple iden-
habits and customs of the host majority. For tity research dealing with the interplay of subna-
instance, one study showed that immigrant youth tional, national, supranational, and transnational
who endorsed integration and assimilation were identities across the world also calls for more com-
at higher risk than separatists of adopting health- plex elaborations of current acculturation models.
compromising behavior such as smoking and The very premise of considering host societies as
drinking alcohol. In line with the IAM, immi- being composed of single or dual host communi-
grants who are confronted by mainly segregation- ties may already be an oversimplification, both
ist and exclusionist host majority members may conceptually and empirically. Host societies of the
reduce acculturative stress and avoid conflictual future may well be constituted of multiple host
Attachment Theory 37

communities, all of which are ethnic and linguistic shapes the goals, working models (that is the inter-
minorities sharing two or more official national personal attitudes, expectancies, and cognitive
languages but no obvious core founding majority. schemas), and coping strategies that she or he uses
when emotion-eliciting events happen in relation-
Richard Y. Bourhis and Shaha El-Geledi ships. This entry examines Bowlby’s original ideas
and the evolution of his theory among later
See also Culture; Desegregation; Discrimination;
Diversity; Immigration researchers.

Normative Features of Attachment Theory


Further Readings
Bowlby’s fascination with the emotional ties that
Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation and
bind humans to one another began with an astute
adaptation. Applied Psychology: An International
observation. In all human cultures and indeed pri-
Review, 46, 5–34.
mate species, young and vulnerable infants display
Berry, J. W., Phinney, J. S., Sam, D. L., & Vedder, P. H.
a specific sequence of reactions following separa-
(Eds.). (2006). Immigrant youth in cultural transition:
tion from their stronger, older, and wiser caregiv-
Acculturation, identity and adaptation across national
contexts. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
ers. Immediately following separation, infants
Bourhis, R. Y., Moïse, C., Perreault, C., & Senécal, S. protest vehemently, typically crying, screaming, or
(1997). Towards an interactive acculturation model: A throwing temper tantrums as they search for their
social psychological approach. International Journal caregivers. Bowlby believed that vigorous protest
of Psychology, 5, 1–18. during the early phases of caregiver absence is a
Sam, D. L., & Berry, J. W. (Eds.). (2006). The Cambridge good initial “strategy” to promote survival, espe-
handbook of acculturation psychology. Cambridge, cially in species born in a developmentally imma-
UK: Cambridge University Press. ture and very dependent state. Intense protests
often draw the attention of caregivers to their
infants, who would have been vulnerable to injury
or predation during evolutionary history if left
Attachment Theory unattended.
If loud and persistent protests fail to get the
Attachment theory was developed by John Bowlby caregiver’s attention, infants enter a second stage,
to explain personality and social development known as despair, during which they usually stop
from the cradle to the grave. The theory focuses on moving and become silent. Bowlby believed that
the experience, expression, and regulation of emo- from an evolutionary standpoint, despondency is a
tions at both normative (species-typical) and indi- good second strategy to promote survival. Excessive
vidual difference (person-specific) levels of analysis. movement could result in accident or injury, and
This focus is not surprising given how important loud protests combined with movement might
emotions and affect regulation are to interpersonal draw predators. According to this logic, if protests
functioning in all types of close relationships. fail to retrieve the caregiver quickly, the next best
Bowlby believed that the attachment system survival strategy would be to avoid actions that
serves two primary functions: (1) to protect vulner- might increase the risk of self-inflicted harm or
able individuals from potential threats or harm and predation.
(2) to regulate negative affect following threatening After a period of despair, infants who are not
or harmful events. The normative component of reunited with their caregivers enter a third and
attachment theory specifies the stimuli and con- final stage—detachment. During this phase, the
texts that normally evoke and terminate different infant begins to resume normal activity without the
kinds of emotions, as well as the sequence of emo- caregiver, gradually learning to behave in an inde-
tions usually experienced following certain rela- pendent and self-reliant manner. Bowlby believed
tional events. The individual difference component that the function of emotional detachment is to
addresses how an individual’s personal history of allow the formation of new emotional bonds with
receiving care and support from attachment figures new caregivers. He reasoned that emotional ties
38 Attachment Theory

with previous caregivers must be relinquished using the Strange Situation. The Strange Situation
before new bonds can fully be formed. In terms of involves a sequence of separations and reunions of
evolution, detachment allows infants to cast off caregivers (usually mothers) and their children. It
old ties and begin forming new ones with caregiv- assesses how children regulate negative emotions
ers who might be able to provide the attention and vis-à-vis their caregivers when the children are
resources needed for survival. Bowlby also conjec- upset. Even though most children are distressed
tured that these normative stages and processes when left alone at this age, securely attached chil-
characterize reactions to prolonged or irrevocable dren tend to reduce their negative emotions by
separations in adult attachment-based relation- using their caregivers as a “secure base,” and they
ships, which might also have evolutionary adap- resume other activities fairly quickly after reunit-
tive value in terms of maintaining, casting aside, or ing with them in the Strange Situation. Anxious–
forming new romantic pairs. resistant children, by comparison, remain distressed
In addition to identifying the course and func- and often exhibit anger or resentment toward their
tioning of these three distinct stages, Bowlby also caregivers during reunions episodes. Anxious–
identified several normative behaviors that infants avoidant children, who display fewer overt signs of
commonly display in attachment relationships. distress but usually have elevated heart rates,
Such hallmark behaviors include sucking, clinging, remain distant and emotionally detached from
crying, smiling, and following the caregiver, all of their caregivers during reunions, opting to calm
which serve to keep the infant or child in close themselves in a self-reliant manner.
physical proximity to the caregiver. Bowlby also During later stages of development, one of the
documented unique features of the caregiver and key differences between secure and different types
his or her interaction with the infant that are likely of insecure individuals is how their negative emo-
to promote attachment bonds. The features include tions are regulated and controlled based on their
the competence with which the caregiver alleviates specific beliefs and expectancies about the avail-
the infant’s distress, the speed of responsiveness ability of comfort and support from their attach-
of the caregiver to the infant, and the familiarity of ment figures. Highly secure individuals have
the caregiver. These behaviors and features are also learned from past caregiving experiences to follow
believed to be critical to the development of adult “rules” that permit distress to be acknowledged
attachment relationships. Debra Zeifman and and motivate them to turn toward attachment
Cynthia Hazan, for example, have noted that most figures as sources of comfort and support. Highly
romantically attached adults repeatedly engage in avoidant adults, in contrast, have learned to fol-
hallmark attachment behaviors such as sucking, low rules that limit the acknowledgment of dis-
clinging, prolonged eye contact, and extensive tress and encourage the use of self-reliant tactics
belly-to-belly body contact. Mario Mikulincer and to control and reduce negative affect when it
Phillip Shaver have documented the importance of arises. Highly anxious people have learned to use
the responsiveness of romantic partners in the for- rules that direct their attention toward the possible
mation of attachment security. source of distress, to ruminate about it, and to
worry that their attachment figures will never
fully meet their persistent needs for comfort and
Individual Difference Features
support.
of Attachment Theory
Mikulincer and Shaver have recently proposed a
Attachment theorists after Bowlby have proposed process model that outlines the sequence of events
that different attachment patterns (in children) and that underlie the emotional coping and regulation
attachment styles or orientations (in adults) reflect strategies of people who have different attachment
different ways of regulating affect, particularly histories. For example, when stress or a potential
controlling or dampening negative affect in stress- threat is perceived, highly secure individuals remain
ful, threatening, or overly challenging situations. confident that their attachment figures will be
Individual differences in patterns of attachment in attentive, responsive, and available to meet their
12- to 18-month-old children were first docu- needs and help them lower their distress and anxi-
mented by Mary Ainsworth and her colleagues ety. These beliefs, in turn, should increase their
Attitudes Toward Women Scale 39

feeling of security, which should deactivate their early attachment experiences and later attachment-
attachment systems, allowing them to use con- based relationships in early adulthood, just as
structive, problem-focused coping strategies that Bowlby anticipated.
over time are likely to solve their problems.
Highly insecure individuals follow different
pathways. When highly anxious individuals Conclusion
encounter attachment-relevant stress or threats, In conclusion, attachment theory was developed to
they are uncertain as to whether their attachment account for different patterns of personality and
figures will be sufficiently attentive, available, and social development across the entire life span.
responsive to their needs. Such worries should sus- According to Bowlby, understanding the experi-
tain their distress and keep their attachment ence, expression, and regulation of emotion—par-
systems activated, resulting in the use of emotion- ticularly negative emotion in response to events
focused coping strategies such as hypervigilance to that activate the attachment system—is essential to
signs of possible relationship loss and ruminating understanding how and why individuals with dif-
over worst-case scenarios. When highly avoidant ferent attachment histories behave as they do in
individuals feel stressed or threatened, they experi- their close relationships.
ence—but may not consciously acknowledge—
anxiety at a physiological level. To keep their Jeffry A. Simpson and Lane Beckes
attachment systems deactivated, highly avoidant
persons work to inhibit and control their See also Dyads; Families; Interdependence Theory; Levels
emotional reactions by using avoidant coping of Analysis; Need for Belonging; Social Relations
strategies. Model; Trust
These three emotion regulation/coping strategies—
problem-focused, emotion-focused, and avoidance- Further Readings
focused strategies—are the source of many of the Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1.
interesting cognitive and behavioral outcomes that Attachment. New York: Basic Books.
have been discovered in people who have different Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss: Vol. 2.
attachment styles or orientations. More securely Separation: Anxiety and anger. New York: Basic
attached individuals, for instance, typically experi- Books.
ence more intense and mild positive emotions in Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and loss: Vol. 3. Loss.
their romantic relationships and fewer intense and New York: Basic Books.
mild negative emotions, whereas the reverse is true Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2003). The attachment
of more insecurely attached persons. Recent longi- behavioral system in adulthood: Activation,
tudinal research has also documented connections psychodynamics, and interpersonal processes. In M. P.
between an individual’s early attachment pattern Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
(being classified as secure or insecure in the Strange psychology (Vol. 35, pp. 53–152). San Diego, CA:
Situation at age 1) in relation to his or her mother Academic Press.
and emotions experienced and expressed with a
romantic partner 20 years later. In addition, indi-
viduals classified as insecure (either anxious–
avoidant or anxious–resistant) in the Strange
Attitudes Toward Women
Situation at age 1 are rated by their teachers as less Scale
socially competent during early elementary school.
Lower social competence, in turn, predicts greater The Attitudes Toward Women Scale (AWS),
likelihood of being rated as insecurely attached to developed by Janet T. Spence and Robert Helmreich
same-sex friends at age 16, which in turn predicts in the early 1970s, measures attitudes about the
both the experience and expression of greater nega- rights and roles of women—relative to men—in
tive affect in relationships with romantic partners occupational, educational, and relational domains.
when individuals are in their early 20s. Thus, indi- As an attitude measure focusing on gender roles,
rect but theoretically meaningful links exist between the AWS assesses opinions about the behavioral
40 Attitudes Toward Women Scale

patterns deemed appropriate for men and women competent women in stereotypically masculine
in society. Examples include believing that men domains and whether this would relate to their
should be more responsible for supporting their gender-role attitudes. Although there were gender-
families, whereas women should be more respon- role attitude measures already in existence, such as
sible for nurturing their children. Clifford Kirkpatrick’s Belief-Pattern Scale for
Spence and Helmreich created versions of the Measuring Attitudes Toward Feminism published
AWS with 55 items, 25 items, and 15 items, which in 1936, the items were relatively outdated. In
were published in 1972, 1973, and 1978, respec- need of a more contemporary means of measuring
tively. Sample items on the AWS are as follows: gender-role attitudes, Spence, along with her col-
“There are many jobs in which men should be league Robert Helmreich, developed the original
given preference over women in being hired or 55-item version of the AWS. They then discovered,
promoted” and “Under modern economic condi- to their surprise, that male and female college stu-
tions with women being active outside the home, dents, even those with more traditional gender-role
men should share in household tasks such as wash- attitudes, formed positive impressions of compe-
ing dishes and doing the laundry.” Respondents tent women with masculine interests.
indicate their level of agreement with each state-
ment on a four-option scale. A summary score is
Significance of the AWS
created across all scale items such that higher num-
bers indicate more egalitarian gender-role atti- Though neither the first, nor the most recent,
tudes. More than three decades of research have measure of gender-role attitudes, the AWS is the
demonstrated all three versions of the AWS to be most widely cited and used, serving as a reference
reliable, consistently yielding the same results, and point for more recently developed measures.
valid, accurately measuring what they are intended Spence has attributed the popularity of the AWS
to measure. These properties have added to the to its emergence as one of the first gender-role
usefulness and importance of the scale. attitude measures in the early 1970s, when inter-
This entry addresses the background of the est in gender research was growing exponentially
AWS, the significance of the scale, changes over in psychology.
time in gender-role attitudes, and new directions in Because the AWS has been used so widely to
their measurement. measure gender-role attitudes, comparisons of these
attitudes can be made across time (as discussed in
the next section) and across cultures. Investigators
Background and History
have used the AWS in at least 15 different countries
When discussing the history of the AWS, it is inter- (including Brazil, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic,
esting to note the relevance of the career history of India, Philippines, South Korea, and Spain) on five
its primary founder, Janet Spence. Earning her different continents (Asia, Australia, Europe, North
PhD in 1949, Spence was a pioneering figure for America, and South America). In addition, the
women in psychology at a time when the field was AWS used on college students has also been adapted
largely dominated by men. In 1984, with the for use with adolescents and with the general popu-
American Psychological Association approaching lation in the United States. Although findings from
its centennial, she served as its sixth female presi- these studies are diverse, consistent patterns emerge.
dent, and in 1988, she served as the first member- For example, women and female adolescents typi-
elected president of the American Psychological cally report more egalitarian gender-role attitudes
Society (now the Association for Psychological than their male counterparts. Though the gender-
Science). role attitudes of parents and their children show a
In the 1970s, during the second wave of the moderate degree of association, students consis-
feminist movement, Spence’s research interests tently report more egalitarian attitudes than their
turned to gender. In response to research findings parents or grandparents. In addition, more tradi-
that people liked competent, academically success- tional gender-role attitudes are reported by those
ful males more than incompetent ones, Spence lower in socioeconomic status and those stronger in
became interested in how people would perceive religious affiliation.
Attitudes Toward Women Scale 41

Change Over Time this problem, these ceiling effects are, in and of
themselves, a phenomenon of interest. That is,
The consistent use of the AWS over a period of because these ceiling effects are a more recent
more than three decades has allowed gender phenomenon occurring mostly on certain AWS
researchers to track changes in gender-role atti- items in female college students, researchers can
tudes over time. It is interesting—and no acci- gain a better understanding of change over time
dent—that the AWS appeared at a time when in gender-role attitudes and can also make inter-
women in the United States were more forcefully esting comparisons between male and female
asserting their rights to attain the same educational students.
and employment status as men. Given that the Over time, it has become less socially acceptable
actual behaviors and roles of U.S. women were in the United States to express negative attitudes
changing as they increasingly entered traditionally toward women openly. Because the AWS is an
male-dominated domains, it became important to overt measure of attitudes, it could be argued that
examine whether there were corresponding changes some of the egalitarian responses on the AWS
in societal attitudes about male and female gender might not accurately reflect the respondents’ true
roles. Research does, indeed, indicate that gender- beliefs. This has led to the construction of more
role attitudes are becoming less traditional over subtle measures of gender-role attitudes, such as
time, especially among college students in the the Modern Sexism Scale developed by Janet Swim
United States For example, Janet Spence and Eugene and her colleagues. This scale assesses the extent to
Hahn compared gender-role attitudes (using the which respondents deny that discrimination against
AWS) in four different student cohorts assessed at women still exists, and it has been shown to be a
the same university in 1972, 1976, 1980, and different kind of gender-role attitude measure than
1992, finding the most egalitarian attitudes in more overt measures. It might seem sensible, there-
1992 and the least egalitarian attitudes in 1972. In fore, to discontinue the use of overt measures of
a more comprehensive examination of changes in gender-role attitudes in favor of more subtle mea-
gender-role attitudes that included 71 different sures; however, this action would be short-sighted
samples of U.S. college students, Jean Twenge in the end. Both overt and subtle gender-role atti-
found that gender-role attitudes became steadily tude measures are vital because they serve distinct
more egalitarian in both male and female students research purposes. Most importantly, because the
over a 25-year period from 1970 to 1995. In addi- AWS has been used consistently in research since
tion, although males had more traditional attitudes the early 1970s, its continued use will allow gender
than females at every point in time, these gender researchers to examine how gender-role attitudes
differences decreased in size from 1986 to 1995. change over time well into the future.

Camille E. Buckner
Limitations and New Directions
Despite its usefulness, the AWS has limitations. See also Ambivalent Sexism; Feminism; Gender Roles;
Certain items on the scale appear outdated (e.g., Modern Sexism; Sexism
“It is ridiculous for a woman to run a locomotive
and for a man to darn socks”). Another criticism
levied against the scale, which applies particularly Further Readings
to more recent samples of female college students, Beere, C. A. (1990). Gender roles: A handbook of tests
is that it shows ceiling effects. Ceiling effects occur and measures. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
when most or all responses on a measurement McHugh, M. C., & Frieze, I. H. (1997). The
scale cluster around the high (or, in the case of the measurement of gender-role attitudes: A review and
AWS, the more egalitarian) end. This lack of vari- commentary. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21,
ability in scale responses can lead to difficulty in 1–16.
determining what relationships the scale shows Spence, J. T., & Hahn, E. D. (1997). The Attitudes
with other variables (e.g., educational level or reli- Toward Women Scale and attitude change in college
giosity), an important goal of research. Despite students. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 17–34.
42 Attribution Biases

Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1978). Masculinity and on a scientific analysis of how people should
femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates, explain, or attribute, their own or others’ behavior
and antecedents. Austin: University of Texas Press. by using the available information in a systematic
Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R., & Stapp, J. (1973). A short manner. Heider and Kelley investigated the locus
version of the Attitudes Toward Women Scale (AWS). of causality, whether behavior is caused by some-
Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 2(4), 219–220. thing internal or external to the actor (the person
Swim, J. K., & Cohen, L. L. (1997). Overt, covert, and performing the behavior). Later work, by Bernard
subtle sexism: A comparison between the Attitudes Weiner, identified three further causal dimensions
Toward Women and Modern Sexism Scales.
in terms of which attributions can be classified:
Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 103–118.
stability, the extent to which causes are stable and
Twenge, J. M. (1997). Attitudes toward women,
permanent versus temporary and fluctuating; con-
1970–1995: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Women
trollability, the extent to which causes can be influ-
Quarterly, 21, 35–51.
enced by the actor; and globality, whether a cause
is global in nature or specific to a given situation.
Of most relevance to the issue of intergroup
attribution biases is locus of causality. An internal
Attribution Biases attribution is any explanation that locates the
cause as being internal to the person, such as per-
Attribution refers to the way in which people sonality, mood, abilities, attitudes, and effort. An
explain their own behavior and that of others. An external attribution is any explanation that locates
attribution bias occurs when someone systemati- the cause as being external to the person, such as
cally over- or underuses the available information the actions of others, the nature of the situation,
when explaining behavior. There is evidence that social pressures, or luck. Thus, if people see a
when we are making judgments about the behav- mother shouting at her child and decides that she
ior of our own group (the ingroup) and that of is doing this because she is an aggressive person,
other groups (outgroups), we show attributional they are making an internal attribution. In con-
biases that favor the ingroup. Specifically, where trast, if they decide that she was reprimanding the
ingroup members are concerned, we explain posi- child for behaving badly, they are making an
tive behaviors in terms of internal characteristics external attribution.
(e.g., personality) and negative behaviors in terms
of external factors (e.g., illness). Conversely,
where outgroup members are concerned, we Individual Attribution Biases
explain positive behaviors in terms of external Kelley’s model is a rather idealized account of how
characteristics and negative behaviors in terms of people make causality judgments. Given that we
internal characteristics. The study of attribution normally have limited time and resources, we have
biases is an essential aspect of group processes and a tendency to use heuristics, or shortcuts, when
intergroup relations because these biases can fuel making social judgments, rather than taking into
negative relations between opposing groups. account all of the available information. As a
Understanding how and why attribution biases result, researchers have observed a number of sys-
arise, however, facilitates the development of tematic biases that are made when people are
interventions to reduce them. assessing the causes of behavior.
This entry outlines the basic theory, discusses There are three well-documented attribution
how it applies in individual and group contexts, biases. The correspondence bias refers to the fact
and describes research showing how attribution that behavior is often viewed as a reflection of an
bias may be mitigated. actor’s corresponding internal disposition even
when it was actually caused by situational factors.
The actor–observer bias arises when we attribute
Attribution Theory
other people’s behavior to internal causes and our
Following the pioneering work of Fritz Heider, Harold own behavior to external causes. Both of these
Kelley developed a theory of causal attribution based effects can be explained by perceptual salience.
Attribution Biases 43

The people being observed are the most salient helped or failed to help the participant when he or
aspect of the situation, as they are actually per- she had fallen off a bike). Among Muslim partici-
forming the action—they and their behavior appear pants, positive behavior of a Muslim (an ingroup
to go together, so an internal attribution is made. member) and negative behavior of a Hindu (an
In contrast, when making self-attributions, we are outgroup member) tended to be attributed to
focused outward and the situation is salient, and causes rated as internal, stable, uncontrollable by
thus we attribute causality for our behavior to others, and global. In contrast, positive behavior
external factors. of a Hindu and negative behavior of a Muslim
The self-serving attribution bias refers to our were typically attributed to causes rated as exter-
tendency to make internal attributions for our nal, unstable, controllable by others, and specific.
successes and external attributions for our fail- Notably, Hindu participants showed considerably
ures. If students excel in an exam, for example, less intergroup bias in attributions, suggesting that
they are likely to think this is because they are these biases are stronger among majority groups
very intelligent, but if they fail, they may attribute than minority groups.
this to the poor quality of their teacher. In con- Research has also considered whether there are
trast to the perceptual processes underlying cor- biases in attributions made for the historical
respondence and actor–observer biases, the actions of entire outgroups. (Non-German) Jewish
self-serving attribution bias has a motivational and (non-Jewish) German participants were asked
basis. We are motivated to view ourselves in a why they thought Germans mistreated Jewish
positive light, to have high self-esteem. Attributing people during the Second World War. Jewish par-
success to internal causes boosts our feelings of ticipants were more likely to attribute the behavior
self-worth, whereas attributing our failures to of the Germans to internal characteristics such as
external causes protects us from feeling bad when German aggression than were German partici-
we do not do well. Together, these processes pants. In a further study, Dutch participants were
enable us to maintain and enhance our self- asked to make internal or external attributions for
esteem. Extending these findings, research has behavior in two historical contexts: Dutch behav-
shown that as well as making attributions that ior toward Indonesians during the colonization
favor the self, we are also motivated to make attri- period (negative ingroup behavior) and German
butions that favor groups to which we belong behavior toward the Dutch during the Second
over groups to which we do not. World War (negative outgroup behavior). Partici­
pants were more likely to make internal attribu-
tions about negative outgroup behavior than
Intergroup Attribution Biases
negative ingroup behavior, and more likely to
Intergroup attribution refers to the ways in which make external attributions about negative ingroup
members of different social groups explain the behavior than negative outgroup behavior.
behavior of members of their own and other social Finally, there is evidence for linguistic inter-
groups. A person attributes the behavior of another group attribution biases. People tend to use rela-
person not simply to individual characteristics, but tively abstract terms to describe the negative
also to characteristics associated with the group to behavior of an outgroup member and the positive
which the other person belongs. Moreover, the behavior of an ingroup member, because this
group membership of the perceiver, or attributor, implies that the behavior is generalized to the
can also affect the intergroup attribution process. personality of the actor. In contrast, people use
Social psychologists have investigated how we relatively concrete terms to describe the negative
make attributions in an intergroup context. Hindus behavior of an ingroup member and the positive
(a minority group) and Muslims (a majority group) behavior of an outgroup member because this
in Bangladesh read scenarios about an individual implies that the behavior is specific to a particu-
from either their ethnoreligious group or the other lar context.
group, and they were instructed to imagine that To summarize, in an intergroup context, we
this person had behaved in either a positive or a tend to make attributions regarding locus of cau-
negative way toward them (e.g., a passerby either sality that favor the ingroup over the outgroup.
44 Attribution Biases

This is a form of self-serving attribution bias, but nationality. This cross-categorization creates four
instead of enabling us to view ourselves in a positive groups. For a Bangladeshi Muslim, the double
light compared to other individuals, it enables us ingroup refers to those who share both group
to view the groups to which we belong positively memberships (other Bangladeshi Muslims), the
compared to other groups. Specifically, we tend to partial ingroups are those who share one group
explain the positive behavior of ingroup members membership (Bangladeshi Hindus and Indian
in terms of internal characteristics but the positive Muslims), and the double outgroup refers to those
behavior of outgroup members in terms of exter- who share neither group membership (Indian
nal characteristics. In contrast, we tend to explain Hindus). People tend to favor double ingroup
the negative behavior of ingroup members in terms members and show the greatest discrimination
of external characteristics, but the negative behav- against the double outgroup. Intergroup bias
ior of outgroup members in terms of internal char- against partial ingroup members, however, is
acteristics. We also have also a tendency to make reduced compared to the double outgroup. Thus,
biased intergroup attributions based on linguistics, seeing an outgroup member as being an ingroup
globality, stability, and controllability. member on a second dimension has benefits for
So why do we make these intergroup attribu- intergroup relations. Research on intergroup attri-
tion biases? According to social identity theory, we bution biases mirrors these findings. Bangladeshi
tend to favor our own group over other groups to Muslim study participants made the most positive
maintain a positive perception of the ingroup and attributions about a Bangladeshi Muslim protago-
therefore maintain a high level of self-esteem. We nist and the most negative attributions about an
make intergroup attribution biases to ensure that Indian Hindu protagonist. Attributions made
our group is perceived in a positive light compared about Bangladeshi Hindus and Indian Muslims
to other groups. Three findings support this social were, however, significantly more positive than
identity explanation. First, making group member- those made about Indian Hindus.
ship salient prior to completing an intergroup In sum, intergroup attributional biases arise
attribution task increases the extent to which par- because of our motivation to maintain a positive
ticipants show intergroup attribution biases. social identity, and these biases contribute to the
Second, intergroup attribution biases are stronger maintenance and exacerbation of conflict between
among participants who highly identify with their groups. Research has shown, however, that chang-
ingroup. Third, it has been demonstrated that ing our perceptions of intergroup categories
making internal attributions about ingroup mem- through cross-categorization can lead to reduc-
bers and making global attributions about the tions in intergroup attribution biases. This research
negative behavior of outgroup members predicts therefore makes an important contribution to our
higher self-esteem. understanding of how intergroup relations can be
improved.

Reducing Intergroup Attribution Biases Rhiannon N. Turner and Miles Hewstone

According to social identity theory, making our See also Cross-Categorization; Discrimination; Social
group membership salient increases intergroup Identity Theory
bias, as we are motivated to maintain a positive
perception of our own group relative to other
groups. To reduce attributional bias, it is therefore Further Readings
necessary to change the nature of categorization. Doosje, B., & Branscombe, N. R. (2003). Attributions for
One way of doing this is cross-categorization, the negative historical actions of a group. European
which involves crossing a dichotomous categoriza- Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 235–248.
tion with a second categorization. In the case of Hewstone, M. (1990). The “ultimate attribution error”?
Hindus and Muslims in Bangladesh, for example, A review of the literature on intergroup causal
it is possible to introduce a second categorization, attribution. European Journal of Social Psychology,
the distinction between Bangladeshi and Indian 20, 311–335.
Authoritarian Personality 45

Islam, M. R., & Hewstone, M. (1993). Intergroup homemakers, longshoremen, civic volunteers, vet-
attributions and affective consequences in majority erans, psychiatric patients, and prisoners, among
and minority groups. Journal of Personality and Social others, from the West Coast of the United States
Psychology, 64, 936–950. For this reason, the research taught Americans much
about their own authoritarianism and prejudice.
Authoritarian Personality The Frankfurt/Berkeley school, as the group
was called, viewed following hateful authorities as
being at least as problematic as hateful leadership
Why would a progressive society line up behind a
itself, for without assent and cooperation, what
ruler who invades other nations unprovoked? What
power does a leader have? Their approach was
would lead ordinary people to carry out orders that
thus one of the first to prioritize understanding
risked their nation’s future in order to commit geno-
mass political psychology. According to the author-
cide? Nazi Germany posed such questions to many
itarian personality theory (APT) that Adorno,
social scientists. Authoritarian personality theory
Frenkel-Brunswik, Levinson, and Sanford pub-
(APT), based in psychodynamic theory, was devel-
lished in The Authoritarian Personality in 1950,
oped to explain these behaviors and their psycho-
three elements are necessary to produce an author-
logical underpinnings. Studies based on APT have
itarian personality: (1) being raised in a culture
shown that prejudice is related to the outlook of the
that vilifies certain groups (e.g., European anti-
people who hold such views rather than to charac-
Semitism and U.S. racism), (2) needing to be loved
teristics of the groups they disdain. Thus the social
by one’s parents, and (3) having parents who are
significance, testable hypotheses, and intellectual
punitive and unaffectionate.
ambition of APT has drawn much attention and
The psychodynamic process states that when
criticism and inspired a wide variety of new research.
parents scorn their children, children adopt the
In addition, the cross-culturally robust association
prejudices of their parents and society in an
of authoritarianism with prejudice, stereotyping,
attempt to become pleasing to their parents. As
political attitudes and behavior, and social and
children try to gain moral acceptability by obeying
political values continues to inspire research in per-
authorities who are prejudiced, they adopt the pre-
sonality and social psychology, political science,
dilections for conformity, blind submissiveness to
sociology, and political psychology. This entry
authority, and intolerance of difference. This
examines the concept, supporting evidence, criti-
makes them especially vulnerable to messages
cisms, and responses to these critiques.
from authorities that denigrate the weak and the
deviant. In expressing such prejudices, children
Historical and Theoretical Context
can view themselves as acceptable. Hence, the
During World War II, scholars Theodor Adorno combination of psychological motivations, the cul-
and Elsa Frenkel-Brunswik, who were German tural context of prejudicial ideologies, and particu-
refugees, joined American psychologists Daniel J. lar family practices account for how cultures
Levinson and R. Nevitt Sanford at the University transmit prejudice across generations.
of California, Berkeley. The group was given fund-
ing from the American Jewish Committee to
Evidence of the Authoritarian Personality
research the psychological roots of anti-Semitism.
However, their study became substantially broader, Interview studies of adults by Elsa Frenkel-
representing the intellectual ambition to solve Brunswik attempted to explicate these psychody-
major societal problems by understanding the namic processes. Such evidence is now met with
interplay of human development, psychology, and skepticism because of concerns about retrospective
societies. Their theorizing incorporated two pre- memory and interviewer biases. However, the
dominant schools of thought: psychodynamics, existence of an authoritarian “personality,” or
and culture and personality, and it addressed rela- syndrome of traits, including conformity, submis-
tions within families, between groups, and between sion, and intolerance, was demonstrated with stan-
leaders and their societies. Participants in this dard personality techniques, including interviews,
research included professional men and women, projective tests, and extensive scale development.
46 Authoritarian Personality

Adorno and his colleagues’ research, especially but also because of APT’s moral and political
that of Daniel Levinson, showed that people differ implications and of developments in psychological
reliably from one another in the general tendency theorizing and research methods.
to be prejudiced. That is, those scoring high on the One major criticism of APT concerns the valid-
F-scale (fascism scale) also tended to score high on ity of its personality measures. Richard Christie
anti-Semitism scales; on generalized ethnocentrism and Marie Jahoda, among others, have noted that
scales that tap prejudice against “Negroes,” the scales developed by Adorno and his colleagues
Mexicans, Japanese, “Okies,” immigrants, and are not balanced with equal numbers of protrait
foreigners; and on scales measuring patriotism and and contrait items. That is, the scales contain only
political–economic conservatism. In fact, preju- items with which someone highly authoritarian
diced individuals are likely to endorse logically would agree. For this reason, it is unclear whether
contradictory statements, so long as the statements the scales simply measure authoritarianism as
indicate culturally normed disdain for members of response acquiescence (the tendency to simply
excluded groups. For example, Adorno and his agree with statements), or whether the contents of
colleagues found that authoritarians are likely to the scales matter. Further, this measurement prob-
endorse both of these anti-Semitism scale state- lem can inflate correlations among different scales
ments: “Districts containing many Jews always because if some participants are “yay-sayers” and
seem to be smelly, dirty, shabby, and unattractive” others are “nay-sayers,” that would produce posi-
and “Jews seem to prefer the most luxurious, tive correlations among different scales regardless
extravagant, and sensual way of living.” Such find- of item content.
ings suggest that authoritarianism does not stem Another kind of criticism is both political and
from rational beliefs, but rather from motivation theoretical. People who view patriotism and conser-
or cognitive style. vatism as prosocial and moral may be discomfited
Prejudiced people often feel that their percep- by the finding that patriotism and conservatism cor-
tions and feelings about denigrated groups stem relate strongly with forms of prejudice the West
from qualities of denigrated groups themselves. came to disapprove of following the Nazi genocide,
But research on authoritarianism has documented such as anti-Semitism and anti-Black racism. Scholars
that people prejudiced against one group tend to including Edward Shils and Milton Rokeach think
be prejudiced against other groups who are disre- that extreme intolerance could be exhibited on both
spected in their societies. This finding provides a ends of the political spectrum, and they believe that
completely different interpretation of the cause of communists, for example, should score high on
prejudice than that of naïve psychology. Rather intolerance. In fact, Adorno and his colleagues had
than prejudice being due to properties of the vili- postulated the same idea, but they found no empiri-
fied group, such as their immorality or crudeness, cal evidence for left wing authoritarianism. In 1960,
it means that prejudice stems from the psychologi- Milton Rokeach proposed the D-scale (dogmatism
cal outlook of the perceiver. This finding therefore scale) as an alternative to the F-scale in an attempt
provides psychology with an agenda to research to capture intolerance among both right and left
what, exactly, that outlook is and how it works. wingers, but found comparable empirical results for
the F-scale and the D-scale.
Another criticism of APT is that there is very
Criticisms of Authoritarian Personality Theory
little evidence for the psychodynamic processes it
In fact, the finding that certain individuals are posits. In fact, there is evidence against the hypoth-
more robustly prejudiced, conservative, insecure, esis that punitive parents produce authoritarian
and punitive than others had been empirically children. From the 1950s on, as psychology came
documented early in the 20th century by pro-Nazi to insist on empirical evidence and experimenta-
researchers (e.g., Jaensch) and anti-Nazi (e.g., tion and reject the unobservable unconscious
Lenski) researchers in Europe and the United States processes associated with Freudianism, more psycho­
APT attracted both more attention and more criti- logists were ready to disregard Elsa Frenkel-
cism than that research. This may be because both Brunswik’s psychodynamic research and Theodor
world wars showed the costs of intergroup hate, Adorno’s rejection of positivism.
Authoritarian Personality 47

Finally, the research focus of APT on individual it does not show parallel patterns with RWA.
differences produces a logical contradiction: How Reviews by William Stone corroborate the fact that
can normative prejudice in a society be explained by authoritarianism and the tendency to be prejudiced
features that only some people in that society have? against groups characterizes conservatives more
Tom Pettigrew’s 1958 dissertation examined racism than liberals. In the Soviet Union and satellite
among South African and American Whites and nations, Walter Stephan and his colleagues have
showed that authoritarianism does little to explain shown that those higher on RWA were more likely
racist behavior when racism is normalized in a cul- to endorse communism and the Communist Party,
ture. This criticism led many social psychologists to consistent with the idea that authoritarians con-
reject consideration of individual differences in preju- form to the norms promoted by authorities in their
dice. It can also be said that APT does not answer societies. Recently, Alain van Hiel and his col-
important questions about the culture of prejudice, leagues found that extreme left wing activists in
such as why particular groups get vilified in the first Western Europe have very high scores on a new left
place, why prejudice against the same group rises and wing authoritarianism scale, and this correlates
falls, nor how prejudicial ideologies may change or with liberal economic views.
spread outside of socialization, although answers to
such questions are still being generated. Despite Psychodynamics and Personality Development
including some progressive theorizing about gender,
The Authoritarian Personality shares a cultural short- Consistent with the psychodynamic view, but
coming with its contemporaries: It did not develop a also with other socialization and genetic develop-
sexism scale as an aspect of group prejudice. ment theories, Altemeyer showed that people within
families have similar levels of authoritarianism.
Responses to Criticisms More recently, Christopher Weber and Christopher
Federico have shown that RWA corresponds with
After decades of neglect, the major questions raised anxious attachment. In terms of general personality,
by authoritarian research concerning the normativ- studies in several countries show that RWA corre-
ity of prejudice, how psychological motives lead to lates with being less open to experience and more
prejudice, how prejudice is socialized, and the rela- conscientious. Thus, although APT appears wrong
tion of culture to intergroup relations have been in the particulars concerning socialization, authori-
reconsidered by a wide variety of scholars. tarianism does correspond with people’s orientations
toward close relationships and their temperament.
Scale Redevelopment
Canadian psychologist Bob Altemeyer reviewed Other Conceptualizations
research on authoritarianism and determined that
Rather than accept the description of authori-
the most central elements of the authoritarian syn-
tarianism as a prejudice syndrome or as essentially
drome were authoritarian submission, convention-
political, theorists have sought to identify its core
alism, and authoritarian aggression. He developed
psychology by emphasizing either a socioemo-
balanced scales called Right Wing Authoritarianism
tional or cognitive orientation. Those with a
(RWA) that include all three concepts and are reli-
socioemotional orientation have conceived of
able, valid, and widely used around the world.
authoritarianism as whether an individual is tough-
RWA corresponds to the public’s political behav-
minded or tender-minded (Ted Goertzel, Hans
ior, including voting in many societies. The scales
Eysenck), is easily threatened (David Winter, Bill
have distinguished among the voting records of
Petersen), is uncomfortable and unsuccessful with
North American legislators, evidence that connects
personal autonomy (Detlef Oesterreich), sees con-
authoritarianism with national leadership.
formity as the means to social order (Stanley
Feldman), or perceives the world to be a dangerous
Scale Balance and Left Wing Authoritarianism
place (John Duckitt). The psychological habits that
Altemeyer also tried to develop a left wing may underlie generalized conservatism and preju-
authoritarian measure, but in convenience samples dice may include fear of uncertainty (Michael
48 Aversive Racism

Hogg), intolerance of ambiguity (Glenn Wilson), Duckitt, J. (2001). A dual-process cognitive-motivational


cognitive rigidity (Richard Christie), need for theory of ideology and prejudice. In M. P. Zanna
cognitive closure (Arie Kruglanski), and closed- (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology
mindedness (Milton Rokeach). John Duckitt’s (Vol. 33, pp. 41–113). San Diego, CA: Academic
conception of authoritarianism also addresses Press.
how different elements of cultural context may Eckhardt, W. (1991). Authoritarianism. Political
be important in the development of authoritari- Psychology, 12, 97–124.
anism. Duckitt argues that in more collectivist Marcus, G. E. (Ed.). (2005). Authoritarianism [Special
issue]. Political Psychology, 26.
societies, conformity is emphasized, and along
with the presumption that the world is threaten-
ing, this context should especially lead to the
development of authoritarianism. Correlational
models in several countries are consistent with Aversive Racism
this theory. Finally, Phil Tetlock and Jim Sidanius
have each developed approaches to political cog- Aversive racism is a form of bias that is not overtly
nition to account for extremes on both the right expressed but may reflect the attitudes of a sub-
and the left. stantial portion of people in societies that have
strong egalitarian traditions and norms. Much of
the research on aversive racism has focused on the
Authoritarianism and Culture orientation of Whites toward Blacks in the United
Authoritarianism in individuals correlates robustly States, but similar attitudes have been found
across nations with their right wing political affili- among members of dominant groups in other
ation and voting, prejudice against women, gays, countries with strong contemporary egalitarian
immigrants, foreigners, and subordinated ethnic values but discriminatory histories or policies. In
and religious groups. Cultures can also be consid- contrast to the traditional form of racism, which
ered more or less authoritarian, and can become is expressed openly and directly, aversive racism
more or less authoritarian depending on how inse- operates in subtle and indirect ways. For example,
cure they are. For example, cultures that privilege the negative feelings that aversive racists have
conformity and hierarchicality are considered by toward Blacks do not manifest themselves in open
some to be more authoritarian, and periods of war hostility or hatred. Instead, aversive racists’ reac-
may produce more authoritarian behavior, as tions may involve discomfort, anxiety, and/or
seen in content analyses of popular culture, fear. That is, they find Blacks “aversive,” while at
endorsement of leaders, and voting patterns. the same time rejecting any suggestion that they
Authoritarianism may be conducive to certain might be prejudiced. Despite its subtle expression,
aspects of group living, such as cooperation and aversive racism has consequences that are as sig-
ingroup identification. nificant and pernicious (e.g., the restriction of
minorities’ economic opportunities) as those of
Felicia Pratto the traditional, overt form. This entry provides a
fuller description of aversive racism and its expres-
See also Conservatism; Dogmatism; Need for Closure; sions, then looks at strategies for combating it.
Prejudice; Right Wing Authoritarianism

Nature of the Attitudes


Further Readings A critical aspect of the aversive racism framework
Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & is the conflict between aversive racists’ denial of
Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. personal prejudice and underlying unconscious
New York: Norton. negative feelings toward and beliefs about particu-
Altemeyer, B. (1988). Enemies of freedom: Understanding lar minority groups. For example, because of cur-
right wing authoritarianism. San Francisco: Jossey- rent cultural values in the United States, most
Bass. Whites have strong convictions concerning fairness,
Aversive Racism 49

justice, and racial equality; however, because of a but do not have significant implicit prejudice or
range of normal cognitive, motivational, and stereotypes. Consistent with the aversive racism
sociocultural processes that promote intergroup framework, whereas the majority of Whites in the
biases, most Whites also have some negative feel- United States appear “nonprejudiced” on self-
ings toward or beliefs about Blacks. They may be report (explicit) measures of prejudice, a very large
unaware of these feelings or try to deny them to proportion of Whites also demonstrate implicit
retain a self-image as unprejudiced, but when racial biases. Overall, studies have found that
engaged in social categorization, for example, they Whites’ generally negative implicit attitudes and
will find that their cultural stereotypes are sponta- stereotypes are largely dissociated from their typi-
neously activated. cally more positive overt expressions of their atti-
tudes and beliefs about Blacks.
The aversive racism framework also helps to
Identifying Aversive Attitudes
identify when discrimination against Blacks and
Generally, aversive racists may be identified by other minority groups will or will not occur.
a constellation of characteristic responses to racial Whereas old-fashioned racists exhibit a direct and
issues and interracial situations. First, aversive rac- overt pattern of discrimination, aversive racists’
ists, in contrast to old-fashioned racists, endorse actions may appear more variable and inconsis-
fair and just treatment of all groups. Second, tent. Sometimes they discriminate (manifesting
despite their conscious good intentions, aversive their negative feelings), and sometimes they do not
racists unconsciously harbor feelings of uneasiness (reflecting their egalitarian beliefs). Nevertheless,
toward those of other races (e.g., Blacks) and thus their discriminatory behavior is predictable.
try to avoid interracial interaction. Third, when
interracial interaction is unavoidable, aversive rac-
Predicting Aversive Behavior
ists experience anxiety and discomfort, and conse-
quently they try to disengage from the interaction Because aversive racists consciously recognize
as quickly as possible. Fourth, because part of the and endorse egalitarian values and because they
discomfort that aversive racists experience is due truly aspire to be unprejudiced, they will not act
to a concern about acting inappropriately and inappropriately in situations with strong social
appearing prejudiced to themselves and others, norms when discrimination would be obvious to
aversive racists strictly adhere to established rules others and to themselves. Specifically, studies have
and codes of behavior in interracial situations that shown that when they are presented with a situa-
they cannot avoid. Finally, their feelings will get tion in which the normatively appropriate response
expressed, but in subtle, unintentional, rationaliz- is clear, in which right and wrong are clearly
able ways that disadvantage minorities or unfairly defined, aversive racists will not discriminate
benefit the majority group. Nevertheless, in terms against Blacks. In these contexts, aversive racists
of conscious intent, aversive racists intend not to will be especially motivated to avoid feelings,
discriminate against people of color—and they beliefs, and behaviors that could be associated
behave accordingly when it is possible for them to with racist intent. Wrongdoing of this type would
monitor the appropriateness of their behavior. directly threaten their image of themselves as non-
Recent research in social cognition has yielded prejudiced.
new techniques—such as the Implicit Association Aversive racists still possess unconscious nega-
Test, which uses response times to pairs of stimu- tive feelings and beliefs, however, which will even-
li—for tapping the “implicit” stereotypic or evalu- tually be expressed in subtle, indirect, and
ative (e.g., good–bad) associations that people rationalizable ways. For instance, discrimination
have toward other groups, but possibly without will occur in situations in which the normative
full awareness. These techniques are very useful structure is weak, the guidelines for appropriate
for distinguishing between aversive racists, who behavior are vague, or the basis for social judgment
endorse egalitarian views and unprejudiced ideolo- is ambiguous. In addition, discrimination will occur
gies but harbor implicit racial biases, and unpreju- when an aversive racist can justify or rationalize a
diced people, who also endorse egalitarian values negative response on the basis of some factor other
50 Aversive Racism

than race. Studies show that under these circum- bias that focus on the immorality of prejudice and
stances, White aversive racists may engage in illegality of discrimination are not effective for
behaviors that ultimately harm Blacks, but in ways combating it. Aversive racists recognize that prej-
that allow the racists to maintain their self-image as udice is bad, but they may not recognize that they
unprejudiced and that insulate them from recogniz- are prejudiced.
ing that their behavior is not color-blind. Nevertheless, aversive racism can be addressed
Evidence in support of the aversive racism with techniques aimed at its roots at both the indi-
framework comes from a range of paradigms. For vidual and collective levels. At the individual level,
instance, White bystanders who are the only wit- strategies to combat aversive racism can be directed
nesses to an emergency (and thus are fully respon- at unconscious attitudes. For example, extensive
sible for helping) are just as likely to help a Black training to create new, counterstereotypical associa-
victim as a White victim. However, when White tions with social categories (e.g., Blacks) can inhibit
bystanders believe that others also witness the the unconscious activation of stereotypes, an element
emergency (distributing the responsibility for help- of aversive racists’ negative attitudes. In addition,
ing), they are less likely to help a Black victim than aversive racists’ conscious attitudes, which are already
a White victim. In personnel or college admission favorable, can be instrumental in motivating change.
selection decisions, Whites do not discriminate on Allowing aversive racists to become aware, in a non-
the basis of race when candidates have very strong threatening way, of their unconscious negative atti-
or weak qualifications. Nevertheless, they do dis- tudes, feelings, and beliefs can stimulate self-regulatory
criminate against Blacks when the candidates have processes. Such processes not only elicit immediate
mixed qualifications. In these circumstances, aver- deliberative responses reaffirming conscious unpreju-
sive racists weigh the positive qualities of White diced orientations (such as increased support for
applicants and the negative qualities of Black policies that benefit minority groups), but also pro-
applicants more heavily in their evaluations, which duce, with sufficient time and experience, reductions
provide justification for their decisions. in implicit negative beliefs and attitudes.
Analogously, aversive racists have more difficulty At the intergroup level, interventions may be
discounting incriminating evidence that is declared targeted at processes that support aversive racism,
inadmissible when evaluating the guilt or innocence such as ingroup favoritism. One approach, repre-
of Black relative to White defendants in studies of sented by the common ingroup identity model,
court decisions. In interracial interactions, Whites’ generally proposes that if members of different
overt behaviors (e.g., verbal behavior) primarily groups are induced to conceive of themselves more
reflect their expressed, explicit racial attitudes, as an alternative single, superordinate group rather
whereas their more spontaneous and less controllable than as two separate groups, attitudes toward for-
behaviors (e.g., their nonverbal behaviors) are related mer outgroup members will become more positive
to their implicit, generally unconscious attitudes. through processes involving pro-ingroup bias. Thus,
changing the basis of categorization from race to an
alternative dimension can alter who is grouped as
Combating Aversive Racism
“us” and who is grouped as “them,” undermining
Traditional prejudice-reduction techniques have been a contributing force for contemporary forms of rac-
concerned with changing conscious attitudes—old- ism, such as aversive racism.
fashioned racism—and obvious expressions of bias. For instance, Black interviewers are more likely
Attempts to reduce this direct, traditional form of to obtain the cooperation of White respondents
racial prejudice have typically involved educational when they emphasize their common group mem-
strategies to enhance knowledge and appreciation of bership (such as shared university identity, as indi-
other groups (e.g., multicultural education programs), cated by insignia on their clothes) than when they
emphasize norms that prejudice is wrong, and involve do not. Intergroup interaction within the guide-
direct (e.g., mass media appeals) or indirect (disso- lines of the contact hypothesis (i.e., the idea that
nance reduction) attitude change techniques. How­ contact between groups improves intergroup rela-
ever, because aversive racism is pervasive, subtle, and tions) and antibias interventions with elementary
complex, the traditional techniques for eliminating schoolchildren that emphasize increasing their circles
Aversive Racism 51

of inclusion can also reduce bias through the processes See also Common Ingroup Identity Model;
outlined in the common ingroup identity model. Discrimination; Implicit Association Test (IAT);
The manifestations of aversive racism are more Modern Racism; Prejudice; Racial Ambivalence
subtle than are those of old-fashioned racism, but Theory; Racism; Symbolic Racism
aversive racism has consequences as significant as
blatant bias. Even though it is expressed in indirect
and rationalizable ways, it operates to systemati- Further Readings
cally restrict opportunities for Black members of
other traditionally underrepresented groups. In Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (2004). Aversive racism.
addition, because aversive racists may not be aware In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
of their implicit negative attitudes and only dis- psychology (Vol. 36, pp. 1–51). San Diego, CA:
criminate against Blacks when they can justify their Academic Press.
behavior on the basis of some factor other than Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (1986). The aversive
form of racism. In J. F. Dovidio & S. L. Gaertner
race, they will commonly deny any intentional
(Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism
wrongdoing when confronted with evidence of
(pp. 61–89). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
their bias. To the extent that minority group mem-
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Reducing
bers detect expressions of aversive racists’ negative
intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model.
attitudes in subtle interaction behaviors (e.g., non-
Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
verbal behavior) and attribute the consequences of Greenwald, A., McGhee, D., & Schwartz, J. (1998).
aversive racism to blatant racism, aversive racism Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition:
also contributes substantially to interracial distrust, The Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality
miscommunication, and conflict. and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480.
Nevertheless, aversive racism can be addressed Kovel, J. (1970). White racism: A psychohistory.
by encouraging increased awareness of uncon- New York: Pantheon.
scious negative feelings and beliefs, emphasizing Pettigrew, T. F., & Meertens, R. W. (1995). Subtle and
alternative forms of social categorization around blatant prejudice in western Europe. European
common group membership, and providing Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 57–76.
appropriate intergroup experiences to support Son Hing, L. S., Chung-Yan, G., Hamilton, L., &
the development of alternative implicit attitudes Zanna, M. P. (2008). A two-dimensional model that
and stereotypes and reinforce common identities. employs explicit and implicit attitudes to characterize
prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social
John F. Dovidio and Samuel L. Gaertner Psychology, 94(6), 971–987.
B
evil actions would manifest. They seem like rather
Banality of Evil ordinary people.
Assume that this realization is true. The disturb-
A recent morning’s newspaper had a charming ing consequence of this realization is that large-
snapshot of a laughing soldier playing an accor- scale actions of evil, such as genocide, do not
dion, surrounded by equally cheerful, laughing require large armies of evil individuals to carry
women, all clearly having a carefree time of it. But them out. Instead, ordinary people can become
the reader soon discovers a shocking fact. It is a entrained in the processes that produce the evil
photo of a playful off-duty moment for the staff of outcomes and thereby make those terrible out-
the Auschwitz death camp, which came from a comes possible. Two questions need to be asked
photo album documenting many such ordinary here: How is it that these ordinary people become
moments. The article’s author, Neil Genzlinger, enlisted in the process, and what are the conse-
comments that “yes, the genocide was conducted quences for them of their enlistment? Psychological
by real human beings who kicked back after a theory and research provide at least partial answers
day’s work, flirted with the ladies, shared a joke, to both of these questions.
played with the dog” (2008, B14). In psychology, the “banality of evil” notion has
The reader’s shock is much like the reaction become linked to the famous experiments by
that Hannah Arendt had observing the war crimes Stanley Milgram, which are described in the entry
trial of the Nazi Adolph Eichmann. Arendt was “Obedience to Authority.” Coincidentally, both
surprised, disconcerted, deeply unsettled. She Eichmann in Jerusalem and the first reports of the
expected the man, who had sent countless Jews to Milgram research appeared in 1963, so the world
their deaths, to look and act evil, to embody faced the ordinariness of the Nazi functionary
“evilness.” But instead she was struck by his ordi- Eichmann at about the time it faced the fact that,
nariness, his depthless normality. Her book if ordered to do so, many ordinary citizens of New
Eichmann in Jerusalem characterized this as the Haven, Connecticut, were willing to administer
“banality of evil.” presumably dangerous, perhaps life-threatening,
The book initially generated a storm of contro- shocks to another person in a learning experiment.
versy from those who thought Arendt was trivial- (The use of presumably here is important. Many
izing the evils that the Third Reich committed. descriptions of the Milgram experiment ignored
Now it is read as calling attention to the fact that various cues that it was, in fact, acceptable for the
when acts of evil are committed by an organiza- respondent to continue giving the shocks because
tion, the various actors in the organization will not the experimenter had asserted that the shocks
show all, or even many, of the personal character- would be painful “but cause no permanent
istics that a single individual perpetrating similar damage.”) Later, Philip Zimbardo’s well-known

53
54 Banality of Evil

Stanford prison experiment (described in the entry really being hurt, and this sort of reassurance from
of that name) was read as showing that under- a person who was assumed to have expertise about
graduate students, role-playing prison guards in a this enabled some respondents to continue. The
realistic simulation of a prison environment, were importance of this expert reassurance was demon-
also willing to engage in quite cruel actions toward strated by Milgram himself. In one condition,
other students who were in the prisoner role. This Milgram arranged to have the regular experi-
added a distressing new element to the findings of menter called out of the room while the earlier
the Milgram studies. In the Milgram studies, the shocks in the series were given. The experimenter
respondents’ actions were those that they were asked another respondent, who had been doing a
directed to take by the experimenter, who was record-keeping job, to take his place and continue
present to see that they obeyed his orders. In con- the experiment. That person, who was actually a
trast, the students in Zimbardo’s experiment them- confederate of Milgram’s, told the teacher to con-
selves designed and then independently enacted tinue administering the shocks. At some point in
many of the cruel actions that were taken. That the learner’s protests, the typical respondent refused
evil actions were within the repertoire of at least to continue; this experimenter did not have the
many people seemed well established. expertise to provide valid assurances that continu-
Certainly Milgram thought so. In a letter to the ation was safe. A further interesting response was
sponsor of his research, Milgram wrote: shown by several of these respondents. The replace-
ment experimenter stepped to the shock generator,
In a naïve moment some time ago, I once won- announcing that if the respondent would not con-
dered whether in all of the United States a vicious tinue the process, then he would. These respon-
government could find enough moral imbeciles dents moved to restrain the experimenter from
to meet the personnel requirements of a national doing so, thereby protecting the learner from
system of death camps, of the sort that were harm! Suddenly a very different image of the
maintained in Germany. I am now beginning to respondents emerges. In a similar fashion, one
think that the full complement could be recruited could point to several elements of Zimbardo’s
in New Haven. A substantial proportion of peo- study that were critical to producing the disturbing
ple do what they are told to do, irrespective of behavior of his student guards.
the content of the act, and without pangs of con- So it is possible to contend that the Milgram
science, so long as they perceive that the com- and Zimbardo studies’ subjects were not display-
mand comes from a legitimate authority. (quoted ing the sort of full-blown evil behavior that
in Blass, p. 100) Eichmann displayed. This said, a disturbing possi-
bility remains. Had those individuals remained in
For Americans, this unpleasant conclusion has the experimental contexts over longer time peri-
received intermittent confirmation: My Lai and ods, they might have become habituated to what
Abu Ghraib are familiar names. However, many they were doing, and their ethical concerns might
social psychologists would contest a generalization have faded away as they adapted to their tasks. Or
about the ease with which people could be brought they might have dehumanized the victims by
to harm others. They would point to some more attaching labels such as “rodents” to them. Or
particular aspects of the Milgram experiments that they might have cast them as members of out-
perhaps allowed the respondent to continue to groups who threatened the existence of the ingroup.
administer the shocks because those shocks were By means of these mechanisms, they would eventu-
not going to do permanent harm to the person ally do voluntarily and independently what they
receiving them. One key to understanding the were coerced to do by the situations in which they
Milgram situation is this: When the learner pro- found themselves. They might, in other words,
tested and asked that the experiment be stopped, have moved toward becoming evil-doers.
the experimenter heard this as well as the respon- An insight can be drawn from this. The hierar-
dent, and the experimenter instructed that the chical social components of organizations can be
experiment continue. Respondents would proba- structured in ways that bring about tremendously
bly read this as telling them that the learner wasn’t destructive harm to individuals. Of course, we
Black Sheep Effect 55

know that this is possible when the organization’s Darley, J. M. (1996). How organizations socialize
leaders seek to bring about this harm. That is what individuals into evildoing. In D. M. Messick &
the Nazi regime of Adolph Hitler and his collabo- A. E. Tenbrunsel (Eds.), Codes of conduct: Behavioral
rators has shown us. What we must now realize is research into business ethics (pp. 13–43). New York:
that organizations can drift into harm-doing prac- Russell Sage.
tices even without most individuals in the organi- Genzlinger, N. (2008, April 26). Smiling, everyday faces
zations desiring that this come about. of the killers at Auschwitz [Television review]. New
How this occurs is a topic that social psycholo- York Times, p. B14.
Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority: An
gists are now studying, both experimentally and in
experimental view. New York: Harper & Row.
observational studies. They begin with the under-
Zimbardo, P. (2007). The Lucifer effect: Understanding
standing that people seek to discover how to con-
how good people turn evil. New York: Random House.
duct themselves in organizations by observing the
actions of the people around them. This is a ver-
sion of what social psychologists call the situa-
tional perspective. In the organizational instance
of this perspective, people look to other, more Black Sheep Effect
experienced people to “see how we do things
here.” When they do this, how others behave may In everyday language, a “black sheep” is a group
lead them ethically astray, and they may not member who is undesirable and stands out from
become aware of it. Organizations can fragment the group in such a way as to attract disapproval
tasks and parcel them out among different indi- from the rest of the group. In social psychology,
viduals so that no one individual is aware that the the term black sheep effect, coined by José
sum of the fragments produces harmful outcomes. Marques, refers to a more specific phenomenon in
Also, contagion phenomena can exist. Suppose which someone who is socially undesirable (unlik-
others are “making their numbers” by committing able) is liked less if he or she is a member of your
actions that the new person thinks are ethically group (an ingroup member) than if he or she is a
bad. But suppose that the new person also sees member of a group to which you do not belong
that these rule-bending individuals are getting (an outgroup member). Conversely, someone who
bonuses and promotions from their superiors. It is socially desirable (likable) is liked more if he or
will be very hard for the new person to resist the she is a member of your ingroup rather than a
temptation to bend the rules. This in turn may lead member of an outgroup. Put another way, socially
to escalating pressures in which rule bending turns desirable ingroup targets are judged more favor-
to rule breaking. ably than socially desirable outgroup targets,
while socially undesirable ingroup targets are
John Darley judged less favorably than socially undesirable
See also Conformity; Dehumanization/Infrahumanization;
outgroup targets. Likable and unlikable ingroup
Ingroup Allocation Bias; Intergroup Violence; Minimal members are judged more extremely than likable
Group Effect; Obedience to Authority; Stanford Prison and unlikable outgroup members.
Experiment The black sheep effect usually emerges in asso-
ciation with a more favorable evaluation of the
ingroup than the outgroup as a whole (ingroup
Further Readings bias). The black sheep effect is also more pro-
Arendt, H. (1963). Eichmann in Jerusalem: A report on nounced (a) if the person doing the judging identi-
the banality of evil. New York: Viking. fies strongly with his or her ingroup, (b) if the
Blass, T. (2004). The man who shocked the world: The dimension on which the target is evaluated is
life and legacy of Stanley Milgram. New York: Basic highly relevant to establishing an overall favorable
Books. evaluation of the ingroup in comparison to a rele-
Darley, J. M. (1992). Social organization for the vant outgroup, and (c) if the situation is one in
production of evil. Psychological Inquiry, 3, which intergroup differentiation in favor of the
199–218. person’s ingroup is important.
56 Black Sheep Effect

Social Identity and Ingroup Favoritism between ingroup and outgroup categories. In pur-
suit of positive differentiation of the ingroup as a
Explanation of the black sheep effect draws on social
whole from the outgroup, people adopt a descrip-
identity theory and self-categorization theory. One
tive focus, in which they focus on and emphasize
basic assumption of these theories is that, with few
intergroup differences and pay little attention to
exceptions, when group membership is salient (when
intragroup differences. A descriptive focus directs
it is the psychological basis of information process-
attention to those characteristics of a person (e.g.,
ing, self-conception, and behavior), people engage in
born in Lisbon, Portugal) that allow category
ingroup-serving perceptual and judgmental biases
assignment (e.g., this person is more likely to be
and hold partisan intergroup attitudes. This ingroup
Portuguese than British) rather than to characteris-
favoritism generates ethnocentrism and leads people
tics that allow one to determine whether the
to prefer ingroup members and features to outgroup
person is likable or unlikable.
members and features. It is not surprising, then, that
However, in some situations, there may be
people evaluate ingroup members in general, and
salient ingroup members who display behaviors
socially desirable ingroup members in particular,
that conflict with the expectations associated with
more favorably than similar outgroup members.
a positive ingroup image—for example, dishonest
From this, one might suppose that overall one
members of a political party, traitors, or otherwise
would favor a socially desirable or undesirable
socially undesirable ingroup members. In this con-
ingroup member over a socially desirable or unde-
text, people adopt a prescriptive focus. This focus
sirable outgroup member; after all, ingroup mem-
directs attention to characteristics that are imbued
bers should be favored over outgroup members.
with value but are not associated with a particular
This is where the black sheep effect is counterintui-
social category (e.g., being dishonest). Thus, a pre-
tive and in conflict with social identity theory—as
scriptive focus allows one to determine whether a
indicated above, socially undesirable ingroup
person is socially desirable or undesirable but does
members are disliked more than socially undesir-
not allow one to determine the social category to
able outgroup members.
which he or she belongs (e.g., whether the person
Proponents of the black sheep effect believe that
is British or Portuguese).
this conflict is only apparent. They argue that
While adopting a prescriptive focus, people
socially desirable ingroup members support the
react favorably toward ingroup members whose
ingroup’s overall positive image and thus attract
behavior supports their conviction that the ingroup
positive reactions from other members of the group,
is “right” or is “better than” the outgroup.
whereas socially undesirable ingroup members
Concomitantly, people react negatively toward
undermine such an image and thus attract negative
“deviant” ingroup members because their behavior
reactions. Rather than being in contradiction to the
departs from standards that sustain the perceived
social identity framework, the black sheep effect
relative superiority of the ingroup (i.e., the ingroup’s
corresponds to a more sophisticated form of
subjective validity). Outgroup members, whether
ingroup favoritism. By derogating unlikable ingroup
socially desirable or socially undesirable, are much
members, people are protecting, and thus promot-
less relevant to the definition of the ingroup’s iden-
ing, the positive image of the ingroup as a whole.
tity, and thus they invite less extreme reactions.
The black sheep effect, therefore, ensues from an
Subjective Group Dynamics
internalized social influence process in which peo-
José Marques, Dario Paez, and Dominic Abrams ple subjectively reinforce their confidence in the
have recently developed the subjective group ingroup by upgrading normative members and
dynamics model to explain the cognitive and moti- derogating deviant members in an attempt to rees-
vational antecedents of the black sheep effect. This tablish the group’s positive social identity.
model proposes that people’s reactions toward
socially undesirable (or deviant) ingroup members
Empirical Evidence
involve two interrelated processes.
First, and as proposed by social identity theory, Research has supported the above analysis. For
people attempt to establish a clear-cut difference instance, in one study it was found that Belgian
Boundary Spanning 57

students, presented with likable or unlikable ingroup members who uphold such norms are par-
Belgian or North African target students, judged ticularly favorably evaluated, while those who
the likable Belgian targets more positively than the deviate from the norms are particularly unfavor-
likable North African targets and the unlikable ably evaluated.
Belgian targets more negatively than the unlikable
North African targets. Also, law students evalu- José M. Marques
ated a good performance by another law student See also Conformity; Deviance; Group Cohesiveness;
more positively than a similar performance by a Group Socialization; Norms; Opinion Deviance; Self-
philosophy student and evaluated a poor perfor- Categorization Theory; Social Identity Theory;
mance by a law student more negatively than a Subjective Group Dynamics
similar performance by a philosophy student.
In a similar vein, high school students evaluated
likable students from their own school more posi- Further Readings
tively than similar students from a rival school and
Marques, J. M., Abrams, D., Paez, D., & Hogg, M. A.
evaluated unlikable students from their own school (2001). Social categorization, social identification, and
more negatively than similar students from a rival rejection of deviant group members. In M. A. Hogg &
school. In addition, the black sheep effect generally R. S. Tindale (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social
co-occurred with more favorable evaluations of psychology: Group processes (Vol. 3, pp. 400–424).
the ingroup than the outgroup as a whole. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Research has also shown that the black sheep Marques, J. M., Abrams, D., Paez, D., & Martinez-
effect occurs only when what defines group mem- Taboada, C. (1998). The role of categorization and
bers’ social desirability is deemed relevant for gen- ingroup norms in judgments of groups and their
erating positive differentiation between the ingroup members. Journal of Personality and Social
and outgroup. For example, if the ingroup is a soc- Psychology, 75(5), 976–988.
cer team, being a good athlete will matter more to Marques, J. M., Abrams, D., & Serôdio, R. G. (2001).
its members than being a good musician. Other Being better by being right: Subjective group dynamics
research has shown that participants who identify and derogation of in-group deviants when generic
strongly with their group are more favorable norms are undermined. Journal of Personality and
toward likable and less favorable toward dislik- Social Psychology, 81(3), 436–447.
able ingroup members than toward similar kinds Marques, J. M., & Paez, D. (1994). The “black sheep
of outgroup members. This is not the case with effect”: Social categorization, rejection of ingroup
participants who either identify weakly with their deviates, and perception of group variability. In
group or are allowed to subjectively leave that W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review
group by disidentifying with it. of social psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 38–68). Chichester,
Other research directly supports tenets of the UK: John Wiley.
Marques, J. M., Paez, D., & Abrams, D. (1998). Social
subjective group dynamics model. For example,
identity and intragroup differentiation as subjective
there is evidence that people upgrade likable others
social control. In S. Worchel, J. F. Morales, D. Paez, &
and derogate unlikable others when these others
J.-C. Deschamps (Eds.), Social identity: International
are perceived as ingroup members. The effect does
perspectives (pp. 124–142). London: Sage.
not occur when the targets are described as simply
interpersonally similar to, or different from, the
participants or are described as outgroup members.
This supports the idea that the black sheep effect
indeed emerges as a consequence of the perceived Boundary Spanning
interdependence of self and ingroup members for
the maintenance of a positive social identity. Every group or social system has a boundary that
In a similar vein, there is evidence that evalua- separates it from other groups or systems and
tions are particularly extreme in the case of norms defines who is in the group and who is outside of it.
that are central to and legitimize the group’s exis- Boundary spanning represents the actions that are
tence—in comparison to outgroup members, taken by members of a group to manage those
58 Boundary Spanning

boundaries, particularly interactions with outsid- thus, some of the most fine-grained analyses of
ers. Boundary-spanning activities may be a formal boundary-spanning activities have been conducted
part of some individuals’ jobs or informally carried with these groups.
out by members of the group. How a group man- One comprehensive study of boundary-spanning
ages its boundaries has implications for other group activities in product development teams identified
processes and the performance of the group. four categories of activities. One set of activities,
Early research on groups within organizations termed ambassador activities, was directed pri-
identified two broad functions of boundary marily toward upper levels of the organization and
spanning—information processing and external focused on protecting the team from outside pres-
representation. Information processing involves sure, persuading others to support the team, and
gathering and assessing data from outside the lobbying for resources. The second set of activities,
group and providing summaries and conclusions labeled task coordinator activities, included such
to members of the group. External representation things as resolving product specifications, obtain-
has to do with providing information to outsiders ing feedback on the new design, and negotiating
and trying to shape their perceptions of the group. solutions for coordination problems. The third set,
More recent research has divided these broad cat- described as scout activities, related to general
egories into specific functions, such as mapping scanning of the external environment as opposed
(building a model of the external environment), to interactions aimed at addressing a particular
filtering (keeping troubling information from the issue. In product development groups, examples of
group), and negotiating (developing goals and scout activities included collecting general techni-
schedules). Scholars have argued that the optimal cal information and investigating broad market
amount of boundary spanning is related to the trends inside and outside the organization. The
uncertainty of environment in which the group final set of activities, termed guard activities, rep-
operates and the nature of the technology it uses. resented internal activities designed to prevent
One of the important effects of boundary span- information from leaving the group.
ning concerns the permeability of the boundary of Product development teams that concentrated
the group. Permeability refers to the ease with on ambassador and task coordinator activities and
which information and resources can pass into and displayed relatively low levels of scout activities
out of the group. The permeability of the group’s were most successful in completing their tasks.
boundary can affect the group’s processes and Groups with other profiles of activities were less
potentially its performance. On the one hand, if a successful. These results illustrate two important
group has too few or overly restrictive interactions points about boundary spanning. First, it is not
with outside groups, the group can become “over- simply the amount of external interaction that
bounded.” If this is the case, the group may contributes to successfully managing interdepen-
become isolated and detached from the environ- dencies. Second, some types of external interac-
ment. This can lead to isolation, inaccurate percep- tions may contribute to success, while others may
tions of other groups, and ineffective internal not. In particular, very general and unfocused
group processes, such as “groupthink.” On the interactions that continue throughout the group’s
other hand, if a group becomes “underbounded” life may make it difficult for the group to concen-
by having such a porous boundary that interac- trate on the specific external interactions necessary
tions with outsiders become predominant, the to complete work that is highly interdependent.
group may have difficulty developing cohesive- Some jobs within organizations have formal
ness, establishing shared commitments, and agree- boundary-spanning responsibilities. The boundar-
ing on a common course of action. ies may be between different groups within an
Not surprisingly, much of the research on organization or between the organization and out-
boundary spanning has been conducted with side entities. These types of jobs frequently involve
groups in organizations. For many such groups, simultaneous negotiations with both entities. A
such as engineering groups or product develop- number of factors can influence the approaches
ment teams, interactions with other groups are boundary spanners take in dealing with their
critical for successfully performing their tasks; responsibilities, including the boundary spanner’s
Brainstorming 59

relations with his or her own group or organization follows a set of guidelines or procedures. Research
(for example, how much latitude the boundary on brainstorming has focused on comparing the
spanner is given), the relationship between the effectiveness of group brainstorming and individ-
boundary spanner and the outsider (for example, ual brainstorming. This has led to the develop-
the history of the interactions between the entities), ment of theoretical models of the social and
and the personal characteristics of the boundary cognitive processes involved in group idea genera-
spanner (for example, his or her sensitivity to social tion. These models have relevance for an under-
cues and ability to adapt to different situations). standing of creative processes in a wide range of
Research has shown that individuals who hold groups and teams. Research has also provided
boundary-spanning positions often experience much useful information for improving the prac-
stress and dissatisfaction because of the conflicting tice of brainstorming in organizations.
and ambiguous demands they face. However, such Brainstorming provides an interesting example
positions offer benefits to individuals in terms of of the various factors that may influence group
career advancement and the opportunity to build task performance. One of the major issues in
relationships within the organization. studying groups has been comparing the function-
ing of groups to appropriate individual perfor-
David F. Caldwell mance baselines to determine whether groups are
beneficial or harmful for performance. This has
See also Group Boundaries; Group Cohesiveness; Group
Performance; Groupthink; Work Teams been one of the focal issues in group brainstorming
research. The research has also provided important
insights for optimizing work team performance
Further Readings that involves the sharing of information or ideas.
Brainstorming research has three major goals.
Adams, J. S. (1976). The structure and dynamics of
One is to discover the causes of production losses
behavior in organization-boundary roles. In
in groups. Another is to develop theoretical models
M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and
of the group creative process. The third is to gener-
organizational psychology (pp. 1175–1199). Chicago:
ate ways to enhance brainstorming in groups and
Rand McNally.
overcome productivity losses. After discussing the
Aldrich, H., & Herker, D. (1977). Boundary spanning
roles and organizational structure. Academy of
foundations of brainstorming, this entry describes
Management Review, 2, 217–235. all three areas of research.
Ancona, D., & Bresman, H. (2007). X-teams: How to
build teams that lead, innovate, and succeed. Boston: History and Background
Harvard Business School Press.
Ancona, D., & Caldwell, D. (1992). Bridging the Brainstorming was initially popularized by Alex
boundary: External activity and performance in Osborn, an advertising executive who published
organizational teams. Administrative Science several books in the 1940s and ’50s on the creative
Quarterly, 37, 634–655. process. In these books, Osborn highlighted the
Tushman, M. (1977). Special boundary roles in the use of brainstorming in coming up with novel
innovation process. Administrative Science Quarterly, ideas. He argued that it is important for creativity
22, 587–605. that one refrain from being critical during the idea
generation process. To be creative, one has to let
one’s ideas flow in an unrestrained manner with-
out concern for quality. Expressing a lot of ideas
Brainstorming no matter how wild they are increases the likeli-
hood that good ideas will be generated. Any type
Brainstorming is a technique for idea generation in of negative or evaluative feedback might kill the
which the focus is on generating as many ideas as motivation for unbridled creativity.
possible on a topic in a noncritical fashion. The Osborn also assumed that group brainstorming
term is often used for any interaction that involves is effective because it allows individuals to build on
sharing of ideas, but formal brainstorming typically the ideas of others. Osborn’s various books helped
60 Brainstorming

popularize brainstorming, and it is still the founda- Another factor that may be important in inhib-
tion for much of what passes as group creativity iting performance in groups is concern about oth-
exercises or procedures. For example, IDEO cor- ers’ reactions to one’s ideas, or evaluation
poration, a top product development company, apprehension. Although brainstorming rules spec-
bases its product development sessions on the prin- ify that group members should not criticize each
ciples outlined by Osborn. other’s ideas and should withhold judgment about
Osborn’s ideas were based on his own intuitions their quality, individuals in groups may still be
and experiences of working with groups and indi- concerned about the impression they make on oth-
viduals in the advertising field. He was also well ers. People generally have a desire to make a posi-
versed in the general literature on the group creative tive impression and hence often censor what they
process, and many of his ideas still have merit. say to maintain such an impression. This kind of
However, controlled studies have challenged one of behavior is another reason why group brainstorm-
his claims. He suggested that group brainstorming ing may be less effective than individual brain-
would be twice as effective as individual brainstorm- storming.
ing. At first glance, this prediction seems sensible,
because several individuals are likely to be able to
Social Comparison and Brainstorming
generate more ideas than a single individual can.
However, a fairer comparison involves a group of One inevitable feature of group brainstorming
people who generate ideas together versus the same is that it allows individuals to compare their rate
number of people who generate ideas by themselves of performance and overall quality of ideas with
(what is known as a nominal group). Research has those of others. Several studies have highlighted
consistently revealed that interacting groups gener- some interesting consequences of this social com-
ate fewer ideas than do nominal groups. For exam- parison process. One result of such a process is
ple, a group of four brainstormers might only that the performance of group members may con-
generate half as many unique ideas as the total num- verge in both rate and quality. That is, group
ber of unique ideas generated by four individual members may become more similar over time in
brainstormers. The poorer performance of interact- their pace of idea generation and the types of ideas
ing groups in comparison to nominal groups is they generate. Such convergence is, of course, con-
termed a production loss, because interaction is trary to the goal of encouraging a wide range of
associated with a loss of productivity relative to the ideas and divergent thinking. The social compari-
potential of the group members working alone. son process can also be involved in production
losses. In laboratory groups there appears to be a
tendency for social comparison to lead individuals
Explanations for Production Losses
to reduce their efforts and thus lower the overall
A variety of factors have been implicated as performance of the group. Another interesting
responsible for productivity losses in brainstorm- result of social comparison is that group members
ing groups. Research by Michael Diehl, Wolfgang may perceive their performance as more positive
Stroebe, and Bernard Nijstad has supported the than it really is. Whereas people working alone do
role of production blocking. These researchers not have a reference point for evaluating their per-
propose that the major problem in group brain- formance and thus may feel uncertain about the
storming is that only one person can speak at a quality of their performance, people working in
time, blocking the others from sharing their ideas. groups may discover that they are doing at least as
While one group member is speaking, the other well as others. This in turn may cause them to have
group members may forget their ideas, or they may an inflated view of their performance.
become less motivated to share these ideas because Research by Bernard Nijstad has suggested that
of the blocking experience. Studies have examined another reason for this inflated perception of per-
different aspects of this blocking effect and have formance is the general flow of ideas in groups. In
concluded that not being able to present ideas as individual brainstorming there is likely to be peri-
they occur is a critical factor to the relatively poor odic difficulty in coming up with ideas. In contrast,
performance of interacting groups. in groups there are fewer times when no ideas are
Brainstorming 61

being generated since there are multiple potential additional ideas. This assumption underlies several
contributors to the process. Several researchers cognitive models of group brainstorming. Paul
have sought to demonstrate that group idea Paulus and Vincent Brown have proposed a
exchange can stimulate a higher level of creativity semantic network model to explain the potential
than just individual brainstorming. These research- benefits of brainstorming. This model assumes
ers generally assume either that social-motivation that concepts are stored in long-term memory and
factors or cognitive stimulation can overcome the are related in a network so that some concepts are
inhibiting effects of group interaction. more strongly related to one another than to other
concepts. Ideas that are shared and have some
degree of relatedness to a concept can stimulate
Models of Brainstorming that concept and thus make it available for addi-
Social-Motivational Strategies tional ideas.
Some concepts may be more accessible than
Whenever group members collaborate on gener- others and may thus be more easily retrieved dur-
ating ideas, various social pressures may motivate ing the idea generation process. As a result, it is
them in their search for more creative ideas. likely that the initial phases of idea generation will
Although, as noted above, social comparison can focus on these. However, once these concepts have
reduce performance, the tendency of individuals to been tapped to some extent, individuals may
compare their performance with that of others can increase efforts to search their knowledge base,
also motivate them to work harder. Several studies leading to exploration of somewhat less accessible
have found that when individuals feel individually concepts or categories of ideas. This cognitive
accountable or are aware of how well they are model assumes that both attention to shared ideas
doing in comparison to other group members, and memory of these ideas are critical for contin-
there is increased motivation and increased genera- ued generation of creative ideas in groups.
tion of ideas. Group members can also be moti- Several studies have demonstrated the impor-
vated by intergroup competition when they find tance of both of these factors in enhancing the
out that the performance of their group is lower stimulating potential of shared ideas. For example,
than that of some referent group. when ideas are presented that are relatively com-
An important factor in the success of groups is mon or typical for a topic, they are remembered
the extent to which they set high goals. When better and stimulate the generation of additional
someone in authority sets high goals, these goals ideas more than do relatively unique or atypical
significantly increase the brainstorming perfor- ideas. This model also suggests that some of the
mance of both groups and individuals. One prac- real benefits of group brainstorming may only be
tice that may also be helpful to groups is the use of evident after individuals leave the group and have
trained facilitators or explicit rules that can serve as some time to reflect on the shared ideas. The
a substitute for facilitators (such as encouraging full memory of these ideas may stimulate additional
participation and discouraging talking about non- ideas during such a time of solitary reflection. This
task-relevant issues). Although it has been found type of effect is sometimes called incubation, since
that group creativity can be enhanced by various it is presumed that ideas stimulated in group inter-
motivational factors, similar benefits accrue for action may not be fully realized until the individual
individual brainstormers. No studies have found has had time to let this stimulating effect continue
that the level of motivation in groups allows them throughout his or her semantic network.
to exceed the performance of nominal groups. Bernard Nijstad and Wolfgang Stroebe have also
developed a cognitive model of brainstorming that
focuses on search for ideas in associative memory
Cognitive Models
(SIAM). These researchers emphasize the impor-
The prediction that group brainstorming should tant role of both long-term memory and working
be more effective than individual brainstorming memory—a temporary storage system where one
derives from the notion that ideas shared in the deals with the stored material. This involves a cen-
group should stimulate group members to think of tral executive system that actively searches for cues
62 Brainstorming

(the idea retrieval phase) that can then be the basis programmed to function in a variety of ways and
for a flow of ideas (the idea production loop). can include voting and decision-making features.
When blocking occurs in groups, this may interfere This is sometimes labeled a group decision support
with both stages of this cognitive process. system. For example, one system provides partici-
Although it has some conceptual overlap with the pants with a window at the bottom of the computer
Paulus and Brown model, the SIAM model makes screen in which to generate an idea and then send
some unique predictions. The SIAM model it to the pool of ideas. Another window at the top
assumes that transitions from one idea to another displays ideas generated by the group. These ideas
within a category will be quicker than transitions are arbitrarily divided into folders, and participants
from one category to another. Therefore, external are exposed to the ideas in one of these folders each
stimulation should be helpful for facilitating time they generate an idea. Several studies have
the change to a new category but not for within- found that this kind of exchange of ideas in groups
category ideation. This has been found. Also, when avoids the productivity loss problem. This is not
individuals experience failures in the search process difficult to explain, since there is little production
(by having difficulty coming up with new ideas), blocking using this procedure—participants can
they may become dissatisfied with the process and type ideas as they occur. In fact, as groups increase
stop. This is less likely in groups in which individu- in size, there tends to be an enhanced productivity
als have fewer failures in coming up with new ideas compared to similar-size nominal groups. Most
and therefore enjoy the process and stay with it. studies indicate that this enhancement occurs when
group size reaches eight or more.
Although the reduction of production blocking
Ways to Enhance Brainstorming
appears to be a straightforward explanation for
Based on the two cognitive models, it is not sur- part of the benefit of brainwriting and electronic
prising that approaches to brainstorming that limit brainstorming, it cannot explain the production
cognitive interference and maximize attention to gains. However, these gains can be explained by
ideas from others are most beneficial. That would social motivational and cognitive mechanisms.
explain the positive results obtained with brain- The brainwriting procedure enhances the degree of
writing, which involves the exchange of ideas on accountability and may produce a sense of compe-
pieces of paper. For example, in one study partici- tition in groups, which in turn may motivate group
pants in groups of four sitting around a table members to work harder and persist longer than
wrote ideas on pieces of paper. Participants passed solitary brainwriters. Electronic brainstormers are
each piece of paper to the person on their right for typically anonymous, so the accountability factor
reading and the addition of another idea. When cannot explain their productivity. There may,
each piece of paper contained four ideas, it was however, be an increased sense of competition as
placed in the center of the table. Paul Paulus and group size increases with the larger number of
Huei-Chuan Yang found that this procedure ideas being shared in the folders.
increased the number of ideas generated by groups In most of these studies, the participants were in
by 40% compared to nominal groups of partici- the same room, so social facilitation may have
pants who wrote ideas alone. Even more striking, increased the motivation level in the larger groups.
when group participants continued writing ideas It is also possible that the shared ideas in brain-
in a subsequent solitary session, the group brain- writing and electronic brainstorming provide cog-
storming experience led to 89% more ideas than nitive stimulation. With increased group size, there
the nominal experience. So instead of showing a is increased exposure to novel ideas. A factor that
production loss due to group brainstorming, this may be important is the extent to which the proce-
study demonstrated a significant production gain. dure insures attention to the shared ideas. The
A more popular approach to overcoming the brainwriting procedure encourages attention
production loss of group brainstorming has been because it requires participants to monitor the
electronic brainstorming, which involves generat- ideas. In electronic brainstorming this is not neces-
ing ideas by exchanging them on a computer net- sary. Participants can ignore the shared ideas and
work. The advantage of this system is that it can be focus only on generating their own.
Bystander Effect 63

When participants are encouraged to attend to


others’ ideas because they expect to be tested on Bystander Effect
their memory of these ideas, electronic brainstorm-
ing with only four participants leads to the genera- The bystander effect refers to the inhibiting influ-
tion of more ideas than nominal groups generated. ence of the presence of others on a person’s willing-
This benefit is maintained in a subsequent solitary ness to help someone in need. Researchers have
ideation session, just as in the case of brainwriting. found that, even in an emergency, a bystander is
Thus far, research has not clearly determined the less likely to extend help when he or she is in the
relative importance of the motivational and cogni- real or imagined presence of others than when he
tive factors in brainwriting and electronic brain- or she is alone. Moreover, the number of others is
storming. It seems likely that both factors important, such that more bystanders lead to less
contribute to their benefits. assistance, although the impact of each additional
bystander has a diminishing impact on helping.
Paul B. Paulus The bystander effect is well illustrated by the events
See also Group Performance; Social Comparison Theory; surrounding the brutal murder of Kitty Genovese
Social Facilitation; Social Loafing in 1964, which had a major impact on bystander
intervention research in particular and helping
research in general. After summarizing the Kitty
Further Readings Genovese story, this entry reviews the sequence of
Derosa, D. M., Smith, C. L., & Hantula, D. A. (2007). decisions a bystander may engage in when encoun-
The medium matters: Mining the long-promised merit tering a person in need of help, as well as the pro-
of group interaction in creative idea generation tasks cesses of social influence and diffusion of
in a meta-analysis of the electronic group responsibility that may affect these decisions.
brainstorming literature. Computers in Human
Behavior, 23, 1549–1581.
Nijstad, B. A., & Stroebe, W. (2006). How the group
Kitty Genovese and Bystander Intervention
affects the mind: A cognitive model of idea generation In the early morning on March 13, 1964, a woman
in groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, named Kitty Genovese was returning home late
10, 186–213. from work when a man with a knife viciously
Osborn, A. F. (1957). Applied imagination. New York: attacked and sexually assaulted her in the parking
Scribner. lot of her apartment complex. As reported in the
Parnes, S. J., & Meadow, A. (1959). Effects of New York Times, for over half an hour 38 respect-
brainstorming instructions on creative problem solving able, law-abiding people heard or saw this man
by trained and untrained subjects. Journal of attack her three separate times. The voices and
Educational Psychology, 50, 171–176.
lights from the bystanders in nearby apartments
Paulus, P. B. (2007). Fostering creativity in groups and
interrupted the killer and frightened him off twice,
teams. In J. Zhou & C. E. Shalley (Eds.), The
but each time he returned and stabbed her again.
handbook of organizational creativity (pp. 165–188).
None of the 38 witnesses called the police during
Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis Group.
Paulus, P. B., & Brown, V. (2003). Ideational creativity
the attack, and only one bystander contacted
in groups: Lessons from research on brainstorming. In
authorities after Kitty Genovese died.
P. B. Paulus & B. Nijstad (Eds.), Group creativity: While some details of this story as initially
Innovation through collaboration (pp. 110–136). New reported have since been contradicted by evidence,
York: Oxford University Press. the story has become a modern parable for the
Paulus, P. B., & Brown, V. R. (2007). Toward more creative powerful psychological effects of the presence of
and innovative group idea generation: A cognitive-social others. The story serves as an extreme example of
motivational perspective of brainstorming. Social and how people sometimes fail to react to the needs
Personality Compass, 1(1), 248–265. of others and, more broadly, how behavioral ten-
Sutton, R. I., & Hargadon, A. (1996). Brainstorming dencies to act prosocially are greatly influenced by
groups in context: Effectiveness in a product design the situation. Moreover, this tragic event sparked
firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 685–718. a good deal of research on prosocial behavior,
64 Bystander Effect

which examined when people do and do not emergencies and provide assistance, whereas nega-
extend help (referred to as bystander intervention). tive moods, such as depression, inhibit helping.
The seminal research on bystander intervention However, some negative moods, such as sadness
was conducted by two social psychologists, Bibb and guilt, have been found to promote helping. In
Latané and John Darley. These researchers, and addition, some events, such as someone falling
subsequently others, found that bystanders do care down a flight of stairs, are very visible and hence
about those in need of assistance, but nevertheless attract bystanders’ attention. For example, studies
often do not help them. Whether they extend help have demonstrated that victims who yell or scream
depends on how they make a series of decisions. receive help almost without fail. In contrast, other
events, such as a person suffering a heart attack,
often are not highly visible and so attract little
Bystander Decision Making
attention from bystanders. In these latter situa-
The circumstances surrounding an emergency in tions, the presence of others can have a substantial
which an individual needs help tend to be unique, impact on bystanders’ tendency to notice the situa-
unusual, and multifaceted. Most people have never tion and define it as one that requires assistance.
encountered such a situation and have little experi- In situations where the need for help is unclear,
ence to guide them during the pressure-filled bystanders often look to others for clues as to how
moments when they must decide whether or not to they should behave. Consistent with social com-
help. Latané and Darley’s decision model of parison theory, the effect of others is more pro-
bystander intervention elaborates the sequence of nounced when the situation is more ambiguous.
decisions leading to a bystander’s response. For example, when other people act calmly in the
According to Latane and Darley, before helping presence of a potential emergency because they are
another, a bystander progresses through a five-step unsure of what the event means, bystanders may
decision-making process. A bystander must notice not interpret the situation as an emergency and
that something is amiss, define the situation as an thus act as if nothing is wrong. Their behavior can
emergency or a circumstance requiring assistance, cause yet other bystanders to conclude that no
decide whether he or she is personally responsible action is needed, a phenomenon known as plural-
to act, choose how to help, and finally, implement istic ignorance. But when others seem shocked or
the chosen helping behavior. Failing to notice, distressed, bystanders are more likely to realize an
define, decide, choose, and implement leads a emergency has occurred and conclude that assis-
bystander not to engage in helping behavior. tance is needed. Other social comparison variables,
Examinations of the bystander effect have focused such as the similarity of other bystanders (e.g.,
mainly on the role social influence plays in indi- whether they are members of a common ingroup),
viduals noticing something is wrong and defining can moderate the extent to which bystanders look
the situation as an emergency and on how the pres- to others as guides in helping situations. In sum,
ence of others can cause diffusion of the responsi- when the need for help is unclear, bystanders look
bility to help. Research indicates that social influence to others for guidance. This is not the case when
and diffusion of responsibility are the fundamental the need for assistance is obvious.
processes underlying the bystander effect during
the early steps of the decision-making process.
Diffusion of Responsibility
If a person does notice a situation and defines it as
Informational Social Influence
requiring assistance, he or she must then decide if
If a bystander is physically in a position to notice a the responsibility to help falls on his or her shoul-
victim, factors such as the bystander’s emotional ders. Thus, in the third step of the bystander
state, the nature of the emergency, and the presence decision-making process, diffusion of responsibil-
of others can influence his or her ability to realize ity rather than social influence is the process
something is wrong and that assistance in required. underlying the bystander effect. Diffusion of
In general, positive moods, such as happiness responsibility refers to the fact that as the number
and contentment, encourage bystanders to notice of bystanders increases, the personal responsibility
Bystander Effect 65

that an individual bystander feels decreases—and influence their decision. Researchers have demon-
as a consequence so does his or her tendency to strated the effect of situational expectations on
help. Thus a bystander who is the only witness to helping behavior by presenting people with an
an emergency will tend to conclude that he or she emergency in an area they have been told not to
must bear the responsibility to help, and in such enter. Bystanders previously warned not to enter an
cases people typically do help. But bystanders dif- area where an emergency was occurring were far
fuse responsibility to help when others are present. less likely to help than were those told they could
In the case of Kitty Genovese, it seems that all the enter the area. Thus, when an emergency occurs,
bystanders made the assumption that others were the social context can be a powerful determinant of
present and would intervene, and so they felt little bystanders’ decision to intervene.
or no personal responsibility to help. Diffusion of
the responsibility to help is reduced, however,
Conclusion
when a bystander believes that others are not in a
position to help. For example, in one study, par- The bystander effect refers to the socially inhibiting
ticipants who believed that the only other witness presence of others on helping. When it is unclear
to an emergency was in another building and whether there is a need for help, the presence of oth-
could not intervene were much more likely to help ers tends to influence the first two steps of the
a victim than were participants who believed that bystander decision-making process (i.e., noticing
another witness was equally close to the victim. something is wrong and defining the circumstance
Diffusion of the responsibility to help is increased as requiring assistance). Whether or not a bystander
when others who are viewed as more capable of will feel personally responsible to help is influenced
helping (e.g., a doctor or police officer) are present. by the number of others actually present (or assumed
Research suggests that in emergency situations to be present) and their ability to help. Latané and
where a vicitm will suffer greatly if help is not forth- Darley’s initial investigations of the bystander effect
coming, bystanders relieve themselves of responsi- sparked a wealth of research on helping behavior,
bility by asking “experts,” such as firefighter or which has expanded beyond emergency situations
paramedics, for assistance, thus indirectly helping. to include everyday forms of helping. By illuminat-
But when the costs of helping and not helping are ing the power of situations to affect individuals’
both high, bystanders feel a strong conflict between perceptions, decisions, and behavior, study of the
the desire to act and the fear of helping. For exam- bystander effect continues to influence the course of
ple, in the case of Kitty Genovese, bystanders may social psychological theory and research.
have felt the need to help because the cost of not
helping would be her death, but the possibility of Robert D. Blagg
being hurt or killed themselves deterred them from See also Conformity; Crowds; Informational Influence;
acting. Bystanders often resolve this conflict by con- Normative Influence; Norms; Pluralistic Ignorance;
cluding that someone else will help (i.e., diffusing Social Comparison Theory; Social Facilitation
responsibility), thereby psychologically reducing
the perceived cost of not helping the victim.
Further Readings

Normative Social Influence Dovidio, J. F., Piliavin, J. A., Schroeder, D. A., & Penner,
L. A. (2006). The social psychology of prosocial
A bystander’s decision regarding his or her per- behavior. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
sonal responsibility to help may be affected by situ- Latané, B., & Darley, J. M. (1970). The unresponsive
ational norms and expectations for behavior. For bystander: Why doesn’t he help? New York: Meredith.
example, in a library patrons are expected to be Latané, B., & Nida, S. (1981). Ten years of research on
quiet and in a classroom students may speak up in group size and helping. Psychological Bulletin, 89(2),
a respectful and orderly way, but at a party people 308–324.
may be much less inhibited. When bystanders in an Penner, L., Dovidio, J., Piliavin, J., & Schroeder, D.
emergency situation assess their personal responsi- (2005). Prosocial behavior: Multilevel perspectives.
bility to act, social expectations for behavior may Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 365–392.
C
that is central to the way people understand things
Categorization in the world. Indeed, some writers use the term
category in almost the same way they use concept.
Categorization is the process of understanding things Categorization takes on an added importance in
by knowing what other things they are equivalent to social psychology, since people categorize them-
and different from. It is a process that is widely stud- selves and other people. In fact, discussions of
ied in cognitive and social psychology and in phi- categorization are central to discussions of group
losophy and linguistics. This entry offers an overview processes and intergroup relations because groups
of categorization and outlines its functions, then are based on categories of people.
describes the major views on category structure and The major contemporary theories of group pro-
representation and on category learning, formation, cesses and intergroup relations—social identity
and use (drawn mainly from cognitive psychology). and self-categorization theories, along with more
It also examines social psychological perspectives on specific models such as the common ingroup iden-
biased stimulus processing and sense making, and tity model, optimal distinctiveness theory, and the
concludes by considering a range of ongoing debates ingroup projection model—therefore all address
and controversies in the field. the process of categorization quite directly.
Fundamentally, categorization is about attain-
ing knowledge or understanding. The central con-
Describing the Process
cerns of social psychology relating to social norms,
The categorization process could also be called influence, attitude change, and socially shared cog-
classification or grouping, but it is helpful to pre- nition suggest that knowledge and understanding
serve the term classification for the formal, behav- develop consensually. That is, different people tend
ioral process of separating things and categorization to develop related understanding of the same
for the psychological process and experience. Thus things. In large part, this rests on their developing
a biologist who separates life forms into different compatible ways of categorizing the self and other
species is engaged in a formal scientific process of people and things.
classification (taxonomy), but the psychological People can also categorize the same things in
process that the biologist uses to perform this task radically different ways. Other people could see
is categorization. Importantly, it is also the same your furniture as their firewood or your pet dog as
process people use to decide that the person doing their lunch. This potential for disagreement, how-
the classification is a biologist and not a psycholo- ever, actually points to the success of members of
gist, physicist, or astrologer. human societies in coordinating their categoriza-
As the previous example illustrates, categoriza- tions in harmonious ways. The triumphs and
tion is widely regarded as the cognitive process achievements of human civilization (and not just

67
68 Categorization

social ills and conflict) rest upon the widespread new inferences and predictions about events and
consensus that emerges in categorization, despite objects that he or she is likely to encounter. In this
the infinitely variable number of ways that any way, categorization allows perceivers to go beyond
object (let alone sets of objects) can be categorized. the information given in order to develop an
Categorization can be understood as a blend of understanding, rather than an exact reproduc-
three elements, including background knowledge tion, of the world.
(i.e., expectancies and explicit or implicit beliefs), More than 50 years after their publication, these
perceived equivalence (i.e., how objects are seen to principles remain fresh and vitally applicable, even
be the same as some other objects but different though categorization is intensely researched and
from others), and category use (i.e., explicit label- the research undergoes rapid change. In the field of
ing). These three things can be understood as ele- intergroup relations, part of this vitality stems
ments that constrain each other. Thus it is possible from the incorporation of the ideas of veridical
that explicitly using a category label like “Black” perception into self-categorization theory and into
or “men” may affect the degree to which we see social cognitive work on construct accessibility.
people as equivalent to each other. This can in turn
affect our store of knowledge about relations, so
Allport’s Analysis
that after using or developing an explicit category
label, we may not only come to see those people as The other key contribution that has remained
equivalent but also come to know that Blacks or fresh and vital for a similar period of time has been
men are similar to each other in certain ways. This Gordon Allport’s analysis of categorization as a
knowledge may constrain our future perceptions simplification process involving the reduction of
of equivalence and use of labels. information. Allport argued that categorization is
a response to the overwhelming burden of infor-
mation that confronts perceivers (especially when
The Functions of Categorization
they perceive other people). Following his think-
There are two major views on the functions of ing, we have so many daily encounters that we are
categorization. The first is the view of categoriza- forced to group or type others in order to cope. We
tion as a sense-making process that involves over- therefore tend to group stimuli into the largest
laying meaning on elements. This approach is most categories that we can get away with. That is,
famously associated with Jerome Bruner, who according to Allport, we tolerate abstract, impre-
developed seven principles of veridical perception. cise categories as a response to a complex world.
In the process of simplification, many of these
abstract, imprecise categories, such as group mem-
Bruner’s View
berships, can end up being highly irrational and
Bruner argued that perception is a decision distorted. They may contain a “kernel of truth,”
process and that decisions involve discriminating but they have a high probability of being wrong—
between stimuli and between categories of stim- and such irrational, errant categories can form just
uli. This decision process follows a chain of infer- as easily as more rational, truthful categories.
ence from detecting cues to determining the According to this view, and later adaptations of it,
categorical identity of the stimulus (which could categorization can be seen as an errorful process
lead to the search for further cues). These catego- that is used in preference to more accurate indi-
ries comprise sets of specifications about which viduated or piecemeal perception only due to the
stimuli can be grouped as equivalent. A category limitations of our processing capacity.
is most likely to be used when it is accessible to Allport’s view was subsequently championed in
perception (because it matches the perceiver’s the social cognitive approach to intergroup rela-
past experience or current goals) and where there tions that was dominant in the latter part of the
is high degree of fit between the category and the 20th century. It starkly contrasts with Bruner’s view,
stimuli viewed. Veridical perception involves the which has been championed by self-categorization
perceiver’s taking stimulus input and forming cat- theorists and others. One way of highlighting the
egories, and then using those categories to form contrast between these views is to consider an
Categorization 69

everyday interaction such as waiting for and then Prototype View


getting on a bus.
The prototype view of the nature of categories
In the Brunerian view, when we are confronted
was popularized in the work of Eleanor Rosch,
with stimulus cues such as people sitting on a
who argued that categories are based on an
bench and someone in a uniform driving a bus, we
abstract summary or prototype. Thus, less typical
are likely to search for cues that suggest the exis-
examples of a category are more different from the
tence of known categories, or to form new catego-
prototype than are more typical examples. Rosch
ries to make inferences and predictions. One such
also argued that categorical systems are hierarchi-
categorization might involve distinguishing between
cally organized into a system of levels, where more
bus passengers and the bus driver to make accurate
abstract or general categories include more specific
inferences about the roles and actions of members
categories. That is, there is a basic level of catego-
of each group. The Allportian view would suggest
rization for a category system.
that it is the presence of a large number of people
The basic level for a category system is the level
that leads us to form categories that allowed us to
at which the instance is spontaneously named and
treat the members of those categories in identical
recognized most rapidly (e.g., when we are shown
ways, but at the cost of inevitable error.
a picture of a dining chair and then asked to iden-
tify what it is, we say “chair” rather than “piece of
The Structure of Categories furniture” or “dining chair” because “chair” is the
basic level for this system). The idea of category
Cognitive psychologists have identified three major
abstraction is central to self-categorization theory
long-standing approaches to category structure
and the common ingroup identity model, but the
and representation: the classical view of categories,
idea of a fixed basic level that can be applied to
the prototype approach, and the exemplar view.
social categories is more controversial.
There are also more recent mixed and variable
structure approaches, and all of these views can
also be observed in social psychology, including in Exemplar View
analyses of phenomena such as outgroup homoge- The exemplar view of category structure is that
neity and stereotype change. categories are stored as a collection of instances of
the larger category. According to this view, there is
Classical View
no abstract summary, but merely a set of stored
representations or exemplars of the category. Thus,
The classical view of categories is that they have a social category such as men or Blacks would be
all-or-none defining features. The philosopher stored in the memory of the perceiver as a set of
Ludwig Wittgenstein illustrated the implausibility traces about the members of that category who
of this view through the example of the category had been encountered.
“game.” He demonstrated that despite the fact There has been a great deal of debate in cogni-
that people have no trouble using this type of cat- tive psychology about the merits of the exemplar
egory in everyday life, it is actually very difficult to and prototype views, but there are more recent
come up with a set of all-or-none defining rules for attempts to show that categories can have both
the category “game” that includes things as diverse exemplars and prototypes (in particular for deal-
as children’s amusements and the Olympic games. ing with exceptions). There is also research that
In the 1970s, the classical view was also demon- suggests that categories can vary from having a
strated to be inconsistent with evidence that many form that is closer to an exemplar to one that is
categories are fuzzy and share relatively vague closer to a prototype representation.
family resemblances with others. Furthermore,
category members vary in the degree to which they
Category Learning, Formation, and Use
are typical of a category. Thus, a hijacker is an
atypical example of the category “criminal,” and a The major approaches to category learning, for-
bank robber is a typical (good) example, yet they mation, and use have been based on the ideas
are both criminals in an absolute sense. of similarity-based formation and theory-based
70 Categorization

formation. The purely similarity-based approaches Henri Tajfel and his colleagues, include the intra­
will not be discussed in this entry, as they seem class (assimilation) effect (i.e., increased perceptions
inadequate as accounts of the ways that categori- of similarity within categories) and the interclass
zation takes account of meaning and experience. (contrast) effect (i.e., increased perceptions of dif-
Category formation appears to be based on inter- ference between categories). In social psychological
nally coherent theories about the function and terms, categorization effects are applied by group
nature of things rather than just on the basis of members through the development of standards
surface appearances or gross similarities. and norms that are different from the ones devel-
Indeed, cognitive researchers have shown that oped by other relevant groups. Within the group,
objects could be seen as similar or different depend- members converge on those standards and norms
ing on the order in which they are presented. Thus (usually through the processes of social influence).
Mexico might be seen as like the United States, but The nature of these effects remains debatable. In
the United States might be seen as different from particular, the question is whether categorization
Mexico. Evidence such as this can lead us to ask, effects are distortions and/or biases or accurate but
as Douglas Medin did, if something is said to be contextually variable reflections of reality.
similar to something else in certain respects, then The dominant social cognitive approach has
where do those respects come from? argued that categorization is used because limited
The answer that has had the most extensive capacity leads to biased processing, which in turn
implications for the study of social groups is con- creates distortions. Categorization is seen as an
tained in psychological essentialism, the idea that application of selective attention to both stimuli
categories may have a coherent core or essence that occur spontaneously and constructs that are
that binds category members together. This idea already stored in our cognitive systems. In other
has been applied to social categories in research words, it is believed that categorization takes place
over the last two decades. Psychological essential- because of the need to be selective when detecting
ism for social categories is often equated with the stimuli, and categorization is in fact designed to
notion that some categories are natural and have a make stimulus information that is overwhelming
biological (e.g., genetic) core, while other catego- for the system (or too diffuse) manageable.
ries lack this core. The belief in the psychological However, self-categorization and other sense-
essence of a group or category has therefore been making approaches argue that categorization is a
linked to analyses of race and racial prejudice. veridical, context-dependent, sense-making pro-
Psychological essentialism complements and is cess that produces accurate perceptions from a
sometimes confused with Donald Campbell’s con- current perspective (which follows from the pro-
cept of entitativity. This is the idea that social cess of salience). Henri Tajfel argued that categori-
groups may be perceived to a greater or lesser zation allows perceivers to derive meaning by
degree as entities or things (a point rejected by indi- making different classes of stimuli (social and non-
vidualist stances that claim only individual things social stimuli) coherent. In self-categorization the-
are real). Entitativity was developed from the gestalt ory, perceptions about the self are organized in
principles of perception to argue that a group is hierarchical categories that are contextually acti-
perceived to be more real and coherent to the extent vated through the process of salience (the extent to
that its members are perceptually alike, are close which a particular self-categorization becomes
together, share a common fate, and form a coherent psychologically proponent).
figure or form. Much of the research effort in this It is important to note that self-categorization
area has focused on seeking to demonstrate that theorists believe that variations in self-perceptions
certain types of groups (e.g., families or sporting reflect real changes, as experienced from the point
teams) are more entitative than others (e.g., people of view of the perceiver. The sense-making
waiting at a bus stop and sports crowds). approaches share the idea that categorization is a
Social psychologists have been more interested process that helps perceivers understand their sur-
than cognitive psychologists in categorization roundings, but in each of these treatments, there is
effects on judgment (e.g., in research on multiple a particular key construct that plays the major
categorization). These effects, first studied by role: coherence (in optimal distinctiveness theory),
Categorization 71

explanation (in the social judgability approach), increase the match between perception and real-
and assimilation and contrast (in approaches based ity. According to this model, all perception is
on categorization effects and construct activation). categorical, and categorization allows people to
represent reality from their particular point of
view. Thus self-categorization theorists argue that
Ongoing Debates
apart from the perceiver’s belief in the accuracy of
The contrast of these perspectives sets the scene for his or her perception, accuracy of perception can
some debates and unresolved issues. The first only be established with respect to the degree to
debate revolves around how information-processing which some relevant ingroup member agrees with
capacity affects categorization processes. The idea the judgment.
of capacity limitations is of central importance to The third debate revolves around whether cate-
social cognitive approaches to categorization. gories are stored and retrieved from memory (when
Here, categorization and stereotyping are viewed they are accessible) or spontaneously created anew
as necessary but imprecise shortcuts for people for each situation. The self-categorization theory
overloaded with information from their environ- version of the sense-making account tends to
ments. Accurate judgments are only considered assume that categories are constructed on the spot
possible when people have time and are willing to for each new social encounter. What is assumed to
put in the effort to attend to the unique features of be relatively stable is long-term background knowl-
the individuals they encounter. edge about the world that is used to help construct
This understanding of categorization has been an infinite number of possible categorizations to
challenged by the alternative meaning-seeking view suit each new social context. It is less clear from
espoused by self-categorization theorists. From this this perspective what form this long-term back-
perspective, instead of leading to errors, the pro- ground knowledge takes if it is not categorical.
cess of categorization is seen to provide a meaning- The alternative view put forward by the selective
ful framework for understanding and predicting attention perspective argues that categories are
the behavior of people in different social contexts. stored and retrieved from memory. This approach
The second major debate regarding these two can more easily explain why categories that have
approaches revolves around the issue of whether recently been activated, or are chronically accessi-
categorizations produce distortions or accurate ble, are more likely to be used than older, less
reflections of reality from a perspective. The selec- chronically accessible categories. To resolve this
tive attention model suggests that categorization debate, it will be necessary to determine whether
and stereotyping produce distortions of reality remembering a category is the same as reusing it.
because these processes are seen to lead people to The fourth debate relates to whether some cat-
exaggerate equivalences of members of particular egories are pervasive and constantly applicable or
groups. In this view, the accuracy of group judg- whether all categories are utterly context depen-
ments can only be determined with reference to the dent. Many social cognitive researchers argue that
characteristics of the unique individuals who make there are a small number of basic and primary
up the group. categories, such as gender, ethnicity, and age that
Alternatively, several accuracy-oriented are automatically and unconsciously activated in
approaches propose that stereotypes are based on real interaction. Alternatively, self-categorization theo-
characteristics of social groups. The reflection– rists argue that there is no basic level or set of cat-
construction model argues that beliefs about cate- egories that is primary. Indeed, self-categorization
gories reflect, modify, and influence the construction theory emphasizes that categorization is highly
of reality. According to this model, the accuracy of variable and context dependent and that it would
particular stereotypes will determine whether be a mistake to suggest that gender, ethnicity, or
categorization enhances, or reduces, the accuracy any other category will always be used to catego-
of perception. An alternative accuracy-oriented rize others in interactions. A possible resolution of
approach to stereotyping has been derived from this issue is to view basic and primary categories as
self-categorization theory, in which it is proposed operating at a background level of perception and
that appropriate categorizations always serve to intruding into judgments about members of those
72 Charismatic Leadership

categories even when those categories are not social and historical context, has received an enor-
explicitly salient. mous amount of attention over the past several
One final issue that social models of categoriza- decades. In this entry, charismatic leadership is
tion will need to resolve is whether categories are defined, along with the conditions conducive to its
based on hierarchical structures much like those appearance and typical features of its communica-
shown in tree diagrams. The assumption of hierar- tion. An illustrative example is then presented,
chical structures is adapted from cognitive research followed by some of the limitations of this form of
and appears in self-categorization theory, the com- leadership.
mon ingroup identity model, and the ingroup pro-
jection model. Some recent evidence from cognitive
Defining the Concept
psychology suggests that the idea of hierarchical
structures does not seem to capture the way people First introduced by German sociologist Max Weber,
make inferences about natural object categories. the word charisma comes from the Greek word
This raises similar questions about social catego- χα′ρισμα (kharisma), meaning “gift” or “divine
ries that often do not have clear tree-like struc- favor.” Following this original definition, charisma
tures. For example, Texas is part of America, but refers to an extraordinary quality of a person that
we know that not all Texans are Americans. allows him or her to charm and influence others. In
the common vernacular, charisma is often treated
Craig McGarty, Renata Bongiorno, as a powerful personal appeal or magnetism that
and Ana-Maria Bliuc captivates others. The charismatic leadership
See also Common Ingroup Identity Model; Cross-
approach emphasizes heroic leaders with forceful,
Categorization; Decategorization; Entitativity; dramatic personalities and widespread appeal;
Essentialism; Optimal Distinctiveness; Self- recent examples include leaders such as Jack
Categorization Theory; Social Identity Theory Welch, Bill Clinton, and Arnold Schwarzenegger.
However, charisma is very much in the eye of
the beholder, suggesting that charismatic leader-
Further Readings ship is more accurately understood as a relation-
Crisp, R. J., & Hewstone, M. (2007). Multiple social ship between leaders and followers. Charismatic
categorization. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in leadership emphasizes the importance of symbolic
experimental social psychology (Vol. 39, pp. 163–254). behaviors, emotional appeals, and the role of the
Orlando, FL: Academic Press. leader in making events meaningful for followers.
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Reducing It focuses on understanding how a leader can influ-
intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model. ence followers to make sacrifices, commit to diffi-
Philadelphia: Psychology Press. cult or seemingly impossible objectives, and achieve
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: much more than was initially expected. Charismatic
What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: leadership is, therefore, not solely a property of the
University of Chicago Press. leader’s charisma, and focusing on the leader alone
McGarty, C. (1999). Categorization in social psychology. ignores the unique circumstances that are crucial
London: Sage. in each instance of charismatic leadership. While a
Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P., Reicher, S. D., & leader with extraordinary gifts and qualities is a
Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social critical element in this relationship, aspects of the
group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, followers and the situation are also important in
UK: Blackwell. understanding why some leaders are viewed as
charismatic and others are not.
A significant element is that followers who are
frightened, threatened, or uncertain are more likely
Charismatic Leadership to view a leader as a charismatic savior. Followers
are more susceptible to a charismatic leader and his
Charismatic leadership, combining a leader with or her vision if they are insecure, alienated, and
powerful personal magnetism and a particular fearful about their physical safety or economic
Charismatic Leadership 73

security, or if they have low self-esteem or a weak gifts, and his flare for dramatic gestures such as fast-
self or social identity. Therefore, charismatic leader- ing, simple dress, and spiritual rituals produced a
ship is more likely to emerge during a crisis or dur- heroic persona that challenged current norms and
ing a situation of desperation or uncertainty. The conventional behavior of the time. Second, Gandhi
leader presents a vision or set of ideas promising a came to power in response to a desperate situation:
solution to the crisis and a better future (whether the crisis in India in the wake of British colonization
achievable or not), and followers are attracted to and oppression. Third, Gandhi offered a powerful
this gifted person and come to believe in his or her vision of a better future, including a self-governing
exceptional powers and vision for a better future. India where its citizens would live under their own
To retain his or her followers, however, the laws free from outside interference. Fourth, Gandhi’s
leader must also demonstrate or convince others of vision, rooted in the basic values of Indian culture,
his or her ability to deal with the crisis or threat and attracted a tremendous following. His dynamic
move followers in the direction of a better future. vision created a contagious atmosphere that inspired
Accordingly, charismatic leadership is a process his followers to seek independence. Gandhi’s fol-
that resonates in the exceptional personal attributes lowers were also motivated by his repeated smaller
of the leader, as well as the fit between those attri- successes along the way to independence, including
butes and the needs of followers, against the back- tax reforms and the recognition of non-Christian
drop of a crisis or undesirable state of affairs. marriages. Finally, Gandhi led the country to inde-
Research has emphasized the critical importance pendence from the British, although his ultimate
of the charismatic leader’s vision, including aspects vision of Hindus and Muslims living in peaceful
of both the content and delivery style of the leader’s cohabitation was never achieved. His principles of
message. Charismatic leaders are able to distill com- nonviolence transformed his own country and
plex future ideals into simple messages with wide- inspired future leaders all over the world.
spread and emotional appeal, such as Martin Luther Overall, Gandhi’s followers realized many of
King, Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech. They also use the beneficial outcomes of charismatic leadership,
a variety of communication techniques to appeal to as Gandhi is credited with broadening and elevat-
their followers, such as using colorful, vivid lan- ing the interests of his followers, generating aware-
guage and imagery rooted in shared values. ness and commitment to the mission of the group,
Charismatic leaders also frequently employ and motivating followers to go beyond their own
symbols to their advantage, including the site of interests and sacrifice for the good of the Indian
their speech, visual symbols, props, music, and people as a whole. This example illustrates that
lighting to enhance the appeal of their message and charismatic leadership involves the actual charac-
increase the level of excitement and emotion in fol- teristics of the leader as well as characteristics that
lowers. Similarly, they use tone of voice, inflection, are attributed to leaders by followers within a
pauses, and gestures to increase the intensity and given situation. If the leader’s extraordinary quali-
emotional meaning of their message. Charismatic ties do not clearly resonate with the values and
speeches frequently incorporate analogies, repeti- needs of followers, he or she is likely to be rejected
tion, metaphors, and stories to bring the vision as a radical or mocked as delusional. However, if
“alive” for followers, and communicate optimism the leader’s extraordinary qualities provide a good
that, together, group members can achieve the fit for, or proposed solution to, followers’ needs
promise of a better future if they are willing to sup- and anxieties, followers may even exaggerate how
port the leader and are prepared to make sacrifices exceptional their leader is and idolize him or her.
for his or her cause. In this way, a charismatic leader may attain a
seemingly magical or superhuman persona in the
eyes of his or her followers.
A Historical Illustration
A familiar example of an admired leader, Mohandas
Limitations and the Darker Side
Gandhi, illustrates the ingredients of the charismatic
leadership relationship. First, Gandhi’s followers Charismatic leadership has been defined as a rare
often credited him with possessing extraordinary form of leadership in which the leader is often
74 Charismatic Leadership

irreplaceable because of followers’ dependence on benefit. Other more attractive and credible leaders
the leader’s skills. Therefore, social movements may challenge the vision or the effectiveness of the
and change processes are often difficult to main- current leader.
tain once the charismatic leader is gone, and fol- In addition, charismatic leaders may become
lowers struggle to carry on the momentum of victims of their own success. As the change move-
change. In addition, because charismatic leader- ment grows larger and more powerful, or as their
ship often results in unquestioning obedience to organizations expand in scope and influence, char-
the leader’s directives, followers themselves may be ismatic founders may become increasingly irrele-
less likely to develop leadership skills and experi- vant or lack the expertise to deal with new
ence that will sustain the change process after the challenges. There is also the possibility that their
leader is gone. unconventional behaviors may become distracting
In addition, charismatic leadership also has a or counterproductive as the focus shifts from cre-
darker side. None of the ingredients of the charis- ating change to implementation and performance.
matic leadership relationship guarantee that the
leader’s vision will be morally defensible or ethical, Michelle C. Bligh and Jeffrey C. Kohles
nor do they prohibit followers from carrying out See also Contingency Theories of Leadership; Great
unethical or violent behaviors in pursuit of the Person Theory of Leadership; Interactionist Theories
leader’s vision. Charismatic leaders of the past such of Leadership; Leader-Member Exchange (LMX)
as Adolf Hitler and Jim Jones were able to create Theory; Leadership; Path–Goal Theory of Leadership;
widespread appeal for their visions of racial supe- Personality Theories of Leadership; Social Identity
riority and revolutionary suicide, respectively. Due Theory of Leadership; Transactional Leadership
to the extraordinary, even heroic qualities that fol- Theories; Transformational Leadership Theories;
lowers may attribute to such charismatic leaders, Vertical Dyad Linkage Model
these leaders may begin to believe that they really
are exceptionally qualified to determine the fate of
Further Readings
their followers, resulting in increasingly autocratic,
manipulative, dictatorial leadership that is intoler- Bligh, M. C., Kohles, J. C., & Meindl, J. R. (2004).
ant of dissent or alternate points of view. Charisma under crisis: Presidential leadership,
In addition, due to their often powerful appeal rhetoric, and media responses before and after the
and nonconventional or radical visions for the September 11th terrorist attacks. Leadership
future, charismatic leaders are often extremely Quarterly, 15(2), 211–239.
divisive figures that create bitter enemies as well as Conger, J., & Kanungo, R. N. (1987). Toward a
devoted followers. In some situations, the charis- behavioral theory of charismatic leadership in
matic leader may prove so divisive that he or she organizational settings. Academy of Management
Review, 12(4), 637–647.
paralyzes the change process. In other situations,
Howell, J. M., & Shamir, B. (2005). The role of followers
charismatic leaders become public targets for the
in the charismatic leadership process: Relationships
opposition, and consequently leaders such as
and their consequences. Academy of Management
Gandhi, King, and John F. Kennedy were ulti-
Review, 30, 96–112.
mately assassinated for their beliefs. Hunt, J. G., Boal, K. B., & Dodge, G. E. (1999). The
Finally, it is important to note that charismatic effects of visionary and crisis-responsive charisma on
leadership is often a fleeting phenomenon that can followers: An experimental examination of two kinds
be gained or lost as circumstances change. of charismatic leadership. Leadership Quarterly,
Charismatic leadership can be lost if the crisis 10(3), 423–448.
ends, or if followers become more confident and Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. (1993). The
feel that they are capable of solving problems on motivational effects of charismatic leadership: A self-
their own. Also, charismatic leaders may make concept based theory. Organization Science, 4,
decisions that result in failure, seem to betray their 577–594.
core vision or followers’ needs, or focus more on Yukl, G. (1999). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses
obtaining power and influence for themselves in transformational and charismatic leadership
than on supporting the greater cause for followers’ theories. Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 285–305.
Children: Stereotypes and Prejudice 75

Evidence suggests that such social categoriza-


Children: Stereotypes tion can result in preference for one’s own group.
and Prejudice Psychologists have investigated this in studies
using a visual preference task. In this task, infants
Prejudice, the holding of negative attitudes toward are presented with examples from two racial cate-
others based on the groups to which they belong gories simultaneously, and how long they look at
and the stereotypes attached to these groups, con- each example is used to indicate preference. Studies
tinues to be a major source of strife and conflict using this task show that by the time they are
throughout the world. Do children show prejudice 3 months old, infants prefer to look at faces of
and have stereotypes? If so, how do stereotypes their own racial group rather than those of other
and prejudice arise in early life? What are the dif- racial groups. This preference is not typically
ferent ways that prejudice and stereotypes emerge shown by newborns and is only present in 3-month-
in childhood, and what forms can they take? These old infants living in a predominantly racially
are the questions that are addressed in this entry. homogeneous environment. These findings suggest
People commonly think that young children are that the early development of own-race preference
innocent and devoid of stereotypes and prejudice. in infancy is linked to living in an environment that
However, research in developmental and social exposes the children only to own-race individuals.
psychology has shown that children exhibit many Developmentally, infants have social categoriza-
types of biases at an early age. These can be based, tion ability and, depending on their environment,
for example, on someone’s gender, race, ethnicity, this may result in certain group preferences.
nationality, or body type. The findings suggest that However, at this stage they do not have the ability
understanding the origins and nature of prejudice to express prejudice or stereotypes due to their
in children should be a high priority if we are to limited cognitive and linguistic abilities. As infants
establish effective policy for combating its negative become young children, they often express biases
consequences. Given that stereotypes and preju- directly or explicitly in the words they use to
dice are hard to change in adulthood, most psy- describe different social groups, or more indirectly
chologists agree that interventions must be or implicitly by forming mental associations link-
implemented early in life to be successful. ing their own group (rather than other groups)
with positive experiences, emotions, or attributes
(i.e., showing implicit biases).
Origins of Prejudice
Developmental and social psychologists have sus-
Implicit Biases in Children
pected that prejudice in children may originate
from the child’s early ability to categorize the Recent studies have provided evidence for when
social world. Children develop the ability to recog- implicit biases emerge in childhood. Using the
nize characteristic features of people from their Implicit Associations Test (IAT), researchers have
own group and other groups, and then use this shown that adults have biases toward others,
information to cluster individuals together in which they are not aware of, based solely on race.
social categories. Adults are known to be more This is evidenced by the fact that White adults
accurate at recognizing a face from their own more quickly associate negative words with out-
racial group than from an unfamiliar racial group. group (Black) faces than with ingroup (White)
That this type of face processing is not present in faces. These findings have spawned an industry of
infants at 3 months of age suggests that it is not IAT studies, with much debate about the extent to
innate. In fact, it emerges by 6 months in infants which such associations reflect prejudice or bear on
living in an environment with little racial diversity behavior, such as discrimination toward others.
(i.e., a racially homogeneous environment). This Some developmental studies have examined
indicates that facial input from the infant’s visual implicit bias in childhood using IAT-type method-
environment is a key contributing factor. Therefore, ologies. One study of White British children, using
at an early age children show categorization ability a child-friendly pictorial IAT, found that implicit
based on race. racial and national biases were present from 6 to
76 Children: Stereotypes and Prejudice

16 years of age. This children’s version of the IAT Developmental research has examined prejudice
measured the relative strength of association in the form of explicit preference for one social
between a concept (e.g., “White British” or “Black group over another. Early work on this form of
British”) and an attribute (e.g., “good” or “bad”). explicit bias included the doll test, which showed
Implicit bias was judged to be present if the chil- that Black American children in segregated schools
dren showed faster reaction times for stereotypical preferred White dolls to Black dolls. This research
(e.g., “White British” and “good”) than counter­ was influential in Brown v. Board of Education,
stereotypical (e.g., “Black British” and “good”) the 1954 Supreme Court case that outlawed school
associations. Studies have also found that these segregation in the United States. Other measures
implicit biases remain in older children who typi- have examined explicit forms of prejudice by ask-
cally show reduced explicit bias. This research sug- ing children to attribute positive (e.g., “clean,”
gests that implicit biases based on associations “smart”) and negative (e.g., “mean,” “dirty”)
made between different categories and their attri- traits to a White child or a Black child or to both
butes (either positive or negative) are established children. Explicit forms of ethnic prejudice based
early in life and remain stable, relatively hard to on the above measures are known to develop from
change, and less open to conscious control. 4 to 5 years of age among ethnic majority children.
Other studies have looked at how children Unlike implicit prejudice, which remains relatively
evaluate the intentions of an individual from a stable once it appears in childhood, explicit ethnic
different racial group, in an ambiguous but bias typically declines in ethnic majority children
familiar everyday peer encounter, to determine from approximately 7 years of age.
whether children have implicit biases. The studies Some psychologists explain this developmental
found that 6- to 9-year-old European American trend in ethnic majority children’s prejudice by
children attributed more positive intentions to a attributing it to young children’s poor cognitive
White child than to a Black child in potential ability to judge people from different groups using
“pushing” and “stealing” peer encounters on the individual characteristics (e.g., friendly, hard-
playground. working). Instead, these researchers argue that
Does this suggest that implicit biases are auto- cognitively immature children judge an individual
matic in children? The answer would appear to be based on the group to which he or she belongs (e.g.,
“no”—since these biases were found only among boys or girls). Thus, according to this analysis, chil-
European American children in racially homoge- dren show prejudice because they cannot see the
neous schools; European American children of the similarities between individuals in different groups
same age, in the same school district, but enrolled and the differences between individuals in the same
in heterogeneous schools did not attribute more group. However, recent studies have found a weak
positive intentions to their ingroup than the out- relationship between this cognitive ability and chil-
group; in fact, race was not used to attribute nega- dren’s prejudice, and there is an extensive literature
tive intentions. showing that cognitively mature adults can still
show prejudice. So a cognitive explanation does
not seem adequate for explaining why explicit
Explicit Prejudice in Children
prejudice declines during middle childhood.
Prejudice takes many forms in childhood. This is
not surprising, given that what counts as prejudice
Self-Presentation and Explicit Prejudice
changes as children develop both cognitively and
socially. The nature and complexity of a 5-year-old Some researchers have argued that the develop-
child’s group-related attitude will be manifestly mental decline in explicit ethnic prejudice reflects
different from a 14-year-old adolescent’s attitude. children’s concern about social desirability, in par-
So implicit biases are only one form of childhood ticular their increasing awareness of how others
prejudice, and there is an extensive history of might perceive them and how they can promote a
research in developmental psychology revealing positive impression of themselves to significant
other forms of prejudice in childhood that pro- others. This self-presentation account contends
vides a broader picture. that children develop the ability to strategically
Children: Stereotypes and Prejudice 77

control their expression of prejudiced attitudes which often show a different developmental pat-
and behavior. Developmental research certainly tern from the explicit forms of prejudice described
indicates that by middle childhood, children earlier.
have the social–cognitive capacity to understand
self-presentational motives and engage in self-
Explicit Judgments About Social Exclusion
presentational behavior.
Importantly, children’s self-presentation of prej- Researchers have recently begun to assess chil-
udice requires attention to prevalent social norms dren’s evaluations and reasoning about the exclu-
about the explicit expression of prejudice. Social sion of ingroup and outgroup peers within everyday
norms prescribe cultural expectations regarding group settings. This research provides a broader
attitudes, values, and behavior. These expectations insight into the development of prejudice and use
may be specific to social groups or more wide- of stereotypes in childhood. Developmental
spread within society. Once children understand research has demonstrated that from a young age,
these social norms, they may strategically present children emphasize moral reasoning (e.g., fairness)
themselves as acting in accordance with them, when judging social exclusion based on group
thereby giving a positive impression of themselves membership, such as gender or race, in straightfor-
to relevant and significant others. ward or unambiguous situations (e.g., “Is it all
In support of this argument, developmental psy- right or not all right to exclude a boy from a ballet
chologists have recently shown that group norms club?”). However, children often resort to stereo-
affect the self-presentation of young children’s types to justify exclusion when complexity or
explicit ethnic prejudice and the development of ambiguity is added. For example, who should a
children’s prejudiced exclusion of peers. This ballet group pick when only one space is available
research has found that increasing children’s and two children want to join—one who matches
accountability to their peer group, in that their the stereotype or one who does not? Moreover,
actions are visible and may have to be defended, this research has found that with age, children also
causes children to increase or decrease their preju- begin to use more socially conventional reasoning
diced judgments in line with the dominant norm in (e.g., the need to adhere to social norms or stereo-
their group. types, concerns about effective group functioning)
For example, one study found that 5- to 16-year- to justify exclusion of their peers based on either
old White British children who were highly aware race or gender. Such referencing of social norms
of the social norm against expressing explicit rac- and group functioning may serve as a proxy for
ism spontaneously showed little explicit racial prejudice and stereotypes.
prejudice. In contrast, children with little aware- For example, one recent study found that, when
ness of this norm inhibited their racial prejudice asked to make decisions about exclusion in com-
only when their group’s antiprejudice norm was plex situations, the majority of children between 6
made salient by increasing their accountability to and 12 years of age increasingly justified racial or
the group. Still other studies have shown that chil- gender exclusion using socially conventional rea-
dren can increase rather than inhibit their preju- sons, such as mentioning how an individual chal-
dice based on national group membership when lenges the gender stereotype (“It will be weird to
they are made accountable to their national have a boy wearing leotards, so they should choose
ingroup. This finding fits with studies showing the girl.”). Moreover, a range of studies have
that national prejudice is often seen as more legiti- shown that children’s identification with the per-
mate or acceptable than racial prejudice. These son who is the excluder is related to their justifying
studies show that the self-presentation process racial or gender exclusion based on socially con-
operates to encourage prejudice in the domain of ventional reasons. These findings indicate that
nationality, whereas with race, children typically older children, who are less likely to show the
self-present by inhibiting their prejudice. explicit biases described in the previous section, are
The next section describes another facet of prej- nonetheless willing to condone prejudice and social
udice recently studied by developmental scientists, exclusion using stereotypical reasoning. Together,
namely explicit judgments about social exclusion, these studies suggest that with age, children in
78 Children: Stereotypes and Prejudice

everyday situations find less direct and more subtle seriously attempts to reduce these problematical
ways of showing bias and stereotyping. phenomena in childhood. Indeed, research suggests
Other recent developmental research has docu- that reducing prejudice in children can be accom-
mented age-related increases in social exclusion plished through a variety of methods, including the
judgments, with older children excluding peers promotion of intergroup contact, social–cognitive
who challenge both moral principles and their own skills, empathy, moral reasoning, and tolerance.
group norms about loyalty to the group. This
increased social exclusion of deviant (i.e., “black Adam Rutland
sheep”) peers by older children reflects the grow- See also Black Sheep Effect; Categorization; Children’s
ing importance of group identity as children age Groups; Discrimination; Implicit Association Test
and advance their understanding of how groups (IAT); Inclusion/Exclusion; Prejudice; Stereotyping;
operate. Specifically, this research has found that Subjective Group Dynamics
younger children evaluate the actions of their peers
only in terms of morality, that is, adherence to
moral norms such as fairness or equality, or as self- Further Readings
ish, that is, acting out of self-interest. Older chil- Aboud, F. E. (1988). Children and prejudice. Oxford,
dren, however, judge peer group members in terms UK: Blackwell.
of both their morality and their adherence to Abrams, D., & Rutland, A. (2008). Subjective group
group norms about what a genuine group member dynamics approach: Applications to children and
should do in different settings. adults. In S. Levy & M. Killen (Eds.), Intergroup
relations: An integrative developmental and social
psychological perspective. New York: Oxford
Conclusion
University Press.
Research indicates that children develop prejudice Bigler, R. S., & Liben, L. S. (2007). Developmental
and stereotypes from an early age. The foundation intergroup theory: Explaining and reducing children’s
of this prejudice and stereotyping is the develop- social stereotyping and prejudice. Current Directions
ment of social categorization during infancy. in Psychological Science, 16, 162–166.
Infants begin to show categorization ability in the Brown, R. J. (1995). Prejudice: Its social psychology.
domain of race and also show a visual preference Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
for faces from their own group. Implicit biases are Katz, P. A. (2003). Racists or tolerant multiculturalists?
known to appear around 6 years of age and remain How do they begin? American Psychologist, 58,
relatively stable through childhood into adoles- 897–909.
cence, though some evidence suggests implicit Killen, M. (2007). Children’s social and moral reasoning
racial attitudes are more negative in ethnically about exclusion. Current Directions in Psychological
Science, 16, 32–36.
homogenous environments. Explicit racial preju-
Killen, M., Lee-Kim, J., McGlothlin, H., & Stangor, C.
dice measured through preference or trait attribu-
(2002). How children and adolescents evaluate gender
tion tasks appears around 4 to 5 years of age in
and racial exclusion. Monographs of the Society for
racial majority group children, but generally
Research in Child Development, 67(4, Serial No. 271).
decreases from middle childhood. In contrast, Nesdale, D. (2001). Development of prejudice in children.
children’s reasoning and judgments about social In M. Augoustinos & K. J. Reynolds (Eds.),
exclusion can become more biased with age, as Understanding prejudice, racism and social conflict
children begin to use stereotypes and conventional (pp. 57–72). London: Sage.
reasons to justify social exclusion in everyday com- Rutland, A. (2004). The development and self-regulation
plex situations. Psychologists have typically of intergroup attitudes in children. In M. Bennett &
explained developmental trends in children’s preju- F. Sani (Eds.), The development of the social self
dice using either a cognitive development or self- (pp. 247–265). East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press.
presentational account. Rutland, A., Cameron, L., Milne, A., & McGeorge,
Prejudice and stereotyping begin in early child- P. (2005). Social norms and self-presentation:
hood, often making it difficult to change these atti- Children’s implicit and explicit intergroup attitudes.
tudes in adulthood. For this reason, we need to take Child Development, 76, 451–466.
Children’s Groups 79

experiences and in the peer group itself of chil-


Children’s Groups dren’s behavior, skills, and social understanding
that contribute to such individual differences; and
Peer groups constitute the primary source of chil- to explain peer group processes that contribute to
dren’s socialization outside of the family. development and adjustment.
Competence in the peer group is critical for many
aspects of children’s development, including cog-
nitive development and school achievement as
The Peer Group in Development
well as social, emotional, and personality develop- Observations of children in family, child care,
ment. Within their groups, children are more or and laboratory settings, as well as cross-culturally
less accepted by their peers, more or less visible, in small villages of hunter–gatherer societies,
more or less dominant, and more or less con- show that peer relationships emerge late in the
nected to other group members. These individual second year of life and become increasingly com-
differences in peer group experiences are associ- plex and a more regular part of children’s social
ated with different socioemotional outcomes later experiences over the course of childhood. By
in development. As a result, much of the scholar- middle childhood, children spend a third or more
ship concerning children’s peer groups has been of their time in the company of their peers and
devoted to measuring and explaining the sources begin to express a preference for spending time
of individual differences in children’s integration with peers. Peer relationships are more egalitar-
into the peer group and the developmental conse- ian than those with adults, feature more play and
quences of these differences. More recent and less more conflict, and tend to be less stable and
extensive research literature addresses questions enduring than relationships in the family. Hence,
about children’s attitudes toward their own group children’s peers provide unique experiences not
and groups of other children. available in the family and unique opportunities
for acquiring a wide range of social and emo-
tional competencies.
History
Perhaps one of the most interesting characteris-
Contemporary research interest in children’s peer tics of children’s peer groups is that even with
relationships is usually traced to the discovery by children as young as 3 or 4 years of age, whenever
Harry Harlow in the 1950s that infant rhesus children assort themselves voluntarily, these groups
monkeys reared with their mothers but without are composed almost exclusively of same-sex chil-
exposure to other young monkeys failed to acquire dren. The amount of time children spend with
the social skills necessary for successful adaptation opposite-sex peers declines over childhood and
to group living. Harlow and his students also dis- remains short until adolescence. Sex segregation
covered that the profound social and emotional begins early and trumps any other characteristic
deficits resulting from early maternal deprivation on which children self-segregate, including race.
could be largely overcome by “peer therapy” pro- Girls precede boys in preferring to play with their
vided by extended play with younger monkeys. own sex during the toddler and early preschool
Later, psychologists studying the origins of years, but by childhood boys are more exclusion-
adult psychopathology began to find that difficul- ary. Children of both sexes establish and police the
ties in childhood peer relations were a regular boundaries of their sex-segregated groups, teasing
antecedent of serious problems later in life. Thus, or rejecting peers who play with children of the
children’s functioning in the peer group appeared opposite sex. Perhaps as a result, children who
to be formative in the development of competence spend larger amounts of time in opposite-sex peer
and to have long-lasting consequences. Since the groups than is typical for their age tend to be less
1970s, scholars have worked to measure and char- popular and well adjusted than children who
acterize development and individual differences in prefer same-sex group play.
children’s peer group experiences; to identify the Because sex segregation appears early, is robust,
correlates and causes of differential success in the and appears to be universal, scholars have endeav-
peer group; to determine the origins in family ored to explain why it occurs, how experiences
80 Children’s Groups

differ in boys’ and girls’ groups, and the functions Measurement


of sex-segregated play for development. Eleanor
Children’s peer group acceptance is most com-
Maccoby’s work has been influential in promoting
monly described using sociometric classifications.
and studying such questions. Maccoby has pro-
A frequently used method for indexing sociometric
posed that sex segregation occurs because of
status was developed by John Coie in the 1980s. In
incompatibilities in boys’ and girls’ play and inter-
this procedure, children are asked to select among
action styles. Boys’ play is predominantly active,
their peers those they like most and those they like
physical, rough, and competitive and occurs in
least from a roster of children in their group (e.g.,
large groups, whereas girls’ play is characteristi-
in a class or camp cabin). Children are then classi-
cally quiet, social, verbal, and cooperative, occur-
fied into categories based on how preferred they
ring in dyads or small groups. Therefore, to
are by their peers. Popular children are liked by
understand sex segregation, researchers must
many peers and disliked by few. Rejected children
explain how sex differences in play style develop
are disliked by many peers and liked by few.
as a function of biology and socialization. This is
Controversial children are liked by many peers but
currently an active area of inquiry in developmen-
disliked by many others. Neglected children are
tal psychology.
seldom singled out as being either liked or disliked.
Researchers have also documented that boys’
Average children are those who are liked by some
and girls’ groups differ in the structure and the-
and disliked or ignored by others, and generally do
matic content of their interactions, the density of
not fit any of the other categories.
their social networks, their relationship goals and
There is some debate about whether such selec-
concerns, the types and amount of peer stress
tions should be limited to same-sex peers or should
encountered in the group, and group members’
include both sexes, how large the reference group
interpersonal qualities (such as trust, validation,
should be (e.g., classroom vs. school), and the type
and closeness). There is much less research on
of cut-off score that should be used for creating the
how these different experiences relate to develop-
categories. Different methods yield more or less
ment. Some research suggests that the amount of
extreme groups, which are, in turn, more or less
time children spend in same-sex peer groups influ-
stable over time and may be more or less predictive
ences how sex-typed their behavior is, and sub-
of optimal or problematic outcomes.
stantial research points to sex differences in
Another frequently used procedure is to ask
adjustment, especially in adolescence. For exam-
children to rate each of their peers on a single scale
ple, boys are more likely to exhibit behavior prob-
that varies from “like very much” to “dislike very
lems, whereas girls are more likely to exhibit
much.” The average rating a child receives from
anxiety and depression. One reasonable hypothe-
his or her peers reflects how accepted the child is
sis is that different experiences in boys’ and girls’
in the peer group. This method does not yield dif-
peer groups contribute to sex differences in devel-
ferent sociometric categories, but because it per-
opmental outcomes. Research is currently address-
mits children to evaluate all of their peers, and not
ing this hypothesis.
only those liked most and least, some investigators
argue that it provides a more valid measure of peer
Individual Differences group acceptance.
in Peer-Group Acceptance
Causes and Correlates
Jacob Moreno’s work in the 1930s on the interper-
sonal forces of attraction, repulsion, and indiffer- Regardless of the method used, children who
ence set the stage for much of the research in the differ in peer group acceptance have been found to
latter part of the 20th century on children’s accep- have different behavioral profiles, self-perceptions,
tance by their peer group. This work has empha- socioemotional adjustment, patterns of school
sized that different children are perceived differently achievement, and attitudes and cognitions about
by their peers, with some children being well liked their peers. Initially, research identified broad
and widely accepted, while others are rejected, and dimensions of social behavior such as aggression,
still others are ignored. withdrawal, and prosocial behavior as correlates
Children’s Groups 81

of various sociometric status groups. For example, In addition to differing in social behavior, chil-
rejected children tend to be more hostile and dren from different sociometric groups also exhibit
aggressive toward their peers, whereas popular distinct patterns of social information processing.
children tend to be more friendly and cooperative. In the 1980s, Kenneth Dodge formulated an influ-
Experimental studies of playgroups formed by ential model of individual differences in how chil-
combining previously unacquainted children have dren encode, interpret, and act on social information
shown that such behavioral differences shape chil- during interactions with peers. Empirical research
dren’s sociometric status. has largely confirmed the basic tenets of this
In more recent years, researchers have uncov- model. For example, rejected children tend to per-
ered substantial complexity both in the sociomet- ceive and interpret ambiguous social behavior by
ric categories themselves and in the kinds of their peers as hostile, a characteristic termed the
behavior, cognitions, and attitudes associated with hostile attribution bias. They also endorse hostile
children’s sociometric status. There are thus sub- goals and coercive solutions to social problems,
types of rejected children, such as withdrawn chil- evaluate aggressive solutions positively, and over-
dren and especially aggressive children. Interestingly, estimate how well liked they are by peers.
not all types of aggression are associated with Popular children, in contrast, more accurately
rejection. Indeed, only about half of aggressive encode social cues, attribute benign intentions to
children are rejected by their peers. Experimentally ambiguous behavior by peers, and generate proso-
constructed groups of rejected and “unrejected” cial solutions to social problems. Research has
children have shown that in early childhood, peer shown that such differences in social information
rejection is associated with higher rates of instru- processing originate in representations or schemas
mental aggression to obtain desired objects or that are automatically activated during encounters
positions. Among older children, angry, impulsive with peers. Attempts to alter children’s social per-
aggression in response to provocation, as well as ceptions and cognitions and/or their social problem-
unprovoked, person-centered aggression, is also solving strategies have produced some limited
associated with rejection. changes in peer acceptance. This suggests that how
Furthermore, different types of aggression are children encode and interpret others’ behavior, and
associated with rejection in girls’ groups and in their goals and solutions when they encounter con-
boys’ groups. Whereas physical aggression is often flict or difficulty with peers, may be causally
characteristic of rejected boys, relational aggres- related to their peer group status.
sion in which children use nonphysical means such
as gossip to exclude, harass, or threaten others is
Outcomes
more characteristic of rejected girls. In addition,
the extent to which aggression causes peer rejec- A lack of acceptance by peers has been regularly
tion depends on how normative it is in the peer shown to predict a host of negative developmental
group; in peer groups where aggression is more outcomes for children, including poor school atti-
frequent, it is less likely to result in rejection. tudes and achievement, psychological maladjust-
Likewise, shyness and withdrawal are associated ment, and delinquency. Longitudinal studies have
with rejection only in later childhood when they shown that such associations are especially robust
become nonnormative, although the picture is for children who are stably rejected by their peers
more complicated for children from non-Western over time, particularly for those who are aggres-
cultures (e.g., China). sive and disruptive. It is as yet unknown to what
Similar distinctions have been made among extent these associations are driven by the negative
popular children. For example, some children per- peer experiences these children encounter, by their
ceived as popular by their peers are more domi- failure to acquire important skills from peer group
neering, assertive, and manipulative than they are socialization because of their lack of integration in
prosocial and cooperative. Prosocial behavior the group, by exposure to the socializing influences
tends to be associated with peer acceptance in of other deviant peers, or by some underlying qual-
groups where positive peer-directed behavior is ity of the children themselves or experiences out-
relatively common. side the peer group that feed both peer rejection
82 Children’s Groups

and other social and emotional problems. There is Additional measures are often derived to index
empirical evidence for each of these potential how central, visible, or influential such affiliative
mechanisms, as well as evidence for more complex networks or cliques are. Some are considered
theoretical models that posit multiple, interacting nuclear, others secondary, and others peripheral.
influences. Higher centrality groups tend to be larger than
For example, existing vulnerabilities in the child groups on the periphery. Children themselves can
that might predispose him or her to poor outcomes also be identified as more or less central within
(such as aggression or hyperactive, impulsive their own affiliative networks. The correlates of
behavior) appear to be exacerbated by negative centrality are different for boys and girls. For boys,
experiences with peers, such as rejection or victim- athletic ability, leadership, dominance, and per-
ization. Some research has found that children’s ceived popularity tend to be important for high
reputation in their peer group is self-perpetuating network centrality. For girls, academic skills and
and that peers are likely to discount information achievement, leadership, and perceived popularity
about a child when it runs counter to the peer tend to be correlated with network centrality.
group’s prevailing perceptions of the child. This There is little research as yet concerning how
contributes to the stability of children’s sociomet- group processes such as norm establishment and
ric status as well as their social and emotional maintenance, leadership, and cohesion might vary
experiences in their peer group, and makes it dif- as a function of group size or centrality.
ficult for children with low social status to improve In addition to declining in size with age, peer
their standing. networks become less exclusive and more perme-
able so that children increasingly belong to more
than one clique and the interconnections increase
Children’s Social Networks
among different groups. Boys’ groups generally
Children’s immediate peer groups are embedded in tend to be more interconnected and less exclusive
larger social networks of peer relationships that than girls’ groups, possibly because they are larger
provide unique experiences as well. Social network overall. Across short periods of time, up to 6
analysis identifies and examines patterns in chil- weeks, affiliative networks remain stable with rela-
dren’s specific peer affiliations. This contrasts with tively little change in members. Instability increases
the sociometric approach, which focuses on chil- over periods of a year or more, and younger chil-
dren’s acceptance by their larger peer group. dren’s groups are generally less stable than high
Research on children’s social networks is compara- school groups.
tively recent and has been influenced by concep- Theory and empirical research have focused on
tual frameworks from sociology. the factors and processes that underlie children’s
To identify their social networks, children are affiliative group formation and influence. Factors
asked questions such as who “hangs around with” important to group formation include propinquity,
whom, who belongs to which groups, and which familiarity, and similarity. Children are most likely
children do not belong to any group. Rosters are to affiliate with classmates and other close associ-
not used so that children are limited to reporting ates than with children in their school or neighbor-
on peers about whom they are knowledgeable. hood with whom they have less systematic contact.
Because of the verbal and cognitive demands of This appears to be especially true for younger chil-
this procedure, it is typically used only with chil- dren, whose classrooms are more likely to be self-
dren past third grade. By combining children’s contained. Familiarity is also an important
responses statistically, researchers can create a map determinant of group affiliation, often more impor-
of children’s affiliations with one another based on tant than dissimilarities in academic performance
shared perceptions across respondents. A child is or socioeconomic status.
typically considered to belong to a particular Nevertheless, a key force in peer group affilia-
group or network if so identified by 50% or more tion is similarity based on features such as age,
of his or her peers. On average, network size tends race, physical characteristics, academic achieve-
to increase between elementary school and middle ment, parents’ income, and qualities such as
school, then decrease over high school. aggressiveness or popularity. Some scholars have
Civil Rights Legislation 83

suggested that these shared attributes may provide outgroup prejudice may be weaker until middle
grounds for mutual validation and approval dur- childhood. Also like adults, children’s ingroup
ing a period when social identities are developing. favoritism depends on factors such as the status of
Similarity within children’s peer groups may also the child’s group; children in low-status and/or
reduce intragroup conflict and other threats to the minority groups are less positive about their own
group’s cohesiveness and integrity. group and sometimes even favor the outgroup.
Thus children choose to affiliate with peers who This research area has been concerned primarily
are like them, and within-group socialization pro- with explaining the childhood roots of social ste-
cesses can consolidate, amplify, or alter children’s reotyping and racial prejudice. It would be interest-
behavior and attitudes over time. Research on the ing and productive to integrate research and theory
socialization of children’s attitudes and behavior on children’s peer group affiliation, acceptance,
within their peer group is relatively recent and and socialization with work on the formation and
largely limited to adolescents. The bulk of this maintenance of their intergroup attitudes.
research has been devoted to peer group affilia-
tions among aggressive or delinquent adolescents. Celia A. Brownell
One of the strongest predictors of continuing See also Children: Stereotypes and Prejudice; Cliques;
aggression and problem behavior in adolescence is Gender and Behavior; Group Socialization; Inclusion/
affiliation with peers who also use illegal sub- Exclusion; Sociometric Choice
stances or engage in other risk-taking, violent, or
delinquent behaviors.
Thomas Dishion has coined the term “deviancy Further Readings
training” to describe the processes of reinforce-
Bigler, R., & Liben, L. (2007). Developmental intergroup
ment and approval within adolescent boys’ affilia-
theory: Explaining and reducing children’s social
tive networks that serve to maintain or increase
stereotyping and prejudice. Current Directions in
such behavior and associated normative beliefs. Psychological Science, 16, 162–166.
Although less researched, similar processes have Collins, W., & Steinberg, L. (2006). Adolescent
been shown to operate within affiliative networks development in interpersonal context. In W. Damon
formed on more positive attributes (such as aca- & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology
demic achievement, in which members maintain or (6th ed., Vol. 3, pp. 1003–1067). Hoboken, NJ:
increase their similarity with respect to academi- John Wiley.
cally relevant behaviors). Some research has also Gifford-Smith, M., & Brownell, C. (2003). Childhood
shown that peer group affiliations can reduce a peer relationships: Social acceptance, friendships, and
child’s negative attitudes, such as racism, when the peer networks. Journal of School Psychology, 41,
peer group’s attitudes are more positive. Because 235–284.
of the heightened importance of peer group accep- Maccoby, E. (1998). The two sexes: Growing up apart,
tance for adolescents, coupled with the salience of coming together. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
identity formation and general impressionability Press.
during this period, it is possible that peer group Rubin, K., Bukowski, W., & Parker, J. (2006). Peer
socialization effects are stronger or qualitatively interaction, relationships, and groups. In W. Damon &
different during adolescence than in adulthood. N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (6th
This issue has yet to be addressed, however. ed., Vol. 3, pp. 571–645). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
An independent research literature on children’s
attitudes toward their own groups versus other
groups has shown that, like adults, children have
more positive attitudes toward their own group Civil Rights Legislation
(ingroup favoritism) and more negative attitudes
toward other groups (outgroup prejudice). The Civil rights legislation is a broad term that may be
developmental picture is not yet clear, in part applied to any laws or legal rulings designed to
because of measurement limitations, but it appears protect the basic human rights of individuals any-
that ingroup favoritism develops by age 5, whereas where in the world. These rights include any of a
84 Civil Rights Legislation

range of principles that ensure freedoms, liberties, For example, the United States Congress passed
and general happiness to which all humans are a series of civil rights acts in 1957, 1960, and 1964
considered entitled from birth, such as free speech, that provided further protection against discrimi-
religious freedom, participation in electoral pro- nation for a wide range of groups, establishing
cesses, due legal processes in the court system, and protected classes such as race, sex, and nation of
so forth. The term civil rights legislation is most origin. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 outlawed
commonly used to refer to laws passed during the literacy tests and other barriers to voting, and the
civil rights movement of the 1960s in the United Fair Housing Act of 1968 outlawed discrimination
States, but the term could be applied more broadly in the housing market. In 1990 the Americans with
to describe legal action to protect human rights Disabilities Act added the physically disabled to
further back in history as well as across the globe. the list of protected classes.
For example, civil rights legislation in the United Laws that threaten civil rights also can be
States arguably began with the Constitution of deemed unconstitutional through judiciary deci-
1787, and civil rights are a concern for all nations sions such as those handed down by the United
interested in ensuring rights and freedoms for its States Supreme Court. For example, many schools
citizens. Thus, for example, the United Kingdom in the early 20th century were racially segregated
instituted affirmative action policies to ensure under the notion that the education system was
equal opportunities for Catholics and the poor, “separate but equal”; however, the Supreme Court
and South Africa established anti-apartheid mea- ruled this system unequal and unconstitutional in
sures to end to segregation. the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education case, set-
In the United States, civil rights legislation is ting the stage for the mandatory desegregation of
accomplished through bills passed into law, court American schools.
rulings, and executive orders. The most salient The president of the United States may encour-
examples of U.S. civil rights legislation have con- age civil rights through executive orders. For
cerned Blacks and women, but civil rights legisla- example, President Lincoln’s executive order of
tion has been extended to a wide range of groups 1862—the Emancipation Proclamation—set the
and people in society. Which groups deserve legal stage for the abolition of slavery, and President
protection against civil rights violations and what Truman’s executive order in 1948 formally deseg-
constitutes a “civil right” remain points of contro- regated the military, allowing Black and White
versy. Nevertheless, the ultimate goal of civil rights soldiers to serve in the same units, equally.
legislation is to provide equal freedoms and liber- The goal of American civil rights legislation is to
ties for those who are most threatened and who ensure civil rights for all citizens and guarantee
may not have the political voice for social change that those civil rights are applied equally across
without such legislation. This entry presents a his- different groups of people. Much of the civil rights
torical overview of civil rights legislation and legislation in the United States is designed to pro-
related controversies, considers the impact of such tect classes of individuals who may be at greater
laws, and describes monitoring and enforcement risk of discrimination or harm. Currently pro-
efforts. tected groups at the federal level include those
based on race, color, ethnicity, national origin, reli-
gion, sex, age (that is, those 40 and over), disabil-
Historical Background
ity, and veteran status. This protection is meant to
Civil rights in the United States are enacted both prevent discriminatory treatment in such areas as
by the passing of laws that promote civil rights and employment, the housing market, voting access,
by the overturning of laws that threaten civil and education.
rights. These legal actions can take place in the
legislative, judicial, and executive branches of gov-
Related Controversies
ernment at both the federal and local level.
Legislative bodies can pass laws that enact greater Controversies have emerged concerning the meth-
civil rights protection or remove laws that threaten ods for ensuring civil rights protection, who should
civil rights. be protected, and what constitutes “civil rights.”
Civil Rights Legislation 85

One important controversy surrounds the issue of that are generally seen as deserving protection, and
whether civil rights legislation should be approached the term special rights used disparagingly to refer
in a “color-blind” or a “color-conscious” way. A to proposed legislation to protect groups that some
color-blind approach puts the focus on protection people believe do not to deserve such protection. It
of minorities through ensuring equal treatment could be argued that hate-crimes legislation, such
regardless of minority or majority status, while a as parts of the Violent Crime Control and Law
color-conscious approach puts the focus on prefer- Enforcement Act of 1994 that impose harsher sen-
ential treatment of minorities as a means of over- tencing for crimes against individuals based on
coming more subtle or institutional discriminatory their race, religion, and so on, is a kind of civil
barriers. rights legislation designed to protect minorities
Martin Luther King, Jr. famously endorsed a from crimes directed against them because of their
color-blind society where people would “not be minority status. However, such laws have been
judged by the color of their skin,” but he did so in criticized as unfairly endowing minorities with
an era when blatant prejudice was far more com- special rights or protections that should not differ
mon than it is now. Color-blind approaches today from one group to another. Similar arguments
may be problematic, especially because they often against special rights have been made concerning
involve the denial of real barriers that minorities various instantiations of affirmative action, as well
continue to face. Striking a balance between ensur- as gay rights propositions.
ing equal treatment while helping to surmount Another point of controversy concerns legisla-
existing barriers remains a challenge in the estab- tion that restricts civil rights during times of par-
lishment of civil rights legislation. ticular danger or threat. For example, shortly after
Other controversies have emerged concerning September 11, 2001, the Patriot Act was signed
which minority groups should be protected by civil into law, lifting restrictions on electronic surveil-
rights legislation. Some groups are explicitly denied lance and monitoring on the grounds of increasing
civil rights without much social outcry, such as national security. While these laws are intended for
convicted felons who are denied the right to vote the protection of the country, they are criticized for
in some states. However, the issue of protection compromising the civil rights of those who do not
can become quite controversial with respect to pose a threat.
many groups, and civil rights legislation is often
passed in the face of considerable public resistance.
Effects of Civil Rights Legislation
For example, the Civil Rights Act and Voting
Rights Acts of the 1960s were signed into law Sociologists in the early 20th century doubted that
despite considerable outspoken opposition. More civil rights legislation would affect public opinion,
recent times have seen resistance to the legal pro- as exemplified by William Graham Sumner’s obser-
tection of certain immigrant populations or minor- vation that “stateways do not make folkways.”
ities based on sexual orientation. What makes a This statement suggests that laws do not determine
group deserving of civil rights protection is a point public opinion or cultural views, but that instead
of ongoing, often heated, debate. For example, the public opinion and cultural views determine laws.
passing of Proposition 8, an initiative on the Some would even argue that civil rights laws do
November 8, 2008, California State ballot that not change people’s attitudes toward the group
denied same-sex couples the right to marry, contin- being protected and may even have a negative effect
ues to fuel heated conflict between liberals who for those groups. For example, such legislation may
opposed the proposition and many churches that not remove prejudice, but instead may change the
supported it. form of its expression from blatant forms to more
What is a “civil right” in the first place is also a subtle forms, as has been suggested by modern rac-
point of controversy and is reflected in the lan- ism and sexism theorists. Political scientists have
guage used to discuss civil rights. For example, argued that civil rights legislation from the 1960s
distinctions have been made between “civil rights” led to various backlashes, including the Southern
and “special rights,” with the term civil rights shift from predominantly majority Democratic to
describing proposed legislation to protect groups majority Republican support. Similarly, social
86 Civil Rights Movement

dominance theorists have argued that advances in international level, organizations like Amnesty
civil rights legislation for an oppressed group are International monitor civil rights activities through-
often balanced through countermeasures that out the globe, including the United States, where
ensure the continuing balance of social power in policies such as prisoner detainment without due
favor of majority groups. Other research on “shift- process and capital punishment practices have
ing standards” warns that the protection of various been criticized.
minorities may lead to the application of lower
standards for evaluating their performance, which P. J. Henry
can also have harmful consequences. See also Affirmative Action; Civil Rights Movement;
Nevertheless, positive shifts in American atti- Desegregation; Discrimination; Diversity;
tudes toward Blacks since the passage of civil Institutionalized Bias; Justice; Modern Forms of
rights laws in 1960s have been documented, mov- Prejudice
ing from majority endorsement of segregation and
beliefs in the inferior ability of Blacks to a majority
electing its first Black president in Barack Obama. Further Readings
Attitudes toward women also shifted toward
Crosby, F. J. (2004). Affirmative action is dead; long live
greater equality following civil rights legislation affirmative action. New Haven, CT: Yale University
protecting women. Press.
Further questions remain concerning the impact Faludi, S. (1992). Backlash: The undeclared war against
of civil rights legislation on the attitudes and American women. New York: Doubleday.
behaviors of the protected groups themselves. Katz, P. A., & Taylor, D. A. (Eds.). (1988). Eliminating
Does such legislation offer psychological relief to racism: Profiles in controversy. New York: Plenum Press.
those it protects? Or does it introduce new psycho- Schofield, J. W. (1986). Causes and consequences of the
logical challenges, such as the reinforcement of the colorblind perspective. In J. F. Dovidio & S. L.
stereotype that minority groups inherently need Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism
protection? These questions are being increasingly (pp. 231–253). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
researched and debated in the social sciences. Schuman, H., Steeh, C., Bobo, L., & Krysan, M. (1997).
Racial attitudes in America: Trends and
interpretations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Monitoring Activities Press.
Once civil rights legislation is enacted, it needs to Sumner, W. G. (1906). Folkways: A study of the
be monitored and enforced to be effective. The sociological importance of usages, manners, customs,
passage of legislative acts, judicial rulings, and mores, and morals. Boston: Ginn.
executive orders does not guarantee that civil
rights will be established and upheld. Consequently,
various public and private organizations have
emerged in the United States to help monitor and Civil Rights Movement
enforce civil rights legislation. At the federal level,
the 1957 Civil Rights Act established the United The term civil rights movement refers to the activ-
States Commission on Civil Rights to investigate ist efforts of Black Americans and their allies dur-
civil rights violations, and the Equal Employment ing a particular historical period (1955–1968) to
Opportunity Commission was created in 1961 claim certain basic civil rights previously withheld
to monitor employment discrimination in the pri- from Blacks and to end legalized segregation.
vate sector. These efforts were designed to overturn laws and
Private organizations, too, have emerged to customs of racial segregation, racialized disen-
monitor enforcement of civil rights laws, such as franchisement, and violence against Blacks. Thus
the American Civil Liberties Union and the the civil rights movement represents one of the
Southern Poverty Law Center, legal associations most comprehensive and concerted efforts by U.S.
committed to monitoring and prosecuting civil citizens to bring about social changes that would
rights abuses within the purview of the law. At the both directly improve the lives of Blacks and
Civil Rights Movement 87

expand intergroup contact and facilitate the devel- desegregation orders in places such as Little Rock,
opment of improved intergroup relations. Arkansas, as well as at the University of Alabama
From a broader perspective, the struggle for and the University of Mississippi, and many cities
civil rights in the United States did not begin or in the South chose to shut down their public school
end with the events of this period. A more thor- system for a year or longer rather than integrate
ough examination of the civil rights movement the schools. Years later, Thurgood Marshall, the
among Blacks would take into account a history of lead attorney who brought Brown v. Board of
Blacks’ efforts to secure civil rights from the Education to the Supreme Court, quipped: “Now
moment of their arrival in this country as slaves. It I know what ‘deliberate speed’ means—it means
would also include modern-day efforts to secure ‘very slowly.’” Impatience with the slow progress
equity in education, housing, health care, and all of the use of legislation and the courts to effect
areas of economic life. Moreover, civil rights change led directly to the civil rights movement.
efforts by other groups include the women’s move-
ment, the Chicano movement, the Native American
Historical Highlights
movement, and the gay liberation movement, and
civil rights efforts continue to this day and through- The civil rights movement was distinguished by a
out the world. This entry focuses first on the nar- shift away from the use of litigation as the prime
rower meaning of the term civil rights, looking at strategy for winning new rights toward a focus on
the history and impact of the efforts to claim Black the use of direct action—civil disobedience, non-
Americans’ civil rights, and then touches briefly on violent resistance, and mass mobilization—to effect
related efforts. social change. Rather than seeking support pri-
marily from legislators and judges, civil rights
activists sought broader support for the cause and
Background and Context
demanded the enforcement of laws that already
After the Civil War, many states passed a number of existed.
racially discriminatory laws, and racial violence
against Blacks was both brutal and widespread. In
The Montgomery Bus Boycott
1896, the Supreme Court held in Plessy v. Ferguson
that legalized segregation was constitutional as Trained in nonviolent civil disobedience, Rosa
long as separate but equal public facilities (e.g., Parks was arrested on December 1, 1955, for
schools) were provided to Blacks. Organizations refusing to give up her seat on the bus in
such as the Ku Klux Klan, which engaged in con- Montgomery, Alabama, to a White male passen-
certed and organized acts of violence against Blacks ger. In response, the Women’s Political Council and
that included murder, flourished in the early part of the NAACP organized a bus boycott in Montgomery
the 20th century. In this context, civil rights efforts to protest both Rosa Parks’s arrest and segregation
on the part of Blacks and other groups were focused and discrimination in the bus system. The boycott
primarily on legal efforts to overturn racially dis- was tremendously successful, and the Montgomery
criminatory laws and congressional lobbying to Improvement Association was formed to continue
secure legislative assistance at the federal level. the boycott. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was
These efforts made some progress, culminating in elected to lead the Montgomery Improvement
the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision in Association, which sought broad change in
which the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Plessy v. Montgomery, including but not limited to its bus
Ferguson and held that separate schools for White system. The bus boycott lasted for a year, culmi-
and Black Americans could never be equal and thus nating in 1956 in a Supreme Court ruling in
were not constitutionally permissible. Browder v. Gayle that outlawed segregation in
Although the Court ordered the desegregation public buses.
of all public schools “with all deliberate speed,” King and other leaders of the Montgomery
school desegregation efforts at the elementary, sec- Improvement Association joined the group to other
ondary, and college levels were difficult to enforce. civil rights organizations in other areas of the
Federal military personnel were required to enforce South, leading to similar boycotts and eventually to
88 Civil Rights Movement

the formation of the Southern Christian Leadership House to push for passage of civil rights legisla-
Conference in January 1957. King’s leadership of tion. Kennedy agreed to support the legislation,
the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and but it was not clear he had the votes to pass it. The
the Montgomery Improvement Association, the bills that comprised this legislation—the Civil
success of the efforts in Montgomery, and the Rights Act (1964), Voting Rights Act (1965), and
expansion of those efforts across the U.S. South Fair Housing Act (1968)—were passed not during
made King a national figure. the Kennedy Administration, however, but during
During the early 1960s, organizations such as the succeeding Johnson Administration. The Civil
the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, the Rights Act of 1964 prohibited discrimination on
Congress of Racial Equality, and the Student the basis of race or sex in schools, public facilities,
Nonviolent Coordinating Committee engaged in government, and employment, effectively ending
broad efforts to end desegregation laws. Sit-ins Jim Crow segregation in the South. Initially fairly
were used effectively in many areas to protest and weak in enforcement capabilities, the law was
challenge laws enforcing racial segregation in pub- strengthened in subsequent Civil Rights Acts (e.g.,
lic facilities. In 1964, four organizations together Civil Rights Acts of 1968 and 1991).
(the NAACP, Congress of Racial Equality, Southern The Voting Rights Act prohibited literacy tests
Christian Leadership Conference, and Student to register to vote and provided federal oversight
Nonviolent Coordinating Committee) engaged in of voting registration in areas where there had
a broad voting rights campaign by bringing college been evidence of discrimination in voter registra-
students from around the country to Mississippi to tion. The Civil Rights Act of 1968 is commonly
register voters. referred to as the Fair Housing Act, in that it pro-
This activism was met with strong resistance. vided clearer enforcement provisions against dis-
Civil rights activists were subjected to beatings and crimination in the sale, rental, and financing of
brutal treatment and arrest by police, headquarters housing.
and meeting sites were bombed, and individual
activists were murdered. The strength of this resis-
Aftermath and Ongoing Struggles
tance played a role in the success of the civil rights
movement. Television images of police attacking The Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act
nonviolent demonstrators with weapons, fire of 1965, the Fair Housing Act of 1968, and
hoses, and attack dogs, as well as images of gov- Executive Order 11246 of 1965, which ordered the
ernment officials attempting to bar Black students use of affirmative action to ensure the lack of dis-
from schools and colleges, played an important crimination in employment and federal contract-
role in changing broader public opinion. ing, gave many the sense that the issues for which
the movement had fought most strongly—voting
rights, antidiscrimination laws in employment,
The 1963 March on Washington
housing, and education, and increased attention to
In August 1963, a number of civil rights groups and therefore consequences for violent acts against
and leaders collaborated on the March on Blacks—had been largely resolved. Optimism was
Washington that took place at the National Mall high that the changed legal and social climate
in Washington, D.C. The march was organized to would lead to effective changes in the lives of
push for greater civil rights protections, including Blacks. However, 1968 was also significant because
greater legal protections in the South, fair housing it was the year in which both Martin Luther King,
and employment, a federal employment program, Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy were assassinated,
and voting rights. With more than 200,000 dem- thereby depriving the movement of its most visible
onstrators participating, it was a tremendous suc- leader and of an important political ally.
cess and widely televised. King delivered his most The optimism of the 1960s civil rights move-
famous speech, “I Have a Dream,” at the Lincoln ment victories gave way to the slow erosion of the
Memorial during this demonstration. hard-won gains over the coming decades. School
After the march, King and other leaders met desegregation efforts slowly dissolved beginning in
with President John F. Kennedy in the White the 1980s, as federal courts released pressure on
Cliques 89

districts to continue those efforts. Schools have Transnationally, social change efforts, and par-
slowly resegregated in many places, and today ticularly the use of nonviolent protest and direct
schools in many areas are as segregated as they action to secure civil rights, have been modeled on
were before Brown v. Board of Education. In the civil rights movement. Examples of such move-
2007, a more conservative Supreme Court over- ments include the successful efforts to end apart-
turned school desegregation efforts in Seattle and heid in South Africa, the efforts of students and
Louisville in Parents Involved in Community other activists to secure human rights in China and
Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1. In their Myanmar, and movements to secure human rights
decision, the justices effectively turned Brown v. and create economic change in the Soviet Union
Board on its head and argued that taking race into and the eastern European nations in the late 20th
account in assigning students to schools was century.
unconstitutional.
Affirmative action policies designed to improve Sabrina Zirkel
the access of underrepresented groups to colleges, See also Affirmative Action; Civil Rights Legislation;
employment, and federal contracting have also lost Collective Movements and Protest; Desegregation;
favor among many people, and recent legislative Intergroup Contact Theory; Racism
efforts and court rulings have resulted in many
affirmative action policies becoming illegal in sev-
eral states. Further Readings
The civil rights movement, as a formal, national
Browder v. Gayle, 142 F. Supp. 707 (M.D. Ala. 1956).
struggle, may have ended in the late 1960s, but
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483
many groups have continued and expanded civil
(1954).
rights efforts to the present day, both in the United Carson, C. (Ed.). (2001). The autobiography of Martin
States and throughout the world. In the United Luther King, Jr. New York: Warner.
States, efforts continue to create racial equity in Kluger, R. (1975). Simple justice: The history of Brown v.
health care, employment, primary and secondary Board of Education and Black America’s struggle for
education, and access to higher education. equality. New York: Random House.
Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School
Related Efforts District No. 1, 551 U.S. 701 (2007).
Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896).
Moreover, other movements have persisted in pur- Tushnet, M. V. (2001). Thurgood Marshall: His speeches,
suing civil rights for other groups. Examples writings, arguments, opinions, and reminisces.
include efforts to pursue employment rights by the Chicago: Lawrence Hill.
United Farm Workers of America, and recent dem- Williams, J. (1987). Eyes on the prize: America’s civil
onstrations of support for undocumented workers rights years, 1954–1965. New York: Penguin.
in the United States.
The gay rights movement has been one of the
longest standing civil rights movements in the
United States. The movement began in New York Cliques
with the Stonewall Rebellion, a series of rebellions
that emerged from frustration over police raids on A clique is a small, exclusive, tightly knit group
gay bars to arrest gay men for illegal sexual activ- of people. Membership in such groups usually
ity. Over a period of decades, these efforts have depends on social status and can have negative
succeeded in decriminalizing homosexual sexual connotations (e.g., “Goths,” “geeks,” or
activity across the United States. Efforts to secure “nerds”). However, the term need not be nega-
the right to same-sex marriage have been stronger tive; for instance, clique is used to refer to close
in recent years, and recent court cases have been groups of friends like those commonly seen in
examining antigay marriage statutes across the high schools, organizations, and neighborhoods.
county. One of these cases will likely go to the This entry looks at some of the research related
Supreme Court in the coming years. to this phenomenon.
90 Cliques

Cliques as Social Hierarchies Related Constructs


In early research, Warner argued that cliques are Among adults and adolescents, cliques are charac-
intimate informal groups of friends that represent terized by high levels of conformity. Research sug-
a triumph of class over democratic values in the gests that cliques exemplify homogeneity in
American school system. According to this per- academic performance, showing remarkable con-
spective, cliques are part of the social structure sistency in academic achievement, substance use,
that prevent people of lower social status from and aggression. These findings seem to reaffirm
socializing with those of higher social status. At the popular conception that cliques are breeding
the same time, the clique functions to include grounds of peer pressure and conformity. However,
members of the higher class with others of their research suggests that conformity can also result
kind. In other words, the clique system ordinarily from selection processes, with similar individuals
helps reward those who are higher in class and choosing to associate with one another.
punish those of a lower class. High levels of conformity go hand in hand with
Subsequent research has focused on the forma- the tendency for cliques to be highly cohesive
tion of cliques among children and in organiza- groups. Cohesive groups tend to exert more social
tions, and on the impact of cliques within larger influence, and their members are typically more
social structures on individuals’ satisfaction with committed to the group. There is an inverse cor-
those structures. In development, adolescents from relation between group size and cohesiveness. As
all social classes form cliques. However, students more and more members join a group, it becomes
from middle-class backgrounds tend to switch more difficult to maintain cohesion. This is consis-
friendship groups with shifting interests, whereas tent with the characterization of cliques as typi-
students from working-class backgrounds place cally small groups.
more emphasis on loyalty and stability.
Furthermore, perhaps surprisingly, while posi- Richard J. Crisp and Angela T. Maitner
tive perceptions of self and other are important
determinants of interaction, personality character- See also Conformity; Group Cohesiveness
istics are unrelated to clique formation. In con-
trast, IQ, social class, and how favorably children
are perceived by their teachers predict clique for-
mation in classroom settings. Further Readings
Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. (1995). Dynamics of inclusion
and exclusion in preadolescent cliques. Social
Gender Differences Psychology Quarterly, 58, 145–162.
Brown, B. B., & Klute, C. (2003). Friendships, cliques,
Cliques may have different meanings and func-
and crowds. In M. D. Berzonsky & G. R. Adams
tions for adolescent boys and girls. In adolescence,
(Eds.), Blackwell handbook of adolescence
girls appear more interpersonally competent and
(pp. 330–348). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
are more concerned with intimacy and exclusivity
Henrich, C. C., Kuperminc, G. P., Sack, A., Blatt, S. J., &
in their friendships than are boys. These differ- Leadbeater, B. J. (2000). Characteristics and
ences are reflected in friendship patterns, with homogeneity of early adolescent friendship groups:
preadolescent girls tending to form exclusive dyads A comparison of male and female clique and
or triads, and boys forming larger, more loosely nonclique members. Applied Developmental Science,
knit groups. Being in a clique can have negative 4, 15–26.
effects on girls’ self-esteem, with the clique encour- Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (2001). Socialization in
aging expressions of jealousy and competition. In organizations and work groups. In M. E. Turner (Ed.),
contrast, there can also sometimes be positive Groups at work: Theory and research (pp. 69–112).
effects of clique membership for girls, with recent Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
research by Henrich and his colleagues reporting Warner, W. L. (1942). Educative effects of social status.
its helpful effects on peer relationships and school Environment and education. Chicago: University of
adjustment. Chicago.
Coalitions 91

only obtain the positive outcome if they join


Coalitions forces. For example, in a three-person group, the
members A, B, and C can be assigned two, three,
A coalition is defined as two or more individuals and four votes, respectively. They may then learn
or groups who act jointly to affect their own and that $100 will go to the members of any coalition
others’ outcomes. Coalitions, which can be found that controls at least five votes.
at every level of human organization, arise in situ-
ations where people are in conflict over the alloca-
tion of scarce outcomes but need each other to
Static Theories of Coalition Formation
reach an agreement. This entry begins by describ- The resources that people control are important in
ing the game approaches used to study coalition two distinct ways. First of all, the resources have a
formation, and then examines some of the predom- strategic function in that they determine people’s
inant theories used to explain coalition-building power position or bargaining strength. For exam-
behavior. ple, people’s resources may determine how many
alternatives they have to form a coalition. In gen-
eral, people or parties with many resources will
Coalition Games
have more opportunities to form a winning coali-
To understand coalition formation as a group pro- tion. Second, the distribution of resources also has
cess, social psychologists have adopted an approach a normative function in that they determine how
that has its roots in game theory. In this approach, parties prefer the outcomes of the coalition to be
parties (individuals or groups) are called players, distributed. For example, the minimum resource
and the format in which these players negotiate theory assumes that the coalition members will
about forming a coalition is called a coalition want to distribute the coalition outcomes in pro-
game. Moreover, the outcome that is obtained portion to their initial resources, such that mem-
when forming a coalition is usually a quantitative bers with twice as many resources should obtain
measure such as money or points. The two main twice as much from the coalition outcomes.
questions that are addressed in this research are The essence of most theories of coalition forma-
“Which players will be included in the coalition?” tion is that the selection of coalition partners and
and “How will they distribute the outcomes of the the distribution of the coalition outcomes across
coalition?” its members are strongly related. The preferred
Coalition games have been categorized in a distribution of coalition outcomes thus determines
number of ways. One distinction between coali- who people prefer as their coalition partner.
tion games is whether all coalitions that are Combined with the assumption that people want
allowed to form also yield the same reward or to maximize their own outcomes, minimum
whether each possible coalition yields a different resource theory for example predicts that people
reward. The first type of game is called a simple want to be part of a coalition that contains as few
game. The second type of game is called a multi- resources as possible. In the example above, with
valued game. Another distinction between coali- five votes needed for a winning coalition, this
tion games is whether the individual parties are means that the members with two and three votes
assigned resources or not. These resources are will team up because this would yield each of them
comparable to votes in a political convention. a higher share of the coalition reward than would
Resources are assigned in most simple games but teaming up with the member controlling five votes.
are not assigned in most multivalued games. The members of the coalition with two and three
The coalition games most often investigated by votes would obtain 40% and 60%, respectively.
social psychologists are simple games in which When teaming up with the member controlling
three or more people are each assigned a number four votes, their shares would be lower—
of resources (e.g., votes), and learn that they need 33% (2/6) and 43% (3/7), respectively. Controlling
a certain total number of resources to obtain a many resources may thus not always be an advan-
positive outcome. Because this number exceeds the tage, a finding that is also referred to as the
number of resources of any individual, they can strength-is-weakness effect.
92 Coalitions

Whereas minimum resource theory assumes follow. To solve the disagreement, members are
that people take the distribution of resources as a expected to subsequently meet each other half-
basis for the distribution, other theories stress the way. Bargaining theory thus sees coalition forma-
importance of alternative dimensions. Minimum tion as a dynamic bargaining process that starts
power theory assumes that people primarily focus off with disagreement, and after bargaining, results
on the power dimension (i.e., on whether members in settling and agreement. When members outside
are really needed to form a winning coalition). A a coalition make a competing offer to tempt the
person’s pivotal power is defined by determining coalition members to leave it and form a new
how many winning coalitions would turn into los- coalition, the situation becomes even more
ing coalitions if the member withdrew. This theory dynamic, and new distributions will emerge
assumes that members want to distribute coalition during the process.
outcomes in proportion to the power of their posi- A final theory to consider here is equal excess
tions. Based on reasoning similar to minimum theory, which places greater emphasis on bargain-
resource theory, this leads to the prediction that ing strength. This theory assumes that the distribu-
people want to be part of a coalition that is mini- tion that members of a coalition initially demand
mal in terms of total pivotal power. is determined by what they can reasonably expect
to receive in their best alternative coalition. The
excess that the current coalition can offer over this
Dynamic Theories of Coalition Formation
best alternative will then be divided equally.
Static theories assume that members agree on the Suppose, for example, that two members, A and B,
basis for distribution. This gives the impression bargain over how to distribute the coalition out-
that coalition formation is a process where mem- comes of $100, while knowing that the best alter-
bers take the dimension for distribution as a given native for A pays $50, and for B pays only $30.
and simply calculate which coalition will then Because the best alternatives of A and B add up
yield them the highest outcomes. Dynamic theories to $80, the total excess in this case would be
of coalition formation are more process oriented $20 ($100 – $80). The expected distribution after
and acknowledge that members may disagree an equal split of the excess would then be
about the dimension that should be used to distrib- $60 for A ($50 + $10) and $40 for B ($30 + $10).
ute coalition outcomes. By assuming that people Similar to the process of counteroffers that underlies
are mainly self-interested and that their primary bargaining theory, other members may subsequently
aim is to maximize own outcomes, dynamic theo- tempt the coalition members into forming a new
ries of coalition formation resemble static theories. coalition, which implies that standards for distri-
The main difference between these theories is that bution will change during the bargaining process.
dynamic theories also assume that self-interest col-
ors the selection of dimensions for distribution.
Empirical Support and
Bargaining theory assumes two possible distri-
Theoretical Limitations
bution rules; the proportionality rule (that also
forms the basis of minimum resource theory) and The emphasis of coalition research has tradition-
equal distribution. According to this latter rule, the ally been to determine which of the proposed theo-
outcomes of the coalition should be distributed ries most accurately provides the answers to the
equally to all members of the coalition. Self-interest questions of who will be the members of the win-
may shape the preference for distribution rules. ning coalition and how the coalition outcomes will
Group members with many resources will prefer to be distributed over the members. In general, the
distribute outcomes in proportion to the resources dynamic theories have obtained more empirical
each member possesses. Such a rule would be to support than the static theories. Situational char-
the disadvantage of members with few resources; acteristics and personal characteristics may, how-
they would obtain higher outcomes if the coalition ever, strongly affect how people bargain. Such
outcomes were distributed equally. factors may therefore affect the predictive accu-
Bargaining theory states that self-interested racy of the theories. For example, experienced
members may initially disagree on which rule to bargainers seem less likely than inexperienced
Cognitive Consistency 93

bargainers to distribute the coalition outcomes See also Cooperation and Competition; Distributive
equally, and women appear to show a greater pref- Justice; Group Formation; Mergers; Need for
erence for equality than do men. Belonging; Ostracism; Power
A related and more general issue concerns the
primary motivation of bargainers. The theories cited
Further Readings
above—whether static or dynamic—all agree on
one thing: The primary motivation is self-interest. Gamson, W. A. (1964). Experimental studies of coalition
Parties are first and foremost assumed to strive to formation. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in
maximize their own outcomes, and this in the end experimental social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 81–110).
determines which coalitions will be formed and New York: Academic Press.
how the coalition outcomes will be distributed to Kahan, J. P., & Rapoport, A. (1984). Theories of
the coalition members. This focus on self-interest coalition formation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
fits with the game-theoretic foundations of these Komorita, S. S. (1984). Coalition bargaining. In
theories and research on coalition formation. L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
However, social psychology also acknowledges psychology (Vol. 18, pp. 183–245). New York:
motives other than self-interest. Academic Press.
As social beings, we also care for the other Murnighan, J. K. (1978). Models of coalition behavior:
Game theoretic, social psychological, and political
people’s outcomes. The social utility model of
perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 1130–1153.
coalition formation has formalized this broader
Thibaut, J., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social
perspective on human motivation by distinguish-
psychology of groups. New York: John Wiley.
ing fairness as a separate motivator. The basic
Van Beest, I., & Van Dijk, E. (2007). Self-interest and
tenet of the model is that people assign a positive fairness in coalition formation: A social utility
value to both self-interest and fairness, but that approach to understanding partner selection and
situational and personal characteristics may affect payoff allocations in groups. European Review of
the weights of each of these motives. With this Social Psychology, 18, 132–174.
model, it is now also possible to explain why
sometimes people want to include others in a coali-
tion even if the coalition would be winning only if
these others were left out. Self-interest alone could
not explain such behavior, because coalition mem-
Cognitive Consistency
bers obtain higher outcomes if they share the coali-
tion payoff among few members rather than Cognitive consistency theory encompasses a broad
among many members. People may, however, con- group of theoretical statements whose central core
sider it to be unfair if others are left out. This view is that people prefer consonance among their cog-
accords with the notion that people are reluctant nitions, thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. These
to exclude and ostracize others. People with a theories seek to explain individuals’ discomfort
more prosocial motivation appear especially sensi- with inconsistency in their social lives. Although
tive to what happens to those who are excluded. theories of cognitive consistency initially focused
In a similar vein, research has shown that it on individuals as the unit of analysis, research has
matters whether outcomes are positive or negative. recently shown that cognitive consistency is a cen-
Whereas most research on coalition formation has tral component of intergroup and intragroup rela-
focused on positive outcomes, some research has tionships as well. This entry looks at a precursor
studied how coalitions form when the winning theory and then examines the development of cog-
coalition can allocate a negative outcome and so nitive consistency theory and its application to
determine which parties have to pay. Because both groups and intergroup processes.
people assign a greater weight to fairness when
outcomes are negative, people are more likely to
Balance Theory
include all parties in the coalition agreement.
Most influential of the early cognitive consistency
Eric van Dijk and Ilja van Beest models was Fritz Heider’s balance theory. The
94 Cognitive Consistency

principle of psychological balance can be applied to or counterproductive (the opposite of their actual
any set of cognitions, but it is described most easily beliefs), the action of passing by without giving
as a set of relations between a reference person (P), would have logically followed. As things are, the
another person, perhaps a friend (O), and an atti- action is dissonant.
tude object (X). These relations were said to be Holding two or more inconsistent cognitions
balanced when they were consistent. For example, arouses the state of cognitive dissonance, which is
if P likes O and both P and O like the object X, the experienced as uncomfortable tension. This ten-
cognitions are said to be consistent or balanced. sion has drive-like properties and must be reduced.
However, if person P likes O but they differ in One of the major innovations of dissonance theory
their evaluation of X, then the relationships are compared to prior models of consistency such as
imbalanced or inconsistent. The perception of cog- balance theory, however, is that it speaks in terms
nitive inconsistency produces a strain toward bal- of magnitude. Most dissonance research does not
ance in which P attempts to restore consistency by compare how people respond to consonant and
changing his or her attitude toward the object X or dissonant relationships among cognitions, but
toward the friend O. The steak lover who is friends rather how they respond to cognitions that are dis-
with the vegetarian experiences tension whenever sonant to varying degrees.
their food preferences are discussed; as much as Perhaps the most famous study in dissonance
these two people like each other, there is tension research makes this point very well. Festinger and
over their food preferences and a drive to establish his colleague, J. Merrill Carlsmith, asked research
balance. participants to perform a series of boring tasks:
Much foundational research was conducted turning pegs clockwise, then turning them counter-
under the rubric of balance theory. Balanced rela- clockwise, taking the pegs out of the peg board,
tionships are viewed more positively than imbal- putting the pegs back into the board. After an
anced ones, imbalanced relationships cause more extended period, the experimenter thanked the par-
tension than balanced ones, and there is a desire to ticipants, telling them that the task was completed.
bring imbalanced relations into balance. But bal- The study was about expectations and perfor-
ance theory had very little to say about the charac- mance, he said, and some participants had been
teristics of P, O, and X that would make imbalance told that the task was interesting and exciting,
most troubling or about the methods people would while others had been given no expectation. This
use to attempt to restore balance to dissonant rela- explanation of the study’s purpose was false, but it
tionships. It was in part to address this void that, was a necessary component of the real experiment.
in the late 1950s, there arose a new theory: cogni- The experimenter then said that the research assis-
tive dissonance. tant who was supposed to tell the next participant
that this dull, boring task was actually interesting
and exciting had failed to arrive. Would the par-
Cognitive Dissonance
ticipant be willing to help out and take the assis-
In 1957, Leon Festinger published A Theory of tant’s place?
Cognitive Dissonance. In some ways, dissonance The participant knew that the task was actually
theory is similar to balance theory. The state of boring and dull and that it was generally wrong to
cognitive dissonance occurs when people believe lie to people to raise their hopes. However, the
that two of their psychological representations are experimenter was doing important work and was
inconsistent with each other. Put another way, a even offering to pay the participant for this rela-
pair of cognitions is inconsistent if one cognition tively trivial task. Almost all participants agreed to
follows from the obverse of the other. For example, lie to the waiting stranger (actually a research
some people believe that they should give money assistant), and they then rated the pleasantness of
to the poor but refuse to give change to someone the peg-turning task. The researchers were inter-
who asks for it. These two cognitions are disso- ested in how participants who were highly paid to
nant because not giving alms follows from the lie rated the study compared to those who were
obverse of these people’s belief. Had they believed poorly paid. They found that those paid $20 to tell
that giving money to the poor was either wasteful the lie rated the study as having been more boring
Cognitive Consistency 95

than those only paid $1. This counterintuitive discussion group (which was intentionally made as
finding was well explained by dissonance theory: boring as possible) was in fact interesting.
Those paid $1 had less justification for lying to After having been made to suffer so intensely,
the waiting stranger and thus more need to dis- participants who had read lurid words to this
tort their impressions of the task to match their stranger needed to justify their effort by claiming
attitude-inconsistent statement. that the experience had been worth it. Their dislike
This experimental paradigm was later refined of the discussion group was in conflict with the
and simplified into an “induced compliance” effort they had expended to enter it, and they
method. In this method, participants are persuaded resolved this dissonance by changing their impres-
to make a counterattitudinal statement under con- sion of the group to be more consistent with their
ditions in which (1) they believe they are free to effort. They came to like the discussion better and
refuse (i.e., there are no prohibitively large induce- to like the group members better than those who
ments or punishments for refusal) and (2) the had not suffered to join the group. This work is
statement, if made, will have some aversive conse- relevant to hazing and initiation rituals, as making
quences. A classic example is advocating a noxious a group difficult to join apparently increases that
political position in an essay that will be shown to group’s attraction.
impressionable high school students. Compared to Other studies have shown that groups can alter
those who either are not free to refuse or believe the magnitude of cognitive dissonance and the
their actions will have no consequences or lesser direction that its resolution takes. One study
consequences, those who act under these condi- showed that people in groups can diffuse responsi-
tions come to agree more with their counterattitu- bility for their inconsistent actions and experience
dinal position. less dissonance. Individuals who were engaged in a
group project to write an essay inconsistent with
their attitude apparently convinced themselves that
Application to Groups
their own portion of the inconsistency was less
Shortly after the pioneering study described above, than that of the group, and therefore, they experi-
Elliot Aronson and Judson Mills applied disso- enced less discomfort as a result of the group proj-
nance theory to aspects of a social group. They ect. Another study in a group context showed that
tested whether an unlikable group would become people who act in a manner inconsistent with a
better liked if it had been difficult to join. They fundamental attitude of their group respond to
recruited female participants for a “sexual discus- inconsistency not in the usual manner of changing
sion group.” After an initial screening, participants their attitudes toward the issues, but rather by
were supposedly connected via speakers and micro- derogating the outgroup. For example, members
phones to a discussion of sexual behavior. In real- of the Republican Party in the United States who
ity, participants were made to listen to a tape of wrote an attitude-inconsistent essay advocating
people having a boring conversation about the the Democratic candidate for president resolved
secondary sexual characteristics of various insects. their inconsistency by derogating the outgroup—
Participants then rated how enjoyable the conver- that is, Democrats.
sation had been.
As in the peg-turning study, the key variable of
Intergroup Processes
interest was something unexpected. Before allow-
ing participants to listen to the discussion, the A more recent expansion of cognitive inconsistency
experimenters explained that many people found research has taken it in a direction relevant to inter-
discussions of sexual topics disturbing, and to show group processes. Working from both cognitive dis-
that they were comfortable discussing such topics, sonance theory and social identity theory—which
participants would have to read a list of words. For describes when and why individuals identify with,
some participants, the list was fairly mundane, and act as members of, social groups—researchers
for others, lurid and obscene. Those participants have begun to investigate what is termed vicarious
given the more extreme screening task were more dissonance. They have found that, in addition to
likely than the others to report that the subsequent experiencing personal cognitive dissonance when
96 Collaboration Technology

we make our own choices or act in ways that are Cognitive consistency research began in an indi-
counterattitudinal, we may also experience disso- vidual context, with occasional research studies
nance vicariously whenever members of our social examining people as members of social groups.
groups make choices or act in ways that are incon- This research on individuals focused on their suf-
sistent with their attitudes. Because we are in many fering from imbalanced relationships or dissonant
social groups, the opportunities to experience dis- cognitions as a function of mental representations
sonance on behalf of fellow group members are inside their heads. The current interest in social
numerous. The conceptual proposition that is at identity and cultural psychology, however, has led
the core of vicarious cognitive dissonance is that to an explosion of research examining consistency
dissonance brought about by the actions of a pro- from the perspective of the embeddedness of peo-
totypical member of a social group will lead us, as ple in their cultures and within the social groups
fellow group members, to change our attitudes, that comprise those cultures.
even though we have no direct responsibility for
the dissonance-inducing behavior. Joel Cooper and Matthew B. Kugler
In a typical vicarious dissonance study, a person See also Collective Self; Culture; Festinger, Leon; Social
is induced to evaluate speeches made by other Identity Theory
group members, typically members of the same
group or school as the participant. The participant
overhears the group member agree to make an Further Readings
attitude-inconsistent statement under conditions
that classically evoke dissonance. If the speech- Cooper, J. (2007). Cognitive dissonance: Fifty years of a
writer and the actual participant share a common classic theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
group identity, then the participant too experiences Cooper, J., & Hogg, M. A. (2007). Feeling the anguish of
others: A theory of vicarious dissonance. In M. P.
attitude change, despite having done nothing that
Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
should provoke dissonance. Moreover, the magni-
psychology (Vol. 39, pp. 359–403). San Diego, CA:
tude of the dissonance is a function of the strength
Academic Press.
of the social identification that participants feel
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance.
with their social group. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
This finding has broad implications for inter-
group processes. For example, in cultures that
emphasize group harmony and cohesiveness, the
experience of vicarious dissonance should be quite
high. One recent study in that area found that East Collaboration Technology
Asians, who often do not show personal dissonance
effects, strongly experienced vicarious dissonance The emergence of the Internet over the past 40
when a fellow group member acted in an inconsis- years has created a rich new arena for group activ-
tent manner. This finding was the latest in a series ity. Specifically, where physical collocation was
that has shown that, while personal inconsistency is once a requirement for both group membership
dissonance provoking primarily in Western cul- and communication, computer networks now
tures, interpersonal dissonance also occurs in col- create the opportunity to form and maintain
lectivist cultures such as those of Japan and Korea. groups independent of time and space. These are
A representative study conducted with Japanese often called distributed groups. Tools for support-
and Canadians of European descent showed that ing distributed group work and play are collec-
European participants experience dissonance when tively referred to as collaboration technology.
making difficult choices for themselves as individu- Early forms of collaboration technology emerged
als but that Japanese experienced dissonance only in the 1960s and 1970s as by-products of the first
when making choices for fellow group members. computer networks, such as the ARPAnet. Over
These results suggest that group-based dissonance time, many applications (e.g., electronic mail, or
processes may be universally pervasive and therefore e-mail) designed to support remote computer
relevant to a wide range of people and situations. operations came to be valuable on their own and
Collaboration Technology 97

have become nearly ubiquitous as communication Some “being there” technologies have achieved
tools. The emergence of the Internet in the 1980s, tremendous success and have come to define
and the explosion of network use associated with entirely new genres of interaction and affiliation.
the rise of the Web in the 1990s, have accelerated Consider, for example, adolescents’ use of text
the development of collaboration technology. messaging and the proliferation of “textese.”
Today, this technology spans a wide array of appli- Other forms of “being there” technology, such as
cations and services. Some of these would be rec- data conferencing, have received broad adoption
ognizable to the builders of the ARPAnet (e.g., in certain contexts, such as within corporations to
e-mail and instant messaging), but others probably support distributed work teams. And even more
could not have been imagined by them (e.g., vir- novel “being there” technologies, such as virtual
tual worlds, such as Second Life, and social net- worlds, in some cases have attracted large numbers
working sites, such as Facebook). of users (e.g., the hundreds of thousands using
The development, adoption, and use of collabo- Second Life) who have created vibrant “inworld”
ration technology raise key questions about group economies. Despite this growth, virtual worlds
processes and intergroup relations. Specifically, in remain outside the mainstream of collaboration
traditional groups, physical proximity plays a cen- technology use.
tral role in group formation, maintenance, and
communication. In contrast, distributed groups
“Beyond Being There” Technology
mediate their activity through collaboration tech-
nology. Therefore, the success of distributed groups An equally important thrust in collaboration tech-
depends, to a large extent, on the ability of col- nology is an emphasis on asynchronous interaction.
laboration technology to allow distributed groups This allows people who are not in the same place at
to perform as well, or maybe even better than, col- the same time to engage in a collaborative or collec-
located groups. Much of the history of collabora- tive activity. Landmark instances of “beyond being
tion technology can be understood as attempts there” technology include (a) applications to col-
either to mimic the benefits of collocation (“being lect, process, and distribute user-contributed
there” technology) or to exploit certain features of content—Wikipedia is the best known example;
collaboration technology to create new benefits (b) applications to exploit, analyze, and visualize
(“beyond being there” technology). links and ties among individuals, such as the social-
networking site Facebook; and (c) applications to
process and distill patterns from collective behav-
“Being There” Technology
ior, such as the pagerank algorithm used by Google
An important thrust in collaboration technology is to sort the results of searches in terms of the fre-
an emphasis on real-time interaction that allows quency of pointers to a site. More recent instances
distributed participants to engage in activity at a of “beyond being there” technology include appli-
distance as if they were collocated. Landmark cations to aggregate small increments of human
instances of “being there” technology include attention and labor into large-scale efforts, such as
(a) applications to share common views and con- von Ahn’s “games with a purpose” (e.g., tagging all
trol of documents and drawings, now common in extant images on the Web), Amazon’s Mechanical
the form of data conferencing tools such as WebEx; Turk, NASA’s “clickworkers” (e.g., classifying cra-
(b) applications that provide greater awareness of ters from photographs of the Martian surface), and
distant group members (e.g., “busy” or “away from “crowdsourcing” (e.g., attempting to harness exper-
desk”), now popular in the form of instant messag- tise that is dispersed and difficult to locate, such as
ing tools such as MSN Messenger; and (c) applica- use of the Innocentive Web site).
tions to see and hear distant group members, such Some “beyond being there” technologies have
as videoconferencing. More recent instances of achieved tremendous success and have come to
“being there” technology include virtual worlds define entirely new modes of production and work
such as Second Life, which provide simulated geog- organization, such as Wikipedia or open source
raphies and built environments in which individu- software projects. Similarly, pagerank and Google
als interact via computer-generated avatars. have redefined how people seek information—“to
98 Collective Guilt

google” is now a recognized verb form. Other systems, such as those used by Netflix and Amazon,
forms of “beyond being there” technology, such as depends on users rating or evaluating a sufficient
crowdsourcing, have also produced notable suc- number of movies or books. Motivating these con-
cesses. For example, Mechanical Turk was used to tributions involves system designs that reduce free
accelerate the search for Jim Grey, a famous com- riding. In particular, people are more likely to make
puter scientist who was lost at sea. Grey’s col- contributions when they feel that others, especially
leagues used Mechanical Turk to get thousands of similar others, are also making contributions. In the
volunteers to prescreen tens of thousands of satel- future, the design of these “choice architectures”
lite images of open ocean searching for evidence of will be as significant to the success of “beyond being
Grey’s boat. Figuring out how to use crowdsourc- there” technologies as the design of the underlying
ing to integrate closely coupled, cognitively com- technologies and interfaces.
plex work has proved more elusive.
Thomas A. Finholt

New Directions in See also Communication Networks; Computer-Mediated


Collaboration Technology Communication; Virtual/Internet Groups

Current research suggests important directions for


the development of the next generation of collabo- Further Readings
ration technologies. In terms of “being there” tech-
Bainbridge, W. S. (2007). The scientific research potential
nology, for example, continuing increases in network
of virtual worlds. Science, 317, 472–476.
bandwidth, combined with advances in video reso-
Beenen, G., Ling, K., Wang, X., Chang, K., Frankowski,
lution, have resulted in videoconferencing systems
D., Resnick, P., & Kraut, R. E. (2004). Using social
that show life-sized views of distant group members
psychology to motivate contributions to online
with sufficient clarity to reveal subtle nuances of communities. In Proceedings of ACM CSCW 2004
communication, such as gaze direction and body Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative
language. Researchers have known for some time Work (pp. 212–221). New York: ACM Press.
that users dislike videoconferencing due to the Finholt, T. A. (2002). Collaboratories. Annual Review of
fuzziness of remote images, poor audio quality, and Information Science and Technology, 36, 73–107.
“choppiness” in video and audio transmissions. Hollan, J., & Stornetta, S. (1992). Beyond being there. In
Modern systems, such as Cisco’s Telepresence, Proceedings of ACM CHI 1992 Conference on
address these concerns by combining high defini- Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 119–125).
tion video, spatially located audio (i.e., voices come New York: ACM Press.
from the direction of the speaker’s image on screen), Mark, G. (2002). Extreme collaboration.
and uniform room furnishings to create the illusion Communications of the ACM, 45, 89–93.
that distant group members are all together in the Newell, A., & Sproull, R. F. (1982). Computer networks:
same space. The success of these systems may Prospects for scientists. Science, 215, 843–852.
depend as much on their technical performance as Silberman, S. (2007). Inside the high tech hunt for a
it does on successful elaboration of group proce- missing Silicon Valley legend. Wired, 15. Retrieved
dures and practices to accommodate the systems. February 5, 2009 from http://www.wired.com/techbiz/
Specifically, scheduled use of videoconferencing people/magazine/15–08/ff_jimgray
(e.g., formal meetings) does not create opportuni- Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge:
ties for spontaneous encounters. By contrast, con- Improving decisions about health, wealth, and
tinuous video links between remote public spaces happiness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
do allow for chance meetings, which are an impor-
tant way of coordinating work.
In terms of “beyond being there” technology,
advances in productivity and performance will require Collective Guilt
a better understanding of what motivates individual
contributions to contribution-based production Guilt is an unpleasant emotional reaction that
systems. For instance, the success of recommender occurs with the perception of having committed
Collective Guilt 99

some type of moral violation. Historically, psy- against an outgroup. This produces a perceptual
chological research on guilt has focused on the shift from thinking of oneself in terms of “I” or
feelings of guilt that arise when people feel per- “me” toward thinking of oneself in terms of “we”
sonally responsible for causing illegitimate harm or “us.” In this way, the self can be linked with
to others. Recent research has revealed that people past or present ingroup harm-doing. For instance,
can have similar feelings of guilt when their group contemporary Americans can certainly claim that
is perceived to be responsible for illegitimately they personally did not participate in slavery or the
harming members of another group. This collec- colonization of indigenous peoples. Nonetheless,
tive guilt results from sharing a social identity when contemporary Americans think about them-
with others whose actions represent a threat to the selves as part of the historical legacy, from which
positivity of that identity. Thus even though oth- they may even benefit in the present, they can
ers were responsible for the harm or moral viola- experience collective guilt based on the past actions
tion, and the individual is not directly implicated of the larger “we.”
in the harm-doing, the individual can still have The second factor that influences the extent to
feelings of collective guilt. which collective guilt is experienced is collective
A wide range of intergroup inequalities can responsibility. In order to feel collective guilt, it is
elicit these feelings, from the receipt of unearned important for people to perceive their group as
benefits or privileges that members of other groups responsible for the harm done to the outgroup.
do not receive to more extreme forms of harm- One basis for attributing responsibility to a group
doing, including genocide. Given the aversive is perceiving that group as having benefited from
nature of collective guilt, people are motivated to the harm done to the outgroup. For instance, exist-
avoid or decrease its intensity. There are several ing racial inequality can be framed in terms of the
methods for doing so; these generally involve dis- consequences that it has for outgroup members, or
torting perceptions of the ingroup’s behavior (e.g., in terms of the consequences that it has for ingroup
minimizing the extent of harm done, denying the members. Thus researchers framed racial inequal-
harmful actions entirely) or justifying its actions ity in the United States in terms of Black disadvan-
(e.g., because the victims deserved their outcomes tage or White privilege. The framing of racial
or the ingroup had legitimate reasons for causing inequality as “Black disadvantage” allowed White
the harm it inflicted). Use of all of these options participants to feel less collectively responsible for
can help to maintain a positive social identity the harm done to the outgroup, which lessened
when even the gravest of ingroup harm-doing is collective guilt. Framing racial inequality as “White
confronted. privilege” increased White participants’ feelings of
Despite its aversive nature, feeling collective collective responsibility for the harm done to the
guilt can lead to positive social outcomes, such as outgroup, leading to greater collective guilt.
reducing negative attitudes toward the harmed The third factor that influences the experience of
outgroup and promoting intergroup reconciliation collective guilt is the perception that the ingroup’s
through apologies or reparations. These benefits actions toward the outgroup were illegitimate.
are particularly likely when repairing the harm Collective guilt requires that people see their
done is perceived to be not too difficult or costly, ingroup’s actions as unjustified, immoral, or wrong
so that correcting the wrongs committed by the based on existing ingroup norms. Because it is
ingroup seems both feasible and worthwhile. threatening to conclude that one’s group has acted
unjustly, people will employ a number of strategies
that are aimed at justifying the ingroup’s actions. To
What Causes Collective Guilt?
the extent that the ingroup’s harmful actions can
Several factors influence whether, and how much, be interpreted as legitimate and reflecting noble
collective guilt is experienced in response to remind- intentions—especially those that can be construed
ers of ingroup harm-doing. First, one’s social iden- as protecting the ingroup from harm—collective
tity must be salient. For one to experience collective guilt for even the most severe harm will be lessened.
guilt, one must perceive oneself as a member of a The experience of collective guilt is not simply a
social group that has committed illegitimate harm function of empathy for those harmed. Rather, the
100 Collective Guilt

experience of collective guilt reflects the distress Israel; such claims undermine feelings of collective
that is aroused when the ingroup’s morality is guilt. The same is true of Americans. When
questioned. Two studies have directly tested Americans are reminded of the 9/11 terrorist
whether empathy for the victims or distress about attacks on the United States, they are less likely to
one’s own social identity determines the extent to feel collective guilt for subsequent harm done to
which collective guilt is experienced. In these stud- Iraqis—U.S. actions in Iraq are seen as a legitimate
ies, perceiving the ingroup (i.e., men) as responsible response to al Qaeda-sponsored terrorism. Another
for the inequality that harms the outgroup (i.e., way to legitimize the ingroup’s harmful treatment
women) was found to increase collective guilt via of outgroups is to dehumanize the victims. By por-
self-focused distress and not by empathy for the traying members of outgroups whom we harm as
outgroup. This not only discounts the view of guilt either animals or machines, we can make our
as stemming from empathy, but it also supports ingroup’s behavior appear natural and even neces-
the notion that guilt is a self-conscious emotion. sary. Such perceptions allow people to escape feeling
collective guilt for harm-doing that is inten­tionally
inflicted.
What Reduces Collective Guilt?
Fourth, people can focus on the benefits of the
There are numerous means by which collective guilt harm done to outgroup members, rather than the
can be undermined. For this reason, collective guilt costs. For instance, Dutch research participants
has been described as a fragile emotion. Collective who read a benevolent description of their ingroup’s
guilt can be lessened in at least four ways. historical colonization of Indonesia (e.g., “they
First, people can deny the ingroup’s harmful built roads and schools”) experienced less collec-
actions, or downplay the severity of the harm done tive guilt than those who read a less benevolent
to an outgroup. Perceiving fewer victims or even description of their ingroup’s colonization (e.g.,
fewer ingroup members as involved in the harm- “they annexed land and killed natives”). When the
doing can lessen collective guilt. harmful treatment of the outgroup is portrayed as
Second, people can deny the ingroup’s responsi- turning out positively, then people can escape col-
bility for harm done to an outgroup. For example, lective guilt for their group’s harmful actions.
men could blame women who are raped by sug- People’s feeling collective guilt may not be suf-
gesting that women somehow encourage the per- ficient to translate into their reconciliation with
petrators, whether through their appearance or the outgroup and future positive behavior toward
behavior. By blaming female victims for the harm outgroup members. In order to initiate action,
done to them, men can escape feeling any collec- people must also feel some amount of efficacy to
tive guilt for their group’s harmful treatment of bring about desired changes and believe that it is
women. Moreover, people can deny the existence possible to make up for the harm done. For
of collective responsibility, choosing instead to instance, when men were led to believe that the
claim that only individuals are responsible for their difficulty of making reparations to women for the
behavior. For instance, American soldiers who harm done to them (e.g., the economic disadvan-
served in Vietnam could deny collective responsi- tages women have suffered due to institutional-
bility for the harm done to Vietnamese civilians by ized sexism) would be very costly, collective guilt
suggesting that such harm was committed by a few was lower than when the cost was deemed to be
bad ingroup members and those alone should be more moderate and therefore potentially manage-
held responsible. When individual members of the able. Thus, when people believe they can bring
ingroup are singled out for blame, then people can about change that will result in more positive rela-
escape feeling collective guilt for the group’s harm- tions between groups, feelings of collective guilt
ful actions. are most likely to encourage reparations for past
Third, people can claim that their group’s harm.
behavior was legitimate. For instance, Jewish Although collective guilt is an aversive emotion,
research participants have reported that Israel’s it is predictive of a number of positive social con-
harm to Palestinians is justified because it is in sequences. A variety of studies have shown that the
response to Palestinian terrorist attacks against more White Americans feel collective guilt for
Collective Induction 101

racial inequality, the more they support affirmative An Experimental Procedure for Research
action programs for the harmed group. Feelings of
In studies of collective induction, group members
collective guilt also predict support for apologies
are gathered around a table and informed that
to the harmed group, as well as financial repara-
their objective is to induce a rule based on stan-
tions. Perhaps most important, feeling collective
dard playing cards with four suits (clubs, dia-
guilt for racial inequality can decrease racism.
monds, hearts, and spades) of 13 cards each. Aces
Nyla R. Branscombe and Mark A. Ferguson are given the numerical value 1, deuces 2, and so
on up to kings, which are given the value of 13.
See also Intergroup Emotions Theory; Self-Categorization The rule may be based on any of the characteristics
Theory; Social Identity Theory of the cards, such as suit (e.g., “diamonds”) or
number (e.g., “eights”), or any combination of
numerical and logical operations on suit and num-
Further Readings ber (e.g., “red queens,” “even diamonds alternate
Barkan, E. (2000). The guilt of nations: Restitution and with odd spades,” “red queens or black jacks”).
negotiating historical injustices. New York: Norton. The experimenter then places a card that is an
Branscombe, N. R. (2004). A social psychological process example of the rule (e.g., the eight of diamonds for
perspective on collective guilt. In N. R. Branscombe & the rule “diamonds”) on the table.
B. Doosje (Eds.), Collective guilt: International Each trial consists of three stages: (1) each
perspectives (pp. 320–334). New York: Cambridge group member records his or her hypothesis about
University Press. the rule, (2) the group proposes a hypothesis, and
Branscombe, N. R., & Miron, A. M. (2004). Interpreting (3) the group plays any one of the 52 cards. As
the ingroup’s negative actions toward another group: cards are played, the experimenter arranges them
Emotional reactions to appraised harm. In L. Z. on the table in a way that provides information
Tiedens & C. W. Leach (Eds.), The social life of about what the correct rule might be (with cards
emotions (pp. 314–335). New York: Cambridge that are examples of the rule placed beside one
University Press. another, and cards that are not examples placed
Wohl, M. J. A., Branscombe, N. R., & Klar, Y. (2006).
below the last card played). This procedure contin-
Collective guilt: Emotional reactions when one’s group
ues for 10 trials, at which point the group makes a
has done wrong or been wronged. European Review
final hypothesis and is informed whether it is cor-
of Social Psychology, 17, 1–37.
rect or incorrect.

Collective Induction Collective Versus Individual Induction


Groups solve these rule-learning problems better
Collective induction is the cooperative search for than the average individual (e.g., 20 four-person
rules and principles. For example, members of a groups versus 20 individuals). Beyond this, groups
scientific research team observe patterns and regu- have been compared to the best of an equivalent
larities in some domain (e.g., biology), propose a number of individuals (e.g., 20 four-person groups
theory to explain them, derive hypotheses from versus the best 20 of 80 individuals). In this
the theory, and use experiments or controlled research, the group or individual solves the prob-
observations to test the hypotheses. If the results lem from one array of hypotheses and card plays
of their research support the hypotheses, team (as described above), or from two, three, four, or
members become more confident in their theory. five arrays of hypotheses and card plays. In all
If the results fail to support the hypotheses, team cases, card plays can be viewed as “evidence”
members revise or reject their theory. This entry regarding the correct rule. Including two or more
discusses research on collective induction that arrays is useful, because this group models the
models the behavior of scientific research teams procedure of a team of scientists conducting two
and similar cooperative groups, such as auditing or more simultaneous experiments in a particular
teams, air crash investigators, and art experts. domain (e.g., synthesizing a compound).
102 Collective Induction

With one, two, three, or four arrays of hypoth- hypotheses are either plausible (consistent with the
eses and card plays, groups perform at the level of evidence to that point) or “nonplausible” (incon-
the second-best individuals. With five arrays, how- sistent with the evidence to that point). Research
ever, groups perform at the level of the best indi- indicates that groups use an interesting and orderly
viduals. This is interesting, because it is relatively process of choosing group hypotheses from mem-
uncommon for groups to perform at this level. bers’ individual hypotheses. If at least two group
Studies varying both the number of hypotheses members propose correct and/or plausible hypoth-
and the number of card plays (or evidence) demon- eses, the group selects one of them. However, if
strate that card plays are relatively more important only one member or no member proposes a correct
than hypotheses in helping groups determine the or plausible hypothesis, the group selects among
correct rule. Although group members are gener- all the proposed hypotheses (correct, plausible, or
ally able to generate and propose an adequate nonplausible). If a majority of members proposes
number of hypotheses, they need sufficient evi- the same hypothesis, the group chooses this hypoth-
dence to test and evaluate them. esis, but if there is no majority, the group takes
turns in choosing each member’s hypothesis over
Simultaneous Collective successive trials. On approximately 20% of the
and Individual Induction trials, the group proposes an emergent hypothesis
that no member has proposed, but these emergent
Many scientific research teams conduct experi-
hypotheses are rarely correct.
ments and also exchange hypotheses and/or evi-
If one group member proposes the correct
dence with independent individual scientists who
hypothesis on a trial, the final group hypothesis
are working on the same problem. For example, a
will be correct with a very high probability (.99),
team of virologists at the Centers for Disease
but if no group member proposes the correct
Control may exchange hypotheses and experimen-
hypothesis, the final group hypothesis will be cor-
tal results with independent researchers in other
rect with a very low probability (.01). Thus, groups
laboratories. In research on such simultaneous col-
are remarkably good at recognizing and adopting
lective and individual induction, a group and one
a correct hypothesis if it is proposed by a member,
or more individuals solved the same problem at the
but they are remarkably poor at forming correct
same pace in separate rooms.
emergent hypotheses that no group member has
In four conditions, the group and individual(s)
proposed.
(1) exchanged hypotheses and card plays on each
trial, (2) exchanged hypotheses only, (3) exchanged
card plays only, or (4) solved the problem indepen- Conclusion
dently without exchange. Groups performed better
Research on collective induction yields several gen-
than the individuals, and both exchange of hypoth-
eral conclusions. Collective induction is superior to
eses and exchange of card plays improved group
the induction of the average individual and equal
and individual performance. Moreover, group per-
to the induction of the best individual when the
formance was improved relatively more by
group is given a large amount of information from
exchange of card plays, whereas individual perfor-
many arrays of hypotheses and card plays. Group
mance was improved relatively more by exchange
induction benefits more from increasing evidence
of hypotheses. This again shows that groups are
than from increasing hypotheses. Groups influence
able to generate sufficient numbers of hypotheses
individuals more than individuals influence groups
but need evidence to test and evaluate them.
in simultaneous collective and individual induc-
Additional analyses indicated that, across succes-
tion. Groups follow an orderly process in forming
sive pairs of trials, groups influenced individuals
hypotheses from the hypotheses of their members.
more than individuals influenced groups.
And finally, groups rarely form correct emergent
hypotheses that no member has proposed, but
The Processes of Collective Induction
groups can eventually recognize and adopt correct
After the correct rule is chosen by the experimenter hypotheses if they are proposed by a member.
and an initial example is designated, all proposed These results increase our understanding of how
Collective Movements and Protest 103

cooperative groups, such as scientific research and urbanization had brought increasing numbers
teams, auditing teams, air crash investigators, and of people together in new ways and added new
art experts, engage in collective induction. tactics and modes of organization to long familiar
forms of popular protest. The emergence of demo-
Patrick R. Laughlin cratic politics impelled the educated and well-off
to try to understand the thinking of the large num-
See also Group Performance; Group Problem Solving and
Decision Making bers of their fellow citizens who were acquiring the
right to vote, and to understand popular participa-
tion in transgressive as well as routinized forms of
Further Readings political action.
One very influential interpretation of popular
Laughlin, P. R. (1996). Group decision making and
collective action came to be known as the “collec-
collective induction. In E. Witte & J. H. Davis (Eds.),
tive behavior school” by virtue of its emphasis on
Understanding group behavior: Vol. 1. Consensual
the ways in which the actions of people in collec-
action by small groups (pp. 61–80). Mahwah, NJ:
tives seemed to defy what one would expect of a
Lawrence Erlbaum.
rational individual. This approach was developed
Laughlin, P. R. (1999). Collective induction: Twelve
postulates. Organizational Behavior and Human
by several important writers in late-19th-century
Decision Processes, 80, 50–69. France and continued by U.S. writers well into the
20th century. Writers in this tradition saw unusual
fads, senseless panics, riotous crowds, and even
social revolutions not merely as separate curiosi-
Collective Movements ties but as phenomena with common properties
subject to common explanation. Some writers in
and Protest this tradition stressed the ways in which the inter-
actions of people could lead to a surrender of the
The study of collective movements and protest has capacity for realistic assessment of the conse-
roots in the 19th century and has long been part quences of action. In this line of thought, group
of the social sciences curriculum. In the 1970s, members would uncritically imitate each other,
new theoretical approaches and new empirical buoyed up by group approval, with collectively
methodologies revitalized the field. The next several irrational results. This variant made social psycho-
decades witnessed an efflorescence of research by logical processes central to their explanations. The
practitioners of various social science disciplines— French writer Gabriel Tarde was one of the foun-
especially sociology, but also political science, dational figures with his stress on the sources and
history, and anthropology. Some researchers consequence of “contagion” as otherwise puzzling
focused on the internal dynamics of collective actions spread from one person to another. In the
mobilizations, including interpersonal processes; United States, a major figure was Herbert Blumer,
others addressed the ways broad social and politi- who classified crowds into distinctive varieties and
cal contexts shaped movements and were shaped for whom crowd behavior went through a succes-
by them. Building on the scholarly advances of the sion of lawlike stages.
previous 30 years, researchers in the early 21st A second approach was to stress the significance
century have been raising new questions. of social context. A very common argument in this
tradition was that social transformations in the
modern world, especially rural to urban migration,
Historical Background
industrialization, and access to mass communica-
Social and political transformation in the recent tions, broke down the traditions that had held
past and anticipated future led Americans and people in their conservative grip. Consequently,
Europeans in the 19th century to reflect on collec- they disrupted the networks of family and village
tive movements and social protest. The social sci- that had socialized the young and monitored the
ences emerged at this time, in the wake of the actions of adults, and exposed people to an unfamil-
American and French Revolutions. Industrialization iar social world in the growing towns and the new
104 Collective Movements and Protest

routines of an industrializing order. As people irrationality was intuitively appealing to those


moved from village to town, such processes both afraid of riotous crowds, bemused by odd fash-
removed the inhibitions that had been built into ions and fads, saddened by the erosion of valued
rural life and exposed the urban newcomers to mes- traditions, and/or appalled by revolutions. The
sages from manipulative elites that they were unable rise of fascist movements after World War I
to evaluate. The combined result of such processes seemed to lend additional credence to this picture,
was dangerously irrational behavior. This argument since these movements were seen as both irratio-
about modernizing contexts as a source of collective nal and popularly supported, and since they were
irrationalism could be combined with the social commonly understood as originating in modern,
psychological properties of collectives by contend- mass societies battered by the shock of war fol-
ing that those shorn from the familiar and custom- lowed by economic crises. The general notion that
ary order were prone to seek companionship in collective behavior was a type of temporary psy-
mass organization and to listen to leaders promising chopathology remained strong.
simple solutions to the ills of modern life. Pioneering
French sociologist Émile Durkheim influentially New Evidence and New Ideas
described modernizing change in Europe as a break-
down of customary norms and practices. The During the 1960s, the accumulation of a wide vari-
notion of breakdown seemed to several generations ety of new evidence called into question some of the
of social scientists to explain why contemporary prevailing theories, and new theoretical approaches
Europe and North America fostered apparently were soon developed. Over the next several decades,
irrational movements despite the advances of sci- there was an explosive growth in research in the
ence and technology. In the 1960s, American soci- field. Good research into the participants in the so-
ologist Neil Smelser synthesized this line of thinking called ghetto disturbances in many U.S. cities
in his book Theory of Collective Behavior. strongly indicated that the events tended to involve
Other approaches were also being developed, long-time residents of those cities, not newcomers
both in theory and in empirical observation. torn loose from some other way of life. New
Students of European labor movements, including research by social historians of France and England
Marxists as well as others, thought at least some revealed that participants in many urban distur-
kinds of protest derived from accurate understand- bances in the 18th and 19th centuries were people
ings of material conditions on the part of workers without criminal records, with stable occupations,
in the modern industrial sectors. Investigations and with families. Research by social historians and
into labor movements sometimes drew upon con- anthropologists on migrants from countryside to
siderable empirical research both on the contexts town in the past and present showed strong pro-
of work and on such collective actions as strikes. pensities to maintain ties to village life rather than
Labor movements acquired a rather special posi- to experience complete ruptures. Protest began to
tion for some observers. This was especially so in seem a form of political action rather than a col-
Europe, where it became common to distinguish lectively induced bout of irrationality, more to be
two classes of collective phenomena, the “social” thought of among other political phenomena than
movement and the “national” movement, the for- in the company of fads and crazes, and deserving of
mer stressing actors whose common class interests more scrutiny by political scientists and less scru-
infused their self-representation, identity, and tiny by students of mental aberration.
action and the latter acting on the basis of real or At about the same time, social scientists were
imagined commonalities of history, language, cul- suggesting four new models for the explanation of
ture, and geography. This mode of classification protest, drawing on extensive empirical investiga-
suggested on the one hand that labor movements tion for support and building conceptual bridges
were the core of social movement studies, and on to other fields of social research.
the other that nationalism was the proper subject
Resource Mobilization
matter of other scholars with other tools.
Nonetheless, the general sense that there was To the pioneers of this approach, John McCarthy
a range of phenomena that suggested collective and Meyer Zald, the core actors in protest and
Collective Movements and Protest 105

other forms of collective action were organizations action seemed explicable as evolving organizational
engaged in the strategic deployment of available strategy. When Suzanne Staggenborg and David
resources, rather than individuals committed to Meyer analyzed social conflicts through the lens of
irrational actions. Such organizations had actual movement–countermovement interaction, they
and potential access to such resources as the time were drawing on this young, lively theoretical tra-
of supporters of organizational goals or the funds dition. Social movement organizations could be
supplied by sympathizers. They might be con- seen as one kind of contender for influence, along
strained in various ways by resource deficits; an with the interest groups that had long been noted
organization that could rely on the time of pas- by students of democracy. The concept of “oppor-
sionate enthusiasts might well make different stra- tunity” became central to such interpretations,
tegic decisions from one that relied on donations since movements were seen as adapting to available
from cooler sympathizers. One organization might possibilities. Through the political process model,
launch street protests and another hire lobbyists. social movement theory was able to draw on ideas
One might develop mechanisms to arouse and sus- developed by political scientists.
tain commitment to highly risky personal actions,
while another recruited professional specialists in
New Social Movement (NSM) Theory
making fundraising appeals. McCarthy and Zald
paid a good deal of attention to the ways in which Scholars, at first particularly in Europe, were
movement organizations might permit a profes- paying attention to what protesters were demand-
sionalized stratum to make a career in the move- ing and noted a reduced emphasis on the class-
ment. The ways in which movements might based themes with which certain branches of social
“frame” issues and actions could be seen by adher- movement scholarship had been preoccupied. A
ents of this model as rational strategies for induc- variety of new concerns seemed to dominate recent
ing commitments of resources from actual or protest politics—feminism, human rights, critiques
potential contributors of time or money or as of consumer culture, concerns over alternate
devices to achieve various goals in dealing with lifestyles—and these concerns were often carried
opponents, other movement organizations, or the by less hierarchically structured and less centrally
public. Through the resource mobilization model, controlled organizations than the long-familiar
social movement theory was able to appropriate unions and socialist parties, and with significant
ideas drawn from the sociology of organizations. middle-class participation. The new movements
seemed as much about expressing identities as
about satisfying interests, and as much aimed at
Political Process
altering cultures as at altering the distribution of
Emerging at about the same time, the political material well-being, often describing themselves as
process model looked at movement organizations something new. Scholars like Alain Touraine and
as engaged in strategic interactions with their envi- Alberto Melucci saw the explanation in broad
ronment, including potential allies and opponents, changes in European social context after World
governments, and the public. Movement organiza- War II. The achievement of working-class prosper-
tions were seen as modifying their strategies and ity in postfascist Europe not only reduced the
tactics in light of the responses of their environ- intensity of the class-based conflicts of the past,
ments and of their successes and failures in attain- but also incorporated working-class politics within
ing goals. For organizations that were engaged in the framework of securely democratic political
extremely contentious causes or that embraced for- processes and extensive social welfare institutions.
bidden tactics, simply surviving in the face of oppo- But new issues emerged and energized a different
nents’ counteraction was likely to be among the kind of social movement activism on behalf of
key goals. As researchers came to chart the ways in other goals.
which organizations altered their actions in response Critics who took a broader historical or geo-
to success and failure and to other actions by allies graphical view were quick to point out that the
and opponents, phenomena that had to earlier gen- sorts of identity issues that postwar new social
erations seemed instances of irrational belief and movement (NSM) theorists held to be new could be
106 Collective Movements and Protest

found in the working-class mobilizations of the Since it is evident that there is a great deal of
industrializing era or that environmental issues had social movement activism, either these dilemmas
emerged not only among the well-off citizens of are in practice solved in some way or the issues are
prosperous democracies but in the slums of places poorly posed. Some social movement scholars
like Rio de Janeiro. While some social movement essentially accept the agenda of trying to explain
scholars tended to be simply dismissive of NSM how rational individuals come to participate in
theorists, however, their attention to identity, cul- social movement activism. Some argue that there
ture, the diversity of participants, and the ways are many ways of resolving these dilemmas and
goals and organizational forms shift in response to that participants do not invariably experience
long-term broad changes in economy and polity them as a problem to be overcome. (If, for exam-
were drawn on by many others, even if specific ple, people experience the solidarity of shared
claims about novelty and geography proved empir- danger as a reward, then the apparent cost of risky
ically untenable. In addition, through new social collective action is simply an observer’s error.)
movement theory, the study of movements was able Through collective action theory, whether
to draw on ideas from the sociology of culture. embraced, modified, or rejected, social movement
scholars came to refine their sense of the rewards
and costs of action.
Collective Action
This fourth innovation took the rational indi-
The Standard Agenda
vidual actor as central. The “collective action
problem,” as understood by economists like Since the 1960s, these four approaches, separately
Mancur Olson, was explaining how individual or in combination, have informed the interpreta-
human beings could manage to come together for tion of data gathered by an increasingly numerous
collective goals. This was initially only incidentally body of researchers using a wide array of empirical
a question of how they could come together in materials. Archival research, statistical analyses,
social movement activism in particular. sample surveys, ethnographies, and other tech-
This could be thought of as several separable niques have been used in the study of social move-
problems. ments. Even more than by the embrace of new
theories, social movement scholarship for the past
•• The free rider problem. Why should a rational several decades has been distinguished from that of
individual participate in collective action for a the 19th century and earlier 20th century by draw-
collective objective (even if that individual were ing on superior research.
to benefit from success), rather than sit back and Together these approaches constituted an
let others take the risks and pay the costs? agenda for the study of protest movements that
•• The problem of trust. In circumstances under became the main line of approach for the next
which the participation of many would be several decades. The standard agenda saw move-
essential to achievement of the goal, why should ments as episodes in which actors of various sorts
a rational individual trust those essential others developed strategies and tactics that made the best
to participate, especially if the risks of failure of available resources, reacted to threats or seized
would be to leave one significantly less well off opportunities they for the most part did not them-
than before (for example, dead, imprisoned, fired, selves create, and struggled to frame issues in
or poorer)? This can be formulated in terms of ways that would energize supporters, attract
the well-known game prisoner’s dilemma. allies, neutralize opponents, appeal to powerhold-
•• The problem of personal efficacy. To the extent ers, or justify their actions to themselves. Different
that one could trust that many others would elements of this agenda appealed variously to
participate, why would one pay the costs and scholars committed to “structuralist,” “cultural-
run the risks of participation unless one thought ist,” or “rationalist” modes of explanation, who
that one’s own addition to the collective action invested much energy debating whose mode of
would be the crucial difference between success explanation was more fundamental. For those of
and failure? a more structuralist bent, a good explanation
Collective Movements and Protest 107

would be one that would delineate the institutions Expanded Geography


that endowed various actors with differing inter-
In addition to shining the light of scholarship
ests and resources; culturalists tried to grasp pre-
into the past of the countries that became wealthy
vailing values within which movement activists
democracies, scholars took note of the great geo-
maneuvered to demonstrate the worthiness of
graphic concentration of high-quality empirical
their purposes and methods; and rationalists tried
research within the wealthier parts of the world.
to show how actors endowed with particular
These were places where data collection was easier,
interests would hit on particular strategies to
and they were the places social movement scholars
defend and advance them.
lived and worked. But this meant a restriction on
Other researchers, however, found the stan-
the range of social contexts within which protest
dard agenda too constraining and in increasing
and collective action more generally were being
numbers were urging the field to move into new
studied. Beginning in the 1970s in Mediterranean
directions.
Europe, the greatest wave of democratization in
history opened up new opportunities to conduct
Recent Directions research and posed an array of interesting com-
Expanded History parative questions for students of protest and col-
lective action. Spanish and Portuguese scholars
Increased attention to the interactions of move-
explored the role of protest mobilizations in those
ments with their contexts, including other organi-
countries. The role of social movements in the ter-
zations and especially governments, moved beyond
mination of military regimes in the 1980s was one
short-term studies of particular episodes or cam-
important focus of new study in Latin America.
paigns to long-term historical change. Movement
With the development of the ensuing democratiz-
scholars explored the ways patterns of mobiliza-
ing regimes, students of that region’s protest pat-
tion, expression of demands, targets, tactics, and
terns were examining which sorts of movements,
modes of movement organization changed in
grievances, and actions were continuing those of
response to large social, economic, and political
the military period and which were new. They
changes like urbanization, the growth of effective
were addressing as well which aspects of mobiliza-
states, democratization, or, in the late 20th cen-
tions grew weaker in the democratic period. With
tury, globalization. Charles Tilly argued that there
the fall of European Communist regimes in 1989
are “repertoires of contention” that are available
and beyond, the democratic transition in South
to participants in conflict and that these repertoires
Africa of the 1990s, and democratic movements
are formed at particular historical junctures. The
and transitions in Asia, similar sorts of questions
“demonstration,” for example, entered the reper-
were framing research in those places as well.
toire of contention in Europe in the early 19th
Those aiming at large theoretical statements were
century and then spread far and wide. So the ways
coming to have a much greater range of well-
in which people engage in conflict tends to be situ-
researched cases on which to draw, and this was as
ated within a limited array of culturally available
much a challenge to generalization as it was a spur
forms, although at important moments new forms
to new theory. Some scholars were arguing for a
are invented or old forms stop being used.
broader geographical extension still, bringing
Historians have made enormous contributions to
together into a comparative framework the forms
the study of particular forms, such as the “food
of social movement activism of wealthy democra-
riot” that was of great importance in English and
cies and the forms of protest characteristic of non-
French history from the 17th century into the 19th
democratic regimes.
century. By extending the terrain of research back
before the era of democracy, it became possible to
Transnational Processes
conduct empirical research into how subsequent
democratization reshaped social conflict. These One rather special aspect of the geographic
forays into the past by social movement scholars expansion of protest studies was attention to
dovetailed with the movement among historians to movements that themselves moved on a large geo-
write “history from below.” graphic stage. Students of protest and collective
108 Collective Movements and Protest

action were paying a lot of attention to movements people into protest, studying recruitment into a
that in some sense crossed borders, which could very wide variety of organizations and causes,
come in many guises: from peaceful protest carried out in public view to
violent acts prepared by clandestine organizations.
•• participants traveling to distant sites for Participants were interviewed while demonstra-
concerted action tions were taking place, in prison after arrest, or
•• organizational ties that crossed national frontiers years after various events took place. Researchers
•• protesters targeting institutions of transnational collected participants’ accounts of the processes
governance like the International Monetary Fund that led them to activism and of their lives while
or the World Bank they were activists. This research suggested that
•• immigrants becoming involved as participants or recruitment was frequently a network phenome-
as objects of protest non. People often went to their first meeting or
•• transnational institutions having an impact on first demonstration because a friend was going.
national politics (which became increasingly Although people sometimes chose movements out
common within the European Union) of deep affinity for a cause, it also often happened
•• transnational identities playing a conspicuous that deep ideological affinity only developed as a
role in social conflict (for example, in Islamicist consequence, not a cause, of participation.
movements) Particularly in the subset of causes known as “high
•• protesters in one part of the world learning from risk activism,” participation itself led to increased
protesters far off through vivid television footage trust in fellow activists and increased distance
and exchanging ideas through e-mail and the from previous acquaintances outside the move-
Internet ment. Activist groups could thus develop distinc-
tive subcultures.
Bringing Back Emotion
Beyond Organizations and Beyond the State
In rejecting the older collective behavior model
of irrational action induced by collective processes, Following the standard agenda, a great deal of
some scholars were suggesting that the field had research had accumulated on the ways in which
gone too far in the direction of seeing movement organizations recruited members, crafted strategies
organizations and individual participants engaged and tactics, and dealt with each other in forming
in consciously calculated behavior toward speci- alliances, competing for resources, and opposing
fied ends. Some scholars were now arguing that one another as they struggled to shape state poli-
protest and activism were as much matters of the cies. Thus the movement organization and the
heart as of the head. In considering the claims of state became central concepts for the analysis of
injustice that so often were a part of movement protest. Some researchers aimed at reconceptual-
life, could one do without taking into account situ- izing the study of protest in ways that made one or
ations that elicit anger, disgust, and humiliation? both of these concepts less central.
Could one explain why one appeal succeeds in
Movement Subcultures and Milieu
mobilizing participation and another does not
without taking into account the ways in which Some scholars, like David Meyer, suggested that
shame can become pride? Could one understand there were movement subcultures formed around
how social activism was sustained over time with- adherents of change, who took their propensity to
out considering the pleasure social activists some- protest from cause to cause, and from organization
times take in the fellowship formed in working to organization, and whose careers as protesters
together for a common purpose? and activists were an important object of study.
The formation and sustenance of such subcultures
seemed a new subject matter not exhausted by the
Microprocesses in Context
study of the strategies of movement organization.
Researchers were using varied methodologies to Others suggested that one could identify venues
address the interpersonal mechanisms that brought where activists, potential activists, and nonactivists
Collective Movements and Protest 109

met and created protest-oriented places that func- •• Relevant data. Since data on policy change are
tioned as sources of protest identity and recruitment, generally going to be quite different from data
yet were distinguishable from the organizations on movement actions, the incorporation of
into which they fed. Particular bars, cafes, con- appropriate data will often mean a very much
certs, parks, or neighborhoods could be places larger research endeavor.
strongly flavored by certain social and political
attitudes and outlooks, shaping and nurturing pro- Despite these difficulties, scholars were recogniz-
test but readily overlooked by an exclusive focus ing the study of movement impact as a necessary
on organizations that acted. addition to the research agenda.

Reconsidering the State


Conclusion
Some held that the same sorts of processes that
protesters deployed in relation to states occurred Four decades after new theory and superior empir-
in relation to other defined sites of hierarchical ical research challenged the kinds of analysis that
power. Others went further, suggesting that if the had developed in the 19th and early 20th centu-
structures that sustain social hierarchies are located ries, the study of protest, collective action, and
inside each of us through beliefs taken in as chil- social movements is livelier than ever, moving in
dren or fostered by social interactions as adults, new directions, and with the kinds of disagree-
then one could think of action directed at changing ments among practitioners that, in raising basic
such attitudes, socialization processes, and interac- questions, inspires new research.
tions as crucial sites of change. In this perspective, John Markoff
a group of people meeting in each others’ homes
for the purpose of mutual support in inner change See also Civil Rights Movement; Crowds; Free Riding;
could be thought of as participating in social activ- Ideology; Multiple Identities; Nationalism and
ism even if no publicly visible protest against pub- Patriotism; Organizations; Relative Deprivation;
lic policies ensued. The field of protest studies, in Virtual/Internet Groups
fact, has significant disagreement over how to
define a social movement. For some, the existence
of publicly visible actions in interaction with a Further Readings
state is critical, but for others any concerted action,
Kriesi, H., Koopmans, R., Duyvendak, J. W., & Giugni,
whether publicly visible or hidden away some-
M. G. (1995). New social movements in western
where, and whether directed at a state or not, Europe: A comparative analysis. Minneapolis:
constitutes a sign of social movement activism. University of Minnesota Press.
Lichbach, M. I. (1995). The rebel’s dilemma. Ann Arbor:
Consequences University of Michigan Press.
McAdam, D., McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (Eds.).
While much of protest and movement activism
(1996). Comparative perspectives on social
involves claims of acting on behalf of change, the movements: Political opportunities, mobilizing
study of the effectiveness of collective action in structures, and cultural framings. Cambridge, UK:
bringing about change has emerged as a relatively Cambridge University Press.
neglected area of research. The difficulties are of McAdam, D., Tarrow, S., & Tilly, C. (2001). Dynamics
several sorts: of contention. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
•• Conceptual. What sorts of change should be Meyer, D. S. (2007). The politics of protest: Social
looked for? And on what time scale? movements in America. New York: Oxford University
•• Analytic. Since movements are generally Press.
happening at the same time as many other Meyer, D. S., & Staggenborg, S. (1996). Movements,
things, demonstrating the precise impact that countermovements, and the structure of political
movements have had on policy changes can be a opportunity. American Journal of Sociology, 101,
difficult task. 1628–1660.
110 Collective Self

Smelser, N. (1963). Theory of collective behavior. scholars have argued that there are two kinds of
New York: Free Press. self, the individual self and the collective self. Each
Smith, J. (2008). Social movements for global democracy. has its peculiar body of self-knowledge and both
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. provide a means of self-definition.
Tarrow, S. (2005). The new transnational activism. The individual self is organized around a set of
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. personal attributes that, like a fingerprint, are
Tilly, C. (2008). Contentious performances. Cambridge, unique and differentiate a person (“I”) from all
UK: Cambridge University Press. others (“you”). So, for example, if I am kind but
Zald, M. N., & McCarthy, J. D. (Eds.). (1987). Social
fastidious, hardworking but temperamental, shy
movements in an organizational society. New
but reliable, then such attributes are what make
Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
me a different person from you. In contrast, the
collective self is constructed from attributes that
are shared with other members of the ingroup. Its
function is to differentiate the person from others
Collective Self who are not group members, thus distinguishing
“we” from “they.”
Collective self is a term used in social psychology People belong to a variety of groups, some of
to refer to those aspects of self that derive from which are important in defining a number of col-
the groups a person identifies with or belongs to lective selves, such as ethnicity, race, gender, and
as a member. When the collective self is active, a nationality. One’s membership in groups can vary
person construes the self as “we” based on attri- in salience at different times. If someone is Swiss
butes that are shared with other group members, and crosses into Italy, it is highly likely that nation-
rather than simply as “I” based on attributes that ality, in this case based on attributes shared with
are uniquely personal. Viewed historically, this others who are Swiss, will be highly accessible (i.e.,
psychological focus on a social self rather than an easily brought to mind).
individual self has been slow in coming, though By learning to identify with a particular group,
the concept has long been recognized in sociology. a person acquires a specific collective self and a set
The collective self taps into group membership of group norms that can guide how to think and
and is activated when a particular group becomes act appropriately.
salient at a moment in time. When this happens,
the person draws on a relevant group membership
Collective Action
to make inferences of self-worth and sometimes to
take action in concert with others. Research and Because the individual self and the collective self
theory in this field is at the intersection point of are aspects of the self-concept, both are located
social psychology and sociology, though there within the person and function at that level. Unlike
have been some recent contributions within polit- the individual self, the collective self provides the
ical psychology. person with a mechanism for responding to a
social situation in unison with others. It can both
motivate and guide behavior in one-on-one encoun-
Two Kinds of Self
ters with members of outgroups, or when a person
The idea that the self-concept develops exclusively is acting as part of a larger group (e.g., as in a
from individual experience held sway in social psy- political demonstration). The collective self can
chology for many years, ignoring much of what therefore serve as a platform for collective action,
early sociologists such as G. H. Mead and Charles which social identity theory (SIT) equates with
Cooley had to say about the interplay between indi- social change.
viduals and their society, and about how the self is As conceived by Henri Tajfel, social change is
socially constructed. More recently, social psychol- predicated on a belief system in which intergroup
ogists have come to accept that in characterizing boundaries are thought to be impermeable to
the self as a purely individual entity a great deal of “passing,” for example, the Hindu caste system in
psychological meaning is lost. Many contemporary India. As a result, a lower status individual can
Collective Self 111

improve his or her self-esteem defined by caste associates developed this theory to bring ideology
only by challenging the legitimacy of the higher to center stage—an ideology that favors the status
status group’s position. Whether or not some form quo, even when this conflicts with the interests of
of group action is possible depends on how the the individual or of the group. Ironically, lower
status quo (the existing status and power hierar- status group members sometimes subscribe to this
chy) is perceived. Is it secure or insecure? If lower ideology even when it legitimizes their current
status individuals think it is stable, legitimate, and status and maintains their position of disadvan-
therefore secure, it may be impossible to imagine a tage. Members of a subordinate group may do
different world—an alternative social structure. this to reduce uncertainty by assuming that it is
In such circumstances there is no path for col- better to live in disadvantage and be certain of
lective action. However, there are socially creative one’s place than to challenge the status quo and
strategies that groups can use to foster a positive enter unknown territory.
self-image for the collective self:
Collective Self-Esteem and Ethnicity
•• Subordinate groups can make intergroup
comparisons on novel or unorthodox dimensions A group-based definition of the self can lead to
that favor their group. For example, in a French depressed self-esteem, for example, among mem-
study by Gerard Lemaine, children took part in bers of disadvantaged minorities. Studies of young
an intergroup competition to build the best hut. children’s ethnic identity in the United States and
Lemaine found that when groups were provided elsewhere have provided supporting evidence. A
with poor building materials, and therefore series of American studies of ethnic choices made
could not win, they became creative by by children from the late 1930s to the early 1960s
emphasizing how good a garden they had made. showed that
•• Groups can try to change the consensual value
attached to ingroup characteristics (e.g., •• White children identified with and preferred to
scientists with insufficient funds to purchase be with White children;
sophisticated equipment can highlight the •• Black children identified with and preferred to
conceptual advances of their work). be with White children;
•• They can compare themselves favorably with •• Black children had lower self-esteem.
other groups also of lower status (e.g., working-
class Hispanics pinpointing ways in which they In 1954, the eminent Black American researcher
are superior to working-class Whites). Kenneth Clark appeared as a witness in the land-
mark United States Supreme Court case Brown v.
The contexts in which collective action occurs Board of Education. He testified that generations
require a belief system with distinctive features. of Black children’s self-esteem had been exten-
First, lower status people need to believe that the sively damaged over time. Flowing from this case,
status quo is illegitimate, unstable, and thus inse- the legal decision to outlaw school segregation was
cure. Second, they need to have cognitive alterna- instrumental in legitimizing the civil rights move-
tives (i.e., conceive of a different and more ment in the United States.
promising social order). If both of these conditions Clark’s research was criticized for its assump-
are met, direct social competition is likely. This tion that doll preferences reflected children’s self-
manifests itself in actual intergroup conflict. Such esteem levels. However, Graham Vaughan found
conflict could take several forms, including civil two stable trends in international ethnic identity
rights action, political lobbying, public demonstra- studies that are consistent with Clark’s conclu-
tions, and even terrorism, revolution, or war. As sions: (1) ethnic minorities that are disadvantaged
Stephen Reicher has observed, social movements (educationally, economically, politically) are typi-
typically emerge under these circumstances. fied by lowered self-esteem when intergroup com-
SIT incorporates both social psychological con- parisons are made and (2) social change in the
cepts and social structural (macro) concepts, as status relationship between ethnic groups leads to
does system justification theory. John Jost and his a significant improvement in minority pride and
112 Collectivism/Individualism

individuals’ feelings of self-worth. By 1970, the


ethnic choices made by Black children in the Collectivism/Individualism
United States reflected the phenomenon of “Black
Is Beautiful” that followed the success of the Collectivism is a societal orientation toward promot-
American Black Power movement in the late ing the well-being of the collective, whereas individu-
1960s. There was a similar trend in a series of New alism is a societal orientation toward the well-being
Zealand studies of cohorts tested in different time of individuals. Collectivism and individualism are
periods. Young Maori children switched from pro- important concepts in group processes and inter-
White choices to pro-Maori choices against the group relations because these concepts capture two
backdrop of a Brown Power movement. fundamental motivations of homo sapiens: “getting
Findings from ethnic identity research testify to along” and “getting ahead.” Because humans are
the power of the collective self as a focal point in social animals living in a group that often has com-
the processes of social movements and social plicated internal structures (e.g., an organization),
change. Collective self-esteem can be linked to psy- we must get along with other group members while
chological health. A heightened sense of pride in simultaneously trying to get ahead of them.
one’s ethnicity or gender, or any other valued Collectivism and individualism can be understood
social category, can contribute significantly to a as two significant ways to deal with these two fun-
positive view of oneself defined in group terms. damental human needs at the level of society. Society
consists of multiple groups that compete with one
Graham M. Vaughan another for resources for survival. Thus, in addition
to an individual’s need for survival, the group has its
See also Civil Rights Movement; Collective Movements
own need for survival. Collectivism can then be con-
and Protest; Collectivism/Individualism; Ethnicity; Self-
sidered a solution that attempts to maximize har-
Esteem; Social Identity Theory; Symbolic
Interactionism; System Justification Theory
mony and solidarity among group members (i.e.,
“getting along”), while minimizing the potentially
destructive effect on the group as a whole of egotistic
behaviors on the part of individual group members.
Further Readings
In contrast, individualism can be considered as a
Brewer, M. B., & Gardner, W. (1996). Who is this “we”? solution that attempts to maximize the pursuit of
Levels of collective identity and self representations. self-interest (i.e., “getting ahead”), while minimizing
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, the oppressive effect of the group on individuals.
83–93. When faced with competition from other groups,
Gaertner, L., Sedikides, C., Vevea, J. L., & Iuzzini, J. a group is likely to adopt a collectivistic approach
(2002). The “I,” the “we,” and the “when”: A meta- because intergroup competition requires a degree
analysis of motivational primacy in self-definition. of solidarity among members within the group.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83,
When a group does not face significant competi-
574–591.
tion from other groups and has sufficient resources
Jost, J. T., Kay, A. C., & Thorisdottir, H. (Eds.). (2009).
to share, it should be more receptive to an indi-
Social and psychological bases of ideology and system
vidualistic approach. Ultimately, collectivism and
justification. New York: Oxford University Press.
Reicher, S. D. (2001). The psychology of crowd
individualism are two adaptive approaches to the
dynamics. In M. A. Hogg & R. S. Tindale (Eds.),
prevailing intra- and intergroup conditions. This
Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Group entry looks at the history of these two social orien-
processes (pp. 182–207). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. tations and describes different ways that each may
Sedikides, C., & Brewer, M. B. (Eds.). (2001). Individual be expressed in society.
self, relational self, and collective self. Philadelphia:
Psychology Press.
Historical Background
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory
of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel The Confucian system, which developed in China
(Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations around the 5th century BCE, represents a collec-
(pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. tivistic solution to the potential tension between
Collectivism/Individualism 113

“getting along” and “getting ahead.” Under this provided, over the past two decades, powerful
system, harmony within five cardinal relation- frameworks for understanding cross-national vari-
ships is emphasized: father–son, husband–wife, ations in the self-concept, interpersonal relation-
elder–younger, emperor–subject, and friend– ships, and various other social behaviors. However,
friend. The emphasis is placed on understanding these constructs have also been subject to some
one’s roles, fulfilling one’s duties, and showing criticism, including the charge of conceptual ambi-
deference to authority. These, in turn, strategically guity and problems over the existence of various
reduce within-group competition, smooth inter- subtypes. Most notably, Daphna Oyserman and
personal relationships within a group, and main- her colleagues published a meta-analysis (i.e.,
tain group solidarity. quantitative analysis of all the published studies on
The Greek philosophers of the 5th century BCE self-reported individualism–collectivism) in 2002,
were some of the earliest individualist philoso- which concluded that the difference in individual-
phers. Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics is mainly ism–collectivism of North Americans and East
concerned with how an individual can live a virtu- Asians is negligible. Since the publication of the
ous life and attain the highest possible human goal meta-analysis by Oyserman and her colleagues,
of eudaimonia, or personal well-being. This is in many prominent researchers in the field have
stark contrast with the Confucian emphasis on called for alternative conceptual frameworks and
societal well-being and how to create a nation methodologies to be adopted in cultural and cross-
characterized by cohesion and interpersonal har- cultural psychology. However, it should be also
mony. Although some Western philosophers have noted that when response sets are statistically con-
endorsed a form of collectivism (e.g., Jean-Jacques trolled, self-reported individualism scores were
Rousseau, Karl Marx, Émile Durkheim), many highly correlated with Hofstede’s original results.
other Western philosophers explicitly endorse An additional critique of individualism–collec-
various forms of individualism (e.g., Adam Smith, tivism research revolves around its relatively static
John Locke, Thomas Hobbes). view of culture. With globalization and increasing
Geert Hofstede’s 1980 book, Culture’s international immigration, there is substantial cul-
Consequences, ignited an interest in collectivism and tural fusion. Ronald Inglehart and his colleagues
individualism in psychology. In this book, Hofstede collected survey data on values and attitudes from
examined work-related values of IBM workers from around the world for the last 20 years, concluding
40 nations and identified four important cultural that, in many parts of the world, people’s values
dimensions: “masculinity,” “power distance,” have shifted from traditional attitudes (akin to col-
“uncertainty avoidance,” and “individualism.” In lectivism) to self-expression (a feature of individu-
this survey, the United States ranked ahead of all alism) as a reflection of modernization. However,
other nations on individualism. In the 1980s, Harry some of the cross-national differences have
Triandis and his colleagues conducted numerous remained relatively unchanged over the last two
cross-cultural studies comparing the United States decades. For instance, although Japanese have
with so-called collectivist nations such as Japan, become more individualistic during that time, so
China, and Korea, and legitimized the study of col- have Americans. Thus, the magnitude of cultural
lectivism and individualism in academic psychology. difference between Japan and America has not
In 1991, two prominent social psychologists, decreased.
Hazel Markus and Shinobu Kitayama, published
an influential paper that specified systematic psy-
Varieties of Collectivism
chological differences between collectivist and
individualist nations in terms of people’s self- The Confucian style of collectivism is primarily
concept, motivation, cognition, and emotion. This concerned with how to maintain harmonious rela-
work rendered collectivism and individualism one tionships at various dyadic levels. Because of its
of the most popular research topics in social psy- emphasis on dyadic relationships, the idea is that
chology in the 1990s. group members tend to have strong ties with other
Two related constructs, individualism–collectivism members, and their interpersonal relationships are
and independent and interdependent self have as important as each member’s relationship with
114 Collectivism/Individualism

the group as a whole. Whereas the Confucian style and experienced. Because harmony is emphasized,
of collectivism emphasizes hierarchy and dyadic similarity rather than uniqueness is valued. The
relationships (i.e., hierarchical and relational col- private self—its desires, opinions, inclinations, and
lectivism), other forms of collectivism emphasize so on—may be kept cleanly separate from and seen
collective actions and cooperation in general (i.e., as irrelevant to public interactions (e.g., in Japan,
horizontal and group collectivism). this is expressed by two terms: honne, the private
For instance, in an agricultural society that self, and tatemae, the public self).
requires an irrigation system, a large number of The context-dependent nature of the self is
members have to work together to accomplish one apparent here. While an individualist might make a
common goal. In this context, one’s identification context-independent claim such as “I am hard-
with the entire group becomes more important working,” a collectivist might say “As a teacher, I
than dyadic relationships between group members. am outgoing, but as a husband, I am quiet.” The
In addition, in a situation in which collective self in collectivist societies is experienced as part of
action and cooperation are required, a large pro- a network of social roles and obligations, and
portion of group members share the same status, friendship is no exception. Opportunities to create
and therefore, relationships are not as hierarchical friendships tend to be fewer in collectivist societies,
as a Confucian-style collective organization. Sports as they are created based on preexisting networks.
teams (e.g., football, soccer) represent this type of In fact, friendships are not “created” so much as
collectivism. The distinction between relational “given” in collectivist societies such as Ghana. In
and group collectivism is similar to Ferdinand contrast to individualist cultures, where it is more
Tönnies’s distinction between a small village-like common and desirable to have many friendships,
community (gemeinschaft) and an association- with various levels of personal intimacy, friendships
based society (gesellschaft). in collectivist cultures tend to be more binding,
In relational collectivism, relationships are the with a variety of obligations. The depth and obliga-
self’s defining features, and either personal goals tion of collectivist friendship also limits the sheer
are deemphasized in favor of interdependent goals number of friends one can maintain. In Ghana,
or no distinction between personal goals and sig- most people view having many friends as “foolish”
nificant others’ goals is made. Similarly, in group or naïve, given the impossible level of commitment
collectivism, the fluidity of the self in its relation- and strain that they place on one’s resources.
ship to the group as a whole is expressed as a sense As indicated above, collectivist groups tend to
of sharing a common fate with other group mem- be less permeable: They are difficult to freely enter
bers and in the belief that the experience of one and exit. As people’s social ties are relatively set,
ingroup member affects all other members of the social goals focus on maintaining the relationships
group. The fulfillment of one’s collective responsi- one already has instead of forming new relation-
bility by promoting the interest of one’s group or ships. Consequently, people in a collectivist society
significant others is of primary concern in both tend to draw a sharper distinction between mem-
forms of collectivism. The emphasis on group bers of one’s ingroup and strangers than people in
goals and interdependence is associated with an individualist society, where strangers are
greater exertion of effort and higher levels of coop- regarded as potential future friends. Indeed, in col-
eration among group members, who not only lectivist cultures, the emphasis on harmony, coop-
identify closely with their groups but also regard eration, and cohesion tends to be limited to
their individual contributions as vital to their ingroup relationships. Interactions with strangers
groups’ accomplishments and overall well-being. and outgroup members may be characterized by a
Instead of striving explicitly to actualize a “true” lack of concern or even hostility and discrimi-
self, collectivist individuals strive to cultivate and nation during intergroup conflicts. Furthermore,
maintain deep bonds with significant others and/or differences between ingroup and outgroup com-
important ingroup members. This involves main- munication have been noted in collectivist societ-
taining harmony and adjusting to others’ (or the ies, where generally speaking communication with
group’s) needs, which in turn affects the type of emo- ingroup members is more effective than communi-
tions (e.g., calm, contentment) that are idealized cation with outgroup members.
Collectivism/Individualism 115

Another area where collectivists pay greater boundary. Personal goals are defining characteristics
attention to distinctions between an ingroup and of this autonomous entity and may be in opposition
outgroup than do individualists is in the allocation to the social world. In such cultures, importance is
of available resources. Given that relationships placed on self-reliance, personal cultivation, per-
with ingroup members are of great importance, sonal choice, uniqueness, and self-expression.
material resources tend to be shared equally within Like collectivism, individualism manifests in
collectivist groups: A tribe’s catch can be distrib- different forms. One common typology that has
uted and shared among its members; a dish bought been used to describe different types of individual-
at a restaurant can be distributed among those at ism is horizontal versus vertical individualism.
the table. However, when the task involves distrib- Both types of individualism are characterized by
uting material resources to strangers, decisions are the emphasis on the autonomy and uniqueness of
based on the recipient’s level of contribution, which individuals. However, horizontal individualism
is more typical of exchanges among individualists. tends to stress equality between individuals,
Collectivists also behave more like individualists in whereas vertical individualism emphasizes compe-
favoring contribution over membership when goals tition and being the best in comparison to others.
of productivity and competition take precedence Although some forms of individualism are con-
over goals of interdependence and solidarity. sidered antagonistic toward society (e.g., rugged
In terms of work-related behaviors within col- individualism), the pursuit of self-interest can be
lectivist contexts, working with ingroup members beneficial both to individuals and society. For
tends to result in better performance than working instance, in the 19th century Alexis de Tocqueville
alone. Individual performance of collectivists is observed that Americans, despite their individual-
also enhanced when respected ingroup members ism, help strangers much more willingly than do
are involved in assigning specific goals and tasks. the French, precisely because Americans under-
Compared to their individualist counterparts, lead- stand that many others do not have anyone else to
ers and superiors in collectivist cultures are more rely on; he called this “the doctrine of self-interest
likely to provide nurturance and guidance to sub- properly understood.” In other words, when self-
ordinates, who are expected to show loyalty and interest is pursued with moderation, individualism
devotion in return. does not necessarily interfere with the well-being
Collectivism also has important implications for of society.
group decision making and conflict resolution. For The emphasis on the development and expres-
example, the focus on maintaining ingroup cohe- sion of one’s unique, “true” self constitutes a cor-
sion and harmony means that relationships among nerstone of the formation and experience of
ingroup members may be valued more than the friendship in individualistic societies. According to
tasks themselves during the decision-making pro- most forms of individualism described above,
cess. Also, greater attention is paid to the goals and friendship involves the meeting of two distinct and
concerns of the collective than to the needs of indi- fundamentally separate beings, whose connection
vidual members. Conflicts within the ingroup tend must be created via a mutual sharing of unique
to be avoided whenever possible. When such con- and authentic selves and/or common interests.
flicts do arise, attempts are made to reach agree- Romantic companionship should also be a celebra-
ment or consensus within the group. This often tion and exploration of exciting and unique traits
requires willingness on the part of group members in this context. With different friends reserved for
to modify their own preferences in order to con- the sharing of specific interests, friendships in such
form to the group’s position. societies also become more compartmentalized.
True individualist friendship, like the true self,
should be genuine and spontaneous. Friendships
Varieties of Individualism
should feature spontaneous acts of affection,
The defining characteristic of individualism is the should not arise out of obligation, and may involve
priority it accords to individual goals over group but should not be predicated on practical or mate-
goals. This worldview features the individual as a rial support. Friendships have varying degrees of
self-contained entity with a well-defined self–other intimacy, and those that require self-censorship or
116 Collectivism/Individualism

too much obligation can easily be deemphasized or connections between people are loose, task con-
even left. This ideal is reflected in the high cerns prevail over relationship concerns when mak-
American divorce rate. Indeed, many Americans ing group decisions. Without having to worry as
show a permissive, noncommittal view of love. much about harmony and cohesion within the
Relationships with groups and associations group, members tend to be more outspoken about
also reflect the above model of low-cost, low- their feelings, attitudes, and opinions. It is consid-
commitment, personally expressive relationships. ered acceptable for individuals to place personal
Groups in individualist cultures are more perme- goals ahead of group goals. When disagreements
able. That is, they are easy to join and leave, arise within the group, maintaining one’s own views
requiring little obligation (e.g., a book discussion and problem solving via open and direct communi-
group). With high intergroup mobility, there are cation is seen as helpful, whereas conforming to
many potential ingroups, and it is relatively easy to group pressure is considered a personal weakness.
stay with those that meet one’s personal needs and In addition to particular views toward friend-
leave those that do not. Intergroup mobility is sup- ships and groups, individualism has been associ-
ported by Americans’ high level of general trust in ated with specific emotional experiences. For
others, and this facilitates social exploration and example, pride, a socially disengaging emotion,
making friends. clearly sets the self apart from surrounding others.
With the primary focus of attention on the pur- Among individualists, positive emotions are
suit of personal goals, needs, and desires, the dis- desired, regardless of whether they are socially
tinction between ingroup and outgroup does not engaging or disengaging. This is not the case
take on the same degree of importance in individu- among collectivists, because pride signals a disrup-
alist cultures as it does in collectivist cultures. In tion in harmony with others.
other words, people who are individualist oriented The ethos of individualism is liberating to the
tend to treat friends and strangers more equally. individual, but it is also associated with anxiety and
Their communication with ingroups and out- identity crises. In the United States, for instance,
groups tends to be similar, not varying much in increased personal freedom to choose one’s occu-
overall effectiveness. Also, because individualists pation, spouse, and system of values over the last
experience greater opportunities and need to inter- 50 years has been accompanied by an increased
act with outgroup others, they tend to be more anxiety; this has been referred to as the age of the
skilled than collectivists are at communicating “me” generation and as an “age of anxiety.”
with strangers. Young Americans report experiencing significant
Research also indicates that an individualist ori- pressures to actualize their potential and define
entation is associated with a phenomenon known their identity, and they are plagued by the impend-
as social loafing, which refers to the tendency of ing fears and guilt of failing to choose the best
individuals to exert less effort when working as opportunities available to them. In this sense, the
part of a group than when working alone. The personal autonomy and independence that is cen-
higher occurrence of social loafing among individ- tral to American individualism has its downside.
ualists may partly be due to the greater value being
placed on personal outcomes as opposed to collec- Shigehiro Oishi and Jenny C. Su
tive welfare. It is also known that individualists
See also Collective Self; Common-Identity/Common-Bond
perform better when they are given a choice in the
Groups; Culture; Diversity; Group Socialization;
type of tasks that they will undertake.
Group Structure
Individualism also affects how important group
decisions, such as the allocation of material
resources, are made. In most situations, people in
individualist cultures are inclined to allocate rewards Further Readings
based on group members’ individual contributions Brewer, M. B., & Chen, Y.-R. (2007). Where (who) are
rather than their membership because, in their collectives in collectivism? Toward conceptual
view, group achievement reflects the sum of clarification of individualism and collectivism.
individual inputs. In individualist cultures, where Psychological Review, 114, 133–151.
Common-Identity/Common-Bond Groups 117

Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: Background


International differences in work-related values.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. The distinction between common-identity and
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the common-bond groups is reflected in the two pri-
self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and mary and competing approaches to the study of
motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253. groups within social psychology. Twentieth-century
Nisbett, R. E. (2003). The geography of thought: How social psychology heavily emphasized the study of
Asians and Westerners think differently . . . and why. the individual. The focus of much of this research
New York: Free Press. was how the person impacted his or her group.
Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M. Kurt Lewin defined a group as the sum of its inter-
(2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: personal bonds, implying that attraction to group
Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta- members forms the basis for groups. The social
analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3–72. identity perspective challenged this definition,
Schimmack, U., Oishi, S., & Diener, E. (2005). arguing that groups can be formed under minimal
Individualism: A valid and important dimension of circumstances and members can identify with
cultural differences. Personality and Social Psychology groups based on shared attributes. Thus, the social
Review, 9, 17–31. identity perspective asserts that attraction to a
Tocqueville, A. de (2003). Democracy in America. New group can involve attraction to its identity rather
York: Penguin. (Original work published 1835) than to its individual members.
Triandis, H. C. (1989). The self and social behavior in The distinction between common-identity and
differing cultural contexts. Psychological Review, 96, common-bond groups is relevant to the distinction
506–520.
between the individualistic and social identity
Yuki, M. (2003). Intergroup comparison versus
perspectives. Research on common-identity and
intragroup relationships: A cross-cultural examination
common-bond groups focuses on the different
of social identity theory in North American and East
functions that each kind of group provides for its
Asian cultural contexts. Social Psychology Quarterly,
66, 155–183.
members as well as the different processes that
occur within each kind of group.

Differences Between
the Two Kinds of Groups
Common-Identity/
Common-Bond Groups The distinction between common-identity and
common-bond groups has been applied to a vari-
ety of real-world groups (e.g., college eating clubs,
Some group memberships are based on sharing a online communities). In their original study of
category membership (e.g., women), while others attachment to different types of groups, Prentice
are based on attraction to fellow group members and her colleagues speculated that common-identity
(e.g., groups based on friendships). Based on this and common-bond groups differ in terms of fair-
distinction, in 1994 Deborah Prentice, Dale Miller, ness, longevity, and conflict. Recent research has
and Jenifer Lightdale identified two primary types demonstrated that these groups may also differ in
of groups to which people may belong. This typol- members’ responses to group norms and the fac-
ogy allows researchers to make predictions of how tors they use in forming impressions of themselves,
behaviors differ between the two types of groups. other group members, and their social identity.
Common-identity groups comprise members who
share a social category and are attracted to the
Fairness
group as a whole as well as its overarching identity.
More specifically, members of common-identity Prentice and her colleagues predicted that mem-
groups are attracted to the group’s norms, goals, bers of common-identity and common-bond groups
activities, and other defining features. In contrast, would differ in their preferences for how rewards
common-bond groups comprise members who are should be distributed among members. They argued
attracted to one another as individuals. that, from a social identity perspective, group
118 Common-Identity/Common-Bond Groups

members who are made aware of their social iden- group type that may have consequences for the
tity should perceive members as interchangeable longevity of the group. These researchers found
and homogeneous. Hence, within common-identity that women were attached to groups in which they
groups, members should demonstrate a preference felt close to the other members, while men rated
for resources to be distributed equally among all groups as important when they were attached to
members. In contrast, people in common-bond individual members and the group as a whole. If
groups, who are attached to individuals within the the common bonds in a group disappear, the group
group, should prefer equity relationships in which may no longer be valuable for women, whereas the
members receive rewards in proportion to their common identity of the group would allow men to
contributions (i.e., each individual gets what he or remain attracted to it. Thus some men’s groups
she deserves on the basis of his or her inputs). may last longer than women’s groups because of
In a later study, Sonja Utz and Kai Sassenberg the greater importance of group identity.
found that members of common-bond groups
operate according to an egocentric principle of
Conflict
maximizing their rewards and minimizing their
costs with respect to their own contributions. This Prentice and her colleagues also suggested that
suggests that in common-bond groups, personal members of common-identity and common-bond
goals are more salient than group goals. In con- groups may differ in how they react to conflict.
trast, Utz and Sassenberg found that members of They reasoned that if there is internal conflict
common-identity groups operate according to an within the group, common-identity groups might
altruistic principle of maximizing the group’s be less affected by it than common-bond groups
rewards and minimizing its costs through their because the former are not dependent on harmony
own contributions. Thus, consistent with a social among members. Conflict within common-bond
identity perspective, these results suggest that in groups, however, can have serious implications for
common-identity groups, group goals are more the group’s existence. But common-bond groups
salient than personal goals because the group pro- are not always damaged by internal conflict.
vides an important source of identity. Prentice and her colleagues suggested that external
threat to a common-bond group may encourage
members to come together for a common cause
Longevity
and thereby transform the group into a common-
Another difference between common-identity identity group. Indeed, in field studies, Simon
and common-bond groups is related to the longev- Bernd and his colleagues found that people with a
ity of the group. Common-identity groups should common identity are more likely to participate in
last longer than common-bond groups because group activities, such as collective action, and less
members’ commitment to the former is determined likely to leave the group than are members of
by their attraction to the group’s identity and groups that are based on mutual attraction among
norms rather than to their interpersonal relation- members.
ships with other members. Commitment to
common-identity groups should be stronger than
Group Norms
commitment to common-bond groups because
identity and norms tend to fluctuate very little, Research on chat rooms by Sassenberg and his
whereas interpersonal relationships frequently colleagues elucidated some differences in the pre-
change and even dissolve, and members may leave cursors of norm adherence within common-identity
the group. Using observations of real-world groups, and common-bond groups. This work demon-
researchers have found that lasting communities strated that individuals in common-identity groups
have strong group identities and discourage mem- exhibit higher levels of identification with their
bers from having strong interpersonal relation- chat rooms than do individuals in common-bond
ships that could negatively affect allegiance to their groups. Moreover, identification predicted indi-
group. For example, Elizabeth Seeley and her col- viduals’ adoption and expression of group norms,
leagues found sex differences in preferences for implying that differences in common-identity and
Common Ingroup Identity Model 119

common-bond group members’ adherence to group the group identity) and demonstrate important dif-
norms are explainable by identification with the ferences in processes that occur within these two
group. This research demonstrates the importance types of groups.
of identification processes in adopting and express-
ing group norms. Identification with the group Amber M. Gaffney and Namrata Mahajan
appears to be a key component in understanding See also Collectivism/Individualism; Self-Categorization
when and why members of these two types of Theory; Social Identity Model of Deindividuation
groups adopt group norms. Further, identification Effects; Social Identity Theory
processes may differ due to the reasons people join
groups, affecting a variety of group behaviors and
group norms. Further Readings
Prentice, D. A., Miller, D. T., & Lightdale, J. R. (1994).
Impression Formation Asymmetries in attachments to groups and to their
members: Distinguishing between common-identity
How group members form impressions of them- and common-bond groups. Personality and Social
selves and others is another distinguishing feature of Psychology Bulletin, 20, 484–493.
common-bond and common-identity groups. Sassenberg, K. (2002). Common bond and common
Related to social identity theory, self-categorization identity groups on the internet: Attachment and
theory posits that people’s tendency to categorize normative behavior in on-topic and off-topic chats.
themselves as group members is influenced by the Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice,
social context (e.g., the extent to which their group 6, 27–37.
identity is made salient through comparison with a Spears, R., Postmes, L. M., & Watt, S. E. (2001).
relevant outgroup). According to self-categorization A SIDE view of social influence. In J. Forgas &
theory, when categorized as members of a group, K. D. Williams (Eds.), Social influence processes:
people see themselves in terms of their group’s Direct and indirect influence (pp. 331–350).
shared attributes. Accordingly, members of com- New York: Psychology Press.
mon-identity groups should describe themselves in Utz, S., & Sassenberg, K. (2002). Distributive justice in
terms of their similarity to other group members common-bond and common-identity groups. Group
and to shared group attributes. This should not be Processes & Intergroup Relations, 5, 151–162.
true for members of common-bond groups, which
emphasize members’ personal identities rather than
their shared identity. Russell Spears and his col-
leagues developed the social identity model of dein- Common Ingroup
dividuation effects, or SIDE model, which predicts
that because common-bond groups are based on Identity Model
mutual attraction of members, people in these
groups should be concerned with distinguishing The common ingroup identity model represents a
themselves from other members. These differing strategy for reducing prejudice that assumes that
motivations, in turn, should produce differences in intergroup biases are rooted in fundamental, nor-
how members of common-identity and common- mal psychological processes, particularly in the
bond groups form impressions of other members. universal tendency to simplify a complex environ-
More specifically, while members of common- ment by classifying objects and people into groups
identity groups use group attributes and the group or categories. This process of categorization often
identity to form impressions of one another, mem- occurs spontaneously on the basis of physical
bers of common-bond groups use information similarity, proximity, or shared fate. When people
about individual members to form impressions. or objects are categorized into groups, actual dif-
Studies of common-identity and common-bond ferences between members of the same category
groups clarify two differing perspectives on the tend to be perceptually minimized, and differences
sources of people’s attachment to groups (i.e., attach- between members of different groups become
ment to individual members versus attachment to exaggerated and overgeneralized.
120 Common Ingroup Identity Model

Social Categorization and Bias forces that drive ingroup favoritism to increase
positive attitudes toward others who were previ-
Social categorization, the categorization of people
ously seen primarily in terms of their outgroup
into different groups, has another unique feature.
membership.
When a person categorizes others into groups,
The development of a common ingroup identity
these categories are fundamentally differentiated
does not necessarily always require each group to
between groups to which the perceiver belongs
forsake its less inclusive group identity completely.
(ingroups) and groups to which the perceiver does
It is possible for members to conceive of two
not belong (outgroups). Because people derive
groups (for example, parents and children) as dis-
their self-esteem in part from the prestige of groups
tinct units within the context of a superordinate
to which they belong, members are motivated to
(i.e., family) identity (as “subgroups within one
regard their ingroup in a positive light compared
group” or a “dual identity” representation). When
to other groups. Upon social categorization, people
group identities and the associated cultural values
typically express more positive beliefs, feelings,
are central to members’ self-identification or when
and behaviors toward ingroup members than
they are associated with high status or highly visi-
toward outgroup members. Hence, social categori-
ble cues to group membership, it may be very
zation can enable ingroup favoritism to service
threatening for people to be asked to relinquish
ego-enhancing motivations as long as the situa-
these group identities or, as perceivers, to be
tional context reinforces the importance of the
“color-blind.” Indeed, demands to forsake ethnic
categorical distinction between the groups.
or racial group identities to adopt a color-blind
Although a preferential ingroup orientation can
ideology would likely arouse strong reactance and
evolve into a more destructive, anti-outgroup atti-
result in especially poor intergroup relations.
tude (i.e., prejudice), the mechanisms of ingroup
There is support, however, for the idea that if
favoritism can also provide a means to reduce
people continued to regard themselves as members
prejudice and discrimination. This latter assertion is
of different groups—but all playing on the same
the essence of the common ingroup identity model.
team (i.e., part of the same inclusive entity), inter-
group relations between the “subgroups” would
be more positive than if members only considered
Social Categorization and Recategorization
themselves “separate groups.”
The common ingroup identity model recognizes The common ingroup identity model acknowl-
the fluidity of social categorization processes and edges that other approaches to addressing social
the reality that people belong to a variety of groups categorization can also affect intergroup relations.
that are hierarchically organized in terms of inclu- For instance, decategorizing people—seeing them
siveness. For example, people are members of in an individuated or personalized way instead of
families, neighborhoods, cities, regions, and as members of a group—can also reduce inter-
nations. Modifying goals, motives, expectations, group bias. However, whereas recategorization of
or factors within the immediate situation provides people within a common ingroup identity reduces
the opportunity to shift the level of category inclu- intergroup bias by enhancing evaluations of origi-
siveness that will be dominant. This fluidity of nal outgroup members, decategorization reduces
social categorization, and consequently, the salience intergroup bias by reducing positive regard to
of a particular social identity, are important original ingroup members through eliminating the
because of the implications for altering the way forces of social categorization that promote ingroup
people think about others in terms of their ingroup favoritism in this circumstance.
or outgroup membership, and therefore, how
positively they feel about them. Specifically, the
Functional Relations,
common ingroup identity model proposes that
Categorization, and Bias
inducing people to recategorize ingroup and out-
group members within a common boundary inclu- The common ingroup identity model recognizes
sive of both groups (e.g., a school, a city, a nation, that although social categorization can be suffi-
humanity) redirects the cognitive and motivational cient to produce intergroup bias, intergroup threat,
Common Ingroup Identity Model 121

competition, and conflict can further contribute to This process was particularly exemplified when
negative relations between groups. In particular, one of the boys exclaimed after the achievement of
realistic group conflict theory argues that the moving the truck, “We won the tug-of-war against
major cause of intergroup bias and prejudice the truck.” Subsequent laboratory studies offer
involves zero-sum competition between the groups support for this interpretation of how cooperation
over valuable resources. More broadly, whether reduces intergroup biases by producing recategori-
relations between groups are conflictual or harmo- zation within a common ingroup. In addition,
nious is determined by the functional relations other bias-reducing interventions that rely on
between the groups. When the relationship is pri- related principles of the functional approach (e.g.,
marily competitive, intergroup relations would be techniques such as the jigsaw classroom and some
expected to be prejudice-ridden and conflictual, forms of cooperative learning) may operate psy-
whereas when the relations between groups are chologically through common identity as well as
primarily cooperative, relations between the groups through functional relations directly.
would be harmonious.
In the classic Robbers Cave study, for example,
Empirical Support for the
Sherif and his colleagues studied 12-year-old, middle-
Common Ingroup Identity Model
class boys at a 3-week summer camp in an experi-
ment about the creation and reduction of intergroup Formally, the common ingroup identity model
bias and conflict. These boys were initially assigned identifies potential antecedents and outcomes of
to two groups. To permit time for group formation recategorization, as well as mediating processes.
within each group (e.g., norms and a leadership The general framework specifies the causes and
structure), these groups were kept completely apart consequences of a common ingroup identity.
for the first week. During the second week, the Specifically, different types of intergroup interde-
investigators introduced intense competitive rela- pendence (e.g., cooperative or competitive rela-
tions between the groups in the form of repeated tions) and cognitive, perceptual, linguistic, affective,
competitive athletic activities—centering on tug-of- and environmental factors can alter individuals’
war, baseball, and touch football—in which only perceptions of the different groups. These resulting
members of the winning group received rewards. As cognitive representations (i.e., one group, two-
expected by the functional relations account, the subgroups within one group—a dual identity, two
introduction of competitive activities generated separate groups, or separate individuals) are then
derogatory stereotypes and very physical, hostile proposed to result in specific cognitive, affective,
conflict between these groups. In the third week, and overt behavioral consequences involving inter-
only after the functional relations between the group attitudes. Thus, the causal factors that
groups were altered by introducing a series of goals include features specified by contact theory (i.e.,
(e.g., finding leaks to the camp’s water supply, col- cooperation, equal status, opportunity for self-
lecting money to watch a popular movie, and mov- revealing interaction, and egalitarian norms sup-
ing a stalled truck carrying lunch up a hill to the ported by local authorities) are proposed to influence
dining area)—goals that could not be achieved with- members’ cognitive collective representations of the
out cooperating with each other—did the relations memberships that then, at least in part, mediate the
between the groups become more harmonious. relationship between the causal factors and inter-
Although there was no formal assessment of the group attitudes (i.e., feelings, beliefs, and behav-
psychological processes involved in just how coop- iors). In addition, a common ingroup identity may
eration between these groups reduced intergroup be achieved by increasing the salience of existing
animosity, from the perspective of the common common superordinate memberships or by intro-
ingroup identity model, intergroup cooperation ducing factors (e.g., common goals or fate) that are
likely reduced intergroup conflict because working perceived to be shared by the memberships.
together toward their common goal changed the The common ingroup identity model has
boys’ perceptions of their intergroup boundaries received considerable empirical support. In an
from an “us” and “them” orientation to a more early exploration of the causal role of common
inclusive “we” (i.e., common ingroup) orientation. ingroup identity in reducing bias, members of two
122 Common Ingroup Identity Model

separate laboratory-formed groups of American confidence in suggestions for innovation, and even
college students who were homogeneous with forgiveness. In addition, creating a common ingroup
respect to sex and racial composition were induced identity has been found to increase positive forms of
through various structural interventions (e.g., seat- behavior, such as self-disclosure and helping, across
ing arrangement, dress) to maintain their original original group lines and to be effective for improving
group identities (i.e., conceive of themselves as dif- relations between groups, such as ethnic and racial
ferent groups), recategorize themselves as one groups, that have extended histories of intergroup
group, or decategorize themselves (i.e., to conceive bias. In a particularly dramatic example, emphasiz-
of themselves as separate individuals). The manip- ing common humanity increased Jewish students’
ulations to encourage recategorization and decat- willingness to forgive Germans for the Holocaust.
egorization each reduced bias, and as predicted,
did so in different ways. Specifically, recategorizing
Conclusion
the memberships into one group reduced bias by
increasing the attractiveness of former outgroup Overall, the research evidence reveals consistent
members, whereas decategorizing members of support for the key principle of the common ingroup
these groups reduced bias by decreasing the attrac- identity model: Successfully inducing ingroup and
tiveness of former ingroup members. Identical outgroup members to adopt a more inclusive, one-
findings were obtained when the recategorization group representation inclusive of both groups
and decategorization manipulations were imple- reduces the groups’ bias toward one another.
mented with Black and White Portuguese children, Furthermore, this fundamental principle has been
who have different social status and a shared his- supported across studies that used a variety of
tory of intergroup conflict. methodological approaches, involving participants
Also, manipulations that have been demon- of different ages, races, and nationalities. Conse­
strated to reduce prejudice, by inducing cooperative quently, this model can inform the development of
interaction or structuring positive intergroup con- powerful prejudice-reducing interventions.
tact in ways specified by contact theory, have been
shown in laboratory research to reduce bias by Samuel L. Gaertner and John F. Dovidio
changing intergroup cognitive representations from See also Categorization; Cooperation and Competition;
two separate groups to one group. Specifically, Ingroup Allocation Bias; Jigsaw Classroom Technique;
intergroup cooperation leads to stronger inclusive, Prejudice; Sherif, Muzafer; Stereotyping
one-group representations, which in turn predicts
more favorable outgroup member evaluations. In
addition, investigations across a variety of inter- Further Readings
group settings offer converging support for the idea
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., Validzic, A., Matoka, K.,
that the features specified by contact theory (i.e.,
Johnson, B., & Frazier, S. (1997). Extending the
cooperation, equal status, opportunity for self-
benefits of re-categorization: Evaluations, self-
revealing interaction, and egalitarian norms sup-
disclosure and helping. Journal of Experimental Social
ported by local authorities), reduce intergroup bias
Psychology, 33, 401–420.
because they transform members’ representations Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Reducing
of the memberships from separate groups to a sin- intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model.
gle, more inclusive group. Participants in these stud- Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
ies included students attending a multi-ethnic high Gaertner, S. L., Mann, J. A., Dovidio, J. F., Murrell, A.
school, banking executives who had experienced a J., & Pomare, M. (1990). How does cooperation
corporate merger involving a wide variety of banks reduce intergroup bias? Journal of Personality and
across the United States, and college students from Social Psychology, 59, 692–704.
blended families with households composed of two Sherif, M., Harvey, O. J., White, B. J., Hood, W. R., &
formerly separate families trying to unite into one. Sherif, C. W. (1988). The Robbers Cave experiment:
Common ingroup identity not only increases Intergroup conflict and cooperation. Hanover,
positive evaluations of others, but also increases NH: Wesleyan University Press. (Original work
cross-group friendship selection, helpfulness, trust, published 1961)
Common Knowledge Effect 123

reach a different decision depending on whether


Common Knowledge Effect important information is initially shared or
unshared. This difference is especially problematic
The common knowledge effect describes the when the shared information favors an incorrect
impact on group decision making of whether decision alternative and the unshared information
knowledge relevant to a decision is shared by all favors a different, correct decision alternative. In
group members prior to discussion. Specifically, such a case, known as a hidden profile, groups are
laboratory studies have shown that information unlikely to discover and decide on the correct
known by everyone prior to discussion has a more alternative. Instead, even after discussion, groups
powerful influence on decisions than information are likely to decide on the incorrect alternative that
not shared by everyone. The common knowledge was favored by the information shared by all of
effect demonstrates that an irrelevant factor—the the members prior to discussion.
number of members who know a particular piece
of information—can affect group decisions. If a
piece of unshared information is crucial to making
Theoretical Explanation
a correct decision, the result may be an incorrect Why does information have more influence on the
decision. This entry looks at the common knowl- group decision when all members know it prior to
edge effect and some possible explanations for the group discussion than when only some mem-
such outcomes, then discusses what research has bers know it? One explanation focuses on the con-
shown about promoting better decisions. tent of group discussion, that is, which information
group members actually tend to discuss. Arguably,
discussion of unshared information is more impor-
The Decision-Making Process
tant than discussion of shared information because
When a group comes together to make a decision, unshared information may alter the opinions of
the members must combine and process the infor- members who lacked the information prior to the
mation that is relevant to the decision. Typically, the discussion. Discussion of initially shared informa-
group has a discussion during which members men- tion is less important because all of the group’s
tion information that they believe is relevant to the members have had the opportunity to consider that
decision. The information that the members bring information prior to the group discussion.
to the discussion may initially be known by all of In decisions involving both shared and unshared
the members (shared) or known by only one or a information, however, group discussion tends to
few members (unshared). A primary goal of group focus on the shared, rather than the unshared,
discussion is to inform members of information that information. A particular piece of information is
they did not know prior to the discussion, that is, to more likely to be mentioned if all group members
discuss the information that was initially unshared. know about it prior to the discussion than if only
Ideally, in the end, the group’s decision should one or a few group members know about it prior
reflect all of the relevant information, whether that to the discussion. Initially unshared information is
information was initially shared or unshared. often not mentioned at all. In hidden profile tasks,
However, research shows that information that for example, groups tend to discuss the shared
was shared prior to the discussion tends to influ- information, which favors the incorrect alterna-
ence group decisions more than information that tive, whereas they often fail to mention the
was unshared prior to the discussion. Thus, the unshared information, which would allow the
same fact will likely have more influence on the group to discover the correct alternative. Conse­
group’s final decision if it is initially known by all quently, if the group bases its decision on the infor-
of the group’s members than if it is initially known mation that is actually discussed, that decision will
by only one group member, regardless of how per- be affected more by the initially shared informa-
tinent the fact is to the decision at hand. This is tion because the group discusses more shared than
known as the common knowledge effect. unshared information.
The common knowledge effect can negatively But the tendency of groups to discuss more
affect the quality of group decisions. A group may shared than unshared information does not fully
124 Common Knowledge Effect

explain the relatively strong influence of shared shared information may bolster members’ confi-
information on group decisions. Even when the dence in their initial opinions. Members may also
group discusses unshared information, that infor- interpret new information to be consistent with
mation does not necessarily affect the group’s deci- their opinions.
sion. For example, in hidden profile tasks, groups In addition, unshared information cannot be
that discuss more unshared information are not confirmed by other members, so members who
always more likely to discover the correct alterna- hear the new information may doubt its validity.
tive. Although the tendency of groups to discuss Individuals who discuss shared information are
more shared than unshared information is an evaluated more positively by other group mem-
important factor in the common knowledge effect, bers, and members who know a large amount of
it is not the only factor. shared information tend to have more influence on
The group members’ prediscussion opinions are the group decision. Moreover, full consideration of
another factor in the common knowledge effect. In new information requires time and cognitive effort.
addition to affecting a group’s decision directly, Groups may be motivated to process unshared
through group discussion, information also affects information superficially to reach consensus more
a group’s decision indirectly, by affecting the initial quickly, particularly if they do not believe that
opinions of the group’s members. When members more effortful processing of that information will
first consider decision-relevant information, prior lead to a significantly improved group decision.
to any discussion, they tend to form opinions Thus, the common knowledge effect seems to
about the correct decision. During group discus- be explained primarily by two phenomena: the
sion, a member learns the opinions of the other tendency to discuss more shared than unshared
members. In fact, the members’ opinions are often information and the tendency to base the ultimate
the first thing the group discusses, prior to the dis- decision heavily on the group members’ initial
cussion of any specific information. Those initial opinions, which are based on the information
opinions, in turn, often have a strong influence on members have prior to discussion. Groups do,
the group’s final decision. however, sometimes overcome the common knowl-
Groups often appear to use relatively simple edge effect. To do so, they must both discuss and
methods of combining their members’ initial opin- carefully consider their unshared information.
ions into a group decision, such as averaging those
opinions or choosing the alternative that is initially
Fostering Better Decisions
favored by a majority of the members. Initially
shared information can affect all of the members’ Research has identified a number of conditions that
prediscussion opinions. Initially unshared informa- increase the likelihood that groups will discuss and
tion, however, can only affect one member’s opin- be influenced by information that is unshared prior
ion prior to the group discussion. When the group to the discussion. For example, groups are more
combines all of its members’ opinions into a group likely to decide on the correct alternative in a hidden
decision, the shared information will tend to have profile task if they rank order all of the alternatives,
more influence on the group decision because it has rather than simply choosing the single alternative
influenced the opinions of more group members. that they think is best. Rank ordering forces the
Why do groups base their decisions primarily group to consider all of the alternatives, which may
on their members’ initial opinions, even when lead to the discussion of unshared positive informa-
unshared information is revealed during the group tion about an initially rejected alternative.
discussion? After all, when several members learn Groups that believe they are making a decision
new facts, they should realize that their initial that has an objective correct answer tend to discuss
opinions were based on an incomplete subset of more unshared information and make better deci-
the relevant information and change their opin- sions than groups that believe they are making a
ions. However, when unshared information is dis- decision that does not have a single correct answer.
cussed, it tends to come up late in the discussion, Groups whose members initially disagree about
after the group has already discussed some amount the correct decision are also more likely to discuss
of shared information. That early discussion of and use unshared information. All of these factors
Commons Dilemma 125

encourage a group to discuss more information,


including information that was unshared prior to Commons Dilemma
discussion, and to base its final decision on all of
the relevant information, rather than settling too The commons dilemma is a specific class of social
quickly on a decision that was favored by the dilemma in which people’s short-term selfish
group members’ initial opinions. interests are at odds with long-term group inter-
But laboratory research may overestimate the ests. The commons dilemma, also known as the
severity of the problem posed by the common common pool resource (CPR), the resource
knowledge effect. In everyday decisions, shared dilemma, or the take-some dilemma, was inspired
and unshared information may generally favor the by the metaphor of the Tragedy of the Commons
same alternative, or the most relevant information that Garrett Hardin discussed in his seminal
might typically be shared. In such cases, the addi- 1968 Science article. This story describes a group
tional time and effort that would be required to of herders with open access to a common parcel
discuss and consider unshared information might of land on which to let their cows graze. It is
not result in a better decision. Moreover, real in each herder’s interest to put as many cows
groups may be more motivated and have more time as possible onto the land, even if the commons
than experimental groups to discuss and consider is damaged as a result. The herder receives all
more of the available information before commit- the benefits from the additional cows, but the
ting to a decision. Further research is needed to damage to the commons is shared by the entire
understand the impact of the common knowledge group. Yet if all herders make this individually
effect on important real-world decisions. rational decision, the commons is destroyed and
all will suffer.
Daniel Gigone The commons dilemma stands as a model for a
See also Group Performance; Group Problem Solving and great variety of resource problems in society today,
Decision Making; Hidden Profile Task; Informational such as water, land, fish, and nonrenewable energy
Influence; Normative Influence; Social Decision sources like oil and coal. When water is used at a
Schemes; Socially Shared Cognition higher rate than the reservoirs are replenished, fish
consumption exceeds its reproductive capacity, or
Further Readings oil supplies are exhausted, we face a tragedy of the
commons.
Gigone, D., & Hastie, R. (1993). The common In the 1980s, researchers created an experimen-
knowledge effect: Information sampling and group tal game version of the commons dilemma involv-
judgment. Journal of Personality and Social ing a common resource pool (filled with money or
Psychology, 65, 959–974. points that could be converted into money or lot-
Greitemeyer, T., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2003). Preference- tery tickets) from which a group of individuals
consistent evaluation of information in the hidden
could harvest. If the sum of their harvests per
profile paradigm: Beyond group-level explanations for
round of the game is lower than the replenishment
the dominance of shared information in group
rate, the pool is maintained. The individuals are
decisions. Journal of Personality and Social
each tempted to harvest as much as possible, but if
Psychology, 84, 322–339.
Kerr, N. L., & Tindale, S. R. (2004). Group performance
they do, all suffer and the resource is depleted,
and decision-making. Annual Review of Psychology,
upon which the game ends.
55, 623–655.
Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared Factors Promoting Conservation
information in group decision making: Biased in Commons Dilemmas
information sampling during discussion. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1467–1478. Commons dilemma researchers have studied con-
Wittenbaum, G. M., & Stasser, G. (1996). Management ditions under which groups and communities are
of information in small groups. In J. L. Nye & A. B. likely to under- or overharvest the common
Brower (Eds.), What’s social about social cognition? resource in both the laboratory and field. Research
(pp. 3–28). London: Sage. programs have concentrated on a number of
126 Commons Dilemma

motivational, strategic, and structural factors that pool also increases harvesting. The most likely
might be conducive to commons management. explanation is that people have an optimistic bias.

Motivational Solutions Strategic Solutions


The research shows that some people are more Strategic factors also matter in commons dilem-
motivated than others to manage the common mas. One often-studied strategic factor is the order
resource responsibly. Using the commons dilemma in which people take harvests from the resource. In
game, researchers found that people with prosocial simultaneous play, all people harvest at the same
value orientations harvest less from a resource dur- time, whereas in sequential play people harvest
ing a period of scarcity. Prosocial individuals are from the pool according to a predetermined
also more inclined to engage in sustainable envi- sequence—first, second, third, and so on. There is
ronmental behaviors such as taking public trans- a clear order effect in the latter games: The harvests
portation (instead of the car) and conserving energy of those who come first—the leaders—are higher
and water, as well as to explain their decisions in than the harvest of those coming later—the follow-
terms of environmental impact. ers. The interpretation of this effect is that the first
Motivation to conserve a common resource is players feel entitled to take more. Whereas with
also promoted by people’s group ties. When people simultaneous play, people may adopt an equality
identify with their group, they are more likely to rule, with sequential play, individuals adopt a “first
exercise personal restraint, as well as to compen- come, first served” rule. Another strategic factor is
sate for greedy harvest decisions of ingroup mem- the ability to build up reputations. Research found
bers more than for those of outgroup members. that people take less from the common pool in
Similarly, in the field strongly knit communities are public situations than in anonymous private situa-
usually better at managing resource shortages than tions. Moreover, those who harvest less gain
communities with weak social ties. It might be that greater prestige and influence within their group.
group identity promotes a long-term perspective
on resource management that makes it easier for
Structural Solutions
people to sacrifice their immediate interest on
behalf of their local community. It could also be Much research has focused on when and why
that group identification increases the social inter- people would like to structurally rearrange the
dependencies between community members so commons to prevent a tragedy. Hardin stated in
that they care more for the social rewards and his analysis of the Tragedy of the Commons that
punishments of their community. This needs fur- “freedom in a commons brings ruin to all.” One of
ther investigation. the proposed solutions is to appoint a leader to
The state of the common resource can also regulate access to the commons. Not surprisingly,
shape motivations. One motivational factor is groups are more likely to endorse a leader when a
people’s attributions of the state of the commons. common resource is being depleted and when
Research has manipulated the reasons people were managing a common resource is perceived as a dif-
given for resource overuse. When greedy people ficult task. Interestingly, groups prefer leaders who
were seen as causing the depletion, participants are elected, democratic, and prototypical of the
were greedier than when there was deemed to be a group, and these leader types are more successful
natural cause (like a sudden drought). Resource in enforcing cooperation. There is a general aver-
uncertainty further contributes to overharvesting. sion against autocratic leadership—although it is
In commons dilemmas, uncertainly about the pool quite an effective solution—possibly because of the
size tends to increase individual harvesting and fear of power abuse and corruption.
expectations about how much other people har- Another structural solution is the privatization
vest. When there is uncertainty, people overesti- of the commons, and this has been shown in
mate the size of the resource and perceive greater experimental and field research to be very effec-
variability in how much other people take. Similarly, tive. However, it is difficult to imagine how com-
uncertainty about the replenishment rate of the mon movable resources such as fish, water, and
Communication Networks 127

clean air can be privatized. Privatization also raises See also Cooperation and Competiton; Leadership;
concerns about social justice, as not everyone may Prisoner’s Dilemma; Social Dilemmas; Social Identity
be able to get an equal share. Finally, privatization Theory; Trust
might erode people’s personal and social motiva-
tions to cooperate in preserving a resource. Further Readings
The provision of rewards and punishments
might also be effective in preserving common Foddy, M., Smithson, M., Schneider, S., & Hogg, M.
resources. Selective punishments for overuse can (1999). Resolving social dilemmas. Philadelphia:
be effective in promoting domestic water and Psychology Press.
energy conservation, for instance, through install- Hardin, G. (1968). Tragedy of the commons. Science,
ing water and electricity meters in houses. Selective 162, 1243–1248.
rewards also work, provided that they are open to Messick, D. M., Wilke, H. A. M., Brewer, M. B.,
Kramer, R. M., Zemke, P. E., & Lui, L. (1983).
everyone. An experimental carpool lane in the
Individual adaptations and structural change as
Netherlands failed because car commuters did not
solutions to social dilemmas. Journal of Personality
feel they were able to organize a carpool. Hence,
and Social Psychology, 44, 294–309.
they showed a reaction against this pro-environment
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The
intervention. evolution of institutions for collective action.
There has been much field research on commons Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
dilemmas that has combined solutions obtained in van Vugt, M. (2001). Community identification
experimental research. The seminal work of Elinor moderating the impact of financial incentives in a
Ostrom and her colleagues is worth mentioning. natural social dilemma. Personality and Social
They looked at how real-world communities man- Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1440–1449.
age communal resources such as fisheries, land van Vugt, M., van Lange, P. A. M., Meertens, R. M., &
irrigation systems, and farmlands and came up Joireman, J. A. (1996). Why structural solutions to
with a number of factors conducive to successful social dilemmas might fail: A field experiment on the
resource management. One factor is the resource first carpool priority lane in Europe. Social Psychology
itself. Resources with definable boundaries (e.g., Quarterly, 59, 364–374.
land) can be preserved much more easily than can
resources without such boundaries. A second fac-
tor is resource dependence. There must be a per-
ceptible threat of resource depletion, and it must be Communication Networks
difficult to find substitutes. The third is the pres-
ence of a community. Small and stable populations The term communication networks describes the
with a thick social network and social norms pro- structure and flow of communication and infor-
moting conservation do best. A final condition is mation between individuals within a group. Within
that there are appropriate community-based rules many groups (e.g., a typical office), formal and
and procedures in place with built-in incentives for informal communication patterns are often deter-
responsible use and punishments for overuse. mined in a top-down, hierarchical fashion, where
members direct communication to others at the
Conclusion same level or below but not above. Much of the
research on the effects of communication networks
As populations grow and resources become scarcer,
was conducted in the 1950s; after a long hiatus,
there is a need for policies to avoid commons trag-
researchers are again exploring the effects of com-
edies. It is encouraging that commons dilemma
munication networks. The primary foci of classic
research is increasingly applied to local and global
research on communication networks had been to
environmental problems. The emphasis is shifting
measure how network structure affects informa-
from pure laboratory research toward research
tion flow, and how position within the networks
testing combinations of motivational, strategic,
may affect an individual’s status within the group.
and structural solutions.
More recent work has focused on how communi-
Mark van Vugt cation networks affect group-level properties. This
128 Communication Networks

entry discusses both classic and more recent communication could take place within the struc-
approaches to the study of communication net- ture of a wheel, with one central member (the hub)
works within groups. through which all communications must pass. One
consistent result in such early research was that the
centralization of a communication network (i.e.,
Why Study Communication Networks?
the degree to which some members of the group
The overwhelming majority of research on group had more communication partners than others;
dynamics has studied interacting groups in which e.g., the wheel is more centralized than the circle
communications from each member are sent to the network) was a strong predictor of the efficiency
entire group, with no constraints on communica- of problem solving; that is, the more centralized a
tion (a prototypical example would be a jury sit- network, the more efficient the group was at solv-
ting around a table). This type of communication ing problems. Later research by Marvin E. Shaw
network is common in many small real-world qualified this finding to show that centralized
groups, such as juries; however, it is not common groups solve relatively simple problems better than
in larger groups and institutions. In larger groups decentralized groups, but when problems become
communication is likely asymmetrical, where dif- more complex, centralization can hamper problem
ferent individuals receive and transmit information solving. Another consistent finding of this research
heterogeneously across the entire group. First, was that more centralized group members are
many groups do not necessarily meet in a specific more satisfied with the group process than are
location at the same time, but rather consist of a more peripheral members.
number of asynchronous communications within
subsets of group members. Second, as group size
Recent Advances
increases, there may be evolutionary constraints
on the optimal number of group members per- Most of the research on small group decision mak-
forming any given task. Robin Dunbar has specu- ing in the 1950s through the 1980s was conducted
lated that as groups increase in size, the brain’s in groups with symmetrical communication net-
processing capacity may constrain the number of works, in which each member’s communication
individuals with whom one can optimally commu- was received by the entire group. Therefore, there
nicate. This evolved constraint likely leads to were few advances within the field of communica-
recurrent and structural patterns across all groups tion networks during this time period. Bibb Latané
in terms of communication networks. Therefore, it and his colleagues revived interest in communica-
is important to study the development and effects tion networks in the late 1980s, pointing out that
of communication networks within groups, espe- in large groups, individual group members cannot
cially among larger groups (for example, within necessarily communicate with the entire group at
organizations). the same time. Latané’s dynamic social impact
theory includes a principle of immediacy, which
assumes that influence between any two members
Classic Research
in a group is predicted by the likelihood that they
The first systematic research on communication can easily share communications.
networks was conducted by Harold J. Leavitt of Latané and his colleagues tested the implications
MIT and Alex Bavelas of Bell Laboratories in the of his dynamic social impact theory by conducting
1950s. This work was stimulated by formal math- computer simulations, in which agents were situated
ematical models derived from graph theory. By in a two-dimensional space, where the strongest
placing partitions between participants seated at a influence between agents occurred with immediate
table, Leavitt and Bavelas manipulated communi- neighbors. Each agent was randomly assigned a
cation structures within groups of varying sizes. binary opinion on an issue (e.g., Republican vs.
For example, in a five-person group, members Democrat). Following from other assumptions of
could communicate within a circle structure, in dynamic social impact theory, individual agents in
which each person can only share messages with the simulations also varied in strength (i.e., some
those on either side of him or her. Alternatively, were more influential than others), and agents were
Communication Networks 129

influenced by the number of other agents sharing or groups. Recent empirical research has provided
opposing their preferences. further support for the “six degrees of separation”
After simulating a number of rounds of com- idea popularized by Milgram.
munication, in which each agent’s opinion was Another solution to the small-world problem
compared to the opinions of fellow agents, the involving computer simulation with communication
researchers found that opinions either were main- networks has been provided by Albert-Laszlo
tained or changed as a function of the strength, Barabasi and his colleagues. Barabasi has shown that
immediacy, and number of other agents, and sev- communication networks within large groups share
eral group-level phenomena emerged. Opinions in properties with what are known as “scale-free” net-
the group typically consolidated (or polarized); works. In a scale-free network, some individuals
that is, whichever opinion was most commonly within the larger group have many more communi-
held within the group became even more common cation partners than others; in the terms of earlier
after simulated communication. Because commu- work on communication networks, such members
nication networks constrained communication, can be said to be more centralized. Scale-free net-
opinions also became regionally clustered, such works are another way to solve the small-world
that agents shared opinions with other agents problem; when a small number of members within a
who were physically close to them in the two- large group have a large number of communication
dimensional space, and who were thus able to partners, it takes a relatively small number of links
exert greater influence over them. Latané and his to join any two randomly chosen group members.
colleagues then tested whether these phenomena
that emerged in simulations also occurred within
Conclusion
actual groups discussing issues in communication
networks configured via e-mail exchanges. Both The field of communication networks, a classic
group-level phenomena observed in the computer area of research within group dynamics, recently
simulations—consolidation and clustering—also has been reactivated, partly as a function of
emerged within groups of people discussing issues. advances in computer science. The fact that many
Subsequently, Latané and his colleagues have group decisions are made by subsets of members,
shown that the “geometry” of communication without all group members present at any given
networks—how they are organized—can deter- time, creates a need for more research in this area.
mine the extent to which groups’ opinions will
consolidate and cluster as a function of communi- Martin J. Bourgeois and Nicholas G. Schwab
cation. For example, as communication networks See also Culture; Dynamical Systems Approach; Group
become more “clumpy” or hierarchical, consolida- Polarization; Social Impact Theory; Social Networks
tion and clustering of opinions tend to increase.
Mathematicians and physicists have also recently
shown interest in using computer simulation to Further Readings
test some of the implications of constrained com-
Barabasi, A.-L. (2003). Linked. New York: Penguin.
munication networks within large groups. One
Bavelas, A. (1950). Communication patterns in task-
recent line of evidence was provided by Duncan oriented groups. Journal of the Acoustical Society of
Watts and his colleagues. Watts used computer America, 22, 725–730.
simulation to solve the “small-world problem” Collins, B. E., & Raven, B. H. (1969). Group structure:
posited by Stanley Milgram: If most people com- Attraction, coalitions, communication, and power. In
municate with others within local networks (as E. Artonson & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social
social impact theory assumes), how can any two psychology. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
randomly chosen people within the larger group be Latané, B., & Bourgeois, M. J. (2001). Dynamic social
connected by a surprisingly small number of links impact and the consolidation, clustering, correlation,
(“six degrees of separation”)? Watts showed that and continuing diversity of culture. In M. A. Hogg &
simply adding a small number of random commu- R. S. Tindale (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social
nication links between people can create such psychology: Group processes (pp. 235–258). Oxford,
small world networks even within extremely large UK: Blackwell.
130 Compliance

Leavitt, H. J. (1951). Some effects of certain she may not agree with her supervisor, she is likely
communication patterns on group performance. Journal to comply because the supervisor controls impor-
of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 46, 38–50. tant rewards (e.g., salary) and punishments (e.g.,
Nowak, A., Szamrej, J., & Latané, B. (1990). From the power to have her fired) and is able to monitor
private attitude to public opinion: A dynamic theory her response.
of social impact. Psychological Review, 9, 362–376. Groups may represent another source of com-
Shaw, M. E. (1964). Communication networks. Advances pliance, such as when a holdout juror yields to
in Experimental Social Psychology, 1, 111–147. group pressure despite privately disagreeing with
Watts, D. J. (2003). Six degrees: The science of a
the verdict. In this instance, “going along to get
connected age. New York: Norton.
along” reflects normative influence. In contrast, if
the individual believes that the verdict is correct,
the influence would reflect conversion because his
private beliefs would be consistent with his public
Compliance behavior. The influence in this case would reflect
informational influence.
Compliance is one of a variety of ways in which
people can be influenced by others. Two meanings
have been attached to the term. Investigators such Why Is It Important to Distinguish
as Leon Festinger, Herbert Kelman, and Paul Nail Between Compliance and Private Acceptance?
define compliance as a change in public behavior By knowing the basis for someone’s acceptance
without private acceptance. (As discussed below, of influence—compliance versus conversion—one
when others influence both public behavior and can better predict when the response is likely to be
private acceptance, the form of social influence is performed. In the case of compliance, the influenc-
called conversion or internalization.) More recently, ing agent (e.g., a group) must retain control of
Robert Cialdini has offered a second definition of resources valued by the target person and be able
compliance that ignores the distinction between to monitor whether or not the person complies.
public and private. He defines compliance as However, if the person privately accepts the influ-
acquiescence to a request. Each definition has gen- encing agent’s position, the agent’s ability to
erated a different set of questions and research reward or punish the person and to maintain sur-
findings. This entry examines both definitions. veillance are unnecessary for the response to be
performed. The person will perform the behavior
Compliance as a Change in Public Behavior because it is internalized, that is, it is consistent
with her private beliefs.
Research on compliance as a change in public
behavior has addressed such questions as (a) What
causes people to comply? (b) Why is it important Can Compliance Lead to Private Acceptance?
to distinguish between compliance and private
Numerous studies have shown that compliance
acceptance? and (c) Can compliance lead to private
can lead to private acceptance via a variety of
acceptance?
mechanisms. Perhaps the best documented mecha-
nism is the one proposed by Leon Festinger in his
What Causes People to Comply?
theory of cognitive dissonance. According to this
Research shows that for people to comply, two theory, inconsistency between public behavior and
conditions must be present. First, people must private beliefs produces a tension known as cogni-
believe that the influencing agent has the ability to tive dissonance. This tension motivates people to
reward them for compliance or punish them for reduce their discomfort by changing their private
noncompliance. And, second, they must believe beliefs to be more consistent with their public
that the influencing agent has the ability to moni- behavior. Studies show that belief change is most
tor their compliance or failure to comply. As an likely to occur when there is minimal pressure to
example, consider a worker’s decision to comply comply and the compliance is public. When too
with her supervisor’s request to work faster. While much force is used to gain compliance, there will
Compliance 131

be less cognitive dissonance and therefore less form accurate perceptions of reality, (2) to develop
pressure to change private beliefs to be consistent and preserve meaningful social relationships, and
with public behavior. (3) to preserve a positive self-concept.
Another theory that can account for the impact
of compliance on private beliefs is Daryl Bem’s
Motivation to Form Accurate
self-perception theory. According to this theory,
Perceptions of Reality
people use their behavior to infer their private
beliefs, particularly when they are uncertain about People want to be effective decision makers. To
these beliefs. For example, when a group subtly meet this goal, they need to have accurate percep-
induces a member to contribute to a charitable tions of reality because inaccurate perceptions are
cause and the individual is later questioned about likely to produce poor decisions. Capitalizing on
his feelings about the charity, he might reason that, this motivation, compliance professionals have
because he made the donation, he must have posi- developed several effective strategies for gaining
tive beliefs about the charity. compliance. One such strategy involves presenting
A third explanation for how compliance pro- oneself as an authority or expert on the subject
duces private acceptance relates to the finding that matter under consideration. The strategy relies on
compliance can provide people with the opportu- targets’ tendency to rely on heuristics, or simple
nity to gain new information that could change rules of thumb, to make decisions. In this particu-
their private beliefs. Evidence for this mechanism lar case, target persons would be relying on the
can be found in studies of role playing where indi- heuristic “experts know what’s best.” Examples of
viduals were induced to write an essay favoring a this strategy include an advertisement showing a
position counter to their beliefs. Results show that NASCAR driver recommending a brand of motor
this experience modifies individuals’ private beliefs oil and a waiter informing dinner guests that coq
in the direction of the position taken in the essay, au vin is his favorite item on the menu.
because writing the essay forces them to acquire To increase the perceived value of their product,
new information that can potentially change their compliance professionals also make use of the
beliefs. In sum, then, there are multiple ways in notion of scarcity. They attempt to capitalize on the
which compliance to pressure can ultimately lead belief in many people’s minds that the quality of a
to private acceptance. product is a function of its scarcity—the less avail-
able the product, the better its quality. Examples of
this strategy include stating that there is a “limited
Compliance in Response to a Request
supply” of the product, or it is available only to the
Research on compliance with a request has focused first 50 callers, or “it’s a limited time offer.”
on the strategies often used by professionals to Another tactic used by professionals to increase
gain compliance from potential clients. These pro- the perception that a product is a “good deal”
fessionals include fund-raisers, salespeople, adver- involves the “that’s-not-all” technique. The com-
tisers, political lobbyists, and recruiters, to name a pliance agent first makes an offer and then imme-
few. Their requests may be explicit, such as an diately sweetens the deal by lowering the price or
invitation to donate to a charitable cause, or increasing the benefits. Sometimes this tactic is
implicit, such as an advertisement touting the used in combination with the scarcity tactic, as
advantages of owning a brand of clothing without when the target is informed that the special carving
directly asking for a purchase. knife can be purchased for $30, but if “you
Relevant research has addressed two questions: respond in the next hour you will also receive a
(1) What underlying motives of people do com- free set of paring knives and cutting board.”
pliance professionals attempt to capitalize on?
(2) Based on these underlying motives, what spe-
Motivation to Develop and Preserve
cific compliance strategies do professionals employ?
Meaningful Social Relationships
According to Robert Cialdini, those who employ
compliance-gaining strategies capitalize on three People often want to form new relationships
basic motivations of the target audience: (1) to and maintain existing relationships. It is therefore
132 Compliance

not surprising that people are more likely to com- compliance strategy, “the foot-in-the-door” strat-
ply with a request from someone they like than egy, capitalizes on the need for consistency. People
from someone they dislike. The positive feelings are first asked to comply with a small request,
underlying compliance may be based on the simi- which is usually granted. This is followed by a
larity or attractiveness of the person making the larger request.
request. A compliance tactic based on the motiva- Research shows that complying with the smaller
tion to preserve meaningful social relationships is request makes people more likely to comply with
used by the American Cancer Society. This tactic the larger request. For example, one study showed
involves enlisting group members, such as neigh- that people who first agreed to put a small sign in
bors, to solicit donations from fellow neighbors. their window were more likely to agree to a subse-
Evidence for the effectiveness of such tactics was quent request by a different solicitor to place a
obtained in a study showing that attractive solici- large sign on their lawn than were people who
tors for the American Heart Association produced were not first given the small request. Presumably,
almost twice the amount of compliance as unat- people complied with the larger request because
tractive solicitors. they wanted to be consistent with their image of
Norms, or agreed upon rules of conduct, are an themselves as helpful. Groups often employ this
important part of maintaining social relationships. tactic when socializing new members. For example,
Compliance professionals frequently make use of the group may initially request that the new mem-
one such norm, the norm of reciprocity, to elicit ber make only a minimal contribution to group
compliance. The strategy involves providing the effort, which is followed by escalating demands.
target person with a gift, such as address labels, A second compliance strategy, known as “low-
greeting cards, or a calendar, accompanied by a balling,” capitalizes on targets’ desire to view
request for a donation. The recipient, feeling themselves positively by adhering to commitments.
indebted to the donor, feels obligated to recipro- Take the case in which a customer in an auto show-
cate by making a donation. room makes an initial commitment to purchase a
Another compliance tactic that capitalizes on car. Lowballing occurs when the salesperson ini-
the norm of reciprocity is the “door-in-the-face” tially agrees to sell the car at a lower price than she
strategy. A requester makes an extreme request intends to get. Subsequently, after “consulting”
(e.g., a $200 donation), which is certain to be with her manager, she ups the price by informing
rejected. This is followed by a more moderate the customer that features that were supposedly
request (e.g., a $25 donation). Target persons, feel- included in the original offer, such as undercoating
ing obligated to make a reciprocal concession, tend and power steering, will cost extra. Customers
to comply by agreeing to the more moderate often comply with the additional request, presum-
request. A substantial amount of research docu- ably because they want to view themselves as the
ments the efficacy of this strategy. While the pre- type of person who adheres to commitments.
vailing view is that reciprocal concessions are the
mechanism that makes this work, some research-
Conclusion
ers contend that the key mechanism is “perceptual
contrast.” That is, the more moderate request is Groups commonly pressure members to comply
accepted because, in comparison to the extreme with their wishes. This entry examined two mean-
request, it appears to be a very minimal request. ings attached to the term compliance. Early
researchers defined compliance as public behavior
without private acceptance. Research in this tradi-
Motivation to Preserve a Positive Self-Concept
tion has produced important insights about the
Finally, people desire to maintain a positive conditions under which compliance leads to private
view of themselves, and compliance professionals acceptance. More recently, researchers have
often attempt to capitalize on this motivation. employed a definition of compliance that ignores
Viewing oneself as a person who is consistent and the distinction between public behavior and private
who adheres to commitments contributes to one’s acceptance. Instead, compliance is defined simply
positive self-perception. One well-documented as acquiescence to a request. This definition has
Computer-Mediated Communication 133

stimulated a great deal of research on the motiva- and a wide variety of less familiar tools. CMC
tional underpinnings of compliance and the tactics allows people to communicate at a distance,
that groups and individuals use to induce people to across both space and time. These technologies
comply. Research resulting from these two lines of can alter the ways that people converse with one
inquiry has enriched our understanding of social another in both positive and negative ways. It is
influence in both dyadic and group contexts. important to group processes and intergroup rela-
tions in two ways: First, the use of CMC instead
Martin S. Greenberg of face-to-face conversation can alter the ways
that people interact with each other, affecting such
See also Cognitive Consistency; Conformity;
Informational Influence; Normative Influence; Norms; things as group performance and people’s liking
Obedience to Authority for one another. Second, CMC itself makes it pos-
sible for people to interact with a more diverse set
of individuals, spanning many time zones and
Further Readings countries. Thus, CMC technologies can broaden
Burger, J. M. (1999). The foot-in-the-door compliance
social networks, helping people to know individu-
procedure: A multiple-process analysis and review. als from around the world.
Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 303–325. The appropriateness of any particular CMC
Cialdini, R. B. (2001). Influence: Science and practice tool for group communication will depend on
(4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. what the group is trying to accomplish. Researchers
Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social are continuously working to create newer and bet-
influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review ter CMC technologies that will better support
of Psychology, 55, 591–621. group processes and intergroup relations. This
Cialdini, R. B., & Trost, M. R. (1998). Social influence: entry examines the various types of CMC tech-
Social norms, conformity, and compliance. In nologies, their effects on the conversational pro-
D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The cess, and their impact on social networks.
handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2,
pp. 151–192). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Festinger, L. (1953). An analysis of compliant behavior. CMC Technologies
In M. Sherif, & M. O. Wilson (Eds.), Group relations There are many types of CMC technologies, each
at the crossroads (pp. 232–256). New York: Harper. of which can have different effects on group pro-
Kelman, H. C. (1958). Compliance, identification, and cesses. These technologies can be differentiated
internalization: Three processes of attitude change. along several dimensions. First, CMC technologies
Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2, 51–60. vary according to the mode of communication sup-
Nail, P. R. (1986). Toward and integration of some ported, such as typing, voice communication, facial
models and theories of social response. Psychological
expressions, or gestures. A common way of talking
Bulletin, 100, 190–206.
about this is in terms of richness—the more aspects
of face-to-face communication (words, intonation,
facial expressions, etc.) available in a CMC tech-
Computer-Mediated nology, the richer that technology is said to be.
Thus, video is richer than telephony, which in turn
Communication is richer than instant messaging. Second, CMC
technologies vary according to the type of social
Computer-mediated communication (CMC) refers group they are intended to support. Some, such as
to the exchange of messages via computer tech- IM, are used predominantly by pairs of colleagues,
nologies, as opposed to face-to-face communica- friends, and family members. Others, such as tele-
tion. It includes familiar technologies, such as conferencing and online chatrooms, can support
e-mail or telephony; less common, but also popu- small groups. Yet others, such as blogs and e-mail
lar technologies, such as video conferencing, distribution lists, can support communication
instant messaging (IM; exchanging short text mes- among hundreds, thousands, or even millions of
sages), and blogging (writing in an online diary); people. Third, CMC technologies vary according
134 Computer-Mediated Communication

to whether they are intended to support real-time How well CMC supports group activities
(synchronous) communication, in which speakers depends in large part on the type of task people are
and listeners are both present at the same time and doing. When the goal is informal chitchat, most
can respond immediately to each other’s messages, any kind of synchronous communication will suf-
or whether they are intended to support different- fice, including the telephone and IM. The reason-
time (asynchronous) communication, such as when ing here is that nonverbal and vocal cues are less
someone reads and responds to an e-mail that was important for such conversations than they are for
sent the day before. tasks requiring more social delicacy, such as nego-
The characteristics of a given type of CMC tiations. For these more delicate tasks, richer
(mode of communication, type of social group, media like video conferencing are more appropri-
synchronous vs. asynchronous) have implications ate (in some cases people may actually travel long
for the types of group processes that can be sup- distances to conduct these conversations face-to-
ported. For example, e-mail can be a good method face). Tasks that involve talking about physical
for exchanging documents or notifying others of objects, such as maps, architectural diagrams, or
an upcoming event such as a party or presentation, pieces of technology, also benefit from CMC tools
but it is not as effective as the telephone for mak- that include video. Here, however, the kind of
ing rapid decisions. Instant messaging can be video that is most useful does not show a partner’s
slower than a telephone call, because people typi- face, but rather a view of the work space, so that
cally type more slowly than they speak, but it people can share a view of the objects they are
provides a written record of the discussion that can talking about.
be referenced in the future. At the level of conversational processes, research-
ers have found that specific attributes of media
influence how people communicate with one
Effects of CMC on Conversational Processes
another. For example, when people can’t see their
Face-to-face conversation is an essential part of partners, they are more likely to say things that are
most all group processes; it is the basic mechanism impolite, a phenomenon known as flaming. A
by which people exchange ideas, come to agree- common explanation for this is that when people
ment, negotiate outcomes, and perform other can’t see a partner they feel less constrained by
group tasks. Three key aspects of conversational social norms that prohibit rude behavior. They
processes are often altered when people communi- don’t have to look at a partner’s upset facial
cate via CMC: the types of communicative behav- expression or listen to him or her yell in response.
iors people perform, the role of conversational Flaming is particularly likely when people are
context, and turn taking. anonymous—for example, when they use fictitious
screen names in chat rooms—and thus cannot be
held personally accountable for what they say.
Words, Intonation, and Nonverbal Behavior
Communication via CMC has also been studied
In conversations, listeners attend to the words with respect to interpersonal deception. In text-
being spoken, but they also listen to how these based media like e-mail or IM, not only are visual
words are spoken, and they watch facial expres- cues missing (e.g., “shifty eyes”) but also the per-
sions, hand gestures, and other nonverbal behav- son who is lying has more time to carefully com-
iors for insight into what the speaker means. pose falsehoods. In fact, police agencies can create
Imagine, for example, hearing someone say, “I’m entirely false personas in text chat rooms, as is the
so happy!” versus “I’m so happy.” With the rising case when agents pretend to be young girls in order
intonation suggested by an exclamation mark, the to catch sexual predators. The lack of visual cues to
speaker sounds much happier. Similarly, listeners’ the typist’s identity and the additional time avail-
nonverbal behaviors are important sources of able to carefully craft typed messages create oppor-
information for speakers. Speakers monitor lis- tunities to deceive on a much larger scale than that
teners’ gaze and facial expressions to assess commonly available in face-to-face groups.
whether or not they are listening and understand Perhaps because lying is easier when text-based
the message. media are used, members of groups that interact
Computer-Mediated Communication 135

virtually often show less trust in each other than people to multitask, switching between multiple
do members of collocated groups. Trust among conversations or between a conversation and some
members of virtual groups can be increased if other activity. Because of the invisibility of the con-
people interact informally with one another first, text, conversational partners can’t see that they do
either face-to-face or via CMC. Once people get to not have a person’s undivided attention.
know one another, trust levels in virtual and col- When context is lacking, the careful negotiation
located groups are similar. of engagement in an interaction is disrupted. When
people are face to face, they use a series of nonver-
bal cues (looking at the other person from a dis-
Context
tance to see if he or she is busy, establishing eye
Conversations take place within a larger set- contact, moving into speech range, etc.) to initiate
ting, such as a workplace, school, or home, and a conversation. In virtually all types of CMC, the
this setting helps shape what kinds of messages information needed for this engagement process to
are appropriate and how they should be under- go smoothly is missing. As a result, it is easy to
stood. In CMC, the sender of a message may not interrupt people when they are busy. For example,
know the context of the recipient, and thus acci- when making a telephone call there is no way to
dentally violates social norms. One example of determine if the called person is sleeping, cooking,
this is sending jokes or other personal IM mes- painting, or otherwise engaged—the person is sim-
sages to recipients who are projecting their com- ply interrupted in the middle of whatever he or she
puter screen to an audience. In such circumstances, was doing. The same holds true for senders of IM
the entire audience will see the possibly inappro- messages, although some IM clients allow people
priate message. to indicate their availability for communication
The absence of context also affects people’s (e.g., setting their status as “away”). E-mail spam-
interpretations of events. It becomes easy for peo- mers take advantage of this lack of context by
ple to misinterpret others’ responses or failures to sending hundreds or even thousands of unwanted
respond. If someone fails to respond to an e-mail messages each day.
message, it could be because he or she is intention-
ally ignoring it, or it could be because the person is
Turn Taking and Conversational Participation
very busy. When cell phones become disconnected
in the heat of an argument, it could be because the In a typical conversation, people take turns
signal was dropped or it could be because the speaking and listening in an orderly fashion, using
other party hung up in anger. Several studies have turn-taking signals such as tone of voice; questions
found that when context is lacking, people tend to like, “What do you think, John?”; and eye gaze. In
make what social psychologists call the fundamen- CMC, many if not most of these cues are missing.
tal attribution error: They overattribute the causes This has both negative and positive effects on
of events to their partner’s dispositional character- group interaction. On the negative side, it can be
istics (e.g., laziness, lack of interest) when those more awkward to change speakers in CMC, espe-
causes actually involve situational constraints, cially in large groups such as multiparty audio
such as the quality of the technology (e.g., bad conferences. On the positive side, however, shier
connection). people find it easier to speak up when they do not
A flip side of the ambiguity of CMC is a phe- have to attend to these turn-taking cues. In fact,
nomenon known as plausible deniability. People one of the earliest goals of text-based CMC tools
are aware that their communication partners can’t was to increase the evenness of participation
see what they are doing, and they can thus pretend among members of group by making everyone
to miss messages when they really just don’t want anonymous. That way, it was reasoned, people of
to respond. Plausible deniability is risky, however, lower status or with greater fears of speaking
for the reasons stated above: The sender of the mes- would contribute more. These systems were fairly
sage is most likely to assume that a nonresponse is successful, but as one might imagine, people did
due to partner characteristics, not the situation. not like having anonymous partners and the tools
The ambiguity of context in CMC also enables were never used to any great degree.
136 Computer-Mediated Communication

Using CMC to Broaden Social Networks cultures, particularly the United States, Canada,
and Europe. An important area for future work is
In addition to its effects on individual conversa-
to understand how CMC changes group process
tional processes, CMC can help grow people’s
among different cultural groups and in intercul-
social networks—the set of people they know and
tural communication.
who those people know. But CMC can also intro-
duce problems into these new social relationships.
Longer Term Relationships
Meeting New People
An intriguing aspect of virtual relationships is
When people are all collocated in the same that people are more likely to disclose personal
physical area, they tend to bump into one another information about themselves to those they meet
in common areas such as cafeterias, hallways, or online than they are to disclose such information
coffee shops. Social norms dictate greeting to face-to-face acquaintances. This can have both
acquaintances in such settings, so unplanned con- benefits and costs. On the positive side, disclosure
versations often arise. These conversations of personal information, especially when recipro-
strengthen interpersonal bonds. The majority of cated, can speed up the development of deep and
CMC technologies do not support this kind of long-lasting relationships. On the negative side,
informal communication, though there are some however, disclosure of personal information to
exceptions. For example, there are thousands of unfamiliar others can be risky and in some cases
online chat rooms where one can go to discuss has led to serious consequences such as identity
topics of common interest with people one has theft or predatory behavior.
never met in real life. In some cases, longer term Although CMC can broaden social networks
friendships and even marriages have developed and lead to deep friendships, it can also introduce
from chat room interactions. Another place that problems into social relationships. Earlier, this
people encounter new potential friends is in vir- entry discussed phenomena that surround a single
tual social environments such as Second Life, interaction, either face-to-face or via CMC. These
which even includes large (virtual) public events phenomena have a way of adding up over time,
like concerts or presentations to bring people shaping the quality of the interactions among a
together. Social networking sites like Facebook group of people and influencing the outcomes of
and MySpace also allow people to extend their their activities. The erroneous overattribution of
networks by facilitating connections between problems to others’ personal characteristics rather
friends of friends. At the same time, these sites than technological limitations is one example.
allow people to maintain existing close relation- When failures to respond are attributed to ill will
ships after life changes, such as moving away for or laziness on the part of one’s partners, this
college. can’t help but negatively impact future interac-
One of the values of meeting new people online tions. Similarly, confusions that arise because
is that these people tend to be more diverse than visual or auditory cues are missing in CMC may
those one would meet in one’s neighborhood. In not be noticed until much further down the line,
one chat room, for example, a typical discussion when they have already had significant conse-
included people from the United States, Canada, quences. Perhaps for these reasons alone, social
Mexico, Germany, and Australia. Over time, many interactions via CMC are often less successful
of these people became close friends and some than those among collocated individuals, at least
even traveled to other countries to meet face-to- in the short run. With more time and experience
face. Interaction across cultures brings interesting with CMC, groups are often able to overcome
new challenges for many people, because cultures these problems.
differ in communication styles, politeness norms,
opinions about what topics are appropriate versus Susan Fussell
inappropriate, and norms for who should take the
lead in discussions. Most of what we know about See also Culture; Social Identity Model of Deindividuation
CMC is the result of studies conducted in Western Effects; Virtual/Internet Groups; Work Teams
Computer Simulation 137

Further Readings validity can be evaluated by comparing its output


Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in to empirical observations. Structurally, the theory is
communication. In L. B. Resnick, R. M. Levine, & embodied in the choices of attributes and behaviors
S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared that are included in the model. Dynamically, the
cognition (pp. 127–149). Washington, DC: American theory is captured by the functional rules. These
Psychological Association. rules describe how agents’ attributes (knowledge,
Hancock, J. T. (2007). Digital deception: When, where, mood, etc.) affect their behaviors and how the
and how people lie online. In K. McKenna, behavior of each agent changes the attributes of
T. Postmes, U. Reips, & A. N. Joinson (Eds.), Oxford others, and thus their subsequent behaviors. Using
handbook of Internet psychology (pp. 287–301). the capacity and flexibility of computational mod-
Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. eling, one can combine many theoretical ideas
Hinds, P., & Kiesler, S. (Eds.). (2002). Distributed work. across different levels of analysis (individual, small
Cambridge: MIT Press. group, organizational, and community) into a uni-
Spears, R., Lea, M., & Postmes, T. (2001). Social fied and coherent working model.
psychological theories of computer-mediated
communication: Social pain or social gain. In W. P.
Robinson & H. Giles (Eds.), The new handbook of An Example: Mate Selection
language and social psychology (pp. 601–623). Consider modeling how potential mates choose
Chichester, UK: John Wiley. partners. Suppose the domain of interest is mate
Weisband, S. (2007). Leadership at a distance: Research selection in a heterosexual, monogamous commu-
in technologically supported work. Mahwah, NJ:
nity of unattached agents. Characterizing the
Lawrence Erlbaum.
domain in this way implies that mating occurs
Whittaker, S. (2003). Theories and methods in mediated
when a female and a male agree to form a union
communication. In A. Graesser, M. Gernsbacher, & S.
and leave the pool of unattached agents. Hence,
Goldman (Eds.), The handbook of discourse processes
each agent’s gender is a necessary attribute and a
(pp. 243–286). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
necessary functional rule is that same-sex agents
will not mate. These structural components of the
model are necessary but often are not of primary
theoretical interest. For example, one might develop
Computer Simulation the model based on the following propositions:

Computer simulation uses the computational and Attractiveness proposition: Each agent has a level
storage capacity of computers to model complex of attractiveness that summarizes her or his value
and dynamic systems of behaviors. In a typical as a mate.
application, a model of group process includes:
Process assumptions: (1) a meeting is a temporary
•• agents (group members) who act and interact; pairing of two agents, (2) a proposal to a mate may
•• attributes that describe these agents; occur if the two parties in a meeting are of the
•• behaviors that the agents can display (behavioral opposite gender, (3) either party may initiate a
repertoire); and proposal, and (4) for a proposal to result in mating,
•• functional rules that specify how agents’ the recipient of a proposal must accept.
attributes affect their behaviors and how other
agents’ behaviors affect these attributes. Proposal proposition: The probability that a person
initiates a proposal is positively related to the level
Through a series of computational steps, the model of attractiveness of her or his partner in a
generates the interaction of agents as it unfolds over meeting.
time. At any point, the state of the interaction is
described by the current values of agents’ attributes. Acceptance proposition: The level of attractiveness
Such a computational model is a theory. It sym- of the proposer is positively related to the probability
bolically represents a real-world process, and its that a proposal will be accepted.
138 Computer Simulation

Rejection proposition: The more often a person’s random processes superimposed on the processes
proposals are rejected, the more likely the person that are explicitly incorporated in the model.
will be to initiate and accept a proposal.
Computational Models in Social Psychology
These propositions and assumptions comprise a
simple model of mate selection. The simplicity is In the 1968 Handbook of Social Psychology,
imposed for exposition purposes. For example, the Robert Abelson reviewed the early history of com-
model as outlined assumes that unions once formed putational modeling in social psychology. His and
remain intact. More realistically, some attached subsequent works include many examples of com-
partners may reenter the pool, but the process that puter simulations of group behavior. In 1988,
determines this reentry would have to be specified. Thomas Ostrom edited a special edition of the
Moreover, representing attractiveness as one- Journal of Experimental Social Psychology that
dimensional is simplistic. In practice, attractiveness featured computational models of social behavior.
is determined by many attributes, which are Ostrom characterized computational models as the
weighted differently by different agents. Also, the “third symbol system” for theorizing—verbal lan-
domain of interest could be expanded to include guage and mathematical systems being the other
homosexual and bisexual agents. This expansion two. He argued that computational models combine
would require adding additional attributes and the precision and deductive power of mathematical
functional rules to the process. Adding such com- systems with the flexibility and complexity of verbal
plexity is limited primarily by the creativity and expression. In the 2000 Handbook of Research
ingenuity of the modeler. The medium of computer Methods in Social and Personality Psychology, Reid
simulation easily accommodates complexity. Hastie and Garold Stasser presented two examples
Even within this simple model of mate selection, that illustrate the process (and possible pitfalls) of
translating the theoretical propositions into compu- computational modeling: the IMP (impression and
tational steps adds complexity. Consider the pro- memory processor) model of impression formation
posal proposition. Two agents, M and F, meet. and the DISCUSS model of small group discussion
Each has a specified level of attractiveness and these and decision making. Each model is presented in
are stored in the variables Mattr and Fattr. Does F sufficient detail to illustrate how one constructs and
propose a union? There are two general approaches evaluates models and how computational models
to translating attributes into behavior. One might interact with verbal and mathematical theories and
define a deterministic functional rule: If Mattr empirical observations. In 2000, Daniel Ilgen and
exceeds a critical threshold of attractiveness, then F Charles Hulin compiled a set of papers that describe
will propose. This approach requires an additional applications of computational models and commen-
attribute, namely an attractiveness threshold for tary on these applications. Their book documents
each agent. Alternatively, one might define a sto- the richness and variety of models in organizational
chastic rule that adjusts the probability of F propos- and group behavior.
ing as a positively increasing function of Mattr. This
stochastic approach requires that the program
Computational Modeling of Group Process
complete three steps: (1) compute the probability
of the event as a function of relevant attributes, An attractive feature for the study of group process
(2) sample a value from a probability distribution, is that a model can represent multiple levels of
and (3) compare the sampled number to the com- analysis: the individual, the small group, the orga-
puted probability of the event. If the sampled ran- nization, the community, and society. Bridging
dom number is greater or equal to the probability levels of analysis permits scholars to explore the
of the event (in this case, F proposing), then the implications of what happens at one level for what
event occurs; otherwise, it does not. A stochastic is observed at another level. For example, S. M.
approach implicitly recognizes that variables other Kalick and T. E. Hamilton used a model similar to
than those represented in the computational steps the foregoing example, in which individuals prefer
may determine whether the event of interest occurs, attractive mates, and showed that such a process
and these extraneous contributions are modeled as resulted in mates that were similar in attractiveness.
Conformity 139

They concluded that similar levels of attractiveness Further Readings


within couples does not imply that people seek Hastie, R., & Stasser, G. (2000). Computer simulation
mates who are similar to themselves in attractive- methods in social psychology. In H. Reis & C. Judd
ness. It is possible that an apparent preference for (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and
matching attractiveness is an emergent feature of personality psychology (pp. 85–114). Cambridge, UK:
the process, not a preference of the individual Cambridge University Press.
agents. Bibb Latané and his colleagues provided Ilgen, D. R., & Hulin, C. L. (2000). Computational
another example of bridging levels. A major tenet modeling of behavior in organizations: The third
of social impact theory is that the influence exerted scientific discipline. Washington, DC: American
on a person increases as the number of sources of Psychological Association.
influence increases. One implication is that major- Mason, W. A., Conrey, F. R., & Smith, E. R. (2007).
ity positions are more likely to gain than lose Situating social influence processes: Dynamic,
adherents. As a result, it seems that minority dissent multidirectional flows of influence within social
would disappear over time, causing opinions in a networks. Personality and Social Psychology Review,
group or community to converge on a shared posi- 11, 279–300.
tion. However, Latané and his colleagues demon- Ostrom, T. M. (1988). Computer simulation: The third
strated that another major tenet of social impact symbol system. Journal of Experimental Social
theory modulates the process of majority influence: Psychology, 24, 382–392.
The impact of a source depends on its psychologi-
cal immediacy. One component of immediacy is
proximity in a communication network. They
modeled communities of agents that were con- Conformity
nected by various configurations of communication
channels. Over the course of several rounds of Social influence, defined as changing one’s percep-
“talking,” agents learned their neighbors’ opinions tions, opinions, or behaviors in response to real or
and adjusted their individual opinions toward the imagined pressure from others, is a fundamental
opinions expressed by their neighbors. Latané and aspect of group life. Various forms of social influ-
his colleagues noted three emergent features at the ence have been identified, including compliance
level of the community. First, the number of agents (going along with a direct request from others),
holding minority opinions decreased (consolida- obedience (following the orders of a legitimate
tion). Second, neighborhoods of agents who agreed authority figure), and conformity (changing one’s
emerged (clustering) and disparity of opinions sur- perceptions, beliefs, or actions in the direction of
vived across neighborhoods (continuing diversity). a perceived group norm). This entry focuses on
That is, neighborhoods of minority opinion sur- conformity, examining some of the definitional
vived within an overall pattern of majority influ- and measurement issues that researchers face, the
ence. Third, when multiple issues were tracked motivations that lead people to conform, the
simultaneously, opinions across issues became impact of having a partner (social supporter) on
increasingly correlated over time (correlation), an resisting group pressure, and the role of individual
unintuitive by-product of consolidation and clus- differences in determining conformity.
tering. Thus, the dynamics of social impact, mod-
eled as communication and influence between
Classic Studies
individuals, generated neighborhoods of like-
minded people, pockets of minority dissent, and Two lines of classic research had a great impact on
characteristic belief profiles across multiple issues. how social psychologists think about conformity.
In one set of studies published in 1935, Muzafer
Garold Stasser and Susanne Abele Sherif demonstrated the power of social influence
to change people’s perceptions of highly ambigu-
See also Dynamical Systems Approach; Group Problem ous stimuli. Sherif made use of a perceptual illusion
Solving and Decision Making; Minority Influence; called the autokinetic effect, which occurs when
Research Methods and Issues; Social Impact Theory people are asked to concentrate on a stationary
140 Conformity

point of light in a dark room. Under these circum- groups elicit conformity from their members.
stances, people (who are not informed the light is Scores of studies have been conducted on this topic
actually stationary) perceive movement in the light. in the years since their groundbreaking research
Some think it moves only a little; others think it was published, and much has been learned.
moves a lot. Sherif found that, when groups of
three people were brought together and asked to
Definitional and Measurement Issues
say out loud how far the light moved, their judg-
ments gradually converged over trials. In other As noted above, we define conformity as change in
words, they developed a group norm about the a person’s perceptions, beliefs, or actions in the
distance the light moved. Moreover, this norm had direction of a perceived group norm. Although
a lasting impact on participants’ perceptions. seemingly straightforward, this definition masks
When later asked to make estimates alone, their several complexities regarding how conformity is
responses continued to be influenced by the group conceptualized and measured.
estimate. Subsequent research demonstrated that
conformity to the norm group was still evident a
Movement Versus Agreement Conformity
year later. It is important to note that, in these stud-
ies, there was initially no norm to which partici- Defining conformity in terms of change is use-
pants could conform. Instead, they created this ful, because it allows us to differentiate conformity
norm through mutual social influence, and it then from behavioral uniformity, which involves inde-
influenced their private responses. pendent agreement in the absence of perceived
A second set of studies, published by Solomon group pressure. Simply knowing that a person
Asch in 1951, demonstrated the power of social agrees with a group norm at one point in time does
influence to change people’s perceptions of highly not allow us to make a confident judgment about
unambiguous stimuli. Thus, in contrast to Sherif, the source of that agreement. Perhaps the person
Asch was interested in the conditions under which independently arrived at the group’s position with-
people would yield to group pressure even though out any knowledge of the group norm or any
the group was obviously incorrect. To answer this desire to adhere to it—an instance of behavioral
question, Asch assembled groups of seven to nine uniformity. In contrast, knowing that the person
people for a study on visual perception. The exper- disagreed with the group at Time 1 and then
imental task, which involved matching the length shifted toward it at Time 2 would increase our
of a standard line against three comparison lines, confidence that the group exerted influence on the
was quite easy. Each group contained one naïve person—an instance of conformity. This is espe-
participant who answered next-to-last. The remain- cially true if others who shared the person’s initial
ing “members” were confederates of the experi- position, but were not exposed to group pressure,
menter and gave unanimously incorrect answers failed to change their position.
on 12 of 18 trials. Asch found, to his surprise, that Although the criterion of movement is useful in
conformity occurred even in a situation where the defining conformity, it has potential pitfalls. For
majority gave clearly erroneous answers. example, in some cases a person who indepen-
Participants’ responses agreed with the erroneous dently agrees with a group norm but is tempted to
majority approximately one third of the time, and abandon it may fail to take this action because of
27% of participants conformed on at least 8 trials. group pressure. Here, conformity is revealed by
In contrast, control participants (who made judg- refusal to change. Response inhibition as a reac-
ments privately) gave incorrect answers less than tion to group pressure has also been discussed
1% of the time. Although the level of conformity under the rubric of “conformity by omission,”
that Asch obtained may seem surprising, it is which is contrasted with the more commonly stud-
worth noting that participants’ responses were ied “conformity by commission.” In the commis-
correct approximately two thirds of the time and sion case, conformity involves performing a
24% of participants never conformed. behavior because of group pressure that one would
Together, Sherif’s and Asch’s studies stimulated not otherwise perform (e.g., saying a prayer one
a tremendous amount of interest in when and why does not believe in because classmates are saying
Conformity 141

it). In the omission case, conformity involves fail- sanctions from outgroup members for taking a
ing to perform a behavior because of group pres- public stand agreeing with the group), or both
sure that one would otherwise perform (e.g., not compliance and acceptance (e.g., because he or she
saying a prayer one does believe in because class- accepts the group’s position and wants to encour-
mates are not saying it). age others to adopt this position). Whether confor-
Another potential problem with the movement mity reflects compliance and/or acceptance has
criterion involves the temporal relationship between implications for how a person will behave when
exposure to group pressure and response to this the group is absent. For example, a person who
pressure. We have implicitly assumed that confor- conforms at the public but not at the private level
mity occurs immediately after pressure is exerted, is unlikely to endorse the group’s position when
but this is not always the case. One counter example responding privately. In contrast, a person who
is anticipatory conformity, in which a person conforms at both levels is likely to endorse the
expects future group pressure and responds to it by group’s position even when the group is absent.
moving toward the group norm before the pressure The distinction between compliance and accep-
is applied. Another counter example is delayed con- tance is applicable to nonconformity as well as
formity, in which a person experiences group pres- conformity. Several forms of nonconformity can
sure, is unable or unwilling to conform immediately, be distinguished, but two of the most important
but moves to the group norm at some later time. In are independence and anticonformity. Independence
both cases, there is a causal link between pressure occurs when a person initially disagrees with a
and conformity, but this link is hard to detect. group and exhibits neither compliance nor accep-
tance after being exposed to group pressure. In
other words, the person stands fast when faced
Public Versus Private Conformity
with disagreement. In contrast, anticonformity
Our discussion so far has emphasized overt occurs when a person initially disagrees with a
(behavioral) responses to group pressure. However, group and moves even further away from its posi-
conformity can involve covert (attitudinal or per- tion (at the public and/or private level) after being
ceptual) responses as well. Two general categories exposed to pressure. In other words, the person
of conformity have therefore been distinguished— becomes more extreme in his or her initial position
public agreement (compliance) and private agree- when faced with disagreement. Ironically, then,
ment (acceptance). If conformity is defined as anticonformers are just as responsive to group
movement toward a group norm, then compliance pressure as are conformers, but they manifest their
refers to overt behavioral change in the direction susceptibility in a very different way (by moving
of that norm, whereas acceptance refers to covert away from, rather than toward, the group).
attitudinal or perceptual change. For example, if
an individual initially refused to sign a petition
Motivational Bases of Conformity
advocating abortion rights, learned that a group
advocated these rights, and then signed a petition People conform to group pressure because they are
favoring these rights, the person would be showing dependent on the group for satisfying two impor-
compliance. In contrast, if an individual privately tant goals. One is the desire to have an accurate
believed that abortion should be outlawed, learned perception of reality, and the other is the desire to
that a group advocated abortion rights, and then be accepted by other members.
changed his or her private opinion about these
rights, the person would be showing acceptance.
Informational Influence
The relationship between compliance and accep-
tance is potentially complex. An individual could There is a great deal of evidence that people
exhibit compliance but not acceptance (e.g., want to hold correct beliefs about the world,
because he or she fears group reprisal for deviance because such beliefs lead to actions that maximize
but does not privately accept the group’s position), the probability of rewarding outcomes. Some of
acceptance but not compliance (e.g., because he or our beliefs about the world (e.g., oatmeal cooks
she privately accepts the group’s position but fears better in hot water than cold water) can be verified
142 Conformity

by using objective tests (e.g., leaving oatmeal in 19 expected negative group evaluation. In con-
hot vs. cold water for 5 minutes and then tasting trast, of 24 people who conformed a great deal, 17
it). In contrast, other beliefs (e.g., the U.S. should expected positive evaluation from other group
maintain its nuclear arms capability; the federal members. Additional evidence demonstrates a fac-
government should institute stronger environmen- tual basis for nonconformers’ fear of punishment.
tal regulations) cannot be verified using objective Many studies of reaction to deviance show that
standards and hence must be verified using social group members do indeed reject people who devi-
tests, namely comparing our beliefs to those of ate from group consensus, depending on such fac-
other people whose judgment we respect. If these tors as the extremity and content of the deviate’s
others agree with us, we gain confidence in our position, the presumed reason for the deviate’s
beliefs. If they disagree with us, we lose confidence. behavior, and the deviate’s status in the group.
Because disagreement is disturbing, we are moti- Because actual or anticipated rejection is so dis-
vated to eliminate it, and one way to do so is to turbing, people try to minimize it by conforming to
conform to group norms. group norms.
According to this analysis, people sometimes According to this analysis, people sometimes
conform to groups because they are uncertain conform to groups because they are motivated to
about the correctness of their beliefs and believe be liked (or at least not disliked) and believe that
the group is more likely to be correct than they are. other members will feel more kindly toward
This kind of conformity reflects what Morton them if they conform to rather than deviate from
Deutsch and Harold Gerard labeled informational group norms. This kind of conformity reflects
influence. In general, informational influence pro- what Deutsch and Gerard labeled normative
duces private acceptance as well as public compli- influence. In general, normative influence pro-
ance. This is illustrated in the work of Muzafer duces public compliance but not private accep-
Sherif, discussed earlier. His research indicated that tance. This is illustrated in the work of Solomon
people judging an ambiguous stimulus exhibited Asch, discussed earlier. Few of Asch’s partici-
both compliance (when they made judgments in pants reported changing their perceptions of the
others’ presence) and acceptance (when they later experimental stimuli during the group pressure
responded privately). situation, and subsequent studies indicated that
Because informational influence is based on participants’ private responses after leaving the
insecurity about one’s beliefs, we would expect it situation often differed from their public responses
to be more common when an individual feels in that situation.
dependent on others for information. Consistent Because normative influence is based on insecu-
with this assumption, people conform more when rity about one’s acceptance, we would expect it to
they are working on ambiguous tasks than on be more common when an individual feels threat-
unambiguous tasks. In addition, they conform ened for deviating from group norms. Consistent
more when they have doubts about their own task with this assumption, group members conform
competence and when they think other group more when working for a common goal rather
members are highly competent on the task. than individual goals, presumably because they
believe that deviance on their part will be punished
more severely in the former case. As might be
Normative Influence
expected, however, conformity in common goal
In addition to wanting to hold correct beliefs groups is substantially reduced if members believe
about the world, people are motivated to be that this behavior will lower the group’s probabil-
accepted by other group members. The desire for ity of attaining a positive outcome. Another factor
social acceptance is very powerful in a wide range that increases normative influence is surveillance
of situations and explains why people are typically by other group members. People who are con-
quite uncomfortable if they think others currently cerned about others’ evaluations ought to conform
reject them or are likely to do so in the future. For more when their behavior is public rather than
example, the results of one study indicated that, of private, and conformity is in fact higher in the
25 people who conformed very little or not at all, former condition.
Conformity 143

Mixed Cases The effectiveness of social support can be


explained in terms of the supporter’s ability to
Although informational and normative influ-
reduce informational and/or normative influence.
ence have been discussed here as though they are
In the case of informational influence, social sup-
mutually exclusive, they occur simultaneously in at
porters can lower participants’ dependence on the
least some group situations. This is a major prem-
majority for information about reality. For exam-
ise of social identity theory, which seeks to explain
ple, in one study, participants received support
a range of social influence phenomena, including
from a partner who either had normal vision (and
conformity. This theory assumes that disagreement
hence could see the stimuli clearly) or wore
with others produces uncertainty only when one
extremely thick glasses and failed a “vision test” in
expects to agree with these people. For this reason,
the participant’s presence. Consistent with an
disagreement with ingroup members produces
informational influence explanation, the compe-
more uncertainty than disagreement with outgroup
tent supporter was more effective in reducing con-
members. In addition, the theory assumes that
formity. In the case of normative influence, social
some ingroup members are more influential than
supporters can lower participants’ fear of punish-
others. More specifically, a member’s influence
ment for deviation from the group norm. Research
depends on how much his or her position embod-
indicates that people who dissent from majority
ies what is unique about the group—the norm that
consensus with a supporter are much less appre-
differentiates the ingroup from outgroups.
hensive about being rejected than are those who
Members who are closer to this norm are more
dissent alone. The presence of a supporter may
influential than those who are further from it.
reduce participants’ fear of retaliation because they
Finally, the theory assumes that conformity involves
believe the supporter will absorb some of the
private acceptance as well as public compliance,
majority’s anger toward deviates. This should not
because people believe that ingroup norms provide
be the case, however, if majority members are
valid evidence about reality. A substantial amount
assumed to dislike the supporter, for example
of research is consistent with the social identity
because they are prejudiced against his or her racial
explanation of conformity.
group. In such cases, participants may expect that
a perceived alliance with the supporter will increase,
Social Support and Conformity Reduction
rather than decrease, the majority’s hostility toward
Asch investigated the impact of group unanimity them and hence may continue to conform.
on conformity by having a single confederate dis-
sent from the erroneous majority by giving correct
The Role of Individual Differences
answers on the line-judging task. The presence of
this social supporter reduced conformity dramati- Does everyone who enters a group pressure situa-
cally, from 33% to 6%. In later research, Asch tion respond in exactly the same way to it? Of
found that participants who were opposed by an course not. Every conformity experiment that has
eight-person majority and had a supporter con- been conducted has found that some people con-
formed far less than participants who were opposed form more than others. This universal finding
by a three-person majority and did not have a sup- challenges conformity researchers to discover char-
porter. Subsequent work by other researchers dem- acteristics of participants that reliably affect how
onstrated the generalizability of the social support they respond to group pressure. A variety of such
effect by showing that it reduces conformity on a characteristics, including age, race, sex, cultural
wide range of stimuli (e.g., visual perception items, background, and personality, have been studied in
attitudes) and for a wide range of people (e.g., an effort to meet this challenge. To illustrate the
male and female adults, normal and mentally impact of individual differences on conformity,
retarded children). In addition, social support participants’ sex and cultural backgrounds are dis-
remains effective even after the supporter leaves cussed next. In both cases, the behavioral predis-
the situation, as long as participants continue to positions that people acquire prior to entering a
judge the same type of stimulus and the supporter group pressure situation can affect how they
does not repudiate his or her dissenting position. respond to that situation.
144 Conformity

For many years, the conventional wisdom was the interpretation of these results is not completely
that females are more susceptible to group pres- clear, it is plausible that collectivists conform more
sure than are males. Today, we know that the than individualists because they give greater weight
relationship between sex and conformity is more to collective goals and are more concerned about
complicated. Using meta-analytic techniques that how other people view their behavior and are
combine the results of many studies, Alice Eagly affected by it.
and Linda Carli found that women were indeed So far, this entry has focused on how cultural
more influenceable than men. However, the overall differences between societies affect conformity, but
size of this effect was small, and it depended on the cultural shifts within societies may also be impor-
setting in which the research was conducted. Sex tant. To examine this possibility, Bond and Smith
differences in influenceability were strongest in examined the impact of intracultural change on
group-pressure situations where participants were conformity in the Asch paradigm, using data from
under surveillance by other group members. In the United States. They found that conformity lev-
contrast, women were only slightly more influ- els generally declined from the early 1950s to the
enceable than men in conformity experiments that mid-1990s. These findings are intriguing, but hard
did not involve surveillance and in attitude change to interpret. Were cultural changes the only (or
studies where participants listened to persuasive even the primary) cause of the reduced conformity,
communications. Several explanations for sex dif- and, if so, which of the many cultural changes that
ferences in conformity have been offered. The occurred in the U.S. were responsible?
most plausible is based on the different social roles
that men and women are taught to play in our
Conclusion
society. According to this explanation, men are
taught to be more dominant and assertive than Some 75 years after Sherif’s classic work using the
women, and people of both sexes are more likely autokinetic effect, social psychologists continue to
to exhibit gender-consistent behavior in public be intrigued by the causes and consequences of
(group-pressure) settings than in private settings. conformity. Since the 1980s, much of the work on
Just as men and women who grow up in the conformity has shifted from an exclusive interest
same culture have different socialization experi- in majority influence to a focus on similarities and
ences that can affect their responses to group pres- differences between majority influence and its mir-
sure, so people who grow up in different cultures ror opposite, minority influence (or innovation).
may learn different ways of responding to group The lively debate that has ensued has greatly
pressure. To investigate this possibility, Michael extended our understanding of the nature of social
Bond and Peter Smith examined cultural differ- influence in groups.
ences in conformity using a large meta-analysis
involving participants from 17 countries (Belgium, John M. Levine
Brazil, Canada, Fiji, France, Germany, Ghana, See also Anticonformity; Asch, Solomon; Compliance;
Great Britain, Holland, Hong Kong, Japan, Kuwait, Deutsch, Morton; Deviance; Informational Influence;
Lebanon, Portugal, the United States, Zaire, and Innovation; Minority Influence; Normative Influence;
Zimbabwe). These researchers measured the rela- Obedience to Authority; Opinion Deviance; Sherif,
tionship between the individualism–collectivism of Muzafer; Social Identity Theory
the countries and the amount of conformity that
residents displayed on Asch’s line judgment task.
Individualism is a cultural orientation that empha- Further Readings
sizes independence, autonomy, and self-reliance. Abrams, D., & Hogg, M. A. (1990). Social identification,
Collectivism is a cultural orientation that empha- self-categorization and social influence. In W. Stroebe
sizes interdependence, cooperation, and social & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social
harmony. Bond and Smith found that cultural val- psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 195–228). Chichester, UK:
ues were indeed related to conformity—people in John Wiley.
collectivist cultures displayed more conformity Allen, V. L. (1975). Social support for nonconformity. In
than did people in individualist cultures. Although L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
Conservatism 145

psychology (Vol. 8, pp. 1–43). New York: Such cognitive conservatism is conceptually related
Academic Press. to the resistance to change and traditionalism
Asch, S. E. (1951). Effects of group pressure upon the characteristic of conservative political ideologies.
modification and distortion of judgments. In H. However, this entry is concerned with political
Guetzkow (Ed.), Groups, leadership, and men rather than cognitive conservatism.
(pp. 177–190). Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Press. Among the first to present a psychological the-
Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of ory of political conservatism, Wilson proposed
normative and informational social influences upon that conservatism constitutes a general psycho-
individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social
logical dimension that can be useful in explaining
Psychology, 51, 629–636.
people’s attitudes across a broad spectrum of
Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (1981). Sex of researchers
social issues. Building on this notion, an accumu-
and sex-typed communications as determinants of sex
lation of research over the past few decades has
differences in influenceability: A meta-analysis of
social influence studies. Psychological Bulletin, 90,
uncovered a number of psychological variables
1–20.
associated with conservatism. This entry will dis-
Levine, J. M., & Kerr, N. L. (2007). Inclusion and cuss these variables, as well as the three motiva-
exclusion: Implications for group processes. In A. E. tional categories into which they can be grouped,
Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology: to present a comprehensive overview of the psy-
Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 759–784). chological mechanisms and correlates of political
New York: Guilford Press. conservatism.
Martin, R., & Hewstone, M. (2001). Conformity and In addition to the two core aspects of conserva-
independence in groups: Majorities and minorities. In tism (resistance to change and tolerance of inequal-
M. A. Hogg & R. S. Tindale (Eds.), Blackwell ity), conservatism has a number of peripheral
handbook of social psychology: Group processes aspects, including the desire for order and stability,
(pp. 209–234). Malden, MA: Blackwell. idealization of authority figures, preference for
Nail, P. R. (1986). Toward an integration of some gradual versus revolutionary change, and confor-
models and theories of social response. Psychological mance to traditional social norms. Some of these
Bulletin, 100, 190–206. factors are directly associated with the core dimen-
Sherif, M. (1935). A study of some social factors in sions of the conservative ideological belief system;
perception. Archives in Psychology, 187, 53–54. some are not.
Because conservatism (like liberalism) encom-
passes numerous goals and pervades multiple fac-
ets of life, people adhering to conservative ideologies
Conservatism can endorse different views and beliefs that may
occasionally conflict with one another. For exam-
As used in popular discourse, the term conserva- ple, it is not uncommon for conservatives to sup-
tism typically refers to a political ideology. Political port both increased military spending and the push
conservatism is often contrasted with liberalism, for smaller government. The matter is further com-
and the two are often conceptualized as occupying plicated by the fact that manifestations of conser-
opposite ends of a single ideological continuum. vatism are in constant flux depending on the social
Conservatism comprises two primary dimensions: issues that present themselves to individuals and
(1) a preference for tradition over change and societies at different points in time; for example,
(2) promotion (or tolerance) of inequality. These today’s neoconservative (or neocon) movement
two dimensions often (though not always) are cor- bears limited resemblance to mainstream American
related with one another. This is partly attributable conservatism of just a few decades ago. Accordingly,
to the fact that, throughout history, nontraditional the specific meaning of what constitutes conserva-
social systems have tended more toward egalitari- tive attitudes and beliefs inevitably changes and
anism than traditional ones. Interestingly, in cogni- evolves over time. Nonetheless, even with this
tive psychology, the term conservatism is used in unavoidable fluctuation, identifying major social
reference to the insufficient updating of judgments and psychological factors related to the core values
and estimates in the light of new information. of conservative ideology is feasible and valuable.
146 Conservatism

Motives Associated refers to the differentiation and synthesis of mul-


With Political Conservatism tiple perspectives, or dimensions. Generally speak-
ing, conservative ideologues have been found to be
Numerous theories of conservatism have stressed
less cognitively complex than their liberal ideolo-
the role of motivation in explaining individuals’
gies. Authoritarianism, political–economic conser-
adherence to conservative ideology. Nonetheless,
vatism, and possession of right wing opinions have
to date, no single theory of conservatism has been
all been found to correlate positively and consis-
able to fully explain all of conservatism’s many
tently with psychological dogmatism (the steadfast
manifestations. A recent review of research on
adherence to a belief or attitude with limited will-
conservatism suggests that the key to developing a
ingness to entertain evidence that conflicts with
comprehensive understanding of the psychology of
that view).
conservatism lies at the intersection of several psy-
One assumption of Wilson’s theory of conserva-
chological theories that highlight the cognitive and
tism is that people who hold politically conserva-
motivational factors involved in conservatism.
tive attitudes are less predisposed to seek out
This comprehensive review identifies a specific set
stimulating experiences than are liberals. This the-
of social–cognitive motives significantly associated
oretical assertion is substantiated by correlational
with political conservatism and classifiable into
evidence that conservatives are, in fact, generally
one of three categories: epistemic concerns, relat-
less open and receptive to novel and exciting expe-
ing to knowledge and belief structures and their
riences of various kinds and in a variety of domains.
acquisition; existential concerns, relating to the
For example, compared to liberals, conservatives
meaning and transience of a person’s existence;
are less likely to volunteer for psychology experi-
and ideological concerns, relating to the collection
ments that require openness to experience, they
of social and political ideas (i.e., ideology) that
place less value on having an exciting life, are less
shapes a persons worldview.
imaginative, and score lower on openness to expe-
rience and sensation-seeking scales.
Epistemic Motives
An epistemic motive is a motive relating to cog-
Existential Motives
nition, or thought, and the acquisition of knowl-
edge and beliefs. The accumulation of research Existential motives are motives related to the
evidence strongly suggests that political conserva- person’s very existence, its meaning, and the threat
tives tend to be more closed-minded and rigid in of its termination. In this category belong needs of
their thinking than people on the opposite end of self-esteem and self-actualization, but also fear, the
the ideological spectrum. In other words, individu- perception of threat, and consequent anger directed
als who subscribe to conservative ideologies are at the threatening parties. Because the concepts of
more likely than those who do not to have a high conservatism and authoritarianism are closely
degree of need for cognitive closure. This does not linked (with the latter considered a specific mani-
mean that no liberals possess that need, or that the festation of the former), research on authoritarian-
thinking of political liberals is never rigid or dog- ism has provided a number of insights into the
matic in nature. Nonetheless, an extensive review psychology of conservatism, with specific reference
of the available evidence indicates that conserva- to existential motives.
tives are significantly more likely than their liberal Contemporary as well as classic theories of
counterparts to have this need for closure. authoritarianism have suggested that factors such
Individuals who have a high need for closure as low self-esteem, fear, and aggression may con-
tend to be intolerant of ambiguity. Indeed, conser- tribute to a person’s willingness to adhere to a
vatives are more likely to be more intolerant of politically conservative ideology. Although there is
ambiguity than liberals and, as compared to their relatively scarce evidence suggesting that political
liberal counterparts to prefer “black and white” conservatism and lowered self-esteem are, in fact,
delineations of reality to “shades of gray.” Related related, there is considerable research evidence
to the intolerance of ambiguity is the absence of supporting the notion that fearfulness is related to
integrative complexity. Integrative complexity conservatism, as is the perception of threat.
Conservatism 147

Theories of authoritarianism have also sug- (2) endorsement of inequality—the two core
gested that conservatives are particularly aversive dimensions of conservatism.
to potential losses, which might help explain their Resistance to change is beneficial to the man-
general preference for maintenance of the status agement of uncertainty in that it prevents the
quo over change. Findings suggesting that this is introduction of the unknown and disruption of
the case include data showing that negatively one’s present reality. Fear, however, is inextricably
framed persuasive messages (which emphasize intertwined with the promotion of inequality,
potential losses) motivate changes in the behavior since it can both precipitate the endorsement of
and behavioral intentions of authoritarians more inegalitarianism (as a means of keeping less power-
effectively than positively framed persuasive mes- ful, revolutionary segments of society at bay) and
sages (which highlight potential gains). Fear of arise from it (by breeding discontent, turmoil, and
death is also correlated with conservatism, along even violent struggles).
with increased tendency to hold views of women Epistemic motives facilitate the acquisition of
and minority-group members that are congruent stable and firm beliefs, which in turn provide guid-
with traditional stereotypes. ance and help people navigate their often compli-
cated and ambiguous realities. Existential motives
also encourage achieving and maintaining stability
Ideological Motives
and certainty, and opposing change and avoiding
In addition to individual differences in social entry into the novel and insecure terrain that
and political attitudes associated with authoritari- inevitably accompanies it. Both epistemic and exis-
anism and conservatism, early theorizing also pos- tential motives, thus, are inherently served, to a
tulated that threats levied at the level of the certain extent, by resistance to change. Finally,
political system are more menacing to individuals ideological beliefs (as to the inevitability and jus-
who are highly authoritarian. This hypothesis is tice of the status quo) can help reduce uncertainty
also set forth by Jost’s recent theory of system of and feelings of threat and worthlessness by provid-
justification, which suggests that there is an ideo- ing those who embrace them with a sense of con-
logical motivation to defend the existing social viction and purpose.
system against instability and threat and this moti- Because ideology is instrumental in shaping
vation is strongest among those on the right wing people’s worldviews, and worldviews have impor-
of the ideological spectrum. Considerable experi- tant consequences for interpersonal interaction at
mental and archival research supports the idea that the individual, group, and societal levels, under-
in times of societal turmoil, people are more prone standing the forces that attract individuals to par-
to make more politically conservative decisions ticular ideologies is of great value to society. This
and judgments, and to defer to authoritarian lead- entry traced the accumulation of more than half a
ers in order to regain social stability and security. century of psychological research on conservative
Such findings highlight the fact that conservatism ideology. The results of this labor provide illumi-
is not solely an individual-difference variable; situ- nating insights into the specific cognitive motiva-
ational factors can also play an important role in tional factors that underlie political conservatism.
inducing the tendency to embrace conservative
ideologies. Arie W. Kruglanski and Anna C. Sheveland

See also Authoritarian Personality; Dogmatism; Ideology;


Conclusion Need for Closure; Right Wing Authoritarianism;
System Justification Theory
As discussed in this entry, political conservatism
is related to a number of different epistemic,
existential, and ideological motives. It has been
suggested that virtually all of these can be Further Readings
thought of as originating in attempts to manage Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., &
feelings of uncertainty and fear, which, in turn, Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality.
are close­­ly linked to (1) resistance to change and New York: Harper.
148 Conspiracy Theories

Altemeyer, R. A. (1998). The other “authoritarian uncertainty, conditions under which people are
personality.” Advances in Experimental Social eager for explanations; the content of conspiracies
Psychology, 30, 47–91. is emotionally laden and their discovery can be
Jost, J. T., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2004). A gratifying; the evidentiary standards for corrobo-
decade of system justification theory: Accumulated rating conspiracy theories is typically weak, but
evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of conspiracies that survive in the public conscious-
the status quo. Political Psychology, 25, 881–920. ness are resistant to falsification; the survivability
Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. of conspiracy theories is aided by psychological
(2003). Political conservatism as motivated social
biases and distrust of official sources; and con-
cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375.
spiracy theories of one form or another are held by
Kruglanski, A. W. (2004). The psychology of closed
most people.
mindedness. New York: Psychology Press.
Conspiracy theories and rumors are examples
Rokeach, M. (1960). The open and closed mind. New
York: Basic Books.
of informal social communications. As such, they
Tomkins, S. S. (1963). Left and right: A basic dimension
share several properties. First, rumors are particu-
of ideology and personality. In R. W. White (Ed.), The larly likely to flourish during periods of social
study of lives (pp. 388–411). Chicago: Atherton. uncertainty and anxiety. Indeed, rumor research
Wilson, G. D. (Ed.). (1973). The psychology of began in the 1940s as rumors came to the atten-
conservatism. London: Academic Press. tion of government officials who were concerned
that they would undermine the war effort. Second,
the definition of rumor, proposed by Robert
Knapp as “a proposition for belief of topical refer-
ence disseminated without official verification,” is
Conspiracy Theories similar to but more general than the definition of
conspiracy theories. Third, Knapp noted that the
Conspiracy theories are sets of often erroneous content of rumors expresses and gratifies collective
beliefs that people use to explain malevolent and/ emotional needs. This emotional dimension dif-
or unlawful acts that are perceived to be directed ferentiates rumor from news. So, for example, the
by and in favor of a small and powerful group news that Churchill is now in Washington is likely
that works in secret against a larger group of to elicit little emotion compared with the rumor
unwitting victims. This entry describes research that the Jews are avoiding the draft. It is, of course,
on conspiracy theories as well as closely related a small step to conclude that the latter rumor could
phenomena. It starts by considering the associa- blossom into a conspiracy.
tion between conspiracy theories and rumors and Knapp showed that rumor content can be coded
the social functions of stereotypes. Next, it with respect to its emotional content. A sample of
describes the research findings on conspiracy 1,089 rumors collected in 1942 showed that 2%
theories—when they are most likely to be con- were wish based (e.g., the Japanese do not have
ceived, the nature of the people who subscribe to enough oil to last 6 months), 25% were fear based
conspiracy theories, and the theories’ effects. The (e.g., the entire Pacific Fleet was lost at Pearl
entry concludes by describing explanations for the Harbor), 66% were hostile (e.g., that Churchill
existence of conspiracy theories and conspirato- blackmailed Roosevelt into provoking war with
rial thinking. Japan), and 7% escaped categorization. It is note-
worthy that of all the rumors, 50% concerned
intergroup tensions, and they were mostly anti-
Conspiracy Theories
administration (i.e., government, army, and navy),
and Related Phenomena
anti-British, or anti-Semitic. The emotional con-
Given that there is little research on conspiracy tent of rumor is suspiciously similar to that in
theories, it is worthwhile to consider the properties conspiracy theories, and is predominantly focused
that most conspiracy theories share: Conspiracy on intergroup relations. Rumors are often slander-
theories are usually conceived as explanations for ous, express intergroup hostilities, and scapegoat
events that provoke widespread social anxiety and minority groups.
Conspiracy Theories 149

In 1981, Henri Tajfel proposed a functional 11th attacks. Over time, 21% to 24% of Americans
account of stereotyping: Stereotypes provide positive believed that weapons of mass destruction had
images for ingroups, justify actions committed or been found in Iraq. These false beliefs developed
planned, and provide explanations for widespread independently of political affiliation, and were
social uncertainties. In fact, many of the stereotypes more far more prevalent for viewers of some news
identified by Tajfel fulfill all of these functions simul- sources (e.g., Fox News) than others (e.g., PBS).
taneously. For example, Nazi propaganda depicted The more of these false conspiracy beliefs that
Jews as child molesters, explained German hyperin- people possessed, the more they were in favor of
flation in the 1920s as the result of Jews controlling war with Iraq. Like stereotypes, conspiracies can
the banking system, and explained that Jews were be used to justify planned actions.
plotting world domination. In this case, the accusa- Conspiratorial thinking increases in prevalence
tions were depictions of Jews that were intentionally when there are widespread social uncertainties, as
diffused by Nazi propagandists in an attempt to found during war or in the aftermath of terrorist
forge a common outgroup to promote German attacks, and when there are natural disasters like
unity and serve Nazi aspirations for further power. tsunamis or earthquakes or outbreaks of lethal dis-
Conspiracy theories, rumors, and stereotypes ease. This fact is evidenced by the profusion of
have existed for centuries. Historical accounts documentaries, books, movies, and magazine articles
demonstrate that tens of thousands of women dedicated to explaining events like the September
accused of being witches were tortured and killed 11th terrorist attacks, and the more than 2,000 vol-
in Europe from the 15th through 17th centuries. umes on John F. Kennedy’s assassination. This sug-
The identification of women as witches was largely gests that conspiratorial thinking is driven by a
driven by rumor and religious superstition, and strong human desire to make sense of social forces
appears to have been more likely to occur during that are self-relevant, important, and threatening.
crop failures. In the modern world, rumors and
conspiracies are now easier to diffuse than at any
Who Subscribes to Conspiracy Theories?
time in the past. While this is true, there is reason
for optimism. On a historical time line, superstition While there is some evidence for individual dif-
is in decline; skepticism, rationality, and the scien- ferences that lead people to be more or less suscep-
tific method are on the increase; and perhaps most tible to belief in conspiracy theories, it is also true
importantly, it is possible to combat false rumors that some conspiracy theories are believed by large
using the same technology that aids their spread. majorities of the population. For example, there is
evidence that approximately 90% of the American
population believe that President Kennedy was
Research on Conspiracy Theories assassinated by a conspiracy of one or more of the
following: Cuban exiles, the Central Intelligence
When Do Conspiracy Theories Arise?
Agency, the Mafia, the Dallas police, pentagon
Conspiracies often originate in government pro- officials, and/or Lyndon Johnson, as opposed to
paganda that is designed to manufacture support the official lone suspect, Lee Harvey Oswald. In
for war. Enemies are said to be conspiring to fact, polling data suggest that most people believe
launch an attack, are developing weapons, or are in at least some conspiracies.
implicated in an attack on the homeland. For Research suggests that in general people tend
example, in the lead up to the Iraq war in 2003, to either believe in conspiracies or not. It shows
polls showed that 22% of the American popula- that general belief in conspiracies has several cor-
tion believed that Iraq was directly involved in the relates. First, while there is no evidence for asso-
attacks on September 11, 2001, while a further ciations with gender, education level, or occupation,
35% believed that Iraq was not directly involved, there is evidence that Blacks and Hispanics are
but had given substantial support to Al Qaeda. more likely to believe conspiracies than are Whites.
Further, 32% claimed that it was very likely, and The association between ethnicity and belief in
37% believed it somewhat likely that Saddam conspiracies appears to be mediated by anomie (a
Hussein was personally involved in the September sense of social dislocation) and lack of trust in
150 Conspiracy Theories

other people, the police, and government. Further, American democracy. Hofstadter’s vision was a
people are also particularly likely to believe in con- consensus view of democracy; competing groups
spiracies that they feel are directed at their group. would represent the interests of individuals, but
Blacks, for example, are particularly likely to would do so within a political system that every-
believe that the federal government plants drugs in one agreed would frame the bounds of conflict.
their communities. For Hofstadter, people who felt unable to channel
their political interests into representative groups
Outcomes of Belief in Conspiracy Theories would become alienated from this system, which
would make them vulnerable to charismatic rather
Exposure to media that endorse conspiracies than practical and rational leadership, and would
increases belief. There is evidence that viewing the eventually undermine democracy and lead to
Oliver Stone movie JFK increased belief in the con- totalitarian rule. Those so alienated from the sys-
spiracy to assassinate President Kennedy and tem would not trust the statements of opposition
decreased belief in the official account that Lee parties as being a fair disagreement, rather, differ-
Harvey Oswald acted alone. A further outcome ences in views would be regarded with deep suspi-
was that compared with people who were about to cion. Such people alienated from the system would
view the movie, those who had seen it expressed develop a paranoid fear of conspiracy.
less interest in political participation. It may be According to Hofstadter, the paranoid style is
that distrust of those in power predicts and is not individual pathology, rather, it originates in
caused by belief in government conspiracies. social conflict that raises fears and anxieties,
Given relatively high rates of incidence of AIDS leading to status struggles between opposed
and sexual transmitted infections among Blacks, groups. The paranoid style and resulting con-
researchers have investigated belief in AIDS con- spiracy theorizing derives from a collective sense
spiracies—that AIDS was created by the federal of threat to one’ group, culture, way of life, and
government to kill Blacks—and attitudes toward so on. Extremists on either side of the political
condom use. This research has shown that the spectrum could be expected to develop a para-
more male Blacks believe in this conspiracy, the noid style. On the right, McCarthyism repre-
less favorable their attitudes toward condom use sented the paranoid style—paranoid notions of
are, and in turn the less likely they are to use con- rife communist infiltration of American institu-
doms. There is also evidence that these beliefs lead tions; on the left are examples such as the con-
to distrust of research institutions and are a sig- spiracy of slaveholders against abolitionists or
nificant barrier to getting Blacks to participate in fears of international bankers.
AIDS clinical trials. Hofstadter’s approach is notable because it
An alternative possibility is that Blacks have places the root of conspiracies in intergroup pro-
developed these beliefs because of real discrimina- cesses, which means that his theory can account
tion. For example, starting in 1932 and continuing for the ebb and flow of conspiracy theories over
for 40 years, the Public Health Service working time. Since Hofstadter’s theory was conceived,
with the Tuskegee Institute studied the effect of however, there have been a number of advances in
syphilis on the bodies of 399 Black men by with- social psychology that can account for the role of
holding treatment and allowing them to die, biases in information processing.
despite the discovery of penicillin as a standard
cure in 1947. It is clearly worth noting that gov-
ernments do at least occasionally conspire against Psychological Biases
their own citizens. Biased Assimilation and Attitude Polarization.
John McHoskey provided an explanation for the
Explanations for Conspiracy Theories difficulty of falsifying conspiracy theories.
McHoskey gave advocates and opponents of the
Hofstadter and the Paranoid Style
JFK conspiracy a balanced description of arguments
Richard Hofstadter’s work in history explored for and against the conspiracy to assassinate
the emergence of conspiracy theorizing within President Kennedy. His proposal was that people
Contingency Theories of Leadership 151

who favored or opposed the conspiracy theory Further Readings


would regard the statement as evidence in favor of Abalakina-Paap, M., Stephan, W. G., Craig, T., &
their position. This would occur because proponents Gregory, W. L. (1999). Beliefs in conspiracies.
on both sides engaged in biased assimilation. Political Psychology, 20, 637–647.
According to this phenomenon, information that Clarke, S. (2002). Conspiracy theories and conspiracy
supports one’s position is uncritically accepted, theorizing. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 12,
whereas contrary information is scrutinized and 131–150.
discredited. Further, because of attitude polarization, Goertzel, T. (1994). Belief in conspiracy theories. Political
when people encounter ambiguous information, Psychology, 15, 731–742.
they tend to endorse their original position even Hofstadter, R. (1965). The paranoid style in American
more strongly than they did prior to encountering politics and other essays. New York: Knopf.
the information. This proved to be the case for both Knapp, R. H. (1944). A psychology of rumor. Public
advocates and opponents of the JFK conspiracy. Opinion Quarterly, 8, 22–27.
Kull, S., Ramsay, C., & Lewis, E. (2003). Misperceptions,
The Fundamental Attribution Error. Philosopher the media, and the Iraq war. Political Science
Steve Clarke proposed that conspiratorial thinking Quarterly, 118, 569–598.
is maintained by the fundamental attribution error. McHoskey, J. W. (1995). Case closed? On the John F.
According to the fundamental attribution error, Kennedy assassination: Biased assimilation of evidence
people overestimate the importance of dispositions and attitude polarization. Basic and Applied Social
(e.g., individual motivations or personality traits) Psychology, 17, 395–409.
Tajfel, H. (1981). Social stereotypes and social groups. In
and underestimate the importance of situational
J. C. Turner & H. Giles (Eds.), Intergroup behavior
factors (e.g., random chance, social norms, and so
(pp. 144–167). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
on) in explaining the behavior of other people.
Clarke pointed out that conspiratorial thinking
typically makes this error, asserting that devious,
self-interested, or malevolent people conspire to
make some event come to fruition, such as an Contingency Theories
assassination, terrorist attack, or elaborate cover of Leadership
up. People maintain adherence to their conspir­
atorial thinking because to dispense with the What makes leadership effective in a group or
conspiracy would be to discount human motives in organization? Scholars have been preoccupied
events. Research provides much evidence that with addressing this key question perhaps since
people commit the fundamental attribution error. the inception of leadership as a formal field of
Further, Clarke suggests that the ultimate rea- scientific inquiry. One classic approach that gained
son that people make the fundamental attribution prominence during the 1970s and 1980s is contin-
error is because we are evolved to do so. His rea- gency theories of leadership. Contingency theories
soning is that we evolved in tightly knit groups hold that leadership effectiveness is related to the
where understanding the motives of others was interplay of a leader’s traits or behaviors and situ-
critical for the detection of malevolent intentions. ational factors.
Clearly, the cost of making an error in identifying
others’ insidious motives is small relative to the
History and Background
cost of not identifying such motives, and so we are
psychologically attuned to discount situational fac- The contingency approach to leadership was influ-
tors over dispositional factors in explaining others’ enced by two earlier research programs endeavor-
behavior. ing to pinpoint effective leadership behavior.
During the 1950s, researchers at Ohio State
Scott A. Reid University administered extensive questionnaires
measuring a range of possible leader behaviors in
See also Cults; Nationalism and Patriotism; Rumor; various organizational contexts. Although multi-
Social Representations; Stereotyping; Terrorism ple sets of leadership behaviors were originally
152 Contingency Theories of Leadership

identified based on these questionnaires, two types early theory is that leadership effectiveness (in
of behaviors proved to be especially typical of terms of group performance) depends on the inter-
effective leaders: (1) consideration, leader behav- action of two factors: the leader’s task or relations
iors that include building good rapport and inter- motivations and aspects of the situation. The
personal relationships and showing support and leader’s task or relations motivation is measured
concern for subordinates and (2) initiating struc- through the Least Preferred Coworker scale (LPC).
ture, leader behaviors that provided structure (e.g., This scale asks leaders to recall a coworker (previ-
role assignment, planning, scheduling) to ensure ously or currently) they work with least well and
task completion and goal attainment. to characterize this individual with ratings on a
About the same time, investigators from the series of 8-point bipolar adjectives (e.g., distant–
University of Michigan’s Survey Research Center cold). High LPC scores reflect more positive
conducted interviews and distributed question- descriptions of the least preferred coworker,
naires in organizations and collected measures of whereas low LPC scores evidence more negative
group productivity to assess effective leadership perceptions. Fielder argued that an individual with
behaviors. The leadership behavior categories that a high LPC score is motivated to maintain harmo-
emerged from the University of Michigan were nious interpersonal relationships, whereas an indi-
similar to the consideration and initiating structure vidual with a low LPC score is motivated to focus
behaviors identified by the Ohio State studies. The on task accomplishment.
University of Michigan investigators, however, The interpretation of exactly what high and low
termed these leadership behaviors relation-oriented LPC scores mean has been the subject of much
behavior and task-oriented behavior. This line of controversy and debate. For example, Robert Rice
research was later extended by Robert Blake and suggested that scores on the LPC represent values
Jane Mouton in 1964 to suggest that effective lead- and attitudes, whereas other scholars have drawn
ers score high on both of these behaviors (high– linkages between high and low LPCs and task ver-
high leaders). sus relations leadership behaviors. Fielder con-
Although research consistently supported the tended that task and relations motivations are
dichotomy between task and relations leadership stable traits that are not easily amenable to change.
behavior, little evidence suggested that these leader- Therefore, attempts to encourage a high or low
ship behaviors were related to increased leadership LPC leader to adapt to changing situations would
effectiveness in group performance. Inconsistent be difficult, if not altogether futile. To optimize the
findings characterized the bulk of research in this possibility of an effective group outcome, this
area, and soon the focus of attention on leadership model advocates matching a high or low LPC
behaviors as direct predictors of leadership effec- leader to the right type of situation.
tiveness shifted. However, researchers did not The model purports that task or relations motiva-
abandon the task versus relations dichotomy alto- tions are contingent on whether the leader can con-
gether. Instead, an alternative approach was devel- trol and predict the group’s outcome (i.e., situational
oped that emphasized the potentially critical role of favorability). Situational favorability depends on
the situational context in linking leadership behav- three assessments: (1) whether the leader perceives
iors or traits to effective outcomes. This alternate cooperative relations with subordinates (leader-
approach became known as the contingency theo- member relations), (2) whether the task is highly
ries of leadership. structured with standardized procedures and mea-
sures of adequate performance (task structure), and
(3) whether the leader’s level of authority is punish-
The Contingency Approach ing or rewarding group members (position power).
The combination of leader-member relations, task
The Contingency Theory
structure, and position power creates eight different
of Leadership Effectiveness
situational types, known as octants 1–8, that have
In the 1960s, Fred Fielder advanced the first been more broadly categorized as favorable situa-
theory using the contingency approach, the contin- tions, intermediate situations, and unfavorable situ-
gency theory of effectiveness. The main idea of this ations. Each different situational type is most
Contingency Theories of Leadership 153

effectively handled by either a high or low LPC these studies provide mixed support for the theory.
leader. Specifically, high LPC leaders are most effec- Various scholars have argued that it may be pre-
tive in influencing group performance in intermedi- mature to draw any firm conclusions regarding the
ate situations, and low LPC leaders are most validity of the theory because of methodological
effective in favorable or unfavorable situations. limitations associated with past research and sparse
Fielder’s contingency model has been used in empirical attention to various variables outlined in
training programs and has received a lion’s share the model. For example, little empirical research
of research attention. A large number of studies has investigated participative and achievement-
and three meta-analyses more or less support the oriented leadership styles. However, path–goal
model’s postulations. However, almost half a cen- theory has made an important contribution in
tury after its introduction, further clarifications highlighting the potential influence of leaders on
and future studies may be warranted to iron out followers’ motivation and performance. Moreover,
both theoretical and methodological issues associ- it has informed the development of subsequent
ated with the model. Nevertheless, many scholars leadership theories, such as the substitutes for
consider the work by Fielder and his colleagues a leadership theory by Steve Kerr and John Jermier
classic contribution that inspired consideration of and the self-concept-based theory of charismatic
person and situational aspects in leadership. leadership by Boas Shamir, Robert House, and
Michael Arthur.
Path–Goal Theory
Normative Decision Model
Path–goal theory was originally developed by
Martin Evans in 1970 and expanded by Robert Many contingency theories define leadership
House in 1971 into a more complex contingency effectiveness in terms of group performance or
theory. Drawing on expectancy theory and the team satisfaction. However, the normative deci-
Ohio and Michigan leader behavior studies, House sion model is a unique contingency theory in its
suggested that a leader should help elucidate the exclusive focus on providing prescriptions to opti-
path for followers to achieve group goals. This mize the leader’s decision-making process. The
involves the leader employing particular behaviors normative decision model, originally developed by
in specific situations to increase follower satisfac- Victor Vroom and Phillip Yetton in 1973 and later
tion and motivate efforts toward task accomplish- revised by Victor Vroom and Arthur Jago, empha-
ment. The theory identifies four types of leader sizes situational factors more than leadership
behavior that include supportive (relations ori- behaviors. It outlines a set of five different decision-
ented), directive (task oriented), achievement ori- making strategies that range on a continuum from
ented, participative leader behavior, as well as two directive to participative decision making. These
aspects of the situation, namely, follower charac- strategies include two types of autocratic styles
teristics and task characteristics. (the leader decides alone), two types of consulta-
In situations where the task is dull or taxing, the tive styles (the leader consults followers but decides
theory predicts that supportive leadership behav- alone), and a group decision-making option (group
iors may increase followers’ interest in task accom- consensus).
plishment and encourage followers’ expectations The optimal strategy for decision-making situa-
of a successful outcome. In turn, this may motivate tions may be reached by answering “yes” or “no”
followers’ efforts to achieve the task. In situations to seven questions on a decision tree that may or
where the task is ambiguous or complicated, direc- may not characterize the decision-making situa-
tive behaviors such as clarifying the task at hand tion. Some examples of these situational consider-
and stressing rewards contingent on good perfor- ations include the importance of decision quality,
mance could increase followers’ positive expectan- the likelihood that followers’ would accept and
cies. This may consequently motivate followers’ implement the decision, and the amount of avail-
efforts to achieve designated goals. able information needed for the decision. The deci-
A large number of studies have examined pos- sion tree takes into account seven decision rules or
tulates derived from path–goal theory. Overall, heuristics that eliminate decision options that
154 Contingency Theories of Leadership

would jeopardize decision quality or hinder deci- direction or significant support in accomplishing
sion acceptance. In this way, decision-strategy the task. In this case, it would be best to delegate
options are realized from a feasible set that pur- the task to the follower.
ports to optimize effective decision making. Although intuitively appealing, the situational
A number of field studies and experiments con- leadership theory has not received extensive
ducted in various countries provide support for research attention. Studies support the theory’s
the model. For instance, in 1988, Vroom and Jago postulate that low maturity followers benefit from
reported accumulated evidence that decisions fol- directive behavior, but more empirical verification
lowing the decision tree were almost twice as of the remaining postulates is warranted. The the-
likely to be successful than decisions that did not ory has been criticized for its narrow focus on only
use the prescriptions advocated by the model. one situational variable, but it has contributed to
Furthermore, leaders who make decisions follow- the understanding of leadership effectiveness by
ing the decision tree tend to receive favorable rat- underlining the need for leaders to adapt their
ings from subordinates. Despite solid empirical behavior to different situations.
evidence validating the model, scholars have noted
various limitations. For example, while acknowl-
Conclusion
edging the utility of the model, Sternberg ques-
tioned whether leaders are able to accurately Fred Fielder’s seminal work helped to springboard
answer the questions posed by the decision tree the development of a series of notable contingency
(e.g., forecasting follower acceptance). Overall, theories that account for both leader and situa-
the normative decision model contributes an tional variables. The complexity of contingency
understanding of decision-making processes that theories, however, has drawn criticism for a lack
underscores the significance of the situation. of parsimony. Furthermore, contingency theories
have been viewed as a more mechanical approach
that neglects considerations of instances of extraor-
Situational Leadership Theory
dinary leadership and group processes. Nevertheless,
The situational leadership theory put forth by contingency theories of leadership remain an
Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard in 1969 proposes important contribution to the understanding of
that leadership effectiveness depends on the leader’s leadership effectiveness.
ability to tailor his or her behavior to the demands
of the situation, namely, the subordinate’s level of Viviane Seyranian
maturity. This theory builds on the earlier Ohio See also Charismatic Leadership; Great Person Theory of
and Michigan studies and extends Blake and Leadership; Interactionist Theories of Leadership;
Mouton’s work in emphasizing a combination of Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory; Leadership;
task and relation behaviors (but here task and rela- Path–Goal Theory of Leadership; Personality Theories
tion behaviors are called directing and supporting). of Leadership; Social Identity Theory of Leadership;
Hersey and Blanchard highlight four different types Transactional Leadership Theories; Transformational
of leadership behavior based on combining direc- Leadership Theories; Vertical Dyad Linkage Model
tive and supportive behavior: telling (high directive,
low support), selling (high directive, high support-
ing), participating (low directive, high supportive), Further Readings
and delegating (low directive, low supportive). Fielder, F. E. (1964). A theory of leadership effectiveness.
The leader’s function is to continually evaluate In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
and adapt his or her behavior to each follower’s psychology. New York: Academic Press.
task maturity (i.e., ability) and psychological Fielder, F. E. (1986). The contribution of cognitive
maturity (i.e., willingness) to complete the task at resources to leadership performance. Journal of
hand. For instance, when a follower has lower Applied Social Psychology, 16, 532–545.
maturity, it prescribes that a leader should tell the Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1969). An introduction
follower how to get the job done. When a follower to situational leadership. Training and Development
is more mature, he or she does not need as much Journal, 23, 26–34.
Cooperation and Competition 155

House, R. J. (1996). Path–goal theory of leadership: Competition is overt or verbal behavior that is
Lessons, legacy, and a reformulated theory. intended to hinder another person from achieving
Leadership Quarterly, 7, 323–352. his or her goals at the same time as one achieves
Kerr, S., & Jermier, J. M. (1978). Substitutes for one’s own goals. It is behavior aimed at “doing
leadership: Their meaning and measurement. better than others”—at maximizing outcomes for
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, oneself relative to others, that is, securing an
22, 375–403. advantage for oneself. Competition is usually asso-
Kim, H., & Yukl, G. (1995). Relationships of managerial ciated with a perception of “zero-sum” goal rela-
effectiveness and advancement to self-reported and
tions (achieving one’s own goals hinders others
subordinate-reported leadership behaviors from the
from achieving their goals, and vice versa) and
multiple-linkage model. Leadership Quarterly, 6,
competitive interdependence (one’s own behavior
361–377.
is affected by the behavior of others, and vice
Vroom, V. H., & Jago, A. G. (1995). Situation effects and
levels of analysis in the study of leader participation.
versa, in ways that impede each other’s goals).
Leadership Quarterly, 6, 169–181.
Individualism is a third class of behaviors in
which people act as though, in effect, others did
not exist. It is behavior aimed at “doing well for
oneself”—at maximizing one’s own outcomes
with no regard for others’ outcomes. It is associ-
Cooperation and Competition ated with a lack of perception of any goal relations
and any interdependence. Individualism can some-
Group members are generally expected to cooper- times look like cooperation and sometimes look
ate with one another. In fact, groups exist pre- like competition, but psychologically it is neither.
cisely because their members cooperate to achieve
shared goals. If this cooperation mutates into
Evolution and Genetics
competition, groups often fall apart or suffer a
schism. In contrast, groups as a whole are often The theme of cooperation and competition is
expected to compete with one another. This com- prominent across a wide variety of disciplines,
petition can take the form of friendly rivalry (e.g., probably because it speaks to fundamental assump-
two baseball teams trying to win a game), but all tions about human nature and the kinds of human
too often it is hostile and destructive (e.g., two society that are possible. The British political phi-
nations trying to obtain scarce resources). Clearly, losopher Thomas Hobbes in his classic 1651 book
then, cooperation and competition are fundamen- Leviathan promulgated a very pessimistic view of
tal aspects of the social psychology of groups. human nature in which competition ruled supreme.
He proclaimed that the natural state of humankind
is a “war of all against all” in which lives are
Defining Cooperation and Competition
“solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”
Based on early research by the social psychologists More recently, Darwin’s theory of evolution,
Morton Deutsch and Muzafer Sherif, cooperation first published in 1859, set the stage for a scientific
can be characterized as overt or verbal behavior explanation for the primacy of human competi-
that is intended to help another person achieve his tiveness. According to Darwin, life is all about
or her goals at the same time as one achieves one’s gaining competitive advantage in promoting one’s
own goals. It is behavior aimed at “doing well own genetic makeup. Indeed, in 1976, Richard
together”—at maximizing outcomes for oneself Dawkins famously coined the term selfish gene to
and others. Cooperation is usually associated with convey the biogenetic imperative responsible for
a perception of “non-zero-sum” goal relations the essential competitiveness and dog-eat-dog
(achieving one’s own goals helps others achieve nature of human life.
their goals, and vice versa) and promotive interde- Others, however, have argued that competition
pendence (one’s own behavior is affected by the is not always adaptive. For example, it has been
behavior of others, and vice versa, in ways that suggested that natural selection may operate at the
advance both parties’ goals). group level, whereby individuals sacrifice their
156 Cooperation and Competition

own genetic makeup for the inclusive fitness of the it is a competitive context in which one should be
group or the species to which they belong. selfish and competitive.
According to this position, cooperation can be There are also individual differences in the pro-
beneficial in promoting genetic fitness. pensity to be cooperative or competitive. Some
people (prosocials) are more inclined to make
cooperative choices than are others (individualists
Game Theory and Rational Choice
and competitors), who are more likely to make
Biogenetic and evolutionary debates aside, social generally more selfish choices. This variable of
and behavioral scientists have generally assumed social value orientation is relevant to understand-
that humankind is rationally self-interested. This ing cooperation in everyday life. Prosocials are
rational self-interest, in turn, is assumed to cause more likely to be self-sacrificing in their close rela-
people to behave uncooperatively. However, accu- tionships, are more likely to help others, and are
mulating evidence shows that people can be more likely to make donations to noble causes.
extraordinarily irrational and impetuous in the Prosocials also tend to be older and have more
decisions they make about whether to compete or siblings, especially sisters, than people who are
cooperate with others. more self-oriented. Some people also are simply
The classic research paradigm for studying coop- more trusting of others—not surprisingly, because
eration and competition is the prisoner’s dilemma they believe that others are honest and cooperative,
and a variety of related “experimental games.” The they themselves are more likely to be cooperative.
prisoner’s dilemma is a “two-person, mixed-motive,
non-zero-sum game.” This means that two people
Social Dilemmas
are involved, they each experience a conflict between
being motivated to cooperate and motivated to Of more direct relevance to the study of groups is
compete, and the outcome of their interaction can research on group-level social dilemmas—such as
be that both parties gain or that both parties lose. the commons dilemma and public goods dilemmas.
In contrast, a zero-sum game is one in which one These dilemmas involve crises of trust in which
party’s gain is always the other’s loss. individuals fail to behave cooperatively to benefit
The general set up is that you play a game with the collective because they do not trust other mem-
another participant in which you are confronted bers of the collective to behave cooperatively. The
with a payoff matrix, usually representing mone- commons dilemma describes a situation in which a
tary outcomes. One of four things can happen. If resource can be sustained only if people who use
both you and your opponent are cooperative, then the resource show restraint in using it. An example
you both get a good payoff, but if you are coop- is fisheries—if people fished responsibly, the fishery
erative and your opponent is competitive, then you would be sustained indefinitely and everyone would
do very badly and your opponent does very well. If benefit, but if people selfishly overfish, the fish
you are competitive and your opponent is coopera- would disappear forever and everyone would suf-
tive, then you do very well and your opponent does fer. A public goods dilemma describes a situation in
very badly, but if you are both competitive, then which a resource can be sustained only if people
you both do disastrously. Literally thousands of who use the resource make a sufficient contribu-
studies have shown that players in this game tend tion to it. An example is public radio—if people
to make competitive choices that lead to mutually who listen to public radio make a contribution, it
disastrous outcomes, over and over again. thrives and benefits all users, but if people free ride
However, choices become more cooperative if by listening to public radio without contributing, it
the players are allowed to speak to one another— goes off the air and everyone suffers.
this opportunity is typically not available, as most Research on social dilemmas finds that when
experimental games are noninteractive. Players are self-interest is pitted against the collective good,
also more cooperative when rules of fairness are the usual outcome is competition and resource
made explicit or the game is construed as an inves- destruction. The problem is exacerbated when dif-
tigation of human interaction or conflict resolu- ferent groups access a limited resource. International
tion; otherwise players’ default assumption is that competition over limited resources such as rain
Cooperation and Competition 157

forests, whales, and wetlands tragically accelerates another determined whether they would compete
their disappearance. or cooperate, and that the competitive/cooperative
Dilemmas are very difficult to resolve. Often, nature of the behavior determined the way in
structural solutions are required to force people to which individuals and groups more widely per-
cooperate, conserve, and behave unselfishly. ceived and treated each other.
Structural solutions include measures such as lim- Sherif promoted an influential theory, realistic
iting the number of people accessing the resource, conflict theory, to explain the relationship between
limiting the amount of the resource that people can goals and individual and group behavior. It is
take, facilitating free communication among those called realistic conflict theory because Sherif
accessing the resource, and shifting the payoff to focused on real tangible goals (e.g., money, land)
favor cooperation over competition. Structural rather than symbolic goals (e.g., status, prestige).
solutions ultimately rest on being able to hand He argued that individuals who share goals that
over management of the resource to a powerful require interdependence for their achievement
authority to implement measures, manage the cooperate and form a group, whereas individuals
bureaucracy, and police violations. This can be dif- who have mutually exclusive goals (i.e., if one per-
ficult to achieve. son achieves the goal the other does not) compete.
Two factors that have been shown to engender Interindividual competition prevents group forma-
cooperation and resource preservation in social tion or contributes to the collapse of an existing
dilemmas are communication between group mem- group. At the intergroup level, mutually exclusive
bers and feelings of group identification. goals produce intergroup conflict and ethnocen-
Communication can be effective for several rea- trism, while shared goals requiring intergroup
sons. For example, it can involve explicit promises interdependence for their achievement (what Sherif
of cooperation, allow group members to coordi- termed superordinate goals) reduce conflict and
nate their actions, or promote feelings of group encourage intergroup cooperation.
identification. Group identification, which can also Other researchers have emphasized different
be based on factors other than communication, has aspects of realistic conflict theory. For example,
been shown to build mutual trust among group Morton Deutsch focused in great technical detail
members—people tend to trust ingroup members on the nature of the goal relations rather than on
and therefore are more likely to sacrifice self-interest cooperative/competitive behavior; Chester Insko,
for the greater good of their group. Leadership John Scholpler, and Jaap Rabbie and their col-
plays a critical role in this process because a leader leagues focused on the role played by interdepen-
can transform selfish individual goals into shared dence in producing cooperative group behavior
group goals by building a sense of common iden- and competitive intergroup behavior; and others
tity, shared fate, interindividual trust, and joint focused on negotiation and bargaining and on the
custodianship of the collective good. role of shared superordinate goals in resolving
conflict and building social harmony.
Interdependence and Realistic Conflict
Minimal Groups and Social Identity
In the early 1950s, Muzafer Sherif conducted a
classic series of studies of cooperation and compe- The role of shared goals, interdependence, and coop-
tition among individuals and groups—the boys’ erative behavior in group formation and intergroup
camp studies. These were naturalistic studies con- behavior was challenged by a famous series of labo-
ducted at boys’ summer camps, in which Sherif ratory experiments published in 1971 by Henri
and his associates were able to set the boys’ goals Tajfel and Mick Billig and their associates.
that required individuals to cooperate and goals Participants were placed in ad hoc groups ostensibly
that required groups to cooperate or to compete— on the basis of a trivial criterion—there was no
the goals generally involved tangible resources, for group interaction, membership was anonymous so
example being able to show a movie at camp. His no one knew who was in the group, and the group
main findings from these studies were that the had no past and no future. All that the participants
boys’ perceptions of their goal relations to one had to do was allocate points between an anonymous
158 Cooperation and Competition

ingroup member (not the self) and an anonymous Although intragroup relations are generally
outgroup member. The remarkable finding was that cooperative, this is not always the case. Within
even such minimal groups produced competitive groups, particularly those that are central to mem-
intergroup behavior in which participants favored bers’ identity, people are highly vigilant about
their ingroup over the outgroup. Since this original what the group stands for and what its prototypi-
study, thousands of minimal group studies have rep- cal norms and practices are. In these cases, people
licated the basic finding that social categorization continually assess how prototypical they and oth-
alone can produce competitive behavior toward out- ers are of the group, which leads to competition
group members and cooperative behavior toward over actual and perceived prototypicality. This
ingroup members. competition can be extremely fierce, leading to
The results of the minimal group studies con- marginalization of competitors and suppression of
tributed to the development of social identity the- dissent. It is not unusual for subgroups to form to
ory, which argues that people define and evaluate promote their own image of the group that casts
who they are in terms of the groups they belong them as more prototypical than others—this can
to—in other words, they derive a social identity lead to schisms that destroy the group.
from the groups with which they are affiliated.
Because the self and the group are psychologically
Superordinate Goals and Social Harmony
“fused,” group evaluations (i.e., the group’s status
and prestige in society) become self-evaluations. As discussed above, Sherif believed that superordi-
According to this analysis, then, intergroup rela- nate goals can reduce competition between groups
tions are a competition over the scarce zero-sum and thus improve intergroup relations. Not sur-
resource of status. Hence, intergroup relations are prisingly, substantial research has been conducted
marked by distrust and are intrinsically competi- to explore this idea. Sherif’s argument was that if
tive. In contrast, intragroup relations are generally two groups recognize a shared and valued goal
cooperative—members pull together in an atmo- that cannot be achieved by unilateral action, then
sphere of mutual trust to cooperate to achieve the goal structure is transformed from zero-sum to
group goals that secure a relative advantage for non-zero-sum. This transformation encourages
their group over other groups. Cooperation and cooperative interdependence and interaction
competition are thus consequences of group mem- between the groups, which in turn generates
bership; though they can act as cues to whether mutual goal satisfaction and hence favorable inter-
someone is a member of one’s own group or a group attitudes.
member of a rival outgroup. There are a number of potential limitations to
Subsequent work has suggested several com- this analysis, stemming from the social identity
plexities in intergroup and intragroup relations. idea that groups define who members are and that
Although intergroup relations are intrinsically members therefore have a vested interest in pro-
competitive, the way that competition is expressed tecting and promoting the distinctiveness of their
can vary as a function of people’s perceptions of group and social identity. One problem with
the nature of the relations. For example, members superordinate goals is that they may abolish com-
of low-status groups who see little realistic possi- petition only as long as the goal is in place—once
bility of social change tend to pursue creative and the goal is satisfied, the groups fall back into their
indirect forms of competition, such as choosing old ways. An example of this is the World War II
different dimensions of comparison with the dom- strategic alliance between Britain, the United
inant group or simply comparing themselves with States, and the Soviet Union to defeat Germany
other low-status groups, whereas those who sense and Japan. As soon as the common enemy was
the real possibility of social change are more likely defeated, the superordinate goal was satisfied and
to directly compete with the dominant group. mutually exclusive goals of global dominance gen-
Relatedly, members of dominant groups who feel erated 45 years of a highly competitive cold war
secure in their high status often behave generously between the Soviet Union and the West.
to lower status groups, whereas those who feel It is plausible that superordinate goals involving
insecure often use their power in a harsh manner. superordinate identities should produce a more
Cooperation and Competition 159

enduring transformation of competition into to conduct the negotiations in a setting away from
cooperation—after all, such goals should create a public scrutiny and to have a mutually trusted
common ingroup and shared identity within which third party act as mediator. A trusted mediator can
trust and cooperation should prevail. This is a nice encourage cooperation by reducing emotional
idea, but it can backfire. One problem is that heat, rectifying misperceptions, proposing novel
groups may disagree about the extent to which the non-zero-sum compromises, facilitating graceful
superordinate identity reflects their attributes. For retreats, and inhibiting unreasonable claims. For
example, numerical minorities often feel that super- example, in the late 1970s, U.S. president Jimmy
ordinate identities are being “imposed” on them Carter sequestered Egypt’s president Anwar Sadat
and their own attributes are underrepresented in and Israel’s prime-minister Menachem Begin at
the identity. They therefore feel they do not really Camp David near Washington, D.C., and acted as
fit the superordinate identity—they are not proto- a mediator between the two men. After 13 days,
typical of it and therefore do not belong. Another an agreement was reached that ended a state of
problem is that, because groups cherish the distinc- war that had existed between Israel and Egypt
tiveness of their own identity, a superordinate iden- since 1948.
tity can represent a profound identity threat. An In the absence of mediation, groups that genu-
example is the view held by some British people inely want to reach a solution have to take the
that membership in the European Union (EU) will initiative themselves. One effective strategy, first
destroy what is unique about British identity. suggested in 1962 by Charles Osgood, is called
However, many researchers believe that a super- graduated and reciprocated initiatives in tension
ordinate identity can transform intergroup compe- reduction (GRIT). This strategy capitalizes on the
tition into cooperation under certain conditions. universal human norm of reciprocity and is
They argue that, in order to be effective, a super- designed to build trust. One party announces its
ordinate identity must have a balanced representa- cooperative and conciliatory intent (allowing clear
tion of each subgroup’s attributes, explicitly attribution of a nondevious motive), clearly speci-
recognize and maintain the distinctiveness and fies a small concession it is about to make (acti-
integrity of each subgroup, and place value on vates reciprocity norm), and invites its opponent to
each subgroup’s contribution to the superordinate do likewise. The initiator then makes the conces-
identity. Overall, this set of conditions allows sub- sion exactly as announced and in a publicly verifi-
groups to see themselves as distinct and valued able manner. There is now strong pressure on the
groups, with complementary roles, all working other party to reciprocate. In this way, the two
together toward shared goals. parties slowly resolve their differences through
reciprocal concessions.
Negotiation
Conclusion
Cooperation is very important when two individu-
als or representatives of two groups are negotiat- Cooperation and competition play critical roles in
ing to reach an agreement. If both sides adopt a how people behave within and between groups.
staunchly competitive orientation (according to Within groups, people generally have a shared
Chester Insko and John Schopler’s discontinuity sense of self and a shared interest in promoting
effect, this is more likely to be the case in inter- group welfare. Members trust each other and
group than interpersonal encounters), the process work cooperatively to achieve objectives that can-
of reaching an agreement can be very time con- not be achieved alone. In contrast, relations
suming at best or a total failure at worst. between groups are often competitive. This com-
Intergroup negotiations are particularly difficult petition can involve tangible resources, as empha-
when the negotiators feel they are being observed sized by realistic conflict theory, or status and
by their groups. In such cases, they often feel that prestige, as emphasized by social identity theory.
they need to be highly competitive to protect and One of the great challenges for society is to
promote their group and to signal their loyalty to transform competitive intergroup relations into
it. One way to combat this competitive mind-set is harmless rivalry or respectful and trust-based
160 Cooperative Learning

cooperation in pursuit of shared goals and a shared Sherif, M., & Sherif, C. W. (1953). Groups in harmony
sense of self. This is not easy to achieve, but can be and tension: An integration of studies in intergroup
accomplished under certain conditions. For exam- behavior. New York: Harper & Row.
ple, respected authorities can help to resolve social Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory
dilemmas and facilitate intergroup negotiations. of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel
Superordinate goals can temporarily transform (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations
intergroup competition into cooperation and, (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
under certain conditions, lay the groundwork for a Thompson, L. L. (2009). The mind and heart of the
negotiator (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
more enduring change in intergroup perceptions
Prentice Hall.
and self-conceptions.
Michael A. Hogg and John M. Levine

See also Common Ingroup Identity Model; Commons


Dilemma; Deutsch, Morton; Free Riding;
Cooperative Learning
Interindividual/Intergroup Discontinuity;
Interdependence Theory; Minimal Group Effect; Cooperative learning refers to instructional meth-
Prisoner’s Dilemma; Realistic Group Conflict Theory; ods in which students work in small groups to
Schisms; Sherif, Muzafer; Social Dilemmas; Social help one another learn. There are many quite dif-
Identity Theory; Trust ferent approaches to cooperative learning, but in
general, groups are composed of high, average,
and low achievers and contain from two to four
Further Readings children.
Axelrod, R. (1984). The evolution of cooperation. New Cooperative activities have been common for as
York: Basic Books. long as education has existed, and research on
Bonta, B. D. (1997). Cooperation and competition in cooperative learning goes back to the early days of
peaceful societies. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 299–320. the 20th century. However, development, research,
Deutsch, M. (1973). The resolution of conflict. New and use of more formalized cooperative learning
Haven, CT: Yale University Press. methods began in the 1970s, when various groups
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Reducing in the United States and Israel, in particular, initi-
intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model. ated ambitious programs of research and develop-
New York: Psychology Press. ment intended to create cooperative learning
Hogg, M. A. (2006). Social identity theory. In P. J. Burke models that could be used in a broad range of
(Ed.), Contemporary social psychological theories elementary and secondary schools. In one form or
(pp. 111–136). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
another, cooperative learning has been used and
Insko, C. A., Schopler, J., Kennedy, J. F., Dahl, K. R.,
studied in every major subject, with students from
Graetz, K. A., & Drigotas, S. M. (1992). Individual–
preschool to college, and in all types of schools. It
group discontinuity from the differing perspectives of
is used at some level by hundreds of thousands of
Campbell’s realistic group conflict theory and Tajfel
teachers. One national survey in the 1990s found
and Turner’s social identity theory. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 55, 272–291.
that 79% of elementary teachers and 62% of
Kerr, N. L., & Park, E. S. (2001). Group performance in middle school teachers reported regular use of
collaborative and social dilemma tasks: Progress and cooperative learning.
prospects. In M. A. Hogg & R. S. Tindale (Eds.), There have been hundreds of studies of coop-
Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Group erative learning focusing on a wide variety of
processes (pp. 107–138). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. outcomes, including academic achievement in
Linskold, S. (1978). Trust development, the GRIT many subjects, second-language learning, atten-
proposal, and the effects of conciliatory acts on conflict dance, behavior, intergroup relations, social cohe-
and cooperation. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 772–793. sion, acceptance of classmates with handicaps,
Sherif, M. (1966). In common predicament: Social attitudes toward subjects, and more. This entry
psychology of intergroup conflict and cooperation. focuses primarily on research on achievement
Boston: Houghton Mifflin. outcomes of cooperative learning in elementary
Cooperative Learning 161

and secondary schools and on interpersonal and Empirical Support for the Motivational Perspective
affective outcomes.
Considerable evidence from practical applica-
tions of cooperative learning in elementary and
Theoretical Perspectives on secondary schools supports the motivational posi-
Cooperative Learning and Achievement tion that group rewards are essential to the effec-
Although there is a general consensus among tiveness of cooperative learning, with one critical
researchers about the positive effects of coopera- qualification. Use of group goals or group rewards
tive learning on student achievement, there remains enhances the achievement outcomes of coopera-
a controversy about why and how cooperative tive learning if, and only if, the group rewards are
learning methods affect achievement and, most based on the individual learning of all group
importantly, under what conditions cooperative members. Most often, this means that team scores
learning has these effects. Different groups of are computed based on average scores on quizzes
researchers investigating cooperative learning that all teammates take individually, without
effects on achievement begin with different assump- teammate help.
tions and explain the achievement effects of coop- For example, in Student Teams-Achievement
erative learning quite differently. The following Divisions, or STAD, students work in mixed-ability
sections review research on cooperative learning teams to master material initially presented by the
methods derived from the three most widely teacher. Following this, students take individual
known of these perspectives. quizzes on the material, and the teams may earn
certificates based on the degree to which team
members have improved over their own past
Motivational Perspectives
records. The only way the team can succeed is to
Motivational perspectives on cooperative learn- ensure that all team members have learned, so the
ing presume that task motivation is the most team members’ activities focus on explaining con-
important part of the process. Other processes are cepts to one another, helping one another practice,
believed to be driven by motivation. Therefore, and encouraging one another to achieve. In con-
these scholars focus primarily on the reward or trast, if group rewards are given based on a single
goal structures under which students operate. group product (for example, the team completes
From a motivationalist perspective, cooperative one worksheet or solves one problem), there is lit-
incentive structures create a situation in which the tle incentive for group members to explain con-
only way group members can attain their own cepts to one another, and one or two group
personal goals is if the group is successful. members may do all the work.
Therefore, to meet their personal goals, group A review of 99 studies of cooperative learning
members must both help their groupmates to do in elementary and secondary schools involved
whatever enables the group to succeed and encour- durations of at least 4 weeks and compared
age their groupmates to exert maximum efforts. achievement gains in cooperative learning and
Not surprisingly, motivational theorists build control groups. Among the 64 studies of coopera-
group rewards into their cooperative learning tive learning methods that provided group rewards
methods. In methods developed at Johns Hopkins based on the sum of group members’ individual
University, students can earn certificates or other learning, 50 (78%) found significantly positive
recognition if their average team scores on quiz- effects on achievement, and none found negative
zes or other individual assignments exceed a pre- effects. The median effect size (a way of measuring
established criterion. Methods developed at the the strength of an effect) among the studies
University of Minnesota often give students grades for which effect sizes could be computed was
based on group performance, which is defined in +.32 (32% of a standard deviation separated coop-
several different ways. The theoretical rationale erative learning and control treatments). In con-
for these group rewards is that if students value the trast, among the studies of methods that used
success of the group, then they will encourage and group goals based on a single group product or
help one another to achieve. provided no group rewards, the median effect size
162 Cooperative Learning

was only +.07. Comparisons of alternative treat- Cognitive Elaboration Perspective


ments within the same studies found similar pat-
Research in cognitive psychology has long held
terns; group goals based on the sum of individual
that if information is to be retained in memory and
learning performances were necessary to the instruc-
related to information already in memory, the
tional effectiveness of cooperative learning models.
learner must engage in some sort of cognitive
restructuring, or elaboration, of the material. One of
Social Cohesion Perspective the most effective means of elaboration is explaining
A theoretical perspective somewhat related to the material to someone else. Cognitive elaboration
the motivational viewpoint holds that the effects of theorists explain the effectiveness of cooperative
cooperative learning on achievement are mediated learning in terms of the effects of explanation itself,
by the cohesiveness of the group. The quality of rather than motivation or social cohesion.
the group’s interactions is thought to be largely
Empirical Evidence for the
determined by group cohesion. In essence, students
Cognitive Elaboration Perspective
will engage in the task and help one another learn
because they identify with the group and want one Numerous studies have found that students
another to succeed. A hallmark of the social cohe- working on structured “cooperative scripts” can
sion perspective is an emphasis on team-building learn technical material or procedures far better
activities in preparation for cooperative learning than can students working alone. Although both
and self-evaluation during and after group activi- the “recaller” or explainer and the listener learned
ties. Social cohesion theorists have historically more than did students working alone, the recaller
tended to downplay or reject the group incentives learned more. Thus the students who gained the
and individual accountability that motivational most from cooperative activities were those who
researchers believe are essential. provided elaborated explanations to others.
In social cohesion methods, students generally Students who received elaborated explanations
take on individual roles within the group. In the learned more than those who worked alone, but
jigsaw puzzle technique, students study material not as much as those who served as explainers.
on one of four to six topics distributed to the
group members. They meet in “expert groups” to
Reconciling the Three Perspectives
share information on their topics with members of
other teams who have the same topic, and then Although the three perspectives on cooperative
each student presents the topic to his or her own learning seem quite diverse, there are both theo-
team (in which the members each hold a piece of retical and empirical reasons to expect that meth-
the puzzle). In group investigation, groups take on ods incorporating multiple perspectives have
topics within a unit studied by the class as a whole, particular promise. For example, provision of
and then further subdivide the topic into tasks group goals based on the individual learning of all
within the group. The students investigate the group members might affect cognitive processes
topic together and ultimately present their findings directly by motivating students to engage in peer
to the class as a whole. modeling, cognitive elaboration, and/or practice
with one another. Group goals may also lead to
Empirical Support for the group cohesiveness, increasing caring and concern
Social Cohesion Perspective among group members and making them feel
The achievement outcomes of cooperative learn- responsible for one another’s achievement, thereby
ing methods that emphasize task specialization are motivating students to engage in cognitive pro-
mixed. Research on the original form of the jigsaw cesses which enhance learning.
puzzle method has not generally found positive
effects of this method on student achievement. In
Outcomes
contrast, there is evidence that when it is well
implemented, group investigation can significantly Numerous outcomes of cooperative learning beyond
increase student achievement. achievement have been studied in elementary and
Cross-Categorization 163

secondary schools. One of the most widely studied Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory,
is intergroup relations. Studies of cooperative learn- research, and practice (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn &
ing methods of many types find that students who Bacon.
have worked in groups with peers of different eth- Slavin, R. E., Hurley, E. A., & Chamberlain, A. M.
nicities are more likely to make friends who are (2003). Cooperative learning and achievement: Theory
different from themselves, and to have positive atti- and research. In W. M. Reynolds & G. E. Miller
tudes toward students of other ethnicities. (Eds.), Handbook of psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 177–198).
Beyond intergroup relations, studies have found Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
Webb, N. M., & Palincsar, A. S. (1996). Group processes
positive effects of cooperative learning on such out-
in the classroom. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.),
comes as self-esteem, acceptance of mainstreamed
Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 841–876).
students, attitudes toward school, and attitudes
New York: Simon & Schuster/Macmillan.
toward the subject being studied in groups.

The Future of Cooperative Learning


More than 35 years after cooperative learning Cross-Categorization
research began in earnest, cooperative learning
remains strong in both research and practice. Categorization of people into “us” and “them” is
Cooperative learning is a component of compre- a fundamental characteristic of how we perceive
hensive school reforms, curriculum and instruc- social groups. Sometimes, however, this simple
tional reforms, and programs to improve dichotomization is not enough to fully capture the
intergroup relations. More research and further complexity of intergroup relations. Cross-
development is still likely to be fruitful, but coop- categorization takes account of this complexity.
erative learning has as good a record of research Cross-categorization (or crossed categorization)
and research-informed practice as any approach describes intergroup contexts defined by not one
in the history of education. but two dimensions of social categorization. Take,
for example, age and race. Instead of comparing
Robert E. Slavin oneself with others just according to age (“I’m
young, and they are old”) or just in terms of race
See also Cooperation and Competition; Group
Cohesiveness; Jigsaw Classroom Technique; Social (“I am White, and they are Black”), in cross-cate-
Identity Theory gorization contexts, both of these dimensions are
salient and meaningful. In these situations, four
possible social category combinations are each
Further Readings defined by two constituents: young and White,
young and Black, old and White, old and Black.
Cooper, R., & Slavin, R. E. (2001). Cooperative learning
This introduces greater complexity into the per-
programs and multicultural education: Improving
ceived intergroup relations. Social comparison can
intergroup relations. In F. Salili & R. Hoosain (Eds.),
no longer simply refer to “us” (the ingroup) versus
Multicultural education: Issues, polices, and practices.
“them” (the outgroup), but others are defined in
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Learning
terms of two shared memberships (a double
together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and ingroup), two nonshared memberships (a double
individualistic learning (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. outgroup), or a mixture of shared and nonshared
Rohrbeck, C. A., Ginsburg-Block, M. D., Fantuzzo, J. W., memberships (a mixed membership group). Cross-
& Miller, T. R. (2003). Peer-assisted learning categorization is important for the study of group
interventions with elementary school students: A processes and intergroup relations in two key
meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational ways. First, it has given researchers greater power
Psychology, 94(20), 240–257. in describing, explaining, and improving inter-
Sharan, Y., & Sharan, S. (1992). Expanding cooperative group relations in more complex categorization
learning through group investigation. New York: contexts. Second, it has proved effective as a way
Teachers College Press. of encouraging less reliance on negative stereotypes
164 Cross-Categorization

when forming impressions of others. Both of these Young–Protestant). Put another way, in contexts
approaches are described in this entry. defined by converging categorizations (such as
religion and politics in Northern Ireland), encour-
aging perceivers to focus on shared ingroup identi-
Modeling Complex Intergroup Relations
ties (mixed membership groups), instead of
With respect to its provision of a richer model for converging differences (double outgroups) can
describing intergroup relations, cross-categorization improve intergroup relations. This is because typi-
has enabled a greater understanding of the dynam- cally, evaluations of mixed membership groups (io
ics of prejudice and discrimination for people or oi) are more positive than evaluations of double
socially excluded on multiple criteria. Perceiving outgroups (oo).
multiple identities can create convergent bases for There are also certain conditions that can orient
discrimination: multiple differences that reinforce perceivers to focus on these mixed membership
existing boundaries. For instance, a White man groups, further increasing their value for improving
may feel not quite so different from a White intergroup relations. A positive mood or encourag-
woman but may feel considerably more different ing a focus on ingroup identities leads to a social
from a Black woman, when gender is salient along- inclusion pattern (ii = io = oi > oo). This pattern is
side race (creating a double outgroup). Here the beneficial because evaluations of mixed member-
salience of an additional categorization has rein- ship groups (io or oi) become as positive as they are
forced the differences described by the initial for total ingroup members (ii). In contrast, negative
dichotomy. Converging category differences are a affect or encouraging a focus on outgroup identities
problem because they reinforce discrimination leads to a social exclusion pattern (ii > io = oi = oo).
experienced by individuals who are already The social exclusion pattern is to be discouraged
excluded on one criterion. They also characterize because evaluations of mixed membership groups
many instances of ethnopolitical conflict. For (io or oi) become as negative as evaluations of
example, in Belfast, Northern Ireland, Catholics people defined as double outgroupers (oo).
and Protestants tend to live in different places (e.g., This research shows us that if we want to tackle
Ardoyne vs. Shankhill Road), espouse different bias along converging divisions by emphasizing
politics (Nationalist-Republican vs. Unionist- shared identities (mixed membership groups), then
Loyalist), and even support different football this will be most effective under conditions that
teams (e.g., Cliftonville vs. Linfield); part of the orient the perceiver to shared identities (such as a
problem is precisely that there are few social cate- positive mood). It will be less effective when out-
gories cross-cutting the religion dimension. group memberships are emphasized (such as when
To capture the sort of complex intergroup rela- perceivers are in a negative mood). Where converg-
tions outlined above, research has identified differ- ing identities define conflict, building cross-cutting
ent patterns of evaluation across the four combined ties that create mixed membership groups may be
groups formed from crossing categorizations. The an important way to foster more harmonious inter-
patterns can be represented by notation referring group relations. Furthermore, mixed membership
to the relative composition of ingroup and out- groups have the additional advantage of emphasiz-
group identities (labeled “i” and “o,” respectively). ing both shared and nonshared identities simulta-
For instance, the additive pattern specifies that neously. This is important because placing too
double ingroups (ii) are evaluated more positively much emphasis only on what conflicting groups
than double outgroups (oo), with mixed member- have in common (and not what makes them
ship groups (io and oi) evaluated in between these unique) can backfire, eliciting even greater bias.
two extremes (ii > io = oi > oo). Mixed membership groups strike the important
The patterns are important because they specify balance between inclusion and distinctiveness.
the impact of shifting attention away from con-
verging categorizations that reinforce social divides
Countering Negative Stereotypes
(e.g., Republican/Catholic vs. Loyalist/Protestant)
to dual-identity categorizations that emphasize a As well as describing complex intergroup relations,
common ingroup (e.g., Young–Catholic and and outlining the optimal conditions needed to
Cross-Categorization 165

promote tolerance and inclusion within these con- categorizations offers a potentially useful tool for
texts (i.e., focusing on mixed membership groups), encouraging more flexible approaches to impres-
cross-categorization also provides a means for sion formation. Developmental research offers
more personalized interventions designed to encour- some support for the idea that the model could be
age less bias in impression formation. This second usefully applied to education. For instance, pri-
line of research examines the impact of exposure to mary school children can be taught to classify
multiple identities on the cognitive style adopted by along multiple dimensions using pictures of men
individuals when forming impressions of others. and women engaging in stereotypically feminine
The idea here is that considering cross-cutting ties occupations (e.g., hair stylist, secretary) and ste-
can reduce prejudice because rather than applying reotypically masculine occupations (e.g., construc-
a negative stereotype to someone just because he or tion worker, truck driver). Exposure to these
she is a member of a stigmatized group, people correlated categorizations (and the counterstereo-
come to appreciate that social categories are fluid, typic combinations the children can be encour-
flexible, and dynamic and that there are many dif- aged to generate) can lead to significant reductions
ferent (and positive) ways in which any one person in gender stereotyping.
can be described. As such, the impact of any one In sum, cross-categorization research has been
negatively valued identity is reduced. valuable in two important ways. First, it has
For cross-categorization to promote a cognitive offered an experimental paradigm that is attuned
style less reliant on stereotypic expectations, the to the complexity of contemporary intergroup
perceived categories must form combinations that relations. It has helped us understand the dynamics
tend not to go together (that is, are surprising or of prejudice and exclusion when people are mem-
nonoverlapping). Research has shown that encour- bers of two stigmatized groups, and the conditions
aging people to form impressions of crossed cate- that encourage a focus on what people have in
gory groups that tend to go against expectations common, as well as what makes them different.
(e.g., “woman mechanic,” “gay soldier”) leads to Second, it has offered a means of encouraging
a lesser reliance on stereotypes. To achieve this more flexible approaches to impression formation.
outcome, however, the category dimensions When perceivers are exposed to crossed categori-
involved must be related (e.g., gender and occupa- zations that challenge stereotypic expectations,
tion: most mechanics are men, most soldiers are this can elicit changes in the way people form
heterosexual) because it is only under these condi- impressions, reducing reliance on single, divisive
tions that perceivers will be surprised by counter- categories and encouraging a more complex, dif-
stereotypical combinations (and prompted to ferentiated and tolerant view of others.
engage in more systematic thought to resolve the
inconsistency with expectations). These processes Richard J. Crisp
are not elicited when categories are uncorrelated See also Categorization; Discrimination; Multiple
(e.g., race and gender). One is not, for instance, Identities; Prejudice
surprised to meet a Black man or Black woman.
Research has found that participants asked to
form an impression of surprising combinations, Further Readings
such as “woman mechanic” and “male nurse,” Crisp, R. J., Ensari, N., Hewstone, M., & Miller, N.
used stereotypes of the constituent categories less (2002). A dual-route model of crossed categorization
to describe the target than to describe new or effects. In W. Stroebe, & M. Hewstone (Eds.),
emergent (nonstereotypic) attributes. Emergent European review of social psychology (Vol. 13,
attributes are typical of neither constituent cate- pp. 35–74). East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press.
gory and are produced following a mental resolu- Crisp, R. J., & Hewstone, M. (1999). Differential
tion of the incongruent information. They indicate evaluation of crossed category groups: Patterns,
a cognitive redefinition of the target person that no processes, and reducing intergroup bias. Group
longer relies on stereotypic expectations. Processes and Intergroup Relations, 2, 303–333.
The less stereotypic approach to impression Crisp, R. J., & Hewstone, M. (2007). Multiple social
formation evoked by thinking about crossed categorization. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in
166 Crowding

experimental social psychology (Vol. 39, pp. 163–254). to a specific group. Density can vary for spaces
Orlando, FL: Academic Press. within a particular building or home (inside density)
Deschamps, J.-C., & Doise, W. (1978). Crossed category and for spaces outside (outside density, such as a
memberships in intergroup relations. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), city’s population). Effects of density depend on the
Differentiation between social groups (pp. 141–158). type of density involved and the type of measures
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. obtained.
Miller, N., Kenworthy, J., Carnales, C. J., & Stenstrom,
D. M. (2006). Explaining the effects of crossed
categorization on ethnocentric bias. In R. J. Crisp & Research Approaches
M. Hewstone (Eds.), Multiple social categorization:
There have been many approaches to studying the
Processes, models and applications (pp. 160–188).
effects of crowding. Some studies with humans
East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press.
and animals have explored the effects of natural
variations in density. Animal studies have exam-
ined the effects of group or herd size on social
behavior and mortality. Studies with humans have
Crowding examined how the degree of crowding in different
areas of cities relates to these same types of mea-
Crowding can be characterized as the experience sures. These naturalistic studies are essentially cor-
of stress due to exposure to too many people in relational, which means that they examine the
too little space. One constant since the great relationship between variables without any cer-
plagues has been a continual increase in popula- tainty as to what causes what. A crowded neigh-
tion. The urbanization of civilization has exacer- borhood could have a higher mortality rate because
bated dense population growth, and the population of crowding, but this also could be because it also
of our planet is now close to 7 billion, increasing has more pollution, noise, and a lower economic
at a rate of 1% a year. These trends have contrib- status or because it draws people in need of close
uted to conditions of crowding in some countries access to medical services. Experimental studies
and cities. Researchers have explored the many can provide more conclusive data on the extent to
factors that influence crowding and how the which a crowding variable causes certain effects.
harmful effects of this experience can be reduced. Investigators can manipulate different types of
Studies have examined the various spatial and density in both laboratory and field settings and
social factors that influence the experience of determine the extent to which these variations of
crowding. Any time groups come together, they density affect various measures of performance,
vary in size and spatial arrangement. These two behavior, or well-being.
factors can influence a wide range of social and
task behaviors in groups. The literature on crowd-
Density and Animals
ing involves extensive studies with both humans
and nonhuman animals in laboratory settings and Research with animals has been able to investi-
real-world contexts. This research has led to the gate links between density and negative outcomes
development of a variety of models for under- in naturalistic settings. Early study of the growth
standing the effects of crowding. of a herd of deer marooned on an island in
Crowding is generally defined as a negative expe- Chesapeake Bay found evidence of stress, social
rience related to high levels of physical density (a deterioration, and death as density in the herd
large number of people per unit of space). Density grew. Studies of mice and rats allowed to repro-
can be increased by adding people, decreasing space, duce and “overpopulate” their environments found
or both. The type of density most closely related to severe negative effects of density in these animal
popular understanding of crowding is social density, colonies. Several studies housed animals in envi-
the number of people in a given space or area. Pure ronments where they were forced to share needed
social density variations involve increases in the size resources with large numbers of other animals. In
of the group while the space is constant. In contrast, most of these studies, colonies continued to grow
spatial density involves variation in the area allotted over time until they peaked and the population
Crowding 167

declined. Along the way, various types of social negative effect of crowding on social behavior is
pathology emerged and characterized the colony’s increased aggressiveness.
decline.
These studies found effects of increasing density
Models of Crowding
that may well be more severe than those found in
humans. This may be because humans possess The effects of crowding can most simply be under-
more sophisticated ways to deal with the demands stood from the perspective of environmental stress.
posed by crowding. Thus studies of animal density Environmental events that threaten harm or chal-
are best used as a platform for the development lenge one’s resources are considered stressors.
and evaluation of hypotheses that should be stud- Lazarus and Folkman and others have proposed
ied in humans. that how one perceives or appraises stressful events
and how one deals or copes with them are critical
determinants of the effects of stressors. Many
Density and Humans
negative effects of crowding follow from having to
Since humans experience density both in short- deal with unwanted interactions or spatial intru-
term situations (as in a subway car) and in long- sions. When there are too many people or too little
term situations (e.g., crowded college dormitories), space, these problems increase. The arousal pro-
studies have examined density in both. For exam- duced by such stress can be related to poorer per-
ple, several laboratory studies have evaluated the formance on complex tasks and changes in
effects of short-term variations in density on task physiological functions. Long-term exposure to
performance. Increasing either social or spatial such stress may lead to illness or even death.
density has detrimental effects on task perfor- The psychological model of stress suggests that
mance, especially if the task is relatively complex. effective coping responses may reduce the impact
Density and crowding also seem to have emo- of stressors. The reduction in sociability or social
tional and physiological consequences. High levels withdrawal observed under crowded conditions
are often associated with negative feelings, espe- can be seen as a means of coping with crowding.
cially for males with insufficient space. Density has However, there is little systematic research on dif-
been associated with elevated blood pressure, skin ferent coping strategies and crowding. For exam-
conductance, and levels of stress hormones such as ple, men have been found to cope with dormitory
cortisol or epinephrine. These measures suggest crowding by avoiding spending time in their
that crowding may induce responses related to rooms, whereas females may do the opposite,
stress. Thus, extended exposure to the stressful spending more time in crowded dorm rooms and
conditions of crowding may affect health. Crowding getting more involved with roommates. However,
in prisons has been associated with elevated illness the avoidance strategy used by males could back-
rates and mortality. Illness-related effects have also fire if it undermines the social support system that
been observed for those living in other crowded they need to confront a variety of life stressors
environments, such as college dormitories and other than crowding.
naval vessels. Research on crowding and other environmental
Since crowding is often experienced as unpleas- stressors has found that perceived control is an
ant, it is not surprising that it may lead individuals important factor in understanding the causes and
to become less sociable. Crowded individuals may consequences of stress. Most crowding phenom-
avoid eye contact, sit farther apart in public spaces, ena can be understood from this perspective. When
and reduce the frequency of interacting with oth- environmental conditions produce a sense of loss
ers. Unfortunately, this tendency to avoid social of control, negative effects on health and behavior
contact interferes with the ability to seek out social are likely to result. This loss of control can be
support from others in times of need or, in turn, to caused by feelings of too much stimulation or
provide such social support. This type of support overload, the experience of more interaction than
is a critical factor in our ability to cope with stress. desired, or feelings of constraint or interference if
The lack of such support systems make us more one is unable to attain one’s goals (e.g., privacy,
vulnerable to the negative effects of stress. Another getting to work on time).
168 Crowding

Repeated experiences of such loss of control can commuting time, reduce time spent in a crowded
produce a degree of passivity or learned helpless- room, or develop ways to navigate a crowded
ness in which individuals do not actively assert store. One interesting issue is whether we eventu-
their options or freedoms (e.g., social withdrawal). ally habituate and adapt to the experience of
Even when people do not become passive or help- crowding, thus reducing its negative effects.
less, they may withdraw from other people as a There is some evidence for this type of adapta-
way of regaining control over social interactions. tion effect, but other evidence that exposure to
In crowded dormitories where residents reported crowding can actually increase one’s sensitivity to
many unwanted and/or uncontrollable social con- crowding. Which effect occurs may depend on
tacts, coping behavior included reduced sociability personal characteristics such as ability to screen
and withdrawal and persisted outside the dormi- out external stimulation, coping style, and the
tory. The control perspective suggests that if indi- nature of the experiences encountered in crowded
viduals can attain some sense of control in a conditions (e.g., supportive versus antagonistic).
crowded environment, the negative impact of the Of course, one way of adapting is to avoid crowd-
crowding experience can be reduced. Studies have ing by using the behavioral strategy of social with-
shown that if individuals are given some degree of drawal. The lack of friendliness and social isolation
control over their exposure to crowding (e.g., they evident in many crowded cities may reflect this.
are allowed to leave the situation any time they Although such withdrawal may help an individual
wish), the effects of crowding are reduced. to cope, it may ultimately not be beneficial to have
Other research on dormitories and prison hous- many people socially uninvolved or distant in their
ing also supports a control perspective. Paulus and relationship with one another.
his colleagues found that the number of individu- A number of studies have also provided evi-
als in a housing unit (social density) rather than the dence that certain architectural modifications can
amount of space per person (spatial density) was reduce the impact of crowding. For example, in
the most important factor in the effects of crowded prison dormitories with open sleeping areas, parti-
housing. Large open dorms with many inmates but tions between beds reduce negative effects. Similar
considerable space were related to more illness positive effects of partitions can also be observed
than double rooms with less space per person. in office environments. Other architectural fea-
Some of this effect may have been due to enhanced tures, such as elevated ceilings, more windows,
contagion, but stress hormones have also been and access to doors, have reduced feelings of
linked to crowding-related health problems. crowding. The beneficial effects of such architec-
Similarly, architectural designs that varied in the tural interventions may derive their effects on feel-
number of people sharing resources in college dor- ings of control. Adding partitions in a dorm can
mitories (e.g., lounges, bathrooms, hallways) also allow residents to limit and control interactions
varied in perceived crowding and social behavior. more effectively. In one study, dividing a long cor-
Hence, high social density seems more likely than ridor dormitory in half reduced the effects of
high spatial density to lead to social interference crowding; a suite design in dormitories that allowed
and negative interactions. for more effective control of interactions (com-
pared to corridor-style dorms with double rooms)
was also associated with less crowding.
Practical Implications
If we assume that the population on the planet will Paul B. Paulus and Andrew S. Baum
continue to grow, what can we do to reduce the
See also Group Ecology; Group Performance; Support
detrimental effects of crowding? The importance
Groups; Territoriality
of appraisal and coping suggests several strategies.
One possibility is to modify people’s perception of
crowding. If individuals are forewarned about the
Further Readings
effects of crowding, they might be able to develop
better psychological and behavioral coping strate- Baum, A., & Paulus, P. B. (1987). Crowding. In D.
gies to deal with crowding. People can alter their Stokols, I. Altman, & E. Williams (Eds.), Handbook
Crowds 169

of environmental psychology (pp. 533–570). New ideas but on a lack of ideas, in this view; masses
York: John Wiley. and crowds were quite simply mindless. This per-
Edwards, J. N., Fuller, T. D., & Vorakitphokatorn, S. spective was exemplified in the work of the most
(1994). Household crowding and its consequences. influential of all crowd psychologists, Gustave
Boulder, CO: Westview. Le Bon. This entry begins with a look at his classic
Evans, G. W., Lepore, S. J., & Allen, K. M. (2000). crowd theory, then turns to more recent theories of
Cross-cultural differences in tolerance for crowding: crowds, crowd dynamics, and social change.
Fact or fiction? Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 79, 204–210.
Classic Crowd Theory
According to Le Bon, when people become
anonymous within a crowd—a process he called
Crowds “submergence”—they lose their sense of individual
self but, in being part of the mass, gain a sense of
Crowd events exemplify the complex two-sided invincible power. Having lost their selfhood, and
relationship between the individual and social hence their ability to think and judge, people
reality. On the one hand, crowd action reflects the become subject to “contagion.” This refers to the
structure and culture of the society within which notion that ideas, and more particularly emotions,
it occurs. On the other hand, crowd action reflects spread automatically and rapidly among crowd
back on society, serving to shape and reshape the members. Sometimes these emotions arise haphaz-
world in which we live. In sum, the crowd encap- ardly, Le Bon said, but more generally they are
sulates the core paradox of human action: the fact generated through “suggestion.” That is, Le Bon
that we both determine and are determined by the argued that the loss of selfhood among crowd
social world. It follows that an adequate under- members is accompanied by reversion to a collec-
standing of crowd psychology will provide general tive (or “racial”) unconscious—hence, the tag
insights into the nature of human sociality. group mind theory, which is often given to this
Yet, both within the academic discipline of psy- approach. The racial unconscious generates the
chology and beyond, crowds are seen as asocial impulses that govern action. Because the racial
and irrational, an aberration from the normal unconscious is held to be atavistic, the defining
workings of society rather than a reflection of characteristics of crowd action are considered to
them. This desocialized view did not arise despite be equally primitive.
the social nature of crowd action, but precisely Crowds, according to Le Bon, are powerful
because of it. Modern crowd psychology arose as only for destruction. People, he claimed, descend
part of the response to European industrialization several rungs on the ladder of civilization by virtue
and the rise of a society in which the laboring of joining crowds. Or, to cite a passage that reveals
masses were separated both physically and socially as much about Le Bon’s politics as his science:
from the ruling elites. In this context, the dominant “Many special characteristics of crowds, such as
classes harbored acute fears that the masses would their impulsivity, irritability, incapacity to reason,
rise up to challenge the social order. These fears the absence of judgement and of the critical fac-
coalesced around the figure of the crowd, seen as ulty, the exaggeration of emotions, and others
the masses in action. besides, can equally be seen amongst inferior forms
Both mass society theories in general, and of evolution such as savages and children”
crowd psychology theories in particular, reflected (1895/1947, pp. 35–36).
the ideological perspective of elite progenitors. Le Bon’s ideas have been translated into mod-
This perspective, rather than acknowledging that ern social psychology through the notion of dein-
the various forms of mass movement—syndical- dividuation. While there are a variety of
ism, socialism, anarchism—reflected alternative deindividuation approaches, they share in com-
visions of the social order, held that mass move- mon the notion that immersion in a group leads to
ment was a threat to the very possibility of social a loss of normal judgment and control over behav-
order. Mass movements were not based on radical ior. They can be seen as retaining the negative half
170 Crowds

of the concept of submergence—the notion of loss targets of crowd violence faithfully reflect the
of selfhood, while discarding the positive half—the social belief systems of participants.
notion that people gain a sense of power.
Despite its longevity, the group mind tradition
Normative Theories of the Crowd
was challenged virtually from its inception. Floyd
Allport dismissed the notion of a consciousness In the 1960s and 1970s, a new wave of collective
separate from the minds of individuals as a mean- unrest struck the Western world. This time, how-
ingless abstraction, and he insisted that the indi- ever, the demographics of academia were far dif-
vidual in the crowd behaves just as he or she ferent from those at the start of the century, and
would behave alone, only more so. Allport initi- many theorists related to crowd as participants
ated an individualist tradition that sought to rather than the targets of action. As a result, they
explain social behavior in general, and crowd were far more attuned to the perspectives of crowd
behavior in particular, in terms of the characteris- members and the meanings of their action. This
tics of the actors. If crowds were violent, it reflected gave rise to a variety of models that stressed the
the violent nature of their members. Ironically, this normative processes governing crowd behavior.
is at odds with Allport’s own account of crowd Ralph Turner and Lewis Killian’s emergent
conflict. He argued that the distinctive response norm theory (ENT) examined how crowd norms
profiles that normally govern our individual behav- emerge out of the intense interactions that occur
ior break down under the arousal of crowd condi- during events. ENT suggests that the homogeneity
tions. Instead, a shared instinctual substrate of crowds is largely an illusion. Rather, as people
dominates behavior—particularly the urge to mill around, prominent individuals (or “keynot-
destroy whatever stands in the way of satisfying ers”) will seek to define the reality of the situation
our basic needs. and propose specific forms of action. Over a
Behind the apparent opposition between period, certain voices will become predominant
Le Bon and Allport (or, more accurately, the indi- and hence norms will emerge that may temporarily
vidualist tradition), they share certain key assump- shape coordinated crowd action. The strength of
tions. First, both assume that the individual self is this approach lies in its close analysis of the
the sole basis of reasoned judgment and behav- microsocial interactions through which shared
ioral control. The difference is that group mind understandings are formed during events. Its weak-
approaches see this self as obliterated in the ness lies in its inability to specify which voices get
crowd, while individualist approaches see it as heard or how the local norms developed within the
accentuated. Second, both traditions see crowd crowds relate to broader belief systems. ENT may
conduct, and specifically, crowd violence, as explain the patterning of crowd action, but it does
pathological. However, while group mind theories not explain how this patterning comes to be
locate pathology in generic crowd processes, indi- socially meaningful.
vidualist theories characterize individual crowd Stephen Reicher’s social identity model of crowd
members as generically pathological. Third, the behavior addresses precisely this point. As the name
two approaches explain conduct by processes suggests, this model is based on the social identity
internal to the crowd and hence ignore the role of tradition in social psychology and, more particu-
social context. larly, on self-categorization theory (SCT). The core
These commonalities are interlinked. That is, if ideas here are (a) that the shift from interpersonal
the psychic structure that ensures control over to intergroup behavior is underpinned by a psycho-
action (i.e., the individual self) is conceptualized logical shift from personal identity to social iden-
in asocial terms, it becomes impossible to under- tity, and (b) that when any given social identity is
stand the social basis of behavioral control. salient, we act in terms of the beliefs, values, and
Consequently, both classic traditions of crowd norms associated with the relevant category (what
psychology are unable to explain the socially it means to be British, a Catholic, a feminist, or
meaningful pattern of crowd action. As many whatever). To put it slightly differently, social iden-
studies have shown, far from being randomly tifications are both irreducibly social, in the sense
destructive, the nature of collective action and the that they are historical and cultural products, and
Crowds 171

profoundly personal, in the sense that they define Le Bon proposed, it allows a uniquely privileged
who we are and what we count as significant. They insight into the collective beliefs of social groups.
therefore provide a psychological process that links As the French historian Henri Lefebvre has argued,
the individual to society and explains how the it is only in crowds that people escape their every-
behavior of individual group members is governed day concerns and become the subjects of history.
by social meanings.
Whereas these processes apply to groups in gen-
Crowd Dynamics and Social Change
eral, there are two distinctive features of crowds as
a particular type of group, both of which have The social identity model may be able to explain
implications for the normative process. First, how crowd action reflects existing social belief
crowds are face-to-face groups that typically con- systems. However, there is the danger that such a
front ambiguous or novel social situations. one-sided emphasis on how society shapes crowds
Consequently, crowd members are not able to rely leads to a neglect of how crowds shape society.
on predefined norms that prescribe exactly how The elaborated social identity model of crowd
they should act. Rather, as ENT suggests, they behavior (ESIM) aims to provide a more two-sided
have to elaborate situationally appropriate norms. perspective.
However, unlike ENT, SIM proposes that they do ESIM starts by noting that the original social
so within limits set by their social identity. Thus, identity model only partially recontextualizes
situational norms are more likely to be accepted to crowd action. Thus it might relate crowds to
the extent that they are seen as consonant with the broader social categories, however, in common
broad category definition. Pacifists confronted by with other crowd models, it largely ignores the
the police may choose from a number of actions: a immediate interactional context of crowd action.
sit-down protest, a silent vigil, singing songs of That is, crowd events typically involve interchanges
protest. However, they are unlikely to throw stones between crowd members and another group, typi-
or initiate physical conflict. cally the police or other authorities. Yet the spot-
How, then, do crowd members translate the light tends to rest on the crowd alone, and the
general parameters of social identity into specific explanatory focus tends to be on factors internal to
local norms? It can be done through discussion, the crowd, such as the group’s mind, personality,
although the fast-moving pace of crowd events or social identity. A more dynamic approach
frequently makes this impossible. Often, then, begins by examining crowd processes—and, more
norms will be inferred from the actions of typical specifically, social identity processes—within the
group members, but only as long as those actions unfolding interplay between the parties to an event.
are seen as broadly consistent with category That is, it must be both historical and interactive.
norms. This is the so-called inductive aspect of In order to understand when change will (or
categorization. will not) occur, ESIM involves another step. That
The second distinctive aspect of the crowd has step involves re-envisioning the concept of social
to do with the issue of power—which, as discussed, identity as people’s model of where they stand in a
was stressed by Le Bon but then forgotten by his system of social relations and the actions that are
successors. In everyday life, people are often proper or possible within that position. It follows
unable to act on those aspects of their social iden- that, when people enter into a crowd event on the
tity that would be repressed by powerful outgroups basis of one social position but are repositioned
such as the police. However, when gathered through crowd interactions, their identities will be
together in the crowd, members have sufficient changed through the experience. This will happen
support to overcome such repression. The impor- when two conditions are fulfilled: (1) an asymme-
tant thing is that people will not do just anything try between the way in which the (police) outgroup
with their power. They will do only those things construes the social position of crowd members
deemed proper in terms of their category beliefs. and the way crowd members construe their own
By the same token, people can fully express only position and (2) the (police) outgroup has suffi-
their social identities in crowds. Far from crowd cient power to impose their version of reality upon
power being associated with inchoate action, as the situation.
172 Crowds

Characteristically, in these events, a majority of ESIM is not a narrow model of those few crowd
crowd members see themselves as liberal subjects events that transform society. Rather, it is a more
who are claiming the right to protest, but who general model of how identity can simultaneously
consider their relationship to the police and the shape and be shaped by collective action.
state as positive. However, the police see them as
oppositional and dangerous. Moreover, the police
translate this perception into the concrete reality of Broadening the Relevance
cordons, lines of police horses, and even charges to of Crowd Psychology
disperse the crowd. The experience of being posi- Thus far, crowd research has concentrated on the
tioned as the opposition and of being deprived of way in which participants’ experience of events
what they believe to be their rights leads these affects them. However, there are two senses in
crowd members to reconceptualize themselves as which the relevance of crowds for society is consid-
oppositional, and hence to pay more heed to oppo- erably wider: (1) crowd members identify themselves
sitional forces within the crowd. Such a change of as members of larger social categories and (2) mem-
identity alters their sense of what forms of action bers of the wider community may perceive the
are appropriate in this newly understood world. crowd as representing them. Especially with catego-
Notably, this change legitimates the conflict against ries so large it is inconceivable that everybody could
police and thereby leads to an escalation of vio- ever get together (nation, religion, “race,” etc.),
lence among crowd members. crowds are the “imagined community” made mani-
However, this is not the only transformation fest. The fate of the crowd therefore affects category
that occurs. Crowd members also change their members in general. This is particularly true where
sense of how they relate to other groups in society— events reflect on the relationship between the
notably, other oppositional groups that previously ingroup and a relevant outgroup. Thus, for instance,
were seen as outgroups come to be seen as part of the American civil rights demonstrations and urban
a broader ingroup. They change their feelings of riots of the 1960s and 1970s were critical for rede-
efficacy and their expectations of support from fining Black identity and reframing overall race
others, their commitment to future action, even relations—and the same could be said for the British
their sense of what their action is about and of urban riots of the 1980s.
what counts as success. Often, the act of protest Second, although ESIM has been developed to
and of revealing the partial nature of the state and analyze the immediate interactions between par-
its authorities becomes an end in itself. In short, ties in crowd events, the logic of ESIM, notably its
crowd processes can serve to reconfigure the bal- insistence on a historical and interactive analysis
ance of forces in society. of group processes, can equally be applied to more
Note that ESIM does not suggest that crowd mundane group phenomena. Thus, instead of
action always leads to radicalization. It is equally treating identity as a contextual given that deter-
possible that where people consider themselves mines group behavior, it becomes necessary to
oppositional but are treated positively by the examine how ingroup identity—or, more pre-
police and authorities (i.e., perceive that their cisely, the balance of influence between more or
rights are being protected and facilitated rather less radical voices in the group in terms of defining
than denied), this asymmetry will lead to a process the collective position—is framed by the nature of
of deradicalization and de-escalation of conflict. intergroup relations.
More generally, however, the conditions for any In sum, crowds play a critical role in forming the
sort of change (asymmetries of representation and social identities through which people relate to each
power) are relatively rare. More often, outsiders other in society. The crowd provides a privileged
share the self-understandings of participants and site to investigate the processes of human sociality.
act in ways that consolidate rather than destabilize Crowd psychology needs to be brought back from
identities. In this way, ritualized crowd events such the margins of the discipline—an exotic, spectacu-
as official ceremonies mourning the deaths of lar, but ultimately peripheral concern—to its core.
monarch and political leaders may serve a critical
role in preserving existing social relations. Overall, Stephen Reicher
Cults 173

See also Collective Movements and Protest; Deindividuation; Cults are not a new phenomenon, but the atten-
Emergent Norm Theory; Group Mind; Norms; Self- tion they have received has increased dramatically
Categorization Theory; Social Identity Model of in the past several decades. Many scholars attri-
Deindividuation Effects; Social Identity Theory bute the presence of cults in the United States, for
example, to the culture of change that typified
America in the 1960s. Social and political turmoil
Further Readings surrounded America’s involvement in the Vietnam
Allport, F. (1924). Social psychology. Boston: Houghton War; civil unrest characterized Blacks’ and wom-
Mifflin. en’s struggle for equality; religious influence began
Le Bon, G. (1947). The crowd: A study of the popular to decline as people searched for different ways of
mind. London: Ernest Benn. (Original work understanding. This culture was fertile for groups
published 1895) whose beliefs conflicted with mainstream dogma,
Reicher, S. (1984). The St Paul’s “riot”: An explanation giving rise to the number and popularity of cults.
of the limits of crowd action in terms of a social The numbers of cults and their members are
identity model. European Journal of Social difficult to estimate. At the low end, researchers
Psychology, 14, 1–21. have estimated several hundred cults; at the high
Reicher, S. (2001). The psychology of crowd dynamics. end, researchers have estimated as many as 3,000
In M. A. Hogg & R. S. Tindale (Eds.), Blackwell such groups across the world. One reason that
handbook of social psychology: Group processes estimating the number of cults is challenging is
(pp. 182–208). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. because most cults do not survive to become
Stott, C., & Drury, J. (2000). Crowds, context and
mainstream groups and thus may be overlooked.
identity: Dynamic categorization processes in the “poll
Also challenging is estimating the number of cult
tax riot.” Human Relations, 53, 247–273.
members. Data suggest that relatively few people
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1986). The social identity theory
report having personal, direct contact with cult
of intergroup behaviour. In S. Worchel & W. G.
Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations
groups; however, such data often conflict with
(pp. 33–48). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
those reported by cults. The members of cults may
Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & be motivated to misreport their size, either to
Wetherell, M. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: appear larger and stronger than they truly are or
A self-categorization theory. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. to avoid scrutiny from skeptical outsiders and law
Turner, R., & Killian, L. (1987). Collective behaviour enforcement agents. Estimation is also made dif-
(3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. ficult by the challenges involved in precisely defin-
ing cults. This entry begins with a look at this
issue, then discusses cult leadership and structure,
concluding with a description of socialization pro-
cesses cults use.
Cults
Defining Cults
Organized around a charismatic leader who
demands unquestioning obedience, cults are There is no standard, consensual definition of cults
strongly cohesive groups of people who are com- among social scientists, but most definitions focus
mitted to a transcendent worldview that they on the importance of a charismatic, living person
believe is morally superior. They are rigidly who leads an essentially elitist group that believes
authoritarian, and they are very effective in using in their own moral and social superiority. Their
common methods of social influence to achieve commitment to the leader and his or her message
their goals. Because many people argue that cult is so strong that members may become overly
influence is coercive and destructive to the psycho- dependent on the group to meet basic psychologi-
logical well-being and individuality of members, it cal needs. The strong bonds among members
is important for group researchers to examine the heighten their conformity to behavioral norms and
ways in which cults are typical and atypical of their willingness to be influenced by the leader and
other groups. each other.
174 Cults

A primary challenge for social scientists is dis- history could influence individuals to crave the
tinguishing cults from other groups with similar power and influence that is associated with leading
dynamics. Some scholars have noted that cultic groups.
structure, thought control, and socialization prac- These generalizations should be regarded cau-
tices are not that different from those in groups tiously, however, because the data are usually
like the military and fraternities and sororities. In based on hindsight and cannot be used to confirm
addition, the term cult can be applied so generally causal paths. Regardless, at some point leaders
that it includes most religious and political groups. become quite effective in persuading others that
Outside the scientific realm, the term is used even they have a special, exclusive hold on Truth. The
more loosely, referring to groups of people who leader’s influence cannot be understated. He or she
are devoted to a fashion trend, the latest gadget, a rules with an authoritarian style, regulating every
popular celebrity, a lifestyle, and so on. experience in the members’ day, including work,
Moreover, the term conjures stereotypes of diet, social activities, sex, and marriage. The leader
brainwashed zombies who surrender their posses- is so important in the lives of cult members that
sions to the group, who sexually abuse women and cults often do not survive when he or she dies or
children, and who aggress against mainstream cul- moves on.
ture. Although such stereotypes are valid for some Like most groups, cults quickly form a structure
cultic groups and/or their members, they are not and goals, which vary considerably across cults.
applicable to them all. Indeed, these stereotypes Some groups are organized around the theme of
may be largely based on extreme cults whose sen- humankind’s demise, and their goal is to recruit
sationalized media representation comes readily to members to a path of salvation. Others are orga-
mind (e.g., the People’s Temple, Branch Davidians, nized around political and social themes, and their
Heaven’s Gate, Aum Shinrikyo). goals may include aggressing against institutions
Consequently, some scholars—often labeled that counter those themes. The degree to which
cult apologists—have begun to call cults new reli- cults are tightly structured around these beliefs and
gious movements (NRMs). The term is less affec- their leader varies, as does the degree to which
tively charged, but not without problems. For cults operate in isolation from mainstream society.
example, not all cultic groups are temporally or Some groups allow members to continue living
even ideologically new; and even established, and working in mainstream society, whereas oth-
mainstream religions like Christianity would have ers require members to break away completely
been considered cultic at their inception. Further, from their past life and individuality to embrace a
what is considered to be cultic is sometimes a sub- new identity in the cult (“social implosion”). In
jective judgment to describe any ideological or addition, many cults structure themselves as a fam-
social outgroup. ily, with the leader occupying the most central
position as a loving parent. Those structurally
closest to the leader are trusted, loyal, full mem-
Cult Leadership and Structure
bers who have access to the leader’s private teach-
Central to most definitions of cults is a self- ings. They are the closest to reaching the cult’s
appointed leader, one who views himself or (less vision of enlightenment, and they may have special
commonly) herself as having a divine calling. Some signifiers of their elevated status.
cult leaders claim to be messianic or prophetic;
however, such claims tend to be unverifiable,
Socialization in Cults
fueled by members who want to believe in the
leader and his or her message. The claims are also Once relegated to city streets and airports, recruit-
fueled by the leader’s enigmatic past. Members ment now occurs in more familiar, personal settings.
may know very little about the leader’s life, other For example, prospective members may be recruited
than what the leader wants them to know. Research in their homes (e.g., face-to-face, electronically over
suggests that cult leaders tend to have a tumultu- the Internet) or through their social networks (e.g.,
ous background characterized by crisis, emotional family, friends, coworkers). Researchers have found
instability, and poor social relationships. Such a that these personal strategies are very effective in
Cults 175

forming and maintaining cults because they decrease Once they become new members, individuals find
the likelihood that prospective members will respond that information is controlled inside the group.
defensively to cult messages, or that they will pro- Outside information—especially information that
cess those messages at a deep level. is damaging to the group and its message—is
blocked from reaching members (similar to the
mindguards of groupthink). Information about the
Member Traits
group that is communicated externally is also
A common question that arises in the context of strictly monitored and controlled.
cults is, “Who becomes a cult member?” As social New and full members participate in a variety
psychological studies remind us, we could all be of activities that raise their commitment to the
ideal recruits under the proper circumstances. It cult. They are partnered with old timers who serve
should not be surprising, then, that researchers as benevolent mentors, and they spend much of
have had little success in finding personality traits their day with other members. The relative unifor-
that reliably predict vulnerability to cult influence. mity in members’ characteristics and worldviews
Most prospective members show no signs of sub- validates the group and its beliefs, and it increases
stantial psychopathology or intellectual deficits. the group’s cohesion. Ritualistic confession is a
(Generally, people with severe mental illness are common activity that exposes the members’ short-
poor members because they do not remain in the comings to each other, a vulnerability that can
group for a long time.) enhance trust and solidarity. These activities enable
Recruits tend to be educated young adults the group to monitor the thoughts and actions of
from the middle or upper socioeconomic classes— its members, ensuring that members comply with
characteristics that enable their curiosity and the group norms. Long days of working, recruiting,
search for meaning and identity. Their families are exercising, chanting, and praying exhaust mem-
typically intact, but researchers disagree over whether bers to the point where they are unable to elabo-
or not these families promote healthy autonomy. Any rate on the group’s message.
lack of autonomy may help to explain the appeal of Eventually, members may be expected to recruit
cults that organize themselves like a family. new members, give their assets to support the
group’s mission, and renounce outgroups. These
physical and socioemotional sacrifices enhance
Cultural Context
commitment by producing cognitive dissonance
Looking at factors outside the individual, soci- that is resolved by forming more positive attitudes
ologists have focused on large-scale cultural pat- toward the cult. In most cases, these sacrifices
terns that foster cult influence. Cults tend to unfold gradually, operating according to the foot-
emerge and flourish during times of societal chaos, in-the-door phenomenon. New members are asked
disorganization, and change, like when shifts in a small request (e.g., attend meetings), and their
collective values and worldviews occur. Further, compliance increases the likelihood that they later
individuals are most likely to join cults when they will comply with larger requests (e.g., sever all ties
are experiencing temporary disorganization in with family). Intragroup cohesion and commitment
their personal lives. Such disorganization may to the leader are important in cults, sustaining
occur when young adults leave the familiarity of members’ participation and belief, even when the
home and family for a job or school in an unfamil- leader’s vision of truth is invalidated by reality.
iar city.
The group’s central message, total love and
Exit Strategies
acceptance, is easy to understand and does not
require cognitive elaboration. In fact, deep process- Not all people who join cults remain in them.
ing among members is discouraged. Socially dis- There are a variety of reasons for why members
connected prospective members are showered with leave a cult. They may voluntarily leave because
love (“love bombing”), given hope that the group the group no longer satisfies important needs or
can answer all their questions and provide the sta- interests, or because they have external roles that
bility that seems to be missing in larger society. draw them away from the cult. Members may also
176 Culture

leave involuntarily, such as when the group asks Festinger, L., Riecken, H., & Schachter, S. (1956). When
marginal members to leave, or when family mem- prophecy fails: A social and psychological study of a
bers forcibly remove members. The reasons mem- modern group that predicted the destruction of the
bers leave a cult and the presence of a supportive world. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
postcult support network likely affect cult mem- Galanter, M. (1989). Cults and new religious movements:
bers’ reintegration into mainstream society. A report of the American Psychiatric Association.
Research generally suggests that former cult Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.
members experience an initial period of adjust- Galanter, M. (1999). Cults: Faith, healing, and coercion.
New York: Oxford University Press.
ment difficulties. These difficulties often involve
Lalich, J. A. (2004). Bounded choice: True believers and
disorientation and discomfort in having to make
charismatic cults. Berkeley: University of California Press.
their own decisions, a sense of shame over being
Singer, M. T. (2003). Cults in our midst (Rev. ed.).
influenced by the cult, problems in relationships
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
that were severed during membership, and the loss Stark, R., & Bainbridge, W. S. (1980). Networks of faith:
of personal property that now belongs to the cult. Interpersonal bonds and recruitment to cults and sects.
With the passage of time, former members begin to American Journal of Sociology, 85(6), 1376–1395.
integrate into society and to overcome these chal-
lenges, such that their psychological well-being is
comparable to those in the general population.
In today’s milieu of political and social unrest, it
would not be surprising to see more and newer Culture
cults emerge. Group researchers are ideally suited
to study cults, focusing particularly on such intra- To give a single, uncontroversial definition of cul-
group processes as information management, the ture is a difficult task. Any definition of culture is
construction of members’ shared mental models, itself an expression of a theoretical stance. With
and how cults use social influence to achieve their this caveat, this entry offers a definition that con-
goals. Such intergroup processes as outgroup dero- veys a conception of culture widely used in con-
gation, impression management, and minority temporary psychology. Broadly, culture is a
influence would also be viable foci of study. collection of information (or meanings) that is
Whether social scientists regard cults as evil, (a) nongenetically transmitted between individu-
destructive groups who prey on hapless individuals als, (b) more or less shared within a population of
or as ideological minorities whose right to exist individuals, and (c) maintained across some gen-
and express a different worldview should be pro- erations over a period of time.
tected, these researchers have much to contribute This definition of culture excludes behavior or
to society’s understanding of cults. artifacts. Artifacts may take a material form, such
as tools, machines, and objects, or a more sym-
Jamie G. McMinn bolic form, such as stories, poems, and pictures.
Social institutions such as rituals, laws, and the
See also Charismatic Leadership; Compliance; like are special kinds of artifacts that combine both
Conformity; Group Cohesiveness; Group Socialization;
material and symbolic forms. Information or
Group Structure; Groupthink; Identification and
meaning may be inferred from overt behavior or
Commitment; Obedience to Authority
artifacts, because it causes the behavior or behav-
ior that produces the artifacts. Behavior and arti-
facts may act as markers of culture, but they are
Further Readings not part of culture themselves.
Appel, W. (1983). Cults in America: Programmed for
paradise. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Groups and Cultures
Chambers, W., Langone, M. D., Dole, A., & Grice, J.
(1994). Group Psychological Abuse Scale: A measure Although a culture is often associated with a large-
of cultic behavior. Cultic Studies Journal, 11(1), scale group, such as a nation state, smaller groups
88–117. (e.g., Little League baseball teams, work groups)
Culture 177

and organizations can have cultures as well. More a self-reflectively defined group. For instance, social
generally, cultures and groups are conceptually scientists could define a set of individuals as a popu-
interdependent. The second component of the cul- lation purely on the basis of some arbitrary criterion
ture definition offered earlier stated that cultural (e.g., geographical location, historical period, age,
information is more or less shared among individ- gender, sexual orientation), regardless of whether
uals in a population. A population is often, though those individuals have a self-reflective definition of
not always, defined by a group. Here, a group is themselves as a group. Even then, it is possible to
understood as a collection of individuals who self- speak about their culture, given the definition
consciously regard themselves as members of the offered earlier. Culture can thus be described for a
group, and as an entity with an existence indepen- set of people who lack a group identity.
dent from specific members. Therefore, it is possi-
ble to speak of the culture of a group as the totality
Cultural Transmission
of nongenetic information more or less shared
and Small Group Processes
among members of that group. The culture of a
group is thus a property of that group. Cultural transmission, the process by which cul-
However, the culture of a group includes what the tural information is transmitted from one person
group means and what it means to be a member to another, is central to the sharing of cultural
of that group. These meanings include information information in a group and the maintenance of
(a) that the group exists (usually in contrast to other culture over generations. Recent theorizing sug-
groups); (b) that it has a unique past, some current gests that cultural transmission often occurs within
state, and potential continuity into the future; (c) that the context of face-to-face social interactions
some individuals (but not others) are group members; among people in their joint activities. For instance,
(d) that there is a way to determine group member- children acquire much of their culture through
ship (and the rules by which membership is deter- interaction with their parents and teachers in con-
mined); and (e) that to be a member of the group crete social contexts, such as family activities and
means to have certain psychological and behavioral classrooms. Workers acquire organizational cul-
characteristics. In this sense, culture and group are tures through everyday interactions with col-
coconstitutive: The constitution of a self-reflective leagues and supervisors in small work groups. In
group presupposes the existence of its culture (a defi- other words, the locus of much cultural transmis-
nition of the group, at the very least), and the culture sion is small face-to-face groups, including dyads.
of a group presupposes the existence of the group. Some cultural transmission is carried out pur-
The set of meanings (a) through (e) above, posefully, whereas other cultural transmission
about a group and group membership, may be occurs as an incidental side-effect of other activi-
called a group identity. Group identity in this sense ties. At least one participant in a joint activity
differs from social identity, which was defined by should possess some cultural information, and
the founder of social identity theory, Henri Tajfel, present it to other participants in a form that is
as “the individual’s knowledge that he belongs to understandable to them. In turn, those other par-
certain social groups together with some emotional ticipants should provide some (perhaps tacit) feed-
and value significance to him of his group mem- back regarding their acquisition and appreciation
bership” (1972, p. 292). In Tajfel’s sense, social of the cultural information. As a result, the infor-
identity is an individual’s representation of his or mation becomes shared among participants.
her own group membership, and it presupposes a However, not all those who are present end up
group identity. That is, given the existence of a with the same information—the cultural informa-
group and its meanings, an individual may define tion learned by a particular participant depends on
himself or herself as a member of the group. This that person’s perspective, prior knowledge, and
self-definition as a group member, with its atten- the like. Consequently, no cultural information is
dant emotional and value significance, contributes uniformly distributed within a group. “Shared”
to the individual’s social identity. culture in a group is thus often shared only to the
Nonetheless, a population of individuals who extent that is necessary for its use in members’
share some cultural information does not have to be joint activities.
178 Culture

Cultural transmission can occur among group well as in society, culture can be transmitted from
members, as illustrated by Muzafer Sherif’s classic one generation to the next.
investigation of emergent norms in 1936. In a labo- When a group continues to exist, despite changes
ratory setting, he projected a small speck of light in membership, and information is shared and trans-
onto the wall of a darkened room and asked par- mitted across generations, the group develops a cul-
ticipants to make judgments about its apparent ture. In 1982, Richard Moreland and John Levine
movement. In this situation, people tend to experi- called group socialization the process by which new
ence a perceptual illusion called the autokinetic members acquire a group’s culture and go through
effect, in which there is some apparent movement resulting temporal changes in status and commitment
of the light, although it is in fact stationary. In one to the group. Newcomers enter a group almost like
condition, Sherif had two or three naïve partici- apprentices; as they acquire the group’s culture, they
pants report their perceptions of movements indi- become full members, engage in the group’s activities
vidually and privately at first, and then publicly, in as main participants, and impart their cultural
a group setting. Although there were individual dif- knowledge to “younger” generations. At this point,
ferences in initial perceptions, the participants’ they are fully committed to the group. Nonetheless,
perceptions of the perceived autokinetic movements as they approach the time for their departure to other
converged when the participants were in a group. groups, they begin to extricate themselves from group
Here, cultural information about a frame of activities, reduce their commitment to the group, and
reference—a “usual” or normative range of per- eventually retire from it. An important aspect of
ceived movements in the light—was transmitted group socialization is cultural transmission, and the
among group members incidentally as a side effect of process by which cultural information is gained and
their joint activity of participating in an experiment. lost by group members over time.
For information shared within a group to Enduring groups are typically institutionalized
become part of the group’s culture, it must be groups. That is, they are often legally sanctioned orga-
transmitted vertically across generations. In 1961 nizations within a broader society, or are parts of such
Robert Jacobs and Donald Campbell showed that organizations. Institutionalized groups are psychologi-
a group norm induced by having confederates cally treated as part of the social reality that transcends
report arbitrarily large autokinetic movements in particular individuals’ perceptions and agreements;
Sherif’s experimental situation could persist over this appears to facilitate cultural transmission, and
generations. For instance, in one condition, a naïve strengthens the tendency for new group members to
participant began the experiment with two confed- internalize a group culture. Using Jacobs and
erates, who were instructed secretly by the experi- Campbell’s experimental paradigm, Lynne Zucker
menter to report very large movements in the light. examined cross-generational cultural transmission in
Once everyone had reported their views about the different settings in 1977. In one setting, the confeder-
light’s movement, one of the confederates was ates were described as other participants of a psycho-
removed from the group and replaced by a second logical experiment. In the other settings, the experiment
naïve participant. Everyone again reported their and the other participants were described as part of an
views about the lights’ movement, and then the institution, namely a company or a work group within
last confederate was removed, to be replaced by a company. Naïve participants introduced into institu-
yet another naïve participant. This pattern of tionalized groups internalized their groups’ norms
activities was repeated 10 more times. No further about autokinetic movements more strongly, and
confederates were added to the group; after each passed them on to newcomers more fully, than did
trial, the “oldest” group member was simply participants who construed their groups as part of a
replaced by someone who was totally new to the mere psychological experiment. An institutionalized
experiment. This procedure was meant to repre- group and its culture go hand in hand.
sent generational changes in society at large.
Despite the fact that the two confederates that
Culture in Large Populations and Groups
instituted the original norm were gone by the third
trial, that norm persisted in groups until the fifth Much of the discourse about culture in psychology
generation. This suggests that in small groups, as focuses on large geopolitical regions (e.g., Europe,
Culture 179

Asia), nation states, and ethnic groups. Geert Markus and Shinobu Kitayama in 1991 postulated
Hofstede’s 1980 book, Culture’s Consequences, pro- two types of culturally shaped self-concepts. People
vided a broad framework for such research, high- with an independent self, found mostly in individu-
lighting individualism and collectivism as the new alistic cultures, regard the self as bounded and sepa-
foci for research in psychology. Hofstede described rate from others. The independent self is a unitary
individualism as a cultural pattern that emphasizes and stable entity, characterized by private and inner
the individual’s goal pursuit and well-being, whereas attributes (e.g., honesty, kindness), that motivates
collectivism emphasizes the sustenance of collectives, people to express their unique selves, promote their
such as extended families and kinship groups. personal goals, and assert what is on their minds. In
Individualist and collectivist cultures echo such well- contrast, people with an interdependent self, found
known concepts as Ferdinand Tönnies’s gemein- mostly in collectivist cultures, regard the self as
schaft and geselschaft and Émile Durkheim’s inherently connected to significant others (e.g.,
mechanical and organic solidarity, which the found- daughter, husband) and to ingroups (e.g., a citizen
ers of social science developed to describe social and of a country, a member of a political party). This
cultural changes in the transition from the traditional motivates them to belong and fit in, occupy their
lifestyle to the modern society in western Europe in proper places, engage in appropriate actions,
the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Hofstede promote the goals of others, and “read other
showed that more individualistic countries tend to be people’s minds.” More recently, Richard Nisbett
richer, whereas more collectivistic countries tend to and others in 2001 argued that culture can influence
be poorer. North America, western Europe (the general cognitive styles. An analytical style, associ-
United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Italy, Denmark), ated with individualistic cultures, focuses a person’s
and Oceania (e.g., Australia, New Zealand) are more attention sharply on an object, while largely ignor-
individualistic, whereas Asia (e.g., Pakistan, Taiwan, ing its background. In contrast, a holistic style,
Thailand) and Latin America (e.g., Venezuela, associated with collectivistic cultures, has a broader
Colombia, Chile) are more collectivistic. focus of attention that includes both the object and
Related cultural differences have been found in its context. Thus, combining the ideas of culture,
small group processes, suggesting that small groups self, and cognition, the “standard theory” of East-
may be more real social agents, or more entitative West differences emerged. It suggests that Western
in Campbell’s sense, in collectivist than in individu- individualism promotes independent self and ana-
alist regions of the world. First, in collectivist lytic cognition, whereas Eastern collectivism pro-
Hong Kong, people spend more time in small motes interdependent self and holistic cognition.
groups than they do in the individualist United Consistent with the standard theory, there is
States. People with collectivist Chinese cultural empirical evidence for the prevalence of indepen-
backgrounds also tend to work harder in small dent self-concepts in North America and interde-
groups than alone, whereas people with individu- pendent self-concepts in East Asia. In comparing
alist American cultural backgrounds are more self-concepts in America, Australia, Hawai‘i, Japan,
likely to loaf in groups. Small groups also exert and Korea, it was found that Americans and
stronger social influence in collectivist regions than Australians had more individualist and less collec-
in individualist regions of the world, at least as tivist self-concepts than Japanese and Koreans,
measured by responses to conformity pressure. with Hawaiians in between these two groups.
And collectivists tend to hold small groups more When European Americans, Asian Americans, and
responsible for wrongdoing than do individualists, Koreans described themselves in their own words,
attributing equal or greater agency to groups than it was found that European Americans’ self-
to individuals for misbehavior. descriptions contained the highest proportion of
Linking cultural difference in individualism and personality trait terms, Koreans the lowest, and
collectivism to the self and social behavior, Harry Asian Americans in the middle, again suggesting
Triandis in 1989 argued that different types of self- the American tendency to characterize the self
concepts are prevalent in different parts of the using individual-centered descriptors.
world, and that culture influences social behavior One of the cultural differences in cognition
through the activation of self-concepts. Hazel involves the fundamental attribution error. Social
180 Culture

psychological research in the 1960s and 1970s, two separable cultural orientations, and indepen-
mainly conducted in North America, showed that dent and interdependent selves are now regarded
people have a strong tendency to explain some- as distinct self-concepts that can coexist in the
one’s behavior in terms of the person’s dispositions, same person. This means that some cultures can be
while underestimating the importance of the con- both individualistic and collectivistic, whereas oth-
text in which the behavior occurred. This tendency ers can be neither. Similarly, some people can
was said to reflect a basic limitation of the human show both independent and interdependent self-
cognitive system, but it later turned out to be an concepts, and others can show neither.
error observed more often in North America than Second, although the culture of individualism
elsewhere. Cross-cultural comparisons between the and its link to the independent self appears to be
United States and India, as well as between strong, empirical support for the link of collectiv-
the United States and Hong Kong, showed that the ism to the interdependent self is modest. In a fur-
“fundamental” attribution error was not so funda- ther refinement, the interdependent self has been
mental after all. Indians and Chinese do not exhibit differentiated into a self connected to significant
the error as often as their American counterparts. individuals (relational self) and a self that is
A cultural difference between North America socially connected to groups (collective self). In
and East Asia has been found in emotions as well. particular, there is some evidence that East Asian
A large scale, cross-cultural project comparing collectivism is characterized by a strong interper-
people’s happiness (often called subjective well- sonal bond between close people who are con-
being) showed a substantial difference between nected by reciprocal exchanges of resources,
North America and East Asia—North Americans whereas North American individualism often
tended to be much happier than East Asians. involves large social groups in which people engage
Paralleling these findings, cross-cultural compari- in generalized resource exchanges.
sons in self-esteem have shown a strong tendency Third, although Triandis’s original theorizing
for North Americans to have higher self-esteem emphasized the importance of situational variabil-
than Japanese. A related finding involves the opti- ity in the accessibility of different types of selves,
mism bias—a belief that in the future, one is more situational variability in cultural differences has
likely to experience positive events, but less likely to been generally overlooked in cross-cultural research.
experience negative events, than the average person. Nonetheless, research has shown that cultural
Although this bias is strong in North America and information can be “primed” to increase its cogni-
western Europe, it is much weaker in East Asia, tive accessibility temporarily, and thereby affect
especially in Japan, although a recent study suggests psychological processes. Flexible and situated theo-
that there is a universal tendency toward uncon- rizing about cultural differences is especially impor-
scious positive self-regard. Taken all together, these tant in today’s globalizing world, where many
findings reveal cultural differences in how people people are bicultural or multicultural. These indi-
think and express their feelings about life and them- viduals can often switch their cultural mind-sets
selves. These differences are typically interpreted easily and seamlessly, depending on whatever cul-
as arising from differences in self-concepts— tural information is salient in a given situation.
individualists optimistically pursue their happiness,
whereas the pursuit of happiness by collectivists is
Conclusion
tempered by a sense of obligation to others.
Overall, there is evidence for broad cultural dif- Globalization has increased the exchange of people,
ferences postulated by the standard theory of resources, and information across human popula-
East–West differences. tions in different regions of the world. When people
are exposed to information from other regions, they
have greater opportunities to compare themselves
Recent Trends in Culture and Psychology
to those from those regions. With increasing oppor-
The standard theory of East–West cultural differ- tunities to compare themselves to others, people
ences has been refined in recent years. First, indi- have become more aware of their own cultural
vidualism and collectivism have been found to be uniqueness and have self-reflectively differentiated
Culture of Honor 181

themselves further from others. In other words, Tajfel, H. (1972). Social categorization. In S. Moscovici
they have become more articulate about their cul- (Ed.), Introduction à la psychologie sociale (Vol. 1,
turally based group identities and attendant social pp. 272–302). Paris: Larousse.
identities. When identity differentiations were based
on cultural differences, cultural identities emerged
and became more prominent; as a result, identity
politics became part of the popular discourse. The Culture of Honor
2001 atrocity of the September 11th attacks on the
World Trade Center, arguably a symbol of global- In cultural anthropology and social psychology
ization, highlighted the ideas of cultures and cul- traditions, a culture of honor is one in which val-
tural identities because many believed cultural ues and behavioral norms place a strong emphasis
differences were fundamentally involved in this ter- on status and reputation. Having honor implies
rorist act. Thus, the concept of culture has now being respected by others. For males, this means
been moved to the center stage of the contemporary demonstrating toughness and the willingness to
academic and popular discourse, with an accompa- use aggression if one’s reputation is challenged or
nying sense of urgency. to avenge a perceived insult. For females, codes of
honor often focus on avoiding behaviors that
Yoshihisa Kashima could bring shame or dishonor to oneself or one’s
See also Assimilation and Acculturation; Collective Self; family. This usually means placing a strong
Collectivism/Individualism; Culture of Honor; emphasis on female modesty and moral (particu-
Emergent Norm Theory; Immigration; Initiation Rites; larly sexual) purity. This entry begins with an
Levels of Analysis; Minority Groups in Society; overview, then looks more closely at the internal
Multiculturalism; Norms; Xenophobia workings of honor cultures, and concludes with a
brief summary of related concepts.
Further Readings
Chiu, C.-Y., & Hong, Y.-Y. (2007). Cultural processes:
Overview
Basic principles. In A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins Cultures of honor often have elaborate informal
(Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic conventions about politeness, codes of conduct,
principles (pp. 785–804). New York: Guilford Press. and proper rules for redressing grievances. Honor
Heine, S. J. (2008). Cultural psychology. New York: cultures also tend to be characterized by extreme
Norton. sensitivity to insult that must often be met with a
Kashima, Y. (2008). A social psychology of cultural violent response. Values associated with honor cul-
dynamics: How cultures are formed, maintained, and tures include social interdependence, collectivism,
transformed. Social and Personality Psychology
emphasis on family, modesty (for females), and
Compass, 2, 107–120.
relatively traditional views about gender roles.
Levine, J. M., & Moreland, R. L. (1991). Culture and
Emotions tend to be centered around shame, pride,
socialization in work groups. In L. B. Resnick, J. M.
humiliation, and anger, but also politeness and
Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on
respect. Thus, honor encompasses many things: It is
socially shared cognition (pp. 257–279). Washington,
DC: American Psychological Association.
a set of prescriptive norms outlining acceptable and
Oyserman, D., & Lee, S. W.-S. (2007). Priming unacceptable behavior between individuals, fami-
“culture”: Culture as situated cognition. In S. lies, and social groups; it is a measure of an individ-
Kitayama & D. Cohen (Eds.), Handbook of cultural ual’s social worth and self-esteem; and it is associated
psychology (pp. 255–279). New York: Guilford Press. with the experience of several moral emotions.
Schein, E. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership The study of honor has a relatively long history
(2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. in cultural anthropology, with detailed ethnogra-
Smith, P. B., Bond, M. H., & Kaǧitçibas˛i, Ç. (2006). phies focusing on Mediterranean and Middle
Understanding social psychology across cultures: Eastern honor cultures. More recently, social psy-
Living and working in a changing world (3rd rev. chological research on honor, beginning with work
ed.). London: Sage. by Richard Nisbett and Dov Cohen in the 1990s,
182 Culture of Honor

has had as its main focus the study of aggression in Analyses of homicides in the United States,
the defense of male honor in the southern United beginning in the latter part of the 19th century,
States. Many other cultures around the world have have noted that the South has long been a much
strong honor traditions, including parts of Central more violent region than the rest of the country, a
and South America and many Islamic cultures. trend that continues today. These regional differ-
In addition, certain subcultures such as the ences tend to be magnified when looking at rural
military, the Mafia and the world of organized versus urban populations, Whites versus minori-
crime, and subcultures within inner cities empha- ties, and violence specifically related to honor
size honor or related constructs. Thus, honor cul- concerns (e.g., argument-related homicides, lovers’
tures can exist at the national or regional level quarrels) compared to felony-related violence.
(e.g., Spain, the southern United States), or they Though some of this regional difference may be
can exist in smaller units (e.g., military forces, due to factors such as poverty and higher tempera-
inner-city street gangs). In short, a “culture” arises tures in the South, a number of studies have impli-
wherever interdependent groups of individuals cated cultural values of honor directly.
share a common frame of reference. As individuals In survey research, Dov Cohen and Richard
acquire knowledge of the attitudes, values, norms, Nisbett found that individuals from the southern
and behavioral customs of the group, they become United States endorsed violence more than indi-
socialized members of the culture. viduals from the northern United States when it
was used to protect personal reputation, family, or
property, though Southerners did not endorse vio-
Development of Cultures of Honor
lence more in the abstract. In laboratory experi-
Cultures of honor tend to develop in places that ments by Cohen, Nisbett, and their colleagues,
have little or no formal law enforcement to redress southern U.S. males were more likely than north-
grievances and thus requiring individuals to pro- ern U.S. males to respond to insults with anger,
tect themselves. For example, much of the U.S. elevated physiological responses suggesting a read-
South and Southwest remained a largely lawless iness to aggress, dominant physical behaviors, and
frontier relatively late in the settlement of the actual aggression.
United States. Honor cultures also tend to develop A number of studies have also noted a connec-
in places where the economy is dependent upon a tion between honor norms and the relative accep-
portable commodity for wealth. For instance, tance of male violence against female intimate
herding-based cultures often place strong emphasis partners. For example, students from Brazil (a cul-
on personal honor, because livestock (and thus, its ture of honor) were more likely than northern U.S.
owner’s wealth) is susceptible to theft. In frontiers students to believe a man loses honor if his wife is
and herding-based cultures (as well as subcultures unfaithful, and they were in turn more likely to see
such as criminal gangs that operate beyond the a husband’s violence in response to suspected infi-
reach of law enforcement), those men who can delity as justified. Similarly, Chilean students
best cultivate a reputation for toughness and the (compared to a non-honor-culture sample of Anglo-
quick use of aggression in response to challenges Canadians) believed a husband to be justified in
are often the most respected and enjoy the greatest hitting his wife, but only if the violence was related
social status. to a potentially honor-threatening event.

Honor and Violence Mechanisms of Persistence and Change


Cultures of honor tend to be characterized by high Despite changes in the initial conditions that give
rates of violence, both among males and by males rise to honor cultures, norms about honor may be
against females. Ethnographic work, analyses of stubbornly persistent. For example, despite the tran-
homicides, laboratory experiments, and field stud- sition in the U.S. South from a frontier region with
ies have all demonstrated relatively high rates of a herding-based economy to a region that increas-
violence, and endorsement of honor-related vio- ingly resembles the rest of the nation demographi-
lence in cultures of honor. cally and economically, elements of the culture of
Culture of Honor 183

honor remain. Several macro- and microlevel forces a concern with public reputation as a central
can work together to perpetuate cultural norms organizing principle of social life. However, there
of honor. are also important distinctions between these con-
At the macrolevel, norms about honor are structs and cultures of honor.
sometimes formalized symbolically into the laws For instance, in most cultures that emphasize sav-
or legal traditions of societies. For instance, “honor ing face, public image threats usually lead to inwardly
killings” are still frequently legitimized or excused directed emotions such as shame and embarrass-
in parts of the Arab and Muslim world. Similarly, ment, rather than outwardly directed anger and
laws about gun control, foreign policy, and national aggression, which are more common in honor cul-
and self-defense often reflect (and reinforce) greater tures. Likewise, while the macho Latin American
acceptance of violence in cultures of honor. male is often caricatured as quick-tempered and vio-
Place names can also serve as macrolevel sym- lent, overly aggressive masculinity in honor cultures
bols that reflect and reinforce cultural norms about is often frowned upon as immature or dishonorable.
violence. For example, southern U.S. towns (e.g., Thus, honor codes entail specific rules for when
Guntown, Mississippi; War, West Virginia) and anger and aggression may be expressed.
businesses (Shotguns Bar BQ, Warrior Electronics)
more frequently contain violent words than north- Joseph A. Vandello
ern U.S. towns and businesses. See also Collectivism/Individualism; Culture; Loyalty
At the microlevel, psychological processes such
as pluralistic ignorance may reinforce cultures of
honor by leading men to misperceive the attitudes Further Readings
of their peers. Southern men, for example, are
especially likely to overestimate the extent to Cohen, D., Nisbett, R. E., Bowdle, B., & Schwarz, N.
which their peers would behave aggressively in (1996). Insult, aggression, and the southern culture of
various hypothetical conflict scenarios. honor: An “experimental ethnography.” Journal of
However, cultural views about honor can change Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 945–960.
with demographic and economic shifts. Honor Nisbett, R. E., & Cohen, D. (1996). Culture of honor:
The psychology of violence in the South. Boulder, CO:
norms appear to hold less sway when there are
Westview.
other routes to honor and status besides family
Rodriguez Mosquera, P. M., Manstead, A. S. R., &
name, or where there are other avenues for mobility
Fischer, A. H. (2000). The role of honor-related values
and advancement. For instance, recent survey data
in the elicitation, experience, and communication of
from Saudi Arabia (a culture with strong honor- pride, shame, and anger: Spain and the Netherlands
based traditions) suggests that individuals who self- compared. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
identify as middle class endorse honor less strongly 26, 833–844.
than those from the upper or lower classes. Vandello, J. A., & Cohen, D. (2003). Male honor and
female fidelity: Implicit cultural scripts that perpetuate
Related Cultural Concepts domestic violence. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 84, 997–1010.
Cultures around the world differ in the emphasis Vandello, J. A., & Cohen, D. (2004). When believing is
they place on individuals’ social standing. For seeing: Sustaining norms of violence in cultures of
example, the concept of “face” in some East Asian honor. In M. Schaller & C. Crandall (Eds.), The
cultures and “machismo” in many Latin American psychological foundations of culture (pp. 281–304).
cultures have in common with cultures of honor Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
D
responses. Thus, individuation should promote posi-
Decategorization tive emotions and evaluations. In particular, indi-
viduation is likely to (a) dispel the perception of
Decategorization refers to a process of reducing outgroups as homogeneous, (b) facilitate the percep-
the salience of ingroup–outgroup distinctions. An tion of self–other similarities, and (c) encourage
important consequence is that negative behaviors perspective taking and empathy.
associated with ingroup–outgroup distinctions, Marilynn Brewer and Norman Miller empha-
such as prejudice, stereotyping, and intergroup sized two other processes fundamentally related
discrimination, are also diminished. When a cate- to decategorization: differentiation and personali-
gory distinction is particularly salient, people act zation. In their model, categorized, differentiated,
and think in terms of ingroup–outgroup member- and personalized interactions are part of a con-
ships rather than in terms of personal identities. tinuum: Categorization represents the extreme in
This type of social categorization has two conse- which only groups are salient, personalization the
quences. First, outgroup members are depersonal- pole in which only individual features are relevant,
ized, treated as relatively interchangeable and and differentiation stands in between, character-
undifferentiated elements of a social category; ized by an intermediate level of salience of both
their individual characteristics are ignored, and categorical and personalized aspects. Thus, accord-
group-based appraisals, such as stereotypes, are ing to Brewer and Miller, differentiation does not
used to judge them. Second, intergroup distinc- refer to an elimination of category boundaries,
tiveness is enhanced, thus facilitating competition but to their blurring. With differentiation, within-
and discrimination. Given this situation, decate- category differences are perceived as relevant,
gorization should have beneficial consequences unique, and distinctive information and, as a con-
for social interactions. sequence, can promote the perception of different
subgroups within the broader category. The
groups remain the basis of social interactions, but
Three Aspects of
perceived internal homogeneity within the catego-
Decategorization: Individuation,
ries is reduced.
Differentiation, and Personalization
From a practical point of view, differentiation
Individuation reduces intergroup biases and conflicts can be produced in different ways. First, people
because the more that group members are consid- can be instructed to pay more attention to intra-
ered as discrete individuals, the less their group group differences, partially reducing the salience
membership is likely to be relevant. Deindividuation of group membership. Second, different categori-
of group members has several negative consequences, zations can be applied to the same individuals.
such as disregard, dehumanization, and aggressive Crossed categorization, in fact, diminishes the

185
186 Decategorization

salience of the original ingroup–outgroup distinc- differentiation, or personalization has important


tion, although alternative categorizations are consequences for the generalization process, in
likely to gain importance. Third, the ingroup and which the outcomes of a specific interaction between
outgroup can be joined in a single category that people are extended to other social contexts.
includes both, as proposed by the common Category-based contact is likely to lead to a
ingroup identity model. In this case, the type of change in attitude toward the entire outgroup:
judgments generally reserved for ingroups, in When ingroup members interacting with outgroup
which both group membership and individual dif- members consider all the people involved in that
ferences are taken into account, are applied to the contact situation, including themselves, as inter-
individuals previously categorized as outgroup changeable representatives of their respective
members who are now members of the new groups, the judgments formulated during contact
broader category. are easily extended to the entire categories.
Personalization, which represents one pole of However, according to Brewer and Miller, when
the continuum described by Brewer and Miller, is contact is characterized by categorization, it is
related to the comparison between the self and unlikely that interactions will be experienced or
other individuals. Group memberships are irrele- perceived as positive; it is more likely that they
vant: These interpersonal comparisons cross will be imbued with the negative cognitions,
group boundaries. However, whereas individua- evaluations, and affect generally related to
tion involves primarily perceiving group members ingroup–outgroup distinctions. Thus, a generali-
as distinct individuals, personalization involves zation process will readily occur, but it will most
recognizing personal, idiosyncratic information likely focus on negative rather than positive out-
that is relevant for the self and facilitates the rec- comes of contact.
ognition of similarities between the self and indi- Differentiation, in contrast, creates an enhanced
viduals previously categorized as outgroup perception of group variability and increases com-
members. Information processing is based on plexity of group judgments. Increased variability
individual information collected during the inter- and complexity undermine views of the outgroup
personal interaction, not on category-based pre- as monolithic, reducing category-based judgments
conceptions such as stereotypes and prejudice. As of its members. Because outgroup members are no
a result, categories become less useful tools longer perceived as interchangeable elements of a
because they are not very informative for the per- category, it is difficult to treat them as identically
ception of self and others. characterized by stereotypical traits. The risk
Miller subsequently proposed an alternative involved in differentiation is that the perceived
definition of personalization, considering it as a distinctions among outgroup members may lead to
feature generally related to a focus on personal subtyping of outgroup members. These subtypes
information, involving phenomena such as self- can be treated as being inconsistent with the gen-
disclosure, mutual trust, and empathy. In this con- eral image of the group, and then treated as excep-
ceptualization, both personal and category-based tions, leaving global perceptions of the category
features can be highly salient at the same time, for fundamentally unchanged. If subtyping occurs,
instance when individuals who are well aware of generalization would be limited.
their memberships in different groups reciprocally The generalization process involved in person-
self-disclose or adopt the other’s perspective. In alization is conceptually different. It is based on
general, greater personalization, viewed in this way, the fact that repeated interpersonal interactions
creates more positive attitudes toward others. are able to disconfirm negative stereotypes of the
outgroup because others are seen as unique indi-
viduals who are more similar to the self than to the
The Generalization Process
prototype of a category. As a result, individuals
in Decategorized Contact
eventually become aware that category-based judg-
According to Brewer and Miller, whether an ments are inaccurate or inefficient for understand-
interaction, in which people are in contact with ing members of the other group. Thus, in future
one another, is characterized by categorization, interactions, with the same person or other
Decategorization 187

members of the group, people will be less likely to highly salient during contact. Thus, as Miller noted
base their perceptions on category membership, in his revision of the Brewer and Miller personal-
progressively undermining a cognitive habit that is ization model, some degree of attention to group
now seen as misguided, uninformative, and effec- membership is required for generalization of the
tively useless. From a practical standpoint, this benefits of personalization to occur.
process should be active in contexts characterized
by desegregation, in which people have a range of
Critiques and Limitations
personalized experiences with individual outgroup
members. The decategorization process is generally consid-
ered an effective way to create positive interac-
tions in which interactants like one another, but
Empirical Evidence
there is the risk that its scope is limited to the spe-
David Wilder examined various experimental con- cific situation of contact. As acknowledged by
ditions in which outgroup members can be indi- Brewer and Miller, positive personalized contact
viduated and the salience of group boundaries does not automatically generalize to attitudes
degraded. This happens, for instance, when par- toward the person’s group as a whole.
ticipants interact with group members who display Generalization is more likely to occur if, after
a variety of different behaviors or who disclose personalized contact, people come to believe that
personal, idiosyncratic information. Alternatively, the relevant social categories are uninformative
perceivers may be encouraged to adopt a careful, and of little use. Under these conditions, people
deliberative examination of group members. The are more likely to renounce the use of these social
effects of these manipulations are clear: When categories in future interactions.
individuation is occurs, group-level phenomena, But there is a problem: Is it really possible for
such as perceived outgroup homogeneity and human beings not to use categories? Categorization
ingroup favoritism, are less prominent. However, is a basic process in human perception, which sim-
in further work, Wilder showed that full general- plifies an otherwise overwhelmingly complex envi-
ization from positive contact to favorable attitudes ronment. Thus, using categories may not be a
toward the outgroup is possible only when the question of will, but rather a necessity of human
known individuals are presented as typical mem- cognition. Moreover, people tend to be socially
bers of their category. motivated to use categories in their perceptions
Several studies have also been conducted to and judgments. Group memberships are part of
directly test the decategorization model proposed self-definition and thus involve self-esteem apprais-
by Brewer and Miller. The results are generally als and sentiments such as pride and loyalty.
consistent with the model. Judgments of previously From this perspective, it is unlikely that individu-
unknown outgroup members are more positive als could sustain complete decategorization.
when interactions between ingroup and outgroup Nevertheless, it is possible to recognize and appre-
members are focused on individual characteristics ciate the individuated characteristics of people
(a social focus), rather than on the task they are who are members of another group. Furthermore,
working on (a task focus). This result is amplified not only can the development of positive connec-
when individuals cooperate, rather than compete. tions through personalization produce more favor-
However, as Hewstone has noted, group member- able attitudes toward those individuals, but to the
ship was still salient in this research, and thus, extent that social categories are seen as salient,
interactions were not fully decategorized or indi- these attitudes can generalize to other members of
viduated. Miles Hewstone, Rupert Brown, and the group as well.
their collaborators have further found, across vari-
Alberto Voci
ous settings and adopting different methodologies,
that positive effects of contact are generalized to the See also Categorization; Common Ingroup Identity
whole outgroup mainly when interactions involve Model; Intergroup Contact Theory; Mutual Intergroup
individuals who are considered typical exemplars Differentiation Model; Prejudice; Social Identity
of the outgroup or when group memberships are Theory
188 Dehumanization/Infrahumanization

Further Readings on subtle forms of dehumanization, in which


Brewer, M. B., & Miller, N. (1984). Beyond the contact people are automatically associated with different
hypothesis: Theoretical perspectives on desegregation. kinds of nonhumans, such as animals and robots,
In N. Miller & M. B. Brewer (Eds.), Groups in contact: are presented.
The psychology of desegregation (pp. 281–302).
Orlando, FL: Academic Press. What Is Dehumanization?
Hewstone, M. (1996). Contact and categorization: Social
psychological interventions to change intergroup How dehumanization should be defined is rarely
relations. In C. N. Macrae, C. Stangor, & made explicit in the social psychology literature,
M. Hewstone (Eds.), Stereotypes and stereotyping but the term tends to be used in a few distinct but
(pp. 323–368). New York: Guilford. related ways. First, people can be dehumanized by
Miller, N. (2002). Personalization and the promise of being seen as lacking important human attributes,
contact theory. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 387–410. such as when they are perceived as deficient in
Wilder, D. A. (1986). Social categorization: Implications intelligence, rationality, or refinement. Patronizing
for creation and reduction of intergroup bias. In views of “primitive” people or ethnic groups as
L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social coarse, stupid, and simple exemplify this sense of
psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 293–355). New York: dehumanization. Second, people can be dehuman-
Academic Press. ized by being explicitly denied their full humanity,
such as when they are openly described as subhu-
man or as barbarians. A historical example is the
way in which Blacks in the United States were
Dehumanization/ once officially declared to be worth three fifths of
a human being.
Infrahumanization These first two senses of dehumanization focus
on what certain people are perceived to lack rela-
Dehumanization occurs when a person or group tive to others: how they are less than human. A
is perceived as less than human, is likened to a third sense involves seeing others as being more
nonhuman, or is treated in a way that disregards like nonhumans. This can take the form of perceiv-
the person’s or group’s humanity. Social psychol- ing a group as having more of some nonhuman
ogists have generally studied dehumanization in attribute than other people, or overtly likening the
contexts of intergroup conflict and violence, such group to nonhumans. For example, certain groups
as war and genocide, because the phenomenon have been attributed bestial qualities or likened to
appears to be intimately involved in them. In these animals. Jews were described by Nazis as vermin,
contexts, dehumanizing perceptions are frequently Tutsis were described as cockroaches by Hutus
expressed, and they play a central role in enabling during the Rwandan genocide, and immigrant
aggressive behavior and freeing aggressors from groups are sometimes likened to germs.
normal moral restraints. A fourth sense of dehumanization refers to
This entry discusses the concept of dehumaniza- ways in which people are treated. Some kinds of
tion and presents the different approaches that interpersonal behavior can be described as dehu-
social psychologists have taken to understand it. manizing if they harshly violate moral principles
After laying out these theoretical perspectives, the about how human beings should be treated.
entry discusses recent work on more subtle forms Dehumanization in this sense can be said to occur
of dehumanization, focusing on the phenomenon even if the maltreated person is not explicitly per-
of infrahumanization, in which members of out- ceived as lacking humanity or as being nonhuman
groups are denied attributes that distinguish by the perpetrator. Examples of this sense of dehu-
humans from other animals. This phenomenon is manizing treatment might include torture, degra-
intriguing because it can occur in the absence of dation, exploitation, and treating people as
any intergroup antagonism, it is separate from instrumental means to ends. A common thread in
processes of outgroup derogation, and it takes these examples is that dehumanizing treatment
place unconsciously. Last, other recent perspectives denies human dignity to people.
Dehumanization/Infrahumanization 189

Theories of Dehumanization stereotyped as both cold and incompetent. Drug


addicts and homeless people are often perceived in
Psychologists have proposed a variety of ways of this way: neither interpersonally agreeable nor
accounting for dehumanization. One account, pro- personally capable. Research has shown that
posed by Daniel Bar-Tal, argues that dehumaniza- groups such as these evoke disgust and fail to acti-
tion is a form of delegitimizing belief. These beliefs vate parts of the brain that are involved in social
are elaborated in culturally accepted ideologies cognition processes, such as the attribution of
that represent hated outgroups in extremely nega- mental states to other people. By implication,
tive ways, often portraying their members as members of groups that are denied competence
demons or monsters. In this view, dehumanization and warmth are seen as inanimate (and contami-
is an outgrowth of demonization. By removing the nating) objects rather than as human beings with
legitimacy of the outgroup, beliefs such as these thoughts and feelings.
reinforce the superiority of the ingroup and justify These alternative accounts of dehumanization
its aggressions. share several similarities. They present dehuman-
Another theoretical account, associated with ization as a phenomenon that mainly applies to
the work of Susan Opotow and Albert Bandura, extreme outgroups, accompanies very negative
views dehumanization as a form of moral exclu- perceptions of these groups, and is closely tied to
sion or moral disengagement. When people dehu- the maltreatment of outgroup members. They tend
manize others, they place the others outside of the to see dehumanization as a process that serves psy-
boundary within which normal rules of morality chological or social functions. These may include
and fairness apply. As a result, moral restraints on affirmation of a group’s superiority, enablement of
inhumane behavior are weakened. For example, violent behavior, justification of past aggression,
nonhuman animals fall outside the boundary of or blocking of unpleasant feelings such as guilt and
moral concern for many people, and moral rules vicarious distress at other people’s suffering. These
governing how we should treat our fellow human theories therefore contribute to our understanding
beings do not apply to them. If members of a of dehumanization as a factor in human evil.
group are seen as animallike, we are therefore less
likely to apply these moral rules in our dealings
with them. Moral exclusion allows perpetrators of Infrahumanization
aggressive behavior to feel disengaged from the The theories of dehumanization reviewed here all
suffering that they inflict and therefore less prone share the view that it is an intense phenomenon
to experience moral emotions such as guilt and that is closely linked to violence, aggression, and
shame that inhibit aggression. intergroup conflict. Some recent work argues that
A third account of dehumanization, proposed by subtler forms of dehumanization also exist and
Shalom Schwartz and colleagues, argues that it that these occur in everyday social perception.
hinges on human values. A group is likely to be Members of different groups may unconsciously
dehumanized when its members are seen as lacking perceive one another as less than fully human,
prosocial values that express concern for others and even when their groups are not in conflict.
when their values are seen to be dissimilar from This new approach to the study of dehumaniza-
those of the ingroup. Values express fundamental tion was pioneered by Jacques-Philippe Leyens and
cultural goals and ideals, so when others are seen as his colleagues, who first investigated which char-
having discrepant values, their shared humanity is acteristics are seen as distinctively human. They
called into question. If they do not share in our focused their attention on emotions, distinguishing
humanity, then they are less than human. between secondary emotions, which are unique to
A recent theory of dehumanization, propounded humans (e.g., nostalgia, envy, delight), and pri-
by Lasana Harris and Susan Fiske, links the phe- mary emotions, which we share with other animals
nomenon to stereotyping. The content of group (e.g., sadness, anger, happiness). Leyens and
stereotypes varies along dimensions of warmth colleagues found that people often consider sec-
and competence, and researchers have proposed ondary emotions to be essential components of
that dehumanization can occur when groups are humanness and inferred that if outgroups are
190 Deindividuation

subtly dehumanized, they should be seen as having understanding how conflicts can move from pas-
these emotions to a lesser extent than ingroup sive hatred and suspicion to active violence and
members. No such ingroup–outgroup difference hostility. It can disable people’s usual moral
would be expected for primary emotions, which restraints by portraying others as nonhuman or less
are not distinctively human. than human and therefore undeserving of respect,
In many studies, using questionnaires as well as dignity, and protection. However, recent research
implicit social cognition methods, Leyens and col- and theory suggest that milder forms of dehuman-
leagues have confirmed these predictions: Uniquely ization also exist, suggesting that people habitually
human emotions are reserved for the ingroup, but attribute lesser humanness to other people and
other emotions are attributed equally to ingroup implicitly liken them to nonhumans. The implica-
and outgroup. By implication, outgroup members tions of these subtle forms of dehumanization for
are implicitly perceived as closer to animals than intergroup relations remain to be seen.
ingroup members, and for this reason the effect is
dubbed infrahumanization. People do not merely Nick Haslam, Brock Bastian,
fail to ascribe uniquely human emotions to out- and Stephen Loughnan
group members but actively resist doing so and
See also Categorization; Deindividuation;
respond negatively to outgroup members who dis-
Depersonalization; Essentialism; Prejudice; Stanford
play them. The infrahumanization effect is found Prison Experiment
even between groups that are not in conflict, and
it is not simply a product of derogatory views of
the outgroup, as both positive and negative sec- Further Readings
ondary emotions are attributed to the ingroup.
Recent research and theory have proposed addi- Bandura, A. (2002). Selective moral disengagement in the
exercise of moral agency. Journal of Moral Education,
tional subtle forms of dehumanization. Nick
31, 101–119.
Haslam and colleagues have argued that just as
Castano, E., & Giner-Sorolla, R. (2006). Not quite
people are often denied uniquely human attributes
human: Infra-humanisation in response to collective
such as secondary emotions (i.e., infrahumaniza-
responsibility for intergroup killing. Journal of
tion), they can also be denied attributes that com- Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 804–819.
pose “human nature.” Whereas uniquely human Harris, L. T., & Fiske, S. T. (2006). Dehumanizing the
attributes involve refinement, sophistication, and lowest of the low: Neuroimaging responses to extreme
rationality and are seen as products of socializa- outgroups. Psychological Science, 17, 845–853.
tion, human nature attributes involve warmth, Haslam, N. (2006). Dehumanization: An integrative
imagination, vivacity, and emotion and are often review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10,
seen as innate. Haslam argues that when groups 252–264.
are denied uniquely human attributes, they are Leyens, J.-P., Paladino, P., Rodriguez, R., Vaes, J.,
implicitly likened to animals, and when they are Demoulin, S., Rodriguez, A., et al. (2000). The
denied human nature attributes, they are likened emotional side of prejudice: The attribution of
to robots or machines. secondary emotions to ingroups and outgroups.
Several studies support these claims: Groups Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 186–197.
perceived as lacking uniquely human attributes Opotow, S. (1990). Moral exclusion and injustice: An
were associated with animals, and groups perceived introduction. Journal of Social Issues, 46, 1–20.
as lacking human nature attributes were associated
with robots. Additional studies suggest that similar
processes can occur outside the domain of group
perception. There is evidence that people tend to Deindividuation
see others as having fewer human nature traits than
they themselves have, implying that individuals see Deindividuation refers to the process whereby
themselves as more human than others. people engage in seemingly impulsive, deviant,
Dehumanization is a crucial concept for under- and sometimes violent acts when they cannot be
standing intergroup conflict and especially for personally identified (e.g., in groups, in crowds,
Deindividuation 191

when communicating on the Internet). Deindivi­ and a loss of self-control. Le Bon further argued
duated behavior can occur for two reasons. Some that this loss of control leads to contagion, in
deindividuated situations can reduce accountabil- which a lack of responsibility spreads throughout
ity, meaning that when people are hidden within the crowd and everyone begins to think and act in
a group, for example, they cannot be easily traced the same manner. Finally, people in the crowd
or blamed for their actions. As such, the effects of become more suggestible. In other words, being in
deindividuation can sometimes be viewed as a crowd leads to blind acceptance of the demands
socially undesirable (e.g., rioting). However, of being in a crowd, and people unquestioningly
research has shown that deindividuation also follow the impulses that emanate from a common
strengthens adherence to group norms. Sometimes unconscious. Le Bon’s analysis suggests that crowds
these norms conflict with the norms of society at are messy, incoherent, and often dangerous rabbles
large, but they are not always negative. As such, in which people are not capable of self-control and
the effects of deindividuation can be rather incon- are the victims of a common and inferior mind.
sequential (e.g., “letting loose” on the dance floor) Le Bon’s work was very influential. For exam-
or even positive (e.g., helping people). ple, in the 1920s, Sigmund Freud argued along
This entry provides an historical view of crowd similar lines that crowds unlock people’s uncon-
behavior, examines the issues of accountability scious impulses. Individuals’ basic impulses (derived
and group norms, and discusses the particular from the id) are controlled by crowd leaders, who,
instance of computer-mediated communication. via a process similar to hypnosis, bring out the
animalistic tendencies within all people involved.
Similarly, in the 1920s, William McDougall argued
History and Background:
that crowds bring out people’s instinctive primary
Analyses of Crowd Behavior
emotions, such as anger and fear. Because every-
Theories of crowd behavior provided the origins of one experiences these basic emotions and because
modern deindividuation theory. In particular, the people are less likely to have more complex emo-
work of Gustave Le Bon in 19th-century France tions in common, the basic emotions will spread
promulgated a politically motivated criticism of rapidly within a crowd as people express them. It
crowd behavior. At the time, French society was was argued that this process, similar to Le Bon’s
volatile, and protests and riots were commonplace idea of contagion, leads to deregulated and impul-
(e.g., the revolutionary crowds of 1848 and the sive behavior.
Paris Commune of 1871—see Émile Zola’s
Germinal and Victor Hugo’s Les Misérables for
Deindividuation and Accountability
literary accounts of the time). Le Bon’s work,
which described group behavior in general as irra- Modern theories have applied and extended early
tional and fickle, therefore found much support at principles to understand people’s behavior in
the time. smaller groups and in other contexts, such as when
Le Bon believed that being in a crowd allows people have the opportunity to interact with others
individuals to act differently than they would act while concealing their identity and remaining
when alone. Being submerged in a large group of anonymous. The term deindividuation was coined
people allows an individual to react on impulses by Leon Festinger and colleagues in the 1950s to
that would normally be controlled and perform describe situations in which people cannot be indi-
behaviors that would normally be self-censored. viduated or isolated from others. According to
Some of these behaviors, in the words of Le Bon Festinger and colleagues, being deindividuated
himself, can be “primitive, base and ghastly.” brings about a loss of individuality in its members.
Le Bon argued that such undesirable behaviors Similar to Le Bon, Festinger and colleagues pro-
can arise through three mechanisms. First, ano- posed that being deindividuated (in particular
nymity prevents people from being isolated or within a group) reduces normal constraints on
identified from others in a crowd. Being unable to behavior, and people can do things they normally
be differentiated from others leads to a loss of per- would not do because they are not directly account-
sonal responsibility, a sense of being untouchable, able for their actions. They are in a sense liberated
192 Deindividuation

to do what they like. Festinger and colleagues of guards were physically brutal to the students
found support for this idea by demonstrating that who were deindividuated as prisoners, so much so
participants who were engaged in a group discus- that the experiment had to be terminated early.
sion about their parents while being dressed alike Ed Diener provided a theoretical clarification of
in a dimly lit room were more likely to make nega- Zimbardo’s theory by introducing the concept of
tive comments about their parents than were par- objective self-awareness. Objective self-awareness
ticipants in a control condition. In other words, is high when people’s attention is drawn inward
the deindividuated situation allowed participants toward the self and people actively monitor their
to express views that they would normally keep to own behavior. On the other hand, objective self-
themselves. awareness is low when their focus is directed out-
Philip Zimbardo is responsible for the develop- ward and people monitor their own behavior less
ment of the deindividuation theory most com- or not at all. According to Diener, deindividuation
monly known today. Zimbardo was more specific is caused by a reduction in objective self-awareness,
about what variables would lead to a state of dein- and factors that can reduce this self-awareness
dividuation, as well as the behaviors that should (e.g., anonymity or being in a group) can bring
result from deindividuation. Specifically, Zimbardo about deindividuation. Under conditions of dein-
said that factors leading to a state of deindividua- dividuation, attention is therefore drawn away
tion were anonymity, responsibility (shared, dif- from the self, and people are less capable of moni-
fused, or given up), group size and activity, altered toring their behavior in relation to internal norms
temporal perspective (so that focus is more on the and standards.
here and now than on the past or present), arousal, To support this idea, Diener and colleagues
sensory input overload, physical involvement in observed the behavior of more than 1,300 children
the act, reliance on noncognitive interactions and one Halloween in the 1970s, focusing on 27 homes
feedback, a novel or unstructured situation, and where, on their visit, the trick-or-treating children
altered states of consciousness (such as those were invited to take one candy from a table. Half
brought about by the use of alcohol and drugs). of the children were asked where they lived and
Zimbardo claimed that all these factors act to were asked for their names; half were not asked
minimize self-observation and evaluation, reduce for this individuating information. Results revealed
concern for social evaluation, and lead to a weak- that deindividuated children and children in groups
ening of controls based on feelings of guilt, shame, were more than twice as likely to take more than
fear, and commitment. Thus, thresholds for one candy. Diener and colleagues argued that the
expressing inhibited behaviors are lowered, and groups and anonymous children transgressed
these behaviors are typically impulsive and often because the deindividuating conditions reduced
negative and antisocial. their objective self-awareness and freed them from
In the 1970s, Zimbardo conducted a series of the normal constraints on their impulse to take
experiments in which participants were deindivid- more candies.
uated by being dressed in Ku Klux Klan–style Steven Prentice-Dunn and Ronald Rogers refor-
clothing. In one experiment, female participants mulated Diener’s theory in the 1980s by introduc-
were asked to deliver shocks to another female ing the distinction between public and private
participant (who was in fact a confederate) as a self-awareness in deindividuated contexts. Public
response to incorrect answers in a learning task. self-awareness is said to decrease due to anonymity
Results revealed that the deindividuated partici- such that people become less aware of how they
pants gave shocks that were twice as long in dura- appear publicly to others. Anonymous individuals,
tion as those given by participants who were not for example, are less aware about how they pre­
dressed in the deindividuating clothing. Zimbardo sent themselves, and as a result, their behavior will
and his colleagues also carried out the famous tend to be antinormative, or against accepted
Stanford prison experiment, in which student par- norms and standards. Also, private self-awareness,
ticipants were deindividuated as prisoners or or awareness of internal norms and standards, was
prison guards in a simulated prison setting at argued to decrease due to the physiological arousal
Stanford University. The students in the position of being in a group and the high levels of group
Deindividuation 193

cohesiveness. People therefore become less aware behavior may be far from negative. In other words,
of their internal standards of behavior, and this deindividuated behavior increases adherence to the
will also lead them to behave more impulsively. salient norms of the situation. Gustave Jahoda
The unique contribution here is that deindividua- pointed out a real-life example of this effect of
tion is said to influence behavior by reducing the deindividuation. In some Islamic countries, women
level of explicit control that people have over their wear the full-length, dark-colored chador, which,
thoughts and actions. instead of allowing women to engage in antinor-
Some archival observations support this view. mative behavior, implies a strong system of norms
For example, Brian Mullen conducted a content of behavior to which women adhere.
analysis of the newspaper accounts of 60 lynchings Following this line of reasoning, some critics of
committed in the United States between 1899 and traditional deindividuation theories argue that
1946. He found that the larger the lynch mob, the while group membership can have prosocial and
more savagely they murdered their victims. In this antisocial consequences, these consequences should
case, the arousal of being within a large group with not necessarily be attributed to a loss of individual
a common purpose increased the extent to which selfhood. Steve Reicher, Russell Spears, and Tom
the group performed atrocities. The same principle Postmes have argued that the notion of a loss of
can apply to anonymity. It has been found that selfhood relies, inaccurately, on an individualistic
cultures whose members conceal their identities conception of the self. Rational action is equated
before battle (e.g., by use of face paint) have his- with the individual self, and group membership is
torically been more likely to commit gruesome acts equated with the loss of identity and of rationality.
toward their prisoners than those who do not hide According to Reicher and colleagues, this position
their identities. limits our understanding of deindividuation
phenomena.
Drawing on social identity theory and self-
Deindividuation and Group Norms
categorization theory, Reicher and colleagues proposed
Much of the theorizing about deindividuation up that group membership does not automatically
to this point has focused on how deindividuated entail a loss of self. In each individual, there are
states cause antinormative behavior. Although, in many levels of the self. The self is not only the
general, factors such as anonymity tend to increase individual’s personal identity or what separates
antisocial behavior and increase aggression, not all that individual from other individuals. It also
research findings support this view. For example, encompasses a range of possible social identities
Zimbardo found that soldiers paradoxically gave related to group memberships. That is, the self is
electric shocks of shorter duration when they were also determined by properties that are shared with
deindividuated in the Ku Klux Klan–style clothing others, such as race, gender, and age. When at any
he used in his earlier study. Furthermore, Robert given time a person feels part of a group, he or she
Johnson and Leslie Downing adopted a similar will be attuned to the norms of that group. For this
paradigm but dressed female participants in either to occur, people do not need to be physically pres-
the Ku Klux Klan–style clothing or in nurses’ uni- ent with the group or be physically marked as a
forms. The participants dressed in the nurses’ out- group member in any way. In turn, knowledge of
fits were significantly less aggressive. the group’s norms will guide people’s behavior. In
These results suggest that aggression and antiso- their social identity model of deindividuation
cial behavior are not inevitable by-products of effects, Reicher and colleagues argued that these
deindividuated situations. In some cases in which social identity principles determine how people
norms and standards promote aggressive behavior will behave in deindividuated situations.
(e.g., soldiers dressed in uniform may trigger Revisiting Zimbardo’s paradigm in which par-
norms associated with fighting and aggression), ticipants were asked to wear Ku Klux Klan–style
this may be the case. However, when norms and hoods and cloaks, Reicher and colleagues argued
standards instead promote positive, nonaggressive that asking people to wear such garments should
behavior (e.g., nurses dressed in uniform may trig- have different effects on behavior depending on
ger norms associated with caring and helping), the salient social identity and what is happening in
194 Deindividuation

the deindividuated context. Reicher and colleagues interactions known as flaming and increased levels
argued that manipulating deindividuation by of personal disclosure.
immersion in a group should reinforce the salience Theorists typically attribute this type of behav-
of a prominent social identity (should one be ior to the physical anonymity afforded by the
prominent) at the expense of personal identity. So medium. It is argued that the anonymity of CMC
if personal identity is salient, wearing Ku Klux frees people from normal constraints on behavior,
Klan outfits may increase personal focus, and allowing people to behave impulsively and often
people will rely on their own individual norms to antisocially. However, some research shows that
guide their behavior. But if a group identity is although the deindividuated context of CMC blurs
salient, the deindividuation manipulation is more people’s individual characteristics, an important
likely to have the effect of promoting behavior consequence of this is that it also enhances the
consistent with the norms of the group that people salience of groups and their associated norms.
feel part of at the time, whether they are prosocial As such, some research shows that people who
or antisocial. are deindividuated by being anonymous on the
Support for these ideas comes from a range of Internet often adhere more to the norms of their
work on crowd behavior and group behavior in groups than when they and others are identifiable.
the laboratory. In one study, Reicher asked science For example, research by Russell Spears and col-
and social science students to watch either a leagues shows that group polarization, or the
provivisection (science norm) or antivivisection heightened expression of attitudes consonant with
(social science norm) video. Half of the partici- ingroup prototypical norms, occurs under anony-
pants took part as individuals, and half partici- mous CMC conditions. People’s views, expressed
pated in groups. Further, half of the participants anonymously, become more group-like and there-
were anonymous via the use of masks. In the group fore more normative than antinormative. This is
condition, the masks were different colors to mark increased further if group identity is made salient.
the different groups. Results revealed that people Investigating the effects of anonymity on behav-
conformed more to their group norm when they ior in CMC is currently an active area of research
were tested within a group. That is, scientists in in psychology. Therefore, a long tradition of
groups were more provivisection than scientists research dating back to the 19th century continues
tested as individuals, and social scientists were today as individuals and groups find new ways to
more antivivisection under these same conditions. interact with each other.
Further, science students were more provivisection
when they were deindividuated and when group Karen M. Douglas
membership was salient (the group-anonymous See also Computer-Mediated Communication; Crowds;
condition) than in the individual-anonymous con- Depersonalization; Deviance; Group Mind; Self-
dition. So when group membership is salient, ano- Categorization Theory; Social Identity Model of
nymity can serve to increase adherence to the Deindividuation Effects; Social Identity Theory;
norms of that group. Stanford Prison Experiment

Computer-Mediated Communication Further Readings


A modern example of deindividuation phenomena Diener, E., Fraser, S. C., Beaman, A. L., & Kelem, R. T.
in action can be seen in computer-mediated com- (1976). Effects of deindividuation variables on stealing
munication (CMC; e.g., e-mail, blogs, social net- among Halloween trick-or-treaters. Journal of
working sites, chat rooms). CMC has provided Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 178–183.
people with new ways of communicating with Festinger, L., Pepitone, A., & Newcomb T. (1952). Some
each other, and the unique feature of CMC is that consequences of deindividuation in a group. Journal
unlike many other media, people can communicate of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47, 382–389.
anonymously if they so wish. Just as traditional Le Bon, G. (1947). The crowd: A study of the popular
research on deindividuation predicts, CMC is there- mind. London: Ernest Benn. (Original work published
fore characterized by increased hostile, negative 1895)
Delphi Technique 195

Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (1998). Deindividuation and through warfare. The oracle assured him that such
anti-normative behavior: A meta-analysis. an attack would bring about the fall of a great
Psychological Bulletin, 123, 238–259. empire. Only when his army was soundly defeated
Reicher, S., Spears, R., & Postmes, T. (1995). A social and his kingdom lost did he realize that the proph-
identity model of deindividuation phenomena. ecy referred to his own empire.
European Review of Social Psychology, 6, 161–197. The modern developers of the Delphi technique
Zimbardo, P. G. (1970). The human choice: turned to groups to reduce the ambiguity of the
Individuation, reason, and order versus oracle’s prediction about the future and also
deindividuation, impulse, and chaos. In W. J. Arnold
increase its accuracy. They recognized the value of
& D. Levine (Eds.), Nebraska symposium on
basing decisions on the collective wisdom of a
motivation 1969 (pp. 237–307). Lincoln: University of
group. When many individuals examine an issue,
Nebraska Press.
the group’s decision is informed by more ideas,
and novel solutions and insights may emerge from
the discussion. A group’s scrutiny may also find
and correct errors that may go unnoticed by a lone
Delphi Technique individual. Biases, however, can introduce inaccu-
racy into the decisions made by groups during
The Delphi technique is a structured forecasting face-to-face deliberations. The more rhetorically
and decision-making method that assesses and forceful members of the group may convince oth-
summarizes the individually held opinions and ers to adopt their position, more through force of
judgments of group members with little or no argument than through rational persuasion.
discussion or deliberation among the members. Members may feel uncomfortable expressing their
Named for the legendary Delphic oracle, this position in the group context, particularly when
method involves surveying members repeatedly, they are relatively new to the group and find that
with the results of each round of surveys inform- they disagree with what seems to be the group’s
ing the framing of the questions for subsequent emerging consensus. Members may also be so def-
rounds. The Delphi technique avoids some of erent to those with more authority in the group
the limitations of traditional group decision- that they do not air dissenting views. To counter
making procedures and is particularly useful these negative group processes, the originators of
when the group members are so widely divided Delphi recommended surveying members of the
on issues that a face-to-face discussion will not group individually, before any deliberations
be productive. occurred, to capture their views before they were
influenced by others in the group.
Origin of Delphi
Using the Delphi Method
The Delphi method was developed by decision
makers at the RAND Corporation, which is a non- The Delphi method was initially used for forecasting
profit institute that conducts problem-focused trends—particularly technological developments—
research in public policy, science and technology, and assessing the relative importance of alternatives.
international issues, energy, and the environment. The Delphi method is particularly well suited to
Recognizing the inherent difficulty of reaching con- handling ill-formed problems, ones that cannot be
sensus among experts about future trends and solved by a systematic review of the available data
events, the developers named their method after the or the application of a rational decision-making
famed Delphic oracle of Greek mythology. History method that will identify the best or most satisfy-
claims that those who wondered about their future ing solution. A group may wish, for example, to
could consult the oracle for guidance and, in some identify the economic changes that may result
instances, receive accurate if somewhat ambiguous from global environmental and political events;
prophecies of what lay in store for them. One king set national priorities for the next decade; explore
of legend, for example, asked the oracle if he ways to improve health care; find and rank
should settle a dispute with a neighboring territory the causes of employee dissatisfaction; and set
196 Delphi Technique

budgetary initiatives. Given the enormity of these can be difficult to summarize for subsequent
issues, the group may begin the process by using a iterations. Originally, the process called for sur-
Delphi method to narrow the issues and identify veying experts who had different opinions on the
tentative solutions. issue but had neither the time nor the inclination
The Delphi coordinator would begin the pro- to meet in a traditional face-to-face meeting. If,
cess by developing a short list of questions on the however, generalizability is desired, then the
topic and then gathering the answers of a carefully coordinator should use proper sampling proce-
selected group of respondents. Responses are then dures so that the results are representative of the
pooled and communicated back to the respon- views of those beyond the Delphi group itself.
dents, who are asked to restate their responses to Moreover, and as with most group methods, the
the original items, comment on others’ responses, quality of the results will be determined by the
or respond to new questions that emerged as involvement and motivation of the members. If
important in the first round of surveying. This respondents do not take the time to respond dili-
process is repeated until a solution is reached. gently and thoughtfully, then the Delphi will yield
Delphi procedures vary considerably from this little useful information.
basic formula, but most include these basic ele-
ments. The method is a highly structured one, for
Advantages and Limitations
it requires a coordinator who selects the respon-
dents, designs the survey questions, collects the As a performance technique, Delphi can be very
data from respondents, and develops each interim usefully applied when issues need clarification,
summary and report. By design, respondents usu- when the opinions of a wide range of people are
ally do not know who else is in the Delphi group. important, and when face-to-face meetings are
Delphi is a group procedure, but it avoids face-to- impossible for the people whose input is required.
face group discussion and deliberation to encour- The method also encourages a deep, reflective
age openness and a free-wheeling flow of ideas. analysis of an issue because participants can take
Delphi is also an asynchronous and geographically the time they need to consider the issue. Unlike a
dispersed decision method, for the respondents face-to-face deliberation, in which the discussion
respond when they can, at different times, rather moves at a pace set by the collective, participants
than at the same time and in the same place (such in a Delphi can respond after they have considered
as a conference room table). the issue fully.
Delphi is also an iterative procedure in that the The method is not without certain limitations.
question–answer process is repeated several times. First, the project planners must clearly conceptual-
On the first assessment, participants list their own ize the question they wish to answer; since the
solutions to the questions posed, but their responses group members will be responding individually,
are summarized by the coordinator, who then they will not have the opportunity to clarify the
feeds the information back to the group. The question via discussion. The coordinators must
group members cannot directly discuss any issues therefore make certain that the questions posed are
or ideas raised in the first round, but they can at unambiguous so that each individual is responding
this point amend their original answers or offer to the same set of assumptions. Coordinators must
new points and insights. As this process is repeated, also avoid phrasing their questions in a way that
a consensus emerges, and in some cases, partici- might bias the responses of the group members.
pants may be asked to vote on the validity of the Second, because it involves repeated assessment of
conclusions that emerge. The coordinator may members’ opinions via surveys, a Delphi is, as
stop the process after only one iteration if a solu- originally conceived, a relatively slow procedure.
tion emerges quickly, but complex, unclear prob- Time and effort were needed for the organizer to
lems usually require many more iterations. write and send out the surveys, collect responses,
Group composition is a critical determinant of and generate the next round of questions.
the success of Delphi. In most cases, a Delphi Furthermore, if respondents were not motivated to
group includes between 5 and 20 respondents complete and return the questionnaire, then the
because the responses of too many respondents process broke down completely.
Depersonalization 197

Despite these drawbacks, the limited evidence Self-categorization theorists believe that deper-
pertaining to the effectiveness of Delphi suggests sonalization underlies all group behavior, ranging
that the technique is more effective than an from helping behavior to violent and brutal con-
unstructured problem-solving session. The method duct such as genocide. It is argued that none of
is particularly effective when the group has the these phenomena is possible without people com-
opportunity to meet in later rounds of the process ing to see themselves as members of groups.
to deliberate in a face-to-face situation. Also, tech- Depersonalization is a vitally important concept
nology offers some solutions to these drawbacks. with an unfortunate name. Depersonalization does
The Delphi method was developed as a paper-and- not refer to a loss of self but to a change in the self
pencil technique; the coordinator developed the at a particular time, that is, from seeing oneself as
questions, mailed them to respondents, respon- an individual with individual attributes, opinions,
dents mailed back their responses, and the coordi- and so on to seeing oneself as a group member
nator developed the summative report before who shares attributes, opinions, and indeed a
starting the next iteration. Modern Delphi meth- social identity and is therefore in these ways identi-
ods use computer-based group support systems to cal to or interchangeable with fellow group mem-
coordinate the process. bers. Depersonalization is thus very different from
the concept of deindividuation developed by Philip
Donelson R. Forsyth Zimbardo and colleagues, which involves a loss of
individuality, or to the concept of dehumanization,
See also Brainstorming; Group Problem Solving and
Decision Making; Process Gain and Loss; Social which relates to perceptions of other people as
Comparison Theory nonpeople. This entry describes the process and
provides some examples.

Further Readings
How It Works
Delbecq, A. L., Van de Ven, A. H., & Gustafson, D. H.
Depersonalization is a consequence of the salience
(1975). Group techniques for program planning.
of a social category or group identity, in the sense
Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
that depersonalization takes place as a conse-
Linstone, H., & Turoff, M. (Eds.). (1975). The Delphi
method: Techniques and applications. Boston:
quence of a particular group or social category
Addison-Wesley. membership becoming salient (psychologically
Rowe, G., & Wright, G. (1999). The Delphi technique as switched on or activated). For example, when the
a forecasting tool: Issues and analysis. International social category of parent is salient (as in a meeting
Journal of Forecasting, 15, 353–375. of parents at a school in order to seek government
funding), it is likely that people will have a deper-
sonalized self-perception; that is, they will perceive
themselves as more similar to, and to a certain
extent interchangeable with, other parents.
Depersonalization In such situations there is likely to be a shared
perception of common goals (e.g., improving
Depersonalization is a concept developed by self- learning conditions, organizing sporting or social
categorization theorist John Turner and his col- events for children) and normatively valued ways
leagues in the 1980s to refer to the process of to achieve these goals. Alternatively, in situations
thinking of the self at a particular time as a group in which the social category of parent is not salient,
member rather than as a unique individual. the same people will tend to think of themselves as
Depersonalization can be seen as a process of ste- individuals. The term depersonalization has been
reotyping, but unlike other forms of stereotyping used in a related but different sense by Michael
related to perceiving other people as group mem- Hogg and colleagues (e.g., in uncertainty-identity
bers, it involves self-stereotyping. To put it another theory) to reflect the way in which the perception
way, depersonalization is the transformation from of self and others is captured in terms of the rele-
thinking of oneself as “I” or “me” to “we” or “us.” vant context-specific category prototype.
198 Depersonalization

Self-categorization theory argues that the deper- In the work of Stephen Reicher and colleagues,
sonalization of self-perception is the basic process depersonalization is held to explain instances of
underlying group phenomena such as social stereo- collective action such as crowd behavior at a polit-
typing, group cohesiveness, ethnocentrism, coop- ical rally. Mass behavior (many people doing the
eration and altruism, emotional contagion and same thing at the same time, perhaps even in differ-
empathy, collective action, shared norms, and ent situations) is difficult to explain in terms of the
social influence processes. Therefore, in all situa- individual needs, values, or motivations of the
tions in which people come to think and act together many different people involved. Depersonalization
as a group, the process of depersonalization is is offered as an explanation of the way people not
believed to take place. only come to see a cause as their cause (and as an
expression of their values and beliefs) but also as an
explanation of the way in which appropriate con-
Some Examples
duct or forms of action are rapidly agreed on (e.g.,
To understand what depersonalization is and is that a protest should be peaceful).
not, it is useful to consider a range of examples. There are instances in which depersonalization
Let us take a chilling but familiar example of can be confused with individual self-perceptions
extreme forms of collective action. The atrocities and processes. The actions of people trapped in a
committed on September 11, 2001, by Islamic burning building who trample others to death are
militants who were prepared to commit suicide to sometimes interpreted as collective or mob action
maximize the death and destruction they wrought when they are more properly understood as efforts
on America (and many visitors from other coun- for self-preservation. If the people trapped in the
tries) is an example of depersonalization. The self- burning building were genuinely acting in a deper-
categorization analysis of this situation is that the sonalized manner, they would be more likely to
people flying planes into buildings were not acting seek to rescue the other people than to harm them.
as individuals but as members of a group in con- The salience of a categorization does not inevi-
flict with Americans (and others), and the extent of tably lead to depersonalization and interchange-
this depersonalization was so great that these ability with other group members. In a nightclub,
people were prepared to die for their cause while for example, where heterosexual men and women
killing others. scan the room for attractive potential partners,
Lest it be assumed that this process is wholly gender is a highly salient category, and men and
destructive and negative, bear in mind that hun- women perceive clear differences between those
dreds of emergency service workers also willingly categories. It would be wrong to suggest, though,
placed themselves in the utmost danger to rescue that men in those circumstances typically see them-
trapped victims (broadly speaking, members of selves as interchangeable with other men or that
their American ingroup) from the burning towers. women see themselves as interchangeable with
The deaths of these emergency workers can also be other women, but both these things can become
explained in terms of depersonalization. possible (perhaps following a conflict between
To take a less violent but equally pressing issue, men and women).
the success of the campaign to halt global warming Depersonalization is also important for under-
also depends (according to self-categorization the- standing the phenomena of stereotyping and rac-
ory) on depersonalization. To the extent that ism, in which people subject members of particular
people come to see themselves not as individuals, ethnic, cultural, or religious groups to unfavorable
and not even as citizens of nations or residents of treatment on the basis of negative beliefs about
towns, but as human beings who together share a those groups. To take an example, attacks on
planet (i.e., they “think global”), they are more highly identifiable Muslim women increased sig-
likely to act (locally) to reduce carbon emissions. A nificantly after September 11, 2001, as non-Muslim
similar idea can be seen in the work on recategori- Americans began to see all Muslims as responsible
zation or common ingroup identity by John for the atrocities that had occurred. As these exam-
Dovidio, Samuel Gaertner, and colleagues in rela- ples demonstrate, the concept of depersonalization
tion to prejudice reduction. can help explain extreme forms of racism without
Desegregation 199

resorting to the pathology of certain individuals as The fight for desegregation of American schools
an explanation. Depersonalization seems to present began after realization that segregated Black and
in collective behavior that is regarded as both White schools created unequal opportunities for
socially desirable and undesirable. Black students. As a result of segregation, Black
achievement suffered and relations between the
Craig McGarty, Ana-Maria Bliuc, two groups worsened. In infancy, we learn to
and Renata Bongiorno simplify and categorize people into those belong-
ing to our group (i.e., ingroup) and those belong-
See also Categorization; Referent Informational Influence ing to some other group (i.e., outgroup).
Theory; Self-Categorization Theory; Social Identity Simultaneously, we come to prefer our ingroup,
Model of Deindividuation Effects Stereotyping; while attributing negative stereotypes to out-
Uncertainty-Identity Theory groups. Furthermore, we treat ingroup members
as individuals, whereas we tend to see outgroup
members as a homogeneous social category.
Further Readings Desegregation is based on the belief and scientific
McGarty, C. (1999). Categorization in social psychology. finding that segregation perpetuates our tendency
London: Sage. to ethnically categorize people and discriminate
Reicher, S., Spears, R., & Postmes, T. (1995). A social against outgroup members.
identity model of deindividuation phenomena.
European Review of Social Psychology, 6, 161–197.
Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P., Reicher, S. D., &
Historical Overview and Policy Changes
Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social Multiethnic societies face many challenges.
group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, UK: Basil Although their subgroups often depend on one
Blackwell. another for survival, these societies are plagued by
Turner, J. C., Oakes, P. J., Haslam, S. A., & McGarty, C. intergroup rivalries, and their histories are marked
(1994). Self and collective: Cognition and social by struggles for equality. Simultaneously, each
context. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, group needs to preserve its own identity and even
20, 454–463. independence. As group members gravitate toward
their ingroup, while distancing themselves from
outgroups, de facto segregation emerges. Occasion­
ally, segregation becomes the law (i.e., de jure
Desegregation segregation), as when Blacks were excluded from
White schools in the United States. Although met
Desegregation is a political and social process with harsh criticism and opposition, the landmark
designed to end and reverse the undesirable effects 1954 U.S. Supreme Court decision, Brown v.
of racial segregation by creating a more balanced Board of Education, sought to end and even reverse
representation of members of different groups. harmful effects attributed to de jure segregation.
Racial segregation, prevalent throughout the world, Brown v. Board of Education initiated both
occurs in many areas of social life, such as schools, voluntary and court-ordered attempts to end de
workplaces, the military, and housing. In the United jure segregation. The 1980s and 1990s were
States, attempts to combat it centered on school marked by attempts to end de facto segregation.
desegregation, which in turn generated considerable Specifically, districts voluntarily initiated desegre-
social and political upheaval. Because most research gation, explicitly adopting race-conscious student
on desegregation focuses on school desegregation of assignment policies and using either a weighted
Blacks in the United States, that is the main focus in lottery or a system of tiebreakers to increase
this entry. Specifically, the entry first reviews recent enrollments of either Whites or non-Whites. In
U.S. policy changes that deal with de facto segrega- Seattle, priority was given to students with a sib-
tion and patterns of resegregation in schools. It then ling in their school of choice. Racial tiebreakers
examines school desegregation effects on academic were applied when a school’s composition differed
achievement and intergroup relations. more than 15% from that of the district. Thus, in
200 Desegregation

oversubscribed schools wherein the percentage of segregation and limited the domain of Grutter to
Whites exceeded their percentage in the district, higher education contexts.
Black students received priority, whereas a White At the same time, over the past 16 years, courts
student was assigned to a second-choice or lower- lifted more than 35 court-imposed desegregation
choice school. Closeness to school was considered orders by granting school districts unitary status,
next; the final tiebreaker was a lottery. Other dis- which usually meant a return to neighborhood
tricts, such as Jefferson County, Kentucky, adopted schools. The landmark 1991 Board of Education
similar systems. of Oklahoma City Public Schools v. Dowell and
Adoption of race-conscious student assignment 1992 Freeman v. Pitts cases clarified qualifications
policies soon led school districts to face legal hur- for unitary status as being (a) compliance with the
dles, typically because race was used to determine desegregation order for a limited time, (b) elimina-
admissions. Higher education settings made race tion of segregation to the extent practicable, and
one among many individualized factors that deter- (c) displayed commitment to the district’s constitu-
mined admissions—considerations often not pos- tional obligations. The principle of schooling closer
sible in K–12 schools, where admissions cannot be to home, which guided this process of a return to
based on prior achievement to the same extent as neighborhood schools, leads, unfortunately, to
in higher education settings. Opponents of race- resegregation. In Oklahoma City, the percentage of
conscious assignment policies noted that these Whites in Black schools decreased from 34% in
policies counter a color-blind ideal, perpetuating 1988 to 21% in 2000—a pattern typical of other
instead the idea that race matters most. unitary districts.
The courts shifted between favoring and oppos- Although some think a return to neighborhood
ing race-conscious student assignment policies. schools will improve their quality by strengthening
Challenges to race-conscious assignment policies community attachment and increasing parental
succeeded initially. Over time, however, courts involvement and social capital, examination of
began favoring them.  Thus, in two influential Nashville public schools showed that racially iso-
cases combined in Parents Involved in Community lated Black schools were located in zones with few
Schools (Seattle and Jefferson County), wherein assets and numerous liabilities: impoverishment,
mothers of two White boys challenged their dis- with 43% of the residents lacking a high school
trict’s rejection of their son’s choice of school, diploma (compared with 15% in neighborhoods
both the district courts and circuit courts of of integrated schools); high crime rates; and a lack
appeals ruled that voluntary race-conscious assign- of libraries, hospitals, and higher education insti-
ment policies not only serve, but are also narrowly tutions. Predominately White and racially inte-
tailored to meet, governmental interests. This grated schools, on the other hand, boasted more
change in view followed the influential 2003 affluent neighborhoods.
Grutter case, wherein the Supreme Court rejected
a challenge to the University of Michigan Law
Consequences for Achievement
School’s affirmative action policy and affirmed
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, The adequacy of these policies is best evalu-
1978. The Court ruled that race can serve as one ated after their effects are considered. Recent shifts
of many criteria that determine K–12 and college from desegregated schooling to growing resegrega-
admission decisions. Subsequently, however, the tion would not be important had desegregation
plaintiffs in Parents Involved in Community failed to improve academic achievement. Indeed,
Schools—arguing that higher education contexts according to a National Academy of Education
differ from K–12 schools—appealed to the report, earlier studies and both narrative accounts
Supreme Court, which reversed the application of and a summary of six meta-analytic reviews
Grutter to lower-level K–12 schools and ruled showed little evidence of benefit. More recent evi-
instead that the Seattle and Jefferson County race- dence, however, seems more positive. Those who
conscious student assignment policies violated the attend integrated schools are more likely to gradu-
Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause. ate from high school; attend and graduate from
This decision ended struggles against de facto college; have higher and more realistic occupational
Desegregation 201

aspirations and obtain better paying jobs; and students exceeds that of Blacks. Minority students
exhibit a smaller educational achievement gap. A often live in neighborhoods with fewer material
National Academy of Education committee advantages, lower family property values, and
resolved this discrepancy in outcomes by suggest- fewer books and computers in homes.
ing that the larger, state-level databases of these These differential starting achievement levels
later studies increased their sensitivity to beneficial promote within-school segregation. To students’
effects. misfortune, instead of offering remedial instruc-
The magnitude and persistence of desegregation tion, schools overwhelmingly place minorities in
benefits have been debated. Narrative reviews and lower tracks, taught by less qualified teachers who,
meta-analyses suggest that voluntary plans benefit like the rest of the society, have lower expectations
Black achievement more than mandatory plans and for minority students. Moreover, Black students
that younger attendance at desegregated schools continue their struggle for equal education even
yields more benefit. Furthermore, according to the after high school. For example, their ability to
National Academy of Education report, desegrega- understand racism and deal with it predicts their
tion does not affect achievement of Whites. achievement in colleges and universities.
Experts argue that achievement differences Given these considerations, the persisting
between minority students attending segregated achievement gap is not surprising. In 2001 the
and desegregated schools reflect differential fund- National Center for Educational Statistics found
ing. Until recently, local property taxes funded only 1 in 100 Black 17-year-olds able to read and
public schools, enabling districts in wealthier com- interpret technical data, compared with 1 in 12
munities to receive more funding and spend more Whites. After high school, Black students’ reading
money per student. These disparities also occur and math skills match those of White eighth grad-
within districts. Schools with higher proportions ers. In the 2000 U.S. census, 72.3% of Blacks older
of poor students receive less funding from local than age 24 had completed high school (compared
sources. Race is marginally related to local fund- with 83.6% of Whites), and Blacks were only half
ing, which on a local level means that minority as likely as Whites to have completed a 4-year
schools receive less funding than White schools. college—a difference that holds when controlling
Making all this particularly problematic, higher for prior test scores and socioeconomic factors.
spending promotes achievement. Desegregated Moreover, standardized test scores and high school
schools are presumably wealthier than segregated graduation rates are even lower in predominately
inner city public schools because districts typically minority schools.
achieve desegregation by busing minority students Economic disadvantages among minorities in
into existing predominantly White schools. Thus, general and academic tracking in particular have
patterns of local funding perpetuate disparities in undermined effective desegregation policy. Though
wealth and contribute to the achievement gap it is tempting to blame school boards, schools, and
between inner city and desegregated schools. historical and economic patterns for the policy
Nonetheless, achievement levels of White stu- failure, blame also rests on prejudicial attitudes.
dents in integrated, affluent suburban schools Burdens of desegregation have often fallen on
exceed those of their minority counterparts. Black and Latino students. White students fre-
Contributing to this gap is that these so-called inte- quently have not enrolled when reassigned to
grated schools, even when balanced in percentages Black schools—a  resistance that has continued
of White and Black students, remain segregated on even in high-performing schools with affluent stu-
a more fundamental level—with both outside and dents. Private schools further contribute to segre-
inside forces operating to create within-school seg- gation. Consistent with symbolic racism theory,
regation. First, Blacks, and perhaps other minority wherein the negative White racial attitudes that
students, start at a disadvantage. More White than are formed in early childhood are later covertly
Black children were enrolled in preschools by expressed by opposing busing or affirmative action
1991. Their home environments likely differed. In programs, parents exhibit exaggerated negative
integrated affluent suburban schools, although reactions to the system-produced negative charac-
median family income is $80,000, that of White teristics of public schools—such as discipline
202 Desegregation

problems, insufficiently challenging academics, White schools favored their ingroup over the out-
and too few extracurricular opportunities—to jus- group and judged cross-race dyads as less likely to
tify enrollment of their children in White private be friends than same-race dyads, those in more
schools. diverse schools did not similarly differentiate same-
race and cross-race dyads. Childhood contact is
particularly important in that prejudice develops
Consequences for Intergroup Relations
early and often becomes resistant to change.
Although initiated primarily to offer equal educa- In addition to contact theory, two other theories
tional opportunities, school desegregation also bear on the development of both friendships and
impacts intergroup relations. In particular, school conflicts in multiracial settings. Macrostructural
racial composition affects intergroup friendships, theory argues that racially heterogeneous settings
conflicts, and comfort. Contact theory posits that are conducive to the development of both many
in addition to quantity of racial contact, equal sta- interracial conflicts and many interracial friend-
tus, authorities supportive of intergroup contact, ships. Group threat theory argues that interracial
and cooperative endeavors to achieve common conflict is determined by the relative size of the
goals augment development of intergroup friend- groups, with equal-sized groups having more overt
ship and reduce conflict.  Meta-analytic evidence interracial conflict than numerically dispropor-
clearly shows that contact reduces prejudice. tionate groups.
Furthermore, this benefit generalizes beyond those Supporting macrostructural theory, a study that
in the immediate situation, meaning that integrated measured students’ and teachers’ perceptions of
schools improve attitudes not only toward out- both interracial friendliness and interracial conflict
group students attending them but also toward showed greater schoolwide racial heterogeneity to
other members of those outgroups. This contact be linked to both increased interracial friendliness
effect is particularly strong for children and college and conflict. Yet tracking, which necessarily
students,  further emphasizing integrated school- reduces within-classroom heterogeneity, was asso-
ing’s importance. Although equal intergroup status, ciated with decreased friendliness but increased
support for intergroup contact by authorities in the conflict. Though consistent with contact theory,
situation, and intergroup cooperation toward com- this conflict effect counters macrostructural theory.
mon goals further augment contact’s benefits, con- Support from authorities in the setting, as mea-
tact also reduces prejudice between groups lacking sured by schools’ proportion of minority teachers,
these conditions, perhaps because it induces liking, was associated with reduced conflict but was unre-
reduces threat and anxiety, or a combination. lated to friendliness. Consistent with much research,
Critics sometimes attribute prejudice-reducing cooperative interracial contact while working on
contact effects to selection bias, arguing that interdependent goals increased friendliness and
unprejudiced people are drawn to contact, whereas reduced conflict. When schools required more
prejudiced persons avoid it. Yet experiments and group work, students perceived more interracial
studies that allowed no choice of avoiding contact friendliness, and teachers reported less conflict.
show particularly beneficial effects. Emphasizing However, the association between integrated extra-
the importance of more personalized contact, curricular activities and reduced conflict did not
White students randomly assigned to roommates extend to friendliness. Consistent with group
of different ethnicities were both more comfort- threat theory, lessened friendliness characterized
able when interacting with minorities and more biracial schools with equal-sized groups of stu-
likely to develop interracial friendships than dents, but contrariwise, their teachers did not per-
were Whites assigned to same-race roommates. ceive more conflict. Students in small racial
Furthermore, programs that encourage cross-racial minorities were more likely to select friends from
understanding without providing opportunity for their own group.
intergroup contact are less effective than those Besides influencing friendships and conflicts,
programs providing contact. contact influences one’s feelings of comfort when
Beneficial contact effects are evident by age 3. one is interacting with outgroup students. Further­
Whereas Anglo-British children attending majority more, racial composition further moderates
Desegregation 203

comfort. For Blacks, a higher percentage of White Perceptions that it had failed encouraged courts
students was associated with increased comfort and policy makers to abandon voluntary race-
when interacting with other-race students. All conscious student assignment policies, creating a
other racial or ethnic subgroups displayed a curvi- return to neighborhood schooling. The racial
linear relationship, with higher percentages of achievement gap persists and temporally varies,
Whites associated with greater comfort only to a having  narrowed between 1970 and 1980 but
point. The points beyond which subgroups associ- rewidened by 1988. Desegregated schools, though
ated higher White percentages with decreased com- deficient, are better than inner-city public schools
fort in their intergroup interactions are as follows: or neighborhood schools. Integrated schooling
Asians, 39%; Latinos, 33%; and Whites, 44%. betters minority achievement and intergroup
Thus, when students attend diverse schools wherein relations, making the return to segregated or
Whites are a numerical minority, they are more neighborhood schools problematic. Research on
comfortable in their interactions with outgroup implementation of desegregation in other coun-
students. Together, these findings indicate that the tries, and in other domains, such as the workplace
relationship between heterogeneity and friendliness and housing, is needed.
is curvilinear.
In sum, desegregated schooling benefits inter- Norman Miller and Marija Spanovic
group relations. Greater opportunity for interracial See also Affirmative Action; Civil Rights Legislation;
school contact increases interracial friendships. Civil Rights Movement; Intergroup Contact Theory;
These benefits have been shown to be long-lived in Racism; Tokenism
that desegregation becomes perpetuated later in life
via the increased interracial interaction among
adults who attended desegregated schools and their
Further Readings
more effective subsequent functioning in desegre-
gated settings. Desegregated schooling augments Board of Education of the Oklahoma City Public School
the development and stability of interracial friend- v. Dowell, 498 U.S. 237 (1991), on remand, 778
ships for both minority and majority groups, leads F. Supp. 1144 (W.D. Okla. 1991), aff’d, 8 F.3d 1501
to more positive intergroup attitudes both in the (10th Cir. 1993).
workplace and in general, contributes to greater Brown v. Board of Education, Topeka, 347 U.S. 483
civic engagement, and enables students to acquire (1954), 349 U.S. 294 (1955).
racial acceptance. White students who attend inte- Diamond, J. B. (2006). Still separate and unequal:
grated schools are more tolerant and less fearful of Examining race, opportunity, and school achievement
Black peers than are White students attending seg- in “integrated” suburbs. Journal of Negro Education,
regated schools. Likewise, White students assigned 75, 495–505.
Eckes, S. E. (2006). Barriers to integration in the
Black roommates express more positive attitudes to
Mississippi Delta: Could charter schools be the new
affirmative action policies. Even though these
vehicle for desegregation? Analyses of Social Issues
effects apply to students of all racial groups, recent
and Public Policy, 6, 15–30.
research shows that contact is less effective at
Freeman v. Pitts, 503 U.S. 467 (1992), on remand, 979
reducing intergroup bias among minority than F.2d 1472 (11th Cir. 1992), on remand sub nom.
among majority group members.  The prejudiced Mills v. Freeman, 942 F. Supp. 1449 (N.D. Ga.
attitudes expressed by majorities during the contact 1996), appeal after remand, 118 F.3d 727 (11th Cir.
likely lead minorities to experience intergroup con- 1997).
tact more negatively. Researchers need to further Goldring, E., Cohen-Vogel, L., Smrekar, C., & Taylor, C.
investigate this finding and seek ways to improve (2006). Schooling closer to home: Desegregation
contact experiences of minorities. policy and neighborhood contexts. American Journal
of Education, 112, 335–362.
Goldsmith, P. A. (2004). Schools’ role in shaping race
Conclusion
relations: Evidence on friendliness and conflict. Social
School desegregation faced enormous challenges Problems, 51, 587–612.
from the start and was never fully implemented. Gratz v. Bollinger, 529 U.S. 244 (2003).
204 Deutsch, Morton

Grutter v. Bollinger, 137 F. Supp. 2d 821 (E.D. Mich. Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1948,
2001); 288 F.3d 732 (6th Cir. 2002); 539 U.S. 306 where he was one of the last students of Kurt
(2003). Lewin. From 1948 to 1956, he was on the faculty
Kurlaender, M., & Yun, J. T. (2007). Measuring school of New York University. He left there to spend
racial composition and student outcomes in a 8  years as a researcher at Bell Labs. In 1958, he
multiracial society. American Journal of Education, became a licensed therapist. In 1963, he joined the
113, 213–242. faculty of Teachers College at Columbia. He retired
Linn, R. L., & Welner, K. G. (Eds.). (2007). from Columbia in 1990, but as of this writing
Race-conscious policies for assigning students to
remains active in the International Center for
schools: Social science research and the Supreme
Cooperation and Conflict Resolution (ICCCR) at
Court cases. National Academy of Education
Columbia, which he founded. This entry provides
Committee on Social Science Research Evidence on
an overview of his research.
Racial Diversity in Schools. Washington, DC:
National Academy of Education. Retrieved June 30,
2009, from http://www.naeducation.org/Meredith_ Cooperation and Competition
Report.pdf
McFarland ex rel. McFarland v. Jefferson County Public Deutsch’s impact was immediate. His doctoral dis-
Schools, 416 F.3d 513 (6th Cir. 2005), cert. granted sertation contrasted the performance of coopera-
sub nom. Meredith v. Jefferson County Board of tive groups (in which all members received the
Education, 126 S.Ct. 2351 (2006). same reward for an output) and competitive
Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School groups (in which magnitude of reward was deter-
Dist. No. 1, 426 F.3d 1162 (9th Cir. 2005), cert. mined by each individual’s contribution to the
granted, 126 S. Ct. 2351 (2006). effort). He found the cooperative group members
Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic to be communicative, helpful, friendly, and sup-
test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of portive; oriented toward achievement; able to
Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751–783. reach consensus; capable of coordinating efforts;
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 and highly productive. By contrast, competitive
U.S. 265 (1978). group members were obstructionist, disrespectful
Sears, D. O., & Henry, P. J. (2005). Over thirty years of others’ opinions, and inattentive; had little sense
later: A contemporary look at symbolic racism. In of “we-ness” and little interest in supporting oth-
M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social ers; were unconfident; frequently lacked consen-
Psychology (Vol. 37, pp. 95–150). San Diego, CA: sus; and were uncoordinated and unproductive.
Elsevier Academic Press. This result led Deutsch to ask how to instigate
Welner, K. G. (2006). K-12 race-conscious student cooperation within a group. He concluded that
assignment policies: Law, social science, and diversity.
trust is a key prerequisite. He defined trust infor-
Review of Educational Research, 76(3), 349–382.
mally as “confidence that [one] will find what is
desired rather than what is feared” (Resolution of
Conflict, 1973, p. 148) and formally as the subjec-
Deutsch, Morton tive probability of a positive outcome occurring
exceeding the subjective probability of a negative
(1920– ) event occurring. Immediacy of the outcome also
impacts trust—a positive outcome that is very
Morton Deutsch is a conflict theorist. He has likely to occur, but not for a long time, is unlikely
made sizable contributions to the body of knowl- to induce much trust, for example.
edge on interpersonal and intergroup conflict, If the target of trust is another person, one must
social injustice and oppression, and trust and try to determine the person’s intentions, and the
threat. reliability of those intentions, before assigning
Deutsch was born in 1920. He completed his probabilities to the positive and negative outcomes.
undergraduate training at City College of New Perceived reliability is a function of the person’s
York, took a master’s degree at the University of motivation to perform the intention; the person’s
Pennsylvania, and earned his PhD from the commitment to the behavior; the extent to which
Deutsch, Morton 205

the behavior is clearly focused on a target; and the behavior. The Trucking Game pits two individuals
extent to which the desired outcome can be pro- against each other as owners of rival shipping
duced only by that one specific behavior. companies. The opponents are located on opposite
Under this framework, a person who states an sides of a space, and they must move a loaded
intention to donate money for a good cause can be truck from a warehouse to a delivery site on the
trusted to follow through on the intention if the other side of the space. The trucks thus travel in
money is needed immediately (motivation) and if opposite directions. Individual profit from the
the cause is important to the person (commitment); business is a function of how quickly the load gets
is directed toward one specific goal (focus); and delivered.
needs only monetary support, with no other Each person has the option of using either a
resources being relevant (specificity). Failure to private, winding road that takes a while to navi-
meet any of these conditions (e.g., the money will gate (and hence returns a small profit) or a short,
be applied to a diffuse set of endeavors) will public single-lane road that returns a large profit.
decrease trust that the person will act. The conflict is that if both drivers decide to use the
After developing this model, Deutsch executed single-lane road at the same time, they will meet in
some studies examining the conditions under the middle, causing a delay in delivery, and hence
which interpersonal trust is more and less likely to a decline in profits, while the conflict is resolved.
develop. His primary focus was on individual dif- The optimal strategy is to alternate use of the pub-
ferences and the extent to which they can predict lic and private roads, and an interesting question is
differences in trusting. He found, for example, that how frequently individuals discover that solution.
highly authoritarian people are less trusting than Deutsch, however, added another component
low-authoritarian people. His notion of motiva- that became the defining feature of this paradigm:
tional orientation had even more impact. Deutsch At each end of the public road are gates, and each
argued that people enter into an interaction with driver controls the gate nearest his or her ware-
an overarching goal for the outcomes. While many house. Each person thus has the ability to make
such goals can be stated, three dominate: coopera- the public road nonfunctional for the other. One
tion, or maximization of outcomes for all individu- could, for example, close one’s gate after the other
als; competition, or maximization of the difference person has already started down the public road,
between own and others’ outcomes; and individu- forcing him or her to return to his or her ware-
alism, or maximization of own outcomes with no house and use the private road, which would pro-
concern for others. duce a loss of money on that round. The gate thus
Deutsch found cooperators to always be quite constitutes a threat, and Deutsch was especially
trusting; individualists to be trusting when the interested in how threat impacts cooperation.
intended behavior had to be publicly announced or In his original studies, neither, one, or both of
when participants could interact with each other; the truckers had the ability to close a gate. These
and competitors to never really be trusting, even if conditions constitute no, unilateral, and bilateral
there was public commitment to an intended threat, respectively. The results were striking: In
behavior (although this intervention was most the no-threat condition, both parties ended with
likely to produce some cooperation in competi- net gains; in the bilateral-threat condition, both
tors) or opportunities for communication (espe- ended with net losses; and in the unilateral-threat
cially harmful; competitors either declined the condition, both also ended with net losses, although
chance to interact or used the experience to send the losses were not as severe as in the bilateral-
misleading messages). Motivational orientation threat condition, and the threatener incurred less
has since become a standard variable in the study of a loss than the threatened. The key point,
of cooperative interaction. though, is that an individual who could harm with
no fear of retaliation nonetheless lost money.
Deutsch’s conclusion was that it is better to have a
The Trucking Game
weapon than not (and if your opponent has one, it
Deutsch, in collaboration with Robert Krauss, also is better for you not to have one), but it is best of
developed a new paradigm for studying negotiation all for neither party to be armed.
206 Deviance

Insights Further Readings

Deutsch’s further research into cooperation and Deutsch, M. (1973). The resolution of conflict. New
competition led him to two important insights. The Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
first he termed his crude law of interpersonal rela- Deutsch, M. (1985). Distributive justice. New Haven,
tions: The phenomena that result from cooperation CT: Yale University Press.
or competition themselves produce cooperation or
competition. For example, cooperation produces
trust, and cooperation results from trust. The law is
important because it explains how to produce coop-
Deviance
eration or competition rather than what happens
when cooperative or competitive behavior occurs. The term deviance describes situations in which
In this way, it complements his original work. people violate social rules and conventions.
Deutsch labeled it a crude law because it deals with However, there may be many motives and causes
cause–effect relationships only in passing; its pur- for engaging in deviant behavior, and there may
pose is instead to describe underlying influences also be causes for defining other people’s behavior
(Deutsch himself described it as genotypical). as deviant. This entry reviews sociological and
Deutsch’s second insight dealt with the nature psychological perspectives on deviance.
of justice. He came to believe that the negative
effects of competition were endemic of a larger Sociological Perspectives
societal problem of unjust resource distribution. In
his view, cooperation produces people who are Sociologists have analyzed how social order is sus-
good group members, and the hallmark of coop- tained both in society as a whole through laws,
eration is a just system of reward. From the crude institutions, and distribution of wealth, and through
law, it follows that rewarding people justly will microsociological mechanisms of personal relation-
lead to enhanced cooperation, which in turn makes ships, roles, and influence. Most everyday actions,
people more group regarding. Deutsch thus argued such as buying and selling items, arriving for work
that equality or need-based reward schemes will be in the morning, driving a car, and greeting people,
associated with harmonious relations, and equity- are governed by clear social rules. People’s under-
based rewarding will be associated with imper- standing and following of these rules are essential
sonal relations. Implementing fairer reward for the smooth running of society.
schemes would, then, minimize societal conflict.
He believed, however, that there are strong social Anomie
pressures against acknowledging the existence of
Émile Durkheim viewed deviance as a social
injustice, and without such acknowledgment,
fact, an inevitable part of how society functions.
attempts to bring forth new schemes are unlikely
He argued that deviance is a basis for change and
to succeed. Deutsch thus called for research into
innovation, and it is also a way of defining or
techniques for counteracting these pressures.
clarifying important social norms. One reason
The remainder of his career was dedicated to
that people engage in deviant behavior may be a
this goal, with a particular emphasis on the effi-
state of anomie, which is the absence of clear
cacy of education. Indeed, the ICCCR was created
social norms. For people to understand what
not only as a place for cross-disciplinary collabora-
these norms are, the rules need to be tested occa-
tion on issues of conflict and justice but also as an
sionally. As an example, among stock market
outreach organ for training others in conflict reso-
speculators, the boundary between clever dealing
lution and enhancement of social justice.
and improper dealing is defined by laws. Most of
Craig D. Parks the time, however, inappropriate behavior is
likely to be regulated by informal social processes.
See also Cooperation and Competition; Distributive The groups surrounding these individuals are
Justice; Justice; Just World Hypothesis; Lewin, Kurt; likely to put pressure on them to behave in line
Trust with relevant norms.
Deviance 207

Robert Merton’s theory of anomie proposed social categories such as gender, which are associ-
that deviance is often a response to situations in ated with wider social norms. Travis Hirschi,
which goals cannot be achieved through conven- analyzing the causes of delinquency, proposed
tional behavior. In democratic societies, people that social control is based on bonds of attach-
from wealthier, better connected, and more privi- ment, commitment, involvement, and belief.
leged circumstances have easier routes to personal
success and prosperity. When others realize that
Labeling
routes to achievement are blocked, they experience
strain and are likely to turn to tactics that will help Edwin Lemert distinguished between primary
them get past the blockages. Merton regarded and secondary deviance. Primary deviance involves
deviance as only one of several possible reactions relatively trivial, but generally tolerated, depar-
to frustration, and his ideas have much in common tures from rules. For example, people occasionally
with other theories (see relative deprivation, social take items of office stationery (pens, sticky tape,
identity theory, and system justification theory). etc.) for personal use. When committing such acts,
Merton proposed five types of reaction: confor- most people feel able to sustain the idea that they
mity, innovation, ritualism, retreatism, and rebel- are still honest and law abiding, acting within the
lion. Both innovation and rebellion are forms of bounds of their roles, and that these acts are minor
deviance. Whereas innovation is likely to involve exceptions. Linked to these forms of primary devi-
breaking rules to achieve normative objectives ance, sociologists also observe that societies allow
(e.g., stealing to become rich), rebellion involves certain norms of evasion. For example, drivers on
challenging the rules or objectives themselves (e.g., freeways often travel a little faster than the official
campaigns to legalize abortion or criminalize cer- speed limit. It is widely accepted that breaking the
tain types of drug use or protests such as the march limit will be tolerated, but only up to a point.
in which more than a million people gathered in These norms provide fuzzy boundaries. People
London to oppose Britain’s involvement in the who show that they conform to most rules are usu-
Iraq war). ally given a little freedom to bend some rules, but
Various types of social control inhibit devi- if authorities so choose, they can impose the rules
ance. Primary groups such as families, work strictly.
groups, or teams and close social groups may Secondary deviance describes a situation in
control deviance through direct or immediate which a person has been publicly identified as
sanctions over their members. If a child is disobe- deviant, such as by being classified as mentally
dient, a parent can respond immediately, just as a unstable or criminal. Howard Becker argued, on
sports referee can immediately exclude a cheating the basis of his research on marijuana smokers,
player. In close-knit communities, there is a high that deviant behavior is simply behavior that peo-
level of primary control, so if a member breaks an ple label as deviant. Labeling theory emphasizes
important rule, that member is in significant dan- that being labeled can generate a self-fulfilling
ger of exclusion from the group. In some cultures, prophecy whereby others behave toward the
the family reputations of people may be put at labeled person in ways that confirm or reinforce
risk if a member engages in a criminal or shaming the label. A person who is labeled finds himself or
activity. Extreme reactions such as so-called herself unable to escape. To understand deviance,
honor killing of women for committing adultery, we have to also understand why behavior gets
or even for having been raped, highlight the fact labeled as deviant. Critics of labeling theory have
that deviance is not easily defined in terms of a argued that it underplays the responsibility of the
specific behavior. Instead, deviance is defined by deviant for his or her own behavior. It is clear that
the formal or informal rules imposed by other some behavior is so reprehensible or so unusual
people in the social context in which the behavior that intervention is required, such as to protect
occurs. Social control is also exerted through sec- potential victims (e.g., of school massacres, pedo-
ondary groups that are more abstract, such as philia, lynchings).
organizations that use formal power and regula- The gradation from deviance that is merely
tions, as well as though membership in larger labeled and deviance that may objectively be a risk
208 Deviance

to the group is illustrated by situations of ideo- William Sheldon argued that criminals had a par-
logical opposition. For example, during the Cold ticular (muscular) type of body shape. Although it
War, different sides applied completely different is plausible that certain types of crime might
views of what behavior and indeed which opinions require particular body shapes (e.g., a cat burglar
and values were acceptable. During the McCarthy may need to be athletic), it is not plausible that
era of the 1950s, the Soviet Union regarded capi- there is a generally criminal body type (stock mar-
talism as despicable, and the United States regarded ket fraudsters come in all shapes and sizes). A great
Communism to be criminal. On both sides, some deal of research tried to predict criminality on the
individuals who sympathized with the opposite basis of personality traits (e.g., research by Hans
side shared information or secrets that posed real Eysenck, who proposed that criminality resulted
threats to the security of each. These individuals from high levels of psychoticism, extroversion, and
were tried and sometimes executed as spies. neuroticism).
Regardless of a person’s beliefs, merely being Psychoanalytic theory (e.g., the work of Sigmund
labeled as a Communist in the United States meant Freud and Erich Fromm) emphasizes the role of
being at great risk. Similar divergences between socialization. This perspective argues that parents
Islamic fundamentalism and Western democracy instill in their children a respect for rules and
pervaded the period of the U.S. presidency of authority, represented by the superego. This super-
George W. Bush. ego is an internalized control system that motivates
The focus of social control over deviance shifts people to follow social rules, to respect law and
to different individuals and groups depending on order, and so on. That is, conformity is thought to
the broader social and historical context. For be important for people’s self-concepts. However,
example, in the 1960s, surveys showed that people criminality can be viewed as a product of many
in the United States felt greater distance from forces aside from either biological factors or
homosexual and lesbian people than they did from parental socialization practices. The absence of a
alcoholics, prostitutes, former convicts, and for- stable home and the presence of negative socializ-
mer mental patients. Since then, homosexuality ing agents may play a role, but all these aspects of
has generally shifted from being viewed as being socialization may in turn be affected by other fac-
highly criminal to being viewed as noncriminal. tors, such as poverty within the home and in the
Sociologists distinguish between deviance at dif- wider community. Approaches that focus on dif-
ferent levels of analysis. Some deviance departs ferences between individuals are useful when
from cultural norms and values, such as women in explaining why some people break rules more
Catholic countries who decide to use birth control. often than others do, but those approaches do not
Other deviance is defined in terms of individual help explain why people are deviant in some
pathology (e.g., psychosis, extreme neurosis). Some situations rather than others, why people label
deviance is expressed by individuals within a group others as deviant, or how they react toward devi-
(for example, a student who wears unusual clothes), ant individuals.
and other deviance can be expressed by a group Other perspectives on deviance include evolu-
within society (for example a gang or a cult). The tionary theory, which argues that physically stig-
idea of deviant subcultures is important because it matized (deviant) group members may receive
highlights that groups can generate their own sets hostile and exclusionary reactions from others
of norms, and people within those groups feel they because they pose a threat to survival of the group.
are not deviant even though the group as a whole Norbert Kerr has suggested that people may be
may be viewed as deviant by others. sensitized to the possibility of being rejected
because it has so many consequences for their
Psychological Perspectives physical and psychological well-being.
Individual Propensity to Deviate
Norms and Conformity Pressure
Early psychological approaches to deviance
emphasized the biological and psychodynamic The main thrust of social-psychological research
roots of deviance. For example, theorists such as into deviance has been on the way that (a) individual
Deviance 209

deviants respond to group pressure and (b) groups Minorities as Deviants


respond to individual members who deviate from
An important criticism of Festinger’s model is
the group norms. Muzafer Sherif’s experiments
the assumption that people want to compare them-
on norm formation in the 1930s illustrated that
selves with others who are similar. Contrary to
in ambiguous situations, people quickly form
that assumption, sometimes people prefer to com-
norms. In his autokinetic effect experiments, par-
pare with others who are dissimilar (worse) because
ticipants viewed an illusion in which an objec-
doing so allows people to enhance their self-
tively stationary point of light in a dark room
concept. People might also find dissimilarity useful
appears to move (possibly a consequence of eye
because it allows them to contrast their own posi-
movements). The light was shown on a series of
tion with that of a rival or enemy. Equally funda-
trials, and participants were asked to estimate the
mental is the assumption in Festinger’s model that
distance moved on each trial. When people lis-
influence is likely to be unidirectional, namely,
tened to judgments made by others, they quickly
from the majority to the minority. Serge Moscovici
converged to make estimates within the same
proposed a theory of minority influence that
range. Dependency on others was also illustrated
explains why a deviant group member can change
by Solomon Asch’s conformity experiments.
the majority opinion under some circumstances.
Participants were asked to say which one of a
Moscovici’s genetic model proposes that any mem-
series of lines was the same length as a compari-
ber of a group can potentially exert influence on
son line. When three confederates gave a unani-
others. Echoing Durkheim’s theorizing, Moscovici
mous incorrect answer, many of the genuine
has held that deviants play a key role in bringing
participants ignored what they could see and
about social change. To illustrate this, Moscovici
agreed with the confederates. These experiments
and colleagues showed how judgments of whether
illustrate the pressure to uniformity in groups.
physical stimuli (a blue slide) were blue or green
People feel that they should be in agreement,
could be influenced by a minority if the minority
especially about the physical world.
showed an incorrect (green) but consistent response.
Leon Festinger proposed that group uniformity
Moscovici identified that in these situations, even
pressure is based on the group’s ambition to
though the majority opinion is known (we gener-
move toward particular goals (group locomotion)
ally agree what blue looks like), a consistent mes-
and the desire among group members to validate
sage from a minority can make us reconsider our
their opinions about the nonphysical world (social
judgments. Further research suggested that a
reality). The social reality function involves the
minority group member’s opinion has greater
process of both evaluating the accuracy of opin-
influence when the person combines his or her
ions and validating (confirming) the accuracy of
consistency on that particular opinion with flexi-
those opinions. A group usually comprises people
bility (e.g., agreeing with the majority in opinions
who are similar in important respects (e.g., shar-
on other topics). Thus, in strong contrast to
ing a religion, culture, leisure interest, or objec-
Festinger’s ideas, Moscovici holds that groups
tive). When a member of the group differs from
progress and develop as a result of conflict.
the modal opinions of others, the group’s loco-
Whereas people succumb to normative influence
motion is impeded, and its sense of social reality
from majorities (i.e., people simply conform with-
is undermined. The group will therefore engage
out changing their private opinions), conflict from
in communication to deal with the problem.
minorities makes groups reevaluate their ideas and
Possible solutions are to evict the deviant from
perspectives and allows them to innovate.
the group, to pressure the deviant to conform, or
to change the group’s opinion to agree with the
Reactions to Deviant Group Members
deviant. Dorwin Cartwright and Alvin Zander
added two further reasons why groups desire uni- Given the potentially disruptive impact of a dis-
formity: Uniformity helps define the group’s senting minority, it is not surprising that research
boundaries and distinctiveness from other groups, also examines how people react toward deviant
and uniformity strengthens the cohesiveness of group members. One of the most widely reported
the group. studies was published in 1951 by Stanley Schachter.
210 Deviance

He composed groups of 8 to 10 people, who had people may consider how differences between their
to reach agreement on the appropriate treatment own and other groups are affected by the presence
or punishment for a delinquent. The groups of deviant individuals. José Marques and col-
included three confederates, one of whom con- leagues demonstrated a black sheep effect (see
formed to the group’s modal opinion, one of the entry titled Subjective Group Dynamics),
whom disagreed (the deviate), and one who gradu- whereby people derogate deviants in their own
ally changed from the deviate to the modal opinion groups relatively more than deviants in other
(the slider). Results showed that communication groups. This is thought to be motivated by people’s
was directed more frequently toward the deviant desire to sustain a positive social identity. A devi-
than toward the other confederates and that the ant in the ingroup threatens the validity of social
deviant was less likely than other confederates to identity (based on the idea that we are right and
be treated favorably. Subsequent evidence suggests we agree with one another). Dominic Abrams and
that there may be a threshold effect with deviants. colleagues also distinguished between two types of
A deviant who exhibits the potential to change (to deviance in intergroup situations. Antinorm devi-
conform) is worthy of investment of time and ance describes a situation in which, when com-
effort because this change will reinforce the group. pared to the majority in a group, a group member
A deviant who is very extreme or whose opinion expresses views that are relatively opposed to the
seems rooted in a more pervasive difference with member’s own group and agrees with or supports
the group is more likely to be ignored or rejected an outgroup. Pronorm deviance is the situation in
from the group altogether. This fits with research which a person shows more extreme endorsement
on minority influence showing that extreme minor- of his or her own group and rejection of the out-
ities are less influential on the rest of the group group (e.g., a fanatic). People tend to be more
than moderate minorities are. sensitive, and react more strongly, to antinorm
An important question is how people make sense deviants. An interesting consequence is that people
of deviant behavior within their group. John Levine are often positive toward outgroup members who
and colleagues have shown that deviant members are antinorm deviants. This is because such devi-
who shifted toward the majority opinion were ants lend credibility and support to the ingroup’s
viewed as seeking greater approval from the group social reality. The importance of social interaction
whereas deviants who shifted away were viewed as in groups as a mechanism of social control is dem-
being independent and assertive. The interpretation onstrated by developmental psychology research.
of behavior may also depend on other things in the As young as 8 years of age, children seem to learn
context. For example, dissent in a group may be that groups expect their members to be loyal and
acceptable if it does not threaten the group’s out- conform, and these young children also recognize
comes, but if it involves harm to the group (e.g., by that ingroup deviants will be criticized. This
reducing its rewards or by revealing important infor- understanding appears to be based on children’s
mation to a rival group), it is likely to invite much ability to take different social perspectives and also
harsher reactions. On the other hand, Edwin on actual experiences of belonging to a range of
Hollander’s research on idiosyncrasy credit shows social groups.
that people who have shown loyalty to a group in the
past may be permitted to dissent from the majority
Deviant Groups
and to influence the majority. More recently, research
has argued that some deviance might actually be As noted earlier, whereas early research empha-
normative, in the sense that group members will sized how groups expect and enforce loyalty and
accept deviant views if those views are believed to be conformity, sometimes resulting in phenomena
espoused in the interests or defense of the group. such as groupthink, they do not always derogate
deviants. Some groups have norms that encourage
originality and innovation, and others are them-
Deviance in Intergroup Situations
selves involved in challenging the status quo. These
Deviant group members are also judged differ- include deviant subcultures such as gangs, as well
ently depending on the intergroup context. That is, as groups that are in conflict over their rights or
Discrimination 211

resources. Early theories of crowd behavior (e.g., Marques, J. M., Abrams, D., Paez, D., & Hogg, M. A.
that of Gustave Le Bon) argued that people become (2001). Social categorization, social identification and
more primitive when they are in a crowd, an idea rejection of deviant group members. In M. A. Hogg &
echoed by Edward Diener’s research on deindi- R. S. Tindale (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social
viduation in groups, showing that feeling anony- psychology: Group processes (pp. 400–424). Oxford,
mous and unidentifiable in a group can reduce UK: Blackwell.
self-regulation and constraint among the group Moscovici, S. (1976). Social influence and social change.
members. London: Academic Press.
Packer, D. J. (2008). On being both with us and against
Although there is evidence that people may
us: A normative conflict model of dissent in social
become more violent and extreme when they are in
groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12,
groups, it does not seem that this is always because
50–72.
they have lost self-control. Social identity theorists
Reicher, S. D. (2001). The psychology of crowd
such as Stephen Reicher argue that groups may dynamics. In M. A. Hogg & R. S. Tindale (Eds.),
establish or develop a norm to confront authority Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Group
or behave in extreme ways, and when people’s processes (pp. 182–208). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
group identity is salient, they follow these norms
more closely (see the entries titled Referent
Informational Influence Theory and Social
Identity Theory). This position raises the ques- Discrimination
tion of who defines an act as deviant and high-
lights that deviance is frequently defined in relative Discrimination refers to the differential treatment
(norm-violating) rather than absolute (lawbreak- of people because of the social groups to which
ing) terms. they belong. In this definition, differential treat-
ment refers to any observable differences in
Dominic Abrams behavior toward people who belong to different
groups. Discrimination may emerge in verbal or
See also Conformity; Deindividuation; Group
Socialization; Idiosyncrasy Credit; Minority Influence; nonverbal behavior, involve positive or negative
Norms; Referent Informational Influence Theory; acts, and stem from an actor’s benevolent or
Relative Deprivation; Social Identity Theory; Stigma; malevolent intent of which he or she is or is not
Subjective Group Dynamics; System Justification aware. People can be discriminated against on the
Theory basis of gender, ethnicity, religion, age, national-
ity, immigrant and socioeconomic status, and
many other bases. Discrimination, therefore, is
Further Readings said to occur when similarly qualified and/or
behaving people are treated differently (e.g.,
Abrams, D., & Rutland, A. (2008). The development of
receive different salaries, mentoring, eye contact),
subjective group dynamics. In S. R. Levy & M. Killen
such that social group membership rather than
(Eds.), Intergroup attitudes and relations in childhood
individual attributes better explain differential
through adulthood (pp. 47–65). Oxford, UK: Oxford
treatment. Because social psychologists have stud-
University Press.
ied discrimination against, as well as stereotypes
Becker, H. S. (1961). Outsiders: Studies in the sociology
of deviance. New York: Free Press.
about and prejudice toward, a variety of groups,
Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley: we know that discrimination, representing differ-
University of California Press. ential treatment, is sometimes related to but is
Kerr, N. L., & Levine, J. L. (2008). The detection of conceptually distinct from prejudice (one’s feel-
social exclusion: Evolution and beyond. Group ings about a group) and stereotypes (one’s beliefs
Dynamics, 12, 39–52. about a group).
Levine, J. M. (1980). Reaction to opinion deviance in There is an important irony about discrimina-
small groups. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), Psychology of tion, namely, that most of us value fairness but
group influence (pp. 187–231). Hillsdale, NJ: have the potential to discriminate (either individu-
Lawrence Erlbaum. ally or collectively). In fact, most of us would be
212 Discrimination

upset by the suggestion that we had discriminated Gordon Allport defined ethnic discrimination as
against another person. To discriminate implies the denial of equal treatment of ethnic outgroups
that we have judged a person unfairly on the basis via verbal rejection, exclusion, or physical attack.
of the groups to which he or she belongs rather Likewise, in their recent social psychology text-
than on the basis of his or her ability, skills, and/or book, Elliot Aronson, Timothy Wilson, and Robin
character. Because, across cultures, people endorse Akert defined discrimination as unjustified nega-
egalitarian ideals, most people feel guilty and self- tive or harmful actions that are expressed toward
critical when confronted with evidence that their people simply because they belong to a particular
thoughts or behaviors violate ideals of fairness. As group. The unjustified negative and harmful actions
a result, images of the kind of person who dis- specified by such definitions refer to blatant acts of
criminates against others are at odds with images discrimination, such as open acts of hostility, ver-
of self as fair and principled. Discrimination is, bal and physical aggression toward, and/or social
however, a persistent social reality, being neither a and economic exclusion of members of particular
thing of the past nor a problem exhibited by the groups.
rare few among us who reject egalitarian ideals. Classic conceptualizations of discrimination
The goal of this entry is to facilitate an under- such as those noted above, however, have over-
standing of the irony of discrimination. Toward looked several pervasive and problematic forms of
that end it begins by distinguishing between blatant discrimination. Not all acts of discrimination can
and subtle acts of discrimination. Then, before pre- be clearly classified as positive or negative. Some
senting examples of discrimination toward various forms of discrimination are inherently neither
groups, it also considers what most people think positive nor negative. Other forms of discrimina-
discrimination looks like versus what contempo- tion may be positive in one context and negative in
rary forms of discrimination typically look like. others (e.g., repeating comments to ensure under-
standing). What constitutes a positive or negative
act may also vary from the perspective of an actor
Blatant Discrimination:
versus the perspective of the targets of discrimina-
What We Think Discrimination Looks Like
tory actions. A young man may sincerely seek to
When asked to imagine an instance of discrimina- be helpful when opening a door for an aging per-
tion, most people call to mind images of blatant son, whereas the aging person may perceive the
discrimination, or overt and unmistakable acts of same act an insulting instance of discrimination
discrimination such as the actions of hateful people that follows from stereotypes of one’s frailty. It is
who behave in negative ways that exclude others important to note that the classic conceptualiza-
because of the groups to which those others tion of discrimination cannot address the impor-
belong. Discrimination is perceived to be a set of tant question alluded to in the introductory
negative actions that follow from malevolent paragraphs, namely, if most people fancy them-
intent and effectively undermine or exclude others. selves to be fair and principled people who define
These sorts of blatant acts of discrimination paral- discrimination as unfair, then how might those
lel acts of old-fashioned racism. Black citizens of same people sometimes behave in discriminatory
the United States were not, for instance, allowed to ways (as individuals or groups)?
commingle with Whites, being banned from entry
into locations available to Whites or, when allowed
Subtle Discrimination: What Contemporary
to enter, required to stay in separate spaces (e.g.,
Discrimination Typically Looks Like
back of the bus, different schools).
Although social psychologists long have What people think discrimination looks like and
acknowledged that discrimination may be mani- what discrimination actually looks like are differ-
fest in positive or negative acts, primary attention ent things. As noted, acts thought of as discrimina-
has been focused on negative acts of discrimina- tion tend to be blatant in that they are (1) negative,
tion that have been assumed to be relatively more (2) linked to malevolence toward a group, and
typical instances of discrimination and of greater (3) harmful. In the absence of any of these three pieces,
consequence. In his seminal work, for instance, acts become more subtle forms of discrimination
Discrimination 213

from the perspective of the actor. As a result, one but discrimination may still emerge in the behav-
may treat people differently solely on the basis of iors over which we have less control, such as
the groups to which they belong (e.g., opening speech errors and eye contact. In addition, when
doors for aging people but not young people, and malevolence exists outside of awareness and/or
for women but not men) but have trouble seeing coexists with benevolent intent, acts of discrimina-
such acts as instances of discrimination. After all, tion may be justified, perpetuated, and explained
how could my behavior be discriminatory if I did away in group-irrelevant terms (e.g., Christopher
not treat someone negatively (e.g., I kindly opened was better qualified than Jamal; race had nothing
the door), I feel benevolence toward the group to to do with it).
which someone belongs (e.g., I adore women), and/
or I behaved in a way that does not harm and may
The Most Subtle Form of Discrimination:
even help another?
Institutional Discrimination

Discrimination Without Malevolence Discrimination can occur individually or insti-


tutionally. Institutional discrimination exists when
Discrimination often occurs because of the systematic policies and practices of an institution
operation of basic cognitive and (via ingroup) self- disadvantage or exclude certain social groups. In
enhancing processes, with no malevolent intent many situations, institutional discrimination results
toward other groups. For instance, when people from judgments made on secondary rather than
are classified as ingroup and outgroup members, primary characteristics. Ethnicity and gender, for
there is an accentuation of similarities within instance, may be consciously eliminated as criteria
groups (we are similar to one another, they are all for hiring, but other criteria that are less directly
similar) and differences between groups (they are related to performance may disadvantage partici-
very different from us). These processes of catego- pation of members of some groups. For example,
rization motivate various forms of discrimination racial profiling and the use of height and weight
(e.g., allocating more rewards to ingroup than to requirements to select firefighters (disadvantaging
outgroup members). It is interesting to note, how- women) enforce discriminatory behaviors across
ever, that differences in how ingroup and outgroup actors, regardless of their personal beliefs about
members are treated often stem from ingroup- ethnicity or gender. Social institutions such as the
favoring biases rather than outgroup-rejecting ten- criminal justice system, the labor market, the hous-
dencies. This is because, as long ago noted by ing and retail markets, the education system, and
Allport, we value that with which we are familiar the health care system use policies and procedures
and protect that which we value, such that the love that systematically disadvantage or exclude mem-
of one’s ingroup often leads to discrimination with- bers of certain groups. In such instances, all indi-
out feelings of malevolence toward outgroups. viduals within an institution are required to uphold
and enforce discriminatory practices, such that
acts of discrimination cannot be attributed to any
Controlling and Explaining Away
individual or set of individuals. Instead, discrimi-
Acts That Could Result From Malevolence
nation results as a mere function of doing “busi-
Even when actors with malevolent intent behave ness as usual.”
in negative and harmful ways (and commit acts Considering the foregoing points, a full and
typically seen as discriminatory), these realities complete answer can be provided to the question
coexist with the fact that people value fairness, see that motivated this entry; namely, if most people
themselves as fair, and reject discrimination as fancy themselves to be fair and principled people
unfair. There are several things people attempt to who define discrimination as unfair, then how
do to negotiate the ambivalent thoughts aroused in might those same people sometimes behave in dis-
such situations. One may try to control behavior criminatory ways (as individuals or groups)? What
to avoid discrimination, but some behaviors are people think discrimination looks like and how
more subject to conscious control than others are. discrimination is actually manifested are different
We may readily be able to control what we say, things. We reject the unfair and negative treatment
214 Discrimination

of people because of the groups to which they accept negative cultural images of racial and ethnic
belong, but because discrimination often takes minorities. Although Whites who score low on
more subtle forms that are hard to see, discrimina- prejudice also harbor negative feelings about other
tion can still occur when it slips by undetected by racial and ethnic minority groups (e.g., as the
those who discriminate. result of shared socialization experiences), they
Subtle acts of discrimination are, however, also endorse egalitarian ideals and hold additional
keenly felt by the targets of discrimination. Subtle sincere positive feelings about minorities and have
acts of discrimination tend to have a contradictory sympathy for racial and ethnic minorities as vic-
duality whereby niceties of one sort (e.g., opening tims of past injustices.
doors) are misaligned with other behaviors of The racial attitudes of White people influence
import (e.g., who gets a raise). As a result, subtle their behavior, determining whether and in what
discrimination is insulting and marginalizing, caus- form one discriminates. Whites who score high on
ing people to question their abilities, exhibit poor prejudice are open about their antipathy and
cognitive performance, and report lower self- behave in consistently negative, rejecting, and bla-
esteem. To illustrate the range of adverse effects tantly discriminatory ways. By contrast, the ambiv-
that acts of subtle discrimination have on the tar- alent attitudes of Whites who score low on
gets of discrimination, this entry turns to concrete prejudice inspire more complex and subtle acts of
examples of discrimination toward groups that discrimination, such that Whites who score low on
have been the target of a great deal of social- prejudice discriminate when discrimination slips
psychological theory and research. by undetected. This occurs when the negative
treatment of another person can be justified in
terms of race-irrelevant factors; for instance, refus-
Examples of the Content and
ing to hire someone, not because he is Black, but
Consequences of Contemporary Discrimination
because there were just others who were excep-
As noted, many groups are discriminated against. tionally qualified. Subtle (vs. blatant) discrimina-
To illustrate the content and consequences of dis- tion is also manifest in body language that may be
crimination, this section describes research examin- difficult to detect by the actor (e.g., speech errors,
ing discrimination against Blacks, women, aging less eye contact), but that may be keenly felt and
people, and gay men because these groups have been distressing to the target.
most thoroughly studied by social psychologists. The subtle and harmful nature of more subtle
forms of racial discrimination was convincingly
documented in a classic set of studies conducted by
Discrimination Against Ethnic Minorities
Carl Word, Mark Zanna, and Joel Cooper. The
Contemporary theories of racism note that researchers asked White men to interview either a
Whites’ attitudes toward racial and ethnic minori- White or a Black job applicant with similar quali-
ties are often ambivalent (i.e., positive and nega- fications, who were trained to behave in similar
tive) and that contemporary forms of racial ways. Findings revealed that the similarly behaving
discrimination are often subtle. Each theory sug- and qualified job applicants were treated differ-
gests that Whites who score low on prejudice (also ently based on their race. When interviewing a
called modern, aversive, symbolic, or ambivalent Black (vs. White) applicant, White men made less
racists) can be distinguished from those who score eye contact, sat less attentively (e.g., at an angle
high on prejudice (old-fashioned, dominative, or facing away), made more speech errors, and termi-
redneck racists), given the presence or absence of nated the interviews sooner. Thus, racial discrimi-
positive feelings toward racial and ethnic minori- nation emerged on behaviors that are harder to
ties. Presumably Whites typically harbor negative control and are outside the awareness of White
feelings about other racial or ethnic minorities that actors.
result from shared socialization experiences and an To examine whether subtle acts of racial dis-
internalization of the negative cultural images of crimination have meaningful consequences for
those groups (e.g., Blacks are lazy, aggressive). those who are the targets of discrimination, Word
Whites who score high on prejudice endorse and and his colleagues asked White men to interview
Discrimination 215

for a position in a second study. Unbeknown to Although the subtle nature of such behaviors may
them, the White men were interviewed by men make it difficult for men to see that such acts are a
trained to behave similarly to the participants in form of gender discrimination, women can keenly
the first study. Findings indicated that the men experience acts of paternalistic discrimination as
performed differently depending on whether they insulting and unfair. When treated paternalistically
had been treated like the White interviewee or the rather than equitably, women feel angry and per-
Black interviewee in Study 1. When treated like the form less well on cognitive tasks. In fact, the pater-
Black (vs. White) interviewees, the men performed nalistic discrimination of men in traditional
more poorly (as evaluated by themselves and inde- achievement domains can actually cause women to
pendent observers). The important and adverse perform more poorly than men (e.g., on standard-
consequences of subtle acts of racial discrimina- ized math tests), where such differences do not
tion are clear given that jobs are often awarded on otherwise exist.
the basis of interview performance. Nontraditional women (e.g., businesswomen,
feminists) are also perceived ambivalently, but in
opposite terms from traditional women—as com-
Discrimination Against Women
petent but cold. In these situations, feelings of
Stereotypically, women and men are perceived respect based on perceptions of competence may
to be complementary opposites who come together mask the degree to which nontraditional women
to make a whole, given interdependencies in nor- are disliked. Respect, for instance, may lead one to
mative heterosexual relations (e.g., child rearing). assign many valued tasks to nontraditional woman,
Women are communal (e.g., nurturing, warm, car- while one’s dislike may make it difficult to attri-
ing) but not agentic. Men are agentic (e.g., influen- bute the successful completion of those tasks to the
tial, strong, independent) but not communal. inherent skills of a nontraditional woman (e.g.,
Given heterosexual interdependencies, men come attributing it instead to others’ help). To the degree
to feel a sense of responsibility for the welfare of that nontraditional women succeed, however, they
traditional women that motivates positive senti- may present a threat (e.g., to men’s position of
ment (e.g., stereotypically warm and communal power or cherished notions of masculinity) that
women are evaluated positively). Positive senti- exacerbates dislike. When feelings of dislike domi-
ment, however, reflects liking (but not respect) and nate, discrimination turns blatant. In such situa-
may mask gender biases that emerge in behaviors tions, nontraditional women and/or women who
that clearly reveal perceptions of women as being are successful in masculine domains are targeted
less competent than men. For example, feelings with backlash (or social and economic punish-
that women are warm and caring lead to genuine ments), sabotage, sexual and/or gender harass-
liking and interpersonal kindnesses (e.g., praise) ment, and other forms of aggression (e.g., ethnic
that can make it difficult for a given man to see harassment).
gender biases that emerge in his behaviors (e.g.,
denial of salary raises). These dynamics overlie
Discrimination Against Aging People
interactions between men and women in particular
contexts (e.g., bosses and employees) and motivate Aging men and women are stereotypically per-
seemingly positive but actually condescending acts ceived as warm but incompetent people who need
of discrimination. to be cared for and paternalistically protected.
Ambivalent attitudes toward traditional women Like traditional women, paternalistic discrimina-
lead to subtle but harmful acts of paternalistic dis- tion against aging people is motivated by benevo-
crimination in traditional achievement domains lence but represents a form of sugarcoated
(e.g., science, technology), where perceptions of discrimination. Such acts of discrimination are
women’s lesser competence imply their inability to contradictory in that they at once convey both lik-
succeed. In these contexts, women receive few val- ing and disrespect. Younger people adopt a “pro-
ued resources (e.g., promotions, raises) as a result tector” status and heap trivial niceties (e.g.,
of their perceived incompetence, but many acts of excessive offers of help, praise for displays of ordi-
interpersonal kindness (e.g., praise, flattery). nary adult competence) on pitied older men and
216 Discrimination

women, which functionally masks stereotypic figures. Because discrimination toward gay men
perceptions of incompetence that convey a lack and lesbians is not only tolerated but often sanc-
respect. From the perspective of the paternalistic tioned, it is perhaps not surprising that open acts
protectors, it is difficult to detect one’s disrespect of hostility and blatant discrimination against gay
for and infantilizing behavior toward older people men and lesbians are relatively common. In fact, as
given the fondness one feels as a result of one’s Gregory Herek and his colleagues have noted, as
cooperative interdependence with aging relatives. many as 20% of adult lesbians and 25% of adult
However, this behavior has adverse consequences gay men have reported experiences of victimiza-
for those who are the targets of discrimination. tion related to their sexual orientation. Furthermore,
Subtle discrimination against older people is Anthony D’Augelli and his colleagues have shown
often manifested in speech patterns. Elderspeak is that more than half of gay, lesbian, and bisexual
a pattern of speech accommodations that are used youth have experienced verbal abuse and 11%
in attempts to communicate more effectively to an have experienced physical abuse because of their
older listener given stereotypic perceptions of sexual orientation. In fact, 2002 Federal Bureau of
impaired cognitive functioning and memory. Investigation statistics indicate that 16% of
Elderspeak is characterized by loud, slowed speech, reported hate crimes are based on sexual orienta-
limited vocabulary, simplified grammar, shorter tion, which is likely an underestimate given that
sentences, exaggerated intonation, higher pitch, gay men and lesbians express reservations about
and repetition. It is important to note that elder- reporting crimes, given concerns about police bias
speak resembles the way adults talk to children (or and needs to disclose their sexual orientation.
baby talk) and when heard out of context is often As noted at the outset, however, most people
mistaken for speech directed toward children. view themselves as fair and principled people who
Although presumed to follow from a sincere posi- make decisions on the basis of other people’s skills,
tive regard and desire to accommodate the needs talents, and qualifications rather than on the basis
of another, the use of elderspeak typically does not of the social groups to which people belong. In
vary with or depend on the comprehension or cog- work situations, discriminatory behavior toward
nitive abilities of older listeners. gay men and lesbians is often relatively subtle and
Although presumed to derive from sincere and more similar to the kinds of discrimination experi-
benevolent attitudes, elderspeak has many adverse enced by racial minorities and women. This point
consequences. When addressed using elderspeak, was demonstrated in a field experiment conducted
older people feel angry, disrespected, and margin- by Michelle Hebl and her colleagues. In this exper-
alized. Elderspeak also causes aging listeners to iment, men and women, who were trained to
exhibit more dependence, question their cognitive behave similarly, were sent into stores to apply for
abilities, and report lower self-esteem. Thus, subtle jobs. In some of the interviews, the men and
discrimination against aging populations has women presented themselves as gay or lesbian, and
adverse consequences that parallel the effects of in other interviews they presented themselves as
subtle discrimination against racial outgroups and straight/heterosexual.
women. The investigators found no evidence of formal
discrimination (e.g., refusing to provide an appli-
cation) against those who portrayed themselves as
Discrimination Against
gay or lesbian, but there was clear evidence of dis-
Gay Men and Lesbians
crimination in interpersonal behaviors. Compared
Unlike women, ethnic minorities, or aging peo- with the way employers interacted with straight
ple, gay men, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgender (or heterosexual) men and women, employers
people are not protected from discrimination by were less verbally positive, spent less time inter-
national laws banning discrimination in the work- viewing, used fewer words while chatting, and
place or in housing or education. In fact, cam- made less eye contact. In other words, although
paigns advocating efforts to bar gay men and the employers could not be accused of treating gay
lesbians from equal rights are openly broadcast men and lesbian women applicants unjustly in a
and sometimes publicly sanctioned by authority formal sense (e.g., refusing to hire), employers
Distributive Justice 217

exhibited uncomfortable or more distant behav- Further Readings


iors toward people they believed to be gay or les- Allport, G. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Oxford, UK:
bian. In addition, it is reasonable to assume that Addison-Wesley.
these subtle acts of discrimination (like subtle rac- Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (2004). Aversive racism.
ism and sexism) could have harmful consequences In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental
for gay men and lesbian women. social psychology (Vol. 36, pp. 1–52). San Diego, CA:
Elsevier Academic Press.
Dovidio, J. F., Glick, P. S., & Rudman, L. A. (2005). On
Conclusion the nature of prejudice: Fifty years after Allport.
The considerations and examples in this entry illu- Malden, MA: John Wiley-Blackwell.
minate several important points. First, discrimina- Fiske, S. T. (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice, and
tion refers to observable differences in behavior discrimination. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G.
Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology
because of the social groups to which people
(Vol. 2, pp. 357–413). New York: McGraw-Hill.
belong. Acts of discrimination are likely to occur
Henry, P. J., & Pratto, F. (in press). Power and racism.
in two situations. People who endorse negative
In A. Guinote & T. K. Vescio (Eds.), The social
stereotypes and possess unbridled negative feelings
psychology of power. New York: Guilford Press.
toward other groups behave in consistently nega-
Jost, J. T., & Major, B. (2001). Emerging perspectives on
tive and blatantly discriminatory ways toward the psychology of legitimacy. In J. T. Jost, & B. Major
disliked groups. This type of discrimination paral- (Eds.), The psychology of legitimacy (pp. 3–32).
lels the blatantly negative and harmful acts of open Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
hostility and exclusion associated with bigots, rac- Vescio, T. K., Gervais, S. J., Hepheitz, L., & Bloodhart,
ists, xenophobes, and White supremacists. By con- B. A. (2009). The stereotypic behaviors of the
trast, people who reject discrimination, value the powerful and their effect on the relatively powerless.
principle of fairness, and feel guilt when their In T. Nelson (Ed.), The handbook of prejudice
thoughts and behaviors violate ideals of fairness, (pp. 247–266). New York: Psychology Press.
discriminate when acts of discrimination slip
by undetected. These people, like many well-
intentioned people among us, display subtle acts of
discrimination that are either positively valenced,
co-occur with benevolent intent, and/or are per-
Distributive Justice
ceived as lacking harmful consequences. Regardless
of the form of discrimination (subtle or blatant Distributive justice, or distributive fairness, refers
from the perspective of the actor), targets of dis- to the extent to which an outcome or a distribution
crimination often experience insult, feel marginal- of outcomes conforms to norms of propriety or
ized, or exhibit a host of adverse behaviors. This fairness. The recognition that people might want
entry has focused on the content and consequences not simply to maximize their own payoffs and
of discrimination with an eye toward social justice rewards but also to see goods distributed in a fair
and recognition that an initial step in attempts to fashion has a long history. As a concept in philoso-
create equal playing fields for all requires an ability phy, notions of fair distribution go back at least to
to detect, understand, and reject subtle and blatant Aristotle’s Ethics, in which distributive justice is
forms of discrimination. said to exist when each person’s outcomes are pro-
portional to his or her merits (or, as we now more
Theresa K. Vescio and Brittany Bloodhart often phrase it, outcomes are proportional to each
person’s contributions to the production of the
See also Affirmative Action; Ageism; Anti-Semitism; outcomes). That is, for a favorable outcome from
Ethnocentrism; Hate Crimes; Homophobia; a joint project, the rewards should be divided
Institutionalized Bias; Intergroup Violence; among those who contributed to the project in
Islamophobia; Modern Forms of Prejudice; Prejudice; proportion to their contributions, their skill, and
Racism; Sexism; Sexual Harassment; Stereotyping; their effort. When a joint undertaking has a nega-
Tokenism; Xenophobia tive outcome, the costs should similarly be borne in
218 Distributive Justice

proportion to each person’s contribution to the of how people will react to unfair distributions.
failure of the enterprise. In either case, distributive Because the equity theory describes changes in
justice exists when proportionality exists. However, behaviors and beliefs that are used to restore a feel-
when outcomes are not proportional to contribu- ing of distributive fairness, it serves to relate feel-
tions, when one party to a distribution receives or ings of unfairness to a variety of possible responses.
gives either too much or too little, then distributive This multiplicity of possible ways of restoring a
injustice exists. sense of equity is both a strength and a weakness
In social psychology, one of the earliest explora- for the theory. It is a strength because it allows the
tions of distributive justice as a topic in its own theory to explain both cognitive and behavioral
right is seen in J. Stacey Adams’s equity theory and reactions to outcome distributions and a weakness
in research associated with that theory. Adams because it is often difficult to predict which par-
suggested that people experience inequity distress ticular equity-restoring actions a given person
when they receive or are associated with distribu- might take.
tions of outcomes that violate norms of fairness, Research on how people award outcomes to
and in particular, outcomes that violate the others has shown that there are other rules of dis-
Aristotelian rule that outcomes should be propor- tributive justice. In many situations, especially
tional to contributions. According to the theory, those that emphasize performance, outcomes are
inequity distress motivates the individual in ques- allocated in proportion to contributions, as Adams
tion either to change the reality of the situation or suggested. However, sometimes outcomes are
to alter his or her perception of the situation in divided according to the need of those receiving
such a way as to restore equity. the outcomes, especially in situations that empha-
Consider, for example, a worker who is being size supportiveness and caretaking. And in situa-
paid more than others who are working equally tions where solidarity and a sense of community
hard and who bring similar skills to the job at are a major consideration, or where it is difficult to
hand. According to Adams, the worker in ques- calibrate contributions or need, outcomes are
tion, if he or she knows about the mismatch of awarded equally. Indeed, psychologist Morton
skills and payment, should experience inequity Deutsch has suggested that the association of each
distress and should be motivated to restore equity. of these rules with the social situations just noted
The worker might, for example, increase his or her runs both ways, so, for example, not only are
effort so that the now-higher contributions will be need-based distributions chosen most often in situ-
proportional to the relatively higher payment he or ations that emphasize caretaking, but using need-
she is receiving. This is an action that changes the based distributions produces greater emphasis on
objective ratio of contributions and outcome, but caretaking and support.
there are also psychological solutions to the under- As psychologists have continued to examine
payment inequity. The worker in question can distributive justice–related phenomena, it has
come to perceive the discrepancy in payment as become clear that justice judgments and related
fair, and thereby reduce equity distress, by altering attitudes and behaviors play an important role in
his or her perceptions of the contributions and how people interact with other individuals and
outcomes of those involved. Thus, the worker with organizations and social institutions. Theory
might decide that he or she in fact has special skills and research on distributive justice have helped
that justify the higher payment. Alternatively, the explain situations as different as how people
worker might decide that there are other positive behave in experimental games to increases in
outcomes that the other workers are experiencing employee theft that are observed when wages or
as a result of being in this job (e.g., the worker other benefits are decreased. Work by Melvin
might think, “This job is an especially good match Lerner and others showed that people hold deep-
for them because the working hours fit their life- seated ideas about fairness—a “belief in a just
styles, so they have benefits that I do not.”). world”—that can lead them sometimes to see
Equity theory is psychological, not philosophi- innocent victims, those experiencing negative out-
cal, because it moves from normative views of comes through no fault of their own, as somehow
what is fair in some objective sense to descriptions deserving their fate. Such victim derogation effects
Diversity 219

are in line with the basic psychological processes distributive and procedural unfairness are stronger
outlined in equity theory because the impression of when people are uncertain and that fairness effects
the deservingness of the victim is altered to make are strengthened by even peripheral or subtle
the situation equitable given the negative outcomes alarm-producing stimuli (such as flashing warning
the victim has received. lights). There is even evidence that the same areas
As the study of the psychology of fairness has of the brain are activated by fairness judgment
progressed, it has become evident that there are processing as are activated by personal uncertainty
not only multiple distributive justice rules but or alarm processing. The reason that people show
there are also forms of justice that involve, not the inequity distress and related justice phenomena
outcomes being distributed, but rather the proce- appears to be that a sense of fairness helps them
dures used to decide the distributions in question. manage uncertainty in their lives, while feelings of
In the early 1970s, several studies showed that unfairness may exacerbate personal uncertainty.
judgments of procedural justice, the belief that
social processes and procedures are fair, can affect E. Allan Lind
a variety of attitudes and behaviors in everyday See also Justice; Just World Hypothesis; Procedural
social interactions, in organizational behavior, and Justice; Relational Model of Authority in Groups
in reactions to legal and societal institutions. We
now know that procedural justice effects are often
as strong as or stronger than distributive justice Further Readings
effects. Indeed, there is evidence that under condi-
Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In
tions in which procedural justice is seen as high,
L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
differences in distributive justice have little effect.
psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267–299). New York:
Studies of the comparative impact of procedural
Academic Press.
versus distributive fairness have decreased, how-
Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world:
ever, as new theories have emphasized similarities, A fundamental delusion. New York: Plenum.
rather than differences, in the way people react to van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. A. (2002). Uncertainty
fairness or unfairness in outcomes and in process. management by means of fairness judgments. In
Testing predictions from fairness heuristic theory, M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
an account of fairness effects that sees all fairness- psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 1–60). San Diego, CA:
relevant experiences—distributive or procedural— Academic Press.
as information used to assess the likelihood of van den Bos, K., Lind, E. A., & Wilke, H. A. M. (2001).
exploitation or exclusion, Kees van den Bos and The psychology of procedural and distributive justice
his colleagues have shown what is termed the sub- viewed from the perspective of fairness heuristic
stitutability effect. The substitutability effect arises theory. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the
when whatever type of fairness is encountered first workplace: Vol. 2. From theory to practice
is generalized in the interpretation of subsequent (pp. 49–66). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
fairness information. Thus, if procedural justice
information is encountered first, subsequent dis-
tributive fairness information is interpreted to be
in line with that early process information. On the Diversity
other hand, if distributive fairness information is
encountered first, then subsequent process infor- Diversity may be conceptualized as variance in
mation is colored by the positive or negative out- human characteristics that leads people to per-
come of fairness impressions. ceive differences relative to the self. Cultural
But why does fairness, distributive or proce- diversity refers to variation in social groups within
dural, matter so much to people? The answer human societies in a given context at a given time.
seems to lie in the capacity of justice judgments to For example, variation in the number of different
help people deal with the various personal uncer- nationalities, racial and ethnic groups, or religious
tainties that life brings their way. Van den Bos and affiliations that are reflected in a specific popula-
his colleagues have shown that the effects of both tion (e.g., residents of the southern United States)
220 Diversity

may wax or wane over time as a result of migra- The operationalization of diversity (i.e., imple-
tion patterns. Changes in cultural diversity over menting manipulations and measures of diversity
time influence the frequency and nature of inter- in research studies) has primarily followed two dif-
group contact, with important implications for ferent approaches. In one approach, researchers
psychological phenomena. Hence, the study of have examined how diversity is dispersed across
diversity—particularly social group diversity—has groups (e.g., the presence or absence of different
emerged across a number of research traditions racial or ethnic group members within the larger
within psychology, including cultural psychology, group, the degree of difference in educational back-
social psychology, industrial/organizational psy- ground between group members). In the other
chology, educational psychology, and clinical/ approach, researchers, particularly those working
counseling psychology. With regard to groups and from a relational demography perspective, have
group relations, theories and research traditions operationalized diversity in terms of numerical pro-
examining a range of different types of diversity portions of different groups (e.g., numerical minority/
(e.g., social identities, attitudes, values, and expe- majority status). Proportional approaches are more
rience) have focused primarily on the role diver- appropriate for capturing some psychological
sity plays in shaping group performance and effects. For example, measuring the proportion of
group dynamics. In addition, group researchers individuals who belong to a minority group within
have examined policies (e.g., affirmative action) a larger group is more sensitive to the relative dif-
and procedures (e.g., diversity training) that ferences between being a lone individual in a group
impact organizational goals of maintaining and (e.g., the only Black woman in a group of White
promoting diversity. women) and being a member of a small minority
(e.g., one of three Black women in a group that also
includes six White women). Being the “only one”
Diversities Within Diversity
is psychologically different from being a member of
Because the concept of diversity refers to a broad a small minority; operationalizing diversity in
array of human attributes, theorists have found it terms of the mere presence or absence of racial
useful to distinguish different types of diversity. group variance could lead researchers to miss
For example, one common practice is to differenti- important psychological phenomena.
ate social category diversity from informational/ More recently, Dora Lau and J. Keith Murnighan
functional diversity. Social category diversity is have used the term faultlines to describe a situation
defined by differences in easily identifiable social within a group where subgroups differ on many
group attributes such as age, gender, race, and correlated dimensions that maximize perceptions
ethnicity. In contrast, informational/functional of differences between those subgroups. These
diversity is defined by variance in less-visible attri- ideas are drawn, in part, from research on self-
butes such as attitudes, knowledge, education, and categorization that has demonstrated that people
functional background or role within a group. In a are more likely to subcategorize others when
similar vein, Douglas Harrison distinguished dimensions of difference appear to covary. For
surface-level diversity, which again refers to variance example, if a group is composed of White men and
in attributes that can be easily detected, from deep- Hispanic women, perceptions of difference between
level diversity, which refers to variance in less- these two subgroups would be stronger than if
visible attributes. In contrast to these approaches, gender and race or ethnicity were unassociated
Joseph McGrath proposed a more complex classi- (e.g., if some of the men were Hispanic and some
fication scheme comprising five different types of of the women were White). As faultlines become
diversity: demographic attributes; task-related more salient, people attend more closely to sub-
knowledge and skills; values, beliefs, and attitudes; groups, with the consequence that subgroup diver-
personality, cognitive, and behavioral styles; and sity can impact group processes quite profoundly.
status within the group. McGrath proposed mea- These theorists would argue, therefore, that we
suring these types of diversity as multiple dimen- need to measure diversity in ways that capture the
sions and creating profiles to reflect the complexity strength of faultlines by considering the degree of
of diversity within groups. correlation between group memberships.
Diversity 221

Diversity Theories: by the racially and ethnically diverse groups were


Group Performance Versus Dynamics more effective and practical than those produced
by homogeneous groups.
The overarching question for much research on
With regard to deep-level diversity, a large lit-
diversity in groups is whether diversity is beneficial
erature has examined whether diversity of knowl-
or harmful. Recent reviews of relevant literature
edge benefits group performance. This research has
highlight two theoretical traditions that conflict
compared, for example, whether distributed knowl-
when it comes to evaluating diversity’s conse-
edge (i.e., different members of the group have
quences for groups. On one hand, research on
different pieces of knowledge) is better than shared
diversity and group performance (e.g., task perfor-
knowledge (i.e., all members of the group have the
mance, problem solving, creativity) suggests that
same knowledge) for task performance. Research
diversity is beneficial to groups. On the other
by Verlin Hinz and Scott Tindale, for example, has
hand, research on diversity and group dynamics
demonstrated that low levels of knowledge diver-
(e.g., group cohesion, satisfaction, commitment)
sity (shared information) are associated with less
points to potentially harmful consequences associ-
elaboration of information during group discus-
ated with increased diversity.
sion. In contrast, when knowledge diversity is high
(unshared information—members of the group
Group Performance
each have unique information to contribute) elabo-
Early theorists such as L. Richard Hoffman and ration of task-related information increases, lead-
Harry Triandis argued that increased diversity was ing to improved performance. Research further
beneficial to group performance because diversity suggests that these effects are qualified by whether
improves decision making. Individuals who come the task requires more complex thinking, by
from different cultural, educational, and functional whether the group members are motivated to
backgrounds are likely to also differ in the knowl- elaborate on information, and by members’ task-
edge and skills they bring to decision-making relevant abilities.
tasks. As the variability of knowledge and skills
increases within a group, so should the perfor-
Group Dynamics
mance of the group, particularly when tasks are
complex or demand multiple perspectives. These Researchers who focus on group dynamics have
value-in-diversity theories further argue that inter- drawn significantly from social identity theory and
acting with diverse peers creates opportunities for argued instead that diversity is detrimental for
people to expand not just what they know but also groups because it promotes conflict among sub-
how they think. Hence, diversity is hypothesized to groups within the larger group. This conflict weak-
promote greater creativity in problem solving ens overall group bonding and cohesion.
because people are forced to break out of mental More specifically, the mere presence of social
ruts that undermine creative problem solving. category diversity (e.g. diverse ethnic groups)
Hypotheses regarding the value of diversity for within a group prompts categorization and differ-
group performance have been tested and sup- entiation, in turn fostering ingroup favoritism and
ported empirically for several types of diversity, ethnocentrism—the tendency to have more posi-
including both surface-level (e.g., racial) and deep- tive attitudes and responses toward people who
level (e.g., knowledge) diversity, although less vis- belong to one’s own social groups. Thus, greater
ible attributes related to knowledge distribution diversity can promote greater conflict within
within task groups have received the primary groups, resulting in less satisfaction, less cohesion
emphasis. With regard to the effects of racial and (i.e., liking for members of the group), and lower
ethnic diversity, for example, Poppy McLeod and commitment to the group. Researchers further
colleagues asked participants in racially and ethni- suggest that these effects could be accentuated by
cally homogeneous versus diverse groups to spend intergroup anxiety and mistrust; dissimilar mem-
15 minutes generating as many ideas as possible to bers may be less likely to trust one another and less
increase tourism to the United States. Results willing to communicate and cooperate with one
pointed to the benefits of diversity. Ideas generated another.
222 Diversity

Empirical tests of hypotheses about diversity Understanding whether and when diversity will be
and group dynamics have again examined a range beneficial requires an understanding of how group
of forms of diversity, but the primary emphasis has categorization processes qualify information shar-
been on surface-level diversities related to race, ing and elaboration within groups. These research-
gender, and tenure within an organization or ers have argued that the positive effects of diversity
group. Results of these studies are mixed. Research on group performance result from increased elabo-
on tenure diversity, for example, shows a negative ration of task-relevant information. However,
impact of diversity on turnover within organiza- when social categorization processes threaten val-
tions: The more diverse the group is with regard to ued social identities, favoritism and bias are likely
tenure, the less socially integrated the group is to occur and potentially disrupt elaboration.
likely to be and the more likely it is that group Hanneke Grotenberg and colleagues recently tested
members will leave the group or organization. such an argument by manipulating levels of ethnic
Research findings on racial and ethnic diversity diversity and knowledge diversity within task
largely parallel these effects. The more racially or groups. When knowledge diversity was high,
ethnically diverse a group becomes, the less likely instructions that emphasized taking advantage of
it is that members will communicate with one multiple viewpoints improved the performance of
another informally, the more likely it is that con- ethnically diverse groups. These effects were medi-
flict will arise, and the more likely it is that mem- ated by information elaboration; the more that
bers will leave the group. However, gender diversity group members elaborated on information, the
appears to have a positive, rather than a negative, better the group performed.
impact on group dynamics. In summary, research on group diversity points
to both benefits and costs of increasing diversity.
Recent theories argue that a more complex and
Integrating Approaches
nuanced understanding of diversity is required to
In response to the apparent contradictions in reconcile these apparently contradictory results.
research findings—that diversity benefits perfor- Future research is likely to focus more carefully on
mance but undermines group dynamics—several moderating and mediating factors that qualify
theorists have argued that it is time to reexamine when diversity is beneficial versus harmful, as well
how scientists think about and study diversity. as why these effects occur.
Across reviews, common themes emerge. First, a
lack of consistency in how scientists define and
Diversity Policies
operationalize diversity is problematic for inter-
preting results across studies. Second, scientists Organizational policies on diversity are designed to
have been focusing primarily on testing the main promote equal opportunity and representation of
effects of a given form of diversity on a single type diverse groups within institutions and to create cli-
of outcome. As a result, there is a lack of apprecia- mates that support the inclusion and acceptance of
tion of the complexity of diversity’s effects. There individuals from diverse backgrounds. The need for
are few examinations of possible moderating and these policies becomes clear on examination of data
mediating factors. Thus, many of the assumptions that demonstrate the continuing problems of rac-
about the mechanisms underlying diversity’s effects ism and sexism within the United States. Despite
remain untested. These reviews call on theorists decades of improvement since the civil rights era of
and researchers to move beyond main-effects the 1970s (and the 2008 election of a Black presi-
approaches, to propose more complex models and dent), members of racial and ethnic minorities con-
to directly assess mediating mechanisms. tinue to face economic, political, and interpersonal
In response to these concerns, Daan van prejudice and discrimination in their daily lives, in
Knippenberg and colleagues have recently pro- both educational and employment settings.
posed the categorization elaboration model, an For women, discrimination in education has
integrative model of diversity and group phenom- diminished significantly, but women remain under-
ena. According to this theory, diversity can have represented in core areas of the sciences, including
both positive and negative effects for groups. some of the most profitable careers in engineering
Diversity 223

and computer sciences. In the workplace, women who do business with the federal government.
can still face hiring and salary discrimination and Agencies must evaluate whether they are guilty of
sometimes hostile climates that promote harass- discrimination by assessing their employment prac-
ment or devalue their contributions. These effects tices (e.g., representation of diverse groups as a
can especially impact working mothers, who face function of the availability of qualified applicants)
a maternal wall when it comes to promotion and and must remedy such discrimination when it
career advancement. occurs. For example, an engineering firm that does
Advocates of affirmative action policies also business with the federal government may have
point out that affirmative action is unique in that too few female employees relative to the propor-
it addresses discrimination without requiring dis- tion of qualified women with degrees in engineer-
crimination victims to voice their complaints. That ing. In this situation, EO 11264 would require the
is, unlike policies and laws that require individual organization to make an effort to increase the
victims to take personal responsibility for chal- number of women hired in engineering positions.
lenging discrimination (e.g., filing a complaint In educational settings, race-sensitive admission
with a human resource office, filing a lawsuit), practices are a common form of affirmative action,
affirmative action policies require institutions to and these policies have been upheld in recent court
police themselves. A strong research tradition sug- rulings. For example, universities may take race
gests that people who claim they have been the into account when evaluating applicants if doing
victims of discrimination may face (often extreme) so fits with the university’s mission to promote a
backlash, which inhibits their willingness to voice diverse student body and if the implementation of
concerns even in severe circumstances (e.g., sexual these policies is sufficiently individualized. Federal
harassment). Hence, policies that do not require court rulings argue that these policies are justified
individual victims of discrimination to assume by a state’s compelling interest in ensuring diver-
responsibility for challenging discrimination play sity within state-sponsored schools.
an important role in reducing discrimination in
organizational settings.
Effectiveness
Scientists have examined a number of outcomes
Defining Policies
when assessing whether affirmative action policies
Affirmative action policies are the most recog- achieve their intended effects. With regard to
nized and perhaps the most misunderstood policies increasing the representation of minority groups in
aimed at promoting educational and employment education and employment, the research largely
opportunities for members of minority groups. indicates that such policies increase the representa-
Affirmative action involves practices that protect tion of women and racially/ethnically marginalized
individuals from discrimination based on status in groups in both academic and employment settings.
legally protected social groups, including gender, In addition such policies appear to promote inter-
race or ethnicity, age, and disability. In contrast to group contact that results in more positive atti-
equal opportunity policies, which passively sup- tudes toward these groups, although the benefits
port diversity and punish violations of equal treat- of contact are qualified by many other factors. In
ment, affirmative action policies are proactive in educational settings, further evidence suggests
implementing practices that redress inequality. there are indirect benefits for members of nonstig-
Examples of affirmative action include practices to matized groups (e.g., Whites, men). Students in
promote diverse applicant pools (e.g., advertising more racially/ethnically diverse contexts engage
employment opportunities in a diverse range of in more complex critical thinking than their peers
newspapers) and federal procurements for minority- in more homogeneous settings. Critics of the poli-
owned and woman-owned businesses. cies point out, however, that the beneficiaries of
With regard to employment settings, Executive these policies may experience self-doubt and low-
Order 11246, issued by president Dwight ered esteem. Such effects have been demonstrated
Eisenhower in 1965, mandates affirmative action empirically, but appear to be limited to laboratory
policies for federal organizations and employers settings; these negative effects do not appear to
224 Diversity

generalize to real-world educational and employ- discrimination in society. The goal of these types
ment settings. of programs is to raise awareness about the differ-
ent types of bias and to help students develop skills
Attitudes Toward Affirmative Action that will allow them to understand and counteract
their own biases. Although only a limited number
Attitudes toward affirmative action vary tremen- of studies have tested these issues empirically, ini-
dously and depend largely on the nature of the poli- tial evidence points to the efficacy of such
cies and perceiver characteristics. People generally approaches. For example, students’ attitudes
favor policies and practices that appear to be “soft” toward stigmatized groups are more positive fol-
(e.g., outreach programs) over those that are por- lowing participation in psychology courses that
trayed as “hard” (e.g., choosing ethnic minorities in focus on issues related to stereotyping and preju-
the case of equally strong candidates). When affir- dice, particularly when such courses foster intro-
mative action programs are described as valuing spective awareness.
merit, they are perceived to be more fair and there- Cooperative learning programs focus on indi-
fore are received more positively. In addition, people rect attitude change through intergroup contact
feel most negatively toward affirmative action in and collaboration rather than explicitly teaching
educational settings rather than employment set- students about cultural diversity, prejudice, and
tings, although more people benefit from the latter. discrimination. Elliot Aronson and colleagues’
When it comes to perceiver characteristics, atti- jigsaw classroom technique is a now-classic and
tudes toward affirmative action appear to be influ- widely used approach to fostering cooperative
enced, not surprisingly, by demographic attributes learning. In a jigsaw classroom, teachers divide
(e.g., gender, race), individual levels of prejudice, students into small ethnically and academically
and political ideologies. Women and Blacks, for diverse groups, distributing materials to be learned
example, tend to support affirmative action poli- across students. Students are then responsible for
cies more than do men and Whites. Both overt and teaching one another the materials. This method
subtle forms of prejudice are associated with less of teaching has produced inspiring results. Students
support for affirmative action policies. In addition, in jigsaw classrooms grow to like and respect each
political conservatism reliably predicts support for other more, are less prejudiced, and have higher
these programs; people who are most conservative self-esteem compared to students in traditional
report the least support. classrooms.

Diversity Education and Training Employment Settings


Diversity education and training programs are In employment settings, employers typically
designed to foster educational and employment adopt educational strategies that parallel the
settings that positively support diversity while dis- goals of educational approaches in academic set-
couraging intolerance and discrimination. Such tings. Empirical examinations of the efficacy of
programs vary tremendously. Some programs such programs in employment settings are lim-
focus almost exclusively on providing employees ited. However, research points indirectly to the
with an understanding of antidiscrimination laws efficacy of diversity training programs. For exam-
whereas others seek to foster positive intergroup ple, members of racial/ethnic minority groups
attitudes through experiential exercises designed to report perceiving their work settings to be more
promote empathy with targets of discrimination. positive and tolerant in institutions where such
programs are implemented. Moreover, programs
to promote a positive work climate appear to
Academic Settings
ameliorate some of the negative effects of racial
In academic settings, two perspectives have diversity on group dynamics described above.
emerged: antibias education and cooperative learn- Not surprisingly, if employees feel coerced or oth-
ing. Antibias education explicitly focuses on teach- erwise threatened by the information presented in
ing students about the existence of prejudice and these programs, it is unlikely such programs will
Dogmatism 225

be successful at reducing intergroup bias and pro- Lau, D. C., & Murnighan, J. K. (1998). Demographic
moting tolerance in the workplace. diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics
of organizational groups. Academy of Management
Review, 23, 325–340.
Conclusion Levine, J. M., & Moreland, R. L. (1998). Small groups.
Around the world, demographers agree that cul- In D. Gilbert, S. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.),
tural diversity within groups and societies is likely Handbook of Social Psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2,
to continue to increase over time as technological pp. 415–469). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
McGrath, J., Berdahl, J., & Arrow, H. (1995). Traits,
advances make it easier for people to travel and
expectations, culture and clout. In S. Jackson &
migrate between regions, and as virtual technolo-
M. Ruderman (Eds.), Diversity in workteams
gies (e.g., Internet telecommunication) increase
(pp. 47–68). Washington, DC: APA Books.
contact among people of different nations and eth-
McLeod, P. L., Lobel, S. A., & Cox, T. H., Jr. (1996).
nic groups. Researchers studying diversity in group Ethnic diversity and creativity in small groups. Small
settings have been challenged by the difficulty of Group Research, 27, 248–264.
defining diversity. Although research to date sug- Paluk, E. L., & Green, D. P. (2009). Prejudice reduction:
gesting there are both costs and benefits of diver- What works? A review and assessment of research and
sity within groups may seem contradictory and practice. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 339–367.
confusing, one thing is clear: diversity in groups Triandis, H., Hall, E., & Ewan, R. (1965). Member
matters. Hence, future increases in cultural diver- heterogeneity and dyadic creativity. Human Relations,
sity and intergroup contact will necessitate a con- 18, 33–55.
tinued effort to understand the role diversity plays van Knippenberg, D., & Schippers, M. C. (2007). Work
in group phenomena, including the factors that group diversity. Annual Review of Psychology, 58,
moderate and mediate its effects on human cogni- 515–541.
tion, affect, and behavior.
Stephanie A. Goodwin
and Zayra N. Longoria Dogmatism
See also Affirmative Action; Civil Rights Legislation;
Dogmatism is a personality characteristic that
Cooperative Learning; Discrimination; Faultlines;
Group Composition; Group Performance; Intergroup
describes an intolerant and inflexible conviction in
Contact Theory; Jigsaw Classroom Technique; one’s own beliefs. People who are high in dogma-
Prejudice; Self-Categorization Theory tism will have a narrow political orientation and
conform easily to authority. They will tend to be
intolerant toward those who are different from
Further Readings themselves and reject points of view that challenge
their own beliefs. Dogmatism is associated with a
Crosby, F. J., Iyer, A., & Sincharoen, S. (2006). closed-minded way of thinking, and it is related to
Understanding affirmative action. Annual Review of
general extremist tendencies rather than any one
Psychology, 57, 585–611.
specific belief system. This entry describes at the
Harrison, D. A., & Klein, K. J. (2007). What’s the
background of the concept, as well as related con-
difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety,
structs and their implications.
or disparity in organizations. Academy of
Management Review, 32, 1199–1228.
Hinz, V. B., Tindale, R. S., & Vollrath, D. A. (1997). History and Background
The emerging conceptualization of groups as
information processors. Psychological Bulletin, 121, The psychological concept of dogmatism was
43–64. introduced by Milton Rokeach in 1960 as a cri-
Hoffman, L. R., Maier, N. R. F. (1961). Quality and tique of Theodor Adorno and colleagues’ authori-
acceptance of problem solutions by members of tarian personality theory. According to Rokeach,
homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. Journal of authoritarianism, which is measured by the F-scale
Abnormal Social Psychology, 62, 401–407. inventory, reflects a right wing orientation and so
226 Dogmatism

cannot account for ideological closed-mindedness Related Constructs


on the left of the political spectrum. Rokeach
It is important to note that there has been dispute
believed that a general tendency toward closed-
over the purported independence of authoritarian-
mindedness was unrelated to specific political
ism and dogmatism and whether Rokeach’s scale
attitudes; rather it was better conceived as a
could appropriately distinguish the two constructs.
content-free tendency to rigidly follow the beliefs
In response to this, Bob Altemeyer introduced a
one holds.
new measure of dogmatism that focused, not on
Rokeach consequently developed a scale in
the way in which dogmatic individuals think, but
an attempt to distinguish content-oriented from
on the definiteness of the beliefs they hold. He
content-free closed-mindedness. The scale contained
argued that dogmatism is the unjustified convic-
two subscales. The first subscale, dogmatism,
tion in the value of one’s beliefs, which is unassail-
assessed those aspects of closed-mindedness that
able by evidence to the contrary. He devised a
are content-neutral. The second subscale, opinion-
new, 20-item scale to measure dogmatism with the
ation, focused on more content-specific tendencies,
use of items such as “The things I believe in are so
encompassing the earlier concept of authoritarian-
completely true, I could never doubt them.” This
ism. With this scale, Rokeach wanted to show that
new scale proved more reliable and valid than ear-
the underlying style of thinking was the same for
lier attempts. For example, it correlated with the
those on both the right (e.g., fascists) and the left
right wing authoritarianism scale, also developed
(e.g., communists) of the political spectrum.
by Altemeyer, which distinguishes between differ-
Rokeach compared extreme right wing groups
ent kinds of authoritarian personalities, namely,
with left wing groups. The results were partially
those who are followers and leaders. Moreover, in
supportive of his argument that dogmatism was a
a follow-up study, Republicans scored higher than
more general construct than authoritarianism. In
Democrats. These results were taken as evidence
one of his studies that compared Adorno and col-
that even though it is defined as a content-free
leagues’ authoritarianism scale with his own dog-
construct, dogmatism is more useful in explaining
matism scale, communists had lower F-scale scores
the mind-set of right wing than left wing ideology.
than all other groups, including conservatives, lib-
Many psychological tendencies have been linked
erals, and Labor Party members. This, he argued,
to dogmatism during the past 20  years. Some of
showed that the F-scale was actually measuring the
these include need for cognitive closure, need for
authoritarianism of the right. On the other hand,
cognition, intolerance of ambiguity, integrative
for the dogmatism scale, communists scored the
complexity, openness to experience, and uncer-
same as conservatives and in fact had the highest
tainty tolerance. Although these variables clearly
score of all the groups tested. Rokeach interpreted
have close links with the central tenet of dogma-
these results as evidence that dogmatism is a more
tism, the precise nature of these relationships has
general measure of (the content-specific) tenden-
yet to be fully explored. Further research is needed
cies tapped by the F-scale.
to answer the question as to whether left wing and
right wing ideologies are distinctive in their con-
Origins of Dogmatism tent while sharing a common set of characteristics
that can be called dogmatism.
Rokeach proposed that dogmatic thought arises
out of a particular set of early childhood experi-
ences, similar to Adorno and colleagues’ explana-
Conclusion
tion for authoritarian tendencies. Specifically, he Recent work has extended our understanding of
suggested that repressed anxiety associated with the cognitive processes involved in dogmatic
an exaggerated glorification of one’s parents would thinking. We know that dogmatic individuals
be linked to the development of dogmatic tenden- adopt and hold more extreme attitudes and find it
cies. By rejecting, out of hand, beliefs that contra- difficult to revise their existing beliefs. We know
dict their own, individuals high in dogmatism that they react to inconsistent information by
could achieve the security and certainty they were ignoring or selectively forgetting it. We also know
unable to attain in childhood. that they are more likely to show an inability to
Dominance Hierarchies 227

ignore previously expressed beliefs when asked to status hierarchies of apes and monkeys. Human
adopt a contrary position. Finally, dogmatic indi- hierarchies do have unique characteristics, most
viduals have a tendency to compartmentalize obviously their dependence on language and com-
information in memory, which likely contributes plex cultural knowledge, but these are evolved
to their tendency to persist in their beliefs in spite variations on a basic primate theme.
of information to the contrary. Some social scientists make the dubious claim
that all human status structures reflect an evolved
Richard J. Crisp and Müjde Peker (primitive) tendency toward hierarchy. To avoid
this fallacy, one can distinguish three kinds of hier-
See also Authoritarian Personality; Ideology; Need for
Closure; Right Wing Authoritarianism archies: (1) face-to-face hierarchies; (2) formal
organization hierarchies, such as those drawn on
corporate organization charts; and (3) macrolevel
Further Readings socioeconomic systems (or social classes) of large
societies. The last two kinds did not exist prior to
Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., &
the development of agrarian societies 10,000 years
Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality.
ago, and they do not occur among nonhuman pri-
New York: Harper & Row.
mates. While such “modern” structures are perme-
Altemeyer, B. (1996). The authoritarian specter.
ated by face-to-face hierarchies, they are not
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
themselves face-to-face hierarchies, and they are
Davies, M. F. (1998). Dogmatism and belief formation:
Output interference in the processing of supporting
not based on the same biosocial mechanisms
and contradictory cognitions. Journal of Personality that affect status ranking within primary groups.
and Social Psychology, 75, 456–466. This encyclopedia entry is concerned solely with
Durand, R. M., & Lambert, Z. V. (1975). Dogmatism face-to-face status hierarchies.
and exposure to political candidates. Psychological Among higher primates, dominance hierarchies
Reports, 36, 423–429. have emergent features beyond simple rank order-
Rokeach, M. (1960). The open and closed mind. New ing. Members of the group prefer to interact with
York: Basic Books. near peers. The highest ranked members (the lead-
ers) perform service and control functions for
other members and for the group as a whole,
directing relations with other groups and defense
Dominance Hierarchies against threats to the membership. Social control
within the group, including the allocation of sta-
Dominance hierarchies reliably form in face-to- tus, is achieved partly by high-ranked members’
face groupings of all primate species, including manipulating the stress of low-ranked members.
humans. Their defining feature is that higher
ranked individuals have more influence, power,
Allocating Ranks
and valued prerogatives than those of lower rank.
To avoid an overly simple picture, several quali- A common misunderstanding is that dominance
fications are needed: Rank may be persistently rel- rank is attained solely by force or aggression, the
evant among primates in permanent groups or only imposition of the strong on the weak. To the con-
occasionally relevant for animals that forage alone; trary, especially among apes and humans, status
rankings are usually but not necessarily transitive; interactions are typically nonviolent, often subtle,
the relative status of two individuals may depend, and, in human terms, “polite” and conforming to
in part, on the proximity of allies; sometimes, the accepted norms. High rank may be a prize for
highest ranking position is shared by a coalition of which to compete, but it can also result from
two or three individuals; and it is often easier to unforced deference by other group members. Only
identify a male ranking than a female ranking. rarely does competition for rank escalate beyond
Often social psychologists speak about small- normal limits, more often among young adult
group status hierarchies in specifically human males. Most of us live our adult lives in continual
terms, ignoring their essential similarity to the status interaction without overt threat or violence.
228 Dominance Hierarchies

Dominance hierarchies, once set, are fairly sta- now becomes a dominance contest. Ego’s stare
ble. But when a group newly forms, there must be makes Alter uncomfortable. Alter may avert his
an initial allocation of ranks, and in established eyes, thus relieving his discomfort while in effect
groups, some individuals occasionally alter their surrendering, or he may stare back, making Ego
positions. How are these initial rankings, and later uncomfortable in return. In the latter case, the
changes in rank, determined? The short answer is “stare-down” continues, with each individual try-
that ranks are allocated either cooperatively, by ing to out-stress the other until finally one of the
consensus of those involved, or competitively, when two succumbs to the discomfort (and to the chal-
there is disagreement over who should be superior. lenger) by averting his eyes. The matter thus set-
Every individual has certain observable signs (or tled, the yielder usually avoids further eye contact
signals) that suggest his or her social status is (or although the winner may occasionally look at the
ought to be) high or low. Some status signs are loser as if to verify his victory. In this context, star-
limited to a particular species, such as the silver ing is an assertive sign of high status. Eye aversion
hair on the back of a dominant male gorilla. is a deferent sign associated with low status.
Others are similar across primate species. For
example, large size, physical strength, vigor, good
health, being adult (vs. being juvenile), being male, Conversation
and (among the higher primate species) having a Speech is the major and unique means of human
high-ranked mother are all signs associated with face-to-face communication, and it provides a
high status, while their opposites suggest low sta- large number of status signs. These may be con-
tus. For humans, wearing expensive and fashion- veyed by specific words (“I came, I saw, I con-
able clothing is a signal of high status. A beautiful quered” vs. “I am the dust beneath your feet”), by
wife, desirable to other men or having a rich accompanying gestures (a pointed finger vs. averted
dowry, gives prestige to her husband; a rich or eyes), or by intonations (loud and commanding vs.
powerful husband or protector elevates a woman’s soft and hesitant).
perceived rank. Status signs precipitate expectation Conversation between Ego and Alter is, by defi-
states in the theoretical work of Joseph Berger and nition, a series of turns in which each person talks
his colleagues. while the other listens. Two rules normally regu-
Visualize two females, Ego and Alter, meeting late turn taking:
for the first time. If their interaction is very brief or
casual, the notion of ranking may never arise. In 1. If one individual is speaking, the other should
more extended or serious meetings, each will remain quiet.
appraise the status signs of the other, forming
some idea of their relative standings. If Ego per- 2. A listener who is offered the floor should speak.
ceives that Alter’s status signs exceed her own, she
may immediately defer to Alter. Ego, in explaining Violating either of these rules is a dominant
such concessions, may offer that Alter belongs in action. If both people violate them, there is a domi-
the higher rank, that Alter deserves it, that Alter nance contest, with each trying to speak over the
could easily take it if Ego resisted, or that Alter will other or interrupting the other. An alternative means
be more competent in the duties of high rank. of acting dominantly is to remain silent while the
If Ego and Alter do not agree on their relative other person offers you the floor. Such violations
ranks, the outcome may be decided by one or more are stressful. The contest is resolved, and the situa-
short dominance contests between them. A mecha- tion becomes more comfortable, when one person
nism postulated to operate across primate species acquiesces and follows the appropriate rules.
is that each individual attempts to “out-stress” or There are other conversational rules of which
intimidate his or her opponent. The one that suc- most of us are consciously unaware but which we
ceeds becomes dominant, the other subordinate. nearly all follow. For example, do not look into
As an example, the eyes of two male strangers, Ego another person’s eyes when no one is speaking
and Alter, meet by chance across a room. Ego (unless in a romantic context or at a distance well
decides to hold the glance. The chance eye contact beyond normal conversational range), and look at
Dyads 229

the speaker’s face, particularly if the speaker is See also Evolutionary Psychology; Social Dominance
looking at you. Violating such rules sends a domi- Theory; Status Characteristics/Expectation States
nant signal, while following them strictly is a def- Theory
erential signal. A conversational dominance contest
may be so subtle that it is barely perceptible, even
Further Readings
to the contenders.
Anderson, E. (1991). Streetwise. Chicago: University of
Testosterone Chicago Press.
Burnham, T. (2007). High-testosterone men reject
Testosterone is produced by both sexes but to a low ultimate game offers. Proceedings of the
greater extent in males than in females. Testosterone Royal Society: Biological Sciences, 274,
is the hormone that is essential for the develop- 2327–2330.
ment of male characteristics in the fetus and the Mazur, A. (2005). Biosociology of dominance and
adolescent; however, this entry focuses on circulat- deference. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
ing testosterone in men. Testosterone is not the
most important determinant of dominance, but it
promotes dominant behavior. The relationship is
reciprocal; that is, changes in dominance behavior Dyads
or social status also cause changes in testosterone
level. Among men athletes, for example, testoster- Strictly speaking, a dyad is any pair of individu-
one rises shortly before their matches, as if in als. However, among psychologists, the term
anticipation of the competition. After matches, dyad is usually restricted to pairs of individuals
testosterone is higher in winners than in losers. who are expected to exhibit interdependence or
Hypothetically, this provides a feedback loop in relatedness in their thoughts, feelings, and behav-
which success in competition heightens testoster- iors. When social psychologists study dyads, they
one, which in turn facilitates future competitive typically are studying interactions between two
success, and so on. On the other hand, a defeat people who have or might anticipate having an
depresses testosterone, which inhibits future com- ongoing relationship. That is, their research
petition. This produces a hormone-reinforced designs typically involve pairs of individuals who
momentum, differentiating winners from losers. influence one another in some manner and often
Testosterone may be implicated in the aggressive in many ways.
street behavior of U.S. inner cities, where sociolo- Technically, dyads are one type of group. At
gist Elijah Anderson vividly portrayed the impor- times, the study of dyads deals with the same issues
tance of dominance contests. He described how as the study of groups of other sizes might deal
facial expressions, gait, and verbal expressions are with. For instance, an organizational psychologist
used by young Black men to make or deter chal- interested in sharing of information between work
lenges. This environment of continual vigilance and colleagues might examine the same issue when
challenge would be expected to elevate testoster- studying collaboration in groups of two, three, or
one. Indeed, mean testosterone among young, four individuals. However, much work on dyads
poorly educated Black men is especially high. (High involves the study of intimate relationships (e.g.,
testosterone is not a general characteristic of Black romantic partners or spouses) that likely include
men but is confined to those who are young and phenomena that simply do not exist at all or in the
poorly educated.) Elevated hormone levels encour- same form in groups larger than two.
age further dominance competition, which occa-
sionally turns violent. Homicides may occur when
a dominance contest between friends or acquain- Ways of Categorizing Dyads
tances, begun over a trivial disagreement, explodes Sometimes dyads are categorized by terms used in
in rage. This tragic outcome is facilitated by the common language. For instance, dyads might be
presence of alcohol and a weapon. referred to as strangers, business partners, ene-
Allan Mazur mies, friends, romantic partners, or spouses.
230 Dyads

Large bodies of psychological, sociological, and Dyadic-Level and Individual-Level Variables


anthropological research are organized around
Whereas some variables may vary within and
these categories. Sometimes, however, psycholo-
across dyads (e.g., whether people care for or trust
gists identify dyads by the nature of the interac-
others may be a result of both individual-difference
tion the members of the dyad have with one
and relationship-specific factors), other variables
another. For instance, a dyad might be described
are strictly of a dyadic nature and cannot be
as an exchange relationship in which each person
assessed or conceptualized without thinking in
offers something to the other with the expectation
dyadic terms because they describe features of
of receiving something in return, or as an authority-
dyads rather than individuals. Examples include
ranking relationship in which one person follows
the amount of self–partner agreement, similarity,
another’s directions by virtue of the status the
or reciprocity, the length of the relationship, or the
first one possesses. Dyads also are identified
relationship type. In addition, some constructs
sometimes by the functions that individuals serve
vary only within dyads because they involve a
for one another. For instance, an attachment rela-
comparison between one person and the other.
tionship is one in which one individual (the
Power and division of labor are examples.
attachment figure) serves as a consistent provider
of support, encouragement, and sense of security
in times of stress through his or her actions or Ways in Which Interdependence
mere presence, while the other person (an attached Between Individuals May Arise
child, for instance) is the beneficiary of these Dyadic interdependence—relatedness in thoughts,
provisions. feelings, and behavior—may arise through a vari-
Large bodies of research are organized around ety of processes, including (a) members of the dyad
the norms that govern dyadic interaction, the forming the dyad on the basis of similarity or dif-
functions that dyads serve for their members, or a ferences, (b) members of the dyad influencing each
combination. Sometimes the distinctions between other, and (c) members of the dyad experiencing
dyads are qualitative, referring to differences in the same events across time.
the form, function, or nature of dyads, and creat-
ing categories that are truly nominal in nature.
For example, mixed-sex dyads may be distin-
Special Considerations
guished from same-sex dyads, or boss–employee
When Studying Dyads
or leader–follower dyads might be distinguished Precisely because of the interdependence of
from dyads of coworkers. Often, however, there thoughts, emotion, and behavior found in dyads,
are substantial quantitative variations among special considerations must be made when analyzing
dyads, and even within individual members of a data arising from dyadic studies. Interdependence
given dyad, in terms of some construct relevant to is empirically indicated when the responses of
the dyads’ form or function. For instance, dyads people within the same dyad are more similar to
can vary in terms of the ongoing degree of respon- (or different from) each other than the responses of
sibility members assume for being noncontin- people who are not in the same dyad. Data analy-
gently responsive to one another, how secure or sis techniques such as intraclass correlation can be
trusting or warm the members feel, how similar used to assess the degree of interdependence. This
they are to each other, or how often their interac- interdependence often presents data analysis chal-
tions are conflictual. Individuals within a single lenges, depending in part on whether members of
dyad can vary in many of these ways as well. the dyad are viewed as distinguishable. In distin-
Researchers may use distinct nominal terms to dif- guishable dyads, a meaningful factor can be used
ferentiate dyads that vary along a quantitative to separate the two members of every dyad. This is
dimension, referring (for instance) to secure ver- often decided theoretically (e.g., should gender
sus insecure pairs of romantic partners. Yet it is matter in this analysis?) or empirically (e.g., does
wise for researchers to keep the underlying quan- gender matter in this analysis?). In the distinguish-
titative dimensions in mind while both theorizing able case, researchers sometimes use the individual
and interpreting findings. as the unit of analysis and employ traditional
Dynamical Systems Approach 231

analytic techniques such as analysis of variance, See also Attachment Theory; Interdependence Theory;
Pearson correlation, and ordinary least squares Levels of Analysis; Research Methods and Issues
regression analysis, but they do so separately for
each level of the member-distinguishing variable
(e.g., separate analyses for men and women in a Further Readings
sample of heterosexual couples). Special analytic Bugental, D. B. (2000). Acquisition of the algorithms of
techniques that use the dyad as the unit of analysis, social life: A domain-based approach. Psychological
such as multilevel modeling and structural equa- Bulletin, 26, 187–209.
tion modeling, are often used when dyad members Campbell, L., & Kashy, D. A. (2002). Estimating actor,
are considered to be indistinguishable (i.e., when partner, and interaction effects for dyadic data using
no variable meaningfully separates the two mem- PROC MIXED and HLM: A user-friendly guide.
bers of every dyad). Without conducting separate Personal Relationships, 9, 327–342.
analyses for each level of a member-distinguishing Clark, M. S., & Monin, J. K. (2006). Giving and
variable, the interdependent nature of the data receiving communal responsiveness as love. In
violates the independence of observations that R. J. Sternerg & K. Weis (Eds.), The new psychology
more traditional analytic techniques assume and of love (pp. 200–223). New Haven, CT: Yale
require. Often these special techniques also are University Press.
Fiske, A. P. (1991). Structures of social life. New York:
employed in the distinguishable case. By modeling
Free Press.
outcome variables as correlated across the mem-
Kashy, D. A., & Kenny, D. A. (2000). The analysis of
bers of each dyad, these techniques usually provide
data from dyads and groups. In H. T. Reis & C. M.
more accurate parameter estimates than do tradi-
Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social
tional analytic techniques. More complex designs
and personality psychology (pp. 451–477). New York:
involve individuals simultaneously belonging to Cambridge University Press.
multiple dyads, such as a woman who is both a Kenny, D. A. (1996). Models of nonindependence in
wife and a mother. Several useful guides for ana- dyadic research. Journal of Social and Personal
lyzing dyadic data, as well as more in-depth treat- Relationships, 13, 279–294.
ments of dyadic analysis, have been published. Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006).
Dyadic data analysis. New York: Guilford.
Olsen, J. A., & Kenny, D. A. (2006). Structural equation
The Importance of Considering Dyadic modeling with interchangeable dyads. Psychological
Context for Understanding Social Phenomena Methods, 11, 127–141.
Social psychology has a tendency to focus on indi-
viduals and their reactions to standardized social
stimuli. The very nature of social phenomena, how-
ever, can vary dramatically by dyadic context. For
Dynamical Systems Approach
example, people working on joint tasks for which
there will be a reward keep track of individual inputs The dynamical systems approach views groups as
when working with strangers but actually bend over systems in which collective behavior arises from
backwards not to do that when working with friends. the flow of information and mutual influence
Offering repayment for a favor can increase liking among members. This approach to studying
within a business dyad yet decrease liking within a groups uses concepts and methods from systems,
friendship. Some researchers have even suggested chaos, catastrophe, and complexity theories. A
that we are fundamentally different people when dynamic system (a general term) is any system
interacting with distinct relationship partners such as that changes over time. A dynamical system (a
a parents, romantic partners, and friends. It behooves more technical term) is any system whose current
researchers studying social processes to routinely ask state provides a basis for predicting its state in
themselves whether their findings might change if the immediate future. The dynamical systems
the dyadic context were altered. approach is particularly useful for understanding
how groups change over time, whether that means
Margaret S. Clark and Edward P. Lemay short time spans of minutes and hours or longer
232 Dynamical Systems Approach

periods of weeks, months, and years. Change such analytical techniques by psychologists was
includes small fluctuations, rhythmic cycles, and not evident until a decade later, after further
both abrupt and gradual departures from prior groundwork adapting catastrophe models to data
patterns. in the biological and social sciences occurred. The
Scholars who take a dynamical systems approach repertoire of dynamical systems applications to
share an interest in the interplay between stability psychology was further developed during the rest
and instability that underlies continuity and change of the 20th century by applying and adapting
in groups. This approach has been most commonly methods and concepts from chaos theory and com-
applied to collective behavior, from dyads to small plexity theory. Chaos theory revealed that seem-
groups to crowds and organizations. However, it ingly small events can have a profound impact on
has also generated theory and research on the pat- how a dynamic system such as a group changes
terning of attitudes in groups, on therapeutic out- over time. The complexity theory concept of self-
comes in group members, and on the emotional organization—the spontaneous emergence of new
dynamics of group members. Studies using this structure and order—provided insight into group
approach have demonstrated how the emergence formation and the emergence of roles, norms, and
of stable dissenting subgroups is consistent with routines in member behavior.
conformity theories, shown that greater complex-
ity heightens the effectiveness of group therapy,
Dynamical Systems
and explained why a modest intervention can have
Methods for Studying Groups
either a small or a dramatically large effect on the
accident rates among workers in groups. To study dynamics, groups must be observed at
multiple time points. Dynamical systems methods
vary widely in the number of time points needed,
History of Dynamical
from a minimum of two for each group to high-
Systems Approaches to Groups
quality data streams that provide hundreds or
Most contemporary dynamical systems approaches thousands of observations. Data are collected and
to modeling groups were developed in the 1980s theory developed and tested via behavioral experi-
and 1990s, but precursors were evident decades ments, coding of group interaction, computer
earlier. Kurt Lewin, one of the founders of group simulation, and mathematical modeling. The
dynamics, proposed an explicitly dynamic approach results are typically analyzed using graphical plot-
to studying groups in the 1940s. Application of his ting techniques, nonlinear regression, and other
field theory approach, however, was hampered by statistical and mathematical techniques for identi-
the lack of appropriate methods. In the same era, fying patterns in time series data. The data may be
Robert F. Bales (who was influenced by Lewin) quantitative or, like Bales’s coding of statements,
developed one of the earliest methods to measure categorical. The best way to illustrate the methods
group interaction, using a fine-grained scale that is to describe selected studies that used particular
classified every statement in a group discussion. A techniques.
statement might be a request for information, for
example, or an expression of approval or support.
Continuous and Discontinuous
The resulting time series of codes can be examined
Change in Accident Rates
to detect recurring patterns over time.
A new wave of dynamical systems approaches Over several decades of research, evidence accu-
to groups emerged in the 1980s. A few years ear- mulated that accident rates in the workplace
lier, in 1976, mathematician E. C. Zeeman pub- depend in part on how many people are working
lished a catastrophe model designed to predict the together in a subunit. How exactly group size and
sudden outbreak of prison riots based on a combi- accidents were related, however, was unclear.
nation of tension and alienation. Catastrophe Some studies found that accident rates were higher
models are a set of mathematical models of discon- in larger groups, whereas others found that acci-
tinuous change such as explosions or the sudden dent rates were highest in smaller or in medium-
collapse of a bridge. However, the adoption of sized groups. No explanation accounted for these
Dynamical Systems Approach 233

mixed results until Stephen Guastello applied a whether the degree of chaos or complexity is asso-
cusp catastrophe model to the data. Cusp models ciated with some outcome such as creativity, coop-
are a good fit for data in which shifts between two eration, or therapeutic effectiveness.
equilibrium states (in this case lower or higher If time series lack adequate length and measure-
accident rates) are governed by two control param- ment precision, then reliable detection of chaotic
eters (features of the operating situation for the patterning is difficult. Fortunately, less demanding
group). methods are available to measure the complexity
The data consisted of accident rates measured at of group dynamics. In the past decade, group
two to four points in time for each subunit. A non- research has shifted away from attempts to iden-
linear regression analysis of the difference scores tify chaotic patterns and toward measuring com-
(changes in accident rates across time) showed that plexity as something that varies both across groups
accidents increased steadily in proportion to envi- and within groups across time.
ronmental hazards (the first control parameter) In the 1990s, Addie Fuhriman and Gary
when units were large. When units were small, Burlingame and colleagues analyzed data from
however, accident rates could shift abruptly from four therapy groups that each met for 15 sessions
near zero to much higher rates, and vice versa. lasting 2  hours each. Every verbal utterance of
Group size was thus the second, bifurcation con- every participant was coded for therapeutic quality
trol parameter. The bifurcation is a shift from on a 16-point scale, generating around 14,000
continuous (smooth, gradual) change to discon- codes per group. After calculating the fractal
tinuous (large and abrupt) change with smaller dimension (a measure of complexity) for the time
group size. When outcomes fit a nonlinear pattern, series of codes from each of the 15 group sessions,
as in a catastrophe model, the results from any their analysis showed that the average level of
particular study will depend on what range of haz- therapeutic quality in a session was higher when
ard conditions and group size was sampled. A group members’ interaction was more complex—in
catastrophe model made sense of what were appar- other words, showed a greater variety of pattern-
ently contradictory results. ing. Other researchers have used fractal dimen-
sions and related measures to study the process of
self-organization in groups.
Chaos and Complexity
in Therapeutic Groups
Self-Organization in Group Formation
Chaos theory emerged after the unexpected dis-
covery that apparently random dynamic behavior Self-organization is the process by which mutual
may actually have a complex order. Chaotic pat- influence among interacting components generates
terns were first documented in such phenomena as pattern and structure at a collective level. For
weather patterns, water turbulence, and dripping small groups, David Pincus has characterized
faucets. Chaotic dynamics generate behavior that these emergent structures as the rules, roles, rela-
is predictable for a short time but then quickly tionships, and realities (systems of shared beliefs)
diverges. This is because very small fluctuations that develop through social interaction and shape
(the proverbial flap of a butterfly’s wing) can send the responses of group members to each other.
a system in a new direction. The empirical study of As patterns emerge, behavior becomes more pre-
chaotic dynamics relied on the development of dictable. Pincus and colleagues have studied self-
measures of chaos that were eventually applied to organization in groups by recording and analyzing
other phenomena, including group behavior. the sequencing of contributions from different
Unlike catastrophe models, which can handle group members to measure the number and length
data measured at just a few time points, reliable of conversational patterns. Both conflict between
detection of chaotic patterns requires much longer and closeness among group members are positively
time series consisting of hundreds and preferably associated with the emergence of orderly patterns
thousands of time points. Analysis of the time series of interaction.
assesses the degree of chaos or complexity that is Using a different methodology, Bibb Latané
present. In group research, studies typically investigate and colleagues studied the impact of interpersonal
234 Dynamical Systems Approach

influence on a large set of people with previously See also Computer Simulation; Emergent Norm Theory;
uncoordinated opinions. They used a simple com- Group Development; Group Formation; Group
puter model called a cellular automata, which is Structure; Informational Influence; Social Entrainment;
like a large checkerboard on which every chip System Theory
(every node) can be one of two colors (red or blue,
for example). The colors might represent a prefer-
Further Readings
ence among two political candidates, a judgment
of guilty or not guilty, or any set of two contrast- Arrow, H. (2005). Chaos, complexity, and catastrophe:
ing attitudes. At the starting point of the simula- The nonlinear dynamics perspective. In S. A. Wheelan
tion, the “attitudes” of the nodes are set at (Ed.), The handbook of group research and practice
random. However, at each subsequent time step, (pp. 201–219). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
the color (the preference) is determined by the Baron, R. M., Amazeen, P. G., & Beek, P. J. (1994).
influence exerted by a node’s neighbors, who are Local and global dynamics of social relations. In
also either red or blue. Closer neighbors exert R. R. Vallacher & A. Nowak (Eds.), Dynamical
stronger influence than more distant neighbors systems in social psychology (pp. 111–138).
do. In the simulation that Latané and colleagues San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
used, the “nodes” also varied randomly in how Guastello, S. J. (2002). Work group coordination. In
Managing emergent phenomena: Nonlinear dynamics
persuasive they were and how “supportive” they
in work organizations (pp. 209–227). Mahwah, NJ:
were of like-minded neighbors. The result of
Lawrence Erlbaum.
repeated interactions among nodes is that the ini-
Guastello, S. J. (2005). Nonlinear methods for the social
tially random distribution quickly reorganizes
sciences. In S. A. Wheelan (Ed.), The handbook of
into coherent areas of like-minded nodes. Even if
group research and practice (pp. 251–272). Thousand
the checkerboard as a whole turns mostly one Oaks, CA: Sage.
color, however, pockets of the other color also Nowak, A., Szamrej, J., & Latané, B. (1990). From
form and persist because of the mutual support of private attitude to public opinion: A dynamic theory of
close neighbors. These computer models provided social impact. Psychological Review, 97(3), 362–376.
an elegant illustration of how stable dissenting Pincus, D. (2001). A framework and methodology for the
subgroups can quickly develop and stabilize even study of non-linear, self-organizing family dynamics.
in the face of a much larger majority with a differ- Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences,
ent view. The simulation results were later repli- 5(2), 139–173.
cated with laboratory studies in which real people Pincus, D., & Guastello, S. J. (2005). Nonlinear dynamics
interacted on computers and shared their views and interpersonal correlates of verbal turn-taking
with those who were closest to them in a social patterns in a group therapy session. Small Group
network. Research, 36, 635–677.
All these studies fit within the dynamical sys- Stacey, R. D. (2003). Complexity and group processes:
tems framework, based on their use of methods A radically social understanding of individuals.
and measures especially suited both to studying New York: Brunner-Routledge.
changes in group outcomes and to illuminating the Vallacher, R. R., Read, S. J., & Nowak, A. (2002). The
dynamic processes that generate these changes. dynamical perspective in personality and social
psychology. Personality and Social Psychology
Holly Arrow Review, 6(4), 264–273.
E
The type of crowd of most interest to Turner
Emergent Norm Theory and Killian is the crowd that is not governed by
established rules, has no predetermined leaders or
An old joke runs along the following lines. Herald: leadership structure, and has no formal, prear-
“The peasants are revolting, My Lord!” Lord: “I ranged mechanisms for making decisions or select-
know, quite disgusting.” Representations of crowds ing leaders. The crowd ought to have been drawn
since at least the Middle Ages have been character- together by a precipitating event that is the focus
ized by this kind of “fear of the masses.” Crowds of the crowd members’ attention, such as a flood,
were seen as dangerous, unpredictable, chaotic, an earthquake, a war, a protest, a strike, or even a
threatening, and inhuman, in that they lacked the power cut that disables the normal mechanisms of
capacity for reason and restraint. Familiar phrases authority.
such as “the baying crowd” and “the herd instinct” According to Turner and Killian, a key charac-
illustrate this infrahumanization. In the 19th century, teristic of such a crowd is that its members share a
industrialization and urbanization gave the masses sense of both uncertainty and urgency. The precise
more chances to congregate, and scholars such as nature of the event that has brought the group
Gustave Le Bon continued to emphasize the irratio- together may not always be clear. Crucially, the
nal and chaotic aspects of crowd behavior. In the ultimate outcome of the event and the crowd situ-
20th century, influenced by the prevailing intellectual ation is difficult to determine. There is no agree-
climate of humanism and the writings of Karl Marx, ment in advance on what the crowd is trying to
scholars realized that there was a method to crowds’ achieve and how. In addition, the crowd can exist
apparent madness and that the behavior of violent only for a limited time and has only a limited time
and terrifying crowds is seldom entirely random. to act. Thus when the crowd first forms, people
Emergent norm theory, the brainchild of the sociolo- ask each other questions like, “What’s happened—
gists Ralph H. Turner and Lewis Killian, was one of was it an accident or a terrorist attack?”; “What’s
the most important contributions in this vein. going to happen next?”; “What should we do?”;
Like many other sociologists and social psychol- “What should I do?”; and “Who will act?” Turner
ogists—most notably their contemporary, Muzafer and Killian labeled this process of investigations,
Sherif—Turner and Killian assumed that social questions, and rumors milling. Through the pro-
behavior is driven by norms. Specifically, they sug- cess of milling, the initial uncertainty experienced
gested that in extraordinary circumstances, such as by the crowd is reduced, and a shared understand-
civic emergencies and certain types of crowd situa- ing of the situation begins to emerge.
tions, the mundane norms that govern the course In the next stage of the formation of emergent
of our everyday lives no longer apply. New norms norms, called keynoting, individuals make positive
are required and are created by the crowd. suggestions for action. A keynote can consist of a

235
236 Emergent Norm Theory

verbal suggestion made to the crowd or some part crowd members act with little hesitation or vocif-
of it (e.g., “Let’s storm the ramparts”), or it can erously suggest courses of action, and they are very
simply consist of a distinctive action (e.g., an indi- likely to be prominent keynoters. In contrast, the
vidual spontaneously mounting the ramparts, set- concerned, while sharing the sense of common fate
ting an example for others). Keynotes are more possessed by the committed, are sure that some-
likely to be accepted if they converge with the pre- thing should be done, but are uncertain about
dispositions of a large part of the crowd. For what. Although they are unlikely to keynote, they
example, if many people in the crowd are angry, are likely to attend closely to, and eventually
aggressive keynotes are likely to be influential. accept and act on, suggestions from others. Some
Eventually, through keynoting, a dominant under- participants are not highly invested in the crowd
standing of what is right and wrong in the situa- but merely want to see what happens; these people
tion is determined, and the urgency of the crowd is are termed curious spectators by Turner and
focused on a specific course of action. Killian. Still other members of the crowd are
At this point, an emergent norm has formed, exploiters, who have shown up merely to capital-
including a shared definition of the situation and a ize on all the fuss, perhaps for the sheer thrill of
shared understanding of which behaviors are right violence and destruction, perhaps for loot, to pick
or wrong in the circumstances. Initially rather pockets, or even to sell souvenirs. Like curious
formless and unsure, the crowd appears now to spectators, the failure of exploiters to resist the
behave with some logic and purpose, and to be emergent norm is liable to be taken as support for
capable of enforcing its new norm. Thus, via pro- it. Even though curious spectators are passive and
cesses of normative influence that are familiar to disengaged, and mercenary crowd members are
social psychologists, crowd members begin to exploiters, the active participants in the crowd are
experience pressure to conform to the implicit likely to see these individuals’ presence and failure
norm that they perceive to be taking shape. By to intervene as tacit signs of approval. In this way,
conforming to this new norm, crowd members they contribute to the growing illusion of unanim-
influence those around them, who infer from these ity among crowd members.
members’ conformity that the norm is widely
accepted.
Critiques of
Turner and Killian point out that the emergent
Emergent Norm Theory
norm does not produce unanimity in the crowd.
There is no “group mind” in emergent norm the- The descriptive terminology of emergent norm the-
ory. If unanimity appears to exist, it is an illusion ory is impressive in its intuitive appeal, its vividness,
reinforced by pluralistic ignorance, a process in and its detail. Ironically, however, its descriptive
which the silence of dissenters is taken for assent. felicity has attracted some of its most telling cri-
The active and apparently enthusiastic participa- tiques. A problem that many critics have had with
tion of crowd members may be attributable to any the theory is that it tends too often to describe rather
number of motives apart from the desire to further than genuinely to explain crowd behavior. If we
the interests of the collective or to validate its understand much of emergent norm theory as a
norms. This point—that as the situation unfolds, causal analysis, it turns out to be circular. Thus
individuals feel and act differently and participate Clark McPhail, the sociologist who has published
for different reasons—is crucial to emergent norm perhaps the most sustained critique of emergent
theory and distinguishes it from other theoretical norm theory, notes that exploiters are so designated
accounts of crowd behavior. because they show up and try to capitalize on the
Turner and Killian flesh out this point by describ- situation, curious spectators earn their label by turn-
ing different types of participants that one might ing up to watch, and the committed are so called
expect to find in a crowd situation and outlining their because they care about the issue that has brought
motives and how they might behave. The committed the crowd together and have strong views on what
feel little uncertainty about the appropriate cause of to do about it. The theory does not specify what
action; they are highly identified with the collective causes different people to adopt these roles. Neither
and have a sense of common fate with it. These does it lay out the conditions that determine
Emergent Norm Theory 237

whether a crowd will organize itself along indi- norms to emerge. Critics from various perspectives
vidualistic lines or more collectivistic lines based have asked whether there is really a radical discon-
on solidarity. Further, it is not altogether clear why tinuity between the norms that govern our every-
some keynotes achieve influence and others do day lives and those that govern crowd situations.
not. Turner and Killian argue that “distinctive” One reason to reject the notion of such a disconti-
individuals and behaviors are likely to shape the nuity is that few, if any, crowds are composed of
emergent norm, but they do not spell out what individuals who spontaneously gather with little or
they mean, exactly, by distinctiveness. Steven no prior history of association. Field studies show
Reicher points out that if emergent norm theory that there is some kind of prior organization in
ultimately attributes the behavior of crowds to the most events involving crowds. Also, people tend
lead of a handful of distinctive individuals, it not to show up alone, but in family, friendship, or
weakens its own claim to be a theory of collective peer groups. Once there, people tend to influence
behavior proper. and look out for each other, according to their
More generally, critics have pointed out that it shared and ongoing norms.
is not clear in what sense the “collective behavior” Research by Reicher and his colleagues shows
of crowds is different from the aggregated behav- that the ongoing social identities and associated
ior of the individuals who comprise the crowd. For normative codes of crowd members, whether as
example, McPhail argues that while psychological environmental protestors, anarchists, or police,
states such as “uncertainty” and “urgency” can be have a profound effect on their behavior in crowd
ascribed to individual crowd members, it is not situations. According to their social identity model
clear they can be ascribed to the collective, at least of deindividuation effects, the creative potential of
without resurrecting the group mind hypothesis. crowds lies in the ability of their participants to
Critics have also alleged that the theory is not discover group norms that may not have been
specific about how crowds form and are orga- apparent to them before, and to transform and
nized. Where emergent norm theory does make adapt group norms in light of the new situation.
clear predictions, empirical support is mixed. For Despite the many criticisms that have been lev-
example, according to the theory, rumor is central eled at emergent norm theory, even its critics have
to the formation of crowds and occurs throughout acknowledged the many valuable insights that it
the milling process. However, field studies of contributed to the study of crowds. In particular,
events involving crowds, such as the Detroit riots its point that crowds have an energizing and cre-
of 1967, showed that more participants heard ative potential, but nonetheless behave in rational,
about the riots through the mass media than by systematic, and normative ways, has been highly
rumor. influential. We still have cause to fear some crowds,
Empirical studies of crowds have produced but it is clear that we should no longer regard them
other problems for emergent norm theory. For as lacking in all human reason or constraint.
example, the theory predicts that conformity to
crowd behavior should be strongest when crowd Robbie M. Sutton
members are identifiable, as participants perceive
that the crowd will reward compliance and punish See also Crowds; Dehumanization/Infrahumanization;
deviance. In contrast to this prediction, most rele- Deindividuation; Depersonalization; Group Mind;
vant research findings suggest that people are more Normative Influence; Social Identity Model of
susceptible to crowd influence when they are Deindividuation Effects; Social Impact Theory
anonymous rather than identifiable, and when
they are low rather than high in self-awareness.
These findings are consistent with deindividuation Further Readings
accounts of crowd behavior. Aguirre, B. E., Wenger, D., & Vigo, G. (1998). A test of
Other critiques have focused on the extent to the emergent norm theory of collective behavior.
which the long-standing norms of the group and Sociological Forum, 13, 301–319.
the societies in which they are embedded are left Diener, E. (1980). Deindividuation: The absence of self-
behind when crowds form, requiring entirely new awareness and self-regulation in group members. In
238 Entitativity

P. B. Paulus (Ed.), Psychology of group influence some aggregates of people qualify as groups more
(pp. 209–242). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. than do others. Thus groups vary along a contin-
McPhail, C. (1991). The myth of the madding crowd. uum of entitativity on which groups are ordered
New York: Aldine de Gruyter. according to the extent that they are perceived as
Reicher, S. (2001). The psychology of crowd dynamics. being “real entities.”
In M. A. Hogg & S. Tindale (Eds.), Blackwell
handbook of social psychology: Group processes
(pp. 182–208). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Cues for Perceived Entitativity
Turner, R. H., & Killian, L. (1987). Collective behavior.
What features influence the degree of entitativ-
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
ity that is perceived in a given group? The percep-
tion of entitativity can be based on several different
cues. A comparison can be drawn between the
perception of objects and the perception of groups.
Entitativity Physical stimuli that are similar to each other are
more likely to be perceived as part of the same
object. In the same vein, perceived similarity
Research on the perception of entitativity addresses
among persons enhances the likelihood that those
the question, “How do we come to see a collec-
persons will be perceived as a group. Also, physi-
tion of people as a group?” Entitativity is the
cal elements that are seen as moving together in
degree to which groups are perceived as having
the same direction are perceived as members of
the nature of an entity. Thus the perception of
the same physical entity. Similarly, persons whose
entitativity lies at the core of a wide variety of
activities are coordinated because they share a
processes that involve groups. It is connected to
common goal, and who therefore share a common
numerous important processes in intergroup per-
fate, will be more likely to be perceived as a
ception and in intergroup relations. This entry
group. Furthermore, the amount of interaction
distinguishes entitativity from another important
among group members, the importance of the
group feature, similarity, and discusses the conse-
group to its members, and the group’s organiza-
quences of entitativity for information processing,
tion and efficiency facilitate the perception of
stereotype formation, collective responsibility,
entitativity.
and social identity.
Types of Groups
Perceived Entitativity
and Its Antecedents As already noted, groups differ in the level of
entitativity they possess. In addition, empirical
Perceived Entitativity
research has shown that people spontaneously rec-
What is entitativity? Entitativity can refer either ognize systematic differences among certain types
to the actual properties of the group (in which case of groups in daily life interactions. The three main
it is comparable to group cohesion) or to the per- types of groups that have been distinguished are
ception of the group as a viable entity rather than intimacy groups, task groups, and social catego-
a mere collection of people. The research on entita- ries. Intimacy groups (e.g., family, close friends,
tivity in the last decade has mainly focused on how support groups) are small groups with high levels
we perceive aggregates of people to be meaningful of interaction; membership is important to their
and unified groups. It answers questions such as members, the groups have long histories, and
these: How and when do we perceive that a given membership in the group tends to be longlasting.
collectivity has the properties that constitute a Task groups (e.g., a committee, a jury, a unit of
group? What does it mean for an observer to see engineers, members of a professional sports team)
an aggregate of individuals as “a group”? are also relatively small and highly interactive, and
Entitativity can be seen as the glue that holds (or is their members have shared goals and common
perceived as holding) a group together, the “group- outcomes. However, task groups are less impor-
ness” or unity of a group. We can observe that tant to their members than are intimacy groups,
Entitativity 239

and they are of shorter duration and easier to join groups have unified, organized “personalities,”
and leave. Social categories (e.g., women, Blacks, and so they try to fit the available information
Democrats, Europeans) are very large groups with into a coherent impression. Thus, information
long histories, relatively impermeable group inconsistent with the existent impression about a
boundaries, and lower levels of interactions among highly entitative group needs to be further pro-
their members. cessed and explained. An important consequence
These three major types of groups seem to cor- of this more extended, integrative processing of
respond to three important social needs that char- information about unified, meaningful groups is
acterize human beings: belongingness, goal that people remember information better about
achievement, and a secure sense of self and social these groups than about groups that are low in
identity. Intimacy groups provide the means for entitativity.
members to satisfy the need for belongingness Furthermore, when people receive behavioral
through emotional attachment, love, acceptance, information about an individual group member of
and social support. Participation in task groups a highly entitative group, they abstract a group
helps an individual in achieving goals through characteristic or trait from this behavior and gener-
mastery, cohesion, success, and efficacy. People alize this trait to other group members. For exam-
also have a strong need to establish and maintain ple, if John is a member of a highly entitative group,
a stable and secure sense of self and social identity. and he acts in a very intelligent manner, perceivers
They frequently derive this social identity from the will infer that other members of the group are also
broad range of social categories to which they likely to be intelligent. They therefore will label
belong, and this identity can aid in creating posi- their group as a whole as “an intelligent group.” In
tive self-esteem. Often people take pride in their this way, people treat highly entitative groups as
group memberships in large social categories, such categories, and they develop prototypic representa-
as religious, ethnic, or national groups. Thus, per- tions of these categories. Thus, a certain group
ceivers’ recognition of these different group types becomes associated with a specific configuration of
and functions can help them in meeting and fulfill- characteristics and traits (e.g., members of Group A
ing important social needs. are then seen as intelligent, organized, diplomatic
In addition, these three group types differ in but vain). All of these effects are more likely to
their perceived level of entitativity. People see inti- occur when the group is perceived to be high,
macy groups as very tight-knit groups. Task rather than low, in entitativity.
groups are also seen as meaningful and unified
entities, but to a lesser extent than intimacy groups. Stereotyping
Finally, social categories are perceived as only
moderately entitative groups. People’s perception of highly entitative groups
as meaningful units and generalization of group
traits and features across all members comes very
Consequences of Perceived Entitativity close to the act of stereotyping. Stereotyping con-
sists of assigning psychological attributes to group
Information Processing
members on the basis of their membership alone.
The degree of perceived entitativity of a group It is an overgeneralization of attributes across all
has important consequences for how individuals group members. A stereotype itself is a mental
process information about groups. Group infor- representation of a group and its properties, an
mation is processed differently for groups that are abstract conception expressed in very general
perceived as high in entitativity than for groups terms. Perceiving a group as being highly entitative
that are perceived as low in entitativity. When pro- leads people to form an abstract representation of
cessing information about a highly entitative group, the group based on information about individual
people spontaneously form an organized impres- group members. In this way, members of highly
sion from the entire group, and this mental image entitative groups come to be perceived as sharing
remains consistent across time and situations. The the qualities inferred about other group members,
perceivers’ assumption is that highly entitative even if the observers don’t possess any actual
240 Entitativity

information about the behavior of the other group of its important cues. Similarity is defined as the
members. The consequence of this process is that, extent to which group members are alike on a
in the mind of the perceiver, members of highly number of dimensions, for example, goals, person-
entitative groups become psychologically inter- ality traits, lifestyle, behavior, and physical appear-
changeable with each other. ance. Although similarity is an important predictor
This perceived interchangeability constitutes of the perception of entitativity, similarity by itself
an important aspect of stereotyping. If all group does not provide a complete understanding of per-
members are seen as sharing the same attributes, ceived entitativity. In fact, entitativity and similar-
then generalizing about the group as a whole ity clearly dissociate under certain circumstances.
becomes easier and seems more reasonable. For Similarity is especially an important cue for the
example, because John acted in a very intelligent perception of entitativity in social categories. All
way, perceivers abstract the trait “the group is members of a social category share some feature
intelligent” and consequently assign this psycho- (gender, race, religion, nationality)—that is exactly
logical attribute to all members of the group. what binds those groups together. In this way it
Hence all group members come to be seen as can be an important cue to the entitativity of some
intelligent. groups. However, similarity is considered a less
important indication for entitativity for some other
types of groups, such as task and intimacy groups.
Collective Responsibility
Of all groups, the family is among the highest in
Another consequence of perceiving a group as entitativity. Yet a husband, a wife, and a baby are
high in entitativity is known as collective responsi- less similar to each other, in spite of their being a
bility. Members of highly entitative groups are strong entity, than the baby is to other babies, or
seen as sharing responsibility for other members’ the husband to other men, or the wife to other
behavior. If one member of a highly entitative women. For task and intimacy groups, perceptions
group commits a wrongdoing (criminal or not), of entitativity draw more on common goals, the
then other group members are perceived as being close interaction among members, and the impor-
partially responsible for the act, even if they were tance of the group to its members than on the
not directly involved in the misdeed. Other mem- extent of similarities among members.
bers of the group are seen as collectively responsi- Furthermore, people tend to see the groups they
ble for the act simply because they are all part of a belong to as more unified and meaningful than
tight-knit group. Members of a highly entitative other groups. Group members value their member-
group may be assumed to share responsibility ship in their own groups, and generally perceive
because they share the same views, the same ideol- them as being higher in entitativity than groups to
ogy, and the same overall goals as the wrongdoer. which they do not belong. Conversely, they per-
The group members of a highly entitative group ceive more variation among members of their own
also might be seen as collectively responsible groups than among members of groups to which
because they should have been able to prevent the they do not belong. These differences in percep-
wrongdoer from performing the inappropriate act. tions of entitativity and similarity in groups to
Judgments of collective responsibility rest on and which one does and does not belong illustrate that
are derived from the perception of a group’s enti- similarity and entitativity are perceived differently
tativity, and do not occur in groups perceived to be depending on membership status.
low in entitativity.
Conclusion
Perceived Entitativity
In summary, the perception of entitativity as
and Perceived Similarity
reflecting the “groupness” of a group occupies a
One difficulty with the concept of entitativity is that place at the very heart of social group processing.
it is sometimes difficult to disentangle its content Perceptions of entitativity influence how people
from that of a number of other group features. process group information in several ways. The con-
Entitativity is often confused with similarity, one cept of entitativity predicts stereotype formation
Escalation of Commitment 241

and provides insight into why people generate ste- resources. Faced with this dilemma, individuals
reotypes. Individuals form a coherent, consistent often invest further in the failing course of action.
mental representation of the highly entitative Escalation of commitment is considered a deci-
groups they encounter in daily life, and they gener- sion-making bias and is often seen as an economi-
alize this representation across all its members. cally irrational act. This is because the initial
Entitativity also is highly functional and helps invested resources are sunk costs (costs that have
people to organize and structure their environ- been incurred and cannot be recovered), which
ment. People spontaneously categorize themselves should be ignored in subsequent resource alloca-
and others into groups. Subsequently, they gener- tion decisions. Escalation of commitment has also
alize typical group features across all the members, been termed the sunk cost effect, entrapment
which is known as stereotyping. Because of the behavior, and the “too much invested to quit”
promising value of entitativity in fulfilling charac- problem. This entry examines various expressions
teristic human needs, individuals feel more com- of this behavior and possible explanations.
mitted to highly entitative groups.
David L. Hamilton and Kaat Van Acker Importance

See also Essentialism; Group Cohesiveness; Perceived


Escalation of commitment has been implicated in
Group Variability; Social Identity Theory; Stereotyping many arenas, ranging from individual decisions to
organizational investments to governmental poli-
cies. Individuals have been shown to escalate their
Further Readings commitments in financial investments, auction
bidding, and romantic relationships, as well as in
Crawford, M. T., Sherman, S. J., & Hamilton, D. L.
decisions about hiring, firing, and promoting
(2002). Perceived entitativity, stereotype formation,
employees. At the organizational level, escalation
and the interchangeability of group members. Journal
of commitment has resulted in many multimillion-
of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1076–1094.
dollar decision errors. For instance, innovations,
Hamilton, D. L. (2007). Understanding the complexities
construction of plants, acquisitions, and loan deci-
of group perception: Broadening the domain. European
Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 1077–1101.
sions have all been shown to involve escalation of
Lickel, B., Hamilton, D. L., Wieczorkowska, G., Lewis, commitment.
A., Sherman, S. J., & Uhles, A. N. (2000). Varieties of Escalation effects have even been found to influ-
groups and the perception of group entitativity. Journal ence professional basketball players’ playing time:
of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 223–246. Players who were higher draft choices gained more
Spencer-Rodgers, J., Hamilton, D. L., & Sherman, S. J. subsequent playing time than was merited by their
(2007). The central role of entitativity in stereotypes productivity on the court. There have also been
of social categories and task groups. Journal of demonstrations of escalation at the governmental
Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 369–388. level. The province of British Columbia’s decision
Yzerbyt, V. Y., Castano, E., Leyens, J. P., & Paladino, to host the world’s fair (Expo 86) involved escala-
M. P. (2000). The primacy of the ingroup: The tion of commitment, resulting in millions of dol-
interplay of entitativity and identification. European lars of losses. And, at the national and international
Review of Social Psychology, 11, 257, 295. level, wars and extended conflict (e.g., the Vietnam
War and the war in Iraq) are perhaps the most
costly examples of escalation.

Escalation of Commitment
Background and Causes
Escalation situations are contexts where individu- One of the primary causes of escalation of commit-
als have invested resources (usually money, but also ment is the individual’s need to justify or rationalize
time or energy) in pursuit of a particular goal, but his or her initial choice. By investing additional
after making scant progress toward the goal, they resources in a losing course of action, decision makers
must decide to withdraw or commit additional have the opportunity to demonstrate to themselves
242 Escalation of Commitment

and others that their initial decisions were, in fact, search for confirming evidence that helps them to
worthwhile and “rational” investments. justify past outcomes rather than predict future
To illustrate the importance of justification, outcomes.
Barry Staw conducted one of the earliest and most Similarly, because escalation decisions generally
well-known studies on escalation. In this study, involve losses, people may have a tendency to be
business students were asked to play the role of a more risk seeking in allocating additional resources.
corporate financial officer in charge of making an This is because losses are generally more painful
important investment decision. Their task was to than objectively equivalent gains are pleasurable.
allocate research and development (R&D) funds Therefore, although people may be more risk
to one of two operating divisions of a company averse in gain situations (to retain the gains), they
that had recently experienced a decline in earnings. tend to take more risks in loss situations (to pre-
Half of the participants allocated the R&D funds vent or recoup losses), resulting in escalation of
to a particular division, were given feedback on commitment. Finally, long-term personality differ-
their decision, and were then asked to make a sec- ences can also increase escalation, with individuals
ond allocation of R&D funds. The other half of focused on striving for personal achievement more
the participants did not make the initial investment likely to be subject to escalation tendencies.
decision themselves but were told that it was made Project-related causes pertain to objective fea-
by another of the company’s financial officers. tures of a project or decision. For instance, escala-
Feedback was manipulated so that half of the par- tion of commitment is more likely to occur when
ticipants received positive results on the initial decision makers believe that there is hope of turning
decisions and half received negative feedback. around a losing course of action, which in turn may
The results showed that participants allocated be more likely to occur when the negative feedback
significantly more money to failing divisions than is ambiguous or temporary. Similarly, if the invest-
to successful divisions, and the effects were most ment payoff is very large or if the costs associated
pronounced when they, rather than another indi- with escalating are deemed to be small, individuals
vidual, were responsible for the initial investment may be more willing to keep escalating.
decision. These findings have been replicated by Social causes often become involved when
other laboratory studies as well as field research on escalation decisions occur in interpersonal con-
issues such as the write-off of nonperforming bank texts. For instance, when individuals make their
loans. Such findings suggest that decision makers investment decisions in public, they can feel a
often seek to justify an ineffective course of action greater need to persist in a losing course of action
by increasing their commitment to it. Thus, so that they can save face in front of others. The
although economic actors should be prospectively need for face saving may be particularly strong if
rational and ignore sunk costs, individuals who individuals’ personal identities are tied to an
escalate their commitment appear to be “retro- investment decision. For example, leaders who
spectively rational,” honoring sunk costs in their are strongly identified with a losing course of
subsequent investment decisions. action may persist simply because consistency
Although justification is a key psychological and persistence (rather than inconsistency and
cause of escalation of commitment, researchers withdrawal) are patterns of leadership behavior
have systematically tried to examine other factors valued by the general public.
that can contribute to and exacerbate escalation. Thus, although much initial research on escala-
These escalation causes can be psychological, proj- tion involved simple situations where only one
ect related, social, or organizational. In addition to person made an investment decision, subsequent
justification processes, there are numerous psycho- research has identified escalation as a broader
logical causes of escalation. For example, people social phenomenon. One example of this is auction
are most likely to escalate their commitment if their bidding, where escalation of commitment can
initial decisions are unambiguous, freely chosen, occur when multiple parties try to outbid each
and open declarations. The way people search for other. In these and other social settings, factors
and process information can also affect their esca- such as competitiveness and rivalry can further
lation tendencies, because individuals tend to fuel escalation of commitment.
Essentialism 243

Finally, when we consider the wider context Staw, B. M., & Ross, J. (1987). Behavior in escalation
in which escalation decisions often occur, it situations: Antecedents, prototypes, and solutions.
becomes apparent that organizational factors Research in Organizational Behavior, 9, 39–78.
can also contribute to escalation of commitment. Teger, A. I. (1980). Too much invested to quit. New
Projects may gain political support over time and York: Pergamon.
become increasingly central to an organization’s
mission and culture. Projects can also gather sup-
porters as resources and careers become increas-
ingly staked to a course of action. Therefore, Essentialism
decisions that start with the actions of a single
manager (or small group of managers) can sub- Essentialism is a philosophical position on the
sequently grow into major commitments by an nature of categories. An essentialist view holds
entire organization. Once decisions have become that members of a category all share an inner
embedded within the organizational context, essence that makes them what they are. Whether
they may also be especially difficult to undo, or not philosophers agree, people often believe
even when withdrawal is in the organization’s that categories have essences, a belief known as
best interests. psychological essentialism. Some of the categories
As outlined above, individual needs to justify deci- that may be seen to have essences are social cate-
sions are often a starting point for escalation. gories or groups. Social psychologists have recently
However, numerous other factors can contribute to taken an interest in essentialist thinking about
the decision-making bias, especially when escalation groups because it seems to play an important role
decisions are viewed as occurring in social and orga- in stereotyping and prejudice. There is growing
nizational contexts. Because so many factors may evidence that people who perceive groups in
contribute to escalation of commitment, escalation essentialist ways are more likely than others to
can be very difficult to prevent. hold negative attitudes toward group members
Some research has considered how to reverse and are more likely to make rapid stereotypical
the causes of escalation to help individuals and judgments about people on the basis of their
organizations de-escalate. For instance, escala- group membership.
tion of commitment can be minimized by having This entry will discuss the concept of essential-
a neutral party (someone not involved in the ini- ism and review evidence for the role that essential-
tial investment and the need to justify it) deter- ist beliefs play in group processes and intergroup
mine the wisdom of allocating further resources relations. It first discusses the meaning of essential-
to the initial course of action. Nonetheless, there ism and what it means to have an essentialist per-
is often a natural momentum toward escalation ception of a social group. It then reviews research
that can compound early losses into larger and on essentialist thinking in relation to race and eth-
potentially dire consequences for individuals and nicity, gender, and sexual orientation, emphasizing
organizations alike. how essentialism is implicated in perceptions, atti-
tudes, and social behavior. It concludes with some
Gillian Ku and Barry Staw remarks about why it is important to study peo-
ple’s beliefs about the fundamental nature of social
See also Cognitive Consistency; Self-Esteem divisions.

Further Readings What Is Essentialist Thinking?


Brockner, J., & Rubin, J. Z. (1985). Entrapment in Among philosophers, a category that is believed to
escalating conflicts: A social psychological analysis. have an essence is known as a natural kind. A
New York: Springer-Verlag. natural kind is a naturally existing class of objects
Staw, B. M. (1981). The escalation of commitment to a that share deep-seated similarities, with biological
course of action. Academy of Management Review, species and chemical elements usually offered as
6(4), 577–587. examples. All tigers share underlying similarities, as
244 Essentialism

do all things made of silver—genetic material in Implications of Essentialist Beliefs


one case, and an atomic structure in the other—
and these essential similarities make them what There is ample evidence from several countries
they are. Silver is essentially different from a super- that racial and ethnic groups are often highly
ficially similar metal such as platinum, and a tiger essentialized—even by young children. It has been
remains a tiger even if it is dressed up to look like argued that essentialist beliefs are inaccurate in
a lion. this domain because racial and ethnic groups are
Philosophers tend to deny that most categories products of history, have no essential common-
do, in fact, have identity-defining essences, but alities, and do not represent discrete types. Never­
laypeople often hold essentialist intuitions all the theless, the visible, embodied nature of ethnic
same. People tend to believe that all tigers are differences seems to promote essentialist think-
fundamentally alike and that what makes them so ing, as does people’s tendency to selectively
is some unchanging and unobservable quality of reproduce within such groups so that ethnicity
tigerness. They may not know precisely what that appears to be transmitted genetically. The atti-
essence is, but they generally believe what some- tudes of people who believe that differences
one with suitable expertise could tell them. Social between people, and especially racial differences,
psychologists and anthropologists have shown are genetically determined have been shown to be
that these intuitions extend beyond the domain of more negative toward ethnic outgroups (e.g.,
folk biology into folk sociology: People often Germans’ attitudes toward Turks, and White
think that some social groups are like natural Americans’ attitudes toward Black Americans).
kinds. Holding essentialist beliefs about race also has
Essentialist beliefs about social groups appear interesting behavioral implications. In a study of
to have several distinct components. Essentialist Asian Americans, those who essentialized race had
thinking involves a belief that a social group is more difficulty negotiating their bicultural identi-
natural and that it has a biological basis. It involves ties and switching between their cultural frames
a belief that membership in the group is all- than those who did not. Thus in addition to foster-
or-nothing: Someone either is in the group or is ing negative views of ethnic outgroups, essentialist
not. It involves a belief that the group is unchanged beliefs appear to lead people to see ethnic differ-
through history and that a group member cannot ences as deep and difficult to bridge.
easily cease to be a group member: Membership is Gender categories are also commonly essential-
immutable. Finally, essentialist thinking implies a ized, even by young children. For this reason,
belief that similarities between group members are people tend to infer that the genders differ in fun-
deep-seated rather than merely superficial. To see damental, unchanging, and nonobvious ways and
a group in a nonessentialist fashion—as based on to exaggerate differences between them. People
social conventions rather than biology, as fuzzy, as who endorse higher levels of essentialist thinking—
culturally shaped and changeable—is to view it as belief in genetic determinism, in this case—tend to
a social construct. show more sexist attitudes toward women. These
Social groups are not all equally essentialized. implications extend to people’s relationship to
Research suggests that groups based on race, eth- their own gender, as women who believe that gen-
nicity, and gender are most essentialized, with der differences are biologically based tend to see
people commonly inferring that their distinctive themselves in stereotypically feminine ways.
physical features spring from underlying biologi- Essentialist thinking about gender also influ-
cal differences. In some cases, people may even ences behavior. One study showed that fathers
see differences between races or genders as akin who held more essentialist beliefs about gender
to the differences between biological species. differences provided less direct care for their
Thus groups differ in the degree to which they are young children and were less involved with them.
essentialized, and people differ in the degree to There is some evidence that men are more likely
which they essentialize groups. The implications to essentialize gender than women, and it has
of these differences between groups and between been argued that this is consistent with the view
people are explored as follows. that essentialist beliefs make existing status
Ethnicity 245

imbalances between men and women seem natu- Haslam, N., Rothschild, L., & Ernst, D. (2000).
ral and inevitable. Essentialist beliefs about social categories. British
Essentialist beliefs about sexual orientation are Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 113–127.
intriguingly different in their implications from Hirschfeld, L. A. (1996). Race in the making: Cognition,
beliefs about race, ethnicity, and gender. Homo­ culture, and the child’s construction of human kinds.
sexuality usually is not seen as essentialized to Cambridge: MIT Press.
the same degree as race and gender. In addition, Rothbart, M., & Taylor, M. (1992). Category labels and
whereas essentialist beliefs about race and gender social reality: Do we view social categories as natural
kinds? In G. R. Semin & K. Fiedler (Eds.), Language
tend to be associated with negative attitudes, simi-
and social cognition (pp. 11–36). London: Sage.
lar beliefs about homosexuality are often linked
Yzerbyt, V., Rocher, S., & Schadron, G. (1997).
to positive attitudes. People with more favorable
Stereotypes as explanations: A subjective essentialistic
attitudes toward gay people tend to believe that
view of group perception. In R. Spears, P. J. Oakes,
homosexuality has a biological basis that is N. Ellemers, & S. A. Haslam (Eds.), The social
unchangeable and inborn, whereas more preju- psychology of stereotyping and group life (pp. 20–50).
diced people tend to believe that it represents an Cambridge, UK: Blackwell.
immoral or perverse choice. Even if people with
antigay attitudes have anti-essentialist beliefs in
this way, however, they also have essentialist
beliefs that sexual orientations are deep-seated,
discrete (i.e., either-or), and linked to many differ- Ethnicity
ences between people.
Ethnicity is a multidimensional concept that
Why Essentialist Beliefs Matter involves both objective and subjective dimensions
of people’s sense of belonging to a community. At
The research sketched in this entry demonstrates its most basic level, an ethnic group can be defined
that people’s beliefs about the nature of social as a community of people who identify with each
groups are important for their group perceptions, other and who are recognized by others on the
attitudes, and social behavior. Other research basis of a presumed common genealogy, ancestry,
shows that it is not just beliefs about particular or heritage. Ethnic groups are typically character-
social groups that matter: People who believe that ized by cultural, linguistic, and religious practices
human attributes in general are fixed, biologically and behaviors that are shared among their mem-
based, and deep-seated tend to endorse stereotypes bers and that distinguish their members from
of a wide variety of social groups. Essentialist those of other groups. Thus ethnic group member-
thinking promotes stereotyping, antipathy to many ship often serves as a meaningful basis of self-
social groups, acceptance of existing social inequal- definition, as well as an influence on one’s
ities, and a tendency to see group differences as experiences and relationships with members of
chasms that are difficult to bridge. Social psycholo- other ethnic groups. This entry defines the term
gists have made great progress in explaining general ethnicity and discusses how it relates to terms
processes of ingroup–outgroup dynamics. Research such as race and culture, then describes the sig-
on essentialism shows that it is also important to nificance of ethnicity for one’s self-concept and
understand people’s beliefs about the underlying social relationships.
nature of groups and group differences.

Nick Haslam Definition and Comparison


See also Categorization; Entitativity; Stereotyping In common language, the term ethnicity is often
used interchangeably with related terms such as
Further Readings race and culture. Although there is a certain degree
Gelman, S. A. (2003). The essential child: Origins of of overlap in the definitions of these terms, some
essentialism in everyday thought. Oxford, UK: Oxford important distinctions also remain. Both race and
University Press. ethnicity involve a sense of shared genealogy, yet
246 Ethnicity

race focuses more on inherited genetic and physi- Italian Americans, Polish Americans) are now
cal characteristics, whereas ethnicity encompasses more commonly referred to under the broad label
both a shared genealogy and the cultural, linguis- of European Americans. Thus, the definitions of
tic, and religious practices that may be transmitted ethnic categories, and the meaning and significance
across generations within a community. Similarly, associated with those categories, can vary greatly
both culture and ethnicity can involve shared cul- over time and across contexts.
tural, linguistic, and religious practices and behav-
iors. Typically, however, culture refers to a broad
Significance for Identity
range of practices and behaviors that can be shared
among all people who live within a particular con- In addition, individual members of ethnic groups
text, whereas ethnicity refers more specifically to may also vary in the extent to which they regard
those that are shared among people who have a the ethnic group as a meaningful basis of identity.
common ancestry or heritage. One’s subjective identification with an ethnic
Due to this shared ancestry or heritage, people group, that is, ethnic identity, can play an impor-
often perceive ethnic groups as consisting of mem- tant role in many domains of one’s everyday life.
bers who share underlying, immutable qualities Ethnic identities continually develop and grow
that define the essence of the group; this is known through participation in cultural activities with
as essentialism. Thus, members of different ethnic other group members, such as ethnic celebrations
groups are sometimes believed to possess charac- and holidays, religious practices, and family gath-
teristics that are deeply rooted in nature and that erings. Having a strong identification with one’s
clearly distinguish them from members of other ethnic group can also contribute to a positive sense
groups. However, clear boundaries between eth- of self-esteem, to the extent that one has a positive
nic groups can often be difficult to determine and evaluation of the ethnic group.
may be decided due to a range of social and his- As a multidimensional concept, ethnic identity
torical factors, some of which may be relatively also includes many different components that can
arbitrary. influence one’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviors.
For example, Jewish tradition would describe For example, one’s ethnic identity may involve
one as being Jewish depending upon the ancestry feelings of belonging or emotional attachment to
of one’s mother, whereas in the context of Nazi the group, knowledge about and engagement in
Germany, being Jewish was defined in terms of the group’s customs and practices, a sense of com-
whether any Jews could be identified in one’s fam- mon fate and shared history among group mem-
ily ancestry. Ethnic group boundaries may also bers, and an internalization of the group’s norms
become blurred through histories of cross-ethnic and values. People may also adopt different
contact and intermarriage, which could result approaches in identifying with their ethnic group,
either from voluntary contact experiences (as in and in cultivating a sense of belonging within the
the case of immigration) or involuntary contact larger society (a process known as acculturation).
experiences (as in the case of conquest and/or People may seek integration—identification
slavery). with both the ethnic group and the broader soci-
Moreover, what we define as an “ethnic group” ety; separation—identification primarily with their
is somewhat malleable, in that ethnic categories ethnic group; assimilation—identification with the
may be construed more narrowly or broadly depend- society at large; or marginalization—identification
ing on the social context in question. For example, with neither of these communities.
in the national context of the United States, the term There are also many social and contextual fac-
Latinos is often used to refer to a single ethnic tors that can enhance or decrease identification
group, even though this broad category includes with one’s ethnic group in multi-ethnic societies.
people from a range of ethnic communities through- For example, if one’s ethnic group represents a
out North, Central, and South America. Similarly, numerical minority in a given context, that experi-
after many waves of immigration and the passing of ence can produce an enhanced awareness of ethnic
multiple generations, ethnic groups that were once group membership and, often, a stronger sense of
considered to be quite distinct (Irish Americans, identification with the ethnic group. Similarly,
Ethnocentrism 247

when resources are not equally distributed across research could usefully examine processes of iden-
ethnic groups in the larger society, recognition of tification and social relations when people belong
the group’s disadvantaged position can lead people to multiple ethnic groups, and how multiple group
to identify more strongly with their ethnic group. memberships might shift our perceptions of group
Changes in the nature and strength of one’s ethnic boundaries and the strategies we use to improve
identification can also emerge from ideologies and interethnic relations.
social conditions that exist in the social context,
such as pressures to reject one’s ethnic group and Linda R. Tropp and Jaeshin Kim
conform to norms of the larger society (e.g., assim-
ilation and color-blind ideologies), or alternatively, See also Ethnocentrism; Genocide; Intergroup Violence;
acceptance of ethnic group differences and open Minority Groups in Society; Multiculturalism; Racism;
Social Identity Theory; Status
support for their expression (e.g., integration and
multicultural ideologies).
Furthermore, some ideologies based on ethnic-
ity can provoke ethnic conflict and violence, rang- Further Readings
ing from segregation and exclusion to mass killings Bernal, G., Trimble, J. E., Burlew, A. K., & Leong,
and genocide. Although it is natural for people to F. T. L. (2002). Handbook of racial and ethnic
feel a certain degree of positive bias toward mem- minority psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
bers of their own group, or ingroup favoritism, Hutchinson, J., & Smith, A. D. (1996). Ethnicity.
some may view their own ethnic group as far supe- Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
rior to others, thereby using their group’s norms, Marger, M. N. (2005). Race and ethnic relations:
practices, and values as the standard against which American and global perspectives (5th ed.). Belmont,
all other ethnic groups are evaluated. This ethno- CA: Wadsworth.
centrism, or view of one’s ethnic group as superior, Phinney, J. S. (1996). When we talk about American
can then be used to rationalize and justify the ethnic groups, what do we mean? American
domination and exploitation of other ethnic Psychologists, 51, 918–927.
groups. Strategies are therefore needed to resolve Waters, M. C. (1990). Ethnic options. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
and prevent ethnic conflicts, and to encourage
more positive relations between ethnic groups. In
large part, strategies to reduce ethnic conflict must
focus on transforming institutional structures in
order to dismantle ethnic hierarchies and establish Ethnocentrism
social and economic equality among members of
distinct ethnic groups. Corresponding to these Membership in social groups is more than mere
changes, efforts should also be taken to diminish classification; it carries emotional significance as
group members’ support for ethnocentric beliefs well. Attachment to the groups to which one
and ideologies, and to instead promote norms of belongs, or ingroups, and preference for these
acceptance and appreciation of ethnic differences. ingroups over outgroups may be a universal char-
In sum, ethnic groups are communities of peo- acteristic of human social life. Ethnocentrism
ple who are presumed to share a common geneal- refers to this strong predilection for loyalty and
ogy, ancestry, or heritage, and whose members preferential treatment of one’s ingroups over
participate in shared cultural, linguistic, and reli- other groups, and the tendency to judge and
gious practices and behaviors. Although mem- evaluate others from the perspective of ingroup
bers of any given ethnic group are typically norms and practices.
perceived as having many characteristics in com- The study of ethnocentrism has a long history in
mon, there is often great variability in how social science research on intergroup relations.
strongly group members identify with their eth- Theories of ethnocentrism incorporate evolution-
nic group, and how their group membership ary perspectives, psychodynamic theory, and social
affects their life experiences and their relations psychological theories of group identity. Research
with members of other ethnic groups. Further on ethnocentrism documents the powerful effects
248 Ethnocentrism

of ingroup attachment on both intragroup and hundreds of studies in the laboratory and the field
intergroup behavior. This entry briefly reviews have documented ingroup favoritism in myriad
ethnocentrism, discussing its origins and the role forms. Preferential treatment and evaluation of
played in it by ingroup bias and examining several ingroups relative to outgroups appears in evalua-
theoretical perspectives on the concept. tions of group products, application of rules of
fairness in the allocation of resources to ingroup
and outgroup members, attributions for positive
History
and negative behavior, and willingness to trust and
The concept of ethnocentrism was introduced to cooperate. Further, the tendency toward preferen-
social science in a book entitled Folkways pub- tial treatment appears to arise automatically when
lished by William Graham Sumner in 1906. The any us–them distinction is made salient. Experi­
apparently universal tendency for human beings to mental social psychologists have demonstrated
differentiate themselves according to group mem- that even classifying individuals into arbitrary
bership was documented in the rich anthropologi- categories in the laboratory can elicit ingroup–
cal observations compiled by Sumner. Sumner outgroup feelings.
adopted the terms “ingroup” and “outgroup” to
refer to social groupings to which a particular indi-
Mere Categorization
vidual belongs or does not belong. He then went
on to speculate that ethnocentrism is a universal Although the term ethnocentrism was originally
consequence of this distinction between ingroups coined to refer to allegiance to ethnic group identi-
and outgroups. Ethnocentrism was defined as a ties, people’s tendency to favor members of their
kind of group self-centeredness characterized by a ingroups over those in outgroups has been found
sense of ingroup moral superiority and contempt to extend across all forms of group membership.
for outsiders. Groundbreaking experiments conducted by Henri
According to Sumner’s analysis, the essential Tajfel and his colleagues in Bristol, England, in the
characteristics of an individual’s relationship to early 1970s demonstrated that merely categorizing
ingroups are loyalty and preference. Loyalty is individuals into two arbitrary but distinct social
represented in adherence to ingroup norms and groupings was sufficient to elicit ingroup favorit-
trustworthiness in dealings with fellow ingroup ism. When given an opportunity to allocate money
members. Preference is represented in ingroup to other individuals known only by their category
pride and differential acceptance of ingroup mem- membership, participants chose to allocate higher
bers over outgroup members. Sumner contended rewards to members of their own category than to
further that all groups view outgroups with con- members of the outgroup category, even in the
tempt and hostility and that ingroup peace and absence of any personal identification of group
cohesion is maintained by intergroup competition members, any past history, or any direct benefit to
and conflict. As a consequence, the term ethnocen- themselves.
trism has come to mean both ingroup favoritism
and general negativity toward outgroups. The
Rules of Fairness
present review will focus exclusively on the ingroup
preference aspect of ethnocentrism (also known as The thing that is most surprising about the
ingroup bias) in order to distinguish ethnocentrism results of the Tajfel experiments is that partici-
from outgroup prejudice as a separate topic. pants were willing to allocate rewards in a way
that favored one individual (an ingroup member)
over another (an outgroup member) without any
Ingroup Bias
apparent justification for the inequality. The fact
The fact that individuals value, favor, and conform that allocations deviated from equal distribution
to their own membership groups (ingroups) over suggests that ingroup versus outgroup distinctions
groups to which they do not belong (outgroups) is alter concepts of what is “fair” or “just.” Equality
among the most well-established phenomena in as a rule of fairness assumes that individuals are
social psychology. Since Sumner’s 1906 book, the same in all relevant respects and hence deserve
Ethnocentrism 249

the same outcomes. Other rules of fairness take external or situational causes). Conversely, posi-
individual differences into account in determining tive acts and success are more likely to be attrib-
outcome distributions. The rule of equity, for uted to internal causes for ingroup members than
instance, holds that individuals should receive out- for outgroup members.
comes proportional to their inputs; thus, those This ethnocentric pattern of attributions was
who contribute more in terms of abilities or efforts labeled the “ultimate attribution error” by Thomas
should also receive more. Pettigrew, and it has been demonstrated in studies
One explanation for the presence of ingroup of attributions made by members of different eth-
favoritism in the minimal intergroup situation is nic groups, sports teams, schools, religions, and
that participants assume that members of their with arbitrary social categories in the laboratory.
own group have greater ability or aptitude than Because of ethnocentric attributions, ingroup mem-
members of the outgroup. Such biased evaluation bers are given the benefit of the doubt in ways that
of ingroup members is a basic element of ingroup outgroup members are not. In effect, ingroups are
positivity. Ethnocentrism also influences percep- credited more for successes and positive actions
tions of social justice and justice motives in gen- than are outgroups, and are less likely to be held
eral. Research provides evidence that group accountable for failures or negative actions. This
identification bounds the scope of people’s con- can explain why ingroup members are rewarded
cerns for social justice, so that motives for justice more when they outperform an outgroup member,
and fairness are more likely to be applied in deal- but the same performance is not rewarded as
ings with fellow ingroup members than with out- highly when produced by an outgroup member.
group members.
Cooperation and Trust
Ethnocentric Attributions
Group membership also plays an important role
One psychological mechanism that sustains dif- in how individuals respond to others when they
ferent perspectives on fairness is the attributions are in a situation of interdependence where each
that are made about the causes of others’ good or person’s own outcomes are affected by how the
bad fortune. If an individual performs well or suc- others behave. There are different social orienta-
ceeds because of personal effort, ability, and integ- tions and motives that individuals might bring to
rity, then he or she is perceived to deserve positive such situations. Most important is whether the
outcomes. Conversely, if an individual’s failure is individual has a cooperative orientation (where the
attributed to personal dispositions such as laziness, goal is to satisfy the needs and motives of everyone
incompetence, or dishonesty, then poor outcomes in the group) or a competitive orientation (where
are seen as deserved. However, the relationship the individual is attempting to maximize his or her
between behavior and outcomes is altered if the own outcomes relative to the others).
behavior is attributed to external factors, that is, it One factor that seems to influence choices in
is caused by circumstances outside the individual’s interdependent situations is the category member-
control. When good performance is attributed to ship of the participants. Even when participants
luck or external aid, positive outcomes are not are strangers to each other, if they know that they
deserved. And poor performance that was caused share a common ingroup membership, they are
by bad luck or handicapping circumstances does more likely to enter into cooperative responding
not deserve bad outcomes. than if they do not have a shared category mem-
The attributions that are made for another per- bership. Apparently, just knowing that another
son’s behavior can be influenced by knowledge of individual is a member of the same ingroup is suf-
the social group to which that individual belongs. ficient to increase the level of trust and coopera-
In general, failure and negative behaviors exhib- tion. Within the ingroup category, individuals
ited by an outgroup member are more likely to be develop trust and cooperate in solving shared
attributed to internal, dispositional causes than the problems. In situations of interdependence with
same negative behavior by an ingroup member outgroup members, however, individuals behave
(whose behavior is more likely to be attributed to less cooperatively.
250 Ethnocentrism

Ethnocentrism leads individuals to adopt a of selection and that selection favors genes that
cooperative orientation toward fellow ingroup produce behavior benefiting anyone who carries
members and to behave in ways that promote those genes, including other individuals who pos-
group welfare rather than individual self-interest. sess the same genes by common descent or kin
However, they are also more likely to adopt a relationships.
competitive orientation toward individuals who One implication of this model of evolution is
are members of outgroups, even when facing a that there is a genetic disposition for people to
common problem. This difference in orientation behave differentially toward “insiders” (kin and
toward interactions with ingroup and outgroup extended family likely to share common genes,
members gives rise to a pervasive ethnocentric ste- ingroups) and “outsiders” (nonkin, outgroups).
reotype, namely, that “we” (the ingroup) are hon- This idea is the basis for a sociobiology of ethno-
est, trustworthy, and moral, and “they” (outgroups) centrism, which holds that ethnocentric behavior
are treacherous and not to be trusted. derives from pursuit of inclusive genetic fitness.
Cooperation between individuals will occur only
to the extent that they have a high proportion of
Summary
shared genes, since helping close relatives perpetu-
The evidence from a number of different ates an individual’s own genes. Conversely, the
domains of social behavior demonstrates the likelihood of conflict between individuals or groups
importance of ethnocentric biases. When a par- of individuals increases as the proportion of shared
ticular group identification is engaged, individu- genes decreases. According to the sociobiological
als act in ways that favor ingroup members and view, the primal ethnic group is the small band of
promote ingroup welfare, even when that behav- 100 to 200 related individuals, within which the
ior is not consistent with individual egocentric human propensity for cooperative social arrange-
motives. However, ethnocentrism also engages ments is presumed to have evolved. Ethnocentric
preferential biases, extreme attitudes, and com- preference is extended to larger social groups
petitive orientation toward members of out- through the development of markers (skin pigmen-
groups. Thus, attachment and loyalty to one’s tation, hair and facial features, mannerisms, etc.),
own group benefits the ingroup, but often at the which signal genetic relatedness among unfamiliar
expense of outgroups. individuals.

Theories of Ethnocentrism Psychodynamic Theories


Given the pervasiveness of ethnocentric biases in Freudian theory departs somewhat from evolution-
social judgments and social behavior, understand- based biological models in assigning a greater role
ing why people display ethnocentric attachment to to experience and development in the origin of
their ingroups has been addressed from many the- ethnocentric identification. Freud’s own theory of
oretical perspectives. A few of the more prominent group identification centered on the role of the
theories will be reviewed here. group leader as the object of identification. Neo-
Freudian theory extended this idea to incorporate
all symbolic representations of the group as objects
Human Sociobiology
of identification. According to this view, group
Theories of human evolution take into account identification and ethnocentrism are the product
the overwhelming evidence that the human species of projection of the self onto external objects and
evolved in the context of group living. Evolutionary introjection/incorporation of objects into the sense
accounts of human psychology are based on analy- of self.
sis of the survival requirements associated with A recent extension of psychoanalytic approaches
living in hunter–gatherer societies. Sociobiological to understanding group identity is terror manage-
models of the evolution of human social behavior ment theory, which is based on the idea that
rest heavily on the notion of inclusive fitness. when human beings evolved the capacity for self-
These models assume that the gene is the basic unit awareness, this included awareness of mortality
Ethnocentrism 251

and the inevitability of their own death. Given the Agreeing with members of one’s ingroup appar-
universal instinct for self-preservation, this aware- ently increases certainty and the subjective validity
ness creates a high level of anxiety, which could of beliefs and attitudes. Finding out that others
lead to paralyzing fear if not sufficiently suppressed. disagree reduces certainty—but only if those oth-
According to the theory, human societies have ers are ingroup members. On many issues of val-
evolved shared worldviews and cultural values as an ues and preferences, we expect to agree with
adaptation to cope with this anxiety over death. By ingroup members but not necessarily with every-
subscribing to this worldview and living up to cul- one, so learning that outgroup members do not
tural values, individuals achieve a sense of validation, share our opinions or values does not shake our
self-worth, and a type of psychological immortality confidence in the correctness of those beliefs.
that serves to suppress mortality terror. Thus, only ingroup members count as sources of
One implication of terror management theory is validation, at least for subjective judgments. As a
that if thoughts of mortality are made salient, an consequence of this relationship between ingroup
individual will respond by reaffirming his or her membership and feelings of certainty, ingroup
own cultural worldview, with intolerance toward attachment and bias increases under conditions of
different values or cultural views. A number of uncertainty and doubt.
experiments have demonstrated just such a rela-
tionship between mortality salience and ingroup
Social Identity and Positive Distinctiveness
bias. When participants in these studies are induced
to think about the prospect of their own death (as Ethnocentric loyalty and preference are analo-
compared to other possible negative experiences, gous to self-integrity and self-esteem. Ethnocentrism
such as a painful dental procedure), ingroup pref- at the group level parallels egocentrism at the indi-
erence, intolerance of others, and intergroup bias vidual level. The comparison between egocentrism
are significantly increased. and ethnocentrism was reformulated by social psy-
chologists Henri Tajfel and John Turner in terms
of a distinction between personal identity and
Social Comparison and
social identity. Personal identity refers to self-
Uncertainty Reduction Theory
conceptualizations that define the individual in
A classic theory of group formation is provided relation to (or in comparison to) other individuals.
by Leon Festinger’s social comparison theory of Social identity refers to conceptualizations of the
affiliation, which was developed to explain why self that derive from membership in emotionally
members of groups tend to be so similar in atti- significant social categories or groups. Just as per-
tudes, values, and behavior. A basic premise of sonal identity derives from social comparison to
Festinger’s explanation is the idea that people need other individuals, social identity is defined by
a sense of subjective validity for their beliefs about intergroup comparison. Accentuation of inter-
themselves and the world around them. Much of group differences, combined with a need for posi-
our knowledge or understanding about the world tive distinctiveness in comparisons between ingroup
we live in does not come from direct personal and outgroup, results in ingroup favoritism.
experience. We may come to learn that ice is cold The shift between personal identity and social
and walls are solid by direct contact with these identity entails a transformation of the definition
objects, but much of our knowledge about what is of self from the individual to the group level. When
right or true—especially our knowledge about group identification is engaged, motivations for
social groups and social behaviors—has no such self-integrity, preservation, and self-esteem are
objective referent. To achieve a sense of validation transferred to the ingroup as a whole. Consequently,
of such beliefs, people engage in social reality test- ingroup status and collective welfare become
ing. Beliefs are seen as valid or appropriate when important to the individual’s sense of well-being.
they are shared by similar others. The more uncer- Consistent with this social identification perspec-
tain an individual is about the correctness of a tive, there is considerable experimental evidence
belief or attitude, the more important it becomes that once the self has become attached to a social
to find consensual support for that belief. group or category, positive affect and evaluations
252 Ethnolinguistic Vitality

associated with the self-concept are automatically


transferred to the group as a whole. And, con- Ethnolinguistic Vitality
versely, status and achievements of the group are
internalized by individual group members regard- The objective vitality of an ethnolinguistic group
less of whether or not they have directly contrib- (an ethnic group defined by its language) can be
uted to the group outcome. An individual’s sense of defined by factors such as economic status, geo-
self-worth is enhanced by the positive distinctive- graphic concentration, and political representa-
ness of his or her ingroup. However, some experi- tion, according to Howard Giles, Richard Bourhis,
mental research indicates that social identification and Donald Taylor. The greater the group’s objec-
with a group may actually be increased when the tive vitality, the more likely it is that group mem-
group is threatened or devalued. Overall, research bers will learn and maintain their ingroup language.
in this area supports the idea that positive ingroup According to ethnolinguistic identity theory, which
evaluation and collective self-esteem are the prod- explains language shifts, multilingualism, lan-
ucts of group identification rather than its cause. guage attitudes, and media use, perceptions of
group vitality are predictive of behavior. This
Marilynn B. Brewer entry looks at the implications of ethnolinguistic
vitality for intergroup relations, language shifts,
See also Categorization; Collective Self; Identification and multilingualism, and social attitudes.
Commitment; Ingroup Allocation Bias; Loyalty;
Minimal Group Effect; Nationalism and Patriotism;
Optimal Distinctiveness; Prejudice; Social Identity Language and Intergroup Relations
Theory; Xenophobia
Objective vitality enables a group to survive as a
distinctive and thriving collective entity. Groups
with higher vitality survive and prosper; groups
Further Readings
with lower vitality eventually cease to exist. Three
Brewer, M. B. (1979). Ingroup bias in the minimal factors combine to determine objective vitality:
intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational status variables, which include economic, social,
analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 307–324. and historic status as perceived from within and
Brewer, M. B. (1999). The psychology of prejudice: from outside the group; demographic variables,
Ingroup love or outgroup hate? Journal of Social which include territory, population numbers, rates
Issues, 55, 429–444. of birth, mixed marriages, immigration, and emi-
Castano, E., Yzerbyt, V., Paladino, M., & Sacchi, S. gration; and institutional support variables, which
(2002). I belong, therefore I exist: Ingroup identification, include formal and informal representation in the
ingroup entitvity, and ingroup bias. Personality and mass media, education, government services,
Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 135–143.
industry, religion, and culture. Objective vitality
Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (Eds.). (1993). Group
provides the sociostructural context for ethnolin-
motivation: Social psychological perspectives. London:
guistic phenomena, but individual people’s subjec-
Harvester Wheatsheaf.
tive beliefs about relative group vitality are
Levine, R. A., & Campbell, D. T. (1972). Ethnocentrism:
Theories of conflict, ethnic attitudes, and group
predictive of behavior. Subjective vitality has been
behavior. New York: John Wiley.
measured across cultures, usually as a single
Pettigrew, T. F. (1979). The ultimate attribution error: dimension, and has been found to vary between
Extending Allport’s cognitive analysis of prejudice. contexts and in the way it is structured—for exam-
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 5, 461–476. ple, depending upon what groups are being com-
Sumner, W. G. (1906). Folkways. Boston: Ginn and pared and the relative weighting of different facets
Company. of vitality.
Tajfel, H. (1970). Experiments in intergroup Ethnolinguistic identity theory builds on and
discrimination. Scientific American, 223(2), 96–102. elaborates social identity theory and combines
Turner, J. C. (1975). Social comparison and social with communication accommodation theory to
identity: Some prospects for intergroup behavior. make predictions about language use in intergroup
European Journal of Social Psychology, 5, 5–34. settings. Following social identity theory, it is
Ethnolinguistic Vitality 253

assumed that people are motivated to maintain a 50% will become extinct in the next generation.
positive social identity and that groups with higher This massive loss of languages is reflected in a
vitality confer more positive identity than groups comparable growth of languages such as Mandarin,
with lower vitality. Following communication English, Hindustani, Spanish, and Arabic. As a
accommodation theory, it is assumed that people social indicator, the number of speakers predicts
use language to psychologically accommodate to language survival. There is evidence, however, that
or differentiate themselves from others, and that people will fight against the loss of a language
doing so reflects beliefs about relative vitality. despite the low objective vitality of that language.
There are three social strategies that people can use Linguistic maintenance and revival movements are
to create a positive social identity. The first is social a case in point. Hawaiian, Gaelic, and Catalan
mobility, in which people in subordinate groups can have all declined dramatically in objective terms
disown their group and converge upon the language but have been saved from the brink of extinction
of a group that possesses higher vitality. This happens by language preservation movements driven by
when people have little commitment to their group concerns about subjective vitality.
and see the possibility of passing into a dominant Such psychological concerns may prevent
group as feasible. Social mobility is endorsed by “invented” languages from taking hold. The most
dominant groups that aim to assimilate minorities. successful of these languages, Esperanto, was
The second strategy is social creativity, in which devised by Ludvic Zamenhof in the late 1800s as a
people in subordinate groups may organize collec- universal auxiliary language that would facilitate
tively, but they avoid direct competition with a global communication. The idea was that people
dominant group. Examples include diglossic lan- would maintain their heritage language but use
guages such as those spoken in Switzerland, where Esperanto to communicate across otherwise insur-
there are High German and (low) Swiss German mountable group boundaries. Despite being easier
forms. Speakers of the low form are viewed more to learn than natural languages, it has never really
favorably on solidarity (e.g., friendliness and kind- caught on; relatively few people speak Esperanto.
ness) than status (e.g., wealth and intelligence), Ethnolinguistic identity theory suggests that the
whereas the reverse is true for those who speak the failure of artificial languages like Esperanto is in
high form. This happens when people have a part driven by their failure to produce sufficient
strong commitment to their group, when group ethnolinguistic distinctiveness for speakers. Indeed,
boundaries are considered impermeable, and when Esperanto is largely made up of European vowel
status relations between groups are highly stable. sounds and is easily mistaken for other languages.
Members of dominant groups will endorse social
creativity when their status advantage is unstable.
Multilingualism
The third strategy is social competition, in
which people in subordinate groups aim to equal- Code switching is the alternating of languages
ize or reverse their group’s low-status position by within an utterance or conversation. Well-known
promoting linguistic revival movements. This examples that have been elevated to the level of
occurs when people are highly committed to their incipient languages include Spanglish and
group, see group boundaries as impermeable, and Hinglish—a respective mixing of Spanish and
see the status relations between groups as unstable Hindi with English. On the one hand, these mix-
and/or illegitimate. Members of dominant groups tures can be thought of as forms of social creativity
are likely to engage in social competition when that exist within speech communities. Those who
aiming to prevail over competitive subordinate mix language in this way differentiate themselves
groups. Endorsement of majority-only language from other, “less sophisticated,” monolingual
policies is likely in this circumstance. ingroup members by using a second language such
as English, and they can thus promote a positive
identity for themselves. On the other hand, code
Language Shifts
switching may be perceived as leading to cleavages
Linguists estimate that there are 6,000 languages within a speech community. Those who maintain
in the world, and that at the current rate of loss, the heritage language without mixing in others’
254 Ethnolinguistic Vitality

codes may come to see themselves as the conserva- Patterns of social creativity are also evident, as
tors of a language that is threatened by a dominant a typical finding is that speakers from high-vitality
group, and hence engage in social competition to language groups are considered high on status
maintain their language. Finally, code switching variables (e.g., wealth, intelligence) but low on
between Spanish and English in the United States solidarity variables (e.g., friendliness, kindness),
can be regarded as a linguistic precursor to cultural whereas the reverse is true for speakers from rela-
assimilation and a form of social mobility. tively low-vitality language groups. This pattern is
When relatively high-vitality language groups extant in the North and South of England as well
come into contact, the result is typically positive. as in Italy, and it seems to reflect the division into
For example, nowadays when Anglo-Canadian historically competitive groups that no longer
children take immersive French-language instruc- engage in outright hostility. Finally, patterns of
tion, research shows that these children are equally mutual downgrading can be found in groups that
proficient in English and French and show no evi- are socially competitive. Further research by
dence of language loss or deficits in general intelli- Lambert and his colleagues in the 1960s, for
gence—a pattern of additive bilingualism. When example, showed that Palestinian and Israeli lin-
groups that differ sharply in language vitality come guistic guises were seen in ways that reflected the
into contact, however, the process of second-lan- group membership of the social perceiver.
guage learning is typically detrimental to the mem-
bers of the low-vitality language group—a pattern
of subtractive bilingualism. This has been proven Current and Future Work
to be the case with Inuit speakers who have been The concept of vitality, which as described above
schooled in English or French. In this case, these was originally tied to ethnolinguistic groups, has
children lack second-language proficiency and been broadened and is now applicable to nonlin-
even perform less well in their heritage language guistically defined groups. Research on aging has
than those given heritage language instruction. shown that the elderly are typically perceived as
possessing higher vitality in Western cultures (e.g.,
Language Attitudes United States, Canada, Australia) than in Eastern
cultures (e.g., Japan, South Korea, China), and
People typically view individual speakers through the that the middle-aged are viewed as possessing the
lens of their group’s language, which in turn reflects highest vitality across cultures. Most recently,
the relative linguistic vitality of groups. In the 1960s, research has shown that Blacks who are more eth-
Wallace Lambert devised the matched guise tech- nically committed avoid television and have
nique. Naïve subjects listened to tape recordings of decreased perceptions of group vitality. It is likely
different speakers and evaluated their personalities. that future research will continue to expand the
In reality, the tape contained recordings of the same concept of vitality to explain intergroup behavior
bilingual speakers using different languages, so any in nonlinguistic contexts.
evidence for differences in evaluation were attribut-
able to the language spoken. In the first study, Anglo- Scott A. Reid and Howard Giles
Canadian and French Canadian respondents
downgraded speakers who used the French guise See also Identification and Commitment; Language and
relative to the English guise. This pattern is under- Intergroup Relations; Multiculturalism; Power; Social
stood in ethnolinguistic identity theory as a pattern Identity Theory
that occurs when groups are defined by marked dif-
ferences in language vitality. The lower vitality lan-
guage group at the time, the French Canadians, were Further Readings
subjectively assimilating to the Anglo-Canadians. Giles, H., Bourhis, R. Y., & Taylor, D. M. (1977).
Since the rise of the Quebecois movement, however, Towards a theory of language in ethnic group
this pattern is likely to have equalized, if not reversed relations. In H. Giles (Ed.), Language, ethnicity, and
as the Quebecois shifted from a social mobility to a intergroup relations (pp. 307–348). London: Academic
social competition strategy. Press.
Eugenics 255

Giles, H., & Johnson, P. (1981). The role of language in could ensure that future generations would be the
ethnic group relations. In J. C. Turner & H. Giles descendants of the best members of society. These
(Eds.), Intergroup behavior (pp. 199–243). Oxford, ideas resonated with Victorian fears about moral
UK: Blackwell. decline and the associated perception that the most
Harwood, J., & Giles, H. (Eds.). (2005). Intergroup criminal and degenerate people were also the most
communication: Multiple perspectives. New York: prolific breeders.
Peter Lang. Galton felt that, for humanity to take control of
Harwood, J., Giles, H., & Bourhis, R. Y. (1994). The its evolutionary future, a more developed science
genesis of vitality: Historical and discoursal
of heredity was needed. To this end, he attempted
dimensions. International Journal of the Sociology of
to quantify the extent to which various traits, such
Language, 108, 167–206.
as criminality, drunkenness, and sexual promiscu-
ity, were inherited. The British eugenics movement
acquired the support of scholars and activists from
across the political spectrum.
Eugenics The establishment of eugenics as a political
force in the United States owes much to the work
Eugenics was a political and scientific movement of Charles Davenport, who published Heredity in
that sought to improve humanity by using the Relation to Eugenics in 1911. Davenport claimed
study of heredity to design programs aimed at that there were genetically determined tendencies
guiding human reproduction. It was based on an toward violent and criminal behavior among cer-
assertion that socially important traits are geneti- tain races. He saw the U.S. population as threat-
cally determined and that steps should therefore be ened by the “inferior” blood and “excessive”
taken to ensure that future generations are breeding of southern and eastern European immi-
descended from individuals with the best traits. grants and others with “undesirable” traits, includ-
Many eugenicists claimed that social categories ing Black people. These threats were to be countered
such as race show inherent differences in intellec- by restricting immigration and denying “defec-
tual and moral worth. The eugenics movement tives” such as criminals and insane people the
originated in England and was most influential in chance to reproduce, perhaps by forced steriliza-
the United States in the first half of the 20th cen- tion. Davenport’s ideas, spurred by the panic over
tury. Eugenics also played a role in other countries. the social problems that came with increasing
For example, in 1940s Germany, eugenics was urbanization, became central to the political agenda
used to legitimize the Holocaust. Eugenics has had of the eugenics movement in the United States.
a lasting influence on several issues relevant to Intelligence testing allowed eugenicists to quan-
group and intergroup processes today, including tify their vision of human worth in an apparently
racism, anti-immigration politics, and group differ- pure measure of innate intellectual ability. This
ences in intelligence. The history of eugenics and interpretation of the tests was contrary to that of
its current importance are reviewed in this entry. their originator, Alfred Binet, but it suited the
eugenics agenda perfectly. Within the military,
White people were found to score higher on the
History
tests than Black people. This was taken as evidence
Although some ideas and practices related to of the biological inferiority of Black people. It led
eugenics can be traced back to ancient Greece, the to the conclusion that trying to equalize opportu-
founder of the eugenics movement is generally nities in education was worthless because some
considered to be Francis Galton, who first pub- groups simply lacked the potential for educational
lished his ideas in 1865. Galton was impressed by achievement.
the writings of his cousin Charles Darwin on evo- Eugenics involved both “positive” interven-
lution by natural selection. This led him to suggest tions, which aimed to optimize reproduction
that it would be possible to take control of human among the genetically fit, and “negative” interven-
evolution by influencing who would reproduce tions to restrict it among the unfit. Positive inter-
and who would not. In this way, he argued, one ventions involved public awareness campaigns and
256 Eugenics

programs such as the “Fitter Families” competi- note, however, that the greatest damage to the
tions, whereby supposedly genetically fit people eugenics movement is likely to have come from
were identified and encouraged to produce off- its association with the Nazis. When the full
spring with one another rather than with the unfit. extent of the Holocaust came to light, few
“Fitness” was evaluated in terms of various criteria, wished to be associated with the eugenicist ide-
including educational success and physical health, ology that the Nazis had pursued so brutally.
which were assumed to be genetically determined.
The negative eugenics interventions are under- Contemporary Importance
standably more infamous. Forcing or persuading
Scientific Racism
those with what were seen as undesirable traits to
be sterilized was a common eugenicist strategy. The 1994 book The Bell Curve: Intelligence and
Throughout the world, there have been official Class Structure in American Life by Richard J.
and unofficial programs to sterilize criminals, the Herrnstein and Charles Murray was a clear sign
mentally ill, the mentally or physically disabled, that the central claims of the eugenics movement
and the poor. Wendy Kline has recently linked remain influential in the United States, although it
U.S. sterilization programs in the early 20th cen- provoked intense debate both within and beyond
tury with an attempt to control female sexuality. academia. The Bell Curve combines a resolute
Many women were sterilized simply because they genetic determinism, claiming that races differ sub-
transgressed conservative norms of sexual moral- stantially in inherited potential, with an associated
ity, which was assumed to be evidence of feeble- political agenda. It therefore echoes the leading
mindedness. The Norwegian government recently voices in the U.S. eugenics movement from 80
admitted to sterilizing hundreds of “gypsies” years earlier. This is not the only example of the
without their full knowledge or consent from continued assertion of genetically determined racial
1932 to 1977. In Nazi Germany, sterilization of differences in intelligence. The Pioneer Fund,
“defective” individuals later became racialized, which was founded by eugenicists in 1937, still
so that Jews and “gypsies” were seen as inher- exists and continues to fund research to support
ently defective. These efforts intensified and ulti- the basic claims that were central to the eugenics
mately led to the murder of millions in the movement.
Holocaust. This interpretation of the relationship between
Negative eugenics also took the form of agita- intelligence test scores and social status is impor-
tion against immigration, which had a major tant to understanding the legacy of eugenics as a
impact on policy. In Britain, the Aliens Act of 1905 political movement. If intelligence tests are seen
was directed against diseased and “idiot” immi- as direct tests of inherited ability, then observed
grants, while the U.S. Immigration Restriction Act differences between class and racial groups can
of 1924 was designed to severely restrict the num- be taken to imply that social hierarchy is based
ber of immigrants from Asia, eastern Europe, and on a natural hierarchy of merit, rather than on
the Mediterranean, whose presumed low intelli- injustice. This leads to the conclusion that
gence and high fertility were feared to threaten the attempts to improve living conditions and educa-
“racial purity” of the U.S. population. tional opportunities for low-status groups are
Despite considerable political influence at its futile; these groups occupy a low status because
peak, eugenics did not go unopposed. Some of the they are genetically predisposed to be unintelli-
strongest criticism came from geneticists who gent. Indeed, some argue that intelligence tests
objected to the distorted version of their science. remain so popular, despite continuing uncer-
Social scientists also sought to undermine the basic tainty about their meaning, because they help to
logic of eugenics by arguing that religious, ethnic, reconcile existing social stratification with the
and other groups share social and cultural simi- egalitarian values and meritocratic ideology that
larities rather than genetic ones. As such, they now prevail in some societies. Thus, a genetic
argued, efforts at improving society should be deterministic interpretation of intelligence test
made by social and cultural means rather than scores is closely connected with ideological ways
through managing reproduction. It is important to of viewing race and class that serve particular
Eugenics 257

political agendas. It can be seen as a form of to back their initiative to deport immigrants who
rationalization and legitimization. had been convicted of crimes. Posters showed a
There are many reasons to reject the genetic deter- group of white sheep grazing on the Swiss flag as
minist account of group differences in intelligence one kicked a black sheep off the flag. The headline
test scores. Even at the height of the eugenics move- for the poster read “Bringing Safety.” Although the
ment, it was noted that racial differences in the test threat posed by immigration tends to be expressed
scores were smallest in northern U.S. cities, where in terms of vaguely defined national “values” or
the economic disparity between White and Black “character” rather than genetics, allusions to race,
people was smaller than in the South, and intelli- color, blood, fertility, and other pseudogenetic
gence scores of immigrant groups increased as these concepts are not uncommon. Indeed, opponents of
groups became more established in America. Both immigration still claim that relatively high fertility
observations suggest that intelligence test scores rates and poor health among immigrants make
reflect the social and economic conditions of the them a particular threat to the host country.
groups being tested. This would be unlikely if intel- A return to the kind of organized academic
ligence tests were a direct measure of some geneti- movement of early 20th-century eugenics seems
cally determined quantity. unlikely today; eugenic ideas are too widely
Recent social psychological work on intelligence opposed in the biological and social sciences. A
also contradicts the genetic determinist account. For return to a concerted political movement that relies
example, research on the threat of stereotyping in directly on eugenics to advocate restricted immi-
relation to intelligence testing suggests that group- gration or the sterilization of the deprived, depraved,
based differences are contingent on the testing situ- or disabled also seems unlikely. However, rem-
ation, such that the standard testing procedures nants of eugenics seem to survive in some circles of
systematically inflate the scores of high-status groups contemporary academic and political debate. There
and depress those of low-status groups. The differ- is certainly no shortage of political rhetoric and
ences do not appear if participants are told that proposed policy that endorses the view that those
their test results have no diagnostic importance. with the best genetic profile should be encouraged
to reproduce, whereas those with the worst profile
should be discouraged. This rhetoric has height-
Anti-Immigration Rhetoric
ened implications in the light of advances in genet-
Since the eugenics movement first became fix- ics and the widespread interest in the human
ated on immigration at the turn of the 20th cen- genome project. As long as people continue to view
tury, immigration has not ceased to be a salient important social traits and behavior as genetically
political issue. On the contrary, it has become the determined, eugenic arguments will appeal to those
foremost issue in political debates around the who believe that the regulation of who reproduces
world, and recent years have seen an increase in with whom is a route to a better society.
public opposition to immigration in many coun-
tries. Anti-immigration rhetoric has, in a sense, Samuel Pehrson and Colin Wayne Leach
diversified. Immigrants are now seen in all sorts of
ways, including as terrorists, welfare scroungers, See also Dehumanization/Infrahumanization;
threats to public services, threats to cultural and Evolutionary Psychology; Immigration; Prejudice;
religious values, and competitors for presumably Racism; Stereotype Threat
scarce jobs and housing. Nonetheless, the tone and
content of the debate are often remarkably similar
to the arguments advanced by Davenport and Further Readings
other eugenicists. Croizet, J. C. (2007). The pernicious relationship between
Opposition to immigration is often associated merit assessment and discrimination in education. In
with a fear that the society will be harmed by the G. Adams, M. Biernat. N. Branscombe, & C. Crandall
admission of people of lesser quality who will (Eds.), Commemorating Brown: The social psychology
propagate undesirable traits. In a recent election in of racism and discrimination (pp. 153–172).
Switzerland, the Swiss People’s Party urged voters Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
258 Evolutionary Psychology

Keller, J. (2005). In genes we trust: The biological were scarce and valuable sources of needed calo-
component of psychological essentialism and its ries during our evolutionary past.
relationship to mechanisms of motivated social This entry provides an overview of evolutionary
cognition. Journal of Personality and Social psychology, examining its basic assumptions and
Psychology, 88(4), 686–702. its view of intragroup and intergroup processes.
Kevles, D. (1985). In the name of eugenics: Genetics and
the uses of human heredity. New York: Knopf.
Kline, W. (2001). Building a better race: Gender, sexuality Basic Assumptions
and eugenics from the turn of the century to the baby
One of the most controversial assumptions of the
boom. Berkeley: University of California Press.
EP perspective is that, because there were so many
strong and recurrent selection pressures through-
out evolutionary history, the human mind contains
a host of highly domain-specific cognitive algo-
Evolutionary Psychology rithms. Once they had been selected and could be
passed on genetically to offspring, these algorithms
Evolutionary psychology (EP) is a specific theoreti- permitted our ancestors to make rapid, efficient,
cal framework within the evolutionary sciences. reliable, and usually fitness-enhancing decisions
The EP perspective toward understanding human when confronted with issues and situations that
functioning and behavior has several unique fea- were most relevant to survival and reproduction
tures and cardinal assumptions that make it differ- across evolutionary history. According to the EP
ent from other major perspectives in the approach, the evolution of these genetically based
evolutionary sciences such as behavioral ecology algorithms accounts for much of the cross-cultural
and co-evolution. Scholars who adopt an EP per- consistency that is witnessed in many psychologi-
spective, for example, assume that the human mind cal features, ranging from which features of mates
has been shaped by tens of thousands of years of tend to be most attractive cross-culturally to which
rather focused selection pressures. Over time, these types of objects or social situations most people in
selection pressures have generated domain-specific vastly different cultures universally like, dislike,
cognitive algorithms (i.e., cognitive, emotional, or fear, become addicted to, or dread. This cardinal
behavioral responses that reliably occur in response assumption—that the human mind is comprised of
to a specific environmental stimulus or set of stim- many domain-specific cognitive algorithms, shaped
uli). These mechanisms, on average, helped our by past selection pressures, which helped our
ancestors make adaptive choices, judgments, and ancestors “solve” recurrent problems related to
decisions that in turn promoted their survival and their reproductive fitness with economy, efficiency,
reproduction (i.e., their reproductive fitness). and reliability—remains one of the most conten-
According to the EP perspective, therefore, our tious aspects of the EP framework.
minds are a reflection of the most important selec- In addition to knowing what the cardinal
tion pressures that our ancestors encountered dur- assumptions of EP are, it is equally important to
ing evolutionary history and, consequently, our understand what the EP perspective does not sug-
“stone age” minds are sometimes ill equipped to gest. It does not suggest that the environment and
deal with novel features and contingencies of the what people learn within their cultures or groups
modern world effectively. This explains why most is unimportant. In fact, virtually all EP-based mod-
people are morbidly afraid of snakes and heights els assume that one cannot understand the opera-
(which were recurrent, major threats to the repro- tion of evolved mental algorithms without also
ductive fitness of people throughout evolutionary knowing to which kinds of environmental stimuli,
history), but they are not afraid of cars or electrical events, or learning histories an individual has been
outlets, which kill many more people each year exposed. EP also does not presume that natural
than do snake bites or falls. It also explains why selection reflects what is “right” or “proper” (that
people have such difficulty limiting their intake of is, it does not fall prey to the naturalistic fallacy),
salty, fatty, and sugary foods, which are overly nor does it imply that naturally selected genes that
abundant in many parts of the world today but underlie specific mental algorithms invariably
Evolutionary Psychology 259

“determine” how people think, feel, and behave in with others in a totally altruistic manner might
different social situations. Genes cannot express have gone hungry if the favor was never returned
themselves in phenotypes unless they are trig- in times of need. It would have been more benefi-
gered by and unfold within the context of specific cial for the hunter to share only with those he
environments. could expect to reciprocate some time in the future.
Across evolutionary history, one of the strongest This pattern of social interaction is known as
and most persistent selective pressures on the reciprocal altruism, which is the foundation for
human mind was other humans with whom indi- many forms of social exchange within both human
viduals had to sometimes cooperate and sometimes and nonhuman groups. Indeed, this form of
compete. Indeed, one of the primary reasons for exchange has even been found to characterize pat-
the rapid and massive development of the neocor- terns of blood sharing among vampire bats.
tex in humans is likely to have been the tremendous
selection pressures imposed by the need for early
Punishing Cheaters
humans to live in groups and work cooperatively
when possible. For this reason, it is important to Traditionally, social exchange research relied
consider how the EP approach can extend and heavily on an economic model of motivation in
enrich our understanding of intragroup and inter- which people were expected to maximize their
group processes, topics that are discussed next. own outcomes (that is, rewards minus costs). An
economic perspective, however, fails to account
for why people exhibit a strong desire to punish
Intragroup Processes cheaters—those who reap the benefits of coopera-
Intragroup, or ingroup, processes are interactions tion without paying associated costs. Research
within social groups. These interactions often take suggests that (a) this desire is motivated by anger—
the form of mutual cooperation to achieve some the less a cheater contributes to the group relative
common goal. In the hunter–gatherer groups from to others, the greater the anger that is felt by the
which we evolved, for example, men probably other group members; and (b) the desire to punish
formed coalitional hunting parties to bring down can at times be so strong that people will punish
large game, and a successful hunter most likely cheaters even at substantial cost to themselves.
shared excess meat with others. This sharing car- These findings, which cannot be explained post
ried relatively low costs because a single kill was hoc by purely economic models, can be under-
often more than a single family could consume stood from the EP perspective. Punishing cheaters
before spoilage. Furthermore, the benefits of shar- in social exchanges is adaptive if doing so inhibits
ing would have been high if others reciprocated them from cheating in the future. When cheaters
when the same hunter was later unsuccessful. are rare, punishers have to punish infrequently
This example illustrates a fundamental tenet of and, thus, bear sporadic and minimal costs.
the EP perspective: In order for a behavior to have Too many cheaters in a group, however, may
evolved, the benefits of engaging in the behavior result in very high costs for the punishing individ-
must have, on average, outweighed the costs. If the ual. Accordingly, individuals should also have
costs outweighed the benefits, the behavior would evolved to prefer those who are cooperative and
have been selected against. Because social exchange trustworthy group members. Various studies have
within groups is potentially risky, natural selection demonstrated that, across a range of interdepen-
may have favored cognitive algorithms designed to dent group types, people consistently value trust-
make accurate impressions of potential exchange worthiness and cooperativeness in other people
partners, maximizing the benefits and minimizing above and beyond nearly all other characteristics,
the costs associated with an exchange. including intelligence and physical attractiveness.
People also prefer group members who are famil-
iar and highly committed to the group, both of
Reciprocal Altruism
which are cues of more or better social exchange
Reconsidering the example of the successful opportunities in the future and, therefore, a higher
hunter, a hunter who indiscriminately shared food chance of reciprocation.
260 Evolutionary Psychology

Threats to Security Intergroup Processes


One final important component in the selec- Intergroup processes are interactions between social
tion of group members is the ability of others to groups. Traditional social psychological perspectives
reciprocate. Simply possessing or demonstrat- toward prejudice, discrimination, and intergroup
ing a willingness to reciprocate is not sufficient. conflict have examined how and why intergroup
Sometimes individuals involuntarily extract clashes occur. Several psychological processes that
benefits without contributing to or reinvesting might be responsible for intergroup conflict have
in the group (e.g., due to age or disability). been studied, ranging from ingroup versus outgroup
Punishing such people would invoke costs to categorization processes, to social learning pro-
the punisher without benefits. Thus, the per- cesses, to perceived competition for limited resources,
ceived reason for others’ cheating should theo- to the motivation to enhance one’s views of the self
retically influence whether or not they are or one’s group. These approaches, however, have
punished. Recent research shows that people relied exclusively on domain-general cognitive pro-
are less likely to punish someone whose cheat- cesses and mechanisms that fail to make important
ing is outside his or her control, especially if distinctions between specific stereotypes associated
this lack of control is attributable to a tempo- with specific groups, different patterns of emotions
rary infirmity. Instead of feeling angry toward and behaviors that are typically elicited by members
such “cheaters,” most people experience feel- of different groups, or contextual and personality
ings of empathy and/or pity. factors that are likely to evoke or inhibit these ste-
Infirmities, however, can pose a threat not reotypes, emotions, and actions.
only to the ability of fair exchange ability within Why, for instance, in the United States, do
a group but also to the safety of group members. Native Americans often elicit pity from people and
The intense sociality of most human groups motivate them to establish community-outreach
increases the likelihood of pathogen exchange programs? Why, on the other hand, do Blacks
between group members. Being social, in other often elicit fear and the desire to protect oneself?
words, typically leads to increased physical And why, more globally, are individuals concerned
proximity, which can facilitate the transmission about contracting infectious diseases especially
of infectious agents. As a result, adaptations prejudice against people who are physically
may have evolved to minimize exposure to and deformed or disfigured, whereas individuals who
maximize distance from individuals who appear see the world as a dangerous place are most preju-
to be contagious. In this regard, physical disgust diced against members of ethnic outgroups?
tends to be elicited by those who exhibit signs of Steven Neuberg and Catherine Cottrell have devel-
disease, such as open sores and discharged oped a new evolutionary conceptualization of the
bodily secretions. This suggests that a disgust origins of intergroup prejudices and conflict based on
response may have evolved to protect people the assumption that many modern-day prejudices
from contagion. may be by-products of adaptations that were origi-
In sum, empirical evidence supports EP-based nally designed by natural selection to manage threats
predictions that (a) people are drawn to partners to intragroup processes. This new approach can
with whom interactions tend to result in relatively answer questions, including those posed above, that
greater benefits than costs, (b) people punish those traditional approaches struggle to explain.
who threaten the equity of exchange within social Because interracial contact is too recent a devel-
groups, and (c) people avoid contact with those opment to have evolved genetically, the EP per-
who are perceived to pose a physical threat to spective does not argue that there should be an
group security. EP-based theories of ostracism and evolved prejudice against a given race or group of
stigmatization of group members who are per- people. Although ancestral tribal groups might
ceived to pose a threat to ingroup cooperativeness have come into contact with other tribal out-
(e.g., cheaters) and safety (e.g., persons with dis- groups, geographic limitations during evolutionary
ease) have increased our understanding of inter- history probably limited most contact to racially
group processes, especially prejudices, which are similar others. Instead, EP theorists argue that
discussed next. humans evolved the capacity to perceive threats
Evolutionary Psychology 261

that could be posed by outgroups and, thus, to psychological approaches, which fail to fully
attend to cues linked with outgroup membership. explain these differences in prejudice, the EP per-
In contemporary society, physical differences spective anticipates that prejudicial responses ought
between races serve as one such cue, so individuals to differ in response to the specific type of threat
in multiracial societies such as the United States linked to the stereotype associated with an out-
learn to classify others based on race. Traditional group.
explanations of racial prejudice, such as the need to
enhance self-esteem or group esteem, fail to explain Situational and Dispositional Influences
why different groups elicit different types of preju-
dices, why these prejudices are often contingent on In addition to explaining how broad environ-
the personality of the perceiver, and why they are mental contexts, such as culture, influence per-
evoked by different kinds of situational cues. ceived threats and group-based prejudice, the EP
approach also predicts that more immediate situ-
Cultural Influences ational and dispositional contexts should influence
perceptions of threat. For example, if prejudice
According to the EP approach, evolved responses against Black men is based on a perceived threat to
are not genetically determined. Instead, they are physical safety, situations that pose a greater risk
environmentally contingent and activated by spe- to safety ought to elicit stronger prejudicial
cific contextual information. In the case of racial responses against this group, but not against
prejudice, an individual’s cultural environment is groups that are not stereotypically associated with
likely to shape the specific threats that are attrib- this form of threat. Likewise, the EP perspective
uted to members of a specific racial group. Such would anticipate that people who are chronically
threats, however, are of evolutionary significance concerned about physical safety should be more
and, therefore, they should trigger evolved adap- biased against a group perceived to threaten phys-
tive responses designed by natural selection to ical safety than people who are less concerned
avoid or eliminate the perceived threat. about this threat. These predictions have been sup-
For instance, in the United States, people are ported by recent empirical evidence. Once again,
exposed to the stereotype that Black men (but not such evidence cannot be explained by traditional
women) are dangerous and more likely to commit social psychological theories, yet it was predicted a
violent crimes. Regardless of its accuracy, this ste- priori by evolutionary theorists.
reotype leads to the perception of threatened Findings such as these have significant implica-
physical safety. This threat perception, in turn, is tions for interventions intended to reduce or elimi-
associated with greater reported fear and a strong nate between-group prejudice. Neuberg and
desire for self-protection. Gay men, in contrast, are Cottrell argue that, because situational, disposi-
stereotyped as spreading disease (e.g., AIDS) and tional, and cultural contexts all interact to form
are thus perceived to threaten health. Instead of different stereotypes of different groups held by
fear, this threat perception evokes physical disgust different people, different interventions may be
and motivates health-protecting behaviors such as needed to combat and reduce these prejudices.
avoiding direct or indirect physical contact. One cannot presume, for instance, that an inter-
According to the EP perspective, there is not an vention designed to reduce the fear directed toward
evolved prejudice against Black men or gay men; Black men will also reduce disgust often elicited by
rather, there is an evolved prejudice against those gay men. Current interventions could be apprecia-
who are believed to threaten safety or carry disease. bly improved by incorporating evolutionary prin-
To the extent that cultural stereotypes portray ciples and findings.
Black men as being dangerous or gay men as carry-
ing disease, prejudicial responses associated with Jeffry A. Simpson and Jonathon LaPaglia
protecting oneself from physical harm or disease See also Cooperation and Competition; Discrimination;
should follow. In both examples, cultural stereo- Ethnocentrism; Homophobia; Intergroup Emotions
types generate perceptions of threat and elicit Theory; Intergroup Violence; Ostracism; Prejudice;
specific emotional and behavioral responses that Realistic Group Conflict Theory; Stereotyping; Stigma;
serve to reduce the threat. Unlike traditional social Xenophobia
262 Experimentation

Further Readings This entry provides an overview of the experimen-


tal method, describing how experiments are con-
Buss, D. M. (2004). Evolutionary psychology: The new
ducted and the basic issues and dilemmas
science of the mind (2nd ed.). Boston: Pearson Educational.
researchers face when designing an experiment.
Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). The evolution
of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 573–587. Overview
Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). Trade-offs,
the allocation of reproductive effort, and the An experimental investigation of group processes
evolutionary psychology of human mating. Behavioral begins with the formulation of a hypothesis, a for-
and Brain Sciences, 23, 624–644. mally stated expectation about how certain inde-
Kurzban, R., & Neuberg, S. (2005). Managing ingroup pendent variables will affect certain dependent
and outgroup relationships. In D. Buss (Ed.), The variables. Hypotheses may be formed on the basis
handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 653–675). of prior research or assumptions about how the
New York: John Wiley. world operates. Once a hypothesis has been
Neuberg, S. L., & Cottrell, C. A. (2007). Evolutionary formed, it is then tested in a controlled study.
bases of prejudices. In M. Schaller, J. A. Simpson, & In 1968, an experiment conducted by Bibb
D. T. Kenrick (Eds.), Evolution and social psychology Latané and John Darley on bystander intervention
(pp. 163–187). New York: Psychology Press. hypothesized that the more individuals who osten-
Schaller, M., & Neuberg, S. L., (2007). Intergroup sibly witnessed an emergency, the longer it would
prejudices and intergroup conflicts. In C. Crawford & D. take for any one individual to intervene in the
L. Krebs (Eds.), Foundations of evolutionary psychology emergency. In an experiment designed to test this
(pp. 399–412). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. hypothesis, Latané and Darley placed an individual
Schaller, M., Park, J. H., & Mueller, A. (2003). Fear of participant in a room containing an intercom and
the dark: Interactive effects of beliefs about danger and told the participant that one or more other partici-
ambient darkness on ethnic stereotypes. Personality pants were seated in different rooms. Participants
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 637–649. were led to believe that they would engage in a
group discussion with one other person, two other
people, or five other people. During the subsequent
discussion, the participant heard a fellow group
Experimentation member ostensibly having a seizure (in actuality,
participants heard a taped recording of an actor
Social scientists have a plethora of ways to gather faking a seizure). The researchers then measured
information about group processes. To describe how long it took the participant to seek help for
how groups operate, researchers can observe the person who was in distress.
groups in action, examine archival data sources, Besides manipulating independent variables and
and use interviews or questionnaires to ask indi- measuring dependent variables, experiments such
viduals about their beliefs and motivations. All of as the one conducted by Latané and Darley involve
these techniques are useful, but none allows firm random assignment of participants to experimen-
statements about causality. For this reason, tal conditions and control of extraneous variables
researchers often utilize experiments, which, if that might affect the dependent variables. In the
properly conducted, allow strong inferences about Latané and Darley study, the number of persons
the factors that produce various group behaviors. ostensibly present while the participant heard the
Because of this ability, experimentation is the seizure was the independent variable. It is the inde-
most widely used methodology in group research. pendent variable that is believed to cause a change
Experimentation involves the manipulation of in the dependent variable, in this case the length of
one or more independent variables to investigate time it took the participant to seek help.
the effects on one or more dependent variables. As hypothesized, the researchers found that the
Experimentation is a powerful method because it larger the group, the longer it took for participants
allows the researcher to draw causal explanations to seek help. The researchers were confident
about the “hows” and “whys” of group processes. that the changes they observed in the dependent
Experimentation 263

variable were not a result of preexisting differences a number of subject effects can threaten internal
in the participants because these people had been validity. Subject effects are aspects of the experi-
randomly assigned to different levels of the inde- ment that produce “artificial” behavior on the part
pendent variable. In social science research, par- of participants. These may take the form of demand
ticipants inevitably bring unique individual characteristics, which are features of the experi-
differences, such as personality traits and life expe- ment that appear to require specific responses from
riences, into a study, and these in turn may affect participants and hence bias how they respond. For
their response to the dependent variable regardless example, when an experimenter is aware of the
of their experimental condition. Randomly assign- hypotheses, he or she inadvertently may express
ing participants to different levels of the indepen- subtle cues that cause the participant to respond in
dent variable minimizes the impact of such factors a way that confirms the hypotheses. Experimenters
on the dependent variable. By ensuring that each can minimize this issue by using a procedure in
participant has an equal chance of being assigned which they remain ignorant of which participants
to each of the experimental conditions, any sys- are assigned to which conditions (e.g., by having
tematic differences between participants is ran- others assign participants to conditions and
domly distributed across conditions. employing techniques, such as recorded instruc-
In addition to participants’ individual differences, tions, which mask condition assignments during
other factors may also affect how they respond to the experiment). In addition, participants may
the dependent variable. For example, if one condi- want to portray the best possible image of them-
tion were run in a setting characterized by frequent selves, which can cause them to act in socially
interruptions while another condition were run in a desirable ways that interfere with a spontaneous
setting without such interruptions, the level of inter- and natural response to the experimental manipu-
ruptions might influence how the participants lations. In all of these situations, the experimental
responded to the independent variables. For this manipulation may not be the only variable affect-
reason, experimenters strive to create conditions ing participants’ response on the dependent vari-
that are as similar as possible, except for the inde- able. Therefore, experimenters must be sensitive to
pendent variable of interest. By holding constant threats to internal validity and make serious efforts
such extraneous variables, the researcher gains con- to avoid them.
fidence that the independent variable of interest in
fact caused any change in the dependent variable.
Field Experiments
As noted, the major advantage of laboratory
Types of Experiments experiments is the substantial control they provide
to the researcher. However, the results of labora-
Laboratory Experiments tory experiments may not generalize to situations
The classic group experiment is conducted in a that exist outside the laboratory. To circumvent
laboratory setting. This setting has several advan- this drawback, field experiments can be conducted
tages. First, random assignment of participants to in more naturalistic settings. In contrast to labora-
conditions is fairly easy to accomplish. Second, the tory experiments, field experiments are often high
laboratory setting allows precise manipulation of in external validity—the extent to which the results
independent variables, as well as a high degree of of the experiment can be generalized to different
control over extraneous variables. Finally, labora- settings, participants, and times.
tory researchers can use precise dependent vari- Inspired by the Darley and Latané’s bystander
ables. Taken together, these characteristics yield intervention study, Irving Piliavin, Judith Rodin,
studies that are high in internal validity—the and Jane Piliavin examined helping behavior in the
extent to which cause-and-effect statements can be tumultuous context of a New York subway train.
made on the basis of the results of the study. In their study, a team of researchers staged an
But there are also some downsides to labora- emergency situation, in which an apparent victim
tory experiments. Because participants in such collapsed in full view of the train passengers, then
experiments are aware that they are being observed, members of the research team, acting as passengers,
264 Experimentation

measured the time it took for bystanders to inter- participants’ dignity. As an aid to researchers, the
vene. The independent variables in their study were American Psychological Association has estab-
the type of victim (drunk or ill), the race of the lished a set of guidelines for ethical conduct of
victim (Black or White), and the presence or research involving human participants. These
absence of a helping model. A major strength of guidelines are based on five principals: (1) protect-
field experiments is that researchers can take ing participants from harm, (2) maintaining par-
advantage of preexisting settings to introduce sys- ticipants’ right to privacy, (3) minimizing deception,
tematic variations and determine their effects. (4) obtaining informed consent from the partici-
Thus, because participants in field experiments are pants prior to a study, and (5) fully debriefing
generally not aware that they are participating in a participants at the conclusion of the study.
study, field experiments are low in subject effects. Experimenters must take great care to ensure
However, field experiments are vulnerable to the welfare of participants and protect them from
threats to internal validity. One drawback of such physical and psychological harm. While physical
experiments is the difficulty of randomly assigning harm to participants is not difficult to assess, psy-
participants to different conditions. In addition, in chological harm is often harder to measure. For
contrast to laboratory settings, where situations this reason, experimenters must make substantial
can be created that are identical except for the inde- efforts to ensure that participants do not experi-
pendent variables of interest, such control is more ence undue stress either during the experiment or
difficult to attain in real-world settings. For instance, afterwards. This is particularly important when
Piliavin, Rodin, and Piliavin could not control the experimenters gather information of a sensitive
number or demographic characteristics of the train nature, such as strongly held attitudes and beliefs
passengers in each condition of their study. about sexual orientation, race, and so forth. In
It is extremely difficult to design an experiment such cases, researchers must ensure participant
that is high in both internal and external validity; confidentiality by removing personally identifying
therefore, researchers typically must choose one information from data.
over the other. In so doing, they have to weigh the A controversial topic in group research is the use
pros and cons of the two kinds of validity and seek of deception. In some cases, deception is necessary
an optimal trade-off between control and realism. to study a particular phenomenon. For example,
Deciding on the appropriate methodology depends both the Darley and Latané and the Piliavin, Rodin,
largely on the research question—whether it is and Piliavin studies led participants to believe that
process oriented or problem oriented. Process- they were witnesses to an emergency situation when
oriented questions focus on understanding the in fact they were not. Because deception raises ethi-
underlying causes of a phenomenon, while prob- cal concerns, group researchers go out of their way
lem-oriented questions focus on solving a specific to avoid it unless it is absolutely essential.
problem. Of course, these two kinds of questions Two final ways to safeguard the rights of par-
are often interdependent, because in order to solve ticipants are to obtain informed consent prior to
a specific problem one needs to understand the participation and to fully debrief participants after
mechanisms that underlie it. Nevertheless, process- the experiment. As thoroughly as possible, research-
oriented questions, which deal with basic mecha- ers should describe the procedures used in the
nisms such as perception, motivation, and emotion, experiment before the study and obtain partici-
are best addressed using laboratory experiments, pants’ consent to take part. Participants should be
whereas problem-oriented questions, in which the informed that they have the right to withdraw
social context is key to developing a solution, are from the study at any point without repercussion.
best addressed using field experiments. At the conclusion of the experiment, researchers
should debrief participants. By offering a detailed
explanation of the experiment and its broader
Ethical Concerns
implications, any use of deception can be explained
By working with human participants, social scien- and justified. In addition, participants can leave
tists face a unique ethical dilemma between gather- the study with an increased understanding of the
ing scientifically valid evidence and maintaining phenomenon being studied.
Extended Contact Effect 265

Conclusion authored one of the earliest statements of this


hypothesis. However, it was Gordon Allport who
In an experiment, through random assignment of
in 1954 provided the most influential account of
participants to conditions and the control of extra-
the circumstances under which contact across
neous variables, the researcher creates an environ-
groups can effectively reduce prejudice.
ment in which only the independent variables
His hypotheses inspired an enormous volume of
could plausibly influence responses on the depen-
scientific research. However, there are many good
dent variables. For this reason, the experiment,
reasons why most people cannot, or do not, enjoy
whether conducted in the laboratory or the field, is
friendly contact with members of other groups.
a powerful tool for investigating group processes.
Thus, the power of cross-group contact to create
Danielle L. Blaylock tolerance and respect might appear quite limited.
However, social psychologists have shown that
See also Action Research; Levels of Analysis; Research cross-group friendships can have positive effects
Methods and Issues; Survey Methods not only on those actually involved, but also on
others who are aware of them—thus the extended
contact effect. This entry reviews supporting evi-
Further Readings dence of this effect and possible explanations for
Aronson, W., Wilson, T. D., & Brewer, M. B. (1998). its occurrence.
Experimentation in social psychology. In D. T.
Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook
Supporting Evidence
of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 99–142).
New York: McGraw-Hill. The extended contact effect was formally intro-
Campbell, D. T. (1957). Factors relevant to the validity duced in 1997 with evidence from a series of stud-
of experiments in social settings. Psychology Bulletin, ies. Two studies were surveys of Whites, Latinos,
54, 297–312. and Blacks. Respondents indicated how many
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental people they knew from their own ethnic group who
and quasi-experimental designs for research on had a friend in one of the other ethnic groups. They
teaching. In N. L. Gage (Ed.), Handbook of research also answered questions measuring their attitudes
on teaching (pp. 171–246). Chicago: Rand-McNally. toward the two other ethnic groups. Both surveys
Reprinted as Experimental and quasi-experimental showed that compared to people who knew of
designs for research. Chicago: Rand-McNally. fewer cross-ethnic friendships, people who knew
about more friendships between members of their
own group and another ethnic group had more
positive attitudes toward that other ethnic group.
Extended Contact Effect Subsequently, surveys have shown the same
positive effect of extended contact for numerous
According to the extended contact effect, merely other groups, including both Catholics and
knowing that a member of our group has a close Protestants in Northern Ireland; German adults
friend from another group can improve our atti- toward “foreigners” and Muslims; German school
tudes toward that group. This means that even a children toward Turkish children; heterosexuals
relatively small number of cross-group friendships toward gay men in both Vancouver, Canada, and
can have a wide impact on prejudice and thus can in New York; White and South Asian high school
influence relations between groups on a large scale. students in Britain; and White, Chinese, and South
The extended contact effect is an expansion of the Asian groups in Vancouver, Canada. In every case,
contact hypothesis, which has a longer history. the more friendships that a person knew about
Sixty years of research has convincingly demon- their own group and another group, the more
strated that positive interactions with people from positively they felt toward the other group.
another group, under the right circumstances, can However, in these survey studies, extended contact
reduce prejudice and create feelings of warmth and and attitudes toward the other group are measured at
respect toward that group. In 1947, R. M. Williams the same time. Therefore, it could be that knowing
266 Extended Contact Effect

about more cross-group friendships leads a person to extended contact effect, those who watched a
hold more positive attitudes—the extended contact cross-group friendship later gave more positive
effect. However, the causal influence behind these evaluations of the other group (the underestimat-
results could just as well be in the opposite direction: ers) than did those who watched a cross-group
Perhaps people with more positive attitudes seek out interaction between strangers or hostile enemies.
situations where there will be more interactions
between the two groups, so they find out about more
Underlying Processes
cross-group friendships. To be certain that extended
contact causes improvements in attitudes, controlled Why does observing the cross-group friendship of
experimental studies were required. others reduce our prejudice? Several explanations
Two different types of experiments have been seem to have merit. First, there is considerable evi-
done. One type has been carried out in the field dence that cross-group interactions can be a source
and involves direct interventions with schoolchil- of anxiety and concern, and these feelings can
dren. In one study, for example, British elemen- strengthen negative attitudes toward the other
tary school children were randomly divided into group and lead us to avoid these interactions.
groups. The researchers then read stories about Observing cross-group friendships can reduce this
friendships between British and refugee children anxiety. The friendly interaction experienced by a
to one of the groups. The other group heard the member of our group may make us more confident
same stories, but the friends were both British. that we can also have positive, friendly relations
Sometime later, the children’s attitudes toward with members of the other group, and this facili-
refugees were measured. The results were that the tates positive feelings and evaluations.
group of children who listened to the cross-group In addition, extended contact can change our
friendship stories had more positive evaluations of beliefs about what is normal and appropriate for our
refugees than the children who heard stories about own group. When other members of our group have
friendships between the two British children. friends from another group, we may come to believe
Other experiments have shown that these pro- that members of our group generally think positively
cedures can improve children’s attitudes toward of that group. We come to think that positive
immigrant groups and toward children with dis- thoughts and feelings are the normal and expected
abilities. Similar effects were found for a group of response of people in our group to the other group.
adolescents in Finland, where reading stories about If we want to be good members of our group, we
cross-group friendships led to improved attitudes should adopt these same positive attitudes.
toward “foreigners.” A recent study investigating the attitudes of White
A second type of experiment has been carried and Chinese Canadians toward South Asian
out in laboratory settings, where new “artificial” Canadians found that those with more extended
groups are created. In one such study, university contact believed that other members of their ethnic
students were told that overestimaters and under- group had more positive attitudes toward South
estimaters differed in a number of important per- Asian Canadians, and this belief about the feelings of
sonality characteristics and then asked to perform others in their group was an important predictor of
a task where they made a series of estimations. All their own positive feelings toward South Asian
of the participants were told they were overesti- Canadians. Thus, extended contact can influence
maters and were given a blue shirt to signal their attitudes by shifting the observers’ beliefs about what
group membership. They then watched as two is normal and expected for members of their group.
other students, one in the blue shirt of the overes- Finally, there is evidence that extended contact
timaters and one in the red shirt of the underesti- works because it creates meaningful connection
mates, worked on a puzzle. between oneself and someone in another group—
What the observers did not know was that these a connection described as the inclusion of the
other students were actors in the experiment. They group in the self. The idea is that other people’s
enacted one of the following three scripts: (1) they cross-group friendships provide a conduit that
were close friends, (2) they were strangers, or connects one’s self-concept (one’s knowledge and
(3) they disliked each other. Consistent with the feelings about oneself) to the other group. When
Extended Contact Effect 267

we feel connected to a member of our own group that even a few cross-group friendships may have
who has an outgroup friend, his or her connection the power to improve the attitudes of many, and
to the other group can also connect us to that it can thus explain how intergroup attitudes are
group. Most people have a strong tendency to see improved even when direct contact between
things that are connected to themselves in a posi- groups is uncommon.
tive light. Thus, if the other group and its members Stephen C. Wright and Arthur Aron
are now to some degree connected to us, we extend
the positive feelings that are reserved for things See also Intergroup Contact Theory; Prejudice
that are connected to us to that group.
Further Readings
Conclusion
Cameron, L., Rutland, A., Brown, R. J., & Douch, R.
It appears that simply knowing about friendships
(2006). Changing children’s intergroup attitudes
between members of one’s own group and mem-
towards refugees: Testing different models of extended
bers of another group can improve one’s attitudes contact. Child Development, 77, 1208–1219.
toward that group. This extended contact effect Wright, S. C., Aron, A., & Brody, S. M. (2008).
can occur as a result of at least three processes: It Extended contact and including others in the self:
can reduce anxiety associated with the other Building on the Allport/Pettigrew legacy. In U.
group; it can change beliefs about what is normal Wagner, L. Tropp, G. Finchilescu, & C. Tredoux
and appropriate for members of one’s own group; (Eds.), Improving intergroup relations: Building on the
and it can connect one to the other group and its legacy of Thomas F. Pettigrew (pp. 143–159).
members in ways that lead to extending a positive Malden, MA: John Wiley-Blackwell.
attitude toward the self to the other group. Wright, S. C., Aron, A., McLaughlin-Volpe, T., & Ropp,
The extended contact effect provides a basis S. A. (1997). The extended contact effect: Knowledge
for real optimism about the possibilities for of cross-group friendships and prejudice. Journal of
improving relations between groups. It means Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 73–90.
F
through a society and left many people financially
Fads and Fashions ruined.
In the 20th and 21st centuries, many more
Fads are objects or activities that are popular with familiar and less dramatic examples of fads have
a group of people over a short period of time. existed. For example, most children in the 1950s
Fads are also known as crazes. Fashions are a owned a hula hoop, but these are rarely seen in the
related phenomenon and are defined as objects or playgrounds of the 2000s. In the early 1980s,
activities that become popular within larger groups many children owned a Rubik’s cube. Fads can
over longer periods of time. Fashions are also also be seen outside the realm of consumerism. For
known as trends. Researchers argue that people example, the social networking site Facebook is
follow fads and fashions as a result of both infor- rapidly growing in popularity, with over 70 mil-
mational social influence (where they incorporate lion visits recorded in a single month in 2008 and
useful information from others about what is hundreds of thousands of new users joining each
acceptable and desirable) and normative social day. Also, the discipline of psychology is not
influence (where they adopt the acceptable behav- immune from research fads that last for a short
ior or desired object so that they themselves are period and then fade in popularity as new research
accepted and liked by others). By following fads topics take their place.
and fashions people can also assert their identity. The two concepts of fad and fashion are often
difficult to tease apart, and there appears to be
little consensus amongst psychologists concerning
History and Background
where a fad ends and a fashion begins. Indeed, one
During the 17th century in the Netherlands, the dictionary definition of a fad is a temporary
demand for tulip bulbs reached such a peak that fashion, idea, and/or behavior assumed by a group.
astronomical prices were charged for a single bulb, Generally, though, it is accepted that fads are
and people were prepared to pay an enormous short-lived, and that the process of adopting the
proportion of their earnings to own this most object or activity of a particular fad over alterna-
desired object. The most famous example of this tives is rather arbitrary. For example, why were
tulipomania was a bulb reportedly sold for hula hoops, and not some equally fun alternative,
f1. 6,000 in the 1620s, when the average annual the most popular toys of their time?
income of the time was fl. 150. While this is an In contrast to fads, fashions are seen as having a
extreme example, it is illustrative of the phenom- sustained influence on society and a broader reach,
enon we popularly know today as a fad. often across multiple societies. For example, the hip-
Tulipomania lasted for a short period of time, but pie fashions lasted for a significant period of time
during this period it caused a craze that swept during the 1960s and ’70s and were followed by

269
270 Fads and Fashions

people throughout the world. In addition, fashions, each song had received from other people who had
unlike fads, are characterized by people in a group visited the site. It was found that in the experimen-
sharing a look or style. In other words, a clear trend tal condition, visitors to the site paid attention to
is noticeable among group members, who alter their the download activities of others, and their choices
appearance to reflect what is collectively perceived were influenced by the choices of others. Popular
as appropriate and stylish at any given time. songs were more popular in the experimental con-
Although fashions can last for extended periods of dition than in the control condition, and less popu-
time, they are inevitably replaced by new fashions lar songs were less popular. Participants in the
that render the old ones outdated—at least until they experimental condition therefore used informa-
return when the fashion industry again proclaims tional social influence to navigate the site and
them fashionable. This is not uncommon, and it is increase their chances of finding the good songs.
another important feature of fashion. Although
some fashions run their course and disappear for-
Normative Social Influence
ever, some return from obscurity after several years
and become part of the “cycle of fashion.” People can also follow fads and fashions when
they want to “go with the crowd” or feel part of a
group. Following trends is one way in which peo-
Fads, Fashions, and Social Influence
ple can gain the approval of others who are impor-
People are influenced by fads and fashions through tant to them. For example, decorating one’s house
two processes of social influence: informational in a particular fashion might make it easier to be
social influence and normative social influence. accepted into a desirable social circle. Similarly,
Informational social influence occurs when peo- wearing particular clothes at school might increase
ple’s choice to follow a norm is informed by the a student’s chances of being accepted by a desir-
choices and decisions of others. Normative social able peer group.
influence occurs when people’s choice to follow a Also, conforming to normative social influence
norm is driven by the desire to be part of a group means that people can avoid some of the negative
(and avoid rejection and exclusion) or to achieve a consequences that might result from standing out
positive social outcome such as being liked or from the crowd. Resisting group pressure can lead
accepted by a desirable group. to disapproval from others, negative interactions
with other group members, and ultimately rejec-
tion or even ostracism by the group. If membership
Informational Social Influence
in the group is important, then conforming to the
Informational social influence is the mechanism fashion norms of the group is one way for indi-
by which people gain important information from viduals to retain the group’s good opinion.
others that subsequently guides their behavior. If
as a result of informational influence people fol-
Fashion and Identity
low fads or fashions, it is because the behaviors of
others have convinced them that doing so is a Related to the notion of conforming to group
good choice. norms, adhering to particular fashions can also be
A study by Matthew Salganik, Peter Dodds, and a way for people to signal their group membership
Duncan Watts in 2006 illustrates informational to others. This is particularly the case for wide-
influence in making fashionable music choices. spread fashions that are adopted by specific
Salganik and his colleagues simulated an online groups, or subgroups of individuals. Such confor-
center for downloading music. After agreeing to mity can evoke positive feelings in people, in that
take part in a study of musical preferences, par- identifying with a personally valued group is good
ticipants were assigned to either a control condi- for self-esteem. In displaying their identity through
tion, where they chose which out of a list of 48 fashion, people also become associated with a par-
songs they wanted to listen to, or an experimental ticular group membership, and other people then
condition, where they chose the songs they wanted make judgments about them based on their mem-
to listen to after seeing the number of downloads bership in that group.
Fads and Fashions 271

For example, wearing Goth clothing and makeup the downswings or lack of success of organiza-
signifies to outsiders that a person is most proba- tional practices.
bly a Goth. Identifying him- or herself as a Goth
might improve a person’s self-esteem. At the same
Fads, Fashions, and Body Image
time, others will make judgments about this per-
son based on his or her Goth attire—for example, Another good example of fluctuating trends can be
that he or she is morbid and likes “dark music,” seen in women’s and men’s responses to social
because this fashion is an identity marker associ- norms concerning body image. In a study con-
ated with a specific set of norms and values. In ducted in the 1980s, Brett Silverstein and her col-
cases like these, where a fashion is shared by a leagues examined the standard female body size/
small group of people, the people adopting the shape in American magazines from 1901 to 1981.
fashion can even be seen as nonconformists. Their results show significant changes in the female
However, some psychologists would argue that body shape over the years. For example, in the
this is still a case of normative group influence—in 1940s and 1950s the images were characterized by
this case, however, people are conforming to a curvaceous women like Marilyn Monroe, whereas
subgroup norm instead of a mainstream norm. in the 1960s the images of women changed to the
reed-thin ideal exemplified by British fashion
model Twiggy.
Organizational Fashions
It is important to note, however, that like all
A good example of how trends fluctuate and how fashions, ideal body weight is culture-specific. A
fashions spread or diffuse can be seen in fashions study of 54 cultures, conducted by Judith Anderson
in the promotion and use of particular manage- and her colleagues in the 1990s, illustrates this
ment techniques within and across organizations. point clearly. Across these cultures, Anderson and
In 1999, Eric Abrahamson and his colleagues stud- her colleagues measured people’s ideal female
ied how the popularity of trends in management body (heavy, moderate, or slender). They also ana-
practices (collective beliefs about the effectiveness lyzed how reliable the food source was in each
and appropriate use of cutting-edge management culture. Interestingly, body size varied according
techniques) is determined by the discourse sur- to the reliability of the food source. Specifically, in
rounding such techniques. They argue that the cultures where food resources were stable, a slen-
success and life of an organizational fashion is also der female body shape was preferred. However, in
determined by the discourse surrounding it. This cultures where the food supply was unreliable, a
idea explains why some fashions might be success- heavier shape was preferred—perhaps because it
ful and long-lasting, and some may not. It also indicated that the woman was likely to be healthy
explains how some fashions may be institutional- and fertile.
ized or adopted in the first place, and why some Men are not exempt from the change in the
may be dismissed as mere fads. physical ideal over time. Harrison Pope and his
In particular, Abrahamson and his colleagues colleagues found some evidence for a changing
argue that variability in when advocates begin, ideal male body in their analysis of GI Joe dolls’
continue, and stop promoting organizational bicep, chest, and waist measurements from the
fashions can explain variability in the fashions’ 1960s to 1990s—these showed a significant
lifecycles. Also, combinations of forces both increase in muscularity over the four decades. In
within and outside the management-fashion mar- another study, Pope and his colleagues asked men
ket can trigger, promote, and diffuse management in the United States, France, and Austria to alter
fashions. Finally, the success and longevity of computer images of male bodies to match their
management fashions can be determined by the actual body shape, their ideal shape, and the shape
emotionality of the discourse surrounding them. that women would find most attractive. While
Emotionally charged, unreasoned, and enthusias- they were accurate about their own shape, partici-
tic discourse characterizes the upswings or suc- pants’ ideal and most attractive shapes differed
cesses of fashions. On the other hand, unemotional, significantly from their own body shape—overall
reasoned, and qualified discourse characterizes they chose more muscular body shapes.
272 False Consensus Effect

There is a great deal of concern about the fash- in some cases”), after which they are asked to esti-
ion for certain ideal body shapes. Some studies mate the percentage of their peers who would also
show that young women perceive themselves as endorse the statement. Investigators then compute
overweight when they are not, and that these a score that represents the difference between the
women are dissatisfied with their normal (or even estimate given by those who endorse the statement
slim) body shapes because they do not conform to and those who do not. For example, suppose 70%
the thin ideal portrayed in the media. Likewise, the of individuals in a sample endorse the death pen-
muscular ideal for male figures has been linked to alty (and thus 30% do not). If the 70% who
feelings of pressure in adolescent and young adult endorse it estimate that 60% of their peers agree
males. Some study results suggest that young men with them, whereas the 30% of those who dis-
are changing their eating habits in order to “bulk agree provide an estimate of 50% regarding their
up” to meet the muscular ideal, which sometimes peers’ agreement, there will be a false consensus
also entails the use of substances such as steroids. effect of 60% – 50% = 10%. Note in this example
Following fashion therefore does not necessarily that participants can exhibit the false consensus
have positive consequences. effect even if they underestimate the percentage of
their peers who agree with them. The key require-
Karen M. Douglas ment for false consensus is that estimates about
others are pulled toward one’s own opinion, irre-
See also Conformity; Inclusion/Exclusion; Informational
Influence; Normative Influence; Norms; Self-Esteem; spective of where they are on an absolute scale.
Social Identity Theory This entry provides a historical background for
research on false consensus, lists explanations for
this phenomenon, identifies similar psychological
Further Readings constructs, and finally, considers the implications
of the effect.
Abrahamson, E., & Fairchild, G. (1999). Management
fashion: Lifecycles, triggers and collective learning
processes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, History and Background
708–740.
Anderson, J. L., Crawford, C. B., Nadeau, J., & In one of the earliest demonstrations of false con-
Lindberg, T. (1992). Was the Duchess of Windsor sensus, Lee Ross and his colleagues asked Stanford
right? A cross-cultural review of the socioecology of undergraduates to wear an unattractive sign pro-
ideals of female body shape. Ethology and moting a local restaurant and found that those
Sociobiology, 13, 197–227. who agreed to do so gave higher estimates of the
Salganik, M. J., Dodds, P. S., & Watts, D. J. (2006). number of students who would agree than did
Experimental study of inequality and unpredictability students who initially declined the request. The
in an artificial cultural market. Science, 311, 854–856. false consensus effect has now been observed in a
Silverstein, B., Perdue, L., Peterson, B., & Kelly, E. wide variety of attitudes and behaviors, such as
(1986). The role of the mass media in promoting a political opinions, health-related behaviors, and
thin standard of bodily attractiveness for women. Sex social perceptions, and it appears even when incen-
Roles, 14, 519–532. tives to make accurate judgments are present.
Research shows that people are particularly
likely to demonstrate false consensus effects for
strongly held attitudes and when judging consen-
False Consensus Effect sus among members of their ingroups rather than
among members of outgroups. Other work shows
People tend to overestimate the extent to which that false consensus is more likely to appear where
other people share their opinions, behavioral incli- there are differences of opinion (e.g., whether
nations, and preferences, a bias known as false capital punishment is appropriate) than where
consensus. In a typical study, participants might there is wide agreement (e.g., whether stealing is
be asked whether or not they agree with a state- acceptable). Of note, George Goethals and his col-
ment (e.g., “use of the death penalty is appropriate leagues have shown that people are less likely to
False Consensus Effect 273

demonstrate false consensus for abilities and pre- All of these explanations suggest a cognitive
dispositions that are a source of personal pride; for bias in how people encode and recall information
example, people see their morality and abilities as about others, but people might also be motivated
being particularly unique, thereby leading instead to perceive consensus in order to avoid ostracism
to a false uniqueness bias. and a lack of social acceptance, as well as to main-
tain self-esteem. They may be particularly con-
cerned about matching the values of their ingroups.
Explanations
Perceiving consensus can facilitate smooth social
There are many possible reasons why false consen- interactions; indeed, people expect consensus more
sus effects occur. First, it is likely that people sur- when they expect to interact with the other indi-
round themselves with others who share their viduals with whom they are estimating consensus.
values, attitudes, and preferences. Research on the These and other motives could partially explain
availability heuristic shows that people make judg- why people overestimate agreement.
ments based on information that is most memo- A review of the false consensus literature by
rable and accessible; given that their peers are Gary Marks and Norman Miller suggests that no
more accessible than those who are not their peers, one explanation fully accounts for false consensus
it makes sense that people’s estimates of universal effects, but rather, that two or more of these pro-
opinion will be biased in the direction of their own cesses could be operating at the same time (depend-
opinion. Because ingroups typically contain rela- ing on the topic). Also, some investigators question
tively more similar others, false consensus is exac- whether the false consensus effect should necessar-
erbated among members of ingroups. ily be called a bias. According to these investiga-
A second explanation is the fundamental attri- tors, one’s own standing is an important piece of
bution error, or correspondence bias; a tendency information—often a well-known piece of infor-
for people to overestimate the consistency between mation—that should be used when projecting
other people’s behaviors and their underlying atti- beliefs in the aggregate. We know less about oth-
tudes. Other people might convey particular atti- ers’ opinions than we do about our own, and we
tudes in order to appear socially appropriate, therefore are less confident in our knowledge of
whereas their true attitudes might be quite differ- their opinions. Thus, our own opinions might be
ent. Nevertheless, if their outwardly expressed considered a reasonable anchor.
attitudes are consistent with our own, we may
overestimate the consensus of our opinion.
Related Constructs
A third reason is that people tend to seek out
confirmatory information for their opinions. It is useful to distinguish the false consensus effect
Research shows that people notice confirmatory from other, related phenomena that also address
information more than disconfirmatory informa- the nature of people’s social comparisons. People
tion, which suggests that people will be more likely display the uniqueness bias when they underesti-
to remember cases in which their opinions were mate the percentage of their peers who could or
validated than cases in which others expressed an would engage in positive behaviors, and overesti-
opposing point of view. A related explanation is mate the percentage of their peers who would or
that when people are asked to estimate how con- could engage in negative behaviors. For example,
sensual their opinions are, they might focus more individuals who engage in community service may
attention on their own opinion than on possible believe that most of their peers would not engage
alternative opinions—a focalism bias. Many stud- in such moral and self-sacrificial behavior.
ies show that people are less likely to consider However, citizens who act in some negative way
alternative perspectives if those perspectives are (e.g., pollute) may believe that most others do like-
not cognitively accessible. For example, if people wise. Research by Goethals and his colleagues
are asked how much they like one food, they may shows that the uniqueness bias is more likely to
report higher ratings than if they make ratings in emerge for beliefs about one’s creative abilities and
the context of several other possible foods they moral proclivities than for academic skills, a ten-
might consume. dency called the “Muhammad Ali” effect because
274 False Consensus Effect

the famous boxer once quipped, “I only said I was the motive to “do the right thing” (and associated
the greatest, not the smartest.” The uniqueness bias concerns about being accurate when judging oth-
is also more likely to appear for general abilities ers’ opinions) overwhelms the motive to seek out
(e.g., intelligence) than for specific ones (e.g., ability validation of one’s own opinions. People can also
to complete a New York Times crossword puzzle). misperceive consensus and consider their own
Importantly, the uniqueness bias is not synony- motives to differ from those of others; as an exam-
mous with false uniqueness nor is it the opposite of ple, supporters of a political issue may overestimate
false consensus, both of which are measured differ- consensus yet believe that their support originates
ently. The uniqueness bias is demonstrated simply from “purer” social concerns than does the sup-
by comparing the estimated percentage of individ- port of their political comrades.
uals who would or could engage in a behavior to An interesting field study demonstrates how
the actual percentage. If 70% of participants in a each of the phenomena described above can co-
given sample indicate that they would engage in a occur. The authors, Benoit Monin and Michael
moral behavior, but members of the sample Norton, capitalized on a water shortage at the
estimate that only 20% would, the sample as a Princeton University campus. A showering ban
whole has demonstrated a uniqueness bias of was instituted over a 3-day period to conserve
70% – 20% = 50%. As a result, it is possible to water, and students were surveyed throughout the
display both the uniqueness bias and the false con- ban regarding their actual shower use and their
sensus effect in the same sample. For example, sup- perceptions of others’ use. On the day after the ban
pose 60% of the members of a group report that was instituted, the investigators found that bathers
they would donate blood and that these individuals offered a higher estimate of the number of students
estimate the donation rate to be 20%, whereas the who were showering (63%) than did those who
40% who would not donate blood estimate the were not showering (39%)—a false consensus
donation rate to be 10%. This would result in a effect of 63% – 39% = 24%. As it turned out, only
false consensus effect of 20% – 10% = 10%. 33% of the students were actually showering.
However, both groups are greatly underestimating Across both groups, the average estimate of the
the percentage of their group who would donate, percentage of students bathing was 47%, leading
which is quite high (60%), representing a unique- to a uniqueness bias of 47% – 33% = 14%. These
ness bias. biases were sustained throughout the ban until it
A second, related phenomenon is pluralistic was lifted, at which point the false consensus effect
ignorance. This occurs when a group of people are remained, but a uniqueness bias then appeared in the
engaging in similar behavior, yet the members of reverse direction (i.e., students underestimated how
the group attribute their own behavior and the many of their peers were showering). Finally, the
behavior of other members of the group to different investigators found that bathers believed they cared
causes (see the entry on pluralistic ignorance for about the community more than the other bathers
other definitions of this phenomenon in social psy- did—in other words, they believed that their own
chology). For example, college students at a party bathing was justifiable (e.g., because they engaged in
may drink excessively because they want to fit in, intense workouts), whereas others’ bathing was due
yet believe that other students at the party are to immorality. At the same time, nonbathers believed
drinking excessively because of a desire to do so. In that they cared more about the community than
another example, research on bystander interven- other nonbathers did. Thus, both bathers and non-
tion in emergencies shows that people misperceive bathers believed their actions were caused by differ-
others’ interpretations of the event from their ent factors than those influencing their peers’
behavior (i.e., they believe that others do not con- behavior—a clear example of pluralistic ignorance.
sider the event an emergency because those others
are failing to act). It would seem that such misper-
Conclusion
ceptions run counter to false consensus effects,
because in the case of pluralistic ignorance, people False consensus is likely to have important conse-
are underestimating the similarity between their quences. To the extent that people overestimate the
own and others’ opinions. Perhaps in these contexts magnitude of social support for their opinions, they
Families 275

may become less open-minded, less persuaded by Ross, L., Greene, D., & House, P. (1977). The “false
alternative perspectives (in part because such per- consensus effect”: An egocentric bias in social
spectives will be perceived to be in a relatively small perception and attribution processes. Journal of
minority), and more convinced of the moral and Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 279–301.
social grounding for their own perspective. In turn, Sherman, S. J., Chassin, L., Presson, C. C., & Agostinelli,
this resistance to alternative perspectives can pro- G. (1984). The role of the evaluation and similarity
mote intergroup hostility, much like the illusion of principles in the false consensus effect. Journal of
unanimity in groupthink. False consensus also has Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1244–1262.
the potential to underlie faulty decision making in
a host of consequential domains; examples include
career and spousal choices, medical decisions, and
political behavior. Although some research shows Families
that asking people to take the perspective of others
makes them less egocentric—and perhaps less sus- The family is the child’s first group. However,
ceptible to false consensus and other biases— defining the family is not an easy matter given
research has not yet indentified systematic ways of today’s diversity of family types, some of which
reducing the bias across multiple domains. have only recently become possible as a result of
advances in reproductive technology. At a mini-
William Klein mum, scholars agree that the family is a social unit
in which members identify with one another and
See also Attribution Biases; Bystander Effect; Deviance;
Groupthink; Inclusion/Exclusion; Need for Belonging; share economic responsibilities, social and emo-
Pluralistic Ignorance; Shared Mental Models; Socially tional commitments, memories of common expe-
Shared Cognition riences, and expectations for continuity over time
and a common future. These elements character-
ize many nonfamily groups as well.
Families are a unique kind of group because the
Further Readings
members of typical families—parents and chil-
Dawes, R. M., & Mulford, M. (1996). The false dren—do not choose their group members and do
consensus effect and overconfidence: Flaws in not typically leave the group. In most families,
judgment or flaws in how we study judgment? unlike other groups, members are also biologically
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision related. Like some other groups, family members
Processes, 65, 201–211. differ in both age and power, and they occupy
Festinger, L. A. (1954). A theory of social comparison prescribed roles when the group is formed (i.e.,
processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140. when the first child is born or adopted). Well-
Goethals, G. R., & Klein, W. M. P. (2000). Interpreting
functioning families are hierarchical, with children
and inventing social reality: Attributional and
relatively powerless compared to parents until the
constructive elements in social comparison. In J. Suls
balance of power begins to change as children
& L. Wheeler (Eds.), Handbook of social comparison:
enter adolescence. Families also serve unique func-
Theory and research (pp. 23–44). New York: Kluwer
tions, the most basic of which is to provide protec-
Academic/Plenum.
Marks, G., & Miller, N. (1987). Ten years of research on
tion and support until children are capable of
the false-consensus effect: An empirical and theoretical providing for themselves.
review. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 72–90. Because families serve as the first and primary
Monin, B., & Norton, M. I. (2003). Perceptions of a source of children’s socialization, much of the
fluid consensus: Uniqueness bias, false consensus, false research on families focuses on how they socialize
polarization, and pluralistic ignorance in a water their children. Historically, theories held that par-
conservation crisis. Personality and Social Psychology ents were the primary shapers of children’s person-
Bulletin, 29, 559–567. alities, values, and social and emotional competence.
Mullen, B., et al. (1985). The false consensus effect: A In recent years, however, it has become clear that
meta-analysis of 155 hypothesis tests. Journal of family socialization is far more complex than sim-
Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 262–283. ple unilateral, parent-to-child influence and that all
276 Families

family members contribute to family social pro- studied, from hunter-gatherer to urban industrial—
cesses, including children themselves. Theoretical they have established an intense and long-lasting
perspectives now reflect this complexity. emotional bond with their parents and other regu-
lar caregivers that is unlike any other interpersonal
bond or relationship.
Family Socialization Processes
Importantly, research has also shown that it is
By studying family members with different degrees this unique emotional bond that opens children up
of genetic relatedness (e.g., identical vs. fraternal to parental socialization influence. One- and two-
twins), researchers have been able to show that year-old children listen to and comply with par-
some of the similarities among children raised in ents’ requests not because they fear punishment,
the same family are a product of their common but because they want to maintain their parents’
family socialization, as traditionally assumed, but love, approval, and protection. One might expect,
some are because children and parents share half therefore, that children with more secure, high-
of their genes. Because individuals’ genes influence functioning attachment relationships would be
their reactions, judgments, and interpretation of more compliant, cooperative, and eager to please
experiences, children uniquely affect their parents’ their parents, and research has confirmed this.
and siblings’ behavior, and thus their parents’ and Attachment research remains a thriving area of
siblings’ influence on them in return. This research inquiry. Ongoing questions include how attach-
has also shown that the children in each family ments vary by culture, how parenting quality and
differ from one another partly because parents child characteristics such as emotional reactivity
treat each child in the family as a unique individ- shape the developing attachment relationship, and
ual, partly because each child interprets and how early childhood attachment relationships
responds to the same family experiences differently influence later developing social and emotional
(e.g., younger and older children respond to competencies. It is especially difficult to address
divorce differently), and partly because each child the last question because it is not possible to
has singular experiences outside the family. Thus, manipulate children’s attachment relationships
family environments and children’s genes interact experimentally. For example, children with more
in complex ways to mold development. For exam- secure attachment relationships in infancy have
ple, children with a genetic history of anxiety dis- been found to be more successful in the peer group
orders who grow up in stressful, conflict-ridden in middle childhood, more likely to be group lead-
family environments are more likely to develop ers, and more well-liked by their peers. One prom-
anxiety-related problems than children without inent theoretical perspective credits these
such a family history, or than children with the associations to a relationship prototype, called an
same genetic propensity who grow up in more internal working model, which is held to derive
typical families. from the child’s attachment relationship and to
influence all subsequent relationships in which the
child participates. Scholars with another perspec-
Attachment
tive have argued that continuity in children’s gen-
Socialization in the family begins with the spe- eral socialization experience in the family is a more
cial relationship that forms between parent and likely explanation. Large-scale longitudinal studies
child during the first year of life, known as parent- in which a significant number of children experi-
infant attachment. In landmark studies by Harry ence changing family environments, and who can
Harlow, John Bowlby, Mary Ainsworth, Alan then be studied for several years to examine their
Sroufe, and their students from the 1950s through subsequent development, hold promise for eluci-
the 1970s, it became clear that children become dating these fundamental questions.
attached to their parents not because parents feed
them, as had long been thought, but because of a
Parenting Styles
biologically based need for contact, comfort, and
safety that is characteristic of all mammals. By the Much of the research on family socialization
end of infants’ first year of life—in every culture concerns how parents convey and enforce rules
Families 277

and expectations for children’s behavior. Based on been working to specify the particular components
influential studies by Diana Baumrind beginning in of each style that produce these differences, as well
the 1960s, scholars have identified four common as whether these styles and their associated out-
parenting styles. These are based on two distinct comes hold up across different family types and
dimensions of behavior that have sometimes also cultures. For example, research suggests that both
been found in research on nonfamily groups: Chinese American and Black American families are
warmth/responsiveness and control/demanding- more likely to use the authoritarian parenting style,
ness. Authoritative parents score high on both but the outcomes for their children are more like the
dimensions. They are attentive, affectionate, and outcomes for White American children reared in
accepting. At the same time, they establish clear authoritative families. This suggests that parenting
routines, rules, and limits; expect age-appropriate styles possess different meanings in different cul-
behavior; and communicate and enforce expecta- tural contexts, and that culture serves as an impor-
tions consistently. Permissive parents score high tant moderator of family socialization effects.
on the warmth dimension, but low on the control
dimension. They are affectionate and responsive,
Other Family Socialization Processes
but also indulgent, with few rules or limits on
behavior or expression and few demands for age- Although research on parenting styles has been
appropriate behavior. Authoritarian parents score influential and informative, it has largely neglected
high on the control dimension, but low on warmth. the role of children in family socialization.
These parents have many, often rigidly enforced Therefore, scholars have begun to extend the study
rules, seldom consider the child’s point of view, of family socialization beyond disciplinary con-
and typically expect their children to behave with texts, and to other mechanisms of influence besides
greater maturity than the children are capable of. control. Research has focused on gatekeeping and
They tend to be intrusive and coercive, as well as monitoring, in which parents manage children’s
harsh, critical, and rejecting. Disengaged parents exposure to adults and peers who model (or fail to
score low on both warmth and control. They are model) culturally valued behavior; scaffolding and
generally detached and uninvolved with their chil- coaching, in which parents create structures and
dren. They are either indifferent to their children’s routines, and provide help and feedback so that
feelings or thoughts, or rejecting and critical. They children learn age-appropriate values and behavior
have few or no routines or rules, and their expecta- through supported participation in a variety of
tions for maturity and age-appropriate behavior social contexts; and mutual reciprocity and affect
are inconsistent or inappropriate. sharing, in which parents and children establish
As one might expect, research has shown that the and share common goals in pleasurable, affectively
developmental outcomes are quite different for chil- positive social settings. Notably, none of these
dren growing up in families with these different involves disciplinary encounters, direct imposition
parenting styles. Children of authoritative parents of control over children’s behavior, or conflict and
were found to be the most socially and emotionally disagreement between children and parents.
competent from early childhood through adoles- The trend in family socialization research has
cence, with correspondingly low levels of malad- been especially influenced by the recent conceptu-
justment. Permissive parenting was shown to be alization of families as groups. This theoretical
associated with impulsivity, aggression, and less perspective places more emphasis on family prac-
initiative and self-reliance in children. Children of tices and norms, the child’s interpretation and
authoritarian parents tended to have little general acceptance of parents’ communication of norms
social competence, and were moody and unfriendly, and expectations, and the child’s own efforts to
with low self-esteem. Finally, children of disengaged behave in accordance with perceived family norms.
parents were found to have the least social and emo- For example, parental monitoring of children’s
tional competence and exhibited a variety of behav- activities and companions in early adolescence is
ioral and adjustment problems. This research, associated with more positive emotional adjust-
however, was conducted with a relatively homoge- ment and greater social competence, but only
neous population. More recently, researchers have when children are honest with their parents about
278 Faultlines

their whereabouts and accept their parents’ author- Thus, a dysfunctional family system can perpetu-
ity in monitoring them. One interesting but unstud- ate itself across generations.
ied question is whether children’s socialization in Contemporary theory acknowledges the impor-
the family establishes some of the basic phenom- tance of the family as a system in adapting to each
ena that characterize nonfamily groups in adult- member’s behavior, including mental health diffi-
hood, such as ingroup attachment and positivity. culties. The tendency for psychological disorders
to run in families can lead to significant stress on
the family system, particularly if there is a lack of
The Family as a System
fit between family members’ problems. For exam-
The most complex conceptualization of families ple, a father who struggles with attention deficit
considers them as holistic systems of intercon- hyperactivity disorder may find it difficult to
nected alliances and relationships that are con- inhibit a harsh reaction to the misbehavior of his
stantly shifting, and that both affect and are impulsive child, whose inherited tendency to impul-
affected by external relationships, including those sivity is further exacerbated by his father’s
in the workplace, the community, and the culture. responses. Family therapy, built on the conceptual-
For example, the marital relationship is affected by ization of the family as an interdependent system
and affects each child’s relationships with each of relationships, has been found to assist in pre-
parent, and each child’s relationship with his or venting relapse of significant mental illnesses such
her siblings. Likewise, the marital relationship is as schizophrenia, and it is a promising method by
influenced by each parent’s workplace relation- which to treat adolescent problems such as eating
ships. Family relationships are also affected by disorders. In sum, whether socializing children or
cultural norms and practices. For example, some providing important resources for the healthy
cultures value strong extended family ties; children functioning of all members, family members influ-
in these cultures are likely to grow up in house- ence one another’s development and adjustment in
holds that include grandparents, aunts, uncles, and multiple, complex, intersecting ways.
cousins as well as parents and siblings. The family
system also develops, with the nature of its rela- Celia A. Brownell and Stephanie Zerwas
tionships changing as each member ages and as the See also Attachment Theory; Dynamical Systems
world itself changes. Maternal employment, for Approach; Group Socialization
instance, has increased dramatically over the last
few decades in Western industrialized nations,
with concomitant changes in family dynamics and Further Readings
children’s experiences. Viewed as a dynamic sys-
Bugental, D., & Grusec, J. (2006). Socialization
tem, the family provides critical physical and psy-
processes. In W. Damon & N. Eisnberg (Eds.),
chological resources for all of its members, and can Handbook of child psychology (6th ed., Vol. 3,
be characterized by its degree of interconnected- pp. 366–428). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
ness, stability, and support. Grusec, J., & Hastings, P. (Eds.). (2007). Handbook of
socialization: Theory & research. New York: Guilford
Dysfunction Within the Family System Press.
Thompson, R., & Raikes, H. (2003). Toward the next
The family can also be the source of interper- quarter century: Conceptual and methodological
sonal stress and conflict. Traumatic life events, challenges for attachment theory. Development and
social disadvantage, mental illness, and substance Psychopathology, 15, 691–718.
addiction can contribute to a breakdown in the
smooth functioning of the family system. In some
extreme cases, parents not only fail to provide for
their children but actively harm them through Faultlines
physical or emotional neglect or abuse. Moreover,
adult children of abusive families are more likely Groups have faultlines when group members’ per-
to replicate such abuse with their own children. sonal characteristics align with one another, so
Faultlines 279

that distinct, unique subgroups are recognizable effects than a group with two members in their 20s
within the larger group. These alignments provide and two members in their 30s. Faultlines also get
the basis for conflict, especially between the sub- stronger as multiple attributes align. Thus, a group
groups, and especially when issues arise that are that includes two older Hispanic men and two
related to the subgroups’ differences. This entry young Caucasian women would have a very strong
provides a specific definition of group faultlines, a faultline, as gender, age, and ethnicity all align.
variety of examples and implications of these Faultline strength is strongest when a large number
faultlines, and some recent research findings. of individual attributes align with each other and
create a small rather than a large number of sub-
groups. The strongest faultlines occur when a large
Defining the Concept
number of attributes that differ widely align them-
The concept of group faultlines uses a geological selves consistently and result in two distinct sub-
metaphor: The surface of the earth is covered by groups. In contrast, if a group’s members are
layers of rocks, huge rocks. Among, between, and extremely diverse (i.e., they all differ from each
beneath the layers are faults, that is, fractures other in many ways), diversity may be high but the
within the earth’s crust. As long as things are calm possibility of a faultline becomes unlikely. Thus,
and external forces don’t appear, faults can be faultlines, and particularly strong faultlines, tend to
dormant for many years without being noticed. surface in groups that have a moderate range of
In like fashion, we can think of the surface of a diversity.
group of people as being covered by their demo- Faultlines and diversity are related but different
graphic characteristics, which hide the more impor- concepts. Diversity refers to the dispersion of
tant, underlying personal characteristics that we group members’ personal characteristics. For
normally associate with those demographics. Thus, instance, a group may be homogeneous with
if we could look down at the earth and see below respect to gender but diverse with respect to per-
its vegetation, we might see its layers and its faults. sonality or cultural values. Groups are diverse
Similarly, if we look at a group of people and see when members are different on any single attri-
their surface characteristics, like race, age, and bute. Thus, a group that includes members who
gender, we also understand that they have deeper all have different occupations is obviously diverse
characteristics, like preferences, inclinations, and in occupations, and more diverse than a group
values. At the same time, we have lay theories that includes two engineers and two clerks.
about how individuals’ surface characteristics Diversity is a characteristic of groups that can
relate to these deeper qualities. We go even further depend on individual attributes, considered one at
when we form conclusions about the deeper inter- a time.
relationships of group members based on their Group faultlines, in contrast, depend on multi-
array of demographic characteristics. ple attributes, considered simultaneously. Faultline
As noted, groups can have faultlines, much like models suggest that the members of a group that is
the earth has faults. Faultlines occur when a tremendously diverse on many dimensions may get
group’s members differ on the basis of one or more along very well with one another because the
attributes and their differences align. When more group has no faultlines. The models also suggest
attributes are intercorrelated, they can create the that another group that is less diverse may have
potential for a schism in the group’s interpersonal internal turmoil and conflict if many of its group
structure (e.g., gender faultlines can divide groups members’ personal characteristics align to form a
into male and female subgroups). Faultlines strong faultline. Faultline models emphasize the
increase in strength when the entire group can be formation and action of subgroups: Faultlines can
divided into a small number of subgroups, each of form the basis for difficult interactions within a
whose members are similar to each other but are group, especially when the topic being discussed is
markedly different from the members of the other related to the characteristics that have caused the
subgroup. faultline. Thus, faultlines use the concept of diver-
For instance, a group with two teenagers and sity and build on it by focusing on the microcom-
two elderly people will experience stronger faultline position of a group’s members.
280 Faultlines

Examples and Implications seen by just observing a person, may lead to


political faultlines within a group—and the poten-
An example may help to clarify the different tial for accentuated political conflict. When con-
dynamics that can emerge from diversity and fault- flict is intense, groups with strong faultlines may
lines. Consider two groups that encompass similar actually break into two or more groups along
levels of diversity but different faultline strengths. A their faultlines.
group with two female accountants and two male Another effect of faultlines, if they are activated,
engineers has a stronger faultline than a group with is that group members may identify more with
a female accountant, a male accountant, a female their fellow subgroup members rather than with
engineer, and a male engineer. While the groups the group as a whole. When subgroup identifica-
have similar diversity in gender and occupation, the tion is strong, members within the same subgroup
former group has a much stronger faultline and, enjoy highly trusting relationships, but they may
theoretically, may have more difficult interactions— be suspicious of the members of the other sub-
especially if the company budget can send only two group. Similarity among subgroup members also
people to a professional conference this year, and creates a psychologically safe environment for
the group must decide between an accounting con- team learning. However, the benefits created
ference and an engineering conference. within subgroups are sometimes created at the
Among the many attributes that can form expense of the whole group.
potential faultlines, social context plays an impor-
tant role in deciding whether a particular faultline
will be activated. For instance, differences in polit- Recent Research
ical ideology in parliament, the home country of Recent research has indicated that strong faultlines
parent companies in international joint ventures, influence the effectiveness of communication with
and geographical locations in global virtual teams a group: When faultlines are weak, communica-
may be more salient than demographic faultlines, tion across subgroups tends to be effective; when
such as gender and race. faultlines are strong, increased communication
When faultlines split a group into subgroups, actually seems to decrease performance. Research
increased internal conflict is a logical result. also has found that members’ identification with
Recent research indicates that this may be the the group was lower in groups with strong fault-
case even when the issues that a group is address- lines than in those with weak faultlines. Decision
ing are not related to the nature of their faultline. accuracy also suffered in groups with strong fault-
When issues are related to the group’s faultline, lines, because these groups failed to process infor-
however, the potential for considerable conflict mation efficiently and effectively.
may increase even more. Thus, if our example A study that is an excellent application of the
group of older Hispanic men and young Caucasian idea of faultlines investigated the characteristics of
women was discussing the establishment of a day firms that were forming a total of 71 international
care center at their organization, they might have joint ventures in China. Each firm had at least two
significant conflict—and it would be easy to pre- expatriate managers and at least two local manag-
dict who would line up on which side of the ers. The managers’ nationalities were an important
conflict. characteristic that could have created “factions”
Over time, group members learn about each (or subgroups) in the management teams: It was to
others’ personal characteristics, and their simi- be expected that local managers might find it easier
larities and differences in values and philosophies to work with other local managers, and that expa-
may become more important than their demo- triates might find it easier to work with other expa-
graphic similarities and differences. In other triates. The research clearly indicated that the
words, as group members get to know how the presence of such strong faultlines led to task and
other members stand on a variety of attitudinal emotional conflict, less “behavioral integration”
issues, what they learn can become the basis for (i.e., information exchange, collaboration, and
either harmony or conflict. Different political joint decision making), and, ultimately, reduced
preferences, for instance, which are not easily performance.
Feminism 281

The bottom line: Faultlines can be a particularly between the ability to bear children and the need
important structural force in the dynamic interac- to stay at home. It is a critical text because it was
tions within groups. written by a man and therefore considered more
credible by a male-dominated society.
Dora C. Lau and J. Keith Murnighan Modern feminist movements are referred to as
“waves.” The waves of feminism in the United
See also Categorization; Cliques; Cooperation and
Competition; Diversity; Schisms; Social Identity Theory Kingdom and the United States have similar time-
lines, although other countries have their own pro-
gressions. The first wave in the United States lasted
Further Readings approximately 60 years, from 1860 to 1920, and
focused on gaining the vote for women. The second
Lau, D., & Murnighan, J. K. (1998). Demographic
wave, in the 1960s and 1970s, is often prominent in
diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics
definitions and descriptions of feminism. While
of organizational groups. Academy of Management
many actions of the second wave were attempts to
Review, 23, 325–340.
make family life more equitable for women, there
Li, J., & Hambrick, D. C. (2005). Factional groups: A
were also extreme changes in society, both within
new vantage on demographic faultlines, conflict, and
disintegration in work teams. Academy of
and outside the feminist movement. The movement
Management Journal, 48, 794–813. of the 1960s left out many women of color, often
focusing on White, middle-class issues such as the
right to employment and the distribution of house-
hold labor. The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Roe
Feminism v. Wade in 1973 made abortion legal, granting
women control over their own bodies, and sparking
The concept of feminism is not universal and has a debate that has continued for over 30 years.
many forms (e.g., liberal, radical, womanism) and Extreme actions covered by the media (e.g., marches,
definitions. However, there are three characteris- bra-burning, single-issue protests) managed to alien-
tics that are shared by most, if not all, forms of ate more moderate feminists, distancing more women
feminism. First is the recognition that women are from what became a very political label. The politi-
treated differently than men, and are in the subor- cal climate during the 1980s and 1990s was difficult
dinate role in society. Second, feminists view gen- for feminism, and women continued to avoid the
der and gender roles as socially constructed (and label “feminist” into the next decade. This is the era
thus capable of change) and as differentially val- during which the third wave of feminism began.
ued within society. Third, feminism holds that
women can be autonomous and self-reliant. The Relevance to Intergroup Relations
main goal of feminism is gender equality.
Women constitute half of the world’s population,
Brief History and the majority hold a socially subordinate role
to men. Compared to men, women experience
Discussions of women’s position relative to men’s inequalities in social, political, economic, and
go back at least as far as the 12th century, although domestic realms. Feminism has brought to the
“feminism” did not emerge until the mid-18th forefront several issues relevant to intergroup rela-
century. Mary Wollstonecraft’s A Vindication of tions, including (a) feminist identities; (b) stereo-
the Rights of Women, published in 1792, is con- typing, prejudice, and discrimination against
sidered the first feminist text. Early North American women; (c) rejection of dominant ideologies; and
feminists struggled with competing loyalties: fam- (d) collective action and social change.
ily vs. self, abolition vs. suffrage, and change vs.
comfort, among others. In 1869, John Stuart Mill
Feminism as Identity
published The Subjection of Women, which distin-
guished between women’s biological abilities and Females today may believe in feminist ideals but
social construction; for example, it differentiated disavow the label “feminist.” This is part of the
282 Feminism

third wave battle, in which women are fighting to contrast, benevolent sexism reflects a consistent
maintain the rights achieved during the second research finding termed the “women are wonder-
wave, but still struggle against many of the obsta- ful” effect. Benevolent sexists view women as pure
cles of 50 years ago. While women may have and deserving of men’s protection. Women are
achieved much success in the workplace, their viewed as complements to men, as men’s partners
roles at home may resemble those of their grand- in heterosexual relationships in which women ful-
mothers. During the 1980s and 1990s, conserva- fill their traditional gender roles of wife, mother,
tive groups tried to undermine the achievements of and nurturer.
the second wave, portraying feminists as angry, Women are less likely to endorse hostile sexism
antimale, bra-burning, home-wrecking, lesbian, than men, but women are equally likely to endorse
and so on. Consideration of this negative portrayal benevolent sexism, especially in highly sexist cul-
is key to understanding why many feminist women tures. On the surface, benevolent sexism appears
choose not to label themselves as such. to be positive and provides women with protection
and domestic power. However, benevolent sexism
actually enforces inequality between women and
Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination
men. Benevolent sexism in a sense keeps women
Societal attitudes toward women are mixed, “in their place” and prevents their mobility in
encompassing both positivity and negativity. employment and attainment of economic and
Researchers have identified two key characteristics social power.
on which women, and social groups in general, are Benevolent sexism rewards women who main-
judged: warmth (or likability) and competence. tain traditional gender roles by providing them
Women who fulfill traditional gender roles, such with affection and protection. Women who violate
as housewives and mothers, are consistently viewed traditional gender roles often are subject to the
as very warm but not very competent. People view effects of backlash. The backlash effect occurs
them as having low social status, and the common when stereotype violators are penalized for their
emotions felt toward these women are pity and violating actions. Women who appear masculine
sympathy. However, people feel more positively in any way can be seen as violators of gender
toward traditional women and tend to help and norms, and they may be sanctioned for it—for
protect them. In contrast, women who fulfill non- example, by being excluded from a social group.
traditional gender roles, such as career women and Feminists often face the backlash effect as they
feminists, are viewed as not very warm but very work toward autonomy and independence.
competent. Society views these women as having Women who experience backlash are faced
high social status and in competition with men. with the dilemma of whether to claim discrimina-
Thus, emotions commonly felt toward these tion and seek justice. Research has shown that
women are envy and jealousy, but people tend to women pondering whether to report discrimina-
cooperate and associate with these groups due to tion worry about retaliation and being seen as
their high status. troublemakers. These fears are reasonable, as
Women who are highly identified with their gen- research suggests that women who claim discrimi-
der are more likely to be aware of discrimination nation are viewed as complainers, are derogated,
against women. However, many women recognize and are blamed for their situation. Further, women
sexism toward women as a group but deny that have reported anger toward other women whose
sexism affects them personally. Part of this denial claim of sexism makes their gender group look
may be due to the fact that sexism, like racism, has bad. The negative social consequences for report-
become more subtle and difficult to detect. ing discrimination may prevent women from doing
Social psychologists have identified two distinct so, which further perpetuates inequality.
forms of sexism, hostile and benevolent. Hostile
sexism is the traditional form in which people hold
Feminism and Dominant Ideologies
openly negative attitudes toward women. Hostile
sexists view women, particularly feminists, as Identification with feminism involves rejecting
competitors with men for jobs and power. In some dominant ideologies or belief systems. Thus,
Feminism 283

feminism commonly involves disidentification with through their romantic partner, and women’s
some of the core values and standard practices in endorsement of the male “hero” is linked to their
U.S. society. A fundamental ideology in the United attainment of less leadership and lower achieve-
States and many other cultures is that of meritoc- ment in education and work. Thus aspects of
racy. A meritocratic system is defined by the romantic relationships between heterosexual men
assumptions that people who work hard will get and women may be challenged by feminist beliefs,
ahead in life, that people get what they deserve, and research has shown that heterosexuals do not
and that anyone can succeed in life regardless of equate beauty and romance with feminism.
their circumstances. A meritocratic worldview con-
flicts with feminism because it does not recognize
Collective Action and Social Change
societal barriers, such as discrimination, as an
influence on life outcomes. Further, people who Attitudes toward women have steadily become
endorse a meritocratic worldview regard victims of more positive since 1970, showing more support
discrimination and inequality as deserving these for women’s employment and education, as well as
outcomes. Feminism as a belief system recognizes for the sharing of household duties by husband
that inequality exists and not all people are treated and wife. In the United States this is consistent for
equally or have the same opportunities; thus, being conservatives and liberals, and does not vary by
successful is not due just to hard work. Feminists region—except in the southern United States,
understand that women have less economic and where people show less agreement with these atti-
social power and fewer resources because of tudes than is shown by those in other regions. It
unequal opportunities, sexism, and discrimination. should be noted that in some parts of the world
Endorsing a meritocratic worldview has conse- improvements are less evident.
quences for women’s well-being. First, women Feminism is not exclusive to women, although
who endorse a meritocratic worldview are less the media would portray it as such. Men have the
likely to perceive discrimination. Thus, women same ability as women to recognize the societal
who may have less life success due in part to dis- disparities between genders, realize that such
crimination may blame themselves for their inabil- inequality can be changed, and know that women
ity to get ahead in life. In contrast, women who can survive without men. Studies have shown that
reject a meritocratic worldview are more likely to women’s relationships with feminist men have
perceive discrimination and recognize it as one resulted in healthier romantic relationships for
cause of their inability to get ahead. both men and women. Both men and women
Cultural belief systems, such as meritocracy, report greater stability and sexual satisfaction with
serve to justify the status quo. That is, people feminist partners. Thus men can serve as allies and
endorse the system and see the world in its current partner with women to work for gender equality.
form as fair and just. A meritocracy places the cause After the second wave of feminism there was a
of events internally, as due to a person’s own “postfeminist” movement that rejected some femi-
actions. If society believes people are responsible for nist ideas as having no merit. Postfeminism encour-
their own life outcomes, then social change is not aged personal choice, and implied that women
needed and inequalities continue. An example of a could have a career, beauty, motherhood, and a
self-harming consequence of women’s endorsement good sex life without any sacrifice. Besides ignoring
of a meritocratic system is women’s perception of political issues, it romanticized domestic life while
entitlement to pay. Women can feel less entitled not addressing the issues of women across the
than men to a high salary for comparable work. nation. However, continuing the work of the women
Another dominant ideology in the United States before them, women have been waging small battles
that is relevant to feminism is romantic idealism. to change their corner of the world, and this could
U.S. society continues to endorse traditional gen- be considered the heart of the third wave of femi-
der roles in romantic relationships, where men nism. While they may not accept the label “femi-
pursue women in courtship and women play a pas- nist,” women around the world are working to
sive role in sexual intimacy. Many women implic- better their lives and the lives of others in a way that
itly believe that their ambitions can be fulfilled acknowledges and tries to lessen the disparity
284 Festinger, Leon

between the positions of men and women in society. research on complex social processes in the labora-
This humanistic movement may be the new femi- tory to test theories and solve applied problems
nism, bound by the fight against oppression. was Lewin’s mission. Festinger remained interested
in people’s level of aspiration and decision making,
Bettina J. Casad and Alian S. Kasabian but he was drawn to Lewin’s striving for concep-
tual understanding and intellectual enthusiasm.
See also Collective Movements and Protest;
Discrimination; Gender and Behavior; Gender Roles; Lewin conducted research meetings very infor-
Ideology; Modern Sexism; Sexism mally so that everyone had a voice, and debate was
encouraged. In these meetings, Festinger was
known for his aversion to sloppy thinking and a
Further Readings fondness for counterintuitive findings, attitudes he
held throughout his career.
Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity
Festinger’s early research concerned the effects
theory of prejudice toward female leaders.
of motivation and group standards on goal setting,
Psychological Review, 109, 573–598.
decision making, taste preferences in the rat, and
Eagly, A. H., & Mladinic, A. (1994). Are people
prejudiced against women? Some answers from
statistics. He obtained his PhD from the University
research on attitudes, gender stereotypes, and of Iowa in 1942, remained at Iowa as a research
judgments of competence. European Review of Social associate for 2 years, and then moved to the
Psychology, 5, 1–35. University of Rochester to work for the Committee
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: on the Selection and Training of Aircraft Pilots.
Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary
justification for gender inequality. American
Social Pressures in Informal Groups
Psychologist, 56, 109–118.
Hannam, J. (2007). Feminism. Harlow, UK: Pearson In 1945, Lewin moved to the Massachusetts
Education. Institute of Technology to found the Research
Center for Group Dynamics, and Festinger joined
him as an assistant professor of social psychology
(although neither he nor Lewin had ever taken a
Festinger, Leon course in social psychology). The center was com-
mitted to the application of psychological concepts
(1919–1989) and methods to solve social problems, and it
attracted many talented students. At the time,
Leon Festinger is known for his contributions to Festinger’s credentials as a social psychologist
the study of group behavior, self-evaluation, and might have seemed questionable; he later said that
attitude change. Many scholars consider Festinger he became a social psychologist by fiat.
to be the person most responsible for moving the His first project was based on attitude surveys
experimental study of social processes to the cen- of residents in married student housing. This study
ter stage of social psychology. yielded a textbook phenomenon—friendships were
more likely the closer the people were physically in
proximity (even by just a few yards). Similarity in
Background
attitudes was also critical—attitudes of residents
Festinger graduated as a psychology major from tended to converge, but residents who held deviant
the City College of New York in 1939 with a attitudes were social isolates.
senior honors thesis on factors affecting how peo- Festinger thought group members acquired sim-
ple set goals. Despite a passion for all kinds of ilar beliefs and opinions because of social pressures
games (initially chess, later Go, pinball, and crib- toward uniformity, but this idea remained to be
bage), he was persuaded to study at the University tested experimentally. In his informal communica-
of Iowa with Kurt Lewin, who was known for his tion theory, he proposed that people are susceptible
studies of motivation. However, Lewin was increas- to social pressure when they are attracted to a
ingly interested in group behavior. Conducting group. This attraction occurs because some goals
Festinger, Leon 285

can be pursued successfully only with the coopera- This experiment reflects several features of the
tion of others or because groups provide validation “Festinger research style.” Festinger realized that
about social reality, which is necessary since some progress in any science required methods appro-
opinions and beliefs cannot be tested directly or priate to that field. Social psychology needed its
objectively (e.g., “Should abortion be legal?”; own experimental approach, following Lewin’s
“Who is the greatest baseball player of all time?”). lead—a kind of experimental theater, with covers
Assuming people are attracted to a group, they stories, accomplices, and deception to control for
could strive for group uniformity or agreement by confounding factors and to create a situation that
trying to change other people’s opinions (commu- was perceived as psychologically meaningful to the
nication), modifying their views to match those of subject.
the other group members (opinion change), or
rejecting divergent others as appropriate references
Social Comparison
(rejection). Such pressures should increase in attrac-
tive groups, or as an issue becomes more relevant After Lewin’s death in 1947, the Research Center
to a group’s goals. for Group Dynamics, with most of its remaining
To test the theory, Festinger and his students faculty, moved to the University of Michigan
conducted a series of laboratory experiments. where it remains today. Faculty salaries at the cen-
Groups (or clubs) were formed of previously unac- ter relied on grant support, however, so in 1951
quainted individuals who were asked to discuss Festinger moved to a tenure-track position at the
various issues. Factors such as types of goals, need University of Minnesota where Schachter was
for social reality, attractiveness, issue relevance, and already on the faculty.
so on were manipulated. In some experiments, At the University of Minnesota, Festinger devel-
accomplices posed as subjects and played scripted oped his second major theory, social comparison
roles as group members with deviating or consen- theory. Informal social communication theory was
sual opinions. The precedents for this ambitious about the power of the group over the person, but
research program were Muzafer Sherif’s and Lewin’s in “A Theory of Social Comparison Processes”
earlier work, but Festinger magnified the experi- Festinger emphasized how individuals use groups
menter’s role as playwright and stage director. to fulfill the informational need to evaluate opin-
For brevity’s sake, only one study will be ions and abilities. The new theory focused only on
described here. For his dissertation, Stanley the need for social reality, and abilities were con-
Schachter, under Festinger’s direction, placed sidered as well as opinions. As with beliefs and
accomplices in groups. One group adopted the opinions, there often is no objective standard
majority view (i.e., the “mode”) from the begin- available to assess abilities. People must rely on
ning, another initially voiced a deviant view but social consensus.
over the course of the discussion adopted the con- Social comparison theory posited that people
sensual position (i.e., the “slider”), and a third (the evaluate their abilities and opinions by comparing
“deviate”) maintained the opposing view. them with those of others when it is not feasible to
Observers coded group discussion behaviors. The test them directly in the environment. Comparison
actual subjects tried to persuade the other discus- leads to pressures toward uniformity (i.e., similar-
sion partners. The mode was readily accepted, as ity), but the tendency to compare will cease if oth-
was the slider after adopting the majority view. ers are too different in dimensions that are related
Initially much communication was directed at the to the ability or opinion at issue. For opinions,
deviate, but when the deviate proved impossible to agreement with others who presumably also are
convince, communication declined, and the devi- motivated to hold correct views should make us
ate was nominated for the most undesirable club feel more confident. For abilities, observing those
assignments. Consistent with the theory, group with similar abilities should allow us to learn our
goals or social reality were achieved by striving for possibilities for action in the environment, which
group consensus, the pressures to obtain unifor- should be identical or very similar to theirs.
mity were manifest via different behavioral routes, Social comparison theory also recognizes a dis-
and deviates were rejected. tinctive feature of abilities. People want to be slightly
286 Festinger, Leon

better than everyone else because the desire to be bet- cognitive dissonance theory and extending it to a
ter or to improve is emphasized in Western cultures. wide range of phenomena. Like the experiments in
This means that complete opinion agreement may be group dynamics, the studies were carefully crafted
satisfactory to everyone, but completely equal abili- and involved cover stories, complex manipula-
ties will not—implying that “a state of social quies- tions, and deception. One of the best known was
cence is never reached,” as Festinger put it. the forced compliance paradigm, in which the sub-
ject performed a series of repetitive and boring
menial tasks and then was asked to lie to the “next
Cognitive Dissonance
subject” (actually an experimental accomplice)
While at the University of Minnesota, Festinger read and say that the tasks were interesting and enjoy-
about a UFO cult that believed the end of the world able. Some subjects were paid $1 for lying, while
was at hand. A housewife, “Mrs. Keech,” reported others were paid $20. Based on dissonance theory,
receiving messages from extraterrestrial aliens that Festinger predicted and found that the subjects
the world would end in a great flood on a specific who were paid $1 for lying later evaluated the
date. She attracted a group of followers who left tasks as more enjoyable than those who were paid
jobs, college, and spouses, and gave away money $20. The subjects that paid a large amount should
and possessions to prepare to depart on a flying not have experienced dissonance because, after all,
saucer that, according to Mrs. Keech, would rescue they were well rewarded and had ample justifica-
the true believers. Given the believers’ serious com- tion. The subjects that paid $1 had little justification
mitment, Festinger wondered how they would react for lying to a stranger and should have experienced
when the prophecy failed. He and his colleagues, cognitive dissonance. To reduce the dissonance,
posing as believers, infiltrated Mrs. Keech’s group they reevaluated the boring task as interesting and
and kept notes on the proceedings surreptitiously. enjoyable. The forced compliance paradigm gener-
The believers shunned publicity while they ated much interest because more attitude change
awaited the flying saucer and the flood. But when was associated with a small rather than a large
the prophecy was disconfirmed, almost immedi- incentive—contrary to reinforcement theory. This
ately the previously most-committed group mem- experiment also illustrates the appeal of cognitive
bers made calls to newspapers, sought out dissonance theory—it combined cognition and
interviews, and started actively proselytizing. motivation and showed how that combination led
Festinger was unsurprised by the sudden prose- to nonobvious predictions.
lytizing after the prophecy’s disconfirmation; he Festinger conducted much research on cognitive
saw the cult members as enlisting social support dissonance processes and even extended the theory
for their belief to lessen the pain of disconfirma- to animal learning, showing that a limited version
tion. Their behavior confirmed predictions from a of dissonance could explain why a rat who worked
theory of his whose premise was that people need harder during acquisition resisted extinction lon-
to maintain consistency between thoughts, feel- ger than a consistently rewarded rat. The former
ings, and behaviors. animal reduced its dissonance by finding extra
The theory proposed that inconsistency among attractions in the situation. Festinger is best known
beliefs or behaviors causes an uncomfortable psy- in psychology for his research in cognitive disso-
chological tension (i.e., cognitive dissonance), nance, and the term cognitive dissonance has
leading people to change one of the inconsistent become a part of popular speech.
elements to reduce the dissonance, or to add con- He received the Distinguished Scientific Award
sonant elements to restore consonance. Mrs. of the American Psychological Association in 1959
Keech’s followers actively enlisted new believers to and the Distinguished Senior Scientist Award of
obtain social support (and thereby add consonant the Society of Experimental Social Psychology in
elements) to reduce the dissonance created by the 1980. He was inducted into the National Academy
disconfirmation. of Sciences in 1972 and the Society of Experimental
In 1955, Festinger left the University of Psychology in 1973.
Minnesota for Stanford, where he and his students In 1964, Festinger moved from social psychol-
launched a series of laboratory experiments testing ogy to research on visual perception. Although
Free Riding 287

this seemed like a radical departure, it was a con- See also Cognitive Consistency; Conformity; Lewin, Kurt;
tinuation of a theme. Festinger’s work on visual Minority Influence; Opinion Deviance; Social
perception concerned how people reconcile incon- Comparison Theory
sistencies between visual perception and eye move-
ments to see coherent images. His social
Further Readings
psychological research concerned how people
resolve conflict (group dynamics), ambiguity Festinger, L. (1950). Informal social communication.
(social comparison), and inconsistency (cognitive Psychological Review, 57, 271–282.
dissonance) all manifestations of pressures for Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison
uniformity. processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140.
Festinger, L. (1983). The human legacy. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Psycho-Social-Archeology Festinger, L., & Carlsmith, J. M. (1959). Cognitive
consequences of forced compliance. Journal of
In the late 1970s, Festinger turned to questions
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 203–211.
about human nature based on archeological data.
Festinger, L., Riecken, H., & Schachter, S. (1956). When
He read the relevant literature, talked to special-
prophecy fails. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
ists, and visited archeological digs, work that Press.
resulted in a monograph, The Human Legacy. His Festinger, L., Schachter, S., & Back, K. (1950). Social
ex-student Schachter referred to it as “psycho-social- pressures in informal groups: A study of human
archeology.” factors in housing. New York: Harper.
A general theme of this work was that humans
often bring about problems unwittingly as a func-
tion of their intellectual and creative talents to cre-
ate new technologies without being fully able to
foresee their long-term consequences. Initially, Free Riding
Festinger’s “archeology” was perceived to be at
the margins of social psychology, but now it can Free riding refers to enjoying the benefits and
be seen as prescient of current developments in rewards associated with membership in a group
evolutionary and cultural psychology. without making full contributions to that group.
Free riding can occur in a range of group and team
contexts varying in size, membership type, and pur-
Mentoring pose. For example, individuals can free ride in a
Festinger was described by an ex-student as “a larger group or societal context by failing to make
tough character who did not suffer fools gladly.” contributions to shared resources and public goods,
Others testified to his voracious curiosity, extraor- such as libraries, blood donation centers, recycling
dinary memory, incisive intellect, and powers of units, and public broadcasting networks. However,
concentration—more than a little intimidating. they can also free ride by withholding their efforts
However, he mentored dozens of students, his from a small project team and relying on the work
office door was always open, and he was on a first- of others. Free riding (also sometimes referred to as
name basis with his students, something quite rare the free-rider effect or the free-rider problem) may
in the 1950s. Meetings at his home where ideas undercut a range of group, collective, and societal
were discussed over beer and pretzels and dinners initiatives intended to benefit multiple parties. This
with students and other faculty members were entry describes the background of thinking in this
common, and everyone played games in his lab. area, looks at a sampling of research, and briefly
Something of Kurt Lewin’s benign nature and cha- discusses related social concepts.
risma rubbed off on Festinger. Both charisma and
intellect contributed to the “Festinger legacy” in Historical Background
experimental social psychology.
Although analysis of the relationship between indi-
Jerry Suls vidual action and societal outcomes has a long
288 Free Riding

philosophical tradition, economists and sociolo- potential value of each vote), or if voters are influ-
gists such as Vilfredo Pareto, Paul Samuelson, and enced by potential rewards from friends, political
Max Weber were among the first modern scholars organizations, or community groups (or otherwise
to formally articulate the potential for free riding, fearful of negative reactions from these sources that
as well as other similar forms of social inaction, to could result from not voting), individual inaction
undercut various societal and market processes. In will be less likely. Similarly, individuals with a
an influential 1965 book, Mancur Olson provided vested interest in specific election-related issues or
an economic analysis of how large collectives can who view themselves as socially responsible might
lead individuals to view their contributions to the also be more likely to participate.
collective as mostly or entirely unnecessary, lead- Free riding is not restricted solely to very large
ing to disinterest and apathy. groups or societal collectives, but can also occur
Specifically, individuals are likely to view their among smaller units, including organizations,
own contributions to an outcome or public good small groups, and project teams. Indeed, recent
that is provided by many such individuals as at research by economists, political scientists, sociol-
best minuscule, and perhaps as entirely unneces- ogists, social psychologists, organizational psy-
sary. Stated differently, individuals may reason chologists, and industrial relations scholars has
that if they do not provide the requisite effort or implicated free riding as an important phenome-
resources, others are likely to sustain the resource non in a wide range of behaviors and contexts,
anyhow; thus, they may therefore simply choose to including cooperative learning in the classroom,
“let George do it.” The likelihood of being able to the provision of public resources, voting behavior,
continue to benefit from a pooled resource with restaurant tipping, community vaccination, chari-
many contributors may be nearly as high when table and blood donation, energy conservation,
one makes little or no contribution as when one and raw material preservation.
makes a full or even exceptional contribution.
Olson noted that such free riding becomes
Research Findings
increasingly likely as the size of the group increases,
both because individual actions are less immedi- Robert Albanese and David Van Fleet did an
ately noticeable in larger groups and because indi- analysis in 1985 of the implications of free-riding
viduals are likely to view their collective actions as theory for business organizations and teams within
being efficacious in larger groups. As group size such organizations. They concluded that the most
increases, the costs of organizing individual contri- effective means for countering free riding in orga-
butions or efforts are also likely to increase, pro- nizations is to create organizational task and team
viding another possible mechanism for individual structures conducive to individual accountability
inaction. Other factors influencing individual and responsibility. They highlighted several strate-
action include the level of public interest about gies, include building communication systems and
specific causes, the presence of coercion or special cultures that broaden individuals’ views of self-in-
incentives to participate, the nature of the task, terest to also incorporate organizational goals,
and individual differences in factors such as value more closely monitoring individual contributions,
orientation (a habitual tendency to value the self or making individuals more accountable, allowing
others) and fairness perceptions. individuals to make more unique contributions,
Consider a political election as an example. As and building organizational commitment.
the potential voting base increases in size, it becomes At the small group level, Norbert Kerr and his
increasingly likely that each individual voter will colleagues have conducted a programmatic series
have less impact on the outcome, that each individ- of studies on free-riding effects and related phe-
ual will see less efficacy to his or her vote, and that nomena. In these studies, participants were asked
it will be increasingly difficult logistically to orga- to pump as much air as possible through a hand-
nize voter participation in an effective manner. Yet, controlled device both individually and with oth-
if public interest in the election and in issues central ers, and the task type and ability level of participants
to the election is high, if the anticipated outcome is relative to their partners or teammates were
expected to be very close (thereby increasing the manipulated. Several of these studies showed that
Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis 289

when working with a highly capable teammate on individual, if taken by most or all such individuals,
a disjunctive task (in which the group performance would be detrimental to the group as a whole. In
is determined by the strongest performer within the case of free riding, it may benefit individuals to
the group), individuals reduced their efforts, free refrain from contributing their time or money to a
riding on the work of their teammates. Kerr and public resource (such as a community service orga-
his colleagues noted that in these conditions, par- nization, symphony orchestra, library, or public
ticipants’ efforts are more dispensable, or unneces- television station), but if most or all such individu-
sary for satisfactory group performance. Thus, free als were to similarly free ride, the public good in
riding doesn’t just occur in large groups or societal question would be seriously diminished in quality
collectives, it also occurs in small work groups and might even become unable to sustain its exis-
when individuals believe their efforts are not obvi- tence. Hence, as many scholars have acknowl-
ously needed. edged, the literatures on free riding and on social
Some of these studies also documented that dilemmas are largely compatible with one another,
when working with a highly capable member who especially with regard to the subclass of social
consistently performed poorly, individuals often dilemmas known as public-good dilemmas, in
choose to also withhold their own effort from the which individuals are likely to make less than their
task to avoid being played for a fool, a phenome- fair share of contributions to collective resources
non that was called the sucker effect. However, the that are reliant on many individuals.
news was not all negative with regard to individual
effort. Some studies also documented conditions Steven J. Karau
under which team members with little ability See also Group Motivation; Köhler Effect; Social
showed very high motivation levels when working Dilemmas; Social Loafing; Sucker Effect
on conjunctive tasks (in which the group perfor-
mance is determined by the weakest performer
within the group). In this latter case, called the Further Readings
Köhler effect, participants’ efforts were highly Albanese, R., & Van Fleet, D. D. (1985). Rational
indispensable and crucial to team performance, behavior in groups: The free-riding tendency.
creating the potential for enhanced motivation. Academy of Management Review, 10, 244–255.
Kerr, N. L. (1983). Motivation losses in task-performing
groups: A social dilemma analysis. Journal of
Related Processes
Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 819–828.
Free riding has a close relationship with some Kerr, N. L., & Bruun, S. E. (1983). Dispensability of
other social processes. Specifically, in the case of member effort and group motivation losses: Free-rider
withholding effort from a group, free riding consti- effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
tutes a form of social loafing. Social loafing is the 44, 78–94.
tendency for people to reduce their efforts when Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action: Public
working in groups. Thus, free riding represents a goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge, MA:
type of social loafing in which people take advan- Harvard University Press.
tage of the efforts of teammates in order to mini- Stroebe, W., & Frey, B. S. (1982). Self-interest and
mize their own efforts—when they perceive that collective action: The economics and psychology of
their own efforts are likely to have little or no public goods. British Journal of Social Psychology, 21,
121–137.
impact on the group outcome. Because free riding
in small groups often emerges in situations where
the nature of the task or of the expected contribu-
tions of teammates makes a person’s own efforts
seem dispensable, it may represent a more con-
Frustration-Aggression
sciously aware or strategic type of social loafing. Hypothesis
Free riding is also an inherent problem in all
types of social dilemmas. Social dilemmas are situ- The frustration-aggression hypothesis is an
ations in which actions that are beneficial to an attempt to explain aggressive behavior by linking
290 Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis

it to frustration, in particular frustration of goals. It is important to point out that Dollard and his
One important application involves scapegoating, colleagues believed that their account of frustra-
where it is suggested that as sources of frustra- tion and aggression was valid for human as well as
tion accumulate—during an economic crisis, for nonhuman (i.e., animal) actors, and for groups as
example—the frustrated groups might unleash well as individuals. That is, we should expect
their aggression against a convenient social target, aggressive inclinations to result whenever a person
often a minority group. This entry discusses devel- or animal experiences frustration. The logic of the
opment of the theory and its major assumptions, frustration-aggression hypothesis was applied to
applications to intergroup relations, and critiques. the context of intergroup as well as interpersonal
relations.
Background and Assumptions
Applications to Intergroup Relations
The frustration-aggression hypothesis was intro-
duced by a group of Yale University psychologists, In the realm of intergroup relations, the frustra-
John Dollard, Leonard Doob, Neal Miller, O. H. tion-aggression hypothesis was used to shed
Mowrer, and Robert Sears. These authors pub- light on the dynamics of stereotyping, prejudice,
lished an important monograph in 1939 entitled and outgroup hostility. The theory of scapegoat-
Frustration and Aggression, in which they sought ing is probably the most well-known application
to integrate ideas and findings from several disci- of the frustration-aggression hypothesis to the
plines, especially sociology, anthropology, and study of prejudice. The general idea is that as
psychology. In terms of intellectual history, the economic or other sources of frustration accu-
work is notable for its eclectic use of psychoanaly- mulate, people tend to seek out convenient social
sis, behaviorism, and Marxism. It became one of targets, or scapegoats, on whom to unleash their
the most influential explanations in the history aggression.
of social science for the origins and expressions of Drawing in part on Freudian concepts of dis-
aggressive behaviors. placement, projection, and catharsis, the theory
The point of the frustration–aggression hypoth- held that once frustration and the impetus for
esis was to identify a universal, parsimonious set of aggressive behavior have occurred, it makes rela-
testable assumptions that would apply to virtually tively little difference who receives the brunt of the
all situations of violence in humans and other ani- violence. In some cases, aggression naturally takes
mals. According to the original, strong version of the form of retaliation against the initial source of
the hypothesis that appeared in Frustration and frustration. In other cases, situational constraints
Aggression, “the occurrence of aggression always can prevent a person from being able to react
presupposes the existence of frustration, and, con- against the actual source of frustration (such as
trariwise, frustration always leads to some form of when the frustration was caused by a very power-
aggression.” Thus, frustration, which was concep- ful person or group). In still other cases, such as
tually and operationally defined in terms of goal natural disasters, there may be no one to blame,
interference, was seen as both a necessary and suf- but the frustration can still produce aggressive
ficient condition for aggressive behavior. inclinations.
The hypothesis was soon modified by the Yale Under these latter two sets of circumstances, it
group, however, and in 1941 it was proposed that was predicted that people will engage in scape-
frustration might lead to many different responses, goating, that is, selecting relatively weak, vulner-
one of which is aggression. Whereas the original able targets for aggression (such as members of
formulation explained the lack of overt aggressive low-status minority groups, who cannot fight
behavior in certain situations in terms of inhibition back effectively). For example, it was suggested
due to the fear of punishment (which would not that during the Great Depression, many Germans
diminish the aggressive drive), the subsequent ver- blamed Jews and many Southerners in the United
sion made clear that some responses to frustration States blamed Blacks for their economic frustra-
could reduce the instigation response to such an tions. However, recent research suggests that the
extent that the aggressive response did not occur. connection between economic conditions and hate
Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis 291

crimes is more elusive than frustration-aggression (such as control or domination). This criticism
researchers once assumed. can be dealt with rather easily by confining the
According to the theory, the displacement of frustration-aggression hypothesis to cases of hos-
aggression onto a socially sanctioned (i.e., conve- tile aggression alone.
nient) victim group serves several purposes. First, Critics also challenged the premise that any
and most important, it channels the expression of interference with ongoing goal-directed behavior
aggressive impulses and creates cathartic relief would evoke frustration. According to Abraham
once the aggression has been released. Second, it is Maslow and others, legitimate (or justified) inter-
socially undesirable to behave violently toward ferences do not necessarily produce frustration.
others in the absence of justification, but prejudi- Only forms of interference that seem illegitimate
cial attitudes can be used to justify (or rationalize) (or arbitrary or otherwise unjustified), they argued,
the expression of hostility. In this way, members of should lead to frustration. Research on attribution
disadvantaged groups can be blamed for their own processes indicated that aggressive behavior is
plight as targets of hostility and prejudice. Finally, indeed a prevalent response to deliberate and
in accordance with psychoanalytic thought, the unfair efforts to interfere with an individual’s goal-
theory of scapegoating suggests that victim blam- attainment opportunities.
ing is exacerbated by the projection of (typically Finally, the nature of the connection between
unconscious) guilt that frustrated parties feel as a perceived frustration and the display of violence
result of their own prejudice and violent activity. also turned out to be more complicated than
The occurrence of stereotyping, as discussed by Dollard and his collaborators realized. In the most
Gordon Allport and Bernard Kramer, is explained empirically successful modification of the original
by the theory of scapegoating as another manifes- frustration-aggression hypothesis, Leonard
tation of rationalization tendencies. Rather than Berkowitz suggested that frustration is a psycho-
simply rationalizing an aggressive posture directed logically aversive state that can create a predisposi-
against one person, stereotypes are effective ratio- tion to behave aggressively. His model was a
nalization devices that would seem to legitimize reformulation of the frustration-aggression hypoth-
hostility against a social group in its entirety. esis that integrated subsequent theorizing on the
Consequences of the scapegoating dynamic include antecedents of aggression and addressed many of
overgeneralization of stereotypical traits to an the criticisms directed at earlier versions of the
entire social group and the exaggeration of simi- hypothesis. According to Berkowitz, frustration
larities among group members, especially with will lead to aggression to the extent that it elicits
respect to stereotypical qualities. Finally, because negative emotions. Moreover, frustration is only
stereotypes are ingrained in the culture, they tend one form of unpleasant negative affect that can
to signal which social groups are appropriate tar- provoke violent responses.
gets for relieving one’s frustration. The general idea was that aversive experiences
produce negative emotions and feelings, as well as
related thoughts and memories of past reactions to
Criticism and Modifications
negative events. Berkowitz noted that these negative
The frustration-aggression hypothesis was extre­ emotions and thoughts lead automatically to the
mely influential with respect to subsequent decades fight-or-flight response. The choice between “fight”
of empirical research on aggression and violence. and “flight” responses was theorized to depend on
Nevertheless, the hypothesis was severely criticized the intensity of the negative emotion as well as the
on the grounds of theoretical rigidity and over- subjective appraisal and interpretation of the situa-
generalization; clearly, it was necessary to limit tion. A key factor was whether or not goal interfer-
the scope of the hypothesis to establish its valid- ence was expected, and Berkowitz regarded this as
ity. For instance, the initial hypothesis failed to a more important factor than its legitimacy (although
differentiate between hostile forms of aggression, illegitimate interferences are also frequently unex-
in which the actor’s goal is to inflict harm, and pected). To the extent that unexpected interferences
instrumental forms of aggression, in which are more psychologically aversive than expected
aggression is simply a means to attain other goals interferences, they were theorized to lead more
292 Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis

easily to aggressive behavior. Although Berkowitz’s far less common than a straightforward applica-
model has also been criticized for being overly sim- tion of the theories of frustration aggression and
plistic, it has received substantial empirical support relative deprivation would suggest.
and is generally considered to be the most useful
and valid reformulation of the classic frustration- John T. Jost and Avital Mentovich
aggression hypothesis. See also Prejudice; Relative Deprivation; Scapegoating;
Other researchers have focused more on the System Justification Theory
concept of frustration, asking questions about the
nature and causes of frustration and whether dif-
ferent forms of frustration can produce different Further Readings
behavioral outcomes. Their focus has been on feel-
ings of relative deprivation, especially the notion Allport, G. W., & Kramer, B. M. (1946). Some roots of
that these feelings are experienced very acutely prejudice. Journal of Psychology, 22, 9–39.
when expectations are suddenly thwarted, particu- Berkowitz, L. (Ed.). (1969). Roots of aggression: A
re-examination of the frustration-aggression
larly when expectations have been rising. It has
hypothesis. New York: Atherton.
been suggested that feelings of deprivation under
Berkowitz, L. (1989). Frustration-aggression hypothesis:
these circumstances can often lead to violence, as
Examination and reformulation. Psychological
in “revolutions of rising expectations.”
Bulletin, 106, 59–73.
Still other researchers have distinguished Dollard, J., Doob, L. W., Miller, N. E., Mowrer, O. H.,
between interpersonal (or fraternal) deprivation & Sears, R. R. (1939). Frustration and aggression.
and intergroup deprivation. Such research suggests New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
that interpersonal deprivation (i.e., an individual Green, D. P., Glaser, J., & Rich, A. (1998). From
feeling that he or she is deprived relative to another lynching to gay-bashing: The elusive connection
individual) can lead to low self-esteem, a lack of between economic conditions and hate crime. Journal
motivation, and even depression, whereas inter- of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 82–92.
group deprivation (i.e., members of a group feeling Gurr, T. R. (1970). Why men rebel. Princeton, NJ:
that they are deprived relative to the members of Princeton University Press.
another group) can lead to social protest and col- Miller, N. E., with Sears, R. R., Mowrer, O. H., Doob, L. W.,
lective mobilization. However, it has often been & Dollard, J. (1941). The frustration-aggression
pointed out that such acts of shared rebellion are hypothesis. Psychological Review, 48, 337–342.
G
of these questions, research in the following
Gangs decades, mostly in the United States, provided a
mixed picture. Regarding stability, an early study
Used originally to refer to a group of workmen, in Los Angeles suggested that many of the city’s
the term gang is now most often applied to groups gangs had histories extending back as much as 50
distinguished by their involvement in criminal years. This and other work noted that enduring
activities. This entry provides a brief history of gang identities are often based on locality, under-
research on gangs, describes methods of inquiry in lining another recurring theme in gang research—
this field, and outlines types of gangs and their the significance of territoriality. Many other
forms of organization. It then examines the rela- studies, however, failed to find such long-term
tionship between gangs, crime, and victimization. stability or even to find gangs at all.
The issue of stability is difficult to separate from
that of size. Gang members often provide unreli-
History
able, uncertain, and highly inflated estimates.
Scholarly interest in gangs can be traced at least as Sometimes, as Yablonsky found in a study of New
far back as 19th-century journalistic accounts of York gangs, they estimate membership in their
adolescent males growing up in areas of high gangs in the several hundreds. More systematic
population density and economic disadvantage. observation points to much lower numbers, though
Charles Dickens’s fictionalized gang in Oliver this work has also revealed the importance of dis-
Twist, for example, was based on accounts of tinguishing core from peripheral members. In the
London street urchins. 1960s, studies of patterns of association in gangs
More systematic and scientific study of gangs over spans of 6 months to a year pointed to core
began in the 1920s in the United States with Frederic memberships of less than 10 as typical, but there
Thrasher’s massive investigation of more than 1,300 were exceptions.
gangs in Chicago. He concluded that young people
seek out gang membership from a desire for excite-
ment, and he painted a picture of gangs as stable,
Methods of Studying Gangs
coherent, and highly structured, with well-defined What are the consequences of being a group in
roles such as war counselor, armorer, and treasurer. which criminal behavior is normative, perhaps
Thrasher’s account of gangs did much to define even its “core business”? A challenge to answering
the questions dominating subsequent research: any questions about gangs is posed by the diffi-
How stable are gangs, and how large are they? culty of collecting valid evidence.
How coherently are gangs structured? What are Research on gangs involves the study of natu-
their core or defining activities? In answer to each rally occurring rather than ad hoc groups. There

293
294 Gangs

are significant challenges in securing information described below—in reality there are no sharp dis-
from and about gangs, because they are involved continuities between types. However, it is conve-
in illegal activities. Questionnaire methods are nient for researchers to focus on the extremes and
attractive, given the low cost of collecting data the middle of the continuum as “ideal types.”
from large samples. The particular difficulty in Organized gangs are criminal business organi-
using questionnaires with gang members relates to zations, primarily composed of adults engaged in
credible guarantees of confidentiality, which limit criminal activity for economic reasons. The mem-
the researcher’s options for checking the validity of bers of such gangs are commonly from the same
responses. Interviews potentially generate richer ethnic background, have poor job skills and
data but at much higher cost. Many interview opportunities, and group together for social sup-
studies in this field have relied on sampling young port and financial survival. They are secretive in
offenders while they are detained or incarcerated. their membership and engage in profitable forms
Participant observation would appear to offer the of organized crime (e.g., selling drugs, prostitu-
most accurate picture of gang life but contains its tion, human trafficking, protection rackets). They
own challenges, the most obvious but not neces- are also highly organized and hierarchical, with a
sarily the most serious of which is the ethical posi- quasi-formal career structure. Such gangs tend to
tion of the observer. One notable example of such be very stable, and their memberships tend to be
an approach, described by James Patrick in his long-lasting, often spanning generations.
1973 book A Glasgow Gang Observed, was Street gangs are primarily composed of youth
achieved through the researcher’s temporary mem- and young adults who see the gang as a surrogate
bership in the gang. A more recent example is the family and a source or support, friendship, and
10-year relationship between sociologist Sudhir protection. The members of such gangs proudly
Venkatesh and a Chicago gang trading in illegal advertise their gang affiliation and may engage in
drugs. The rich detail and high ecological validity crime for economic reasons as well as in organized
of such research is offset by the problem of gener- violence against similar gangs seen as rivals. Street
alization, in that each study is effectively a single gangs are semistructured, and individual roles in
case study. Researchers have also drawn on out- these gangs are loosely defined. The groups are
group perspectives—those of community workers somewhat stable but exhibit a pattern in which
or criminal justice agencies, for example—to they appear and disappear in waves, over time.
develop a picture of gang characteristics. But the Wanna-be groups are formed by adolescents
goals and perspectives of the various outgroups who band together from time to time to engage in
inevitably color their accounts and perceptions. social activity as well as criminal and antisocial
For these various reasons, solid evidence on activities in order to find excitement and diversion
gangs—their prevalence, formation, size, composi- rather than obtain economic gain. The small num-
tion, organization, activities, and consequences for ber of female gangs that have been reported fit into
members—remains limited. this category. Organization is minimal, and the
groupings involved are quite transitory, based
more on convenience and availability than effort or
Gang Composition: Organization and Types
commitment. It is not clear that such groups invari-
While Thrasher’s work described what appeared ably aspire to be gangs in a more identifiable sense.
to be highly organized and stable gangs with At least some research suggests members of such
clearly defined roles and positions, more recent gangs are adolescents hanging around with their
work has portrayed gangs as loosely organized, friends. By virtue of their visibility in public places,
flexible, and short-lived. It is now generally however, they are at risk of being perceived, identi-
accepted that the organization of gangs falls along fied, and labeled as gang members by others.
a continuum defined by the respective extremes of
organized–stable and flexible–transient, and
The Relationship Between Gangs and Crime
though the continuum has also been partitioned
into types of gangs—such as the typology distin- Gang membership is associated with criminal
guishing organized, street, and wanna-be gangs activity, but an important question concerns the
Gangs 295

source of this association. This question is fre- and more violent crime. More organized gangs are
quently answered in one of two ways: (1) joining a also more likely to deal in drugs. Supplying and
gang can turn a young person into a criminal or selling illegal drugs requires coordinated activity,
(2) gangs are groups of young people who indi- and if a group moves into drug trafficking this may
vidually are criminally active. Neither of these set up a feedback loop—a higher degree of organi-
answers captures the whole truth. zation will support more extensive and profitable
Consider the potential routes into gang mem- drug-based trafficking.
bership. At least three have been distinguished, The more organized the gang, the more visible
though in practice it is likely they overlap and it will be, and the more likely it will be defined
combine in varying degrees of relative importance. and treated by those outside it as a group. In addi-
First, joining a criminal gang may be a pragmatic tion, more visible gangs attract more police atten-
career decision. In some localities and for some tion, increasing the possibility of arrest and
social groups, criminal gangs are the primary and conviction. Labeling, whether as gang member or
perhaps the only providers of employment. Second, through more formal criminal proceedings, in
young people who become homeless often band turn increases the likelihood of further and more
together to form surrogate families and provide serious offending.
solutions to shared problems. At least one authority Basic group dynamics reinforce these feedback
on homeless youth, John Hagan, has argued, how- loops. Gangs that are more organized are more
ever, that there are important differences between likely to form and adhere to shared norms and
these groupings of street youth and delinquent shared views. And their decisions about which
gangs, differences the group members emphasize. actions to take are more likely to polarize in the
The third route begins with individual inclina- direction of already shared inclinations. Intergroup
tion and the common tendency for young people dynamics further reinforce the distinctive identity
to join groups in pursuit of companionship and of the group, the deference of its members to
fun. Such groupings reflect already established ingroup norms, and the emergence of leadership.
inclinations. This is important, as inclinations
toward antisocial behavior and crime predate
The Relationship Between
group membership. Young people are more likely
Gang Membership and Victimization
to form or join delinquent gangs, and not other
groups, to the extent that they are already disposed Research on delinquency shows a clear link between
to such activity. There is little evidence that young victimization and offending, but there is uncer-
people not so disposed succumb to pressure to join tainty surrounding the causality underlying the
gangs. However, gang formation is also favored by relationship. Some recent work supports the view
certain social and environmental conditions, that victimization comes first, often in the family
including economic deprivation and residential or in an institution that has substituted for an
instability. This route into gang membership, in absent or nonexistent family.
other words, is a combination of inclination and Insofar as victimization disposes individuals to
opportunity. offending, it may increase the possibility that they
Associating with like-minded peers increases the will become gang members. One plausible line of
likelihood that individuals’ shared inclinations will argument is that those who suffer victimization,
translate into more consistent habits of behavior. and so lose confidence in conventional forms of
The group nature of juvenile offending is well protection, join gangs as alternative means to
established. For routine involvement in more seri- secure protection and redress for grievances.
ous crime during adolescence, the group context Ironically, however, gang membership increases
seems almost to be a necessary condition. Thus the likelihood of further victimization. And the
opportunities to affiliate with other youth inclined more organized the gang, the higher the risk of
to be delinquent increase the likelihood of a young violent victimization of its members. Much of this
person’s committing crimes. victimization is a product of the intergroup con-
The more organized the gang, the greater the flict characteristic of relations between gangs, but
likelihood of its members committing more serious some reflects social control within gangs.
296 Gender and Behavior

Institutionalization of Gangs Hagedorn, J. M. (2005). The global impact of gangs.


Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 21(2),
The link between gang membership and violence 153–169.
relates to what is perhaps most distinctive about Venkatesh, S. (2008). Gang leader for a day: A rogue
gangs as social groups. Almost all other social sociologist crosses the line. New York: Penguin.
groups, whatever the strength of the group dynam-
ics that sustain their particular norms, operate
within a more general normative framework
enforced by the state. Gangs, to varying degrees, Gender and Behavior
operate outside this framework—and violence,
whether potential or actual, becomes a substitute
Gender is a subject of much interest to social sci-
instrument of social control.
entists who study groups, and there are a number
If a sense of exclusion from the protection of the
of reasons for this. First, much of our daily life is
state system is a feature of involvement in delin-
spent in mixed-gender groups. For example, a
quency, and thus in delinquent gangs, under cer-
family—a group in which much of our social
tain circumstances this sense of exclusion is shared
behavior occurs—usually contains members of
by entire subpopulations. Defining features of
both genders. Thus, most of us are required to
these populations are urbanization, poverty, and
interact with members of the other sex on a regu-
some combination of minority ethnic, religious,
lar basis. Second, gender seems to hold an impor-
and racial status. As John Hagedorn has observed,
tant place in our conception of ourselves and
these circumstances favor the institutionalization
other people. One of the first questions we ask
of gangs—a process in which their gang identity
about a new baby is, “Is it a boy or a girl?” We
survives leadership changes and membership turn-
are uncomfortable when someone’s gender is
over, they become larger and develop more com-
ambiguous. And third, gender affects behavior
plex role structures, they have the capacity to
both within and between groups in a variety of
adapt to changing conditions, and they become
social locations.
more embedded in a host community. This last
A number of social scientific perspectives exist
circumstance reflects gangs’ involvement in provi-
on the mechanism by which gender affects social
sion of economic, security, and other needs not
behavior. This entry reviews a few of the primary
met by the mainstream. They may also be the
perspectives and discusses some of the social loca-
focus for identities in opposition and resistance to
tions in which gender most affects behavior.
the dominant culture. But violence, or the capacity
for it, is integral to their functioning, and such
gangs are characteristically male dominated and Perspectives on Gender and Behavior
armed.
Gender scholars have espoused a variety of con-
Nicholas Emler and Marina Rachitskiy ceptualizations of gender and gender differences in
behavior. These vary from very individual and
See also Deviance; Group Composition; Group person-oriented (gender is an integral part of an
Formation; Group Polarization; Group Structure; individual’s self-concept) to interactional (gender
Identification and Commitment; Minority Groups in
is a learned behavior) to structural (gender is a
Society; Norms; Roles; Social Deviance
system of social practices and cultural beliefs) con-
ceptualizations. Gender as identity, gender as role,
Further Readings and gender as a structural system of practices are
Ball, R. G., & Curry, D. G. (1995). The logic of discussed in this entry.
definition in criminology: Purposes and methods for
defining gangs. Criminology, 33, 225–245.
Gender as Identity
Gordon, R. M. (2000). Criminal business organizations,
street gangs and “wanna-be” groups: A Vancouver Gender holds an important place in how we
perspective. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 42, categorize individuals. In fact, cognitive psycholo-
39–60. gists have shown that gender is the usually first
Gender and Behavior 297

category by which we classify others upon meeting nurturance and emotional expressiveness and
them. Further, this process is automatic and agentic behaviors as those that require assertive-
unconscious. ness and independence. In our culture, communal
At least as important for the study of behavior, behaviors are associated with women, and agentic
gender is a large component of our definitions of behaviors with men.
our own identities. Most children define them- At the elementary school level, gender socializa-
selves in terms of their gender—“I’m a boy” or tion usually takes the form of what Barrie Thorne
“I’m a girl”—during their preschool years. When calls borderwork, which is interaction that serves
researchers think of gender as an identity, they can to heighten the differences between the genders.
examine how this sense of meaning plays out in This interaction separates the genders and perpetu-
social behavior and what it means to an individual ates gender stratification (e.g., as expressed in
to be male or female. “boys have cooties” and “no girls allowed”). For
When people interact, they bring these identities older children, the socialization process centers on
to the group. An identity is a component of the self learning (primarily from peers) about how to con-
and, as such, is a standard to which individuals duct romantic relationships with members of the
hold themselves. With regard to gender, this means other gender. This socialization also serves to rein-
that people bring with them an idea about their force stereotypes about appropriate masculine and
own gender identity, or how masculine of feminine feminine behavior. In adulthood, this socialization
they believe themselves to be. Researchers who often continues. However, at times interaction is
examine the effect of gender identity on behavior created to teach less stereotypical gender behavior,
thus see interaction as the place in which these such as in women’s consciousness-raising groups.
meanings are made and maintained for individu- Once socialized, people take the received ideas
als. Generally, they see interaction as reproducing of what constitutes “right” or “proper” behavior
general patterns of social meaning regarding gen- for each gender into their social interactions, and
der, femininity, and masculinity. However, view- these ideas guide their behavior. Thus, in groups,
ing gender strictly as an identity makes gender an people tend to enact their gender, no matter what
individual trait rather than a part of the larger else they are doing. Candace West and her col-
social structure. To fully understand the place of leagues have labeled this interactional process
gender in group processes and group relations, an “doing gender.” Gender is thus a set of behaviors
understanding of the broader processes that dif- people perform, rather than just a way that people
ferentiate men and women is required. think about themselves.

Gender as Role Gender as a System of Practices


Another important way in which gender is con- Recently within the social sciences, there has
ceptualized by scholars is as a social role. A gender been more thinking about gender as a set of social
role is a set of structured social expectations practices rather than as an individual trait or a
attached to the position of “male” or “female.” socialized role. These practices exist at the level of
People’s gender role represents both the sum of the the social institution. They serve to organize social
ways in which they express their gender identity behavior on the basis of gender and bring with
and also the kinds of activities that are seen as them a set of social relations of inequality that
appropriate for their gender. Through socializa- distinguish men (as privileged) from women (as
tion, children are taught—by their elders and by not privileged). There are two mechanisms by
each other—what kinds of behavior are appropri- which this occurs: (1) through the exaltation of
ate for a person of their gender. things generally associated with men, to which
Alice Eagly has proposed a social role theory women are denied access and (2) through the dep-
which suggests that social roles develop from the recation of things associated with women. The
sexual division of labor. The theory distinguishes system of practices affects the patterns of behavior
between communal and agentic types of behaviors, of men and women, and the system of inequality
defining communal behaviors as those that require influences cultural beliefs and status effects.
298 Gender and Behavior

Cultural Beliefs power cues are displayed in accordance with a


Numerous survey and experimental studies gender status conception.
show that cultural beliefs about gender, also called These studies, while demonstrating the privi-
gender beliefs or gender status beliefs, exist every- leged position of men, also attribute that position
where. Despite changes in discrimination laws, to status effects rather than to socialization or
women’s workforce participation, and notions of identity. When women are put in high status posi-
political correctness, these gender beliefs persist. tions through experimenter manipulation, they
The content of these gender beliefs can be described display the same types of high status behavior as
using stereotypes: Women are more nurturing and do men. In other words, it is the status position
communal while men are more self-interested and that produces the behavior, not a person’s gender
instrumental. In addition, men are seen as more per se. Given our culture’s gender beliefs, however,
competent, worthy, intelligent, and capable than it is men who receive the benefits of status effects
are women. Women are seen as nicer. in the current system of practices.
These abstracted meanings are held broadly
and are roughly consensual. Most people in the Locations of Gender Differences in Behavior
culture can articulate them and believe that most
other people hold them. The expectation is that Gender differences in behavior exist, regardless of
most people will behave in a manner consistent the perspective taken on them. Examples can be
with these beliefs and expect others to behave that found across many arenas of social life. This entry
way as well. Given the distinction that privileges focuses on intimate relationships, household labor,
men, people generally enter social interaction work, and other organizations.
believing that men will act in more competent
ways than will women and that men are more Intimate Relationships
deserving of opportunities to exert influence in
the group. A number of scholars have studied differences
These cultural beliefs affect social interaction in how men and women approach intimate or
markedly. They provide the underlying structure romantic relationships. Differences have been iden-
and set of practices that shape group and inter- tified in the ways men and women talk to each
group interactions. One way in which this happens other, the ways they interpret what others say, and
is through the activation of status effects. the amount of talking they do. One oft-cited
notion is that women talk at home, whereas men
talk in public. While the veracity of that notion can
Status Effects
be questioned, there certainly is evidence that men
Status effects occur when a characteristic, such and women have somewhat different experiences
as gender, carries differential levels of privilege and in intimate relationships.
this difference affects social interaction. Status The popular notion is that women want inti-
effects result in things like estimations of compe- macy, while men try to avoid it—at least as long as
tence, opportunities to contribute to a group task, it is socially acceptable to do so. However, as the
influence, and leadership. work of Lillian Rubin shows, the case may be that
Many (but not all) cases of gender inequality men simply do not need to express the desire for
are better understood as status effects than, for intimacy, which may be due to socialization (i.e.,
instance, effects of gender socialization patterns. males learn it is not manly to express a need for a
This interpretation has been confirmed and elabo- partner) and/or social position (i.e., men’s author-
rated in theoretical and empirical studies in varied ity does not require them to express their feelings
settings. For example, men control about twice as of intimacy verbally). In addition, women often
much of a group’s participation time as women, create barriers to intimacy through their behavior,
men counterargue more and women agree more even as they claim to want more intimacy. The
than vice versa, and men are five times more likely ways men and women behave in intimate relation-
than women to assume leadership roles in initially ships is not as black and white as the stereotypes
leaderless groups. Research also shows that nonverbal portray.
Gender and Behavior 299

Household Labor Cecilia Ridgeway showed how status differ-


ences often perpetuate gender inequality in busi-
One issue that can impinge on intimate male–
ness organizations through gender labeling of jobs,
female relationships is housework. With women’s
misattribution of results, constructing people as
increased participation in the paid workforce, it is
gender-interested actors, and other processes.
often argued that unpaid work at home in the
Those status effects usually carry across interac-
form of cleaning, shopping, cooking, caring for
tants and situations, so they diffuse and perpetuate
children and the elderly, and outdoor chores
gender stereotyping and gender-based hierarchies
should be distributed equally between men and
in organizations.
women. Nevertheless, the results of studies on the
Rosabeth Moss Kanter conducted an analysis of
time men and women spend on housework are
the social organization of corporations. She exam-
mixed. Some studies show that women still do
ined how particular social structures constrain or
more of this kind of work than do their male coun-
create opportunities for people, particularly minor-
terparts, even when other variables like time avail-
ities, who are in a similar situation to women
ability and resources (i.e., who works more/less
when they first entered the workforce in large
and who makes more/less) are statistically elimi-
numbers during the 1970s. Kanter focused on
nated. However, other studies indicate that as
social structural characteristics of businesses, such
women have increased their paid work hours, they
as hierarchy, distribution of power across posi-
have decreased the time spent on housework, such
tions, and social networks. Then she examined
that men’s and women’s total work hours (com-
how an individual’s position within the social
bining paid and unpaid work) are about equal.
structure in combination with his or her role and
Arlie Hochschild was the first researcher to
its power constrains that individual’s choices.
study dual-career families in depth to see what
Women in particular were found to be isolated in
really happens to the housework when both part-
low-level, low-power positions, disconnected from
ners work outside the home. He used the term “the
others, and therefore unable to engage in behavior
second shift” to refer to the burden of household
that would lead to promotion.
work carried by women, who put in a full day at
work and then many more hours of unrewarded,
often unfulfilling work at home. This is also some- Other Organizations
times called women’s double burden. It has been posited that “gender is everywhere.”
In fact, gender differences in behavior have been
Workplace identified in such diverse places as schools, religious
As noted above, one way in which the system of organizations, and voluntary organizations. While
practices privileges men is by exalting things they more women than men graduate from college, fewer
do while denigrating activities associated with women are represented in graduate programs and
women. Nowhere is this more clear than in the among faculty. Many religious organizations pro-
workplace. On the whole, men’s jobs involve hibit women from participating in various roles
higher prestige, better pay, and more autonomy within religious institutions and support organiza-
than women’s jobs. tions. Women tend to belong to voluntary organiza-
Studies of comparable worth, the idea that tions that are smaller, focused on community or
work of equal value and difficulty should be youth, and more peripheral. Men belong to volun-
rewarded with equal pay, indicate that the pay tary organizations that are larger, more connected to
difference is due, at least in part, to discrimina- other organizations, and more focused on econom-
tion. Even when studies statistically control for ics and business. Clearly, gender has wide-ranging
issues such as job interruption, education, time on effects on behavior in a multitude of contexts.
the job, and job performance, they still find that Lisa Slattery Rashotte
men are paid more than women in similar jobs.
The system of practices is influenced by status See also Gender Roles; Identity Control Theory; Roles;
processes as well, as illustrated by the following Sexism; Status; Status Characteristics/Expectation
examples. States Theory
300 Gender Roles

Further Readings Concept of Gender Roles


Bianchi, S. M., & Mattingly, M. J. (2004). Time, work, The definition of gender roles derives from the
and family in the United States. Advances in Life concept of social role, which refers to the shared
Course Research, 8, 95–188. expectations that apply to people who occupy a
Eagly, A. (1987). Sex difference in social behavior: certain social position or are members of a particu-
A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence lar social category. At an individual level, roles are
Erlbaum. schemas, or abstract knowledge structures, per-
Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and women of the taining to a group of people. To the extent that
corporation. New York: Basic Books.
role schemas are shared among members of a soci-
Kroska, A. (2004). Divisions of domestic work: Revising
ety, they are important structures at the societal
and expanding the theoretical explanations. Journal of
level as well as the individual level. Roles are thus
Family Issues, 25, 900–932.
aspects of social structure, which consists of per-
Rashotte, L. S., & Webster, M., Jr. (2005). Gender
status beliefs. Social Science Research, 34,
sisting and bounded patterns of behavior and
618–633.
social interaction.
Ridgeway, C. L., & Correll, S. J. (2004). Unpacking the Social roles foster characteristic ways of behav-
gender system: A theoretical perspective on gender ing among people who have the same social posi-
beliefs and social relations. Gender & Society, 18, tion within a social structure or who are classified
510–531. in the same general societal category (e.g., as men,
Risman, B. J. (2004). Gender as a social structure: Theory as elderly). Encouragement to act in particular
wrestling with activism. Gender & Society, 18, ways arises from the shared role schemas that
429–450. people in a society hold. For example, people who
Rubin, L. B. (1983). Intimate strangers: Men and women have a particular occupational role (e.g., as an
together. New York: Harper & Row. accountant or a plumber) are subjected to a set of
Thorne, B. (1995). Borderwork among girls and boys. expectations concerning the work they should do
In S. E. Cahill (Ed.), Inside social life: Readings in and the manner in which they should do it.
sociological psychology and microsociology Gender roles apply to people in the extremely
(pp. 180–188). Los Angeles: Roxbury. general social categories of male and female. These
roles, like roles based on qualities such as age,
social class, and race/ethnicity, have great scope
because they apply to all aspects of people’s daily
Gender Roles lives. In contrast, more specific roles based on fac-
tors such as family relationships (e.g., father,
daughter) and occupation (e.g., nurse, police offi-
Gender roles consist of shared expectations that
cer) are mainly relevant to behavior in a particular
apply to individuals on the basis of their socially
social context—at work, for example, in the case
identified sex. The sharing of gender roles refers
of occupational roles. This general applicability of
to the tendency of expectations associated with
gender roles means that they influence behavior,
men and women to be consensual in society. At an
even though specific roles simultaneously constrain
implicit or explicit level, most people endorse
behavior. For example, because gender roles are
expected behaviors as appropriate for men or for
present in the workplace, people have somewhat
women. Therefore, as Eagly’s social role theory
different expectations for female and male occu-
argues, membership in the female or male social
pants of the same workplace role.
category subjects people to social expectations
that affect social interaction in group situations
On Stereotypes
and influence the intergroup behavior that tran-
spires between women and men. This entry defines The importance of gender roles is revealed in
gender roles and discusses the consequences of research on gender stereotypes, which documents
deviation from them, their effect on self-concepts, the differing beliefs that people hold about the
theories about their origin, and their impact on typical behaviors of women and men. The content
individuals and society. of many of these beliefs can be summarized by
Gender Roles 301

differences on two dimensions, which are fre- aspect of gender roles describes what is desirable
quently labeled communal and agentic. Women, and admirable for each sex, providing guidance
more than men, are thought to be communal—that concerning what behaviors are likely to elicit
is, friendly, unselfish, concerned with others, and approval from others. People thus refer to what is
emotionally expressive. Men, more than women, desirable for persons of their sex when they
are thought to be agentic—that is, masterful, asser- endeavor to build and maintain social relation-
tive, competitive, and instrumentally competent. ships. In summary, the power of gender roles to
Gender stereotypes also encompass beliefs about induce role-consistent behavior derives from these
other personal attributes, including physical char- roles’ descriptions of what is typical of men and
acteristics, typical roles, specific skills, and emo- women and what is desirable for them.
tional dispositions. Research on gender stereotypes The idea that expectations about male and
has shown that merely classifying a person as male female behavior are shared implies a social consen-
or female automatically evokes these expectations, sus about typical and appropriate behaviors as
or mental associations, about the characteristics well as people’s awareness of this consensus. This
that are typical of men or women. These associa- consensus is evident in stereotype research, which
tions are pervasive and influential even when has shown generally similar gender beliefs among
people are unaware of them. people who differ in attributes such as sex, age,
Beliefs about the typical characteristics of ethnicity, social class, and others. Moreover, social
women and men are not sufficient to demonstrate cognitive researchers have maintained that virtu-
gender roles because roles are composed not ally everyone acquires the stereotypical beliefs that
merely of expectations about how people do are associated with important social categories
behave, but also of expectations about how they such as sex, race, and age. In addition, awareness
should behave. Social roles are thus prescriptive of the society’s apparent consensus about the char-
(or injunctive) as well as descriptive. Research has acteristics of men and women is demonstrated by
demonstrated the prescriptive quality of gender respondents’ ability to report on the stereotypes
roles by showing that stereotypical ways of behav- held in their own cultures.
ing are perceived as generally desirable for people In summary, the power of gender roles to affect
of each sex—at least insofar as researchers have behavior derives not only from their description of
examined the evaluatively positive aspects of gender typical and desirable behavior of women and men
stereotypes. but also from their tendency to be relatively con-
To identify desirable behaviors for women and sensual and for people to be aware of this consen-
men, some studies have investigated beliefs about sus. People thus believe that the typical other
ideal women and men. These beliefs about ideal person holds these beliefs and consequently would
behavior tend to parallel beliefs about typical react favorably to role-consistent behavior and
behaviors of women and men. Such findings show unfavorably to inconsistent behavior. Therefore,
that people tend to think that women and men social approval and a smoothly functioning social
ought to differ in many of the ways that they are interaction in group settings generally follow
perceived to differ. This oughtness transforms gen- from behavior consistent with gender roles. Conse­
der stereotypes into gender roles. And these descrip- quently, it is not surprising that, following from
tive and prescriptive beliefs define what is considered social psychological concepts such as normative
masculine and feminine in a given society. influence and self-fulfilling prophecy, research on
The descriptive aspect of gender roles specifies the behavioral confirmation of gender stereotypes
what is considered normal or typical for each sex has shown that, under many circumstances, men
and thus provides guidance concerning what and women act to confirm the stereotypical expec-
behaviors are likely to be effective in a situation. tations that others hold about their behavior.
People refer to others of their own sex to find out
what sorts of behaviors are usual for individuals of
Deviation From Gender Roles
their sex in a particular situation. They tend to
imitate these sex-typical behaviors, especially if a A key assumption of a gender role analysis is that
situation is ambiguous or confusing. The prescriptive behavior inconsistent with gender roles is often
302 Gender Roles

negatively sanctioned and tends to disrupt social female. These self-definitions constitute an inter-
interaction. The sanctions for role-inconsistent nalization of societal gender roles. The term gen-
behavior may be overt (e.g., losing a job) or subtle der identity refers to these self-definitions in terms
(e.g., being ignored). of masculinity and femininity. Individuals of each
Social psychologists have produced many dem- sex differ in their gender identity, and men and
onstrations of negative reactions to deviations women differ on the average. Gender identity is
from gender roles. For example, in one study, men only one of many possible social identities, with
who behaved passively and women who behaved each identity representing the individual’s psycho-
assertively were rated less favorably than men who logical relationship to a particular social category
behaved assertively and women who behaved pas- (e.g., race, social class, religion).
sively. Also, in small group interaction, women’s Studies of gender identity have shown that
competent, task-oriented contributions are more women, more than men, ascribe communal quali-
likely to be ignored and to elicit negative reactions ties to themselves, and men, more than women,
than identical contributions from men. Moreover, ascribe agentic qualities to themselves. In addition,
women tend to lose likability and influence over women’s construals of themselves are oriented
others when they behave in a dominant style by toward interdependence, in that their representa-
expressing clear-cut disagreement with another tions of others, especially those to whom they are
person, using direct speech, or displaying assertive linked in close relationships, are treated as part of
or extremely competent actions. Group members themselves. In contrast, men’s construals of them-
thus elicit conformity to gender-role norms by dis- selves are oriented toward separation and domi-
pensing rewards such as liking and cooperation in nance, albeit incorporating a collective focus on
return for conformity to these norms and by dis- membership in larger groups such as teams and
pensing social punishments such as rejection and organizations.
neglect in return for nonconformity. The internalization of gender-stereotypical
In general, gender roles regulate social interac- qualities results in people adopting these qualities
tion because people judge the value and appropri- as personal standards for judging their own behav-
ateness of others’ behavior according to its ior. They tend to evaluate themselves favorably to
conformity with gender roles. Because people the extent that they conform to these personal
often sanction behavior that is inconsistent with standards and to evaluate themselves unfavorably
gender roles, these roles have a generally conserva- to the extent that they deviate from these stan-
tive impact by exacting costs from people who dards. One study found that to the extent that
deviate from norms concerning male and female gender role norms were personally relevant to par-
behavior. Weighing these negative outcomes in a ticipants, experiences that were congruent with
cost–benefit analysis, people do not deviate from gender norms (i.e., involving dominance for men
their gender role unless nonconformity produces and communion for women) yielded positive feel-
benefits that outweigh the costs. Part of these per- ings about the self and brought participants’ actual
ceived benefits for women, as members of a subor- self-concepts closer to their desired self-concepts.
dinate group in society, may be having some However, despite evidence of gender roles acting
chance to gain access to rewards and opportunities as self-standards, people raised in culturally atypi-
formerly reserved for men. cal environments may not internalize conventional
versions of gender roles and thus may have atypi-
cal gender identities. Research has thus shown that
Gender Roles and Self-Concept
people who have self-concepts that differ from
Gender roles can produce differences in males’ and those that are typical of people of their sex are less
females’ behavior not only by affecting the rewards likely to show traditionally sex-typed behavior.
and punishments received from others but also by
affecting the self-concepts of women and men.
Origins of Gender Roles
Psychologists have often focused on the extent to
which individuals define themselves by the attri- Gender roles form an important part of the culture
butes that are associated with being male or and social structure of every society. Although the
Gender Roles 303

ascription of agentic qualities to men and commu- dominated, success in them is perceived to follow
nal qualities to women is widely shared across from agentic personal qualities, whereas to the
world cultures, beliefs about the proper relation- extent that occupations are female dominated, suc-
ships between women and men vary widely. cess in them is perceived to follow from communal
Traditional ideologies endorse the dominance of personal qualities.
men over women, whereas modern ideologies Roles that entail the greatest amount of power
endorse more egalitarian relationships. Gender and status remain male dominated. Thus status
ideology is generally more modern in more devel- differences between the sexes foster expectations
oped, urbanized nations. that men are assertive and directive and that
According to Wood and Eagly’s biosocial model, women are supportive and cooperative. These
even though gender roles are products of the cul- expectations arise from people’s observations of
ture, they are not arbitrary cultural constructions inequalities between the sexes. Traditionally, men
but are rooted in a society’s division of labor have interacted with women who have lower sta-
between the sexes. The differing distributions of tus than they do—for example, male executives
men and women into social roles form the basis interacting with female secretaries. Until relatively
for gender roles. Thus, the typical division of labor recently, it was unusual for men to interact with
in industrialized nations assigns a disproportionate women who are equal or superior to them in
share of domestic activities to women and of other income and prestige—for example, male execu-
activities to men. Mainly women occupy the tives interacting with female executives.
domestic role, somewhat more men than women The inequalities that individual men and women
occupy the employee role, and women are more experience are transformed into widely shared
likely than men to be part-time employees. beliefs not merely in men’s greater status and
Although most women are employed in the paid power, but also in their greater ability and worthi-
labor force in the United States and many other ness. It follows that men more readily exercise
industrialized nations, women and men tend to be influence over women in new encounters, even
employed in different occupations in a somewhat outside of workplaces, and women more readily
sex-segregated labor force. accept this influence. The expectations that flow
The link between gender roles and the male– from men’s higher status shape interactions even
female division of labor follows from the principle when a man and a woman are objectively equal in
that men and women are expected to have attributes status. Nevertheless, relatively recent changes in
that equip them for their sex-typical roles. People the status of women have moderated this aspect of
are expected to accommodate to their family and gender roles in many contemporary societies.
employment roles by acquiring role-related skills,
such as women learning domestic skills and men
Impact on Individuals and Society
learning skills that are useful in paid occupations,
particularly in male-dominated occupations. Also, Gender roles can have powerful effects on individu-
women’s association with the domestic role and als who take these roles into account as they strive
female‑dominated occupations favors interperson- to reach important goals, enhance their self-esteem,
ally facilitative and friendly (i.e., communal) behav- and gain approval from others. Even without con-
iors. In particular, the assignment of the majority of scious awareness of gender roles, people have men-
child‑rearing to women leads people to expect and tal associations about men and women that guide
prefer nurturing behaviors from women. their thoughts and behaviors and help maintain
In contrast, men’s association with the employ- traditional arrangements. Because masculine and
ment role, especially male‑dominated occupations, feminine associations are elicited automatically by
leads people to expect more assertive and confi- cues related to gender, these associations influence
dent (i.e., agentic) behaviors from them. In addi- virtually all social interaction.
tion, expectations about the personal qualities of In all social settings, people must negotiate
each sex appear to be shaped by their typical paid social interactions as men or women and therefore
occupations. In support of this idea, research has must contend with their own and others’ expecta-
shown that to the extent that occupations are male tions concerning the behaviors that are typical and
304 Genocide

appropriate for individuals of their sex. Violating Implications for self-views, social behavior, and
others’ expectations about male or female behav- subjective well-being. In A. H. Eagly, A. E. Beall, &
ior can bring negative reactions, whereas meeting R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of gender (2nd
their expectations can bring rewards of social ed., pp. 169–191). New York: Guilford.
approval and cooperation. In addition, living up to Ridgeway, C. L., & Bourg, C. (2004). Gender as status:
one’s own personal gender identity can yield An expectation states theory approach. In
rewards of self-esteem and satisfaction. Yet, this A. H. Eagly, A. Beall, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The
view that conformity to gender roles yields social psychology of gender (2nd ed., pp. 217–241).
New York: Guilford.
and personal rewards is overly simple in societies
Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. (1978). Masculinity &
in which women’s position in the social structure
femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates,
is changing and therefore gender roles are in flux.
& antecedents. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Although these changes can loosen the constraints
Williams, J. E., & Best, D. L. (1982). Measuring sex
of traditional norms about how men and women stereotypes: A thirty-nation study. Newbury Park, CA:
should behave and thus allow more behavioral Sage.
flexibility, other consequences include ambiguity, Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2002). A cross-cultural
confusion, and debates concerning the proper analysis of the behavior of women and men:
place of women and men in society. Implications for the origins of sex differences.
Psychological Bulletin, 128, 699–727.
Alice H. Eagly

See also Gender and Behavior; Norms; Roles; Sexism;


Status Characteristics/Expectation States Theory;
Stereotyping
Genocide
As defined by the United Nations, genocide
Further Readings
involves “acts committed with the intent to
Best, D. L., & Thomas, J. J. (2004). Cultural diversity destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical,
and cross-cultural perspectives. In A. H. Eagly, A. E. racial, or religious group.” Although human
Beall, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of beings have been victims of genocidal assaults
gender (2nd ed., pp. 296–327). New York: Guilford. throughout history—and prehistory—the word
Bianchi, S. M., Robinson, J. P., & Milkie, M. A. (2006). genocide itself is of relatively recent origin. A
Changing rhythms of American family life. New York: word from the Greek geno (meaning “race” or
Russell Sage. “tribe”) and Latin cide (meaning “killing”), it first
Carli, L. L., & Eagly, A. H. (1999). Gender effects on
appeared in print in 1944 in the book Axis Rule
social influence and emergent leadership. In G. N.
in Occupied Europe, written by Raphael Lemkin,
Powell (Ed.), Handbook of gender and work
a Polish lawyer. Lemkin had already been study-
(pp. 203–222). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
ing the causes and consequences of mass slaughter
Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2008). Of men, women,
when he witnessed the annihilation of his own
and motivation: A role congruity account. In
J. Y. Shaw & W. L. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of
community, Eastern European Jewry, during
motivation science (pp. 434–447). New York: Guilford. World War II. After the war, he dedicated himself
Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A to raising awareness of genocide. His efforts were
social‑role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence directed toward lobbying for the establishment of
Erlbaum. international treaties to prevent genocides and
Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. (2000). Social punish those who carried them out. His efforts
role theory of sex differences and similarities: A culminated in the 1948 United Nations Convention
current appraisal. In T. Eckes & H. M. Trautner on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of
(Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender Genocide. This entry provides a general definition
(pp. 123–174). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. of genocide, and then looks at the phenomenon
Gardner, W. L., & Gabriel, S. (2004). Gender differences from the viewpoint of perpetrators, victims,
in relational and collective interdependence: bystanders or witnesses, and heroes and resisters.
Genocide 305

Definition blameless. By any reasonable standard, however,


genocidal killings cannot be construed as acts of
In Lemkin’s view, genocides did not necessarily self-defense.
entail intentions to murder every member of a Besides the Holocaust, recent history’s most
group. Nor was killing of any kind absolutely notorious genocides include the slaughter of the
essential. Trying to wipe out a group’s cultural Tutsis in the African nation of Rwanda in 1994,
existence, making it essentially disappear, was the expulsion and murder of Turkey’s Armenian
enough. The UN genocide convention focuses on population shortly after the outbreak of World
physical destruction of a group’s members—that War I, the killings of large segments of the
is, mass murder—but it still leaves room for inter- Cambodian population by the Khmer Rouge in the
pretation. Indeed, the issue of how best to define late 1970s, and the rape, pillage, and slaughter of
genocide has been very contentious. inhabitants of the Darfur region in Sudan that
At one extreme, some reserve the term for began in 2003.
efforts to exterminate every last living member of In addition to the systematic annihilation of
a group. By that definition, few events would large numbers of people, two other aspects of
qualify—perhaps only the Holocaust, the Nazis’ genocide inspire particular horror. One is how
attempt to exterminate all Jews who fell into their genocide becomes a project in which members of
hands. At the other extreme, some argue that any the perpetrator group from every level of society
armed assault on civilian noncombatants is geno- become involved—including politicians, the mili-
cidal. Attempts to develop a finer grained language tary, police, business owners, educators, clergy,
of mass brutality have been no more successful. and members of youth movements. The second is
For example, the term ethnic cleansing is some- the barbarous and diabolical nature of the killing.
times used to label actions against civilian popula- In Rwanda, in the space of a few weeks, hundreds
tions that are allegedly less extreme than of thousands of people were cut down with
genocide—specifically, attempts to forcibly dis- machetes, often by their own neighbors. The
place or transfer a group rather than directly Armenians were subject to months of rape, assault,
destroy it. Arguably, however, ethnic cleansing is and robbery as they marched to their deaths. And
simply a term perpetrators use to downplay the the Holocaust culminated in the establishment of
severity of their crimes. Few if any “ethnic cleans- assembly line–style death factories in which Jews
ings” do not also involve mass murder. (and others) were exterminated in poison gas
Despite these ambiguities, genocide can be chambers (which the victims were led to believe
defined as an organized effort to brutalize, kill, or were shower rooms).
otherwise eliminate people who are targeted simply
because of their social identities, and not because
Conditions Leading to Genocide
they pose any objective threat. Although genocide
can involve spontaneous explosions of mob vio- Organized genocidal killings do not develop
lence, it requires planned and organized group spontaneously. They are inspired, directed,
activity. Murder is central to genocide, but other and sanctioned by powerful and influential
acts of violence and cruelty that characterize it are instigators—typically, political leaders. But some
also important to acknowledge and understand. circumstances facilitate instigators’ efforts to
In addition, there are other ways to try to elim- mobilize people for genocide.
inate groups—by preventing births, for example. Genocides are most likely to occur when people
Also important to note is that although any civil- in a society perceive themselves to be experiencing
ian casualties during armed struggles are tragic, difficult life conditions or some sort of social crisis.
not all such civilians are genocide victims. During While some societal problems lend themselves to
an episode of genocide, all members of a group— relatively straightforward solutions, others do not.
men, women, children, senior citizens—are explic- Thus, when a bad situation seems out of control
itly targeted for violence. Finally, perpetrators of and is causing widespread fear and frustration, as
genocide almost always believe they are doing the in wartime, people become increasingly desperate
right thing and do not believe that their victims are for answers. At such times, they are receptive to
306 Genocide

simple analyses of their problems—including the machete-wielding Hutus to decapitate their Tutsi
idea that those problems have been caused by the neighbors.
evil machinations of another group of people and First-person accounts of genocide reveal that
that the solution is elimination of that group. over time, the lethal and often shockingly brutal
Groups experiencing a collective sense of humil- behaviors of perpetrators are not typically direct
iation are especially prone to lash out at scapegoats responses to orders from above, nor are they trig-
to avenge perceived slights. In early 20th-century gered by any other sort of immediate social pres-
Turkey, people were acutely aware of the Ottoman sure. Instead, perpetrators’ activities are usually
Empire’s eclipse, and early military reversals dur- self-initiated, self-directed, and carried out with
ing World War I further eroded Turkey’s status as enthusiasm and even creativity. Ervin Staub has
a major world power. Later in the century, the characterized the increasing brutality of perpetra-
German people believed that they had been unfairly tors as a progression along the continuum of
blamed for World War I, and they felt burdened destructiveness. Perpetrators, like bystanders, need
by what they perceived to be the vindictive provi- to rationalize and justify their behaviors. Often,
sions of the Versailles treaty. Just as individuals this involves convincing themselves that their vic-
lash out at others when experiencing a threat to tims deserve the treatment they are receiving. That
their egos, so do groups, as the Turkish govern- can be accomplished by dehumanizing members of
ment did with the Armenians and Nazis did with the victim group. It is easier to terrorize and kill
the Jews. others when one believes that they are so evil,
debased, and generally inferior as to no longer
even qualify as human beings. The end result of
How People Become Perpetrators
this process is that perpetrators become convinced
Although genocides are group-level phenomena, of the moral justification of extermination, and
individual human beings carry out the killings— need no prodding to participate.
that is, they are the ones who chop off people’s In addition, a perspective on intergroup rela-
heads with machetes, drive them over cliffs, shoot tions known as social identity theory describes
them at close range, and herd them into gas cham- how simply identifying strongly with a perpetrator
bers. How people bring themselves to do such group can transform individuals by leading them
things, which under normal circumstances would to embrace attitudes (such as prejudices), beliefs
violate their moral standards, is a complex issue. (such as stereotypes), and behaviors (such as dis-
Research by social psychologists has vividly criminatory practices) they see as being prototypi-
demonstrated the surprising ease with which peo- cal of their group.
ple can be led to engage in harmful, destructive A disturbing implication of this discussion of
behavior, especially when people perceive the how people become perpetrators is that it involves
authority figures directing their behavior to be normal psychological processes. In other words,
powerful and legitimate. In Stanley Milgram’s obe- normal people become participants in genocide.
dience studies, for example, participants adminis- Not all people are equally promising candidates
tered what they believed to be deadly electric for the role of mass killer, but perpetrators are not
shocks to a protesting person simply because an necessarily characterized by extreme personality
experimenter told them it was expected and characteristics. Indeed, research by behavioral sci-
required of them. entists has not revealed any traits that are neces-
Brutality also comes easier to people when they sary or sufficient for explaining why people become
are in large groups. Being part of a crowd, and less perpetrators.
identifiable as an individual, can lower a person’s
normal inhibitions. People who are just blurry
Which Groups Become Victims
faces in a mob become less attentive to their nor-
mal standards of behavior. This phenomenon, Victims of genocide are generally members of
known as deindividuation, undoubtedly played a minority groups that have long been the targets of
role in scenes such as those witnessed in Rwanda, prejudice. But not all minority groups—not even
where large groups of people assembled to urge all those perceived unfavorably by the majority—are
Genocide 307

equally at risk. Particularly vulnerable are ethnic People will be even more inhibited from inter-
(and other) groups that are seen as competitors for vening if they believe that most other people, unlike
resources (and thus viewed with hostility), and at themselves, support the assault on the victim group,
the same time, as being clever, competent, and suc- even if that belief is false. Groups are often charac-
cessful. Such groups are the targets of envious terized by pluralistic ignorance, a state of affairs in
prejudice. They are believed to be motivated to which individuals assume that other group mem-
make life difficult for the perpetrator group and bers have different attitudes or beliefs than they do
capable of carrying out sinister plans to get their despite that fact that those attitudes and beliefs are
way. In other words, people can convince them- more similar to their own than they realize.
selves that these groups are plausible causes of the Pluralistic ignorance prevents people from express-
difficult life conditions in a society. As a result, ing their objections to unjust or even genocidal
members of these groups become scapegoats. policies. This is especially true when people fear
Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, Jews in that their opinions might suggest a lack of courage,
Germany, and Tutsis in Rwanda were all targets strength, or patriotism. Thus, people often conform
of envious prejudice. to group norms that are privately endorsed by only
Also at risk are groups that are seen as being not a small minority of group members.
only hostile, but also so intellectually and culturally Few people are comfortable with passively
inferior as to be less than human. Such groups are observing the unjust victimization of others. To
the targets of contemptuous prejudice. Members of resolve this tension, bystanders rationalize or jus-
these groups are slaughtered not because they are tify their inaction. A common method involves just
believed to be plotting against the perpetrator world thinking, the tendency to believe that those
group but because, at crucial junctures in a soci- who experience misfortune deserve their fate. The
ety’s development, they are seen to be dangerous— more people justify genocidal policies, the more
and expendable—impediments to progress. Native they become supporters of those policies. And sup-
Americans, the Roma people in Europe (often porters, of course, can eventually become active
called “Gypsies”), and the original inhabitants of participants in mass killing.
Tasmania were targets of contemptuous prejudice.
Nations as Bystanders
Acquiescence to Evil: It is easy to understand how individuals might
Bystanders and Supporters not believe they have the power to intervene effec-
Most members of perpetrator groups are not tively to stop genocides. The same cannot always
actively involved in the killings. Few, however, be said, though, of other nations. Nonetheless,
speak out against the evil being perpetrated in their those nations also usually are passive bystanders.
names. Many bystanders undoubtedly support the Governments are rarely willing to incur the costs
violence, as victims of genocide are typically tar- (financial, political, and human) of a military
gets of preexisting prejudice. Even were this not intervention or rescue operation. They typically
the case, and even if large segments of the perpe- rationalize their inaction, often by downplaying
trator group opposed the killing, a number of the magnitude of the violence. Otherwise, they
psychological factors would work to mute their argue that there are no effective means of inter-
objections. vention available to them or that any attempt to
The first is diffusion of responsibility. Even intervene will only make matters worse for the
when people believe an injustice is taking place victims.
and they are capable of intervening in some
way, they feel less obligated to do so if they
Heroes and Resisters
perceive that many others are also witnesses and
could act instead of them. In such circumstances, Just as it is impossible to define a specific perpe-
people might not be willing to bear the costs of trator type, those who actively oppose genocide
coming to the aid of other people, even if those do so for a wide variety of motives. Some act not
costs are not great. so much out of sympathy for the victims, but as a
308 Genocide

way of expressing animosity toward the perpetra- killings occurred during a civil war in which
tor group. Others assist potential victims or oth- members of the perpetrator group also perished
erwise subvert the perpetrators’ plans as a result in large numbers; or some combination of these
of the social influence or even active encourage- excuses.
ment of esteemed authority figures (for example, Other groups have openly admitted to their
local religious leaders). Certainly, though, many former genocidal polices and have attempted to
people have engaged in resistance and even made come to terms with the past. Contemporary
heroic efforts to save those targeted for death Germany is a prominent example. Holocaust edu-
because of deeply held values and beliefs that are cation is a part of the regular school curriculum,
incompatible with genocide. One of the most and many prominent public memorials to the
commonly cited characteristics of helpers is an Nazis’ victims have been constructed.
extensive (i.e., inclusive) view of people—that is, Individual members of former perpetrator
a belief that people should be first and foremost groups can experience collective guilt—that is,
categorized as human beings, and not in terms of guilt due to actions taken by members of their
race, ethnicity, or nationality. “Extensivity” is groups, even if they themselves did not take part
associated with feelings of responsibility for oth- in those actions (perhaps because they were not
ers’ welfare. born yet). Collective guilt can be constructive, for
Case studies of heroic helpers reveal a common example by inspiring reconciliation with survivors
pattern. Such people typically start with limited of the killings and support for the payment of
acts of resistance but over time become more com- reparations. Collective guilt is far from universal,
mitted in their opposition and bolder in their however. To experience it, people have to subjec-
actions. In other words, they progress on a con- tively identify with the group that committed
tinuum of benevolence. Major acts of heroism usu- genocide, but not too strongly. People for whom
ally represent the final stage of a process that starts group membership is the most salient and impor-
with small acts of kindness or bravery. tant aspect of their self-concept will find it diffi-
Nations can behave heroically too. During cult to admit that there is cause to feel guilt. In
World War II, Danes organized a rescue operation other words, they will be motivated to deny that a
that allowed most Jews in their country to escape genocide took place or to explain it away.
to Sweden. Bulgaria was also notable for having Survivors of genocide often demonstrate remark-
shielded most of its Jews (especially native-born able psychological resilience. Some, however, expe-
ones) from the Nazis. The country’s leaders, in rience psychological difficulties, including guilt at
their deliberations and in communications with having lived when so many others were killed.
the public, emphasized the primacy of the Jews’ These internal struggles can complicate their inter-
identity as Bulgarians. Consistent with social personal and family relationships. Although no
identity theory, this led other Bulgarians to per- one can reasonably demand that genocide survi-
ceive themselves and the Jews as sharing a com- vors forgive their former assailants, reconciliation
mon fate. is more likely under certain conditions. The first is
some expression of collective guilt by the perpetra-
tors. The second is that survivors frame what hap-
The Aftermath: Collective Guilt
pened as an example the terrible things that
and Forgiveness
people—as opposed to Germans, Turks, and
Perpetrator groups are often loath to admit that others—do to other people. Coexistence after a
they carried out genocidal killings. Simple denial genocide is difficult but not impossible.
is usually untenable, however. Instead, perpetra-
Leonard S. Newman
tors might argue that the number of deaths has
been grossly exaggerated; that most victims died See also Anti-Semitism; Bystander Effect;
from disease and starvation, despite efforts to Dehumanization/Infrahumanization; Deindividuation;
sustain them during a chaotic period of upheaval Discrimination; Holocaust; Just World Hypothesis;
and violence; that those who were killed died as a Obedience to Authority; Pluralistic Ignorance;
side effect of normal military operations; that the Scapegoating; Social Identity Theory
Graduated Reciprocation in Tension Reduction (GRIT) 309

Further Readings experts advocated a buildup of far more nuclear


Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the weapons than would ever be needed and simulta-
perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social neous recognition of the impossibility of com-
Psychology Review, 3, 193–209. pletely shielding the country from nuclear attack.
Browning, C. R. (1992). Ordinary men: Reserve police Their logic was that such a strategy would both
battalion 101 and the final solution in Poland. New convince the USSR of the United States’s ability to
York: HarperCollins. annihilate them and produce extreme reluctance
Darley, J. M. (1992). Social organization for the within the United States to actually launch such an
production of evil. Psychological Inquiry, 3, 199–218. attack, because a counterattack could not be com-
Newman, L. S., & Erber, R. (Eds.). (2002). pletely defended (“erect[ing] stabilized deterrence
Understanding genocide: The social psychology of the on the shifting sands of human fallibility”).
Holocaust. New York: Oxford University Press. Negotiated disarmament was also advocated in
Oliner, S. P., & Oliner, P. M. (1988). The altruistic some quarters, though Osgood believed any such
personality: Rescuers of Jews in Nazi Europe. New negotiations were doomed by biased perceptions,
York: Free Press. distrust, self-fulfilling prophecy, and inflexibility.
Power, S. (2003). “A problem from hell”: America and The catalyzing event for Osgood, however, was
the age of genocide. New York: HarperCollins. a debate between the philosophers Bertrand Russell
Staub, E. (1989). The roots of evil. New York: and Sidney Hook over whether it was preferable to
Cambridge University Press. live under communism or be killed in a nuclear
Waller, J. (2002). Becoming evil: How ordinary people war (Russell preferred the former, Hook the lat-
commit genocide and mass killing. New York: Oxford
ter). This convinced Osgood that people were
University Press.
viewing the conflict as a conquer-or-be-conquered
situation, and he refused to believe that only two
outcomes were possible. GRIT was his response.
Graduated Reciprocation
in Tension Reduction (GRIT) Basic Principles of GRIT
The essence of GRIT is quite simple. One combat-
Graduated reciprocation in tension reduction ant unilaterally announces and performs a conces-
(GRIT) is a behavioral strategy designed to reduce sion and indicates expectation that the opponent
hostilities among conflicting parties. It is a unilat- will reciprocate. If reciprocation occurs, the initia-
eral strategy under which the adopter initiates a tor announces and makes a second, larger conces-
system of conciliation and reciprocation and at sion, hoping it will be reciprocated. This process
the same time signals a willingness to cease the continues until the combatants arrive at common
process if the other party attempts to exploit the ground. An occasional failure to reciprocate is tol-
goodwill. GRIT is applicable to both intergroup erable, but if a series of concessions are not recip-
and intragroup conflict. rocated, the initiator revokes the last action to
GRIT was proposed in 1959 by Charles Osgood bring the relationship back into balance, and
in response to the escalation of the Cold War and makes no further changes. Even if such an unsatis-
the wave of strategic models being advocated, all factory outcome occurs, the environment will be
of which took, in Osgood’s view, untenable per- improved relative to the pre-GRIT atmosphere,
spectives on U.S.–USSR relations. Military strate- unless it is the initial concession that is rebuffed.
gists advocated a preventive or preemptive first Osgood’s analogy for GRIT was of two people
strike (“getting it all over with in an angry burst of standing at opposite ends of a seesaw. The seesaw
hell-fire,” in Osgood’s words). Pacifists argued for is balanced, but very wobbly, and it would not
unilateral disarmament by the United States, on the take much for one person to tumble off, which
assumption that the USSR would not attack a would cause the other to come crashing to the
defenseless country and would eventually follow ground and both to be injured. Under GRIT, one
suit (“passively hoping for the best from an aggressive person would take a small step toward the center
opponent as we lay down our arms”). Think-tank of the seesaw and indicate that the other should do
310 Graduated Reciprocation in Tension Reduction (GRIT)

the same. If the other person did so, the seesaw United States and USSR announced and traded
would come back into balance and be a little more concessions over the course of 15 months. However,
stable than it was previously. Repetition of this this initiative is often criticized as disingenuous
process would eventually lead to the two people because the concessions were largely valueless
standing in the middle of the seesaw, with the see- (e.g., the U.S. offered to halt atmospheric nuclear
saw balanced and very stable. If at any point one weapon tests, but held a 2-year backlog of unana-
person failed to mimic the steps forward of the lyzed data when the offer was made), and Kennedy
other, the initiator would need to back up to stopped the process when public criticism of his
the last position in order to bring the seesaw back actions grew large enough to concern Democratic
into balance, and here the process would end. strategists. Some have pointed to this latter event
Within each step, there are a number of caveats as evidence that GRIT will never work because the
and details that must be addressed. The concession public will not tolerate seemingly endless giving to
should not be so major that it cripples the initia- an enemy. This is speculative, however.
tor’s ability to retaliate if abused. The magnitude Although developed to deal with international
of the concession should match that of any conces- conflict, GRIT was rather quickly recognized as
sions made by the opponent. Thus a large conces- being applicable to interpersonal conflict as well.
sion should be followed with a large concession In fact, most of the subsequent research on GRIT
and a token one with a token one. Concessions has focused on reducing interpersonal tension. It is
should ultimately be made across a variety of important to understand that, because of its com-
issues. It is not helpful to give in on one issue and plexity, a comprehensive test of all aspects of
hold firm on everything else. The initiative should GRIT at once is not possible. Even if such an
be unforeseen, so that the opponent has no time to experiment could be designed, the number of study
distort or propagandize the offer. The concession subjects required would be so large as to be pro-
must be publicly announced, and the initiator must hibitive. Instead, researchers have examined par-
actually follow through on the announcement. ticular pieces of GRIT and then assembled those
Finally, the actual behavior must be clear and pieces into a larger picture. In general, this work
unambiguous so that even a biased observer will has supported Osgood’s arguments for clear com-
agree it is truly a concession, and the quality of the munication of intent, adherence to an announced
concession should be independently verifiable. concession, verifiability of the concession, willing-
Osgood saw GRIT as accomplishing four goals: ness to overlook occasional lapses in reciproca-
(1) reduction and control of tension, (2) creation tion, and the need for balanced power.
of a trusting atmosphere, (3) empowerment to take Some other arguments are less well supported,
initiative, and (4) alteration of future relational however. For example, so long as one matches the
processes. When Osgood proposed his model to frequency of concession performed by the oppo-
reduce international tension, his discussion of nent, matching of the magnitude seems unimport-
these goals focused strictly on that arena. That is, ant. One could thus always respond to a concession
as examples of unambiguous concession, he pre- with a smaller concession, so long as one always
sented actions such as reduction of trade barriers, does respond. More critically, direct invitations to
reduction of troops in disputed territory, and pro- reciprocate are often perceived as devious rather
vision of food to impoverished regions supported than attractive. People tend to see the inviter as
by the opponent. And the last chapter of his book having an ulterior motive and the invitation as an
was devoted to rebutting imagined arguments attempt to set a trap. As the invitation is a crucial
against GRIT by policymakers. part of GRIT, this raises serious questions about
how to convey one’s expectation of reciprocation
without inducing suspicion. Finally, some aspects
Applications of GRIT
of GRIT, most notably the recommendation to
To date, there has not been a complete application diversify concessions, have received no systematic
of GRIT at the international level. The closest research attention.
approximation is President John F. Kennedy’s June Some research has tried to identify who is most
1962 Strategy for Peace initiative, under which the likely to employ GRIT. The clearest indication is
Great Person Theory of Leadership 311

that users are highly confident individuals with an of traditional academic and lay understandings of
internal locus of control. Reflecting back on the leadership. This is because it provides a straight-
Kennedy example, it is also clear that the strategy forward answer to the question, “Are leaders
needs to have majority support within the group to born or made?” Answering that great leaders are
be effectively applied. For reasons that remain “born,” the GPTL suggests that these leaders are
vague, it appears difficult to persuade even neutral superior to other people by virtue of their posses-
individuals to adopt a conciliatory position. Thus, sion of innate intellectual and social characteris-
the GRIT supporter who hopes to win converts is tics. In short, leaders are simply people who have
unlikely to succeed. “the right stuff.”
It is important to note that the body of literature This stuff is commonly conceptualized in terms
summarized here is not large. In some cases, the of distinctive personality traits that are believed to
conclusions drawn are based on one or two studies. make those who possess them inherently more
Therefore, GRIT needs more, and more systematic, adept at directing, managing, and inspiring others
investigation. Unfortunately, research on GRIT has than lesser mortals. Either implicitly or explicitly,
tailed off considerably since the mid-1980s, as con- these leaders are typically assumed to be men,
flict theorists have shifted their attention to mutual- which is why the theory is also often referred to as
gain models of conflict resolution (e.g., integrative the “great man theory of leadership.” Different
bargaining) and to third-party mediation of con- analyses place emphasis on the importance of dif-
flicts. Undoubtedly, many researchers were disillu- ferent traits, but these typically relate to qualities
sioned by the difficulty of testing more than one or such as intelligence, decisiveness, insight, imagina-
two elements of GRIT at a time. GRIT is still cited tion, and charisma.
by theorists with some frequency, but it is usually This entry examines the origins of the GPTL
represented as a well-understood approach that is and some of its empirical and practical limitations.
appropriate for some situations but not for others. It also looks at how the theory has been refined
This is unfortunate because, as we have seen, much over time and at some of the ways in which it has
remains unclear about the dynamics and limita- been challenged. A key point is that while the
tions of the strategy. empirical validity of the theory is highly suspect,
this has not stopped it from being enormously
Craig D. Parks influential.
See also Cooperation and Competition; Group
Perfomance; Negotiation and Bargaining; Power; Historical Context
Social Dilemmas; Team Negotiation; Trust
The origins of the GPTL are often traced to Plato’s
Republic. Written in 380 BCE, the Republic pre-
Further Readings sented ideas on leadership in the form of a tutorial
in which the student (Adeimantus) learns from the
Clemens, W. C., Jr. (2004). Dynamics of international
master (Socrates) that only a rare class of philosopher–
relations: Conflict and mutual gain in an era of
ruler is innately fit to lead the uneducated and
mutual interdependence (2nd ed.). Lanham, MD:
brutish majority and that, without such leaders,
Rowman & Littlefield.
Osgood, C. E. (1962). An alternative to war or surrender.
democracy is in peril. For Socrates, the key charac-
Urbana: University of Illinois Press. teristics of such a ruler quickness in learning, a
good memory, courage, and breadth of vision.
Important, too, is that the person needs to be
gifted physically as well as mentally.
Great Person Theory Although embryonic, Plato’s analysis set the
stage for the large body of subsequent leadership
of Leadership research that focused attention on the psychology
of the individual and argued that leaders’ distinc-
Dating back at least 2,000 years, the great person tive and exceptional qualities mark them out as
theory of leadership (GPTL) is one of the cornerstones qualified not only for responsibility and high office
312 Great Person Theory of Leadership

but also for universal admiration and respect. embodies. At a practical level, a series of influen-
Particularly important in this respect were Thomas tial reviews (e.g., by Gibb) failed to find a strong
Carlyle’s 1840 lectures titled “Heroes and Hero or reliable link between a person’s possession of
Worship,” which argued that the history of civili- particular psychological or physical traits and his
zation is effectively the history of the great men or her subsequent success as a leader. Observers
whose leadership made civilization possible. often claim to be able to identify leader traits ret-
Examining the historical trajectory of such rospectively, but prospectively, it is very difficult
ideas, there is a clear lineage that progresses from to specify traits that will cause some people to be
John Stuart Mill’s notion of the genius whose plea- more effective leaders than others.
sures are of a higher order than the animalistic At a political level, observers have argued that
gratifications of the majority, through Friedrich the GPTL is pernicious because it disempowers the
Nietzsche’s “superman” who would let nothing general populace by leading its members to believe
stop him from satisfying his appetites, to Gustave (a) that they are ruled out of contention for high
Le Bon’s notion of the hypnotic crowd leader. office due to their lack of a suitable leadership pro-
These ideas were carried into the 20th century file and (b) that it is people who possess this profile
by Max Weber—in particular through his writings who bring about all forms of worthwhile progress
on the historical significance of charismatic leaders and social change. In this vein, one of the key func-
who possess superhuman powers not accessible to tions of the GPTL is to encourage the acquiescence
the ordinary person. Weber argued that such people— and passivity of followers who, if they accept the
and only such people—have the capacity to deliver view that social change is brought about by the
enlightenment and salvation to the masses. This actions of distinguished individuals, become
analysis became less popular in the wake of World resigned to their lowly role and are deterred from
War II, after people had become terrifyingly famil- seeking to stimulate collective change.
iar with the capacity for charismatic dictators to These arguments are supported by historical
deliver the very opposite. Nevertheless, the idea of observations that the cult of the individual leader
charismatic leadership has recently been rehabili- was promoted particularly vigorously in 19th-
tated and revitalized by James McGregor Burns, century Europe (e.g., through portraits, statues,
whose work focuses on the special properties of an and biographies) to nullify the threat to the ruling
individual that allow him or her to articulate a elites that was posed by the prospect of popular
vision that inspires large-scale group action and revolution. It is possible to see profiles of powerful
transformation. and wealthy CEOs as a modern manifestation of
Along similar lines, numerous popular organi- the same status–preserving motivations.
zational texts advance slightly different versions of In the last decade, critiques of the GPTL have
the view that the key to effective organizational had a significant impact on mainstream theory in
and political leadership lies in a peculiar constella- social and organizational psychology, which has
tion of traits and abilities that set the chosen few developed a range of approaches to leadership that
apart from the undifferentiated mass. In this vein, either adapt or challenge the GPTL in various
hagiographic profiles of business leaders typically ways. The most popular adaptations take the form
encourage attempts to discover the secrets of busi- of contingency models, which see leadership as the
ness success within the psychology of the excep- product of an interaction between the person and
tional individual—their unusual habits, their the situation. According to such formulations,
unique tastes, their extraordinary drives. leadership is not just about having “the right stuff”
but also about being in “the right place at the right
time.” Again, though, researchers have questioned
Critiques
the predictive power of these models and their indi-
Despite the enduring popularity of such work, vidualistic conceptualization of the person—in
many researchers and commentators, dating back particular, the view that the psychology of the indi-
to Herbert Spencer at the end of the 19th century, vidual leader is stable, static, and immutable.
have questioned the wisdom and utility of preoc- Important strands of work have argued that the
cupation with the individual leader that the GPTL focus on the leader that is encouraged by the GPTL
Group Boundaries 313

needs to be balanced by consideration of the Weber, M. (1946). The sociology of charismatic


importance of followers to the leadership process. authority. In H. H. Gerth & C. W. Milles (Eds.
In different ways, this alternative emphasis is & Trans.), Max Weber: Essays in sociology
found in work by Robert Lord and Edwin (pp. 245–252). New York: Oxford University Press.
Hollander, which emphasizes the importance of (Original work published 1921)
followers’ perceptions and actions (followership)
to the success of leaders, and in work by James
Meindl, which argues that leadership is a reflection
of followers’ (often faulty) attributions for the Group Boundaries
causes of group success.
Taking such critiques even further, social iden- Group boundaries are used to determine who is
tity researchers argue that successful leadership is included in a specific group and who is not. Such
achieved not by individuals who are different from boundaries play a central role in human percep-
others in the way that the GPTL suggests, but tions and behaviors. Sometimes group boundaries
rather by leaders who exemplify what the group refer to concrete and objective criteria that deter-
stands for in any given context. Rather than direct- mine group membership (as in the case of gender).
ing attention toward the leader in isolation, this Sometimes the crossing of group boundaries is a
perspective focuses on the status of leaders as rep- special event that is readily apparent and even ritu-
resentatives and mobilizers of shared group values, ally celebrated (as when new fraternity members
goals, and identities. It argues that successful lead- are initiated, or a new national citizenship is
ership is not a product of great individuals set awarded). More often, however, group boundaries
apart from ordinary mortals, but rather ordinary are defined in a metaphoric or symbolic way. They
mortals who embody and promote their groups. indicate which individuals are most likely to expe-
rience a psychological sense of inclusion or exclu-
S. Alexander Haslam sion in relation to a particular group.
See also Charismatic Leadership; Contingency Theories
of Leadership; Interactionist Theories of Leadership; Origins and Functions of Group Boundaries
Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory; Leadership;
Path–Goal Theory of Leadership; Personality Theories Group boundaries are used to help define the
of Leadership; Social Identity Theory of Leadership; social roles of the self and others. Group boundar-
Transactional Leadership Theories; Transformational ies indicate who you are, how you are expected to
Leadership Theories; Vertical Dyad Linkage Model behave, and how you are seen by others. Group
boundaries may evolve naturally and organically
Further Readings (as when new members are added to the family
through marriage or birth, or existing family mem-
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper &
bers drift apart and disconnect) or they may be
Row.
defined with reference to strict criteria that some-
Carlyle, T. (1940). Heroes and hero worship. London:
times have legal implications (e.g., through legally
Harrap.
certified admission to certain professions). Group
Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D., & Platow, M. J. (2009).
boundaries may connect individuals who are simi-
The new psychology of leadership: Identity, influence
and power. New York: Psychology Press.
lar to each other in terms of a central characteristic
Nietzsche, F. (1977). The twilight of the idols and the that they share (such as their ethnic origin) or they
anti-Christ. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin. may bring together people who can complement
Pears, I. (1992). The gentleman and the hero: Wellington and help each other because they are different (as
and Napoleon in the nineteenth century. In R. Porter in work organizations).
(Ed.), Myths of the English (pp. 216–236). The term group boundary permeability is used
Cambridge, UK: Polity. to indicate the extent to which boundaries are
Plato. (1993). The republic. (A. D. Lindsay, Trans.). fixed (impermeable boundaries) or flexible and
Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. (Original work easily crossed (permeable boundaries). Because of
published 380 BCE) the symbolic and metaphoric way in which group
314 Group Boundaries

boundaries tend to be defined, permeability does Even when group memberships are flexible and
not simply reflect whether it is possible to acquire subject to change, group boundaries can be used as
or discard defining group characteristics (such as a point of demarcation in a more gradual and
gender or ethnic origin). Instead, the permeability ambiguous area of transition between different
of group boundaries indicates whether merely groups. Especially for people who find themselves
belonging to a certain (e.g., ethnic or gender) at or near this demarcation area, group boundaries
group prevents people from moving freely within a may help determine how they should see themselves
social system, for instance to achieve positions of in relation to others around them. In this case, the
higher social status. knowledge that one is included in or excluded from
Group boundaries have two main functions. a particular group can result in the adoption of
The meaning-seeking function of group boundar- group membership markers, such as language use
ies means that they can be used as a tool to acquire (e.g.,regional dialect, professional jargon), prefer-
information about specific individuals (including ences for certain foods or dress styles (e.g., when
the self), the way those individuals relate to each male students cut their hair and buy a business suit
other, and the way they are likely to behave. The after graduation), and adaptation to specific behav-
strategic identity expression function of group ioral norms (e.g., when immigrants attempt to
boundaries means that people can define them show politeness in locally approved ways).
(and who is included in or excluded by them) in As a result of such group boundary transitions,
ways that best fit their own self-image. This is the many groups are characterized by a continuous
case, for instance, when someone who studied at a flow of new members entering and current mem-
prestigious university but did not earn a degree bers leaving. In this process of changing commit-
there claims to be an alumnus of that university. ment to the group, individuals can also experience
role transitions within the group—for example,
from new member to full member to marginal
Group Boundaries and Meaning Seeking
member. This process is described in group social-
Group boundaries help us define who different ization theory, developed by Richard Moreland
individuals are and how they relate to each other. and John Levine. Sometimes the crossing of group
Even when personal relationships seem to be the boundaries is marked as a meaningful event at
primary basis for social interaction, events that which an aspiring group member qualifies to enter
make group boundaries more salient can have dra- the group or a long-standing member formally
matic consequences. This happened, for instance, takes leave of the group (e.g., by going into retire-
in the former Yugoslavia. Friends, neighbors, and ment). In other cases, however, people repeat-
even spouses felt alientated from each other edly move back and forth across group
and sometimes harmed each other because ethnic boundaries. These boundary spanners can facili-
and racial group boundaries became the central tate networking and integration between differ-
defining feature of their social and political reality. ent groups. In work contexts, boundary spanners
The psychological mechanism by which people are seen as an important source of information
structure and define their social world through exchange and innovation that can improve work
group boundaries was illustrated in a classic exper- team performance.
iment by Tajfel and Wilkes. They demonstrated
that objectively defined stimuli (lines of different
Strategic Identity Expression
length) were perceived differently, depending on
whether they were presented as a set of individual Group boundaries are not always defined by con-
stimuli with gradually increasing length or as two crete membership criteria (such as gender). When
separate groups, one with “short” lines and the group boundaries are more ambiguous, they can
other with “long” lines. In the latter case, the differ- be adapted or redefined to strategically include or
ences between the lines that were categorized into exclude specific individuals. Such strategic identity
the same group were minimized. At the same time, expression is likely to occur when people come to
the differences between adjacent lines that were the conclusion that their group is devalued by oth-
separated by a group boundary were exaggerated. ers. This may prompt them to self-present and
Group Boundaries 315

behave as if they belonged to another, more highly tasks. But there also are other more subtle forms of
valued group. threat that directly relate to group boundaries.
In social psychology, a basic assumption is that These forms of threat occur independently of the
people generally want to achieve and maintain a group’s social standing. The threat in this case is
positive sense of self, and a theory that explains implied in the fact that the way people are seen by
how this basic motivation affects the way people others does not necessarily converge with the way
perceive groups is social identity theory, developed those people prefer to see themselves.
by Henri Tajfel and John Turner. This theory Categorization threat refers to the threat that is
argues that people tend to self-present and behave evoked when someone is regarded as a member of
in line with norms of groups that can yield them a a particular group but does not see this as desir-
positive identity. As a consequence, people who able, or thinks it is inappropriate to refer to this
belong to groups that have a positive image are group membership in a given situation. Thus, even
motivated to guard their group against the inclu- when inclusion in the group is not disputed (e.g., a
sion of individuals who can spoil the group’s favor- woman cannot deny her gender), or when the
able image. Indeed, research has shown that people group reflects positively on the self (e.g., women
respond quite negatively to those who aspire to be are socially sensitive), people may still object to
included in a group but do not meet the criteria for being defined in terms of specific group boundaries
membership (i.e., impostors). Likewise, people in a particular context. In fact, research has shown
tend to be highly critical of current group members that when women think their gender is not relevant
whose characteristics or behaviors reflect nega- to a particular work context, they object to being
tively on the rest of the group (i.e., black sheep). categorized on the basis of their gender, even if
When people belong to a group that does not that categorization leads to positive outcomes
contribute to a positive identity, they can use a (e.g., attractive work assignments).
range of strategies to cope with this situation. One Conversely, exclusion threat is the fear that oth-
possibility is to blur the boundaries between differ- ers will define group boundaries in such a way that
ent groups. Members of groups with low status, one is not included in the groups that are seen as
for instance, tend to emphasize differences among appropriate for the self. This is the case when
individual group members to convey that not all immigrants, seeking to adopt a new national citi-
individuals in the group necessarily have the same zenship, are not seen as full citizens by those who
characteristics. This is intended to lessen the mean- were born in the host country. Once again, the
ingfulness of their (devalued) group membership threat is not primarily about the attractiveness of
as a way for others to acquire information about one group or the other or about whether people
individual group members, including themselves. meet formal membership criteria. Instead, people
Alternatively, when the significance of group boun­ feel threatened when their preferred self-definitions
daries cannot be denied, or when these boundaries are not respected or accepted by others.
cannot be crossed, members of stigmatized groups
(such as the mentally ill, handicapped, or homo- Naomi Ellemers
sexuals) may simply hide this stigmatizing condi- See also Black Sheep Effect; Deviance; Group Socialization;
tion in an attempt to avoid social exclusion. Optimal Distinctiveness; Ostracism; Perceived Group
Variability; Self-Categorization Theory; Social Identity
Threats of Inclusion and Exclusion Theory; Social Mobility; Tajfel, Henri

Because of the subjective and symbolic nature of


many group boundaries, the way they are drawn Further Readings
can imply a source of (identity) threat, to which Ellemers, N., Spears, R., & Doosje, B. (1999). Social
people can respond with strategic identity expres- identity: Context, commitment, content. Oxford, UK:
sion. When people are seen as members of a nega- Blackwell.
tively stereotyped group, the resulting stereotype Moreland, R. I., & Levine, J. M. (1982). Socialization in
threat can limit their ability to present themselves small groups: Temporal changes in individual-group
positively to others or to perform well on certain relations. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in
316 Group Cohesiveness

experimental social psychology (Vol. 15, pp. 137–192). actively dislike Bill”). Conversely, social attraction
New York: Academic Press. is a “depersonalized” form of liking based on the
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory extent to which you believe that a person is a pro-
of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel totypical member of a group to which you both
(Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations belong. Prototypical members are those who pos-
(pp. 94–109). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. sess essential defining characteristics of the group
Tajfel, H., & Wilkes, A. (1963). Classification and (e.g., “We are a hardworking group”).
quantitative judgment. British Journal of Psychology, Another promising theoretical approach to
54, 101–104.
cohesion was published in 1998 by Albert Carron,
Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D.,
Lawrence Brawley, and Neil Widmeyer. They
& Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social
defined cohesion as “a dynamic process reflected
group: A self‑categorization theory. Oxford, UK:
in the tendency for a group to stick together and
Blackwell.
remain united in the pursuit of instrumental objec-
tives and/or the satisfaction of member affective
needs.”
Carron and his colleagues identified four major
Group Cohesiveness characteristics of cohesiveness. First, cohesion is
multidimensional. Although task and social fac-
The term cohesiveness derives from the Latin tors are the primary binding properties of most
word cohaesus, which means “to cleave or stick groups, there are numerous reasons for group
together.” This may be the one aspect of cohesive- members to stay united (e.g., the stigma associated
ness on which all scholars agree. However, as is with leaving the group, contractual constraints).
the case with many theoretical constructs, it is dif- Second, cohesion in any group (e.g., sports
ficult to reach consensus about the nature of cohe- team, family, work group, army platoon) is
siveness (or cohesion) and its proper measurement. dynamic. Cohesion—and the factors that contrib-
First scientifically and operationally defined by ute to it—in a group can change over time. In a
Leon Festinger and his colleagues in 1950, the sci- marriage, for example, the perceptions of unity
entific concept of cohesiveness has been marked by and closeness that any couple experiences typically
debate. Indeed, in a 1985 publication, Stuart do not remain static over a lifetime. Instead, feel-
Drescher and his colleagues suggested that the ings of closeness, unity, and togetherness fluctuate
definition and empirical understanding of cohe- over time.
sion lack both clarity and consistency. And after Third, cohesion is instrumental. Most groups
examining the history of research on cohesion, have a raison d’être that includes sticking together,
Peter Mudrack concluded in a 1989 publication and this represents the instrumental basis of the
that it has been “dominated by confusion, incon- group. For a book club, for example, the raison
sistency, and an almost inexcusable sloppiness in d’être may be mostly social or some combination
defining the construct.” One promising approach of task (reading the book) and social (being with
to cohesion is Michael Hogg’s 1992 application of friends). For a committee, the raison d’être may be
John Turner and colleagues’ self-categorization exclusively instrumental (achieving committee
theory. Hogg distinguished between two types of objectives).
attraction/liking that occur in groups (and help Finally, cohesion is affective. In 1995, Roy
bind group members together)—an interpersonal Baumeister and Mark Leary proposed that humans
form called personal attraction, and a group-level have a fundamental need to affiliate—that people
form called social attraction. The individual group need frequent interpersonal contact with others in
member can experience each of these types of situations characterized by stability and affective
attraction. Further, both may or may not be pres- concern. Membership in any group satisfies the
ent at a given time. affiliation need. Cohesion certainly provides a
Personal attraction varies in strength in differ- “feel good” property to groups. Lack of cohesion,
ent dyadic relationships within a group (e.g., “I in contrast, contributes to feelings of anxiety,
like Mary a lot, am ambivalent about George, and depression, and alienation.
Group Cohesiveness 317

Carron and his colleagues also proposed a con- Group Cohesion and Ingroup Relationships
ceptual model of cohesion. A foundation for that
Ingroup Favoritism
model is that each group member develops beliefs
about the group as a whole (i.e., the similarity, A common correlate of ingroup favoritism is
closeness, and bonding among members), as well sacrifice—the willingness to place the needs and
as about the group’s ability to satisfy personal goals of the group above one’s own needs. In
needs. The former beliefs are labeled group inte- research conducted with sports teams, for example,
gration; the latter are labeled individual attractions Harry Prapavessis and Albert Carron found that
to the group. athletes holding the strongest perceptions of team
Carron and his colleagues suggested that there cohesiveness showed the greatest propensity to
are two fundamental orientations associated with make sacrifices for their teams—to accept less play-
group members’ perceptions of cohesion: (1) a task ing time, adapt to a personally unfavorable style of
orientation, which represents a general motivation play, and accept and carry out unpleasant duties.
to achieve the group’s instrumental objectives and
(2) a social orientation, which represents a general
Group Success and Group Cohesion
motivation to develop and maintain social relation-
ships and activities within the group. Consequently, A question of long-standing interest has been
four manifestations of cohesiveness were suggested: whether cohesion is associated with group success.
group integration–task, group integration–social, Popular wisdom has been that it is. For example,
individual attractions to the group–task, and indi- as early as 550 BCE, Aesop concluded that “union
vidual attractions to the group–social. gives strength.” Research in the 20th century,
however, produced results that seemed to contra-
dict Aesop’s conclusion. For example, in a narra-
The Development of Cohesiveness
tive review of research on group productivity
How and when does cohesiveness form in groups? published in 1972, Ivan Steiner concluded that
This question can be examined using the minimal evidence does not support a positive relationship
group paradigm. In this paradigm, strangers are between group productivity and cohesion.
assigned to groups randomly and then informed In 1991, Charles Evans and Kenneth Dion con-
that they share some trivial characteristic (e.g., a ducted a meta-analysis (a statistical integration of
preference for one artist over another). Immediately, results from many different studies) to reconcile
this shared characteristic leads to bonding (a sense the apparently mixed results of prior studies on
of unity) and “group members” begin to exhibit cohesion and performance. Based on their analy-
ingroup favoritism and outgroup bias. According ses, these authors concluded that a positive rela-
to Henri Tajfel and John Turner’s social identity tionship between group cohesion and performance
theory, the underlying mechanism is social identi- does exist, though they cautioned that these results
fication with the group (or self-categorization as a should not be generalized to work settings where
group member), which accentuates perceived or performance criteria are complex.
assumed similarities among members of the ingroup In 1994, Brian Mullen and Carolyn Copper
and perceived differences between the ingroup and conducted another meta-analysis to investigate the
an outgroup. relationship between cohesion and performance.
If categorization into “us” (the ingroup) versus Their sample of studies represented a broad spec-
“them” (the outgroup) occurs as readily as it does trum of research from sociology and psychology—
in the minimal group paradigm, then it is hardly a dealing with military units, sports teams, work
surprise that distinctions between “us” and “them” groups, and social groups. Mullen and Copper
are especially strong in groups to which individu- found that, overall, there was a positive relation-
als choose to belong and to which they develop ship between task cohesion (but not social cohe-
strong feelings of cohesion. We now consider sion) and group performance. Interestingly, they
some of the cognitive, affective, and behavioral also found that the cohesion–performance rela-
antecedents, consequences, and correlates of group tionship was stronger for “real groups” than for
cohesion. artificial groups. With regard to sports teams,
318 Group Cohesiveness

Mullen and Copper found that higher cohesion Shared Beliefs


was associated with enhanced team performance
Until recently, theorists assumed that group
across all types of sports, regardless of the amount
members have similar beliefs about the level of
of group interaction required.
cohesion in their group. Researchers typically mea-
In 2002, Carron and his colleagues conducted a
sure group cohesion by asking members to (inde-
meta-analysis focusing solely on sports teams.
pendently) complete a questionnaire pertaining to
They found that social and task cohesion lead to
the group’s level of task and/or social cohesion.
team success, and task cohesion and social cohe-
Members’ responses are then combined to create
sion early in the season contribute to team success
an aggregated score that represents a group-level
later on. And, as in the meta-analysis by Mullen
characteristic.
and Copper, Carron and his colleagues found that
However, researchers have begun to ask whether
group success produces increased cohesiveness.
it is always appropriate to combine individual per-
Thus, groups that have strong social and/or task
ceptions of cohesion. If one group member sees the
bonds perform well, and groups that perform well
group as highly cohesive, another as completely
develop stronger social and/or task bonds.
lacking in cohesion, and a third holds an intermedi-
ate view, then an aggregate score is misleading—
Individual Satisfaction members of the group do not possess similar beliefs.
Some researchers therefore assess the degree to
Group member satisfaction is also entwined in which shared beliefs are present in a group using an
the cohesion–performance relationship. Research index of agreement. With regard to cohesion, the
has revealed that perceptions of cohesion contrib- index of agreement provides a statistical measure of
ute to group performance, which in turn produces the extent to which group members show consen-
greater member satisfaction. Member satisfaction sus in their perceptions of the group’s level of unity.
then leads to the development of greater group Assuming there is sufficiently high agreement
cohesiveness. among members, the index of agreement can be
used to justify the aggregation of individual scores.
Jealousy Recent research with sports teams has shown
that group members are more likely to share beliefs
Platoon commanders, office managers, coaches,
about their team’s level of cohesion when they
and other leaders spend a great deal of time and
perceive that cohesion is strong. That is, individu-
effort trying to develop sacrifice behavior, suc-
als tend to agree about cohesion when they are
cessful performance, group cohesion, and member
part of a close-knit group, but often disagree about
satisfaction in their groups. Within many groups,
cohesion when their group is more divided. In
there are various issues that can be toxic, if not
addition, team members are most likely to possess
properly addressed. These can create an unfavor-
shared beliefs when judging the team’s level of
able atmosphere within the group and weaken its
unity around group tasks and least likely to pos-
cohesion. One such issue is jealousy. Jealousy is a
sess shared beliefs when they evaluate the team in
common phenomenon in many groups. For exam-
terms of how well it satisfies their social needs.
ple, one group member might be jealous about the
This is not surprising because sports teams are task
amount of attention that another receives from
oriented, in that the majority of members’ interac-
the group’s leader. Or within a family, one sibling
tions relate to the group’s common task, and
may harbor jealousy toward another with regard
group success is a high priority.
to his or her appearance, personality, popularity,
or some other attribute. In a 2005 study of
Group Norms
Division I athletes, Cindra Kamphoff and Diane
Gill found negative relationships between both John Turner, in his referent informational influ-
task and social cohesion and the presence of jeal- ence theory, has suggested that social identification
ousy within a team. Moreover, jealousy was more develops through a three stage process: (1) Social
strongly related to task cohesion than to social categorization occurs such that individuals per-
cohesion. ceive themselves as part of a distinct category or
Group Cohesiveness 319

group; (2) Individuals’ behavior is strongly self-identity (e.g., “I am an athlete”), coupled with
influenced by the expectations, attitudes, and cultural beliefs about the sports context (e.g.,
behaviors of others in that category or group; and “The team’s welfare comes first”), diminish the
(3) Individuals conform to the expectations (i.e., salience of race and ethnicity. Research with col-
group norms) and stereotypes associated with the lege athletes has provided some support for this
group.Typically, the third stage—conformity to conception. Both Black and White college athletes
group expectations—is strongly related to the pres- with a strong athletic identity strongly endorse the
ence of group cohesion. Groups that are strongly proposition that racial discrimination is not a
united have the potential to exert more influence problem in sports. Popular media have also sup-
on their members. A classic study by Stanley ported this notion. In 1971, an award-winning
Seashore in 1954 illustrates the relationship between television drama called Brian’s Song documented
group cohesion and productivity standards in work the real-life friendship of professional football
settings. Seashore gave a questionnaire to more players Brian Piccolo, a White running back even-
than 5,800 employees (in 228 work groups) in a tually stricken with cancer, and Gale Sayers, a
machinery factory. He found that highly cohesive Black teammate who supported Piccolo during his
work groups showed less variation in productivity courageous battle against the disease.
than did less cohesive groups. Highly cohesive
groups also had higher or lower group productivity
Negative Consequences of
(in comparison to the factory norm for productiv-
High Levels of Group Cohesion
ity), depending on the extent to which group mem-
bers perceived the company to be “supportive.” Despite the benefits associated with high levels of
cohesion, it has some disadvantages as well. For
example, in his classic 1972 work on “group-
Group Diversity
think,” Irving Janis described situations in which
Laboratory studies using the minimal group members’ needs to maintain “groupness” and con-
paradigm have shown that stronger ingroup cohe- sensus negatively influence their abilities to con-
sion can produce greater bias toward an outgroup. sider and critically evaluate alternative ideas or
Of course, it is possible that ingroup and outgroup viewpoints. In other words, maintaining a high
categorizations also can be applied to members of level of group cohesion and conforming to group
the same group. Birds of a feather may flock norms become more important than paying atten-
together and produce more cohesion when they tion to all the facts. Poor-quality decisions are
do, but many groups require that birds of different often the result. Janis noted that involvement in
feathers flock together. Sports teams, military highly cohesive groups is the primary cause for
units, and work groups, for example, are often groupthink, although the presence of other vari-
composed of individuals of varying ages, ethnici- ables (e.g., group isolation, directive leadership)
ties, and races—demographic factors that have contributes as well.
been shown to be sources of conflict among group More recently, the potential disadvantages of
members. strong group cohesion were explored within the
As Elizabeth Mannix and Margaret Neale sug- context of sports. In a 2005 study, James Hardy
gested in their 2005 report on workplace diversity, and his colleagues asked more than 100 athletes
“the optimistic view holds that diversity will lead (from a number of sports and various competitive
to an increase in the variety of perspectives and levels) about the potential disadvantages of high
approaches brought to a problem. . . . However, task and social cohesion in sports teams. More than
the preponderance of the evidence favors a more half of the athletes reported possible disadvantages
pessimistic view: that diversity creates social divi- of high social cohesion, whereas a third reported
sions, which in turn create negative performance potential disadvantages of high task cohesion.
outcomes for the group.” Some of the reported negative consequences of
A popular conception is that sports is one place high social cohesion were at the group level, such
where racial and ethnic conflicts do not exist. The as time wasted socializing and failure to communi-
rationale for this conception is that an athletic cate information that was less than positive. Others
320 Group Composition

were at the personal level, such as social isolation Hogg, M. A. (1992). The social psychology of group
of individuals who were not in the core group. cohesiveness: From attraction to social identity.
Potential disadvantages associated with high task London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
cohesion at the group level included damage to James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1984).
social relations because of an extreme focus on the Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and
task at hand. A personal-level disadvantage was without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology,
that high task cohesion leads to increased pressures 69, 85–98.
to perform well so as not to disappoint teammates. Mannix, E., & Neale, M. A. (2005). What differences
make a difference? The promise and reality of diverse
teams in organizations. Psychological Science in the
Conclusion Public Interest, 6(2), 31–55.
Mudrack, P. E. (1989). Defining group cohesiveness: A
Human beings have a fundamental need to affiliate.
legacy of confusion? Small Group Research, 20,
This need is manifested in nearly every group, no 37–49.
matter how minimal. Even on the basis of arbitrary Mullen, B., & Copper, C. (1994). The relation between
criteria, individuals quickly develop perceptions of group cohesiveness and performance: An integration.
“us” and “them” and then favor the ingroup over Psychological Bulletin, 115, 210–227.
the outgroup. So, it is hardly surprising that mem- Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory
bers of real groups form cohesive bonds around of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel
their task and their relationships with one another. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations
In turn, the relative degree to which cohesiveness is (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
present in a group is related to group maintenance
(activities associated with the development of the
group) and group locomotion (activities associated
with the achievement of group goals)—the two
fundamental tenets of group dynamics identified by Group Composition
Kurt Lewin. Thus, it is not surprising that some
group theoreticians believe that cohesion is the A key feature of every group is its composition—
single most important group variable. the number and types of people who belong.
Group composition has been studied extensively,
Albert Carron and Shauna Burke though in much of that work, it was studied
See also Diversity; Festinger, Leon; Group Performance;
mostly because of its role in other group phenom-
Groupthink; Organizations; Referent Informational ena, not as a phenomenon in itself. In any event,
Influence Theory; Self-Categorization Theory; Social much research has been done, and several efforts
Identity Theory; Socially Shared Cognition; Sports have been made to review and analyze this work.
Teams; Teams; Work Teams One way to organize research on group compo-
sition is to focus on the characteristics of group
members who were studied. Thus, some researchers
Further Readings study group size, which involves the simple pres-
Carron, A. V., Shapcott, K. M., & Burke, M. A. (2008). ence or absence of group members. Other research-
Group cohesion in sport and exercise: Past, present, ers study the demographic characteristics (e.g., race,
and future. In M. Beauchamp & M. A. Eys (Eds.), sex, or age), abilities (e.g., knowledge or intelli-
Group dynamics advances in sport and exercise gence), opinions (e.g., conservatism or religiosity),
psychology: Contemporary themes (pp. 117–139). or personalities (e.g., traits or needs) of group mem-
London: Routledge. bers. Unfortunately, researchers seldom view group
Dion, K. L. (2000). Group cohesion: From “field of composition broadly enough to encompass more
forces” to multidimensional construct. Group than one member characteristic. Researchers who
Dynamics: Theory, Research and Practice, 4, 7–26. study the sex or racial composition of groups, for
Evans, C. R., & Dion, K. L. (1991). Group cohesion and example, rarely consider one another’s theories or
performance: A meta-analysis. Small Group Research, research findings, even though work on one of
22, 175–186. those topics might well inform the other.
Group Composition 321

Another way to organize research on group literature, by conceptual orientation, is probably


composition is to focus on measurement issues. the most informative, and so the next sections pur-
How can one compute a single number to capture sue it further.
the composition of a group? Some researchers mea-
sure the central tendency among group members,
Group Composition as a Consequence
examining their mean score on some characteristic
that can vary continuously (e.g., intelligence, con- Most groups are rather small. Several researchers
servatism, or emotionality), or the proportion of have done observational studies of natural groups
group members who have some characteristic that that people form for various activities (e.g., shop-
is categorical (e.g., Blacks, females, or Republicans). ping at a mall, working on a task), and the results
Other researchers are more interested in the vari- are clear and consistent—people prefer smaller
ability among group members—the group’s level of groups, often containing just a few members. Why?
diversity. They might examine the range or vari- Several possible answers have been proposed.
ance in continuous characteristics (e.g., weight, First, if we assume that people want to keep
batting average, sociability) or the distribution of track of the ongoing personal relationships (who
members across the levels of categorical character- likes whom) within a group, so that they can use
istics (e.g., college major, religion). Finally, a few that knowledge to guide their own interpersonal
researchers have measured special configurations behavior, then larger groups may be more confus-
of characteristics among group members. There ing and thus aversive. As the number of people in
has been considerable interest, for example, in the a group increases, the number of possible relation-
unique problems that can arise in groups contain- ships (not only between individuals, but also
ing a “token” member (e.g., a work group of men between individuals and subgroups, and between
containing just one woman). subgroups) obviously increases too, but at a star-
Finally, research on group composition can be tling, exponential rate. In fact, a group that con-
organized by focusing on the general conceptual tains more than just a few members may already
orientation that is taken. Three such orientations exceed the limits of short-term memory (seven
can be identified. Most researchers conceptualize plus-or-minus two pieces of information) when it
group composition as the cause for other group comes to the number of possible relationships.
phenomena. One might study, for example, the Thus, people may prefer small groups because they
effects of group size on levels of conflict among are easier to understand.
group members. Other researchers conceptualize Another possible explanation why people prefer
group composition as a consequence of other fac- smaller groups is that bad things happen less often
tors. One might study, for example, whether in such groups. Research has shown that larger
groups tend to be especially homogeneous for a groups are more likely than smaller ones to experi-
particular member characteristic, and if evidence ence a variety of negative outcomes, such as devi-
of homogeneity is found, then one could ask how ance, social loafing, and internal conflict. Of
that homogeneity was achieved and is maintained. course, some of these outcomes can be avoided by
Are the work groups in an organization mostly strengthening a group’s structure (e.g., status sys-
made up of White men? If so, then why are there tems, norms, roles), or by devoting more resources
not more women and people of color in those to monitoring and controlling members’ behav-
groups? Finally, a few researchers conceptualize iors. But such changes can make membership in
group composition as a context within which the group less satisfying and may alienate some
other phenomena can occur—a context that can members, which strengthens their preference for
shape those phenomena. One might study, for smaller groups.
example, how the number and ages of a family’s Finally, evolutionary psychologists have noted
children influence the intellectual development of that in the animal kingdom, creatures that are
each child. Do children from larger families, or inherently social often seem to organize themselves
from families in which many children were born at into groups of a particular size. For example, a
about the same time, grow up to be less intelligent? given species of birds will form flocks that are all
If so, then why? This last method of organizing the about the same size. This “species-specific group
322 Group Composition

size” may reflect the optimal balance point between example, just because of their sex or race), but also
membership in smaller versus larger groups when it because a few studies have shown that diversity
comes to such issues as feeding, reproduction, nur- can improve group performance, especially on
turance, and defense. A larger group, for example, tasks that require creativity.
might offer more opportunities for possible mates,
but it would also entail greater competition for
Group Composition as a Context
such mates. Maybe humanity, as an inherently
social species, has “discovered” across long periods Few researchers have studied group composition
of evolutionary history that smaller groups have as a context, which seems a shame, given that
greater survival value. As a result, such groups are almost every psychological phenomenon can occur
preferred in general and without much thought. in groups of many types, whether they be families,
The fact that people prefer smaller groups neighbors, coworkers, or others. So, if the compo-
means that efforts to create or maintain a large sition of a group can indeed shape the way a phe-
group are unlikely to succeed. What often happens nomenon unfolds, then we should explore how
is that a large group will break apart into smaller and why such shaping occurs. Consider, for exam-
cliques, which may or may not like one another, ple, a study done several years ago on the relation-
work together well, and so on. Special tactics may ship between scholastic aptitude (as measured by
be needed to avoid these problems. the scores of high school students on the SAT) and
What about diversity in groups? Several studies academic performance (as measured by those stu-
have shown that groups are usually homogeneous, dents’ grades later on, during their first semester in
rather than heterogeneous. Why? Maybe it is college). This phenomenon is well understood, of
because homogeneous groups are less likely than course—students with greater scholastic aptitude
heterogeneous ones to experience various prob- tend to perform better academically. And that is
lems, such as miscommunication, mistrust, and exactly what was found in this study, but what
lack of cohesion. This might be why people are less made it special was that the researchers examined
committed to more heterogeneous groups, put less students who were living in different settings at
effort into such groups, and are more likely to quit college—at home, in a dormitory, or in fraternity
them. Another possible explanation is that homo- or sorority houses. Although the impact of SAT
geneity is a natural by-product of group socializa- scores on college grades was always positive, it
tion practices. Because similarity is an important proved to be strongest among students living at
source of interpersonal attraction, people are more home, somewhat weaker among students living in
likely to join (and remain in) groups whose mem- college dormitories, and weakest among students
bers are more similar to themselves. And groups living in fraternities and sororities. Why? Maybe
are more likely to admit (and try to retain) people because the values of those people students lived
who are more similar to their members. Diversity with in those different settings were dissimilar,
is thus rare, unless outside pressures (e.g., affirma- suggesting that group composition effects were
tive action programs) are brought to bear. Even occurring. Students’ families probably valued their
when diversity does arise in a group, it often “cor- academic achievement more than did students’
rects” itself over time through attrition. The people dormitory roommates, who probably valued
most likely to leave a diverse group are those who achievement more than did the student’s Greek
are most different from the other members. “brothers” and “sisters.” Put another way, the
The fact that people prefer more homogeneous scholastic aptitude of a student was converted into
groups means that efforts to create or maintain actual academic achievement more thoroughly
more heterogeneous groups are also unlikely to when the student lived in a setting where others
succeed, unless special tactics are used. The mem- thought that achievement mattered.
bers of heterogeneous groups must be led to
accept, appreciate, and make productive use of
Group Composition as a Cause
their differences from one another. This is neces-
sary not only for reasons of social justice (people Most researchers who study group composition
should not be excluded from work groups, for think of it as a cause for other group phenomena
Group Composition 323

of interest. The underlying premise of their work is important to the extent that group members notice
that if we understood more about group composi- it in one another and believe that it matters.
tion, then it might be possible to create groups that Demographic characteristics, such as age or race
were just the right size, or that contained just the or sex, should thus produce stronger composition
right kinds of members, to ensure that various effects than other member characteristics, because
positive outcomes occurred (or that various nega- they are inherently more salient and because peo-
tive outcomes did not occur). Consider, for exam- ple generally see them as more important for their
ple, all the effort that the coaches, managers, and social interaction. Moreover, composition effects
owners of sports teams put into drafting the right that involve these “surface” characteristics should
players. What about all the trouble that lawyers go occur earlier in the life of a group than composi-
to when selecting the right jurors for a murder tion effects that involve “deep” characteristics,
trial, or all the concern that has been voiced by such as abilities, opinions, or personality traits,
both politicians and voters about how many con- because the latter require more time for members
servative and liberal justices (whose other quali- to assess. A characteristic can also gain or lose
ties, such as gender, age, and ethnicity, are debated salience depending on various situational factors,
as well) ought to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court? such as the distribution of that characteristic
Finally, consider attempts by therapists to create among group members, the task on which a group
groups that contain the right kinds of patients— is working, or the outsiders with whom a group
people whose interactions will have the greatest must deal. For example, sex is a more salient in
possible therapeutic value for everyone involved. groups that contain a token female member, camp-
There are many theories (each with associated ing skills are more salient to groups about to go on
research findings) that reflect the conceptualiza- outdoor retreats, and political beliefs are more
tion of group composition as a cause, but this salient to groups whose members have political
work tends to be narrow—researchers seldom con- axes to grind. In all these cases, increases in the
sider more than one member characteristic, even salience of the characteristic would make relevant
though there could be parallels in how composi- composition effects more likely to occur.
tion effects involving different characteristics occur. Moreland and Levine’s answer to the second
In an attempt to take a broader approach, Richard question involved the notion of visibility. A par-
Moreland and John Levine developed a “generic” ticular group member, they argued, is visible to the
theory of group composition efforts, one that extent that others can tell what his or her charac-
spans different member characteristics. They began teristics are, and the more visible someone becomes,
by asking three broad questions that such a theory the more impact that person’s characteristics will
ought to be capable of answering. First, of all the have on the group. What makes some group mem-
characteristics that the members of a group pos- bers more visible than others? Visibility can arise
sess, which characteristics will matter most in a from higher status in the group, from more fre-
given situation? Will race be important? What quent (or intense) participation in group activities,
about intelligence? Second, once some characteris- or from longer membership in the group (senior-
tic has been identified as important, which group ity). Someone who has played an especially impor-
members (each of whom possesses some level of tant role in the life of the group may also have a
that characteristic) will be most important? Does lot of visibility. For example, a group’s “founder”
one person’s intelligence, for example, matter as can sometimes imprint his or her personality on
much for the group as another person’s intelli- the group (consider Steve Jobs and Apple). It is
gence, and if so, why? Finally, how do members’ also possible for someone to gain or lose visibil-
characteristics combine to affect the group? That ity because of situational factors like the kind of
is, what kinds of transformations (from the indi- task the group must perform. If an engineering
vidual to the group level) are possible, and when group is asked to solve some complex design
will transformations of each kind occur? problem, for example, and only one of its members
Moreland and Levine’s answer to the first ques- has been trained to solve such problems, then that
tion involved the notion of salience. A particular person will suddenly become more visible to the
member characteristic, they argued, becomes rest of the group.
324 Group Composition

To answer the third and final question, Moreland something that newly formed or temporary groups
and Levine evoked the notions of transformation are unlikely to experience.
rules and social integration. Transformations of We are still a long way from understanding
member characteristics into group characteristics group composition effects well enough to create
can follow two rules, one simple and the other ideal groups—groups that are the perfect size and
complex. The additive rule is relatively simple—the contain exactly the right kinds of members. But
more of some characteristic that exists among the interest in this topic has been growing, leading to
members of a group, the more that group will be some valuable new theories and research findings.
shaped by it. A basketball team whose players are Optimism is thus justified.
better at making 3-point shots, for example, will
probably win more of its games. A work group Richard L. Moreland
containing more men will probably take more
aggressive action toward competitors. And the See also Diversity; Group Socialization; Homophily;
Supreme Court is probably more likely to make Tokenism
abortion illegal if some future president appoints
additional conservative justices. Under the additive
rule, each member affects the group independently Further Readings
of every other, so it hardly matters what the other Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., Gavin, J. H., & Florey, A. T.
members are like. This implies a corollary, namely, (2002). Time, teams, and task performance: Changing
that any particular person will affect every group to effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on team
which he or she belongs in about the same way. functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 45,
The interactive rule is more complex, corre- 1029–1045.
sponding to what many people call “chemistry” in Kanter, R. M. (1977). Some effects of proportions on
groups. Sometimes individual characteristics com- group life: Skewed sex ratios and responses to token
bine in strange, often unexpected ways. A team of women. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 965–990.
mediocre football players, for example, surprises Lau, D. C., & Murnighan, J. K. (1998). Demographic
fans by winning most of its games, or a team of diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics
star players fails to win many games, enraging of organizational groups. Academy of Management
fans. Under the interactive rule, the effects of dif- Review, 23, 325–340.
ferent members on the group are interdependent— Mannix, E., & Neale, N. A. (2005). What differences
one member’s impact depends a lot on what the make a difference? The promise and reality of diverse
other members are like. And again, there is a corol- teams in organizations. Psychological Science in the
lary, namely, that any particular person can affect Public Interest, 6, 1–25.
every group to which he or she belongs in a quite Miller, J. M., & Rotolo, T. (1996). Testing a dynamic
different way. model of social composition: Diversity and change in
voluntary groups. American Sociological Review, 61,
When do these different transformation rules
179–202.
operate? Based on a review of the literature on
Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (1992). The
group composition effects, Moreland and Levine
composition of small groups. In E. Lawler,
argued that the additive rule always operates, even
B. Markovsky, C. Ridgeway, & H. Walker (Eds.),
in laboratory groups, where strangers meet briefly Advances in group processes (Vol. 9, pp. 237–280).
to carry out a trivial task. It is not difficult, in fact, Greenwich, CT: JAI.
to find published accounts of additive composition Nemeth, C. J., & Staw, B. M. (1989). The tradeoffs of
effects. But the interactive rule seems to operate social control and innovation in groups and
only in groups that have higher levels of social organizations. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in
integration—groups that are more “real,” because experimental social psychology (Vol. 22, pp. 175–210).
they operate out in the world, exist for longer peri- New York: Academic Press.
ods, carry out more important tasks, and so on. Tsui, A. S., Egan, T. D., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1992). Being
Published accounts of interactive composition different: Relational demography and organizational
effects are difficult to find—chemistry in groups, attachment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37,
for better or worse, appears to be a rare thing, 540–579.
Group Development 325

in 1951 to address phases of group problem solv-


Group Development ing. These researchers divided into thirds the inter-
action time of eight groups of men engaged in a
Whether there are predictable patterns of develop- variety of decision-making tasks (e.g., planning a
ment in small groups has been of interest to group thesis, making arrangements for a Christmas
scholars and practitioners for some time. Theories party, devising strategy for a chess game) and then
of group development differ in what and how tallied the number of acts of orientation (providing
many levels of analysis they focus on. Some mostly or requesting information, repetition, clarification,
stick to the group level, treating the group as a or confirmation), evaluation (providing or request-
whole unit and its members and their experiences ing evaluation, analysis, emotional expression, and
as relatively homogeneous. Others focus on the wishes), and control (providing or requesting
development of individual members into, through, direction and autonomy) in each third. Orientation,
and out of groups. Still other theories focus on evaluation, and control occurred in all three phases
how groups develop in the context of their embed- of problem solving, but orientation peaked in
ding environments. Recent theories attempt to phase one, evaluation in phase two, and control in
incorporate all three levels of analysis by consider- phase three. Bales and Strodtbeck concluded that
ing the interplay among the group, its members, problem-solving groups move from an emphasis
and its context over time. on problems of orientation to problems of evalua-
tion to problems of control.
In 1956 Bennis and Shepard, who studied
Group-Level Theories
groups that were trying to improve their internal
Theories that focus on the group as a unit consider communication systems, proposed that groups face
the different stages of interaction the group moves two major and competing obstacles: (1) members’
through over time. Some of these theories propose orientations toward how power should be handled
sequential stages, envisioning groups as moving and distributed in the group and (2) members’ ori-
from one stage to the next in a given order. Other entations toward each other. Based on these
theories propose flexible stages, envisioning groups obstacles, Bennis and Shepard proposed that
as skipping or repeating stages as needed. groups undergo two major phases of development:
Group-level theories of development have been (1) preoccupation with authority relations and
largely based on studies of groups that have been (2) preoccupation with personal relations.
assembled to accomplish a particular task and Echoing similar themes of authority and inti-
have little or no member attrition or replacement. macy in groups, in 1958 William Schutz proposed
For example, Bruce Tuckman’s famous review the Fundamental Interpersonal Relations
was based largely on studies of therapy and train- Orientation (FIRO) model of human relations
ing groups with stable memberships, and the pio- based on studies of U.S. Navy groups. Schutz pro-
neering work of Warren Bennis and Herbert posed that all human interactions move from
Shepard was based on groups with fixed member- resolving issues of inclusion (being with, belonging
ships that attempted to improve their internal to, and receiving attention) to resolving issues of
communication. control (having power, influence, and authority) to
Theories of group development typically iden- resolving issues of affection (sharing feelings and
tify up to three aspects of development: (1) task inner thoughts). Schutz proposed that human
activity, (2) member experiences, and/or (3) group interaction defaults to an earlier stage if issues in
norms. Theories also identify three or more stages the next stage are not successfully resolved.
of group development: (1) a beginning, involving In 1965, Tuckman proposed what has become
formation and orientation; (2) a middle, involving the best known theory of group development.
coordination and performance; and (3) an end, Based on a review of studies and theories of groups
involving task completion and/or the dissolution over time, Tuckman proposed a four-stage model
of the group. of group development with the rhyming labels of
One of the first theories of group development forming, storming, norming, and performing.
was proposed by Robert Bales and Fred Strodtbeck Tuckman and Mary Ann Jensen later added a fifth
326 Group Development

and final stage, which they called adjourning. identification, when a precipitating event motivates
Tuckman discussed both the interpersonal and the group identification and coordination; (3) group
task processes of the group during each stage. productivity, characterized by collaborative work;
When the group is forming, members look to oth- (4) individuation, when members want individual
ers to provide guidance, information, and feedback recognition for their contributions; and (5) decay,
about what interpersonal and task behaviors are when the group begins to return to discontent.
acceptable in the group. While storming (which Though stage models of group development
Tuckman suggested might be skipped by task- appear to suggest that groups move linearly from
focused groups), members attempt to express their one stage to the next over time, most theorists have
individuality and resist the formation of group allowed exceptions to this rule (e.g., Tuckman sug-
structures. During norming, members accept the gested that groups may skip storming or revisit it)
group and the idiosyncrasies of other members and or back-and-forth cycles between stages (e.g.,
begin to interact harmoniously and openly to Stephen Worchel’s cyclic model). Many scholars
avoid conflict. In the performing stage, members have criticized stage models of group development
constructively try to complete the group task. for treating groups as closed systems that are largely
Finally, when the group is adjourning, members impervious to their embedding environments and
struggle to accept the end of the group. for being descriptive without outlining the processes
Subsequent group-level models echoed earlier underlying group transitions between stages.
ones. In 1974 Rosemary Sarri and Maeda Galinsky
proposed three dimensions of group development: Multilevel Theories
(1) social organization (the structure and pattern of
Member–Group Relations
member roles in the group), (2) task activities, and
(3) group culture (the norms and expectations that Taking a different perspective on group devel-
characterize the group). They also specified seven opment and focusing on the member–group rela-
stages of group development: (1) origin (composing tionship over time, Richard Moreland and John
the group), (2) formative (seeking mutual interests), Levine proposed a model of group socialization in
(3) intermediate (moderate group cohesion), (4) revi- 1982 that provides a flexible template for studying
sion (challenges to existing group), (5) intermediate member movement into, through, and out of
phase 2 (cohesion after revision), (6) maturation groups. Unlike other theories of group develop-
(stabilization of processes), and (7) termination ment, the model of group socialization can be eas-
(dissolution and/or goal attainment). In 1980 Roy ily applied to study ongoing groups experiencing
Lacoursier proposed a five-stage model of group membership change.
development that resembled Tuckman’s model— Based on a social exchange approach to the
his stages were labeled orientation, dissatisfaction, member–group relationship, Moreland and
resolution, production, and termination. Levine’s model of socialization assumes that groups
In the 1990s extensions of prior models were and individuals exercise influence over each other
proposed that combined stages or made them more and that the relationship between them changes in
flexible. Susan Wheelan proposed five stages of a systematic way over time. Three psychological
group development: (1) dependency and inclusion, processes are at work in the model: evaluation,
when members worry about being accepted and commitment, and role transitions. The individual
included in the group; (2) counterdependency, evaluates the extent to which a group will meet his
when members experience conflict over group or her needs, and the group evaluates the extent to
goals and procedures; (3) trust and structure, when which an individual will contribute to attaining
norms and roles are more established and secure; group goals. These evaluations result in individual
(4) work and productivity, when members focus and group levels of commitment to one another,
on task accomplishment; and (5) the final or termi- which are related to a number of important out-
nation stage, which groups with distinct end points comes. A group that is committed to an individual
experience. Stephen Worchel proposed a cyclical is likely to work to satisfy that individual’s needs
model with six stages: (1) discontent, before mem- and retain that individual as a member, whereas
bers strongly identify with the group; (2) group individuals who are committed to a group are
Group Development 327

likely to work hard at achieving group goals and simulated work groups in a laboratory setting,
maintain their membership. Changes in commit- Chang and her colleagues observed patterns of
ment are also important because they lead to role both punctuated equilibrium and linear progression
transitions in the group. Through this process, in groups.
individuals pass through five phases of member-
ship in groups (investigation, socialization, mainte-
Member-Group-Context Dynamics
nance, resocialization, and remembrance), which
are divided by four role transitions (entry, accep- Recent models of group development incorpo-
tance, divergence, exit). rate all three levels of analysis to explain group
adaptation to context, members’ needs, and inter-
personal dynamics in the group over time. For
The Group in Context
example, Deborah Ancona and her colleagues
Rather than looking inward at members’ expe- have studied the roles that different work group
riences within and movement through groups, members play while managing the group’s rela-
models that focus on how the group develops in tionship with the embedding context (usually a
relation to its context look outward to the group’s work organization). Mary Waller and her col-
embedding context to predict group development. leagues have examined the mutual adaptation of
Connie Gersick’s “punctuated equilibrium” model members’ work rhythms in groups, based on their
of group development suggests that deadlines preferences for pacing and planning and the task
shape group development. Through an in-depth demands placed on groups by their environments.
observational study of eight naturally occurring Others have theorized about what stimulates
work groups, whose life spans ranged from 7 days change in groups over time. Scott Poole and his
to 6 months, Gersick discovered that the first half colleagues proposed four sources of change in
of a group’s interaction was characterized by an groups over time: (1) life cycle change, or group
approach to accomplishing the group task that development as it is traditionally conceived of as a
was adopted without explicit discussion. At the prescribed sequence of stages imminent within, or
halfway point between the first group meeting and imposed on, groups; (2) teleological change, or
the task deadline, however, a group often reevalu- purposeful movement toward group goals that
ated its original approach, developed a new one, adapts to feedback from the group’s environment;
and then executed that approach to meet the dead- (3) dialectical change, which emerges from conflict
line. The punctuated equilibrium model thus pro- between opposing viewpoints and forces; and
poses two major stages of group development: one (4) evolutionary change, which emerges from
before the middle of a group’s life span and a sec- repeated cycles of variation, selection, and reten-
ond after its midpoint, both driven by the group’s tion of group members, goals, and strategies.
task deadline. Gersick’s model is unique compared Holly Arrow, Joseph McGrath, and their col-
to previous ones, which largely propose that leagues proposed typologies of groups and devel-
groups pass through stages of development in a opment trajectories over time based on the complex
predictable and sequential fashion. The punctu- interaction among local, global, and contextual
ated equilibrium model instead proposes that group dynamics. At the local level are members,
groups undergo long periods without change, fol- tasks, and tools (i.e., group resources and proce-
lowed by sudden change caused by “revolutionary dures) and their characteristics; at the global level
events,” such as reaching the temporal midpoint of are emergent structures and norms in the group
a project. that emerge from and subsequently constrain local
Artemis Chang and her colleagues later sug- dynamics; at the contextual level are aspects of the
gested that the punctuated equilibrium model and group’s environment, such as deadlines, the orga-
other stage models of group development (such as nizational environment, and threats and opportu-
Wheelan’s integrative model) could be viewed as nities. Arrow, McGrath, and their colleagues
complementary, in part because the integrative propose possible trajectories of development for
model outlines the lower level processes at work various aspects of groups. These trajectories
within Gersick’s two phases. When studying include (1) robust equilibrium, in which an aspect
328 Group Dissolution

of a group converges on a stable state and remains Wheelan, S. (1994). Group processes: A developmental
there; (2) multistability, in which an aspect of a perspective. Sydney, Australia: Allyn & Bacon.
group alternates between two or more equilibria Worchel, S. (1994). You can go home again: Returning
over time; and (3) instability, in which an aspect of group research to the group context with an eye on
a group demonstrates instability or a chaotic pat- developmental issues. Small Group Research, 25,
tern over time. Aspects of groups that may follow 205–223.
one or more of these trajectories include (1) com-
mitment levels between members and their groups
(from Moreland and Levine’s model of group
socialization), (2) project output and performance, Group Dissolution
(3) division of labor and roles within the group,
(4) information sharing, (5) conflict, and (6) group Group dissolution is a topic that has attracted
norms and procedures. much attention recently. Scientists are interested
As this entry indicates, there is a good deal of in theoretical issues, such as how and why groups
scholarly interest in group development. A variety dissolve, whereas practitioners are interested in
of theoretical perspectives have been offered to more pragmatic issues, such as how to delay the
describe and explain how groups develop over dissolution of groups that are helpful (e.g., self-
time, and each of these perspectives has both help groups) and how to hasten the dissolution of
strengths and weaknesses. Recent theories that groups that are harmful (e.g., youth gangs, terror-
consider the interplay among the group, its mem- ist cells).
bers, and its context over time appear to be par- One way to organize work on group dissolution
ticularly promising. is to distinguish between two general scenarios.
The first involves the dissolution of groups that
Jennifer L. Berdahl and H. Colleen Stuart were not expected to last for a long time (e.g.,
juries, therapy groups, task forces, health care
See also Dynamical Systems Approach; Group
Composition; Group Dissolution; Group Formation;
teams, and negotiating teams). Members of such
Group Socialization; Role Transitions; Social groups know right from the start that their groups
Entrainment; Therapy Groups; Work Teams will someday dissolve. They may even know (if
only roughly) when that will occur. A second sce-
nario involves groups that could, at least in prin-
Further Readings ciple, last indefinitely (assuming things go well).
Many groups are of this sort, though turnover
Arrow, H., Henry, K. B., Poole, M. S., Wheelan, S., among members (and other changes over time) can
& Moreland, R. (2005). Traces, trajectories, and be viewed as part of a continual “dissolution” pro-
timing: The temporal perspective on groups. cess, in which the current incarnation of the group
In M. S. Poole & A. B. Hollingshead (Eds.),
keeps disappearing and is replaced by newer incar-
Theories of small groups: Interdisciplinary
nations. Dissolution is a somewhat different phe-
perspective (pp. 313–367). Thousand Oaks, CA:
nomenon in these two scenarios, so they are
Sage.
considered separately in this entry.
Bennis, W., & Shepard, H. (1956). A theory of group
development. Human Relations, 9, 415–437.
Gersick, C. (1988). Time and transition in work teams: Expected Dissolution
Toward a new model of group development. Academy
of Management Journal, 31, 9–41. How are groups affected by the knowledge that
Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (1982). Socialization in they will surely dissolve? Research on how antici-
small groups: Temporal changes in individual-group pated future interaction affects relationships shows
relations. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in that people who expect to continue interacting
experimental social psychology (Vol. 15, pp. 137–192). with one another often behave in ways that pro-
New York: Academic Press. duce interpersonal attraction. For example, they
Tuckman, B. (1965). Developmental sequence in small (a) disclose more information about themselves,
groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 384–399. (b) gather more information about others and
Group Dissolution 329

remember such information better, and (c) act that they can keep in touch, and plan possible
more cooperatively. Interpersonal attraction within future “meetings” of the old group. But people
a group should strengthen its cohesion. All of this who once were in a group together often find it
suggests that there might be less cohesion, and difficult to maintain any meaningful relationships
perhaps more conflict, in a group that members with one another.
expect will dissolve. Ironically, these effects might
hasten the group’s demise.
Unexpected Dissolution
Another possible effect of expected dissolution
involves group development. In 1988, Connie Many groups don’t expect to dissolve, so their
Gersick published a study of groups that were members do not think about it unless serious prob-
working on projects with definite deadlines (after lems arise that make the group’s possible dissolu-
which the groups were expected to dissolve). She tion more salient. Those problems can be internal
found that knowledge about the dissolution of a or external in origin. A major internal problem for
group structured its members’ activities. In the many groups is conflict among members. Although
groups that Gersick studied, members began their conflict has some benefits, it can also damage a
projects quickly, without much planning, and group in serious ways. To the extent that group
worked hard until about half their time was gone. members are fighting with one another, for exam-
Then, suddenly, they paused to reconsider what ple, they have less time and energy to accomplish
they were doing. As part of that reflection process, the group’s tasks. As a result, the group begins to
the group members often sought more informa- fail, which weakens both the commitment of its
tion. Then they began to work hard again, but members and support for the group among outsid-
often in different ways, reflecting changes in their ers. As conflict intensifies, some members may
strategies. Gersick did not study any groups that leave the group, and prospective members may be
did not expect to dissolve, but her findings imply reluctant to join because the group seems so
that such groups might not have stopped to reflect unpleasant. As a result, the group shrinks and may
and change strategies, or at least that they might eventually disappear. Several kinds of external
have done that only as needed rather than at any problems are possible. For example, a group may
particular point in time. lose support from stakeholders, who withdraw
There has been considerable research on how resources that the group needs to survive. Or a
members react just before a group dissolves that group may antagonize authorities or competitors,
was always expected to dissolve. Some of this who decide that it ought to be weakened or even
work was summarized in a 1977 article by Bruce destroyed. Paradoxically, attacks from outsiders
Tuckman and Mary Ann Jensen. They proposed often backfire—according to K. L. Dion, group
that a new stage of group development (“adjourn- members naturally resent such attacks and react by
ing”) be added to the four stages already proposed becoming more cohesive and working harder to
by Tuckman (forming, storming, norming, and keep the group alive.
performing). Much of the work that Tuckman and Whether a group’s problems are internal or
Jensen reviewed involved counseling or therapy external, they may not always be clear to group
groups, but other researchers, such as Joann members. A process of problem identification,
Keyton and James Krantz, have studied reactions described by Richard Moreland and John Levine,
to the impending dissolution of work groups, like is often required. A problem must first be detected
those embedded in organizations that are going and diagnosed, then the group must develop pos-
out of business. Some common themes can be sible solutions for it, and finally the “best” solu-
found in all of this work. People in groups that are tion must be chosen and implemented. Research
about to dissolve struggle to complete whatever suggests that groups do not do any of these very
group tasks remain, but that is often difficult, in well—they are often slow to detect problems and
part because they feel sad, discouraged, and anx- may diagnose problems incorrectly. As for devel-
ious about the future. Special events (e.g., parties) oping solutions, many groups decide that the only
may be held, at which group members reminisce solution needed is to simply keep on doing what
about the past, exchange contact information so they have been doing, but with more intensity.
330 Group Ecology

And even when groups admit the need for change, categorize themselves as members. That is either a
they often prefer to “borrow” solutions for their comforting or a disturbing prospect, depending on
problems (solutions that have been used before, by the group.
themselves or other groups) rather than trying to
develop new solutions. Borrowed solutions, of Richard L. Moreland
course, do not always “fit” the problems they are See also Categorization; Group Boundaries; Group
meant to solve. Finally, when groups try to choose Cohesiveness; Group Development; Group Formation;
the best solution for a problem, they often limit Schisms; Social Identity Theory
their options to just a few alternatives, even when
more solutions are available.
These and other mistakes force many groups to Further Readings
cycle back through the process of problem identi-
Dion, K. L. (1979). Intergroup conflict and intragroup
fication repeatedly, wasting time and energy. This
cohesiveness. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.),
contributes (along with several other factors) to a
The social psychology of intergroup relations
general trend toward failure. Large problems often (pp. 211–224). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
cannot be solved, and small problems frequently Gersick, C. J. G. (1988). Time and transition in work
grow larger and larger, until they cannot be solved teams: Toward a new model of group development.
either. Many groups that never expected to dis- Academy of Management Journal, 31, 9–41.
solve thus reach at some point the realization that Harris, S. G., & Sutton, R. I. (1986). Functions of
they will soon dissolve. parting ceremonies in dying organizations. Academy
When that point has been reached, some of the of Management Journal, 29, 5–30.
activities and emotions described earlier (for peo- Keyton, J. (1993). Group termination: Completing the
ple who expect their groups to dissolve) are likely study of group development. Small Group Research,
to occur again, but with two differences. First, 24, 84–100.
members of these groups want to understand why Krantz, J. (1985). Group process under conditions of
their groups are dissolving. What went wrong? organizational decline. Journal of Applied Behavioral
Who is to blame? Could anything have been done Science, 21, 1–17.
to preserve the group, and if so, then why was it Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (1992). Problem
not done? Considerable sense-making activity thus identification by groups. In S. Worchel, W. Wood, &
occurs among members, much of it involving attri- J. Simpson (Eds.), Group process and productivity
butions for the failure of the group. Outsiders are (pp. 17‑48). Newbury Park, CA.: Sage.
likely to be blamed, if that makes any sense at all, Tuckman, B. W., & Jensen, M. A. C. (1977). Stages of
but if not, then leaders and other high-status mem- small-group development revisited. Group and
bers of the group are targeted. A second difference Organization Management, 2, 419–427.
is emotional in nature. Besides feeling sad, discour- Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D.,
& Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social
aged, and anxious about the future (like people
group: A self-categorization theory. Malden, MA:
who expect their groups to dissolve), members of
Blackwell.
these groups often feel angry as well—not only
with others but often with themselves. That anger
can sometimes leads to aggression.
Group Ecology
Conclusion
Ecology is a branch of biology that analyzes the
Maybe the issue of group dissolution is less impor- relationship between an organism and the setting
tant than it seems. Social identity theorists have where it lives. Groups can be analyzed in this
long argued that a group exists and can influence way too. Every group occupies some setting, and
people’s behavior whenever those people simply no group can be fully understood without analyz-
think about themselves as group members. If that ing that setting. Analyses of the settings that
is correct, then a group could survive almost indef- groups occupy reveal a variety of environmental
initely, so long as people remember the group and factors, ranging from the physical to the social to
Group Ecology 331

the temporal. Although researchers usually study Gerald Salancik and Jeffrey Pfeffer in a 1978 pub-
the effects of environmental factors on groups, lication, have argued that various social processes
attempts by groups to control those factors are can influence workers’ opinions about whether
sometimes studied as well. That is, a setting can their jobs are interesting, their salaries are adequate,
be both a cause and an effect of group activities. and so forth. For example, members of work
groups may call attention to some factors more
than others, evaluate some factors more positively
Physical Environments
than others, “explain” why things are the way that
The physical environments of groups have been they are now, or predict whether and when things
especially interesting to researchers. One popular might get better or worse. It would not be surpris-
research area is crowding. The effects of crowding ing, then, if judgments about the work environ-
on groups are studied in residential areas, college ment were affected in these ways as well.
dormitories, and prisons, as well as laboratories. The computerization of offices has led research-
As people feel more crowded, they exhibit greater ers to study the impact of technology on work-
stress, worse performance (especially on more groups. A wide variety of computer systems have
complex tasks), and more negative social relations. been studied, including (a) simple word-processing
These effects are believed to be mediated by several or accounting programs; (b) complex collaborative
factors, including loss of control, cognitive over- writing/editing programs; (c) electronic mail, bul-
load, and behavioral constraints. Some researchers letin boards, and chat rooms; and (d) support sys-
have found that groups, rather than being the rea- tems for group decision making. E-mail has been
son why people feel crowded, can sometimes pro- studied most often. The evidence suggests e-mail
vide solutions to crowding problems. In a crowded can affect workgroups in several ways, such as
dormitory, for example, a friendship group might reducing overall communication, equalizing partici-
form and “take over” several rooms or a lounge pation levels, weakening status systems, emphasizing
area. This could restore group members’ sense of informational rather than normative influence,
control, reduce their cognitive overload, and and encouraging deviance. There is little evidence
weaken some of the constraints on their behavior. that e-mail improves group productivity.
A related area of research involves groups that The research described so far has focused on
work in “exotic” environments, such as outer how the physical environment can affect a group.
space, underground, underwater, or at the poles. But there are also several ways in which a group
These environments are generally dangerous, con- might try to control its physical environment.
fining, and impoverished in terms of stimulation. Some groups, for example, have the resources and
Common responses by groups to such environ- mobility to seek out pleasant environments or
ments include increased cohesion, greater pressure avoid unpleasant ones. And some groups can alter
on members to conform, and the development of their environments in ways that make them more
strong leadership. Groups apparently adapt in these pleasant. Finally, it is often possible for a group to
ways to eliminate or control any problems that are interpret its environment in ways that make it
internal to the group, so that the group’s external seem more pleasant.
problems can be handled more effectively. Few researchers have studied how groups move
Another area of research on physical environ- from one environment to another. A more popular
ments involves groups that work in factories or focus of research is on how groups try to alter their
offices. Underlying this research is the assumption environments. Much of this research involves terri-
that working conditions affect job satisfaction, toriality. Many groups, such as youth gangs, mark
which in turn affects how productive workers are. territories and then defend them against outsiders.
Temperature, lighting, floor space, noise, and pro- Primary territories, which are owned by groups and
visions for privacy have all been shown to affect used by them often (e.g., family homes), are the ones
workers, but individual reactions to such factors most likely to be marked and defended, but second-
may well be shaped by groups. Judgments about ary and public territories are sometimes treated that
working conditions are often made collectively, way as well. Secondary territories (e.g., a corner bar
rather than individually. Several theorists, including or certain tables in a dormitory cafeteria) are not
332 Group Ecology

owned by groups, but are used often by them. These reactions vary with characteristics of both
Public territories (e.g., a picnic table, camping space, the group and the invader. For example, a larger
or spot on the beach) are neither owned nor used group, or one whose members have higher external
often, but still may be viewed by groups as their status or are interacting more intensely (e.g., argu-
“possessions” for periods of time. Some groups also ing), is less likely to be invaded and will react more
apportion their primary territory among members, negatively if its space is invaded. And if situational
usually on the basis of status. This occurs in families constraints (e.g., a narrow hallway) “force” some-
(e.g., mothers and fathers “own” different parts of one to invade a group, or the invader has a higher
the house), work groups (e.g., the boss has an office external status, or apologizes for his or her misbe-
with lots of space, windows, and special furnish- havior, then a group is likely to react less negatively
ings), and even college classrooms (e.g., good stu- to a violation of its space.
dents often sit toward the front and center and poor A second type of research on group spaces
students often sit toward the back and sides). involves deflection studies. Imagine an area in
Territoriality is alleged to serve several purposes which sight lines prevent people from seeing a
for groups. A territory could help a group to group until they are almost upon it. For example,
(a) protect valuable resources, (b) improve living/ a group may be doing something in an alcove
working conditions, (c) gain a sense of privacy, located just off a hallway. This hides the group for
(d) control social interactions, (e) become more a while from people walking down the hall, until
cohesive, and (f) express a social identity. And they come close enough to discover that the group
when certain members take or are given special is there. If “group spaces” indeed exist, then a
areas of a group’s territory for their own, they deflection ought to occur in these situations—the
could enjoy some of these same benefits at a more people walking by should change their course sud-
personal level. However, there is little evidence denly, as though they were “bouncing” off a kind
that territoriality actually produces benefits like of force field. This is exactly what happens, and
these for groups or their members. some of the same individual and group variables
Although group territories are usually fixed in that affect behavior in invasion studies operate in
space, it may be possible for groups to create por- deflection studies and with similar effects.
table territories that can be transported from one A few theorists have tried to analyze how
location to another. There is considerable research groups interpret their physical environment. For
on the “personal spaces” of individuals—invisible example Daniel Stokols argued in a 1981 paper
“force fields” that people carry around with them that when a group has occupied a place for a long
in order to buffer themselves from the world. time and conducted many activities there, that
When someone “invades” another person’s space, place will acquire special meanings that become
that person is likely to back away until the space is shared among members. Those meanings may be
restored, and if the invader does the same thing functional, motivational, or evaluative and can
again, then the person may well react angrily. Do produce place dependence and other important
“group spaces” exist too, and if so, then are they consequences. Place dependence means that mov-
like the personal spaces of individuals? Two types ing the group to another place, even one that seems
of research suggest that the answer to both ques- to offer similar or better resources, can be very
tions is “yes.” unsettling to the group and might cause unforeseen
First, invasion studies examine how groups react and unwelcome changes in its structure, dynamics,
when outsiders try to pass through them (e.g., or performance. For example, moving a family
someone walks through the middle of a group of from one house to another might alter the relation-
several people talking together in the hallway). ship between a husband and wife or the relation-
Research has shown that outsiders try to avoid ships between parents and their children.
doing this, and when it must be done, they seem
embarrassed and may even apologize to the group,
Social Environments
as if realizing they have misbehaved. The group, in
turn, is likely to be annoyed and may glare at the The social environments of groups have been stud-
intruder or say something hostile to him or her. ied less often. The most popular research area is
Group Ecology 333

clearly intergroup relations. Several other entries in which he or she belongs. This phenomenon occurs
this Encyclopedia are about intergroup relations often in families. For example Urie Bronfenbrenner
and related issues, so there is little need to explore in a 1986 publication noted that child develop-
that topic here. A few points are worth noting, ment, which seems to occur primarily within a
however. First, many researchers seem to assume family, can also be influenced by other groups to
that groups relate to one another in a social vac- which children and their parents belong. Problems
uum. Usually, only two groups are studied, and at work that parents experience, for example, may
they have no connections to one another. Yet be brought home by them, causing them to neglect
nearly all groups are bound together in some way, or even mistreat their children. And peer groups to
because they share members, have developed which children belong may lead them to misbe-
friendship ties that cross group boundaries, or are have, causing their parents to become angry and
embedded in the same social network. Also, other mistrusting. Sometimes two groups overlap so
groups or individuals often intervene in intergroup much that they are nearly the same group. Family
relations if they believe that their own outcomes businesses can be both strengthened and weakened,
could be affected. As a result, intergroup relations for example, by the merging of family and business
are usually complex, involving many actors related affairs. What can a parent who runs a business do
to one another in a variety of ways. about a bumbling worker who happens to be a son
Researchers also seem to assume that intergroup or daughter? Family businesses must often develop
relations are nearly always competitive, yet there is special procedures for regulating the family–business
clear evidence of cooperation among groups. boundary.
Sometimes that cooperation is indirect, as when Groups are often influenced by people who are
one group imitates others by importing their pro- not actually members. These people include pro-
cedures or uses other groups for social comparison spective and ex-members, friends and relatives,
purposes. More direct forms of cooperation are customers and clients, and enemies. An “outsider”
possible too, as when groups exchange valuable can, for example, sometimes change a group’s per-
resources, form alliances to attain common goals, formance, as when a sports fan cheers for the home
or merge to form new groups. These and other team and/or mocks the visiting team during a big
cooperative relations among groups often emerge game, thereby helping the home team to win that
in the context of groups having shared superordi- game. Outsiders can also change the atmosphere
nate goals that cannot be achieved by working in within a group, as when a lone woman enters a bar
isolation or in competition. containing only male patrons. More direct forms of
There are, of course, other areas of research on influence are also possible, as when people are
the social environments of groups. One of them recruited into new groups by their friends, or some-
involves groups embedded in organizations. Most one persuades a person to leave his or her current
of this research focuses on formal work groups group and join that person’s group instead.
within business organizations. Work groups are Finally, all groups are embedded within a cul-
often shaped by the organizations in which they ture, whether it be national or regional. At least
operate. For example, work groups in organiza- some of the variability among groups may thus
tions that are failing can adapt to their unfortunate reflect cultural differences, and some of the changes
circumstances. Organizations of all kinds offer groups undergo may reflect cultural trends.
opportunities for informal groups to form and Unfortunately, little research on these matters has
operate as well. In fact, organizations can be viewed been conducted.
as large social networks that link individuals and The research described so far has (again) focused
groups with one another in many different ways. on how the social environment can affect a group.
Another area of research on social environments But groups can and do try to control the social envi-
involves groups that share one or more members. ronments that they occupy. Deborah Ancona has
A single person can belong to several different studied this phenomenon extensively among work
groups. This produces interdependence among groups within business organizations. She believes
those groups, because experiences in one group can that the best groups adapt to their organizational
affect the person’s behavior in all the others to settings through various boundary-spanning
334 Group Ecology

activities, such as negotiation (bargaining for neces- seems to affect the recall of information about the
sary resources), scanning (acquiring valuable infor- task, not the initial encoding of that information.
mation), profile management (impressing powerful Group members under time pressure absorb just as
others), and buffering (defending against current or much information about a task as they would oth-
anticipated attacks). Ancona has found that special erwise, but then later on they become more selec-
roles (e.g., ambassador, scout, guard) associated tive than they otherwise would be in their memories
with these activities develop within many work of that information. Information that seems less
groups. More importantly, Ancona has found that relevant to their goal is likely to be forgotten.
work groups perform better if they carry out more Although time can affect groups in several ways,
boundary-spanning activities, through these roles or groups are not helpless time travelers. Research
in other ways. In fact, she argues that a work suggests that they often try to control their tempo-
group’s success often depends less on what is hap- ral environment. For example, Gregory Janicik and
pening inside the group than on what is happening Caroline Bartel argued in a 2003 publication that
around it. work groups control time through allocation (how
much time should be devoted to achieving various
goals?), scheduling (when must projects relevant to
Temporal Environments
those goals be done?), and synchronization (what
Several other entries in this encyclopedia examine should each group member be working on at a
ways in which time could influence groups (e.g., given moment?). In a study that tested these claims,
the formation, development, and dissolution of they found that when groups spent more time at
groups, and group socialization). So, little more temporal planning, which included allocation,
needs to be said here about those phenomena. scheduling, and synchronization activities, their
There are other ways, however, in which temporal performance improved. Other research on the con-
environments can affect groups. For example, con- trol of time includes work on “temporal orienta-
sider how work groups react to time pressures. tions” in groups (members may focus on the past,
One interesting example of those effects is tempo- present, or future) and work on how groups might
ral entrainment. If a work group is given a specific be strengthened by traditions and periodic rituals.
amount of time to perform a task, then its mem-
bers adjust their behavior to suit whatever time
Conclusion
they have. If the situation changes, so that more or
less time becomes available, then group members The physical, social, and temporal environments in
ought to change their behavior accordingly. But, in which groups operate are clearly important. They
fact, they do not—they keep on working as if the not only influence the groups that occupy them,
original time limit were still in place. Why? Maybe but they are also the targets of group activities
this is a specific example of a more general phe- designed to change them. Yet group environments
nomenon, namely, the difficulty that groups often are rarely salient to groups themselves and some-
have with changing their routines. times not even to observers. They provide a back-
Other interesting work on how time pressure ground to group life, unnoticed because they
affects groups has been reported by Steven Karau surround a group and are always there. They
and Janice Kelly in a 2004 publication. They pro- deserve to be analyzed and studied more often,
posed and tested an “attentional focus” model of however—they may be unobtrusive, but they are
such effects. According to their model, time pres- important.
sure leads group members to focus on a restricted
Richard L. Moreland
range of task cues and to adopt task completion as
their major goal. All this changes how group mem- See also Boundary Spanning; Extended Contact Effect;
bers act toward one another (e.g., less socializing, Families; Group Culture; Group Development; Group
more impatience) and how well they perform their Dissolution; Group Boundaries; Group Formation;
task (e.g., better at tasks for which quantity of Group Socialization; Intergroup Contact Theory;
output is more important, worse at tasks for which Organizations; Social Entrainment; Territoriality;
quality matters more). A narrow focus of attention Virtual/Internet Groups
Group Emotions 335

Further Readings streets to celebrate when their national team


Ancona, D., & Bresman, H. (2007). X-teams: How to advances in World Cup competition. Company
build teams that lead, innovate, and succeed. employees exchange congratulatory hugs when
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. their firm wins an important new contract. On the
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a negative side, people experience irritation or anger
context for human development: Research when they encounter those they perceive as illegal
perspectives. Developmental Psychology, 22, immigrants to their country. And, in all too many
737–742. cases, extreme rage, fear, and hatred directed at an
Harrison, A. A., & Connors, M. M. (1984). Groups in outgroup (a group to which the perceiver does not
exotic environments. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances belong) are driving forces behind pogroms, policies
in experimental social psychology (Vol. 18, of “ethnic cleansing,” and even genocide.
pp. 49–87). New York: Academic Press. Following a brief historical overview of the
Janicik, G. A., & Bartel, C. A. (2003). Talking about study of emotions and their relationship to group
time: Effects of temporal planning and time awareness memberships, this entry will discuss research find-
norms on group coordination and performance. ings in two distinct areas: (1) emotions that people
Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 7, experience in individual encounters with members
122–134. of other groups and (2) emotions that people expe-
Karau, S. J., & Kelly, J. R. (2004). Time pressure and rience when they categorize or think of themselves
team performance: An attentional focus integration. In as a group member.
B. Mannix, M. Neale, & S. Blount (Eds.), Research on
managing groups and teams: Time in groups
(pp. 185–212). Oxford, UK: Elsevier. Historical Perspective
Kelly, J. R. (1988). Entrainment in individual and group
The exposure of Nazi atrocities in the immediate
behavior. In J. E. McGrath (Ed.), The social
aftermath of World War II sparked a research
psychology of time: New perspectives (pp. 89–110).
focus on the psychological origins of prejudice,
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Krantz, J. (1985). Group process under conditions of
which one influential perspective traced to intense
organizational decline. Journal of Applied Behavioral inner psychodynamic conflicts resulting in an
Science, 21, 1–17. “authoritarian personality.” This perspective
Salancik, G., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information focused on affective processes resulting in extreme
processing approach to job attitudes and task design. hatred for outgroups—in other words, the psy-
Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 224–253. chology of the extreme bigot. These emotions were
Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1991). Connections: New ways seen as irrational, targeted at convenient outgroups
of working in the networked organization. (as the Nazis targeted the Jews) without any basis
Cambridge: MIT Press. or justification in actual intergroup experience.
Sundstrom, E. (1986). Workplaces: The psychology of However, this line of research was criticized on
the physical environment in offices and factories. both conceptual and methodological grounds, and
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. by the 1960s psychology as a whole began to
Taylor, R. B. (1988). Human territorial functioning: An undergo a “cognitive revolution,” with theories
empirical, evolutionary perspective on individual and stressing information processing rather than emo-
small group territorial, cognitions, behaviors, and tion and motivation. At the same time, research
consequences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University attention shifted from the rare and abnormal char-
Press. acteristics of the extreme bigot to the more “nor-
mal” prejudices that (all too obviously) are common
in large numbers of ordinary people. Influential
perspectives in this period stressed that prejudice
Group Emotions often resulted from conformity to the norms of
one’s own ingroup or from stereotypes (socially
Many of the strongest emotions that people experi- shared beliefs) about negative characteristics of the
ence are related to events that affect social groups. outgroup. Emotions played little obvious role in
Soccer fans throughout a country pour into the these models.
336 Group Emotions

Beginning in the 1980s, research interest turned that is culturally dominant) can become irritated or
once again toward emotions, with a focus on annoyed when outgroup members speak a differ-
people’s immediate experience in intergroup ent language, follow different cultural customs, or
encounters. Negative feelings such as anxiety and otherwise violate the ingroup’s cherished and sym-
irritation were found to be provoked by encoun- bolically important norms and expectations. In
ters with others who are culturally different or extreme cases, these feelings of discomfort can fuel
belong to unfamiliar or disliked groups, as described demands that outgroup members put aside all ele-
below. Finally, in the 1990s researchers began to ments of their own cultures and assimilate to the
link emotions and group memberships in a more majority, even in relatively innocuous areas of dif-
direct way, assuming that particular emotions can ference such as clothing styles.
be experienced when people simply think of them- Negative feelings in intergroup interactions can
selves as members of particular groups and not also arise from the negative images and stereotypes
only in face-to-face intergroup encounters. In these of an outgroup that people absorb over a lifetime
more recent views, emotions related to group through socialization as well as from the media
memberships are no longer seen only as irratio- and the popular culture. Many individuals do not
nally driven by deep underlying personality con- consciously acknowledge these negative thoughts
flicts. Instead they are seen as more or less adaptive because they conflict with more explicit egalitarian
and understandable, arising from such factors as attitudes, but this nonconscious conflict still has
conflicts or competition between groups, cultural effects: Like intergroup anxiety, suppressed con-
differences, or lack of familiarity and experience flict can disrupt thoughts and feelings and interfere
with cross-group interaction. In other words, emo- with positive social interaction.
tions are normal, and any of us is likely to experi- Finally, some people may explicitly recognize
ence them when reacting to members of an that they have negative feelings or stereotypic
outgroup. Thus, emotional responses to groups are thoughts about outgroup members they encounter
not the sole property of a few extreme, irrationally and feel guilty or upset about having such thoughts
motivated bigots. or feelings. Again, the result of these self-directed
negative emotions may be disruption of social
interaction.
Emotions in Individual
This discussion has focused on negative emo-
Encounters With Outgroup Members
tions, which are frequently part of intergroup
When people interact with members of outgroups, interaction, but positive emotions can also occur
they may experience the negative emotion of inter- and in fact can lead to reductions in prejudice, as
group anxiety stemming from unfamiliarity with will be discussed later.
the group, lack of knowledge about how to behave,
or fear of unintentionally giving offense. This
Emotions Based on
anxiety can disrupt the smooth flow of interaction,
Identification With a Group
producing a self-fulfilling prophecy. Notably, peo-
ple who experience intergroup anxiety may attempt In a number of ways, emotions can be experienced
to avoid interacting with outgroup members. In when people simply think of themselves as mem-
fact, it is generally true that negative emotions bers of a particular group, even without specific
about the outgroup motivate people to avoid inter- intergroup contact or interaction. As in the exam-
group encounters. Intergroup anxiety is special in ple mentioned earlier, people often feel positive
that the tendency to avoid is not motivated by emotions of joy or pride when their nation, sports
prejudice in the usual sense (dislike or antipathy team, or other group achieves a success or positive
for the outgroup) but by relatively benign social outcome. In such circumstances people tend to
motives, such as desires for the interaction to go stress their connection with the group, for example
smoothly and to avoid appearing prejudiced. by referring to it as “we” or by wearing clothing
A second source of negative feelings about out- with team logos or colors.
group members is simple cultural difference. Identifying with a group can make events that
Members of one group (especially a majority group affect another individual group member (not only
Group Emotions 337

the group as a whole) emotionally relevant to a are related to those groups’ structural positions in
perceiver. Consider how you would feel on hearing society. For a perceiver who occupies the societal
that another member of your religion, nation, or “mainstream,” some groups are regarded as
other significant group had been negatively and friendly allies and as high in status or competence,
unfairly treated by the authorities in some far-off resulting in feelings of respect and admiration.
place. Although the event does not affect you per- Other groups are friendly but low in status and
sonally in any way, if your common group mem- competence (such as the elderly or disabled), and
bership with the victim is salient, you may react elicit feelings of sympathy and pity. Conversely,
with unhappiness and anger. groups that are regarded as dangerous competitors
The underlying reason that people feel emo- rather than allies, and as high in status and compe-
tions, whether positive or negative, on the basis of tence, are responded to with envy—this has tradi-
group membership is that an important group tionally been the case for Jews. And competitive or
becomes part of the psychological self, an aspect of threatening groups that are low in status, such as
social identity. As a result, any event or situation drug addicts or people on welfare, are viewed with
that impinges on the group—a success or failure, disgust. These emotional responses to groups of
threat, or hopeful outlook—can generate emo- each type (allies/competitors, high/low status) in
tional responses just as if the situation were directly turn have implications for the ways people prefer
relevant to the personal self. So someone can feel to act toward those groups.
great when his or her team wins because the team One theoretical perspective has been developed
identification is part of the self, even though the specifically around the idea that emotions can be
perceiver personally did not score a single goal. rooted in group memberships. Intergroup emotions
Or, a person can feel threatened by discrimination theory holds that when people identify with a
against a fellow group member because the group group they tend to appraise objects or events in
is threatened, even though the individual is person- terms of their implications for the ingroup (rather
ally unaffected by the remote event. People can than for the individual self). As a result, emotions
even feel guilty about actions of their group in can be experienced with regard to the group mem-
which they have had no personal participation, for bership or social identity, and like any emotions,
example, events in a nation’s colonial past that they will contribute to desires or tendencies to act
took place hundreds of years before the individual in specific ways. The resulting feelings and behav-
was even born. iors will be differentiated rather than simply nega-
An evolutionary perspective sheds light on this tive in character. Thus, people might view one
phenomenon by assuming that (a) emotions are threatening outgroup with anger and feel desires to
generally functional and adaptive in directing confront or attack them, while another rival group
responses to threats and (b) because humans is viewed with fear, which generates desires to
evolved in group living situations, emotions are escape or avoid them. Research has confirmed
likely to be sensitive to group-level as well as these and other predictions of the theory.
individual-level threats and dangers. This perspec- Most of this discussion of emotions based on
tive predicts that people have a built-in readiness group identification has involved emotional
to respond with distinct emotions not only to responses to specific events or objects (an ingroup
threats to themselves (e.g., threats of physical victory or a threatening outgroup, for instance).
harm or theft of personal resources) but also Research inspired by intergroup emotions theory
threats to their group (e.g., threats to the stability has found that people associate more general or
of the group’s status hierarchy, to group-defining chronic emotional feelings with particular group
beliefs or symbols, or to the clarity of group memberships. These are feelings such as anxiety,
boundaries). Outgroups may thus elicit negative irritation, pride, discouragement, and so on that
reactions because they are perceived as posing are not direct responses to any particular objects
group-level threats, even if the individual perceiver or events, but rather more general emotional feel-
is in no way personally threatened. ings tied to particular group identities. So people
Another viewpoint holds that the specific emo- might feel high levels of pride when they think of
tions that people feel in response to societal groups themselves as citizens of their nation, or anger
338 Group Emotions

when thinking of their political party membership, people see the other simultaneously as an individ-
even if neither of these emotions is especially char- ual and as a member of the group. These findings
acteristic of them when thinking of themselves as regarding the effects of intergroup contact reinforce
individuals. For positive emotions such as pride, the importance of emotional processes as contribu-
satisfaction, and happiness, higher levels of these tors to intergroup relations in general.
more general or chronic group emotions are expe- Several important future directions for investi-
rienced by those who identify more strongly with gation in the area of group emotions can be identi-
a valued ingroup. General group emotions also fied. Research in this area has relied almost
relate to people’s general behavioral tendencies completely on self-reports of emotions, leaving
toward the ingroup and outgroups, such as desires unanswered questions about how “real” or deep
to affiliate with and support the ingroup or to group-based emotional experiences may be.
avoid or confront outgroups. In sum, just as indi- However, limited evidence to date suggests that
vidual-level emotions can be either acute responses group-based emotions have many of the same con-
to specific objects or events (such as fear at the sequences as conventional individual-level emo-
sight of a wasp) or more general, chronic emo- tions, including biasing effects on cognitive
tional or mood states (such as happiness, depres- processes, physiological responses, and activation
sion, or anxiety), so also can group emotions can patterns in emotion-related brain regions. Multiple-
be acute or chronic. Both types of group emotions method investigations will be able to clarify the
are meaningfully related to people’s attitudes and relative roles of conscious thoughts, affective pro-
behaviors toward ingroups and outgroups. cesses, facial expressions, and the like in contribut-
ing to the totality of an emotional episode.
Although emotions are conventionally thought
Related Topics and New Directions
of as automatic and uncontrollable, phenomena
Although negative emotions most often arise in that just “happen” to people, recent research has
situations of intergroup conflict or competition, begun to investigate the ways people intentionally
positive emotions can also occur in intergroup situ- manage and regulate their emotions. Do people
ations, and they can be important in reducing regulate group emotions in the same ways as indi-
prejudice. Specifically, for over half a century the vidual emotions? Does the fact that group emo-
idea that personal, friendly contact across group tions are socially shared—experienced in consensus
lines can reduce prejudice has been tested and con- with other members of the ingroup—make them
firmed. It is often assumed that the reason is that more difficult to regulate? Since group emotions
contact helps debunk inaccurate negative stereo- are based on psychological identification with the
types about the outgroup, which in turn clears the group in the first place, are shifts in group identifi-
way for prejudice to diminish. In contrast, the real cation viable strategies for emotion regulation in
story appears to be that friendly contact produces some instances? That is, might people choose not
changes in emotions—more positive and less nega- to identify with a group if membership regularly
tive feelings about the individual outgroup member produced negative feelings of guilt, irritation, or
and hence the group as a whole—rather than discouragement? These questions have scarcely
changes in stereotypic beliefs. Evidence for this idea begun to be addressed, although knowledge about
includes the fact that contact produces larger emotion regulation might suggest new strategies
changes in affective measures of prejudice than in for changing emotionally based prejudiced reac-
cognitive beliefs such as stereotypes. Some theorists tions to outgroups.
have been concerned that friendly contact with an Finally, conventional perspectives on prejudice
individual outgroup member might be relatively and stereotypes include the idea that these phe-
unlikely to reduce prejudice toward the group as a nomena are highly stable and difficult to change or
whole because the outgroup friend would be seen reverse. In contrast, emotions are labile, shifting
as exceptional or unrepresentative of the negatively rapidly over time periods of minutes if not sec-
viewed group. However, friendship with an out- onds. This observation suggests that further exam-
group member does reliably decrease prejudice ination of the role of emotions in prejudice and
toward the group as a whole, suggesting that intergroup behavior might reveal ways that these
Group Formation 339

phenomena vary on short time scales, rather than of people into more enduring new collectives, and
remaining stable over months or years. the deliberate assembly of new groups by powerful
outsiders. Behavioral coordination among two or
Eliot R. Smith and Diane M. Mackie more individuals creates an ephemeral acting
group. In more persistent groups that come together
See also Intergroup Anxiety; Intergroup Contact Theory;
Intergroup Emotions Theory; Prejudice; Self- over multiple interactions, the forming process
Categorization Theory; Self-Fulfilling Prophecy; Social establishes the roles, norms, and boundaries that
Identity Theory; Symbolic Racism constitute group structure. Structure is a feature of
standing groups, to which members continue to
belong even when the group is not assembled for
Further Readings
action. Structures established during group forma-
Cottrell, C. A., & Neuberg, S. L. (2005). Different tion guide behavior when members assemble and
emotional reactions to different groups: a reassemble over time.
sociofunctional threat-based approach to “prejudice.” In standing groups, successful group formation
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, creates psychological bonds between members and
770–789. the group. When groups are deliberately assem-
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). bled, as when a teacher assigns students to project
A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: groups or a manager recruits employees for a com-
Competence and warmth respectively follow from mittee, choices about group size, membership, and
perceived status and competition. Journal of task structure help determine how effectively
Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902. group members will work together. The formation
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (1986). The aversive
process is more challenging when we are put
form of racism. In J. F. Dovidio & S. L. Gaertner
together in configurations that differ from those
(Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp.
that emerge spontaneously and to which our psy-
61–90). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
chology is adapted.
Mackie, D. M., Maitner, A. T., & Smith, E. R. (2009).
Intergroup emotions theory. In T. D. Nelson (Ed.),
Handbook of prejudice, stereotyping, and Acting Group Formation
discrimination (pp. 285–308). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum. Since the 1950s, research by biologists and social
Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (1985). Intergroup scientists has revealed how bands of social pri-
anxiety. Journal of Social Issues, 41, 157–175. mates typically feed, travel, or sleep together in
Tropp, L. R., & Pettigrew, T. F. (2005). Differential small, temporary, shifting collectives that may
relationships between intergroup contact and affective form in seconds or minutes and dissolve shortly
and cognitive dimensions of prejudice. Personality and thereafter. Similar types of ephemeral groups are
Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1145–1158. evident throughout human societies. We readily
Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., perceive people as belonging to a group when they
& Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social act together, especially if they also look alike and
group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, UK: are physically close together. Despite their tran-
Blackwell. sient nature, short-lived groups that meet only
Yzerbyt, V. Y., Dumont, M., Wigboldus, D., & Gordijn, once can still be psychologically meaningful.
E. (2003). I feel for us: The impact of categorization Ostracism research, for example, has documented
and identification on emotions and action tendencies. the distress people feel when they are excluded
British Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 533–549. from an ephemeral group, even when the benefit of
inclusion (e.g., sharing in a game of ball passing to
pass the time in a waiting room) seems trivial.
Perception of common threat is one of the
Group Formation strongest triggers for spontaneous group forma-
tion, as seen in World War II London, for exam-
Group formation includes the short-lived emer- ple, when people preferred to congregate in
gence of ephemeral groups, the self-organization subway tunnels rather than use small private
340 Group Formation

shelters. Social psychology experiments in the Self-Organization of New Standing Groups


1950s and 1960s also demonstrated that people
anticipating unpleasant events seek out the com- When the same people repeatedly come to one
pany of others facing the same threat. In addition another’s aid, this indicates not just a momen-
to defensive solidarity, ephemeral groups may tary coalition but a more enduring alliance—a
emerge to exploit resources unavailable to indi- standing group with members, rather than sim-
viduals, to share and discuss information, to enjoy ply a set of people interacting. Support cliques—
social activities, and to tackle challenges beyond small, tight-knit groups whose members interact
the scope of a single person. A barn raising, a intensively and rely upon one another for costly
pickup basketball game, a clump of people gossip- assistance—tend to average around five people.
ing, and a search party are examples. The people Sympathy groups, which can also be counted on
involved are drawn together based on shared or for support but involve relationships that are not
complementary needs and cooperate to gain as close or demanding, are typically larger, in the
mutual benefits. When the needs are met or the range of 12 to 15 people. Standing support and
benefits cease, the group dissolves. sympathy groups balance out costs, benefits, and
Coalition formation, which occurs when two or risks not only across people but also across time,
more individuals temporarily join forces to gain an and rely on the strength of the bonds among
advantage, is a particularly well-studied form of members to ensure that members’ needs are met.
ephemeral group that is ubiquitous among humans People also organize into standing work groups
and chimpanzees. Coalitions generate consider- to tackle ongoing projects. Musicians form
able social complexity by making power and sta- bands, entrepreneurs launch new businesses, and
tus dependent not just on individual size and neighbors form community watch groups. When
strength but also on the ability to recruit support forming project groups, people tend to seek out
from others, a vital defensive resource. In social others whom they already know, who are similar
primate populations, support can be solicited demographically, and whose competence they
through vocalizations, facial expressions, and ges- trust.
tures such as reaching out a hand to solicit assis- The formation of durable new groups occurs
tance. By observing coalitions that form in public, via social integration—the strengthening of bonds
individuals can track dynamic changes in social among people—and group identification, which
hierarchies and relative power. According to the creates a bond between a person and a group. The
“social brain” hypothesis, which proposes that the incidence of new group formation is affected by
cognitive demands of complex human social inter- the opportunities and constraints offered by the
action have been an important factor in brain social setting and the needs of potential members.
evolution, attention to coalition tracking has People entering a new social setting, such as a new
helped spur the development of higher mental job or school, will typically have unmet needs for
capacities in primates. belonging, social support, and other resources,
Because people are attracted to similar others, and will be more open to forming or joining new
groups that form spontaneously are more homoge- groups. Opportunities for frequent informal inter-
neous than would be expected by chance. action allow people to discover needs in common
Observations of people in public settings indicate and hence facilitate self-organized group forma-
that such groups are also typically small, between tion. Secondary sources of information from
two and five people. Small group size makes it mutual acquaintances or from social networking
easier for people to hear each other clearly when sites, for example, also help people organize into
conversing, and allows for everyone to have their groups based on shared interests. As successful
say. Small size also enables groups to coordinate groups grow, coordination becomes more diffi-
their behavior in real time (act alike) without nego- cult, so growth tends to spawn new smaller
tiating more formal guidelines for behavior (norms), groups. This can happen either because the group
division of labor and responsibilities (roles), and splinters permanently or because smaller sub-
task specifications (standard operating procedures, groups form their own identity and agenda under
agendas) that larger groups need. the umbrella of a larger organization.
Group Formation 341

The emergence of new opportunities in the envi- and what their own position in the group will be.
ronment encourages self-organized group forma- If the group has a leader, others depend on him or
tion to exploit resources, whether through the her to provide guidance; if not, a member who
formation of new businesses, activity clubs, or shows early initiative may emerge as a leader.
research groups pursuing grant money. The pro- Members try out different actions to see how the
pensity of people to organize themselves into new group responds, allowing them to either discover
political, social, and economic groups both ties or create the boundaries of acceptable action and
communities together and allows them to adjust to reduce uncertainty. Members also explore what
changing circumstances. This can pose a threat to the task or project calls for, seeking to discover,
oppressive regimes and organizations, which may confirm, or create ground rules for how they will
actively counter the tendency of people to join proceed.
forces by limiting opportunities for unsupervised Studies of group development since Tuckman’s
assembly. model was published have supported its validity
for a wide variety of groups, expanded insights
into the forming stage that he described, and also
Formation as a
documented clear exceptions. For example, Susan
Stage of Group Development
Wheelan has stressed the anxiety about inclusion
Group formation creates a new collective entity and acceptance that members feel in the forming
with a boundary that distinguishes outsiders from stage, while they are establishing trust and seeking
members. Because standing groups interact repeat- approval. Members’ tendency to be polite and
edly, they change over time, developing structures avoid conflict makes decisive group action unlikely
not available to newly formed or ephemeral groups at this stage.
that enable them to handle a broader range of Two important exceptions show that groups
projects, to coordinate more effectively in larger need not follow this standard forming process.
groups, and to tackle more complex and difficult Some task groups come together for a single proj-
tasks. ect and disperse when the job is done. They resem-
The duration and difficulty of the formation ble ephemeral groups in their speed of formation,
process depends on the nature, purpose, composi- but complete a task that requires repeated interac-
tion, and expected lifetime of the group. Some new tion over a longer period. Research has shown that
groups hit the ground running. Others require these groups usually get to work immediately,
more time to sort out structure and process issues deferring questioning, exploration, and thorough
before members are capable of working together orientation to task demands until later. Members
effectively. Groups that are small, with a clear goal focus on the task, attend to division of labor and
and a mix of appropriate skills but limited demo- task leadership as the key structural features, and
graphic diversity, can form more quickly than often do not identify strongly with the group.
groups that are larger, more demographically Despite their immediate task focus, these quick-
diverse, and have a poorly defined task. Diversity start groups perform less effectively and efficiently
in background, culture, and associated expecta- in the first half of their time together than during
tions for behavior can be good for group perfor- the second half of the project.
mance in the long run, but culturally diverse Also contrary to the standard model, specialized
groups take longer to form. groups such as flight crews are able to perform
The first systematic observations of group for- complex and challenging tasks effectively within
mation as a stage in group development—systematic minutes of forming. Crews can form quickly
change over time in groups—began appearing in because prior training and extensive knowledge of
the late 1940s and 1950s. In 1965 Bruce Tuckman what their own and other members’ roles require
integrated the findings of 50 studies into what is removes the uncertainty that generates testing and
still the most well-known model of group develop- dependency. Structure does not need to be devel-
ment, with “forming” as the initial stage. Forming oped because it is imported, and crew members fit
involves testing and dependence. Group members together like pre-engineered modules. Even in such
seek information on what is socially appropriate crews, however, a short period spent reaffirming
342 Group Learning

the structure and orienting members to one another


helps the group operate smoothly. Group Learning
When formation fails to bind members together
around a common purpose, most self-organized Groups and teams have increasingly become a
groups will quickly dissolve. Assembled groups critical component in organizations. Indeed, many
whose members are not so free to leave the group organizations rely on groups to carry out both
may, however, continue to meet even without a operational and strategic tasks, such as designing
sense of shared purpose or commitment. Poor and producing new products, delivering services
group design increases the risk of failed formation, to customers, and developing strategies to respond
low commitment, and poor performance. Groups to changes in the environment. While working on
that are too large to coordinate easily, with mem- these tasks, learning at the group level occurs
bers who have conflicting expectations or agendas when teams change what they know or what they
and very different backgrounds, and whose mission do based on the experience they have acquired
is either unclear or not aligned with member needs, working together on the group task.
will have special difficulty completing group forma- The topic of group learning has received
tion and working together for a common purpose. increasing attention from both researchers and
practitioners over the last two decades. Studies
Holly Arrow across a variety of disciplines have addressed
questions such as these: Under what conditions
See also Coalitions; Group Boundaries; Group
Composition; Group Development; Norms; Ostracism;
do groups learn? Which factors inhibit or enhance
Roles; Team Building group learning? Which factors explain differ-
ences in rates of learning across groups and orga-
nizations? The main findings of research
investigating learning at the group level is the
Further Readings
subject of this entry. The entry discusses the
Arrow, H., McGrath, J. E., & Berdahl, J. L. (2000). learning process and its main subcomponents,
Group formation: Assembly and emergence. In Small identifies both antecedents and consequences of
groups as complex systems: Formation, coordination, group learning, and describes why learning in
development, and adaptation (pp. 61–88). Thousand groups is important to organizational effective-
Oaks, CA: Sage. ness. Although many researchers use the terms
Bakeman, R., & Beck, S. (1974). The size of informal groups and teams interchangeably, others differ-
groups in public. Environment & Behavior, 6(3), entiate between the two terms. In this entry, the
378–390. terms team learning and group learning are used
de Waal, F. B. M., & Harcourt, A. H. (1992). Coalitions interchangeably because this terminology does
and alliances: A history of ethological research. In
not affect the findings discussed.
F. de Waal & A. H. Harcourt (Eds.), Coalitions and
alliances in humans and other animals (pp. 1–9).
Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Research on Group Learning
Dunbar, R. I. M. (1993). Coevolution of neocortical size,
group size and language in humans. Behavioral &
Group learning emerged as a distinct research
Brain Sciences, 16(4), 681–735.
topic in the 1990s. Since then it has greatly
McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and expanded in both volume and variety. Research on
performance. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. group learning builds on and complements a
Moreland, R. L. (1987). The formation of small groups. wealth of studies on organizational learning.
In C. Hendrick (Ed.), Group processes review of Organizational learning has been investigated in
personality and social psychology (Vol. 8, many research fields, including organizational
pp. 80–110). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. behavior, industrial engineering, operations man-
Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in agement, and strategic management. Research on
small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), 384–399. both group and organizational learning makes the
Wheelan, S. A. (1994). Group processes: A important distinction that learning at the group or
developmental perspective. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. organizational level is different from individual
Group Learning 343

learning. Not only does group learning involve Learning Curves


learning by individuals, it also involves sharing,
Research on learning curves examines the rate
distributing, and coordinating knowledge across
of improvement associated with experience in both
individuals. If an individual group member has
manufacturing and service operations settings.
learned something, this does not imply that group
This research has robustly demonstrated a link
learning has occurred. For group learning to occur,
between cumulative production experience and
group members must have access to others’ knowl-
operational performance improvement, which is
edge—either because it has been shared with them
measured by cost reduction, quality improvement,
by the relevant individuals or because they know
productivity improvement, or completion time.
that they can access the knowledge by consulting
Although research has shown that performance
the individuals or a repository such as a database
typically improves with experience, it has also
containing that knowledge.
documented enormous variation in the rate at
While group learning is critical to an organiza-
which performance improves. Some groups evi-
tion’s success and survival in a constantly chang-
dence dramatic improvements with experience,
ing environment, assessing it is a challenging task.
whereas others evidence little or no learning.
Two main measures are commonly used to assess
Researchers are beginning to understand factors
group learning: (1) changes in group knowledge
that explain differences in learning rates observed
that occur with experience and (2) changes in
across groups. For example, research has found
group performance that are associated with expe-
that efficiency improvements are enhanced by
rience. Both measurement approaches pose chal-
team stability, knowledge sharing, common own-
lenges. The difficulty with the first measure is that
ership, and codified knowledge. These findings
much of the knowledge group members acquire,
point to the influence of the group context on the
share, and use is not coded in formal documenta-
rate of improvement associated with experience.
tion; is “tacit”; is distributed across members; or
resides in repositories other than individuals (such
Group Context and Group Learning
as routines or technologies the group uses to
accomplish tasks). As for the second measure, A second area of research on group learning
researchers have used changes in the routines the focuses on the importance of group context in
group uses to perform its task or changes in char- affecting the processes and outcomes of group
acteristics of task performance (such as quality learning. Studies in this research stream are mainly
and speed) that occur as the group gains experi- field based (i.e., done in actual work teams) and
ence to measure group learning. Yet, there are investigate how learning processes in groups differ
many factors other than experience that influence based on contextual factors such as the group’s
group performance. Researchers need to account learning climate, leader behavior, and the group
for such factors or control for them in their empir- orientation or goals. Several antecedents of learn-
ical research in order to infer that group learning ing behavior within groups have been identified.
occurred. Among them there are identification with the
Group learning has been investigated in four group, leader behavior, group climate, shared
main streams of research over the last two decades: learning goals and orientation, group structure,
(1) learning curves in manufacturing or service and task characteristics. This work has identified
operations settings, (2) work on group context and important direct effects, such as the influence of
group learning, (3) research on how groups learn context on group learning, as well as variables that
from different types of experience, and (4) small enhance or inhibit the impact of context on learn-
group research on learning, memory, and knowl- ing. For instance, a learning orientation (as con-
edge transfer. While a few attempts at synthesis trasted with a performance orientation) has been
exist across the areas, these research streams have shown to improve performance, but only to a cer-
generally flowed in parallel, with little confluence. tain extent: If taken too far, a learning orientation
There are enormous opportunities for these can actually hurt group performance. Another
research streams to come together and thereby important predictor of group learning is psycho-
increase our understanding of group learning. logical safety, defined as a shared belief that a
344 Group Learning

group is safe for interpersonal risk taking. Research they are working on, of the expertise and skills of
has demonstrated that the effects of team-leader each group member, and of the resources available
coaching and context support on group learning to accomplish the task. Groups reach this shared
behavior are due to the effects of the former vari- understanding by developing transactive memory
ables on psychological safety. systems (TMS), which allow team members to
encode, store, retrieve, and share the different
Types of Experience and Group Learning pieces of information and knowledge group mem-
bers possess. When members know what each
A recent trend in research on group learning is other knows, both individually and collectively,
to characterize experience at a fine-grained level group performance on interdependent tasks is
and to investigate the effects of various types of enhanced. Because of the positive relationship
experience on learning processes and outcomes. found between transactive group memory systems
Work in this area has identified different dimen- and group performance, studies have investigated
sions of experience, such as homogeneous versus what enhances or inhibits the development of TMS
heterogeneous experience and direct versus indi- within groups. This body of research has identified
rect experience. As an example, research has dis- features of the group that positively or negatively
tinguished between learning from direct experience, affect TMS development. For instance, high turn-
defined as learning from interactions within a over has been found to inhibit TMS development,
group, and learning from indirect experience, while high diversity in group members’ expertise
defined as learning by seeking ideas, help, or feed- and communication has been shown to foster TMS
back from outside the group. These distinctions development. Research in this area suggests that
between types of learning are important because storing information and knowledge within groups
different types of learning have different effects on in a coordinated manner is fundamental to learn-
organizational performance variables. For exam- ing processes and leads to better group perfor-
ple, local learning or learning from direct experi- mance on tasks that involve interdependencies
ence has been found to positively influence the among members.
efficiency of group operations and to be responsi- Not only do groups learn directly from their
ble for the effects of group cohesion on efficiency. own experience, they also learn indirectly from the
In contrast, distal learning or learning from indi- experience of other groups. This later form of
rect experience has been found to positively influ- learning has been referred to as knowledge transfer
ence group innovativeness. This stream of research or vicarious learning. Personnel movement (the
can be productively combined with the second transfer of members across groups) is the primary
stream to arrive at a deeper understanding of mechanism through which knowledge transfer has
group learning. Examining how dimensions of been effected in the laboratory, and it has been
experience interact with dimensions of the context shown to be an effective mechanism for transfer-
to affect group learning processes and outcomes is ring knowledge across groups as well as for stimu-
a very promising approach. lating the creation of new knowledge among group
members.
Group Learning, Memory,
and Knowledge Transfer
The Learning Process
A fourth stream of research on group learning
and Its Subcomponents
examines how members of a group learn either
from their own experience or from the experience Group learning occurs through three main subpro-
of other groups, and how they store knowledge in cesses: creating knowledge, retaining knowledge,
the group memory system. Research in this area is and transferring knowledge. Creating knowledge
mainly experimental and is thus able to draw refers to the development of new knowledge or
causal conclusions on the relationships investi- better understandings of existing information with
gated in a controlled laboratory setting. Through the group. For instance, as group members work
experience working together, group members build together, they might acquire more information
a shared understanding and knowledge of the task about each other’s expertise and skills and, as a
Group Learning 345

result, develop new understandings or combine codified in routines than noncodified knowledge.
their knowledge in new ways. Research on this A shared superordinate social identity has also
first subprocess of group learning has investigated been found to facilitate the transfer of knowledge
when characteristics of members influence the gen- between groups.
eration of new knowledge. Diversity in the views
and perspectives represented in the group has been
Group Learning Consequences
found to stimulate knowledge creation, and mem-
ber rotation among groups has been found to have Group learning has important consequences for
similar effects. The creation of knowledge is also both the group and the organization in which the
affected by social networks. Specifically, groups group operates. As mentioned earlier, group learn-
with communication ties or links to other groups ing can enhance group creativity and promote
with different knowledge are more likely to be group performance. Learning within groups is a
creative than are groups with dense internal social key mechanism through which an organization
networks but few ties to external groups. can learn, adapt, and respond to changes in its
The second subprocess of group learning is environment. Thus, group learning can enable the
retaining knowledge, which refers to embedding organization to respond strategically to changes
knowledge in various repositories so that it can and turbulence in the environment. The relation-
persist over time and be reused in the future. For ship between group and organizational learning is
example, knowledge might be embedded in indi- poorly understood, and more research is necessary
vidual members, in routines or task sequences, or to understand how learning at the group level
in member–task networks such as the transactive translates into learning at the organizational level.
memory systems group members develop while Also, little is known about how patterns of group
working together. Depending on where knowledge learning can be created and maintained within an
is embedded, different factors might impair the organization so that different groups can learn in
retention of knowledge. Research has found that their most effective ways but ultimately toward the
turnover is detrimental to a group’s knowledge same organizational goals. Future research shed-
retention when knowledge is embedded in indi- ding light on these questions is warranted and
viduals, especially when the members leaving the could yield important insights for theory and for
group are high-performing individuals. However, practice.
it has been shown that group structures can buffer
Linda Argote and Francesca Gino
groups from the detrimental effects of turnover.
When group members have specialized roles and See also Group Performance; Innovation; Organizations;
procedures exist for accomplishing the task, the Personnel Turnover; Social Networks; Team
impact of turnover is reduced. Embedding knowl- Performance Assessment; Transactive Memory
edge in routines or in repositories such as tools or Systems; Work Teams
artifacts promotes its retention because interrup-
tions in a group’s work are less likely to have det- Further Readings
rimental effects.
Argote, L., Gruenfeld, D., & Naquin, C. (2001). Group
The third subprocess of group learning is learning in organizations. In M. E. Turner (Ed.),
transferring knowledge. Through knowledge Groups at work: Advances in theory and research
transfer, one group is influenced by the experi- (pp. 369–411). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
ence of another. Moving members from one Argote, L., & Todorova, G. (2007). Organizational
group to another has been shown to promote the learning: Review and future directions. In
transfer of both tacit and explicit knowledge. G. P Hodgkinson & J. K. Ford (Eds.), International
Other factors influencing knowledge transfer are review of industrial and organizational psychology
social networks, communication, relationships (pp. 193–234). New York: John Wiley.
between work groups, characteristics of the tasks Bunderson, J. S., & Sutcliffe, K. A. (2003). Management
groups perform, and features of the knowledge team learning orientation and business unit
being transferred. For instance, research has performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88,
shown that it is easier to transfer knowledge 552–560.
346 Group Memory

Edmondson, A. C., Dillon, J. R., & Roloff, K. (2007). Early empirical work on group memory focused
Three perspectives on team learning: Outcome on comparing individuals and groups on memory
improvement, task mastery, and group process. In performance. Similar to findings in other cognitive
J. P. Walsh & A. P. Brief (Eds.), The Academy of domains (e.g., problem solving), multiple studies
Management annals (pp. 269–314). New York: have found that groups recall more information
Psychology Press. than individuals. Many of the early studies tested
Kane, A. A., Argote, L., & Levine, J. M. (2005). a model called truth wins—if one member of the
Knowledge transfer between groups via personnel group can recall a piece of information correctly,
rotation: Effects of social identity and knowledge
the group will recall the information. Actual group
quality. Organizational Behavior and Human
performance tends to be less than this optimal
Decision Processes, 96, 56–71.
model would predict. For relatively simple types of
Liang, D., Moreland, R., & Argote, L. (1995). Group
information (e.g., nonsense syllables, words, etc.),
versus individual training and group performance: The
mediating effects of transactive memory. Personality
groups perform near the truth wins model, but
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 384–393.
typically they do better if at least two members
Reagans, R., Argote, L., & Brooks, D. (2005). Individual recall the information. For more complex types of
experience and experience working together: information (e.g., pieces of evidence for a jury
Predicting learning rates from knowing what to do trial, key pieces of information for a strategic plan-
and knowing who knows what. Management Science, ning team), having more than two group members
51, 869–881. who can recall the information seems important.
Wilson, J. M., Goodman, P. G., & Cronin, M. A. (2007) Thus, although groups remember more than would
Group learning. Academy of Management Review, an average individual, and more than can be
32(4), 1041–1059. remembered by any individual member, their
Wong, S. S. (2004). Distal and local group learning: memory rarely achieves what could be considered
Performance trade-offs and tensions. Organization an optimal level of performance. This entry exam-
Science, 15, 645–656. ines explanations for the superiority of group
memory performance, describes the stages in this
performance, and reviews current research in the
field, including work on transactive memory and
Group Memory shared memory models.

In psychology, memory often has been defined


Explanations for
purely at the individual level. According to this
Superior Group Performance
analysis, memories are stored in various parts of
the brain and are based on experiences and struc- Recent research on group versus individual mem-
tured learning of information. However, more ory performance has focused on three explana-
recent conceptualizations of groups as information- tions for the superior performance of groups:
processing systems have begun to redefine memory information pooling, error correction, and effec-
to include both the group and organizational lev- tive group decision making. Effective group deci-
els. To the degree that memory involves the stor- sion making is defined as integrating all useful
age and retrieval of information, groups and information and avoiding decision errors, so both
larger social aggregates perform and rely on such information pooling and error correction are
processes on a regular basis. Anthropologists have involved. Information pooling suggests that groups
long viewed memory and recall as sociocultural recall more information because individual group
phenomena. The retelling of stories and myths by members recall different pieces of information to
parents and group leaders allows all members to some degree. The nonoverlapping recall across
share the cultural heritage of the group and helps group members allows groups to recall a greater
to reinforce the cultural norms and ideals repre- total number of items relative to any single indi-
sented therein. However, only recently has psy- vidual. Research has generally supported pooling
chology focused on the social or collective nature as one of the factors underlying the individual–
of memory. group difference. Error correction implies that
Group Memory 347

group discussion leads groups to reject incorrect piece of information being recalled likely will vary
items that may have been erroneously recalled by across members due to differential rates of storage
a specific group member. Recent research has con- degradation (forgetting). Research has shown that
firmed that groups do reduce errors, but only if the greater the number of members who recall a
they are allowed to discuss each item. Nominal piece of information, the greater the likelihood that
groups (groups in which each member contributes the group will recall the information when neces-
to the group product but the members are not sary. Thus, information that is shared across group
allowed to interact) produce considerably better members is more likely to be recalled. Unfortunately,
total recall scores than do individuals, but also in information rich environments, greater informa-
increase intrusion errors (items recalled that were tion sharing also involves a greater cognitive load
not part of the initial information to be recalled). for each member (i.e., more information for each
Thus, group discussion seems to be an important member to recall). Research on individual memory
aspect of both error correction and effective deci- consistently has shown that recall probabilities for
sion making by groups. any given item decrease as the number of items
increases. Although the issue is not settled, some
Stages of Group Memory Performance research supports the notion of some partial infor-
mation sharing across members as a good strategy
Group memory performance, much like individual for improving group memory. Having information
memory performance, involves a number of infor- shared by only some group members eases the cog-
mation processing stages. nitive load relative to complete sharing but increases
the probability of group recall relative to no infor-
Attending to and Encoding Information mation sharing. More research is needed on this
Groups must first attend to relevant informa- topic to elucidate the relative trade-offs between
tion and then encode it (i.e., give it meaning and reduced cognitive load and information sharing
relevance to the situation at hand). Because groups across different task domains.
contain multiple members, each with the ability to
encode information, they can encode information Information Retrieval
in different ways. Each group member may encode
a piece of information idiosyncratically based on Retrieval is the final stage of memory. Research
his or her previous information exposure and cur- findings on encoding and storage reflect informa-
rently activated categories. Such idiosyncratic tion retrieval as the final outcome. However, some
encoding may increase the likelihood that a piece research has specifically looked at retrieval at the
of information will be recalled due to many more group level. One aspect of retrieval by a group is
contextual cues that may allow at least one mem- whether the group reaches consensus as to whether
ber to access the encoded information. Groups can a specific piece of information should be consid-
also encode information strategically by assigning ered valid, or an accurate representation of the
certain types of information to specific group initial information. For the group to have retrieved
members, based on their role in the group or their a piece of information, there must be some agree-
specific expertise. Thus, information may not be ment as to whether the information was originally
encoded by every member, and the degree of present or valid. One of the reasons for superior
encoding may vary across group members. performance by groups compared to individuals is
that invalid information will rarely receive enough
support from the group to be included. Similar to
Information Storage
other areas of group performance, majority or plu-
Once encoded, the information must be stored rality processes seem to provide a viable descrip-
in some manner in the group. Much like encoding, tion of the group decision process. Incorrect items
storage can also vary across group members. rarely receive support from a majority of the mem-
Different members may have different information bers and, therefore, are not included in the infor-
demands in terms of the amount of information mation recalled by the group. For correct items,
presented to them. Therefore, the likelihood of a plurality or majority support will almost always
348 Group Memory

lead to inclusion. In addition, occasionally correct of what they know, or metaknowledge. A transac-
minorities will be able to convince incorrect major- tive memory system is defined by distributed
ities in include a correct item. Thus, item correct- knowledge at the cognitive level in conjunction
ness and degree of consensus both play a role in with shared knowledge at the metacognitive level.
group retrieval. Each group member is assumed to have some
A second aspect of group retrieval involves cued unique knowledge that the other members do not
recall in groups. It seems intuitive that recalling have. This allows the group as a whole to store
information in groups could help each member (and retrieve) a greater amount of information
recall more information, because items produced than would be expected with a random distribu-
by other members will cue a particular item that tion of information across individual members.
might not have been recalled without such a cue. However, the unique information held by each
Although there is some evidence the group-level member is only accessible to the group if each
cuing process occurs, it comes with a cost that member knows which group member has that
often overrides the benefit—interference. Although unique knowledge. Thus, the metaknowledge is
hearing information from other group members shared by the group members, while the actual
may cue new items in memory, it can also interfere knowledge is distributed uniquely across the indi-
with ongoing memory processes and prevent items vidual members.
from coming to mind that would have done so There is now a vast amount of evidence that
without the interference. Unfortunately, in most transactive memory systems aid in group and orga-
face-to-face interacting group situations, results nizational memory. For example, married couples
tend to show that group discussion interferes with tend to do better at trivia games than paired
individual memory processes more than it aids strangers, because each member of the couple
them through cuing. However, group members knows which member is better at certain catego-
sometimes remember more after being in an inter- ries of knowledge. Other research has shown that
acting, as opposed to a nominal, group. In addi- teams trained together tend to perform better than
tion, some recent research shows that technology teams composed of members trained individually,
(split-screen computer-mediated interaction) can because the team-level training allows members to
reduce interference and still provide opportunities learn who is good at what. Although groups can
for cuing. be engineered to have a transactive memory sys-
tem, most groups form such memory systems natu-
rally and within a relatively short period of time.
Transactive Memory
Other research has shown that one of the key
The concept that has garnered the greatest amount issues concerning turnover in organizations is that
of research attention in the past two decades is when a team loses a member, some of the unique
transactive memory. Initially hypothesized as a knowledge available to the group is no longer pres-
mechanism for increasing group memory perfor- ent, and the group has to reestablish both the
mance, it quickly became a description of how knowledge and the metaknowledge it needs, and
groups and organizations could, should, and often then ensure that new members learn the metacom-
do structure information storage. A transactive ponents of the transactive memory system.
memory system involves both cognitive and meta-
cognitive knowledge at both the individual and
Shared Mental Models
group or organizational level. Metacognition
involves what people think they know about what Another related area of research relevant to group
they know. Thus, psychology professors may memory involves shared mental models. Groups
know that they have expertise in psychology but working on a particular task often need to share a
no expertise in chemistry. The actual knowledge basic understanding of both the task on which they
they have about psychology and chemistry is work and the group within which they work.
located at the cognitive level, but the fact that they Having all members know what needs to be done,
know that they know more in one area than and who should be doing it, allows them to coor-
another (or at least believe they do) is knowledge dinate their actions to reach their performance
Group Mind 349

goal. The shared task mental model tends to be B. Mullen & G. R. Goethals (Eds.), Theories of group
quite specific to the technology and resource behavior (pp. 185–208). New York: Springer-Verlag.
requirements of the particular task. However, the
shared group mental model almost always involves,
in part, a transactive memory system. Group mem-
bers must know where information is located Group Mind
within the group in order to efficiently access it.
There may be other aspects of the shared mental The “group mind” is one of the most ambiguous,
model of the group (e.g., power relations, the most controversial, and most contested ideas in
importance of each position, the idiosyncrasies in the whole of social thought. It can be traced back
personality of the other members), but transactive to the notion of Atman, or universal soul, in
memory is almost always a key component. ancient Indian thought. In its modern guise, the
Theory and research on group memory in psy- concept derives most directly from German ideal-
chology are relatively recent developments, and ist philosophy, where it denotes a collective con-
there is much left to learn. However, the early sciousness that is separate from and independent
research has demonstrated the importance of of the consciousness of individuals
group memory and has changed the way memory
is conceived in group and organizational settings.
Historical and Philosophical Roots
R. Scott Tindale and Elizabeth Jacobs In broad terms, there are two variants of the con-
See also Collaboration Technology; Group Learning;
cept of group mind. The universalist position, rep-
Group Mind; Group Performance; Socially Shared resented in the work of Hegel, suggests that history
Cognition; Transactive Memory Systems; Work Teams is the reflection of a universal and unitary spirit
(geist) that unfolds according to its own internal
dialectic. Human beings are merely agents of this
Further Readings
geist, and the nature of human society reflects its
state of development. By contrast, the particularist
Basdon, B. H., Basden, D. R., & Henry, S. (2000). Costs position proposes that each group (usually concep-
and benefits of collaborative remembering. Applied tualized as a people or nation) has its own volks-
Cognitive Psychology, 14, 497–507. geist, which unfolds in its own way leading to
Brandon, D. P., & Hollingshead, A. B. (2004). distinctive histories for different peoples. This
Transactive memory systems in organizations. approach is represented in the writings of Johann
Organizational Science, 15, 633–644.
Gottlieb Fichte and Johann Gottfried von Herder,
Hinsz, V. B. (1990). Cognitive and consensus processes in
especially as they responded to the invasion of
group recognition memory performance. Journal of
German lands by Napoleon’s armies. The impor-
Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 705–718.
tance of this context reveals the political nature of
Moreland, R. L. (1999). Transactive memory: Learning
the group mind concept, which in turn is the source
who knows what in work groups and organizations.
In L. L. Thompson, J. L. Levine, & D. M. Messick
of much of the controversy that surrounds it.
(Eds.), Shared cognition in organizations: The Fichte in particular came to view the “true self”
management of knowledge (pp. 3–32). Mahwah, NJ: as the political state rather than the individual.
Lawrence Erlbaum. Individuals are but elements of the state, he
Stewart, D. D., & Stasser, G. (1995). Expert role thought, their interests are wholly subordinate to
assignment and information sampling during collective those of the state—indeed, they have no meaning
recall and decision making. Journal of Personality and or value outside of their relation to the state. The
Social Psychology, 69, 619–628. relationship of individual people to the body poli-
Tindale, R. S., & Sheffey, S. (2002). Shared information, tic is conceptualized as much like the relationship
cognitive load, and group memory. Group Processes of individual cells to the whole human body,
and Intergroup Relations, 5, 5–18. which alone is fully conscious. And just as one
Wegner, D. M. (1987). Transactive memory: A would cut out any collection of cells to save the
contemporary analysis of the group mind. In body, so individuals must always be sacrificed for
350 Group Mind

the political whole. Not surprisingly, then, the the early 20th century; among others, those of
group mind concept has long been denounced as Wilhelm Wundt, Carl Jung, Theodor Geiger, and
an apology for (Prussian) absolutism. Such cri- Alfred Adler. Jung’s system, which (like that of Le
tiques were only intensified by the Nazi usage of Bon) racializes the group mind concept, is especially
volksgeist principles. well known. He believed that identical ideas occur in
members of the same race, independently of any
contact, and that these ideas indicate the existence of
Critics in Social Psychology
a psychic commonality. In the crowd, individuals
Group mind concepts entered the mainstream of experience a sense of “mystical participation” that
social psychology in a two-stage process. First, reflects their unconscious racial identification. Where
over the course of the 19th century, they spread the masses behave, said Jung, archetypes take over.
beyond philosophy to the social and life sciences. Group mind ideas were also highly influential
In particular, the work of Alfred Espinas on bee among the founders of British and American social
communities gave credibility and prestige to such psychology, including William James, William
ideas. Espinas argued that, while bees display indi- Sumner, Edward Ross, and William McDougall.
vidual consciousness, they can also form a special- Indeed, it is the last of these who is most explicitly
ized part of the highly integrated whole, which has associated with the approach through his book,
its own collective consciousness. In this way indi- The Group Mind, first published in 1920. He
vidual consciousness can be seen as a constituent almost immediately regretted this title and referred
part of the consciousness of a higher order unit. to it as a “tactical error.” McDougall rejects the
What is more, the group mind ensures that the notion of “some mental entity that exists over and
cognitive or emotional state of any one element above all individuals comprised in the group.” For
will automatically spread to all others. Espinas him, the notion of a group mind is akin to the
held this to be true even where individuals do not gestalt principle that an understanding of the life
have common parentage. The collective conscious- of the whole must incorporate principles (notably,
ness exists in all parts of the animal kingdom, from of organization) that cannot be arrived at by the
protozoa to humans, in this view. study of the parts alone.
In a second stage, crowd psychologists drew Yet, equally, these systemic principles affect
directly on the work of Espinas and others in for- action through the way that they affect the con-
mulating their own theories. Gustave Le Bon, the sciousness of individual actors. Whatever
most famous of these psychologists, was particu- McDougall’s actual position, his title wrought its
larly influenced by the group mind approach. In baleful effects. Despite his explicit repudiation of
his book The Psychology of Peoples, he suggested Le Bon’s claim that crowds revert to a racial
that different “races” have irreducibly different unconscious, he and Le Bon were and still are gen-
“souls,” which means that they feel and think dif- erally lumped together. As such, they generated a
ferently and cannot comprehend one another. This powerful reaction, and in this respect, even more
idea was then imported into his crowd psychology. than in their own work, they had the most influ-
Le Bon argued that, in everyday life, people may ence on psychology. This is reflected in Floyd
have developed more sophisticated and individual Allport’s foundational text, Social Psychology,
ways of being. However, when submerged in the published in 1924, in large part as a riposte to
mass, all this is stripped away, and people revert to group mind theorists.
the more primitive “racial unconscious.” This Allport makes three claims. First, he dismisses
unconscious provides the ideas and emotions that the notion of a group mind and the notion of a
spread uncontrollably among all crowd members, collective consciousness as the most flagrant form
and it explains why even the most refined of indi- of this “group fallacy.” For Allport, “there is no
viduals can behave like a beast in the crowd. psychology of groups which is not essentially and
Le Bon’s ideas were highly influential, and his entirely a psychology of individuals.” Second, the
use of group mind as a supraindividual level of con- behavior of people in group settings is to be
sciousness was employed as the central explanatory explained entirely in terms of individual tenden-
concept in a whole series of crowd psychologies in cies. This, claims Allport, reflects a scientific
Group Motivation 351

imperative to explain the complex in terms of the See also Collective Movements and Protest; Crowds;
simple, the whole in terms of its parts. Third, he Lewin, Kurt; Nationalism and Patriotism; Self-
argues that any commonalities of social behavior Categorization Theory; Social Identity Theory; Socially
reflect the convergence of individuals who, due to Shared Cognition
similarities of “constitution, training and common
stimulations, are possessed of a similar character.”
Further Readings
Such an approach proved so influential that, 50
years later, Ivan Steiner was forced to ask “what- Allport, F. (1924). Social psychology. Boston: Houghton
ever happened to the group in social psychology?” Mifflin.
Berlin, I. (1996). Kant as an unfamiliar source of
nationalism. In I. Berlin (Ed.), The sense of reality
The Socially Structured (pp. 232–248). London: Chatto & Windus.
Field in the Individual Graumann, C. F. (1986). The individualization of the
social and the desocialization of the individual. In
Both group mind theorists and their individualist C. F. Graumann & S. Moscovici (Eds.), Changing
critics conflate explanandum and explanans conceptions of crowd mind and behavior
(respectively, the phenomenon that requires (pp. 97–116). New York: Springer-Verlag.
explanation and that which explains it). Thus, the Hegel, G. F. (1979). Phenomenology of spirit. New York:
idea of a group mind goes from assuming that Oxford University Press. (Original work published
consciousness must be explained at a group level 1807)
to positing that consciousness exists at a group Le Bon, G. (1947). The crowd. London: Ernest Benn.
level. In retort, individualism goes from denying (Original work published 1895)
group-level consciousness to denying that con- McDougall, W. (1920). The group mind. Cambridge,
sciousness can be explained at a group level. There UK: Cambridge University Press.
has long been another position in social psychol-
ogy, which suggests that consciousness is individ-
ual but, in part at least, requires explanation at a
group and societal level. This was what McDougall
was arguing in his defense of his position. It is
Group Motivation
reflected early on in the work of Leon Festinger on
social norms and in the works of Muzafer Sherif, When people work together on a task (e.g., group
Solomon Asch, and particularly Kurt Lewin. The project for class), they influence each other, mak-
task for Lewin is to address the nature of the ing the group experience different from working
socially structured field within the individual. alone in a number of ways. One important type
Over recent years, such a stance has come of influence involves task motivation, or the
increasingly to influence the social psychology of amount of effort exerted to reach a goal. Because
groups through social identity and self-categorization groups are frequently assembled to complete
theories. They suggest that we act collectively to tasks, much research has been conducted to
the extent that we define ourselves in terms of a explore when and why groups affect their mem-
collective identity. Hence, the behavior of group bers’ motivation.
members cannot be explained without considering After a brief review of research on group moti-
the cultural and historical nature of these identi- vation, this entry summarizes some of the impor-
ties. Equally, these cultural and historical factors tant lessons that have been learned and illustrates
become potent only to the extent that they struc- how these lessons can help us predict when work-
ture the self-understanding of individuals. In short, ing in a group will decrease effort (i.e., motivation
rather than positing a group mind beyond the indi- losses) versus increase effort (i.e., motivation
vidual, or denying any reality to the group, the gains). Moreover, knowledge about group motiva-
task of social psychologists is to investigate the tion can help us make better informed decisions
group in the mind of the individual. about whether individuals or groups should under-
take a task and about how to design and structure
Stephen Reicher group tasks.
352 Group Motivation

History results of these studies can be understood using the


Collective Effort Model, which identifies two sub-
Do people work harder in groups or when alone?
jective judgments that determine group members’
More than a century ago, Max Ringelmann showed
level of motivation. One is how instrumental their
that, for certain tasks, people working in a group
efforts are for reaching a goal, and the other is the
were less productive than the same number of indi-
value of that goal. Motivation is highest when
viduals working alone. Although it was soon well
group members believe their efforts will increase
documented that group performance often differed
the chances of obtaining a goal and when they also
from individual performance, it was not until
value that goal. Motivation decreases if effort is
much later that researchers demonstrated that
not seen as instrumental and/or if group members
these performance differences could be due to
do not place much value on the goal.
changes in task motivation. Given the applied
implications of group motivation, research on this
topic is conducted within several disciplines, includ- Motivation Losses
ing social psychology, industrial/organizational
Group members frequently reduce the amount of
psychology, and organizational behavior. A num-
effort they expend on a task when they are work-
ber of scholars contributed ideas that were instru-
ing together compared to when they are working
mental to advancing knowledge about group
alone. Imagine three brothers doing yard work as
motivation, and their influence is still evident in
a group. Suppose they rake and collect twelve bags
contemporary theory and research.
of leaves in an hour. On average, then, each
brother fills four bags. Motivation loss in the
Studying Group Motivation group would be demonstrated if each brother were
In 1972, Ivan Steiner proposed a valuable set of given an hour to individually rake and bag leaves
ideas for understanding and assessing group moti- and each filled five bags.
vation. Steiner suggested that groups fail to achieve Motivation losses (also known as social loafing)
their potential productivity because of losses in are one reason each brother may accomplish less
coordination and/or motivation. Whereas coordi- when working with others than when working
nation losses occur when group members do not alone. Sometimes these reductions in effort occur
pool their resources and efforts optimally, motiva- in groups because members feel their personal con-
tion losses emerge from reductions in effort. But tributions to the overall group product are not
just how does one determine whether a loss in discriminable from the contributions of others. For
motivation has occurred? example, if the brothers used a division of labor
One approach that has been frequently adopted that assigned each a unique role (e.g., raking, hold-
is to compare the motivation level of a person ing the bag, filling the bag with leaves), effort
working on a task alone to the motivation level of might decline because it would be difficult to make
a group member working on the same task. For comparisons of their relative effort levels, given the
instance, in a classic study by Richard Ingham and distinct nature of their responsibilities. But even if
his colleagues, participants were asked to pull on a the brothers decided not to assign unique roles,
rope either alone or in a group. In the group set- task motivation would still be likely to decline if all
ting, the other group members were positioned the bags of leaves were piled together so that no
behind the participant so they could not be seen, one could discern who did what.
and, unbeknownst to the participant, were Consistent with the Collective Effort Model,
instructed not to pull on the rope. The researchers research shows that motivation in groups also
found that people working alone exerted greater drops when members believe that their efforts will
force during the task than did those who thought have little impact on the group’s success. For
they were working as members of a group. example, if the group is large and its task is dis-
To date, more than 100 studies have been con- junctive (that is, requires that only one member
ducted in a variety of settings (e.g., laboratories, solve a problem in order for the group to solve it),
organizations) showing that motivation levels are then individual members are likely to feel that their
influenced by working in a group. Many of the efforts are not necessary, and hence they will be
Group Motivation 353

unlikely to exert much effort. This tendency to free determine the fate of the collective, these members
ride on the efforts of others is especially likely will increase the amount of effort they expend. This
when the task is not enjoyable or rewarding. is due to their realization that their performance
Social loafing can be contagious, spreading even will have a strong impact on how well the group
to group members who are diligent and relatively performs and how other members evaluate them.
self-motivated. If hardworking group members This phenomenon was first demonstrated by
perceive that others in the group are not trying as the German industrial psychologist Otto Köhler
hard as they are, they may decrease their own and is referred to as the Köhler effect. Research
efforts to avoid feeling exploited and being seen shows that people will work hard when their
(or seeing themselves) as a “sucker.” group is counting on them, in part because they
feel that their efforts are necessary for group suc-
cess and in part because they don’t want to face
Motivation Gains
disapproval from others. Another factor is social
Many factors can lead to motivation losses in identity. A central tenet of social identity theory is
groups, but are there conditions that encourage that when individuals embrace a group and their
people to work harder in groups than when alone? membership becomes central to their identity, the
Although motivation gains in groups are not com- success and status of the group affect their self-
mon, they do exist, and over the past few decades appraisals. If the group is successful, has status,
there has been an increased focus on understand- and is perceived positively, the member who iden-
ing when and why working in groups can lead to tifies with the group derives self-esteem through
enhanced effort. this association. Conversely, if the group has a
When they are part of the group, members often negative image, the member who identifies with
share a common fate, in the sense that the out- the group experiences reduced self-esteem.
comes obtained by individual members are the Thus, group membership and identity can affect
same regardless of their personal contributions. motivation in interesting ways, particularly in the
When the fate of group members is shared in this context of intergroup competition. When groups
way, motivation gains can emerge when some are competing against other groups, competitive-
members feel they must compensate for the less ness and motivation increase, compared to when
capable members with whom they are working. individuals are competing against other individu-
Particularly on tasks that are very important, bet- als. When people working on a task feel that they
ter performing members may increase their efforts are representing a group and their success or fail-
and do more—even more than their fair share—so ure will be viewed as an indicator of their group’s
that the group as a whole can succeed. Such social ability, motivation is likely to increase. Importantly
compensation is especially likely if these group though, whether effort increases or decreases is
members believe that their performance is neces- dependent on whether excelling at the task is
sary to achieve their common goal. something the group endorses or rejects.
For instance, imagine that three students have In work groups, others’ acceptance is often
been assigned to work together on a group project earned by trying hard and doing well. So, when the
for their psychology course. The instructor has individual efforts and contributions of group
informed the class that members of a group will all members are identifiable, gains in motivation may
receive identical grades. If one of the group mem- occur because members are concerned with how
bers is struggling in the course, or for some other others will evaluate them. It should be noted, how-
reason cannot adequately fulfill his or her responsi- ever, that the desire to be evaluated positively does
bilities, the other members of the group may increase not invariably result in enhanced motivation. It
the amount of effort they dedicate to the project to will not enhance motivation when the group’s
compensate for this less capable student. While they norms discourage high levels of effort. Moreover,
will probably not welcome the additional work, it is important to recognize that whether height-
their task motivation will, of necessity, increase. ened motivation facilitates or hinders group per-
It is also the case that, on tasks for which the formance depends on several aspects of the task,
contributions of the weaker members of the group such as familiarity and difficulty.
354 Group Performance

Conclusion
Group Performance
Research shows that working in a group can lead
to increases or decreases in effort. Although peo-
Group performance is the process and outcome of
ple often conceptualize motivation gains and
members’ joint efforts to achieve a collective goal.
losses as distinct phenomena, some researchers
That goal could be nearly anything—to reach a
argue that they share similar underlying causes.
decision, to solve a problem, to generate an idea,
For instance, when people perceive their contribu-
to negotiate a contract, to build a house. The sci-
tion toward the group’s product to be unimport-
entific study of group performance has been cen-
ant for group success, they will reduce their effort.
tral to several disciplines, particularly social
However, when they perceive their contribution
psychology and industrial/organizational psychol-
to the group to be important for group success,
ogy (where it is more likely to be referred to as the
they will increase their effort. Thus, it is impor-
study of team effectiveness). Thus, it is not sur-
tant to understand the basic social psychological
prising that a vast amount of research on group
processes that underlie why people exert more or
performance has been done—literally thousands
less effort in group settings. Such understanding
of studies. There are many reasonable ways to
should be very helpful for creating productive
describe and summarize this research literature.
task groups.
This entry considers three questions that have
Ernest S. Park and Robert B. Lount, Jr. dominated and guided much of this research:
(1) Are groups more productive than individuals?
See also Free Riding; Group Performance; Köhler Effect; (2) What factors affect a group’s performance?
Ringelmann Effect; Social Compensation; Social (3) Why don’t groups perform as well as they can?
Facilitation; Social Identity Theory; Social Loafing;
Sucker Effect
Comparing Individual
and Group Performance
Further Readings
There are some tasks that only groups can under-
Harkins, S. G. (1987). Social loafing and social take (e.g., certain sports; certain tasks requiring
facilitation. Journal of Experimental Social more skills or inputs than any single individual
Psychology, 23, 1–18. could possess). Most tasks, however, can be per-
Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A formed either by individuals or by groups. Hence,
meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. an early and eminently practical question was,
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, “Are groups more productive than individuals?”
681–706. Actually, the first topic receiving sustained
Kerr, N. L., Messé, L. A., Seok, D., Sambolec, E., Lount, research attention was a variant on this question,
R. B., Jr., & Park, E. S. (2007). Psychological namely, “Are individuals more productive when
mechanisms underlying the Köhler motivation gain others are present than when they are not?” Because
effect. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33,
a common feature of working in groups (although
828–841.
not a necessary one, particularly in this era of vir-
Latané, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many
tual work groups) is the presence of others, this is a
hands make light the work: The causes and
rather fundamental question. And several aspects
consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 37, 822–832.
of the research on this topic are instructive for the
Weber, B., & Hertel, G. (2007). Motivation gains of
broader study of group performance.
inferior group members: A meta-analytical review. First, it soon became clear that there was no sim-
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(6), ple and general answer to the question—sometimes
973–993. individuals performed better in the presence of oth-
Williams, K. D., & Karau, S. J. (1991). Social loafing and ers (social facilitation), and sometimes they per-
social compensation: The effects of expectations of formed worse (social inhibition). It is also rare for a
co-worker performance. Journal of Personality and simple or completely general answer to be found for
Social Psychology, 61, 570–581. nearly any question about group performance.
Group Performance 355

Second, it eventually became clear that the answer performance exceed individual performance in gen-
to the social facilitation question hinged largely on eral for certain kinds of tasks?” Reviews of the group
what the task was. For simple, well-learned tasks, performance literature have offered some useful
the presence of others was facilitating, whereas for answers to such questions, such as the following:
complex, poorly learned tasks, isolated individuals’
performance tended to be superior. In much the • Gayle Hill’s thorough review in 1981 con-
same way, few if any generalizations about group cluded that group performance is usually superior
performance can be made without careful consider- to individual performance on learning or concept-
ation of just what task a group is undertaking. attainment tasks, vocabulary/word knowledge
Third, progress in answering this question resulted tasks, idea generation tasks (like brainstorming),
less from the pattern emerging from a welter of and nearly all abstract problem-solving tasks. She
studies than from a theoretical insight (in this case, attributed this superiority to group members’ abil-
by Robert Zajonc, who recognized that the presence ity to correct each other’s errors and to effectively
of others was usually arousing and that such arousal pool their resources (e.g., knowledge, skills, prob-
tended to facilitate behaviors that were already lem-solving or learning strategies).
likely to occur). Although interest in group perfor-
• Most studies examining the accuracy of judg-
mance has always had a very practical bent, Kurt
ments (e.g., judging weights or numerosity, geog-
Lewin’s dictum that “there is nothing so practical as
raphy judgments) have shown that the average
a good theory” has repeatedly been confirmed in the
judgment of a group of judges is usually superior
study of group performance.
to the average judgment of randomly selected indi-
One of the first studies directly comparing indi-
viduals. Such research has led some to tout “the
viduals with cooperative groups was published in
wisdom of crowds.” However, once again, this
1932 by Marjorie Shaw. She had students in a
conclusion has been shown to depend upon the
class try to solve word puzzles either as individuals
nature of the judgment being made. Aggregating
or in four-person groups. Across three such prob-
individual judgments does lead to more accurate
lems, including one that no individual could solve
judgments as long as individual judgment is unbi-
alone, she found that groups were more likely to
ased (i.e., the errors of judgment are random).
solve the problem than were individuals, a result
However, if individual judgments are systemati-
that she attributed to group members catching and
cally biased (e.g., individuals’ weight judgments
correcting one another’s mistakes. This and other
are mostly too high), then aggregating those judg-
advantages of groups—members complementing
ments will not improve judgment accuracy, even
one another’s knowledge, pooling their efforts,
though the variability in judgments will be
strategically dividing labor, encouraging one
reduced.
another—might lead one to suspect that groups
are generally better problem solvers and decision • Good performance on many tasks has several
makers. But even a moment’s consideration will features. For example, a good reader should not
suggest that there are many tasks for which a only be able to read quickly but with high compre-
group’s disadvantages probably outweigh its hension as well. So, whether groups do better than
advantages. Consider the familiar task of driving a individuals may depend upon how we define good
car. With a bit of training and practice, an indi- performance. One such criterion, on which groups
vidual can master the different subtasks involved— often have been found to be inferior to individuals,
steering, braking, using the accelerator, and so on. is productivity per person. Even when the average
However, it would be considerably more difficult group is more productive than the average indi-
for a group—one person steering, another braking, vidual (e.g., can solve a problem more quickly),
and so on—to perform the same task. Clearly, individuals may still be more efficient than groups
certain forms of coordinated behavior are more (e.g., it would cost more to pay a group to achieve
effectively accomplished by one person working any particular level of productivity than to pay the
alone than by several people working together. same number of individual workers). Other popu-
Nonetheless, there might still be simple answers lar performance criteria include the quantity and
to more focused questions, such as, “Does group quality of production, how satisfied the performers
356 Group Performance

and other stakeholders are with the group’s work, first you need a chicken.” Likewise, if you want to
and whether group members want to keep on have a productive group, first you need productive
working together. group members (people with the knowledge, skills,
and abilities needed to perform the task and the
It is only meaningful to compare individual and interpersonal skills required to work productively
group performance when there is some agreed- with one another).
upon standard for good performance (e.g., a cor- An obvious and basic feature of group composi-
rect solution for a math problem or maximum tion is the group’s size. Clearly, some tasks have
productivity on an assembly line). There are many specific size requirements (e.g., you can only build
tasks, however, where no such standard exists (e.g., a human pyramid with groups of size 3, 6, 10,
in most criminal cases, we cannot tell whether the etc.); for other tasks (e.g., producing a loud cheer
defendant is really guilty or not), or there is little at a sporting event), the bigger the group, the bet-
agreement about such standards (e.g., which is the ter. For most tasks, variations in group size can
“best” brand of champagne). For such judgmental potentially enhance or undercut group perfor-
tasks, it may thus be difficult to characterize groups mance. Larger groups have performance advan-
as more accurate or productive than individuals. tages in that they tend to have a bigger and more
Even with such tasks, though, one can meaning- diverse pool of resources (e.g., member abilities,
fully compare the relative susceptibility of groups connections with outsiders) and to be viewed (both
versus individuals to certain biases of judgment. inside and outside the group) as more legitimate
For example, we may not be able to tell whether and effective. However, larger groups also can
juries reach the “right” verdicts more often than have bigger problems with coordinating and moti-
individual jurors, but we can still see whether juries vating their members, monitoring and sanctioning
or individual jurors are more biased by proscribed unproductive behaviors, and meeting the idiosyn-
information (e.g., inadmissible evidence) when they cratic needs of particular members. And the impact
reach their verdicts. Once again, the answer to such of such size-related effects can be aggravated or
questions seems to depend a great deal on aspects mitigated by other actions the group might take
of the group’s task. If there is widespread accep- (e.g., labeling member contributions might miti-
tance of a bias among individuals, groups tend to gate the adverse effects of member anonymity in
accentuate that bias, but when group members can large groups). A group’s optimal size, then, is that
easily recognize a bias, the process of group inter- size where such advantages are maximal and such
action can correct or mitigate it. disadvantages are minimal. Given the many fac-
tors that influence group performance, it is hard to
specify that size a priori. Many particular groups
Factors Affecting Group Performance working at particular tasks may only come to iden-
Whether groups perform better or worse than indi- tify their optimal size through trial and error.
viduals, an important question whenever a task One aspect of this question is whether more
must be performed by a group is, “What factors productive groups generally include certain types
will affect the group’s performance?” Of course, of people—people in certain demographic, person-
the broadest answer is, “Many factors will matter, ality, or attitudinal categories. Research on group
but their effects will usually depend upon the sex composition is instructive in this regard. In
group’s task.” 1985, Wendy Wood reviewed studies comparing
all-male and all-female work groups and found
that, overall, groups of men outperformed groups
Group Composition
of women. However, this conclusion was based on
As every sports coach knows, an important averaging results across all tasks. Many of these
aspect of group performance is how the group is tasks required task abilities that favored males
composed. Olympic teams are not representative (e.g., physical strength). But if one focused on tasks
samples of their nation’s populations. Rather, their that favored females (e.g., verbal tasks), then the
members are very carefully selected. There is an opposite conclusion held—groups of women were
old saying, “If you want to make chicken soup, more productive than groups of men. Likewise,
Group Performance 357

groups of men tended to do better at tasks that links or relationships among group members.
required their more task-oriented interaction style, These links can refer to a variety of things, includ-
whereas groups of women tended to do better at ing who can communicate with whom, who has
tasks that required their more interpersonally ori- authority over whom, and who likes whom.
ented interaction style. The same basic moral
emerges from the study of other individual differ- Communication Networks
ences: There are few if any individual differences in Sometimes the nature of the group or its task
group member demographics or personality that dictates who can communicate with whom.
are consistently related to better group perfor- Sometimes group leaders or managers have the
mance. One must carefully consider just what the discretion to design their groups’ communication
task requires of the group to begin to identify what networks. Sometimes channels of communication
a good group member would look like. evolve informally in groups. Regardless of their
Maybe the secret of good group performance origins, communication structures can have a
lies not in particular individual traits or abilities, strong effect on how effectively groups perform.
but rather in having just the right combination of One widely studied aspect of communication net-
member characteristics. To take a trivial example, works is their degree of centralization. Centralized
effective American football teams require both networks tend to have a few “central” members
burly linemen and smaller, faster backs. Much of who receive information from the rest of the group,
the research on this question has focused on the process it, and then communicate back to the rest
effects of the homogeneity or heterogeneity of of the group. For example, the highly centralized
group membership and group performance. For “wheel” network has everyone in the group able to
example, Patrick Laughlin and his colleagues communicate with a single member at the group’s
asked whether a group with homogeneous levels of “hub,” but with no other members. The highly
ability (e.g., three medium-ability members, decentralized “comcon” network permits any
MMM) would perform a vocabulary task any bet- group member to communicate with any other
ter than a more heterogeneous group with the group member. Research on communication net-
same average member ability (HML). For this work centralization has shown, unsurprisingly,
task, it turned out that the heterogeneous group that different networks work best with different
performed better. In much the same way, other tasks—with fairly simple tasks, centralized net-
research has asked whether heterogeneity with works tend to be more productive, but with more
respect to other characteristics of group members complex tasks, decentralized networks tend to be
(e.g., gender, race/ethnicity, personality) helps or superior (in part because they avoid the problem of
harms group performance. Some of the interest in overloading central group members with more
this topic stems from widespread interest in the information than they can handle).
effects of diversity in the workplace, that is,
whether diversity in race, ethnicity, gender, and so
Authority Structures
on improves or impairs work group performance.
It appears that certain kinds of diversity (e.g., in Groups can also differ in their authority
task relevant knowledge and skills) can indeed be structures—who has power over whom. A simple
helpful to groups if they provide a larger pool of and obvious example is the distinction between
resources or help groups to examine issues more hierarchical groups, where power flows from top to
critically. When diversity leads to subgroup forma- bottom, and egalitarian groups, where all members
tion and conflict, however, it can undermine group have similar levels of power. Clearly, the optimal
productivity. authority structure depends on the group’s task and
even on the members’ personalities. For example,
John Wilson, Joel Aronoff, and Lawrence Messé
Group Structure
showed that a hierarchical structure led to better
In addition to a group’s composition, its struc- performance at a model-building task than an
ture is also an important factor in how well it egalitarian structure for groups composed of
performs. A group’s structure is the pattern of members with high safety needs (who are more
358 Group Performance

concerned with being in safe and predictable envi- focused and more interpersonally focused, some-
ronments). They suggested that this structure pro- one who works hard to gain acceptance by the
vided more structure to members’ work, minimized group, is more effective when the favorability of a
role uncertainty, and reduced the need to take ini- situation is neither good nor bad.
tiative or risks when working on the task, all of Other research on this topic, initiated by James
which are important to safety-oriented people. Meindl, has suggested that leaders actually have
However, the reverse was true for groups com- less impact on group performance than their fol-
posed of members with high esteem needs (who are lowers believe they have. This judgmental bias,
relatively more concerned with demonstrating their called the “romance of leadership,” may help sat-
competence to others); with this task, the egalitar- isfy our desire to believe that how well our group
ian structure gave members more of a chance to or organization performs is really under someone’s
display their unique individual competencies. direct control. In this view, leaders play a rather
The most interesting aspect of a group’s author- symbolic role in groups, one that convinces follow-
ity structure is leadership. Given that some mem- ers that success is possible and meaningful.
bers have authority over the others, how should
that authority be used to maximize the group’s Evaluative Structures
performance? Early research on leadership tended Another important factor in task groups is how
to focus on the question of what kind of person is group members evaluate one another and the
likely to assume or be granted leadership in groups. group as a whole. Methods of sociometric choice
Such work has shown that members who have (e.g., each group member is asked how much he or
status-endowing attributes (e.g., people who are she likes or respects each of the other group mem-
taller, male, belong to higher status social catego- bers) have often been used to summarize and ana-
ries), have resources that are useful for task perfor- lyze such evaluations. For most tasks, the existence
mance (e.g., task ability, intelligence), show strong of mutually antagonistic subgroups or cliques will
commitment to the group (e.g., never miss a meet- interfere with effective group performance.
ing, talk a lot during group discussion), possess One widely studied consequence of mutual
useful social traits (e.g., extraversion), and fit the positive evaluations is enhanced group cohesive-
group’s prototypes of a good member (e.g., con- ness. Actually, scholars disagree about what it
form to group norms) or a good leader (e.g., self- means to say that a group is cohesive. A common
confident, decisive) are more likely to emerge as view is that a cohesive group is one whose mem-
group leaders. bers like each other and the group as a whole.
Much subsequent work has focused on the Another view is that a cohesive group is one with
question of what makes one leader more effective which the members identify strongly. Yet another
than another. An important line of research by view is that a cohesive group is one whose mem-
Tom Tyler and his colleagues has shown that the bers respect one another’s task abilities, are highly
procedures a leader follows when making deci- committed to the group’s goals, and are willing to
sions or resolving conflicts in a group are at least work together (regardless of how much they like
as important for evoking support from other mem- each other). These alternative aspects of group
bers as the decisions the leader ultimately reaches. cohesion tend to co-occur. More importantly,
Most theories of leader effectiveness also have rec- cohesive groups are generally more productive. A
ognized that the nature of the group’s task, mem- notable exception to this rule is when the norms of
bership, and norms have as much to do with a a group discourage member effort, as in some
leader’s effectiveness as does the behavior of the industrial settings where there are sanctions for
leader. For example, Fred Fiedler’s contingency workers who work too hard (i.e., “rate busters”).
theory of leadership argues that a tough, task-
oriented leader is most effective when facing either
Group Work Environment
a very favorable group task situation (e.g., there is
little conflict in the group, the task is well defined, There has also been considerable attention given
the leader has lots of power) or, ironically, a very to the effects of a group’s work environment on its
unfavorable situation. A leader who is less task productivity. Every environment has certain physical
Group Performance 359

features, for example, that might influence a group’s helpful, as long as the goals are specific and chal-
performance. Such features include levels of light- lenging), or (d) the (generally positive) effects of a
ing, noise, and crowding in the environment. It has collective sense of efficacy. (These topics are explored
been shown that the absolute level of an environ- in the readings listed at the end of the entry.)
mental stressor is often less important for group Although the focus here is on what affects
performance than whether workers have some sense group performance, keep in mind that sometimes
of control over that stressor. Of course, a group’s it is at least as interesting to know what group
social environment (e.g., relationships with other performance affects—what are the consequences
work groups in the organization, group, or organi- (e.g., for member commitment, for the group’s
zational culture) and temporal environment (e.g., future) of particular members or the group as a
time pressures) can also affect its performance. whole performing well or poorly. Many of the
How group members interact with their tools relationships discussed earlier are clearly recipro-
and with one another can also be an important cal; for example, high group cohesiveness usually
factor. The possibilities for improvement (and enhances group productivity, and high group pro-
deterioration) of work environments have been ductivity usually enhances group cohesiveness.
broadened in the last few decades by striking
advances in technology. These include new com-
Actual Versus Potential Group Productivity
munication technologies (e.g., e-mail, meeting
software) that enable asynchronous and distrib- As noted earlier, one informative baseline against
uted group work, new information technologies which to contrast group performance is individual
(e.g., large databases, the Internet) that expand the performance. Other baselines include those defined
pool of readily available sources of information, by some rule or function that predicts how group
and so-called group support systems. The latter members combine their contributions. For exam-
permit groups to access and share information and ple, at a task like a group tug-of-war, it might be
to organize their interactions in novel ways. A predicted that group performance will simply
good illustration is the use of computerized brain- equal the sum of the performances by individual
storming, where members of idea-generating members. Other popular combination rules include
groups work at separate but interconnected com- the average of members’ performances, the best
puter stations rather than talking face-to-face. This member’s performance, or the worst member’s
avoids some of the inefficiencies of face-to-face performance. Such combination rules always make
interaction (e.g., being unable to contribute an assumptions, if only implicitly, about the process
idea while someone else is talking), but still pre- whereby group members work together on their
serves some of the distinctive advantages of group task. So, for example, the simple summative com-
brainstorming (e.g., having access to others’ ideas, bination rule for a tug-of-war assumes that group
which spur one’s own thoughts). members will repeat in the group what they do as
individuals, and that they can combine their indi-
vidual pulls efficiently (e.g., they will all pull
Beyond Group Composition,
together). By comparing actual group performance
Structure, and Environment
with the performance predicted by one or more
The preceding description highlights a few of combination rules, researchers can empirically test
the more important performance-relevant factors those process assumptions and thereby learn not
that have been studied and a few illustrative find- only how well groups can perform some task, but
ings, but this only scratches the surface of the also something about the social processes that pro-
group performance literature. This entry could just duced that performance.
as easily have focused on other topics, such as, In a very influential book published in 1972,
(a) the effects of groups engaging in some planning Ivan Steiner suggested that for any well-defined
(it is generally helpful for performance), (b) the task, there was an optimal combination rule. That
effects of groups reflecting on what they do (it is, he suggested that given the resources individual
appears not to be particularly helpful), (c) the effects members bring to the group (e.g., each member’s
of groups setting performance goals (it is generally task-relevant knowledge and ability) and the
360 Group Performance

demands of the task itself, there is some unique dependence on groups to attain so many goals, the
way of combining those resources that will maxi- study of group performance will continue to be a
mize the group’s productivity. He referred to that vitally important area of behavioral science.
optimal level of productivity as the group’s “poten- Although the general topic is extremely complex
tial productivity” and argued that this was a par- and there is still more to be learned, a great deal
ticularly interesting baseline against which to has already been learned in the approximately 120
compare actual group performance. If the way that years since Max Ringelmann first asked groups to
group members work together is less than optimal, grab a rope and pull as hard as they could.
then actual group productivity will be lower than
potential group productivity. Steiner thought this Norbert L. Kerr
was usually the case, and he called the shortfall Adapted from David G. Myers, Social Psychology, 9th
“process loss.” He suggested that process loss edition, with the permission of McGraw-Hill.
could stem from two things—coordination losses
(when the group failed to combine or coordinate See also Brainstorming; Communication Networks; Group
Cohesiveness; Group Motivation; Group Problem
its resources in the optimal way) or motivation
Solving and Decision Making; Group Structure; Group
losses (when group members worked less hard
Task; Leadership; Process Gain and Loss; Ringelmann
when in the group than when working individu- Effect; Social Facilitation; Social Loafing; Sociometric
ally). By identifying and analyzing such motivation Choice; Teams; Virtual/Internet Groups
losses, one could improve group performance.
This approach is nicely illustrated by research
on the Ringelmann effect. In what was history’s Further Readings
first social psychological experiment, Max Aronoff, J., & Wilson, J. P. (1985). Personality in the
Ringelmann found that as groups pulling on a social process. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
rope got larger, so did their process loss (i.e., the Hill, G. (1981). Group vs. individual performance: Are
difference between actual productivity and poten- N+1 heads better than one? Psychological Bulletin,
tial productivity, defined as the sum of the indi- 91(3), 517–539.
vidual members’ abilities). Later research showed Kerr, N. L., MacCoun, R., & Kramer, G. P. (1996) Bias
that this process loss was partly due to coordina- in judgment: Comparing individuals and groups.
tion losses (i.e., the more people pulling on the Psychological Review, 103, 687–719.
rope, the harder it is for them to pull at the same Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Ilgen, D. (2006). Enhancing the
time and in the same direction) and partly due to effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological
motivation losses (the bigger the group, the less the Science in the Public Interest, 7(3), 77–124.
average member pulls). The latter finding has led Moreland, R. L., Levine, J. M., & Wingert, M. L. (1996).
to considerable work on social loafing, revealing a Creating the ideal group: Composition effects at work.
In J. H. Davis & E. Witte (Eds.), Understanding group
number of aspects of groups that can undercut
behavior: Consensual action by small groups (Vol. 2,
member motivation (e.g., the difficulty of identify-
pp. 12–15). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
ing member contributions for many group tasks).
Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group process and productivity.
More recently, it has been shown that the opposite
New York: Academic Press.
can occur under some conditions—people can be
Surowiecki, J. (2004). The wisdom of crowds: Why the
more motivated when working in groups than many are smarter than the few and how collective
when working alone. For example, research on the wisdom shapes business, economies, societies and
Köhler effect has shown that when people learn nations. Boston: Little, Brown.
that other group members are less capable than van Knippenberg, D., & Schippers, M. C. (2007).
themselves, or that the group may fail unless every- Work group diversity. Annual Review of
one does their best, motivation gains will occur. Psychology, 58, 515–541.
Wood, W. (1985). Meta-analytic review of sex differences
in group performance. Psychological Bulletin, 102,
Conclusion
53–71.
Many of our goals are pursued collectively, in Yukl, G. (2005). Leadership in organizations (5th ed.).
groups, organizations, and nations. Given this Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Group Polarization 361

the novel is a flop, she will have expended consid-


Group Polarization erable time and energy without remuneration.
Imagine that you are advising Helen. Please
Group polarization is the tendency for group inter- check the lowest probability that you would con-
action to enhance group members’ initial inclina- sider acceptable for Helen to attempt to write the
tions. This group polarization phenomenon, which novel. Helen should attempt to write the novel if
occurs both in experimental settings and in every- the chances that the novel will be a success are at
day situations, provides a window through least [intervals range from 1 in 10 to 10 in 10].
which researchers can observe group influence. After making your decision, guess what the
Experiments have confirmed two group influences: average person would advise.
informational and normative. The information
gleaned from a discussion mostly favors the ini- Having marked their advice on a dozen such
tially preferred alternative, thus reinforcing support items, five or so individuals in Stoner’s study
for it. This entry begins with a look at how this line would then discuss and reach agreement on each
of research evolved, describes a variety of examples item. To everyone’s amazement, given popular
of group polarization, and discusses two possible commentary about the conservatism of groups, the
explanations. group decisions were usually riskier. During dis-
cussion, group members’ opinions converged.
Curiously, however, the point toward which they
The Case of the “Risky Shift”
converged was usually a lower (riskier) number
The discovery of the risky shift phenomenon illus- than their initial average.
trates how an interesting discovery often leads Here was an interesting puzzle. The small risky
researchers to hasty and erroneous conclusions, shift effect was reliable, unexpected, and without
which ultimately get replaced with more accurate any immediately obvious explanation. Dubbed the
conclusions. While trying to understand the curi- risky shift phenomenon, this finding inspired stud-
ous finding that group discussion enhanced risk ies of risk taking by individuals and groups. These
taking, investigators discovered that discussion revealed that the risky shift occurs not only when
actually tends to strengthen whatever is the ini- a group decides by consensus—after a brief discus-
tially dominant point of view, whether risky or sion, individuals, too, will alter their decisions.
cautious. What is more, researchers successfully repeated
A research literature of more than 300 studies Stoner’s finding with people of varying ages and
comparing individual and group decision making occupations in a dozen nations.
began in 1961 with a surprising finding by James What group influences produce such an effect?
Stoner, then an MIT graduate student. For his mas- And how widespread is it? Do discussions in
ter’s thesis in industrial management, Stoner tested juries, business committees, and military organiza-
the commonly held belief that groups make more tions also promote risk taking? Does this explain
cautious decisions than do individuals. He invited why teenage reckless driving, as measured by
people individually, and then in groups, to advise death rates, nearly doubles when a 16- or 17-year-
imagined characters how much risk to take. Here is old driver has two teenage passengers rather than
an example of the kind of hypothetical scenario none?
Stoner used, created for my own research: After several years of study, researchers discov-
ered that the risky shift was not universal. They
Helen is a writer who is said to have considerable could write decision dilemmas on which people
creative talent but who so far has been earning a became more cautious after discussion. One of
comfortable living by writing cheap Westerns. these featured “Roger,” a young married man with
Recently, she has come up with an idea for a two school-age children and a secure but low-
potentially significant novel. If it could be written paying job. Roger can afford life’s necessities but
and accepted, it might have considerable literary few of its luxuries. He hears that the stock of a
impact and be a big boost to her career. On the relatively unknown company may soon triple in
other hand, if she cannot work out her idea or if value if its new product is favorably received—or
362 Group Polarization

decline considerably if it does not sell. Roger has • Glen Whyte reported that groups accentuate
no savings. To invest in the company, he is consid- the “too much invested to quit” phenomenon that
ering selling his life insurance policy. has cost many businesses huge sums of money.
Is there a general principle that predicts both the Canadian business students imagined themselves
tendency to give riskier advice after discussing having to decide whether to invest more money in
Helen’s situation and more cautious advice after the hope of preventing losses in various failing
discussing Roger’s? Most people advise Helen to projects (for example, whether to make a high-risk
take a greater risk than Roger, even before talking loan to protect an earlier investment). They exhib-
with others. Group discussion then accentuates ited the typical effect: 72% reinvested money they
these initial leanings. Thus, group members dis- would probably not have invested if they were
cussing Roger’s dilemma become, on average, more considering it as a new investment on its own mer-
risk averse than they were before discussion. its. When making the same decision in groups,
94% opted for reinvestment.
Do Groups Intensify Opinions?
Another research strategy has been to pick
Realizing that this group phenomenon was not issues on which opinions are divided and then iso-
a consistent shift toward increased risk, research- late people who hold the same view. Does discus-
ers reconceived it as a phenomenon in which sion with like-minded people strengthen shared
discussion typically strengthens the average views, and does it magnify the attitude gap that
inclination of group members. This idea led separates the two sides? George Bishop and David
investigators to propose what French research- Myers investigated this question by setting up
ers Serge Moscovici and Marisa Zavalloni in groups of relatively prejudiced and unprejudiced
1969 called group polarization, the tendency for high school students and asking them to respond—
group discussion to enhance group members’ before and after discussion—to issues involving
initial leanings. racial attitudes, such as property rights versus
open housing. They found that the discussions
among like-minded students did indeed increase
Group Polarization Experiments
the initial gap between the two groups.
This new view of the changes induced by group
discussion prompted experimenters to have people
Group Polarization in Everyday Life
discuss attitude statements that most of them
favored or most of them opposed. Will group In everyday life, people associate mostly with
interaction not only lead risk takers to become others whose attitudes are similar to their own.
riskier, but bigots to become despisers, and givers Does everyday group interaction with like-minded
to become more philanthropic? The following are friends intensify shared attitudes? Do nerds become
examples chosen from dozens of studies that con- nerdier and jocks jockier?
firm such group polarization: It happens. The self-segregation of boys into all-
male groups and of girls into all-female groups
• Moscovici and Zavalloni observed that dis- accentuates over time their initially modest gender
cussion enhanced French students’ initially posi- differences, notes Eleanor Maccoby. Boys with
tive attitude toward their president and negative boys become gradually more competitive and
attitude toward Americans. action oriented in their play, while girls with girls
• Mititoshi Isozaki found that Japanese univer- become more relationally oriented.
sity students gave more pronounced judgments of On U.S. federal appellate court cases,
“guilty” after discussing a traffic case. “Republican-appointed judges tend to vote like
Republicans and Democratic-appointed judges
• Markus Brauer and his coworkers found that tend to vote like Democrats,” David Schkade and
French students’ dislike for certain other people Cass Sunstein observed in 2003. That’s under-
was exacerbated after discussing their shared nega- standable. But, as these researchers noted, such
tive impressions. tendencies are accentuated when judges are among
Group Polarization 363

other like-minded judges: “A Republican appoin- worsen when the players are in groups. During
tee sitting with two other Republicans votes far actual community conflicts, like-minded people
more conservatively than when the same judge sits associate increasingly with one another, amplify-
with at least one Democratic appointee. A ing their shared beliefs. Gang delinquency emerges
Democratic appointee, meanwhile, shows the same from a process of mutual reinforcement within
tendency in the opposite ideological direction.” neighborhood gangs, whose members share attri-
butes and hostilities. If “a second out-of-control
15-year-old moves in [on your block],” surmised
Group Polarization in Schools
David Lykken in 1997, “the mischief they get into
Another real-life parallel to the laboratory phe- as a team is likely to be more than merely double
nomenon is what education researchers have what the first would do on his own. . . . A gang is
called the accentuation phenomenon: Over time, more dangerous than the sum of its individual
initial differences among groups of college stu- parts.” Indeed, “unsupervised peer groups” are the
dents become accentuated. If the first-year stu- strongest predictor of a neighborhood’s crime vic-
dents at College X are initially more intellectual timization rate, reported Bonita Veysey and Steven
than the first-year students at College Y, that gap Messner. Moreover, experimental interventions
is likely to increase by the time they graduate. that take delinquent adolescents and group them
Likewise, compared with fraternity and sorority with other delinquents actually—no surprise to
members, independents tend to have more liberal any group polarization researcher—increase the
political attitudes, a difference that grows with rate of problem behavior.
time in college. Researchers believe this results
partly from group members reinforcing shared Group Polarization on the Internet
inclinations.
E-mail and electronic chat rooms offer a poten-
tial new medium for group interaction. By the
Group Polarization in Communities beginning of the new century, 85% of Canadian
teens were using the Internet for an average of 9.3
Polarization also occurs in communities, as
hours weekly. Its countless virtual groups enable
people self-segregate. Liberal communities attract
peacemakers and neo-Nazis, geeks and Goths,
liberals and become more liberal, while conserva-
conspiracy theorists and cancer survivors to isolate
tive places attract conservatives and become more
themselves with like-minded others and find sup-
conservative. Neighborhoods become echo cham-
port for their shared concerns, interests, and suspi-
bers, with opinions ricocheting off kindred-spirited
cions. Without the nonverbal nuances of face-to-face
friends. In the United States, the end result has
contact, will such discussions produce group
become a more divided country. The percentage of
polarization? Will peacemakers become more pac-
landslide counties—those voting 60% or more for
ifistic and militia members more terror prone?
one presidential candidate—nearly doubled
E-mail, Google, and chat rooms “make it much
between 1976 and 2000. The percentage of enter-
easier for small groups to rally like-minded people,
ing collegians (in UCLA’s annual survey) declaring
crystallize diffuse hatreds and mobilize lethal
themselves politically “middle of the road” dropped
force,” observed Robert Wright in 2003. As
from 60% in 1983 to 43% in 2008, with corre-
broadband spreads, Internet-spawned polarization
sponding increases in those declaring themselves
will increase, he speculated.
on the right or the left.
On college campuses, the clustering of students
Group Polarization in Terrorist Organizations
into mostly White sororities and fraternities and
into ethnic minority student organizations tends to From their analysis of terrorist organizations
strengthen social identities and to increase antago- around the world, Clark McCauley and Mary
nisms among the social groups. Segal surmised that terrorism does not erupt sud-
In laboratory studies, the competitive relation- denly. Rather, it arises among people whose shared
ships and mistrust that individuals often display grievances bring them together. As they interact in
when playing games with one another often isolation from moderating influences, they become
364 Group Polarization

progressively more extreme. The social amplifier Informational Influence


brings the signal in more strongly. The result is
According to the best-supported explanation,
violent acts that the individuals, apart from the
group discussion elicits a pooling of ideas, most
group, would never have committed.
of which favor the dominant viewpoint. Ideas
For example, the September 11, 2001, terrorists
that are common knowledge to group members
were bred by a long process that engaged the
will often be brought up in discussion or, even if
polarizing effect of interaction among the like-
unmentioned, will influence their discussion.
minded. The process of becoming a terrorist, noted
Other ideas may include persuasive arguments
a National Research Council panel, isolates individ-
that some group members had not previously
uals from other belief systems, dehumanizes poten-
considered. When discussing Helen the writer,
tial targets, and tolerates no dissent. Over time,
someone may say, “Helen should go for it,
group members come to categorize the world as
because she has little to lose. If her novel flops,
“us” and “them.” Ariel Merari, an investigator of
she can always go back to writing cheap
Middle Eastern and Sri Lankan suicide terrorism,
Westerns.” Such statements often entangle infor-
believes the key to creating a terrorist suicide is the
mation about the person’s arguments with cues
group process. In 2002, he wrote: “To the best of my
concerning the person’s position on the issue. But
knowledge, there has not been a single case of sui-
when people hear relevant arguments without
cide terrorism which was done on a personal whim.”
learning the specific stands other people assume,
According to one analysis of terrorists who were
they still shift their positions. Arguments, in and
members of the Salafi Jihad—an Islamic fundamen-
of themselves, matter.
talist movement, of which al Qaeda is a part—70%
But there is more to attitude change than
joined while living as expatriates. After moving to
merely hearing someone else’s arguments. Active
foreign places in search of jobs or education, they
participation in discussion produces more attitude
became mindful of their Muslim identity and often
change than does passive listening. Participants
gravitated to mosques and moved in with other
and observers hear the same ideas, but when par-
expatriate Muslims, who sometimes recruited them
ticipants express them in their own words, the
into cell groups that provided “mutual emotional
verbal commitment magnifies the impact. The
and social support” and “development of a common
more group members repeat one another’s ideas,
identity.” Massacres, similarly, have been found to
the more they rehearse and validate them. Just
be group phenomena. The violence is enabled and
privately writing out one’s ideas in preparation
escalated by the killers egging each other on.
for an electronic discussion tends to polarize atti-
tudes somewhat.
Explaining Polarization
Normative Influence
Why do groups adopt stances that are more exag-
gerated than that of their average individual mem- A second explanation of polarization involves
ber? Researchers hoped that solving the mystery of comparison with others. As Leon Festinger argued
group polarization might provide some insights in his influential theory of social comparison, we
into group influence. Solving small puzzles some- humans want to evaluate our opinions and abili-
times provides clues for solving larger ones. ties, something we can do by comparing our views
Among several proposed theories of group with those of others. We are most persuaded by
polarization, two have survived scientific scrutiny. people in our reference groups—groups with
One deals with the arguments presented during a which we identify. Moreover, wanting people to
discussion, the other with how members of a like us, we may express stronger opinions after
group view themselves vis-à-vis the other mem- discovering that others share our views.
bers. The first idea is an example of informational When we ask people to predict how others
influence (influence that results from accepting would respond to items such as Helen’s dilemma,
evidence about reality). The second is an example they typically exhibit pluralistic ignorance: They
of normative influence (influence based on a per- don’t realize how strongly others support the
son’s desire to be accepted or admired by others). socially preferred tendency (in this case, writing
Group Position Theory 365

the novel). A typical person will advise writing the Further Readings
novel even if its chance of success is only 4 in 10 Isenberg, D. J. (1986). Group polarization: A critical
but will estimate that most other people would review and meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and
require 5 or 6 in 10. (This finding is reminiscent of Social Psychology, 50, 1141–1151.
the self-serving bias: People tend to view them- Lykken, D. T. (1997). The American crime factory.
selves as better-than-average embodiments of Psychological Inquiry, 8, 261–270.
socially desirable traits and attitudes.) When the Merari, A. (2002, August 22–25). Explaining suicidal
discussion begins, most people discover they are terrorism: Theories versus empirical evidence. Paper
not outshining the others as they had supposed. In presented at the Annual Convention of the American
fact, some others are ahead of them, having taken Psychological Association, Chicago.
an even stronger position in favor of writing the Moscovici, S., & Zavalloni, M. (1969). The group as a
novel. No longer restrained by a misperceived polarizer of attitudes. Journal of Personality and
group norm, they are liberated to voice their pref- Social Psychology, 12, 125–135.
erences more strongly. Myers, D. G. (1982). Polarizing effects of social
This social comparison theory prompted exper- interaction. In H. Brandstätter, J. H. Davis, &
iments that exposed people to others’ positions but G. Stocker-Kreichgauer (Eds.), Group decision making
not to their arguments. This is roughly the experi- (pp. 125–161). London: Academic Press.
ence we have when reading the results of an opin- Schkade, D. A., & Sunstein, C. R. (2003, June 11).
ion poll or of exit polling on election day. When Judging by where you sit. Retrieved June 26, 2009,
people learn others’ positions—without prior com- from http://www.nytimes.com
Wright, R. (2008, June 29). Quoted by Thomas L.
mitment and without discussion or sharing of
Friedman, “Is Google God?” Retrieved June 26, 2009,
arguments—will they adjust their responses to
from http://www.nytimes.com
maintain a socially favorable position? Indeed,
they will. This comparison-based polarization is
usually less than that produced by a lively discus-
sion. Still, it is surprising that, instead of simply
conforming to the group average, people often go Group Position Theory
it one better.
Group polarization research illustrates the The study of prejudice is a cornerstone of social
complexity of social psychological inquiry. As psychological and sociological research.
much as we like our explanations of a phenom- Traditionally, prejudice has been defined as nega-
enon to be simple, one explanation seldom tive attitudes toward a person due to his or her
accounts for all the data. Because people are membership in a social group. Race prejudice,
complex, more than one factor frequently influ- then, is a form of prejudice directed toward people
ences an outcome. In group discussions, persua- on the basis of their perceived racial group. Group
sive arguments predominate on issues that have a position theory is a sociological analysis of race
factual element (“Is he guilty of the crime?”). prejudice which posits that its source lies in the
Social comparison sways responses on value- structural relationship of racial groups in a given
laden judgments (“How long a sentence should society. Fundamentally, it suggests that the fea-
he serve?”). On the many issues that have both tures that make up prejudice are derived from the
factual and value-laden aspects, the two factors relationships between racial groups and a group’s
work together. Discovering that others share preferred position in a racialized social order,
one’s feelings (social comparison) unleashes argu- rather than in the individual feelings and experi-
ments (informational influence) supporting what ences of group members. This entry discusses the
everyone secretly favors. historical foundations of group position theory,
David G. Myers outlines its core tenets, and highlights empirical
research that has investigated the theory. It closes
See also Group Problem Solving and Decision Making; by drawing connections between group position
Groupthink; Informational Influence; Normative theory and existing lines of research, as well as
Influence; Social Comparison Theory offering suggestions and implications for future
366 Group Position Theory

research. In doing so, the entry integrates and Core Features


elaborates on the basic premises of the group posi-
tion theory of prejudice. As the definition process suggests, initial con-
ceptualizations of group position theory examined
race prejudice toward the subordinate racial
The Theory
group(s) from the perspective of the dominant
In 1958, the sociologist Herbert Blumer published racial group. For dominant group members, racial
a short essay urging researchers to move beyond prejudice comprises four features. First, the domi-
a focus on individual feelings, such as antipathy nant racial group feels a sense of superiority to
and hatred, as an explanation for racial preju- other racial groups. Second, inferior racial groups
dice. At the time of its publication, the literature are viewed as qualitatively different from the
emphasized that these individual feelings derived dominant group. Third, members of the dominant
from innate dispositions, such as having an racial group feel that they are entitled to certain
authoritarian personality, and direct social expe- privileges and advantages. Fourth, dominant group
rience. Blumer proposed that scholars should members also posses a basic fear of members of
instead examine the positioning of racial groups subordinate racial groups—they feel that the sub-
in a given society and how dominant racial ordinate group threatens their dominant position.
groups come to define and redefine subordinate Feelings of superiority place the subordinate
racial groups. group below the dominant group and may or may
Race prejudice begins with racial identification: not be manifested in denigration of the qualities of
People identify themselves and others as belonging the subordinate racial group(s), for example in the
to distinct racial groups. Beyond mere identifica- form of negative stereotypes. Categorizing the sub-
tion, groups form images of themselves and ordinate group as “alien” allows the dominant
other groups. In a racialized social order, char- group to place it beyond the dominant group.
acterizing one’s own racial group defines the Together, these feelings act to reflect, justify, and
characteristics of the other group. This ongoing promote social exclusion. While superiority and
process of definition and redefinition places the distinctiveness may give rise to feelings of antipa-
racial group in position vis-à-vis the other. For thy and aversion, this conceptualization reflects
example, in the United States one cannot charac- only a limited understanding of race prejudice.
terize Blacks without evoking, at least implicitly, a Additionally, while dominant groups’ sense of pro-
comparison with Whites. prietary claim and entitlement to important areas
A sense of group position is first set by the ini- of life (exclusive membership in given institutions,
tial contact between the groups and later molded claims to positions of prestige and power) excludes
by ongoing relations. Factors such as power, skill the subordinate group, according to group posi-
sets, and opportunity play a role in this process. tion theory, it does not fully explain racism. For
This arrangement reflects more than a vertical example, within a caste system a sense of superior-
arrangement of groups based on social status—it ity, qualitative distinctiveness, and entitlement
reflects at least two distinct axes, one marked by may be solidified into a structure that is accepted,
domination and the other marked by exclusion. or at least respected, by all of its members, regard-
The structural relations of the groups need not less of their position.
reflect objective reality, but instead a subjective These features point to a positional arrange-
sense of where racial groups belong. The sense of ment of the dominant racial group in relation to
group position is common to all who identify with the subordinate racial group. With these features
the ingroup and provides a framework for mem- in place, race prejudice arises from a fear or suspi-
bers, acting as a powerful norm that guides its cion that the subordinate racial group threatens
members and provides an orientation of what the position of the dominant group. Perceived
ought to be. Group position theory argues that it challenges may arise from a number of different
is when this orientation (i.e., the perception of sources—real or imagined attacks on the natural
where one’s group stands in the social order) is superiority of the dominant group, an intrusion
threatened that race prejudice is manifested. into the sphere of group exclusiveness, or an
Group Position Theory 367

encroachment on areas of proprietary claim. Group Assuming that members of dominant groups will
position theory thus proposes that race prejudice is rarely feel alienated due to their substantial institu-
a defensive reaction to preserve the position of the tionalized privileges, this extension of the group
dominant group. position model implies that alienated minority
groups may hold the strongest feelings of racial
prejudice.
Research Examining Group Position Theory
Blumer placed perceptions of group position and
Limitations of Group Position Theory
the role of competition and threat at the core of
racial prejudice. This was a distinct movement While research highlights many of the components
away from the literature of the time, which focused of the group position model, a fully elaborated
on individual processes. Blumer did not, however, empirical model of the elements of perceived group
conduct an empirical investigation of the premises position has yet to be provided. Additionally, the
of the group position theory. The majority of sub- process of identifying with one’s ingroup and the
sequent inquiries into the theory have been formation of a group identity are missing from the
restricted to indirect tests of its core mechanisms. literature. A number of researchers have argued
Studies that have not employed indirect tests of the that the use of statistical analyses of survey data
model have relied on secondary data analyses with can distort many of group position theory’s pri-
less than ideal measures of core constructs. A num- mary claims, suggesting that quantitative method-
ber of these empirical investigations reduce the ologies reduce processes such as race prejudice to
theory to a structural-level claim of objective basic survey questions that fail to capture the com-
threat. These lines of research, however, are wor- plexities of the original concept. They further
thy of note because of their efforts to examine argue that race relations are in constant process of
claims embedded in the approach, as well as their formation and variable analysis is too crude an
efforts to expand the group position theory to con- instrument to capture this fluidity.
sider dominant and subordinate groups.
Lawrence Bobo has examined a number of
Related Theories
social situations where dominant group members
perceive that they are losing social standing to Group position theory shares commonalities with
members of a racial minority group. For example, other approaches, in particular Muzafer Sherif’s
a heated dispute over the fishing, hunting, and realistic group conflict theory and James Sidanius
gathering rights of the Chippewa Indians in the and Felicia Pratto’s social dominance theory, but
state of Wisconsin led to many Whites feeling there are clear distinctions. A sense of group posi-
deprived in relation to the Chippewa with respect tion involves elements of realistic group conflict
to their perceived gains in resources. In this situa- theory. Both theories examine groups that occupy
tion, it was not that the dominant racial group unequal positions within a social order and the
perceived the subordinate racial group as inferior interests that attach to those positions. The two
or used negative stereotypes to characterize the theories highlight the role of perceived threats to
group but, as Bobo’s research suggested, that groups’ interests and struggles over access to both
Wisconsin residents perceived the Chippewa real and symbolic resources. Group position the-
Indians to be gaining resources at their expense. ory, however, adds a normative and affective
In an intriguing line of research, group position aspect that is not derived from purely material
theory has been expanded to examine race preju- conflicts. Further, while realistic conflict theory
dice held by minority groups by looking at feelings stresses the importance of objective competition,
of racial alienation. Racial alienation manifests in group position theory stresses the subjective sense
a profound sense of group deprivation and a weak, of group position. Both group position theory and
or nonexistent, sense of group entitlement. The social dominance theory share an emphasis on
more group members feel alienated, the more feelings of entitlement, but within social domi-
likely they are to regard other racial groups as nance theory perceptions of competition and
competitive threats to their social position. threat are not clearly articulated.
368 Group Potency

Conclusion aspects of group potency: (1) it is a belief of


mutual confidence that is shared by the members
In examining the relationship between groups as a
of the group and (2) it is a general belief that the
source of racial prejudice, group position theory
group is effective across a variety of tasks or situ-
draws attention to the collective process by which
ations, rather than only in a specific context.
one group comes to define, and redefine, another
Group potency is an important concept in fields
group, as well as the manner in which individuals’
such as group dynamics, management, and indus-
sense of their group’s position in a social order
trial/organizational psychology, because a large
guides their behavior toward other racial groups.
volume of research suggests that group potency
The theory incorporates concepts from both psy-
and performance are positively and reciprocally
chological and sociological literature on prejudice,
related. However, when groups are overconfident,
such as attitudes, affect, stereotypes, group identity,
or possess too much group potency, their perfor-
and patterns of intergroup contact. By drawing on
mance can suffer. This entry begins with a brief
these sources, group position theory posits that
history of such research, then looks at factors
prejudice is not a unidimensional construct.
affecting group potency, related characteristics,
Prejudice involves more than negative beliefs and
and applications of the research.
feelings, and to fully understand this multifaceted
force, scholars must recognize that it concerns pow-
erful commitment to a preferred group position. Background
Danielle L. Blaylock The notion of group potency stems from the semi-
nal work of industrial psychologist Leonard R.
See also Prejudice; Racism; Realistic Group Conflict Sayles, who studied work groups in manufacturing
Theory; Social Dominance Theory; Social Identity plants in the 1950s. Sayles found that “strategic”
Theory work groups—those with high levels of collective
beliefs about their effectiveness—were successful
Further Readings in their work, and that “apathetic” work groups—
Blumer, H. (1958). Race prejudice as a sense of group those that lacked such beliefs—were unsuccessful.
position. The Pacific Sociological Review, 1, 1, 3–7. Sayles also noted that in strategic work groups,
Bobo, L. (1999). Prejudice as group position: success breeds success in the sense that prior good
Microfoundations of a sociological approach to performance can build collective beliefs of efficacy
racism and race relations. Journal of Social Issues, that then can lead to subsequent levels of high per-
55(3), 445–472. formance. Similar observations were made in stud-
Bobo, L., & Hutchings, V.L. (1996). Perceptions of racial ies conducted in the 1990s by team researchers
group competition: Extending Blumer’s theory of such as Richard Hackman.
group position to a multicultural social context. These findings parallel ideas developed by psy-
American Sociological Review, 61, 951–972. chologist Albert Bandura, whose social cognitive
Bobo, L., & Zurinsky, C.L. (1996). Attitudes toward theory identified self-efficacy and collective effi-
residential integration: perceived status difference, cacy as powerful motivational forces for individu-
mere ingroup preference, or racial prejudice? Social als and groups, respectively. Bandura described
Forces, 74, 883–909. self-efficacy as an individual’s belief that he or she
Quillian, L. (1995). Prejudice as a response to a perceived could successfully complete a specific task, in con-
group threat: Population composition and anti- trast with collective efficacy, an individual’s per-
immigrant and racial prejudice in Europe. American sonal belief that his or her group can be successful
Sociological Review, 60, 586–611. in performing a specific task. While self-efficacy is
an individual-level phenomenon targeting an indi-
vidual’s ability to meet a specific goal, collective
Group Potency efficacy involves the group’s perceived ability to be
successful. In each of these cases, in addition to
Group potency is the collective belief within a group ability, it is the individual’s thoughts about himself
that it can be effective. There are two important or herself or the group that can make a critical
Group Potency 369

difference between being a low performer or a part, by that ability. One study of officer cadets
high performer on an individual or collective task. working in groups indicated that group potency
Building upon this research, Richard Guzzo and was an important factor in predicting performance
Gregory Shea developed the notion of group on a problem-solving task, regardless of the
potency (which involves group members’ shared group’s actual ability.
views) in the early 1990s through a series of exper- In addition to leadership, other factors internal
iments and field studies. These researchers devel- to the group can shape members’ potency beliefs.
oped a conceptual framework and a widely used Groups that set clear goals early in the group’s life
measure of group potency. In addition, Guzzo and are more likely to feel confident. Groups whose
Shea demonstrated the distinctiveness of group members are aware of and value each others’
potency from collective efficacy and other motiva- knowledge, skills, abilities, and life experiences
tional concepts. may feel more potent. Prior research suggests that
group size may also influence group potency—too
few members may limit the knowledge and talent
Factors Affecting Group Potency
base, thereby decreasing potency, whereas too
Group potency stems from factors internal and many members may lead to subgroup formation
external to the group. Regarding factors external and conflicts that also can erode group potency. In
to the group, research shows that a supportive general, functional diversity is positively associated
organizational context goes a long way in building with group potency. Research also indicates that
group potency. Organizations that provide rewards, group members’ psychological state, such as expe-
education, information, resources, and goals help riencing “flow,” or being highly engaged in a task,
to support potent groups. Adequate communica- can elevate group potency. In addition, when
tion and cooperation among groups within an groups experience leadership by the group (each
organization helps group members share informa- member shares leadership duties) rather than lead-
tion and resources so that they can feel more con- ership of the group (by one group member), group
fident about their group’s ability to perform. In potency may also increase. Thus, leadership can be
line with Bandura’s social learning theory, organi- an important internal and external force for shap-
zational leaders who model supportive behavior ing group potency.
for team members encourage them to persist There are also factors that can detract from
through difficult times, challenge them to rethink group potency. One is group tenure. The longer a
their ways of doing things, and coach and mentor group works together, the more complacent mem-
them to build group potency. bers can become about their roles and abilities. A
These leadership behaviors are associated with sense of confidence can be problematic when the
transformational leadership, which research has group has performed well over a long period of
linked to the development of group potency in time, but suddenly things change in the environ-
both face-to-face and computer-mediated work ment and members are too comfortable to adapt to
groups. Transformational leaders enhance group the new situation. This is especially problematic in
potency by stressing the importance of group service industries where customer expectations
members working together and highlighting the and requirements for quality are constantly chang-
link between group synergy and successful group ing. Other deleterious effects of group potency can
outcomes. This form of leadership influence can stem from unexpected changes in group member-
become an internal force that builds group norms ship, personal conflicts among group members,
and shapes group processes. For example, the and free riding or social loafing by some members
repeated emphasis on group members’ interdepen- of the group.
dence and the cooperation–outcome link focuses
members’ attention on their collective abilities,
Correlates of Group Potency
thereby increasing the value and appreciation of
their talents and skills. Such an appreciation builds Group potency has been linked to group cohesive-
collective confidence because a group’s belief ness and outcome satisfaction. Groups with strong
about its ability to be effective is influenced, in bonds between their members appear to have high
370 Group Problem Solving and Decision Making

levels of confidence in their collective ability to be development organizations have recently created
effective. Potent groups also appear to be satisfied training programs that emphasize group members’
with their achievements. These group characteris- hope, optimism, confidence, and resilience, which
tics provide process gains that build the belief that represent factors that may be related to group
the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. potency. Coordinators of teams may consider
Research suggests that group potency and per- exploring the relationship between these positive
formance are reciprocally related. In general, psychological states and the development of group
increases in group potency lead to increases in per- potency. Support from senior management (e.g.,
formance, thereby increasing subsequent levels of resources), the creation and maintenance of func-
group potency and so on. This spiraling effect tionally diverse groups, and support from other
results from positive feedback that comes with groups in the organization may also be useful strat-
high levels of performance. Such feedback rein- egies for building group potency.
forces group members’ positive beliefs about their
abilities and effectiveness, and can lead to winning John J. Sosik
streaks for sports teams. See also Group Cohesiveness; Group Motivation; Group
The relationship between group potency and Performance; Transformational Leadership Theories
performance depends on the type of performance
measured. Researchers have observed positive
associations between group potency and creativity, Further Readings
work outcomes, product quality, and customer
de Jong, A. D., Ruyter, K. D., & Wetzels, M. (2005).
service perceptions. In contrast, group potency has
Antecedents and consequences of group potency: A
been shown to have a negative effect on the profit-
study of self-managing service teams. Management
ability of service group operations. This is because
Science, 51(11), 1610–1625.
the goals of customer service and profitability may
Guzzo, R., Yost, P., Campbell, R., & Shea, G. (1993).
be at odds due to the competing values of provid- Potency in groups: Articulating a construct. British
ing high levels of customer service, which can be Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 87–106.
costly, and reduce operating profits. Jung, D. I., & Sosik, J. J. (2003). Group potency and
Group potency has been shown to reduce the collective efficacy: Examining their predictive validity,
harmful effects of a group’s task conflict (i.e., dis- level of analysis and effects of performance feedback
agreement about beliefs and/or methods related to on future group performance. Group & Organization
tasks being performed) on processes and outcomes Management, 28(3), 366–391.
in computer-mediated settings. In one study, task Sosik, J. J., Avolio, B. J., & Kahai, S. S. (1997). Effects of
conflict was negatively related to group cohesive- leadership style and anonymity on group potency and
ness, effectiveness, and outcome satisfaction only effectiveness in a group decision support system
in groups with low levels of group potency. It environment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82,
appears that group potency may soften the impact 89–103.
of task conflict and help groups achieve desirable
processes and outcomes.
Group Problem Solving
Applications and Decision Making
Group potency has several potential applications
for organizations using groups or teams to com- In the broadest sense, a problem is a discrepancy
plete tasks. Given the increasing use of face-to-face between an actual current state and a desired
work groups and virtual teams in organizations, future state. Examples are the givens in an algebra
managers may consider developing training pro- word problem and the correct answer, the engi-
grams focusing on factors external and internal to neering specifications for a new SUV and the fin-
the group that can build group potency (e.g., trans- ished model, and the clues and the correct answers
formational leadership, reward systems). Building in a crossword puzzle. Similarly, in the broadest
on the positive psychology literature, management sense, a decision is a choice among alternatives.
Group Problem Solving and Decision Making 371

Examples are guilty or not guilty for a jury, solving on intellective tasks and group decision
Mortgage X or Mortgage Y for a homebuyer, and making on judgmental tasks.
Candidate A, B, or C for voters in an election. Group tasks may also be distinguished by the
Social psychological theory and research on group number (or proportion) of group members neces-
problem solving and decision making abstracts sary for a collective response. On conjunctive
from these examples by conducting laboratory tasks, all group members must succeed for the
experiments with simplified tasks, typically with group to succeed, such as a team of mountain
college students. This theory and research distin- climbers roped together or a team of neurological
guishes (a) the group task, (b) the group structure, surgeons removing a tumor. On disjunctive tasks,
(c) the group process, and (d) the group product. only one group member needs to succeed for the
The group task is what the group is attempting to group to succeed, such as three students attempt-
do. Group structure includes member characteris- ing to solve a geometry problem or a family trying
tics, such as beliefs, competencies, interests, and to recall the name of a distant relative. Conjunctive
preferences; roles, such as leader or ordinary and disjunctive tasks define the endpoints of a
member; and norms, such as carefully considering dimension of the number of members necessary for
the pros and cons of proposed alternatives. Group a group decision. This number is often formalized
process entails who says what, when, how, to by constitutions and bylaws, such as unanimity in
whom, and with what effect, and the ways in jury decisions for capital cases or simple majority
which group members combine their different to pass a motion using Robert’s Rules of Order.
beliefs and preferences. Finally, the group product
is the problem solution or decision of the group,
Social Combination Processes
which achieves or fails to achieve the group goal
on the task. This entry summarizes the generaliza- Social combination processes map a distribution
tions that have emerged from research on group of group member beliefs, opinions, or preferences
problem solving and decision making. to a single collective group response. Examples
include members who favor the correct or incor-
rect answer to a problem, jury members who
Group Tasks
believe that a defendant is guilty or innocent, and
Intellective tasks have a correct solution, such as voters who prefer Candidates A, B, or C in an
mathematical problems, logical reasoning prob- election. To illustrate, consider five people who
lems, or crossword puzzles. On intellective tasks, attempt to solve an algebra problem alone and
one or more group members who know a correct then as a group. All five members may be correct,
answer may demonstrate it to the incorrect mem- four correct and one incorrect, three correct and
bers who have sufficient understanding to recog- two incorrect, and so on. Given these distribu-
nize a correct answer. Judgmental tasks are tions of member preferences, do groups follow a
evaluative, behavioral, or aesthetic judgments and majority process such that groups of five, four, or
preferences for which no objectively correct three correct group members will be correct and
demonstrable answer exists, such as whether groups of three, four, or five incorrect members
George Washington or Abraham Lincoln was a will be incorrect (a majority wins social combina-
greater president, blackberry or raspberry a tastier tion process)? Is one correct member necessary
jam, or (absent conclusive evidence) a defendant is and sufficient for a correct group response (a truth
innocent or guilty in a jury trial. On intellective wins process)? Or are two correct members neces-
tasks, the objective for the group is to obtain the sary and sufficient (a truth-supported wins pro-
correct answer, whereas on judgmental tasks the cess)? Finally, is the probability of a correct group
objective is to achieve consensus on some response. response proportional to the number of correct
Although “intellective-judgmental” is a continu- group members (a proportionality process)? These
ous dimension rather than a dichotomy, the tasks and other plausible group processes may be for-
used in research tend to fall at one end or the other malized as social combination models, and the
of this dimension, and so it is convenient to orga- predictions of different models competitively
nize research findings in terms of group problem tested against the responses of a number of
372 Group Problem Solving and Decision Making

groups. Thus, the relationship between the nature knowledge effect has been demonstrated for vari-
of the task and the number of group members ous tasks, such as choosing one of three candidates
who are necessary and sufficient for a group for a position, identifying one of three suspects for
response is an important research question. a crime, and selecting one of three investment
opportunities.
Further research has shown that the common
Generalizations About knowledge effect may be overcome in at least three
Group Problem Solving ways. First, the group may be instructed that the
decision is an intellective task with a correct
Group Memory
answer rather than a judgmental task that is a mat-
Evidence indicates that the collective memory of ter of preference. Second, the experimenter may
a group is better than the average memory of its instruct each group member to concentrate on
members. This has been demonstrated for both learning the evidence favoring a particular response
recall and recognition memory and for both verbal and then tell all the members which person has
material and events. Typically two or three accu- which evidence. Third, a leader may encourage all
rate group members are necessary for a correct group members to express all of the information
group response. Experiments on mock juries have they possess, even if it is not corroborated by other
demonstrated that the collective jury memory is members.
better than the individual memory of the average
member and that a quarter to a third of the jury World Knowledge
members will suffice for the jury to accurately
Groups perform better than the average indi-
recall the evidence and judge’s instructions.
vidual on what are referred to as “world knowl-
Transactive memory is the capacity of group
edge” tasks, such as vocabulary, geography,
members to learn and remember different things,
history, basic science, and verbal analogies. The
which gives them more collective than individual
basic social combination process on such tasks is
memory. This has been demonstrated in social and
truth-supported wins, where two correct members
work groups. The crucial factors are agreement on
who support each other are necessary and suffi-
who will learn and know what and coordination
cient to convince an erroneous majority.
of the group members to the task demands. For
example, task demands may be conjunctive, requir-
Mathematical and Logical Problem Solving
ing all members to learn the same thing, or disjunc-
tive, allowing each member to learn and remember Groups also perform better than individuals on
different things. mathematical and logical reasoning problems. The
Information sharing has also been studied. usual social combination process is truth wins,
Experimenters have distributed information among where a single correct member is necessary and
individuals in different ways and then asked them sufficient for a correct group response. On these
to make a collective decision. For example, each of problems, a correct answer exists and a single cor-
three group members may be given two items of rect member is able to demonstrate the answer to
information that favor Candidate A (shared infor- incorrect members, who have sufficient knowledge
mation) and a different item that favors Candidate to recognize the answer.
B (unshared information). If the members each Most of the research examining mathematical
mention their unshared information and the group and logical problem solving has involved an equal
discusses it, they will make an optimal decision number of groups and individuals. Such research
(say, Candidate B). However, if they discuss only compares groups and the average individual. Some
the shared information, they will make a subopti- recent research has compared groups and an
mal decision (say, Candidate A). The initial experi- equivalent number of individuals, for example 40
ments using this hidden profile task found that the four-person groups and 160 individuals. This
groups tended to discuss the common information allows comparison of the groups with the best,
and not the unshared information, which led them second-best, third-best, and fourth-best individu-
to make suboptimal decisions. This robust common als. On some tasks, groups perform at the level of
Group Problem Solving and Decision Making 373

their best member. On other tasks, groups perform (judgmental). Four generalizations emerge from
better than their best member. this research. First, if the correct hypothesis is pro-
posed by a group member, it is virtually certain to
be the final correct group hypothesis. However,
Quantity Estimation
groups do not form correct group hypotheses that
Research has compared groups and individuals no member has proposed. Second, groups perform
on estimations of quantities, such as the popula- at the level of the best of an equivalent number of
tion of cities, lengths of rivers, and revenues of individuals. Third, multiple examples and nonex-
corporations, for which correct answers exist but amples of the correct rule are more important than
are generally unknown by ordinary people. In gen- multiple hypotheses (proposed rules). In other
eral, groups perform somewhat better than indi- words, group members are able to generate suffi-
viduals, and at the level of their average member, cient hypotheses to determine the correct answer,
in quantity estimation. Both groups and individu- but they need sufficient evidence to evaluate them.
als make better estimations when given a frame of Fourth, positive tests (choosing a card that fits the
reference, such as estimating the length of the Ohio current hypothesis) are more effective than nega-
River given the length of the Mississippi River or tive tests (choosing a card that does not fit the cur-
estimating the population of Florida given the rent hypothesis), because positive tests are more
population of Texas. These frames of reference likely to lead to further examples that make the
convert a raw estimation into a more intellective correct rule more apparent.
task by allowing reasoning from the given infor-
mation to the estimated quantity.
Generalizations About
Group Decision Making
Collective Induction
Mock Jury Decisions
Collective induction is the cooperative search
for generalizations, rules, and principles. This is A large amount of research has studied mock
the essence of scientific inquiry. One research pro- juries making decisions in criminal or civil cases. In
gram has simulated this process using a rule- this research, individuals typically read a trial sum-
learning task with ordinary playing cards. The mary and choose their preferred verdict (e.g.,
correct rule may be based on any characteristic of guilty or not guilty). They then discuss the case as
the cards, such as suit (e.g., clubs), number (e.g., a group and choose a collective verdict. Because
larger than seven), alternation (e.g., red and black the pregroup individual decisions are known, the
cards alternate), or any combination of these. The social combination process that underlies the
problem begins with a known example of the cor- group decision can be determined.
rect rule (e.g., the eight of diamonds for the rule Several generalizations emerge from the research
two red and two black cards alternate). On each on criminal cases. First, there are few differences
trial the group members propose individual hypoth- between the verdicts of smaller (e.g., six-person)
eses, agree on a group hypothesis, and choose any and larger (e.g., twelve-person) juries. Second,
card to test their hypothesis. Examples of the cor- groups follow a two-thirds majority decision pro-
rect rule are placed to the right of the previous cess. Third, decisions for groups that do not have
example, and nonexamples are placed below the a two-thirds majority favor the defendant, a find-
last card played, so that an array of evidence ing known as a leniency bias. Fourth, juries seem
(examples and/or nonexamples in the order of to follow two different types of deliberation and
play) develops over successive trials. decision processes. Verdict-driven juries quickly
This inductive rule-learning task is both intellec- divide into factions favoring different verdicts.
tive and judgmental: Hypotheses that do not fit the Each faction proposes only evidence that favors its
evidence may be demonstrated to be nonplausible verdict, and the factions argue and take many bal-
(intellective), but correct hypotheses may not be lots until enough jurors change to allow a group
demonstrated to be uniquely correct relative to decision. In contrast, evidence-driven juries col-
other plausible hypotheses that also fit the evidence lectively consider evidence for and against the
374 Group Problem Solving and Decision Making

defendant and construct a story of the sequence of cautious shift. Subsequently, it was realized that
events. After they have constructed this story, they groups generally make more extreme decisions in
consider which of the possible verdicts matches the direction of the prevailing tendency of their
the story. Thus, verdict-driven juries approach members, which is called the choice shift. The
the decision as an adversarial process, whereas important generalization is that groups exaggerate
evidence-driven juries approach the decision as a the prevailing tendency of their members. The two
cooperative problem-solving process. While the major theoretical explanations for the choice shift
decisions resulting from the two types of delibera- are persuasive arguments theory and social com-
tion are similar, members of evidence-driven juries parison theory. Persuasive arguments theory
afterwards are more satisfied with the deliberation emphasizes that group members encounter new
process and more likely to feel that both their own arguments during group discussion, which cause
and others’ views were fully considered. Fifth, the them to shift their position in a more extreme
most important individual characteristic that pre- direction. Social comparison theory emphasizes
dicts influence in the jury deliberations is world that group members desire to look as good as or
knowledge, which is acquired by education, read- better than others, which causes them to adopt a
ing, travel, and occupational and organizational more extreme view on the issue under consider-
experience. ation. These member changes are then aggregated
Research has also investigated damage decisions by a majority social combination process, resulting
in civil cases. Here, a rather different pattern of in the choice shift.
influence occurs. In civil cases, members who are In a related set of experiments, individuals who
closest to the group median have the most influ- made attitudinal judgments alone and then dis-
ence on the jury decision. cussed the issue were more extreme in their indi-
vidual judgments after group discussion than
before. This phenomenon is called group polariza-
Choice Shift and Group Polarization
tion, although it is more properly group-induced
In the early 1960s, an experiment was conducted polarization. The important generalization is that
in which college students considered hypothetical group discussion and decision exaggerate the sub-
scenarios with two possible actions, one leading to sequent individual judgments of group members.
a more desirable but less likely outcome, and the For example, groups of conservative people make
other leading to a less desirable but more likely out- more conservative judgments as individuals fol-
come. For example, they were told that a student lowing group discussion and decision, whereas
has been accepted in two graduate programs in groups of liberal people make more liberal judg-
chemistry, a rigorous program in a prestigious uni- ments as individuals following group discussion
versity in which few students succeed in obtaining and decision. This has been demonstrated with
their PhD, and a less rigorous program in a less many judgmental tasks.
prestigious university in which virtually all students
succeed. Success in the rigorous program was
Groupthink
described as leading to a better career, but as a more
risky choice. When making group decisions about Groupthink is the name given to deleterious
what odds of success they would accept in order for group processes leading to decisions that turn
the student to choose the more rigorous university, out to be fiascos, such as the decision of President
participants made more risky decisions than the John F. Kennedy to invade Cuba in the Bay of Pigs
average group member had previously made as an and the decision of President Lyndon B. Johnson to
individual. This result, which was replicated with escalate the war in Vietnam. According to Irving
many hypothetical scenarios and with many differ- Janis’s original theory, groupthink occurs in highly
ent populations, is called the risky shift. cohesive and isolated groups with a highly directive
However, scenarios were soon written in which leader. These groups consider themselves morally
groups accepted less risk than their average mem- superior to their adversaries and fail to consider all
ber in such situations as marriage and investment possible alternatives or the reactions of their adver-
in an unstable foreign country, which is called the saries. Members who may have doubts yield to the
Group Socialization 375

directive leader and the apparently unanimous Kerr, N. L., & Tindale, R. S. (2003). Group performance
group opinion in order to “remain players” in the and decision making. Annual Review of Psychology,
group. In contrast, analyses of successful decisions, 56, 623–655
such as that of President Kennedy to impose an Laughlin, P. R., Hatch, E. C., Silver, J. C., & Boh, L.
embargo in the Cuban Missile Crisis, indicate non- (2006). Groups perform better than the best
directive leadership, division of the group into individuals on letters-to-numbers problems: Effects of
independent subgroups, consideration of the pros group size. Journal of Personality and Social
and cons of alternative scenarios, consultation out- Psychology, 90, 644–651.
Levine, J., & Moreland, R. L. (1998). Small groups. In
side the group, appointment of a devil’s advocate,
D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The
and a reconsideration of the initial decision prior to
handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 415–467).
the final decision. Experimental research testing
New York: McGraw-Hill.
this influential theory has shown that the most
important factor is directive leadership, whereas
group cohesion and isolation are less important.

Group Socialization
Conclusion: “Work the Problem”
In the movie Apollo 13, an oxygen tank in the The life spans of groups vary widely. At one end
spacecraft explodes on the way to the moon, the of the longevity continuum are groups that exist
moon mission must be aborted, and the lives of the for minutes, such as several strangers who coop-
astronauts are seriously threatened. When the erate briefly to help the victim of an auto acci-
flight controllers at Mission Control erupt in angry dent. At the other end of the continuum are
mutual recriminations, the flight director makes a groups that exist for centuries, such as the Society
strong simple command: “Work the problem!” of Jesus (Jesuits), a male Catholic religious order
Everyone settles down to devote his or her energies founded in the 1500s that continues to this day.
and skills to the paramount problem of saving the Most groups fall somewhere between these two
astronauts. After a final radio silence, the reenter- extremes, with life spans ranging from a few
ing spacecraft splashes down near the rafts of the hours to a few years.
frogmen and television cameras. An enraptured Groups that exist over time are not static enti-
world is suddenly unified. Just like the astronauts, ties. Instead they change in ways, large and small,
the flight director, and the people of Mission that can profoundly affect their members’ interac-
Control, we are where we are—with the prob- tions and outcomes. Some of these changes, labeled
lems we must solve, the decisions we must make, group development, involve alterations in the group
and the human and material resources we pos- as a whole. It has been proposed, for example, that
sess. Research on group problem solving and many groups move through five consecutive stages
decision making indicates that groups can be in which members exhibit (1) polite efforts to get
highly effective if we cooperate with each other to acquainted, (2) conflict regarding how the group
work the problem. should function, (3) consensus about group proce-
dures, (4) cooperative efforts to achieve common
Patrick R. Laughlin goals, and (5) withdrawal from one another and
the group as a whole. Other changes, labeled group
See also Common Knowledge Effect; Group Performance;
Group Polarization; Group Task; Groupthink; Hidden socialization, involve alterations in the relationship
Profile Task; Juries; Social Decision Schemes between the group and each of its members.
Although development and socialization can influ-
ence one another, they are different processes and
Further Readings hence warrant separate consideration. This entry
Hastie, R. (1986). Review essay: Experimental evidence focuses on group socialization, examining how the
on group accuracy. In G. Owen & B. Grofman (Eds.), length and quality of individuals’ relationship with
Information pooling and group accuracy (pp. 129–157). a group affect their thoughts, feelings, and behav-
Westport, CT: JAI. iors toward one another.
376 Group Socialization

A Model of Group Socialization Groups’ and individuals’ evaluations of one


another are typically not static, but instead change
Most of the work on socialization has focused on
over time. When this happens, their commitment
organizations rather than small groups. To correct
also changes, increasing when evaluations become
this imbalance, in 1982 Richard Moreland and
more positive and decreasing when they become
John Levine developed a comprehensive model of
more negative. Both the group and the individual
group socialization designed to explain the changes
develop decision criteria (specific levels of commit-
that groups and individuals produce in one another
ment) that indicate when the individual should
from the beginning to the end of their relationship.
undergo a role transition signaling movement from
Although the model is relevant to many aspects of
one phase of group membership to another. Each
organizational socialization, it is meant to apply
party tries to initiate a transition when its commit-
primarily to small, voluntary groups whose mem-
ment rises or falls to its decision criterion, but a
bers interact on a regular basis, feel emotional ties
transition will only occur if both parties agree that
to one another, share a common perspective, and
it is appropriate. Because role transitions signifi-
work together to achieve joint goals. An important
cantly alter the relationship between the group and
hallmark of the model is its focus on reciprocal
the individual, it is important that they both know
influence between the two parties—not only can
when a transition occurs. For this reason, transitions
the group change the individual, but the individual
are often marked with special a ceremony, or rite of
can also change the group.
passage. Following a role transition, the two parties
continue to evaluate one another, often using differ-
ent criteria. These evaluations can produce further
Basic Processes
changes in commitment and subsequent role transi-
According to the model, three psychological tions. Thus, an individual’s passage through a group
processes underlie group socialization—evalua- involves a series of membership phases separated by
tion, commitment, and role transition. Because role transitions. Figure 1 illustrates a typical passage
groups want to recruit and retain members who involving five membership phases (investigation,
will help them achieve their goals, they evaluate socialization, maintenance, resocialization, and
individuals in terms of their previous, current, and remembrance) and four role transitions (entry,
probable future contributions to these goals. acceptance, divergence, and exit).
Similarly, because individuals want to belong to
groups that will help them satisfy their personal
Passage Through the Group
needs, they evaluate groups in terms of their previ-
ous, current, and probable future contributions to The first phase of group membership is investi-
these needs. gation, during which the group and the individual
These evaluations, in turn, affect how much decide whether to establish a formal relationship.
commitment the group and the individual feel In this phase, the group engages in recruitment,
toward one another. The higher the group’s evalu- which involves first identifying and then evaluating
ation of the individual, the more commitment it prospective members. In some cases, identification
will feel toward him or her. Similarly, the higher is assigned to recruitment specialists; in other cases,
the individual’s evaluation of the group, the more all members are encouraged to keep an eye out for
commitment he or she will feel toward it. When a promising candidates. Once prospective members
group feels strong commitment toward an indi- are identified, they must be evaluated in terms of
vidual, it will experience positive emotions toward the likelihood that they will make a positive contri-
the person, try to satisfy his or her needs, and seek bution to the group. This process can be more or
to gain or maintain the person as a member. In a less difficult, depending on the ease of assessing the
parallel fashion, when an individual feels strong characteristics necessary for effective performance
commitment toward a group, he or she will experi- (e.g., knowledge of organic chemistry vs. ability to
ence positive emotions toward it, try to achieve stay calm under pressure). At the same time, pro-
group goals, and seek to gain or maintain member- spective members engage in reconnaissance, which
ship in the group. involves identifying and evaluating potential groups
Group Socialization 377

Time
Prospective New Full Marginal Ex-
Member Member Member Member Member

Acceptance
AC

Divergence
Commitment

DC

Entry
EC
Exit
XC

Investigation Socialization Maintenance Resocialization Remembrance


Recruitment Accommodation Role Accommodation Tradition
vs. vs. Negotiation vs. vs.
Reconnaissance Assimilation Assimilation Reminiscence

Figure 1 A Model of Group Socialization


Source: Reprinted from Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (1982). Socialization in small groups: Temporal changes in
individual‑group relations. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 15, pp. 137–192). New
York: Academic Press; reprinted by permission of Elsevier.

that they might join. These tasks can also vary in and gifts. These kinds of ceremonies, which can
difficulty, depending on the number and visibility vary in degree of positivity, are useful because they
of groups in people’s environment and their will- elicit gratitude from newcomers and motivate them
ingness to reveal information about themselves. If to work hard. In other cases, entry ceremonies
the group’s commitment to the individual rises to involve negative treatment, such as initiations that
its entry criterion (EC), it will extend an offer of can vary from mild to harsh. Negative ceremonies
membership. Similarly, if the individual’s commit- are useful because they allow current members to
ment to the group rises to his or her entry criterion, assess newcomers’ commitment to the group and
he or she will seek such an offer. also motivate them to rationalize their suffering in
If both parties’ commitment rises to their respec- a way that increases their commitment (“If this
tive entry criteria during investigation, the person group is so hard to get into, it must be valuable”).
will make a role transition from prospective mem- Once entry has occurred, the group and the
ber to new member. The ceremonies that signal individual enter the second phase of group mem-
entry are designed to both test and increase new bership—socialization. During this phase, the
members’ commitment to the group. Such commit- group attempts to change the individual so that
ment is important because current members often he or she contributes more to the attainment of
have doubts about new members’ skills and their group goals. This involves providing the new
understanding and acceptance of group norms. In member with the knowledge, ability, and motiva-
some cases, entry ceremonies involve positive treat- tion needed to play the role of a full group mem-
ment of new members, such as welcoming parties ber. Groups use a variety of tactics in socializing
378 Group Socialization

newcomers, ranging from formal training to punishment in which full members are forced to
informal mentoring. As Levine and Moreland engage in degrading behavior and suffer physical
have suggested, groups’ success in socializing new pain.
members is influenced by newcomers’ character- Once acceptance has occurred, the group and
istics and behaviors (e.g., their familiarity with the individual enter the third phase of group
the group before joining and efforts to learn membership—maintenance. During this phase,
about it after joining), as well as current mem- the two parties feel strong commitment to one
bers’ characteristics and behaviors (e.g., their another and engage in role negotiation, during
prior experience dealing with newcomers and which the group tries to place the individual in a
ability to integrate newcomers into group activi- role that maximizes his or her contributions to
ties). To the extent that the group is successful in group goal attainment and the individual tries to
changing the individual, he or she undergoes define that role in a way that maximizes satisfac-
assimilation. During the socialization phase, the tion of personal needs. In seeking to fill a particu-
individual also attempts to change the group so lar role (e.g., treasurer), the group looks for
that it contributes more to the satisfaction of his candidates who are likely to perform the role well
or her personal needs. This involves providing and ask relatively little in return. Once a favorite
the group with information about these needs candidate has been identified, the group must con-
and motivating it to satisfy them. The latter goal vince the person to accept the role. This can
is easier to achieve in some cases than others. For involve offering incentives (e.g., money, power)
example, the more committed the group is to the for taking on the role, making the person’s cur-
newcomer (e.g., because he or she possesses valu- rent role less rewarding, appealing to the person’s
able skills), the more motivated current members loyalty to the group, threatening the person with
are to satisfy the individual’s needs. In addition, ostracism for refusal, and so on. In a parallel fash-
compared to a newcomer entering the group ion, an individual who wishes to occupy a par-
alone, two or more newcomers entering together ticular role must convince the group to allow this
often find it easier to convince the group to to happen. This can involve making a case that
address their needs. To the extent that newcom- one is uniquely qualified to perform the role,
ers are effective in changing the group, it under- offering to play the role without special incen-
goes accommodation. tives, performing one’s current role with reduced
If the group’s and the individual’s commitment enthusiasm, and so on. After a full member takes
to one another during socialization rise to their on a particular role, the group’s commitment to
respective acceptance criteria (AC), the person will the individual depends on how well he or she ful-
make a role transition from new member to full fills the role, and the individual’s commitment to
member. As in the case of entry, the ceremonies the group depends on how satisfying he or she
that mark acceptance are designed to both test and finds the role. To the extent that both parties
increase members’ commitment to the group. evaluate the situation positively, their mutual
Although people who have completed socializa- commitment will remain high.
tion generally pose less threat to the group than do However, if the group’s and the individual’s
those who have just joined, the group is nonethe- commitment to one another during maintenance
less motivated to make sure that full members are fall to their respective divergence criteria (DC), the
highly committed. Such commitment is important person will make a role transition from full mem-
because full members have more power, status, ber to marginal member. Divergence ceremonies
and responsibility than do people in other phases vary in negativity, but they rarely have positive
of group membership. Like the ceremonies that features. Their negativity can be influenced by sev-
mark entry, those that signal acceptance can be eral factors. For example, such ceremonies tend to
either positive or negative and can vary in inten- be harsher when marginal members’ behavior is
sity. Positive ceremonies often involve sharing attributed to controllable causes (e.g., motivation)
secret information about the group and bestowing rather than uncontrollable causes (e.g., illness) and
new rights and responsibilities. Negative ceremo- when the group is performing poorly and is under-
nies can range from mild harassment to harsh staffed. Divergence ceremonies vary widely and
Group Socialization 379

include demotion in rank, reduced privileges and from marginal member to ex-member. Like diver-
responsibilities, less access to secret information, gence ceremonies, exit ceremonies vary in negativ-
exclusion from informal cliques, and increased ity, but rarely have positive features. Moreover,
monitoring of one’s behavior. the factors that influence the harshness of diver-
Once divergence has occurred, the group and gence ceremonies (the perceived controllability of
the individual enter the fourth phase of group marginal members’ behavior, the group’s perfor-
membership—resocialization. During this phase, mance and staffing level) have parallel effects on
the two parties try to repair their relationship. The exit ceremonies. Harsh exit ceremonies, which
group’s efforts to resocialize a marginal member subject marginal members to public humiliation,
are more intense when the member’s presumed can take several forms. These include forcing the
reason for failing to meet group expectations is members to apologize for their misdeeds, requiring
controllable rather than uncontrollable, when the them to return membership insignia and previ-
member previously had high rather than low status ously obtained rewards (e.g., bonuses), and deny-
in the group, and when the member will be hard ing them future benefits typically given to
rather than easy to replace. To the extent that the ex-members (e.g., pensions). Such ceremonies serve
group is successful in changing the individual, he several functions, including punishing deviates for
or she undergoes assimilation. During the resocial- their transgressions, warning other members about
ization phase, the marginal member also attempts what will happen to them if they misbehave, and
to influence the group. His or her efforts are more signaling to outsiders that the group does not tol-
intense when the group’s presumed reason for fail- erate certain forms of behavior. In contrast, mild
ing to meet the member’s needs is controllable exit ceremonies remove marginal members from
rather than uncontrollable, when the member’s the group while allowing them to save face. These
prior status was high rather than low, and when include eliminating the individual’s responsibilities
the member has unattractive rather than attractive (e.g., by downsizing the group), convincing the
options outside the group. To the extent that the individual to resign quietly (e.g., by threatening
marginal member is successful in changing the exposure and/or providing a generous severance
group, it undergoes accommodation. package), and helping the person move to another
Resocialization can have one of two outcomes, group (e.g., by writing inflated letters of recom-
depending on whether the group’s and the indi- mendation). Such ceremonies may be used because
vidual’s commitment to one another rise to their of a feeling of responsibility toward people who
respective divergence criteria or fall to their respec- once made valuable contributions to the group,
tive exit criteria (XC). When the two parties’ com- fear of retaliation from angry ex-members, or con-
mitment rises, the person will return to full cern that outsiders will think poorly of the group
membership via a special role transition (conver- if it has flawed members.
gence). Of all the decision criteria identified in the Once exit has occurred, the group and the indi-
model, only the divergence criterion produces a vidual enter the fifth and final phase of group
change in membership status when crossed either membership—remembrance. This phase can vary
from above (maintenance to resocialization) or in length, depending on how long the individual
from below (resocialization to maintenance). was a member and how committed the two parties
Although convergence might seem to cancel out were to one another. During remembrance, the
the negative implications of divergence for both group develops a consensus about how much the
the group and the individual, this is frequently not individual contributed to its goals, and this retro-
the case. Often groups have a lingering distrust of spective evaluation influences its commitment to
full members who previously “fell from grace,” on the ex-member. Commitment can also be influ-
the assumption that they might do so again. And enced by how the person behaves after leaving
often full members who previously occupied a (e.g., donating money to the group vs. airing its
marginal status in the group feel a lingering dirty laundry to outsiders). As time passes and the
estrangement from the source of their demotion. individual becomes less salient to the group, he or
When the two parties’ commitment falls to their she passes into the group’s tradition. Memories of
exit criteria, the person will make a role transition the ex-member can affect the group’s reaction to
380 Group Socialization

current and future members. For example, an ex- set of decision criteria and are equally committed
member who embarrassed the group may reduce to one another throughout their relationship, this
the likelihood that it will recruit prospective mem- is not always the case. And when it is not, the two
bers with similar characteristics. In a parallel fash- parties are likely to experience conflict regarding
ion, during the remembrance phase the individual the timing of role transitions.
thinks about how much group membership satis-
fied his or her personal needs, and this retrospec- John M. Levine
tive evaluation influences the ex-member’s
commitment to the group. Commitment can also See also Group Boundaries; Group Composition; Group
be influenced by how the group behaves after the Development; Group Structure; Identification and
individual leaves (e.g., by including him or her in Commitment; Inclusion/Exclusion; Norms; Power;
its activities vs. denying that he or she was ever a Roles; Role Transitions
member). As time passes and the group becomes
less salient to the individual, it is gradually incor-
porated into his or her reminiscence. Memories of Further Readings
the group can affect the person’s reactions to cur- Ashforth, B. E. (2001). Role transitions in organizational
rent and future groups. For example, past mem- life: An identity-based perspective. Mahwah, NJ:
bership in a highly rewarding group may increase Lawrence Erlbaum.
the ex-member’s expectations for groups that he or Bauer, T. N., Bodner, T., Erdogan, B., Truxillo, D. M.,
she later joins. & Tucker, J. S. (2007). Newcomer adjustment during
organizational socialization: A meta-analytic review of
antecedents, outcomes, and methods. Journal of
Additional Considerations
Applied Psychology, 92, 707–721.
In summarizing the group socialization model, Griffin, A. E. C., Colella, A., & Goparaju, S. (2000).
an idealized picture was painted of how a “typi- Newcomer and organizational socialization tactics: An
cal” individual might pass through a “typical” interactionist perspective. Human Resource
group. However, passage through a group can be Management Review, 10, 453–474.
more complex, as the following examples illus- Levine, J. M., & Moreland, R. L. (1994). Group
trate. We assumed that group and individual com- socialization: Theory and research. In W. Stroebe &
mitment levels change gradually over time, but M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social
sometimes they undergo sudden and dramatic psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 305–336). Chichester, UK:
shifts (e.g., when a newcomer performs an heroic John Wiley.
act that causes a surge in the group’s commit- Levine, J. M., Moreland, R. L., & Hausmann, L. R. M.
ment). In addition, we did not discuss the fact that (2005). Managing group composition: Inclusive and
decision criteria may vary in their positions rela- exclusive role transitions. In D. Abrams, M. A. Hogg,
& J. M. Marques (Eds.), The social psychology of
tive to one another, which can have implications
inclusion and exclusion (pp. 137–160). New York:
for the number of role transitions and membership
Psychology Press.
phases that a person experiences. For example,
Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (1982). Socialization in
while the acceptance criterion must be higher than
small groups: Temporal changes in individual–group
both the divergence and exit criteria, the entry cri- relations. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in
terion could be either higher or lower than the exit experimental social psychology (Vol. 15, pp. 137–192).
criterion. And the length of a membership phase New York: Academic Press.
can vary greatly, depending on whether the two Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (2001). Socialization in
decision criteria that demarcate it are similar (lead- organizations and work groups. In M. E. Turner (Ed.),
ing to a short phase) or dissimilar (leading to a Groups at work: Theory and research (pp. 69–112).
long phase). In unusual cases in which two adja- Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
cent decision criteria are identical (e.g., DC = XC), Van Maanen, J., & Schein, E. H. (1979). Toward a
the phase they would have demarcated will not theory of organizational socialization. In B. M. Staw
occur at all! Finally, although the figure assumes (Ed.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 1,
that the group and the individual share the same pp. 209–264). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Group Structure 381

arose naturally from kin relations. As communities


Group Structure grew and individuals migrated from home com-
munities to more urban areas and joined a differ-
The discipline of social psychology is rooted in the entiated workforce and society, family ties were
quest to understand two aspects of how people strained. New forms of social patterns emerged,
relate to and interact with one another: stability built on the basis of organic solidarity—the inter-
and change. Regularities that engender observable, dependence of functional positions in society. In
stable, and repeated uniformity in social interac- the emerging industrial society, characterized by a
tion are generally attributed to group structure. division of labor, no single individual could sur-
Even change—or group dynamics—is often con- vive on the basis of her or his own work. The role
sidered to have a predictable logic, which research- one played in any social group depended on the
ers link to group structure, defined as the uniform role others played. This interdependence became
patterns in the relations among group members the foundation for patterned social relations,
that are linked to social positions and categories. according to Durkheim.
In this entry, a brief summary of the intellectual In a parallel logic examining the structure of
history and background of the concept of group social relationships, Ferdinand Tönnies also picked
structure is given, followed by a discussion of up on the importance of structure as the key to
benchmarks in research that have helped scientists understanding social life. He made an important
understand the nature of group structure and the distinction between community and society—the
role group structure plays in group processes. former is closely linked to the concept of a group.
Tönnies referred to the rationality of order in
social interaction derived from one’s position in
History and Background
face-to-face groups (i.e., communities) whose
From the very earliest studies of group dynamics, members share a common purpose and values as
researchers have recognized that relations between gemeinschaft. In contrast, gesellschaft refers to
group members play an important role in what macro relations born of social class position, inter-
people do and what happens to them. Widely rec- ests, and control and formalized through laws and
ognized as the first social psychological experi- policies.
ment, Norman Triplett’s The Dynamogenic Factors Concurrent with this early work, Georg Simmel
in Pacemaking and Competition, published in (recognized by some as the father of modern soci-
1898, demonstrated that the physical presence of ology) was developing a theory of social life
other people in a competitive relationship enhanced prem­ised on patterns of association among indi-
performance over that obtained when people per- viduals. Simmel posited that society was best
formed alone. While these early studies of social conceptualized in terms of repetitive patterns of
facilitation did little to explore the actual nature of activities between individuals across time and
the group members’ relationships, they firmly place, or “forms-of-sociation.” Simmel’s early
established the impact of those relationships, lead- interest was in patterns of reciprocity, hierarchy,
ing researchers to explore different facets of the and affiliation.
relationships as well as regularities in them. According to many researchers, Simmel included,
Early on, social philosophers and social theo- norms and values are fundamental building blocks
rists pointed to norms and values as the fundamen- in determining the behavior of people vis-à-vis one
tal source of regularity in social relations, another. Yet, it did not take social psychologists
particularly in small groups and communities. long to recognize that expectations for behavior
Émile Durkheim, who is associated more com- (i.e., norms) and beliefs about appropriate or
monly with sociology than psychology, offered the desirable behaviors and outcomes (i.e., values)
concept of mechanical solidarity—ties between were themselves tied to people’s position in a
members generated by shared values and experi- social system. That is, for example, behaviors such
ence—to define social relations. He proposed that as deference of one person to another are expected
mechanical solidarity made cooperation and civil by virtue of people’s relative status positions in the
society possible, and that mechanical solidarity group within which they are interacting.
382 Group Structure

Society is possible, according to Simmel, techniques to diagram and quantify relationships


Durkheim, Tönnies, and other early social theo- between group members along any of a number of
rists, because of such predictability in relationships. dimensions of interaction. Moreno’s early work
Simmel’s work became the foundation for the study focused on using sociometric methods to identify
of social structure—uniform patterns of relation- subgroups and alliances within groups, arguing
ships between members of a society, emanating that these “hidden structures” determined the cli-
from the social categories members occupy. As mate of a group and, through it, the well-being of
Simmel at least implicitly recognized, those patterns members. Sociometric methods took rapid hold,
arose in different but interrelated dimensions of became the basis for the journal Sociometry (now
interaction (e.g., reciprocity, hierarchy, affiliation). Social Psychology Quarterly), and were the pre-
To summarize, the concept of structure in social cursors of network analytic methods used in con-
relations grew out of early recognition by social temporary research on group structure and
theorists that (1) there are recognizable patterns in processes.
social interaction, which (2) arise from the posi- As the utility of graph theoretic methods as a
tions individuals occupy vis-à-vis one another, and means of generating insight on the nature and
(3) carry with them norms that govern behavior consequences of group structure became appar-
for individuals occupying one position in relation ent, researchers began to rapidly adopt the strat-
to those occupying other positions. Thus, we can egy to understand a range of group structures. In
conceptualize group structure as the uniform pat- a series of studies on the relationship between the
terns across multiple dimensions of interaction communication structure of a group and how the
within and between groups, arising from group group performed on a problem-solving task, Alex
members’ social categories and the norms govern- Bavelas and Harold Leavitt demonstrated that
ing behavior within and across those social catego- more centralized structures (i.e., those in which
ries. As this conceptualization suggests, group one or a couple of group members were directly
structure defines interaction both among group allowed to communicate with all or the majority
members and across the boundaries of groups. To of meetings) generated quicker and less error-
date, however, most research on group structure prone solutions to a group information-sharing
has focused on the effects of group structure on problem, compared to less centralized structures
uniformity of behavior among members of the (i.e., those whose members communicated only
same group, intragroup structure, as opposed to with one or two others). In addition, the studies
patterns in the behavior of members across groups, by Bavelas and Leavitt revealed that centralized
intergroup structure. The following sections pro- structures were perceived as more likely to
vide a brief overview of benchmark research pro- involve a strong leader (usually one of the indi-
grams in these two lines of research involving viduals occupying a more centralized position).
group structure. Members of decentralized groups, however,
expressed greater satisfaction with the group
than members of more centralized groups. This
Structure in Intragroup Contexts
work suggested that leadership may be differenti-
The vast majority of research on uniformity in the ated into two roles: task leadership and socio­
patterns of relationships in groups has focused on emotional leadership.
within-group analyses. The early work of Jacob Focusing on the socioemotional or affective
Moreno, a psychotherapist, set the stage for the structure of interpersonal relationships, Fritz
theoretical strategy and methodology of modern Heider’s seminal work, The Psychology of
analyses of group structure. Moreno argued that Interpersonal Relations, posited that perceptions
individual well-being is rooted in interpersonal of individuals (like objects) tended toward “psy-
relationships. Consequently, documenting and chological balance”—a logical and stable constel-
understanding those relationships is the key for lation of positive and negative affect within a
successful psychosocial interventions. To facilitate network of people or objects. While anecdotal
such understanding, Moreno developed a research examples served to convey the principles of
methodology called sociometry, which uses graph balance, extending them to large groups proved
Group Structure 383

challenging. Dorwin Cartwright and Frank Harary, of leadership and influence among members of
however, used graph theoretic methods to formal- trial juries could be predicted by the interaction
ize and extend Heider’s principles of balance. The patterns among members, as well as their social
result was a compelling demonstration of the inter- characteristics. Bales’s work alongside that of
relations between group structure and group Strodtbeck, in turn, became an important founda-
dynamics based on a single key assumption: tion for research by Joseph Berger and his col-
Groups in balance tend to remain in balance, and leagues in their theoretical research program on
unbalanced groups tend toward balance. This expectation states. This program entails a number
assumption and the application of network meth- of theories relating interaction patterns to struc-
ods to document and track changes in groups led tural differentiation among group members, includ-
to new abilities to predict such phenomena as exits ing status characteristics theory—a theory that
and entries into groups, changes in affiliations and details how states of social categories (such as
communication patterns among group members, “male” or “female” states of the category “sex”),
and the dissolution of groups. which are imbued with greater or lesser social
Robert Freed Bales took up the differentiation value in accord with the norms of the broader soci-
of leadership roles (i.e., task oriented versus ety and are tied to differentiation in the content
socioemotional oriented) as a part of his larger and amount of interaction engaged in by those
program of understanding patterns of interaction assigned to the states. For instance, men tend to be
in problem-solving groups. Using “who-to- more valued in wider society than women (as
whom” techniques akin to network analysis, he reflected, for example, by men receiving greater
examined the different kinds of verbal and non- earnings than women with comparable job types,
verbal behaviors exchanged by groups, using this ability, and experience). This differential social
as a foundation for the development of an ana- valuing bestows differential status on men and
lytic method for examining groups, Interaction women in social groups. Research over several
Process Analysis (IPA). Bales’s IPA methodology decades shows that as interaction in groups pro-
approached groups as networks of actors engaged ceeds, lower status actors tend to be more deferen-
in act-by-act exchanges. Through analysis of tial to higher status actors in group interaction,
these exchanges, Bales demonstrated that groups higher status actors tend to be more dominant and
are demarcated by identifiable stages in their subsequently more influential in group problem
interactions, which focus on the resolution of solving, even when actual ability is unknown or
problems. The six problems his IPA methodology even runs contrary to the status that social catego-
identifies are problems of orientation, evaluation, ries engender.
control, decision, tension management, and inte- As graph-theoretic methods and social network
gration. The former four (orientation, evaluation, analysis matured, they began to be applied to a
control, and decision problems) reflect task- host of other domains. Alongside interests in lead-
related issues that groups must resolve, while the ership, researchers gained an interest in the con-
latter two (tension management and integration) cept of power, or control over valued resources,
reflect socioemotional issues the group must which structures relationships among members in
resolve. Consistent with the work of Bavelas and groups. George Homans viewed power in behav-
Leavitt, Bales and his colleagues demonstrated iorist terms, proposing that resources could be
that key actors emerge to lead the group through used to influence behavior of group members as a
the resolution of these problems (i.e., the task reward (positive reinforcement) or punishment
leader and the socioemotional leader) and that (i.e., by denying resources to members). Examining
the actors assuming these leadership roles could the flow of resources using mathematical and net-
be identified by the pattern or structure of their work analytic methods, Richard Emerson offered
who-to-whom acts. an insight that served to change much thinking
Bales’s seminal work influenced a host of col- about groups and group structure. Power, he
leagues and students, including Fred Strodtbeck, argued, was a characteristic not of a member of a
who adopted the IPA methodology in his famous group, but rather of the relations between group
analysis of juries. His studies showed that patterns members. This key insight led researchers studying
384 Group Structure

not only power, but a host of other group struc- Structure in Intergroup Contexts
tures (e.g., influence, communication, affiliation,
affect) to explicitly articulate structure in terms of In contrast to the extensive research on intra-
relations between members, as opposed to as ema- group structure, relatively little work has been
nating from an attribute of members. done to theorize the structure of relationships
A further development in the understanding of between social groups outside that of social net-
power, by David Willer and his colleagues, also work analysts noted above. The work that has
served to change the landscape of group studies. occurred, however, has had a profound effect on
Willer proposed that it is not power use that mat- the study of group dynamics. An early and influ-
ters in shaping group relations, but rather the ential line of work on intergroup structure and
potential for power (as perceived by group mem- relations across group boundaries is the work by
bers) that affects groups. This line of reasoning Muzafer Sherif and his colleagues, captured in a
echoed earlier work by symbolic interactionists series of studies on the relations between groups
who, drawing on William James’s work, recog- of boys at a summer camp—the renowned
nized that “what men perceive to be real is real in “Robbers Cave” experiments. Sherif demon-
its consequences.” strated that intergroup attitudes are conditioned
The methods of exchange theorists drew upon by the structure of access to valued resources.
and matured alongside social network analysis. In When resources are acquired through a zero-sum
the 1970s and 1980s, significant computational competition, group members tend to develop hos-
and methodological advances by Harrison White, tile attitudes toward members of an outgroup and
Linton Freeman, and other network analysts seek opportunities to undermine the outgroup’s
forged new paths in not only how structure is pursuit of those resources. In contrast, when
theoretically conceptualized, but how it is quanti- resource acquisition requires cooperation across
tatively measured. Owing partly to increased avail- groups, positive attitudes and relations tend to
ability and growing processing power of computers, arise across members of the groups.
social network analysts developed empirically Another line of research exploring intergroup
driven conceptualizations of patterns of relations structure is social identity theory, developed by
among individuals, operationalizing structure in Henry Tajfel and John Turner. This line of research
terms of such concepts as density (i.e., the inter- remains one of the most prolific and influential
connectedness of group members) and centrality research programs on group structure and action.
(i.e., the extent to which the relations in a group Social identity theory is also a multilevel theory,
are focused on one or a few members). linking self-concept to group membership and to
The methodological strategy of social network attitudes and behaviors toward ingroup and out-
analysis is founded on empirically examining how group members. At the core of this work is the
relationships between individuals are organized assumption that individuals seek to enhance their
and how that organization affects individual sense of self. The self, in turn, is comprised of iden-
behaviors, attitudes, and interactions. As a result, tities derived from membership in social groups. To
network analysts tend to avoid a priori assump- the extent that the social groups to which one
tions regarding who is or is not a member of a belongs are viewed favorably (by oneself or others),
group, unlike other approaches to conceptualizing one’s self-concept is enhanced. Furthermore, identi-
groups (i.e., on the basis of commonly shared traits ties are assessed through a process of social compar-
or identities). Indeed, one of the most interesting ison—that is, what matters is the extent to which
implications of social network analysis is that one’s group is viewed more or less positively com-
groups may be best conceptualized as clusters of pared to one or more other groups. Tajfel and his
dense ties among individuals, who, in turn, are tied colleagues demonstrated that individuals engage in
(albeit less densely) to individuals in other clusters. a variety of behaviors that generate advantages for
That is, social network analysis calls into question members of the group to which they belong, includ-
the notion of a group as a closed system of indi- ing offering exaggerated positive evaluations of
viduals, instead emphasizing the fluidity of group ingroup members, overrewarding them, and afford-
boundaries. ing them greater influence in decision making.
Group Task 385

In summary, group structure, the uniform pat-


terns in the relations among group members, serves Group Task
as both an independent and dependent variable in
the study of group processes. The dynamics within Groups exist for many reasons—some social (pro-
and across groups can be conceptualized in terms viding settings where we can satisfy our need to
of the way relationships are organized, the content belong), some symbolic (contributing to our sense
of the relationships (e.g., friendship, communica- of identity), and some task related (e.g., making a
tion, identity), and how those relationships affect decision, solving a problem, winning a sports
individual attitudes, behaviors, and interactions. competition). This entry deals with the latter rea-
son—performing a group task—and considers
Lisa Troyer and C. Wesley Younts some of the ways in which aspects of the group’s
task guide how the group and its members behave.
See also Communication Networks; Group Cohesiveness;
Interaction Process Analysis; Leadership; Roles; Social
This is particularly important because generalities
Exchange in Networks and Groups; Social Identity about groups (e.g., “groups are better performers
Theory; Social Networks; Status Characteristics/ than individuals”) are all too often asserted as if
Expectation States Theory they held true across any and every task that a
group might confront. To the contrary, nearly any
assertion about group behavior must take into
Further Readings account the nature of the group’s task. With few
Bales, R. F. (1950). A set of categories for small group (if any) exceptions, a statement about group
interaction. American Sociological Review, 15, 257–263. behavior should always have an explicit or implicit
Bavelas, A. (1950). Communication patterns in task- qualification—“but, of course, this depends upon
oriented groups. Journal of the Acoustical Society of the following features of the group’s task . . .”
America, 22, 725–730. This entry gives a few examples of why this is
Cartwright, D., & Harary, F. (1956). Structural balance: true, describes some of the task distinctions that
A generalization of Heider’s theory. Psychological have been proposed and used successfully to ana-
Review, 63, 277–293. lyze group behavior, and finally describes the
Durkheim, E. (1933). The division of labor in society most ambitious attempt to classify group tasks,
(G. Simpson, Trans.). New York: Free Press. (Original which was developed by the late Joseph E.
work published 1893) McGrath in his 1984 book, Groups: Interaction
Freeman, L. C. (2004). The development of social network and Performance.
analysis: A study in the sociology of science. Vancouver, Groups often simultaneously work on several
British Columbia, Canada: Empirical Press. tasks or on complex tasks with rather different
Heider, F. (1953). The psychology of interpersonal features. For example, a high school volleyball
relations. New York: John Wiley.
team wants to maximize student participation and
Moreno, J. L. (1937). Sociometry in relation to other
fitness, to represent their school well, to entertain
social sciences. Sociometry, 1, 206–219.
spectators, to win interteam competitions, and so
Sherif, M., & Sherif, C. W. (1953). Groups in harmony
on. Each subtask may place different demands on
and tension. New York: Harper.
Simmel, G. (1898). The persistence of social groups: Part
the group and may affect its dynamics, sometimes
I (A. W. Small, Trans.). American Journal of
in contradictory ways. For example, increasing the
Sociology, 3, 662–698, 829–836. size of the team may make it better able to maxi-
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity mize student participation, but may simultaneously
theory of inter-group behavior. In S. Worchel & undercut its ability to win (by including people
L. W. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup who are not highly talented). The game of volley-
relations (pp. 33–48). Chicago: Nelson-Hall. ball likewise is complex, and its different features
Tönnies, F. (1988). Community and society. New prescribe and constrain the group’s behavior in dif-
Brunswick, NJ: Transaction. ferent ways. For example, composing a team of
White, H. C. (2008). Identity and control: How social taller players improves its chances of blocking
formations emerge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton shots at the net, but may reduce its skill at other
University Press. aspects of the game (e.g., setting the ball, digging
386 Group Task

out low shots). So it is often an oversimplification correct response was likely or unlikely. For very
to suggest that groups have a single, simply defined well learned tasks, where the correct response was
task. Nevertheless, the performance of a group on highly likely, the presence of others facilitated this
a complex or multipart task can often be analyzed response and, hence, improved performance. But
in terms of more simply described subtasks. for poorly learned tasks, where errors were highly
Our understanding of just how important task likely, the presence of others likewise facilitated
features are for group behavior has developed in these responses, which, in turn, hurt performance.
two rather different ways. Some scholars have pro- Identifying this key task feature brought order to a
posed rather general theoretical models about how confusing research literature and increased our
group tasks differ and how these differences might understanding of the effects of others’ presence—a
affect group behavior. The task classification, or basic feature of most task-performing groups.
taxonomy, of McGrath (described below) is a good
example. Other scholars did not begin with a the- Group Polarization
ory of group tasks, but rather discovered that
A slightly more recent question to intrigue group
focusing on certain aspects of the group’s task
researchers was, “Are groups more willing to take
helped explain apparently confusing or contradic-
risks than individuals?” Societies entrust many
tory patterns of findings. Let us illustrate the latter
important but risky decisions (e.g., whether to
approach first.
declare war or try criminal defendants) to groups
rather than to individuals, so this is obviously an
Dependence of Group Behavior on
interesting psychological question. The results of
Task Features: The Bottom-Up Approach
the first studies, done nearly 50 years ago, were
Social Facilitation surprising—groups appeared to be more willing to
endorse an attractive but risky course of action
One of the first research questions in social psy-
than individuals. This finding was referred to as the
chology and in the study of small groups was,
risky shift (from a more cautious individual prefer-
“How does the presence of other people affect a
ence to a less cautious group preference). But just
person’s task performance?” The earliest studies,
as in the case of social facilitation, subsequent
done near the beginning of the 20th century, gen-
research on the risky shift found that sometimes
erally found that the presence of others, either as
group discussion had exactly the opposite effect,
passive observers or as people working at the same
leading to more cautious group preferences than
task (so-called coactors), seemed to improve indi-
individual preferences—a cautious shift. It took
viduals’ performance. Such results were referred to
some time (and insight) before it was recognized
as social facilitation. However, soon additional
that the direction of shift depended vitally on one
studies showed the opposite pattern—individual
feature of the group’s decision task—namely,
performers doing less well in others’ presence than
whether individuals were initially generally more
when working alone. One way of reconciling such
favorable toward the risky or the cautious choice.
confusing results was to suggest that they depended
Group discussion served to strengthen or polarize
on the performance task—but what aspect of the
opinion in whatever direction individuals already
task? Several were suggested (e.g., intellectual vs.
favored. This pattern of group polarization turned
physical tasks, simple vs. complex tasks), but none
out to be very general, applying not just to risk
seemed to bring order to the confusion. It was not
decisions, but to collective attitudes, jury verdicts,
until Robert Zajonc proposed his drive theory of
and many other judgments.
social facilitation in 1965 that a plausible task fea-
ture was identified. Zajonc’s theory said that the
Contingency Theories of Leader Effectiveness
presence of others increases drive or arousal. Well-
established theory suggested that the effect of such A long-standing question has been, “What makes
drive increases was to make high probability a good leader?” A number of people have argued
behaviors more likely to occur (and to make low that a good leader’s main job is to keep his or her
probability behaviors less likely to occur). So, a group focused on the demands of the task, even if
key task feature was shown to be whether the this means being somewhat directive and critical,
Group Task 387

thereby undercutting his or her popularity in the widely recognized and accepted by group mem-
group. Others argue that one cannot lead effec- bers. He called tasks with such a solution intellec-
tively without nurturing positive relations with the tive tasks and showed that advocates for the
group, even if such an emphasis on leader-member correct solution to these tasks could and did rou-
relations reduces the group’s task focus. By the late tinely prevail, even when their number was fairly
1970s, many studies had attempted to see which small. However, larger factions usually prevailed
style of leadership (friendly/relationship oriented at judgmental tasks, which have no such correct
versus withdrawn/task oriented) leads to more solution.
effective group performance, but there was no
clear pattern to their results. Then Fred Fiedler Summary
suggested that the answer to this question depended
on aspects of the group’s task and the leader’s rela- Many more such examples could be given (e.g.,
tionship with the group. In particular, the more whether groups fall short of their potential to gen-
structured the group’s task (e.g., group members erate creative ideas depends on whether one per-
understand what is expected, the tasks are simple son’s generation of an idea interferes or blocks
and well understood), the higher the leader’s “situ- other members’ thinking or expression; whether
ational control.” Fiedler showed that groups were group members socially loaf depends on whether
more effective with a more task-oriented leader the task permits individual members’ contribu-
when situational control was either very low tions to be publicly identified). These and other
(strong, directive leadership was essential) or very examples illustrate the basic insight that what a
high (the leader did not need to worry about nur- group does depends critically on what it is trying
turing the group), but that when situational con- to do (i.e., its task). It should be clear, though, that
trol was moderate, the opposite occurred (a more such demonstrations usually come to narrow con-
relationship-oriented leader was most effective). clusions. They tend to implicate particular task
features (e.g., how well learned the task is, whether
there is a correct answer) as important for particu-
Social Combination and Group Performance lar group phenomena (e.g., social facilitation,
One influential approach to studying group per- social combination processes). Other scholars have
formance is the social combination approach. It taken a different approach by attempting to iden-
asks, “Can one predict the group’s ultimate deci- tify task features that help explain a wide range of
sion or product from a knowledge of what the group phenomena.
individual members bring to the group?” A consid-
erable amount of research has shown that for
Group Task Taxonomies:
many group tasks, the answer is “yes”—one can
The Top-Down Approach
often find a rule, or scheme, that reliably linked
individual preferences or abilities and the group’s One popular approach to analyzing group tasks is
final decision or product. For example, in jury to try to identify key features that differentiate
decision making it has been shown that the jury such tasks. This approach starts from an examina-
verdict is nearly always predictable from some tion of the full variety of tasks groups work on and
variation on a majority-wins social decision then seeks to divide them into useful categories or
scheme, which holds that the verdict preferred by dimensions. For example, Marvin Shaw identified
a majority at the outset of deliberation will be the six ways that group tasks differ: (1) their require-
jury’s final verdict. However, some research has ments for intellectual versus motor skills, (2) how
shown that for certain group tasks, majorities rou- difficult they are, (3) how interesting they are,
tinely fail to prevail. For example, at simple arith- (4) how familiar they are, (5) how much they
metic problems, an incorrect majority will routinely require member cooperation, and (6) whether they
yield to a correct minority. Patrick Laughlin recog- have few or many solutions. In another such clas-
nized that the appropriate social combination rule sification, Richard Hackman suggested that groups
depended on a key feature of the group’s task— usually work on production, discussion, or problem-
whether or not it had a solution that could be solving tasks.
388 Group Task

Another approach is to focus on a few basic what groups do. If one looks at the figure like a
task features, and then link those features to inter- map, the two “northern” slices in Quadrant I
esting group variables or processes. This approach include tasks where groups have to generate some-
is best illustrated by an influential task taxonomy thing, either plans (Type 1; e.g., an advertising
proposed by Ivan Steiner, who suggested three campaign), or ideas (Type 2; e.g., creativity tasks).
basic task features: The “western” slices in Quadrant II include tasks
where groups have to make choices among alterna-
1. Is the work required of members on the task tives, either intellective tasks with correct answers
divisible? Unitary tasks (e.g., solving a math prob- (Type 3; e.g., solving a math problem) or judgmen-
lem) do not have subparts that can be assigned to tal tasks without a correct answer (Type 4; e.g.,
different group members; divisible tasks (e.g., judging a beauty contest). The “southern” slices in
building a house) do. Quadrant III include tasks where group members
have to negotiate something, either resolving opin-
2. Does the task emphasize the quantity or the ion or value conflicts (Type 5; e.g., a group of
quality of the group’s product? Maximizing tasks politicians trying to hammer out a mutually accept-
(e.g., bailing water out of a ship) emphasize quan- able political platform) or resolving conflicts of
tity; optimizing tasks (e.g., solving a math prob- interest (Type 6; e.g., labor and management nego-
lem) emphasize quality. tiators trying to reach agreement on a contract).
Finally, the “eastern” slices in Quadrant IV include
3. How must individual inputs be combined to tasks where group members need to execute some
yield a group product, that is, what are the task’s action, which either involve conflict between
prescribed combination processes? For this latter groups or group members (Type 7; e.g., a basket-
task feature, Steiner focused on simple, unitary ball game) or do not involve conflict (Type 8; e.g.,
tasks. For additive tasks (e.g., a group tug of war), a group building a house). McGrath also suggests
the group product is a simple sum (or sometimes, that there are two basic dimensions underlying
average) of member inputs. For disjunctive tasks these tasks—a vertical dimension dividing tasks
(e.g., a unitary math problem), the group must that require higher levels of cooperation (those
choose one member’s input (preferably that of the “above the equator”) from those involving higher
most able member). For conjunctive tasks (e.g., a levels of conflict (those “below the equator”), and
tethered mountain-climbing team), the group prod- a horizontal dimension dividing tasks that focus on
uct is defined by the worst member’s input. Finally, group members’ intellectual or conceptual skills
for discretionary tasks (e.g., a group judging how (the “western hemisphere”) from those that require
many jelly beans are in a jar), group members can skilled overt behaviors (the “eastern hemisphere”).
combine member inputs in any way they choose. This taxonomy has many admirable qualities. It is
comprehensive, potentially describing all the differ-
Steiner was then able to show how different vari- ent kinds of tasks groups tackle. It is coherent,
ables should affect group performance differently showing many of the ways that tasks are similar
for different types of tasks. So, for example, and different. Most importantly, it is conceptually
increasing a group’s size or the heterogeneity of powerful, in that it incorporates many of the task
member ability should increase group performance distinctions that have been shown to be important
at a disjunctive task, but reduce group perfor- for group behavior.
mance at a conjunctive task.
Joseph McGrath combined the previous two
Conclusion
approaches (Shaw’s descriptive approach and
Steiner’s conceptual approach). His taxonomy, the Human beings constantly draw distinctions
group task circumplex, is pictured in Figure 1. because such distinctions can be useful in helping
McGrath proposed that there are eight types of us describe, understand, and control the world we
tasks, which he arrayed like slices of a pie. The live in. Scholars who want to describe, under-
slices can first be divided into four quadrants, stand, and control how groups function have
which distinguish the most basic differences in found it useful to distinguish between the different
Group Task 389

Quadrant I
Generate

Generating Ideas Generating Plans

s
Cre

task
Plan ype 1:
Typ y task
Cooperation

ativ

ning
e2
it
Solving

T
Executing

:
Problems Performance

s
w/Correct : Tasks
Answers Inte Type e8 s/
llec 3 Typ ance asks
tive : rfo
r m
tor
t
tas
k Pe o-mo
s ch
Quadrant II psy Quadrant IV
Choose Execute
: Co Type
e 4 ing n
Typ -mak com tests/ 7:
Deciding ion pet batt
cis asks itive les/
Issues De t tas Resolving
ks
Conflict

w/No Right Conflicts


Answers of Power
Mix asks
s

Typ otive
Cob e 5:
con nitive
task

ed-m
t

e 6:
Typ

flict

Resolving Resolving
Conflicts Conflicts
of Viewpoint of Interest
Quadrant III
Negotiate

Conceptual Behavioral

Figure 1 McGrath’s Group Task Circumplex


Source: Reproduced from Joseph E. McGrath, Groups: Interaction and Performance, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1984,
Chapter 5. Reprinted with permission.

kinds of tasks that groups undertake. Although See also Contingency Theories of Leadership; Group
there is, as yet, no single model that fully describes Performance; Group Polarization; Group Problem
and explains all the complexities of group life, Solving and Decision Making; Job Design; Social
considerable progress has been made in identify- Decision Schemes; Social Facilitation
ing useful distinctions regarding the tasks that
Further Readings
groups confront.
Hackman, J. R., & Morris, C. G. (1975). Group tasks,
Norbert L. Kerr group interaction process, and group performance
effectiveness: A review and proposed integration. In
L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
This entry is dedicated to the memory of Joseph E. psychology (Vol. 8, pp. 44–99). New York: Academic
McGrath. Press.
390 Groupthink

Laughlin, P. R., & Ellis, A. L. (1986). Demonstrability failure to appraise the risks of the preferred solu-
and social combination processes on mathematical tion, and selective information processing. These
intellective tasks. Journal of Experimental Social two categories of symptoms in turn are predicted
Psychology, 22, 177–189. to lead to highly defective decision making.
McGrath, J. E. (1984). A typology of tasks. In Groups: The concept of groupthink has had enormous
Interaction and Performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: popular appeal and captured the collective imagi-
Prentice Hall. nation of the public and analysts alike. For exam-
Shaw, M. E. (1973). Scaling group tasks: A method for ple, groupthink appeared as a dictionary term just
dimensional analysis. JSAS Catalogue of Selected
3 years after it was coined. In the popular press,
Documents in Psychology, 3, 8.
the term is commonly used to refer to any group
Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group process and productivity.
that appears to have made a poor decision without
New York: Academic Press.
regard to existing evidence that conflicted with the
group’s choice. Researchers have continued to
search for new examples of failed decisions that
may support the groupthink theory. For example,
Groupthink recent work has used the groupthink concept to
analyze the World Com accounting fraud incident,
Groupthink is the extreme concurrence-seeking Nazi Germany’s decision to invade the Soviet
displayed by decision-making groups that is pre- Union in 1941, Ford Motor Company’s decision
dicted to result in highly defective decisions. The to market the Edsel, Gruenenthal Chemie’s deci-
groupthink concept was first developed by Irving sion to market the drug thalidomide, the tragedy at
Janis in 1972 to explain such disastrous incidents Kent State during the Vietnam War, the Challenger
as the United States’s decision to invade the Bay of and Columbia space shuttle tragedies, the European
Pigs in Cuba, the failure of the United States mili- Union decision about imposing sanctions in the
tary to foresee the Japanese attack on Pearl Chechnya conflict, and a city council’s decision to
Harbor, Great Britain’s appeasement of Nazi ignore state-mandated earthquake preparation
Germany in World War II, and the decisions to procedures.
escalate the Vietnam War and the Korean War.
According to this perspective, groupthink is
Research on Groupthink
hypothesized to occur when particular antecedent
conditions are present. These include high group Despite the popular appeal of the concept, empiri-
cohesiveness, insulation from experts, limited cal research evidence provides only equivocal sup-
search and appraisal of information, directive port for the groupthink model. Case studies of
leadership, and high stress combined with low decision making by intact groups frequently find
self-esteem and little hope of finding a better solu- inconsistent evidence for the complete model.
tion to a pressing problem than that favored by Following the typical case study methodology, evi-
the group leader or influential members. dence for antecedents, symptoms, and conse-
These conditions lead to extreme concurrence- quences are inferred from archival documents and
seeking that in turn leads to two classes of faulty from interviews with observers and participants.
outcomes: symptoms of groupthink and symptoms For example, Bertram Raven’s analysis of the
of defective decision making. Symptoms of group- decision-making processes of the Nixon White
think consist of the illusion of invulnerability (the House suggested that the group’s cohesion
group can do no wrong), collective rationalization, depended not on interpersonal liking (a typical
stereotypes of outgroups, self-censorship (individ- definition of group cohesion) but rather on an
uals do not express any objections to the group esprit de corps based on the group members’
decision), mindguards (group members who desires to remain part of a prestigious team.
enforce conformity), and belief in the inherent Similarly, analyses of the National Aeronautics
morality of the group. Symptoms of defective deci- and Space Administration’s fateful decision to
sion making include incomplete survey of alterna- launch the space shuttle Challenger also question
tives and objectives, poor information search, the conceptualization of groupthink and the model
Groupthink 391

itself. Little evidence was found for the antecedent evidence have taken two directions: examinations
conditions of group cohesion (as defined by mutual of other factors that might affect groupthink pro-
attraction), lack of impartial leadership, and homo- cesses and reconceptualizations of the original
geneity of members’ backgrounds, but some evi- model.
dence was found that the launch team was in a
highly stressful situation and for groupthink symp-
Recent Developments
toms of illusion of invulnerability, rationalization,
illusion of unanimity, pressure on dissenters, mind- Several investigations have examined the impact of
guards, and bias in processing information at other variables on groupthink processes and out-
hand. Evidence for other symptoms was inconclu- comes and on the incidence of groupthink in novel
sive. In general, evidence supporting the complete contexts. Once again, results generally question
groupthink model is limited, with only varying the validity of the groupthink model and the utility
degrees of support for the existence of antecedent of additional variables. Research examining fac-
conditions and symptoms of groupthink and tors such as accountability, certainty orientation,
defective decision making. predisposition to conformity, and time pressure
Experimental studies have attempted to manip- has produced limited support for the full group-
ulate multiple antecedent conditions of groupthink think model. In addition to examining the role of
while assessing groupthink symptoms and group additional variables in producing groupthink,
decision effectiveness. In general, studies using tra- research has focused on investigating the incidence
ditional formulations of groupthink and its ante- of groupthink in new contexts. As with investiga-
cedent conditions have found only limited evidence tions of other factors, only limited support has
for groupthink symptoms and no evidence for been obtained. For example, an analysis of archi-
impaired group decision effectiveness. For exam- val news articles revealed that some groupthink
ple, research examining the effects of cohesion and factors (the salience of group membership, the
leadership style (autocratic vs. participative) finds positive evaluation of ingroup leaders, the negative
few effects consistent with the groupthink model. evaluation of outgroup leaders, and the appear-
Cohesion rarely affects either groupthink symp- ance of self-appointed mindguards) were higher
toms or decision quality. Similarly, measures of during the Northern Ireland conflict. However,
decision quality and other symptoms tend to be other factors were unaffected by the conflict.
unaffected by such conditions. However, one con- Reconceptualizations and reformulations of the
sistent finding supports the model’s predictions. original groupthink model have focused on both
Groups with directive leaders or who are instructed refining the concept itself and exploring new
to limit information sharing and discussion tend to approaches to defining the antecedent conditions.
do so. The social identity maintenance model of group-
In sum, research provides very limited support think also was developed in response to the equiv-
for the groupthink model and its traditional con- ocal empirical support for the groupthink model.
ceptualization. Both case and experimental studies This perspective underscores the prominence of
question the causal sequences of the model, failing the group’s social construction of its internal pro-
to document the full constellation of groupthink cesses and external circumstances. According to
and defective decision-making symptoms and even this model, groupthink then becomes a process of
the defective decision making that is supposedly concurrence-seeking that is directed at maintaining
the ultimate result of groupthink. a shared positive view of the functioning of the
This lack of evidence has raised criticism about group.
the theory that include (a) poor characterizations of The model suggests that two antecedents of
the various components of the groupthink process, groupthink, cohesion and collective threat, are
(b) poor specification of links between antecedent especially critical in producing groupthink as
conditions and consequences, and (c) ambiguous social identity maintenance. The first condition,
definitions of the conditions under which group- cohesion that incorporates a social identity per-
think should and should not occur. Responses to spective, contributes to the development of a per-
these criticisms and the lack of empirical research ception of the group as a unique identity, enhances
392 Groupthink

the development of a shared positive image of the example, the social identity maintenance approach
group, and provides the basis upon which threat suggests that groups will be motivated to protect
can operate. The second condition, a collective the group’s identity and its image. In those
threat, is the catalyst for the intragroup processes instances, a group may use the recommended
that promote concurrence seeking and defective interventions to support its identity rather than
decision making. This approach has been sup- enhance its decision-making processes. Thus, the
ported in experimental studies in which the defec- group is likely to consult with outside experts
tive decisions associated with groupthink have and associates who support its preferred option.
been obtained and in case studies. However, all of The group may also adopt superficial evaluation
the approaches discussed here require further test- strategies that mimic true conflict about ideas but
ing and validation. actually serve to reinforce and bolster its favored
decision.
Other recommended strategies for overcoming
Methods for Overcoming Groupthink
groupthink have focused on interventions designed
Irving Janis identified nine methods for preventing to reduce pressures for identity protection, to
groupthink in decision-making groups. The meth- change the group’s identity, and to stimulate con-
ods were generally directed at overcoming the bias structive conflict (full evaluation of ideas, tasks,
of the leader and promoting independent judg- and decisions). Methods for reducing the need to
ments and complete evaluation of all information. protect the group’s identity include the provision of
These methods included: (1) encouraging members an excuse or face-saving mechanism, the risk tech-
to consult with outside experts to obtain alterna- nique, and multiple role-playing procedures.
tive opinions, (2) assigning a devil’s advocate Providing an excuse for potential poor performance
(a member who would thoroughly question all appears to reduce the group’s need to engage in
group decisions) in each meeting, (3) asking mem- identity-protection tactics and increases the group’s
bers to consult with trusted associates, (4) assign- focus on problem solving, in turn enhancing perfor-
ing the role of critical evaluator to each member mance. The risk technique is a structured discussion
during all group meetings, (5) dividing the group situation designed to facilitate the expression and
into subgroups to pursue the same problem or reduction of fear and threat. Finally, multiple role-
issue, (6) requiring the group to construct alterna- playing procedures can be accomplished by having
tive scenarios of any opponent’s possible actions, group members assume the perspectives of other
(7) limiting the leader’s expression of solutions constituencies with a stake in the decision or of
preferences, (8) holding a second chance meeting another group member.
after the decision is made to encourage reconsid- Another approach to overcoming groupthink is
eration of alternative solutions, and (9) assigning altering the group’s identity. This approach is likely
independent groups to formulate solutions to the to be used when the identity is firmly entrenched
same problem or decision. and linked to a failed decision alternative. Procedures
Janis noted that none of these strategies is a for stimulating constructive conflict include struc-
foolproof method for overcoming groupthink and tured discussion principles and procedures for pro-
that most involve significant risks. For example, he tecting minority opinions, as well as linking the role
suggested that assigning the role of critical evalua- of critical evaluation to the group identity. One
tor might lead to prolonged debates that would be method is to provide training in discussion princi-
difficult to resolve and costly in terms of time. It ples for the group leader or, preferably, for all
might also require special training for group mem- members. A second is simply to expose group mem-
bers who are unaccustomed to such conflict. The bers to these recommendations; this approach
use of multiple decision-making groups can diffuse appears to increase decision quality. Finally, con-
responsibility and accountability. The involvement structive evaluation (as well as other interventions)
of large numbers of participants also may be costly can be made a part of the normative content of the
in terms of time and money. social identity, as in jury instructions.
New perspectives on groupthink also suggest
other drawbacks to these interventions. For Marlene E. Turner and Anthony R. Pratkanis
Groupthink 393

See also Conformity; Deviance; Group Cohesiveness; Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of
Group Polarization; Normative Influence; Social policy decisions and fiascoes (2nd ed.). Boston:
Identity Theory Houghton Mifflin.
Janis, I. L. (1989). Crucial decisions. New York: Free
Press.
Turner, M. E., & Pratkanis, A. R. (1998). A social
Further Readings
identity maintenance theory of groupthink.
Aldag, R., & Fuller, S. (1992). Beyond fiasco: A Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
reappraisal of the groupthink phenomenon and a new Processes, 73, 210–235.
model of group decision processes. Psychological Turner, M. E., Pratkanis, A. R., & Samuels, T. (2003).
Bulletin, 113, 533–552. Identity metamorphosis and groupthink prevention:
Baron, R. S. (2005). So right it’s wrong: Groupthink and Examining Intel’s departure from the DRAM industry.
the ubiquitous nature of polarized group decision- In A. Haslam, D. van Knippenberg, M. Platow, &
making. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental N. Ellemers (Eds.), Social identity at work: Developing
social psychology (Vol. 37, pp. 219–253). San Diego, theory for organizational practice (pp. 117–136).
CA: Elsevier Academic Press. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
H
of minorities in their local, regional, and national
Hate Crimes communities. To fully understand hate crimes
requires a knowledge of theory and research in
The term hate crime is of recent origin, dating prejudice and discrimination.
from the late 1980s. Hate crimes constitute a class
of criminal offense, defined by a country’s laws, in
Historical and Modern Targets
which violence and other forms of aggression are
perpetrated knowingly against members of a ste- Examples of hate crimes from the past are not
reotyped minority group. While it is assumed that hard to find. Anti-Semitism in the pre-Christian
hatred is the principal cause of this aggression, it era flourished in Egypt and Syria, triggered by the
would be more accurate to categorize these actions Jewish faith’s insistence on monotheism. Similarly,
as bias-motivated crimes. In the United States, Jews and early Christians were persecuted by the
bias crimes have long been recognized, and the Romans for not recognizing the pantheon of gods.
Civil Rights Act of 1968 offered protection based Other examples of anti-Semitism are medieval
on an individual’s race, color, religion, or national Christians labeling Jews the killers of Christ, and
origin. From a modern perspective, sexual orien- the Nazi Holocaust designed to obliterate Jews
tation is an omission from this federal list of pro- from the face of the earth.
tection. Any minority group whose members The 20th century has witnessed systematic mass
share a detectable attribute is a potential target for killings of Armenians at the hands of the Ottoman
hate crimes. Empire, ethnic cleansing in Bosnia, and genocide in
Examples of hate crimes include physical assault, Cambodia and Rwanda. Over the course of two
murder, and genocide; attacks on property; bullying centuries in the United States, bias-motivated
and harassment at school or in the workplace; ver- intimidation and violence toward Native Americans
bal threats or abuse; offensive graffiti, letters, post- has been frequent. Hate crimes received more pub-
ers, and pamphlets; and malicious complaints (e.g., lic attention in 20th-century America with the
to a local authority). Target groups include those lynching of Blacks, the erection of burning crosses
defined by their ethnicity, nationality or national on properties belonging to targeted families, and
origins, gender, sexual orientation, and physical or the painting of swastikas on synagogues.
mental disability. The evidence of hate crimes goes More recent targets are gay men and lesbians.
back to ancient times, but the widespread use of the The United States Federal Hate Crime Statistics for
term hate crime is modern. Popular interest in hate 2006 reported the following order (and numbers)
crimes reflects frequent reporting of such crimes in of bias offenses in five categories: race (4,737),
the media and an increased concern at the govern- religion (1,597), sexual orientation (1,415), ethnic-
ment and policy-making level to protect members ity or nationality (1,233), and disability (94). The

395
396 Hate Crimes

most common targets within these categories were economy. Because this hypothesis was a psycho-
Blacks, Jews, gay men, Hispanics, and those with dynamic theory, derived partly from psychoanalytic
mental disabilities. Surveys in the United States principles, the authors argued that frustration-
have revealed that (a) more than 90% of homo- induced aggression is displaced onto an alterna-
sexual people have reported being victims because tive target (a person or even an inanimate object)
of their sexuality and (b) one quarter of a student that can be hurt legitimately, without fear. In
sample from diverse ethnic and economic back- other words, a scapegoat is found.
grounds admitted that they had verbally abused Dollard and Miller linked the theory to the
people they thought were homosexual. presence of prejudice in individuals and also
As a hate crime, the murder in 1998 of Matthew applied it in a more general way to explain large-
Shepard received international attention. A 21-year- scale, intergroup aggression against minorities. If
old gay college student in Wyoming, Shepard was the cause of frustration is beyond reach, the need
kidnapped in a bar by two young White men. He for aggression is displaced onto a weaker group,
was taken to a remote prairie where he was tied to which functions as a scapegoat. From here, a
a fence, whipped in the face with a gun until he search began for trends in bigoted violence that
lost consciousness, and left for dead in freezing could be attributed to frustration arising from eco-
weather. He was found a day later, but he died in nomic downturns. Historical examples included
the hospital. His killers admitted to laughing dur- anti-Semitism, but Dollard’s colleagues, Carl
ing the attack. The assailants were convicted, but Hovland and Robert Sears, looked for supportive
they avoided the death penalty by plea bargaining data closer to home. In a 1940 study, they noted
and were helped when Shepard’s mother appealed that archival records in the southern United States
for clemency. Described at the time as a crime that across 50 years contained evidence of a relation-
shocked the nation, it became a rallying point for ship between an economic index (the price of cot-
gay rights and also for promulgating tolerance of ton) and the incidence of racial aggression (the
diversity. number of Blacks lynched). As the price of cotton
fell (frustration), more Blacks were lynched (dis-
placed aggression), even though the idea that
Theoretical Approaches
Blacks were responsible for declining prosperity
A key to understanding the origins of hate crimes was far-fetched. However, when time-series analy-
is to apply what is known from social psychologi- ses in later research were applied to contemporary
cal research dealing with prejudice. The accelera- data to test the link between economic conditions
tion of anti-Semitism in Europe in the 1930s, and hate crimes against minorities, there was scant
which was entwined with Nazi ideology, placed support for the frustration-aggression hypothesis.
the explanation of prejudice high on social psy-
chology’s agenda. Several major theories of preju-
The Authoritarian Personality
dice were developed in the decades that followed,
in particular, several that offered accounts of why There have been other approaches that have
minority groups could become the victims of dis- looked for the origins of prejudice based on per-
crimination, including hate crimes. sonality characteristics. The most famous of these
was a theory advanced by Theodor Adorno and
his colleagues. Initially, they used a psychodynamic
The Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis
perspective in an attempt to trace the origins of
One early and elaborate attempt at a theory to anti-Semitism to a set of personality traits. As their
explain hate crimes was the frustration-aggression research proceeded, they extended their argument
hypothesis. In 1939, John Dollard and Neal Miller to cover fascism, and then authoritarianism, since
and others argued that aggressive behavior arises their data suggested that individuals who are
from a preexisting frustration, with a mediating prejudiced against one ethnic group were usually
state of psychological disequilibrium that can be prejudiced against all minorities.
corrected only by aggression. In many cases the Such individuals are bigots and have an authori-
cause of frustration is intangible, such as the tarian personality that is defined by a constellation
Hate Crimes 397

of characteristics: a respect for and deference to man, Rodney King. The assault had been captured
authority and authority figures, an obsession with on video and played on national TV. Against a
rank and status, a tendency to displace anger, background of deepening economic disadvantage,
resentment of weakness, an intolerance of uncer- Blacks regarded the acquittal as a poignant symbol
tainty, and a need for a rigidly defined world. This of the low value placed on American Blacks by
syndrome of beliefs and behaviors originates in White America. The riot started at the intersection
early childhood. Children whose parents adopt of Florence and Normandie avenues, a relatively
excessively harsh and disciplinarian practices to well-off Black neighborhood in South Central Los
secure emotional dependence and obedience Angeles. A nearby liquor store was looted, cars
develop an ambiguity in which they both love and were damaged, and the police were attacked. The
hate their parents. This ambiguity is stressful and police moved in reinforcements, but later withdrew
seeks resolution. Owing to guilt and fear, the hatred in an attempt to reduce tension. The intersection
cannot be expressed, so it is repressed and finds was then in the hands of the rioters, who attacked
expression through displacement onto weaker oth- Whites and Hispanics. Reginald Denny, a White
ers, while the parents and the power and authority truck driver who was driving through, was dragged
they represent are idealized. This resolution of from his cab and brutally beaten, a crime watched
ambivalence provides an enduring framework for live on TV by millions and which came to symbol-
future life and is generalized to all authority fig- ize the riots.
ures. According to this theory, extremist groups South Central Los Angeles is relatively typical
such as the Ku Klux Klan would have large num- of Black ghettos in the United States. However, the
bers of members fitting this personality profile, and junction of Florence and Normandie was atypical,
at different times in their history such people would better off than other parts of the ghetto. It was a
have little difficulty in carrying out extreme acts of Black neighborhood where the poverty rate had
violence against particular minorities, including dropped markedly during the 1980s. That the ini-
Blacks, Jews, Catholics, and homosexuals. tial outbreak of rioting would occur there, rather
than in a more impoverished neighborhood, is
consistent with relative deprivation theories of
Intergroup Perspectives
social unrest.
A different approach to unraveling the causes of Other theories do not deal directly with crime,
hate crimes comes from the field of intergroup but do address the issue of how prejudice arises.
relations. In 1972, Leonard Berkowitz applied the According to Muzafer Sherif’s realistic conflict
concept of relative deprivation to understanding theory, stereotyping, discrimination, and prejudice
how frustration could be retained as an underlying against members of an outgroup, as well as inter-
stimulus to collective unrest. The concept refers to group conflict, follow when the goals of groups
people’s feeling that their attainments fall short of collide by competing for scarce resources. Also
their aspirations, and has two forms: (1) egoistic relevant here is Henri Tajfel and John Turner’s
relative deprivation, where the shortfall is based social identity theory, which is not constrained by
on an individual making comparisons with other focusing on group goals regarding tangible
individuals, and (2) fraternalistic relative depriva- resources. Instead, the theory’s main premise is
tion, where the shortfall is based on making com- that a group provides its members with a social
parisons between one’s membership group and identity, and in turn this should serve to make an
other groups. individual member’s self-concept more positive.
The second form points to unrest as a conse- Social comparisons with relevant outgroups do not
quence of frustration sensed by a whole group. This always succeed in this way. When people perceive
can be heightened during an economic downturn that their group has inferior status, believe that
and could flair quite suddenly into violence against this status is illegitimate, and assume that there are
a comparison group. For example, in a context of viable alternatives, social competition is likely to
rising unemployment, the 1992 Los Angeles riots ensue to create a positive social identity. Direct
erupted unexpectedly following the acquittal of intergroup conflict often occurs, such as collective
White police officers accused of beating a Black action, protests, and revolutions.
398 Hidden Profile Task

In summary, intergroup theories become rele- The hope is that group members will thoroughly
vant to hate crimes by pinpointing that individual exchange information in their unique areas of
crimes against members of a target group have expertise, helping the group to make an optimal
their roots in supportive norms and often ideolo- decision. Unfortunately, research has shown that
gies, that govern how ingroup members should group discussion is an ineffective tool for pooling
behave toward minorities. member expertise. Instead, group decisions tend to
favor information that all the members knew
Graham M. Vaughan before the discussion, thereby defeating the pur-
pose of creating a group with diverse knowledge.
See also Authoritarian Personality; Frustration-
Aggression Hypothesis; Genocide; Intergroup Research using the hidden profile task has identi-
Violence; Realistic Group Conflict Theory; Relative fied conditions under which group members are
Deprivation; Scapegoating; Social Identity Theory more likely to share their unique knowledge and
help the group to make a better decision than any
single member could have made alone. This entry
Further Readings looks at how the hidden profile task is used and
discusses what it reveals about poor decision
Green, D. P., Glaser, J., & Rich, A. (1998). From lynching
to gay bashing: The elusive connection between
making and its remedies.
economic conditions and hate crime. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 82–92. Task Illustration
Ferber, A. L. (Ed.). (1994). Home-grown hatred: Gender
and organized racism. New York: Routledge. Hidden profile tasks typically are used in labora-
Franklin, K. (2000). Antigay behaviors among young tory experiments on small decision-making groups.
adults: Prevalence, patterns, and motivators in a Groups may be charged with determining the
noncriminal population. Journal of Interpersonal guilty suspect in a homicide investigation, hiring
Violence, 15, 339–362. the optimal job candidate, or selecting the best
Heuman, G., & Walvin, J. (Eds.). (2003). Slavery reader. drug to market. In all cases, group members are
London: Routledge. given a finite set of decision alternatives and infor-
Levin, J., & McDevitt, J. (1993). Hate crime: The rising mation about those alternatives. Some information
tide of bigotry and bloodshed. New York: Plenum. about the alternatives is given to all group mem-
Sherif, M., & Sherif, C. W. (1953). Groups in harmony bers. In addition to this shared or commonly
and tension: An integration of studies in intergroup known information, each member also receives
relations. New York: Harper & Row. information that no one else in the group receives.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory This unique knowledge is known as unshared
of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel information. A hidden profile task is one in which
(Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations the shared information supports a suboptimal
(pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. decision alternative, whereas the totality of infor-
mation (shared and unshared) supports the opti-
mal decision alternative.
As an illustration, imagine a three-person group
Hidden Profile Task choosing between two alternatives for a personnel
selection task decision: Candidate A and Candidate
A hidden profile task is a method of distributing B. In the total pool of information there are five
information among members of a decision-making pieces that support Candidate A and nine pieces
group, leaving the optimal decision alternative hid- that support Candidate B. Candidate B, therefore,
den from members unless they thoroughly pool is the better alternative. All three group members
their unique knowledge. This task is an important read the same five pieces of information that sup-
tool in understanding when and why groups make port Candidate A. That is, all information that
decisions that fall short of their potential. Today supports Candidate A, the suboptimal alternative,
more than ever, decision-making groups are com- is shared. In addition to this shared information,
posed of members with different expert knowledge. each group member reads a different set of three
Hidden Profile Task 399

pieces of supportive information about Candidate consistent with their preferences. In the hidden
B. Individually, each member reads five pieces of profile task, information is distributed such that
information that support Candidate A and just members prefer a suboptimal decision alternative.
three pieces that support Candidate B. Therefore, Because the shared information supports the poor,
each member will enter the group deliberation pre- yet preferred, decision alternative, group members
ferring the same suboptimal candidate. Given that evaluate this information more positively than the
the group is charged with reaching a consensus on unshared information that is not preferred by all
the best candidate, and all members already agree, the members. If individuals are shown the entire
they will have little motivation for discussing the pool of information after forming an initial prefer-
information at length and hence will not discover ence for a decision alternative in a hidden profile
that Candidate B is the better alternative. task, individuals still positively evaluate shared
The challenge is for group members to recog- information that supports their initial preference.
nize that they have unique knowledge, thoroughly The hidden profile task confounds shared informa-
share that knowledge with each other, and be will- tion with information preference consistency, such
ing to change their initial decision preference. that shared information is consistent with mem-
Unfortunately, several factors inhibit the likeli- bers’ preferred alternative and unshared informa-
hood that group members will share their unique tion is inconsistent with their preferences. In this
knowledge and reach the best decision. way, the hidden profile task presents members
with a twofold reason for avoiding unshared
information—it is probabilistically unlikely to be
Causes of Poor Performance
sampled for discussion, and it is inconsistent with
One reason why groups perform poorly on a hid- members’ initial preferences.
den profile task is because of a discussion bias Finally, information known or revealed to be
favoring shared information. When group mem- shared is judged more important than unshared
bers know a combination of shared and unshared information, regardless of whether it is consistent
information, they are more likely to mention first with members’ preferences. Shared information
and later repeat shared than unshared informa- may acquire its value because it can be validated
tion. Some scholars argue that the discussion bias by others as relevant and accurate. Alternatively, if
favoring shared information results from simple a member communicates unshared information,
probability. If group discussion of information is others must take the information at face value or
viewed as a random sampling process in which question its authenticity. Because of the validation
information is randomly sampled from members’ benefit that shared information possesses, those
minds, then shared information is probabilistically who communicate or know a lot of it (relative to
more likely to be discussed because there are more others) are judged to be more capable decision
members’ minds from which to select it (compared makers than members who mention or know
to unshared information, which resides in a single much unshared information. The evaluative bene-
member’s mind). fits bestowed upon shared information and com-
For the hidden profile task, the discussion bias municators of it (and likewise, the evaluative
leads members to give insufficient attention during decrements associated with unshared information)
deliberation to the very information that is critical may make it difficult for groups to successfully
for determining the optimal decision alternative. solve a hidden profile task.
The result is poor group decisions. If unshared
information supports the same decision alternative
Remedies
as shared information, then failure to discuss
unshared information will not harm group choices. More than two decades of research suggest potential
Therefore, the hidden profile task is the special remedies to the hidden profile problem faced by
case in which neglecting to discuss unshared infor- decision-making groups. One recommendation that
mation will harm group decisions. helps groups is to take more time to discuss and
Groups also perform poorly on a hidden profile reach a decision. Shared information is favored early
task because individuals favor information that is in discussion, but it is less likely to be mentioned
400 Holocaust

later in discussion. Unshared information, in con- rarely know whether their information is distrib-
trast, becomes increasingly more likely to be men- uted as a hidden profile, it is wise to presume that
tioned as group discussion progresses. If information it is and take the time to uncover the team’s store
exchange is viewed as a random sampling process, of unshared information.
then unshared information is more likely to be
sampled for discussion when group members run Gwen M. Wittenbaum
out of shared information to sample. See also Common Knowledge Effect; Group Performance;
Diversity of opinion also facilitates a hidden Group Problem Solving and Decision Making; Group
profile solution. Despite the potential discomfort Task; Hidden Profile Task; Opinion Deviance
of dealing with a deviating opinion in the group,
simply having one member who holds a different
alternative preference from other members helps Further Readings
the group to reach the best decision in a hidden
Schulz-Hardt, S., Brodbeck, F. C., Mojzisch, A.,
profile task. Group performance is aided equally
Kerschreiter, R., & Frey, D. (2006). Group decision
when just one or all members of the group disagree
making in hidden profile situations: Dissent as a
on the preferred alternative. Opinion diversity facilitator for decision quality. Journal of Personality
benefits group decisions because it compels mem- and Social Psychology, 91, 1080–1093.
bers to discuss information more completely and Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (2003). Hidden profiles: A brief
for a longer time compared to when all members history. Psychological Inquiry, 14, 304–313.
initially agree. It also exposes members to informa- Wittenbaum, G. M., Hollingshead, A. B., & Botero, I. C.
tion that is inconsistent with their preferences. (2004). From cooperative to motivated information
Therefore, composing groups that have a diversity sharing in groups: Moving beyond the hidden profile
of opinions can help solve the problems that ensue paradigm. Communication Monographs, 71, 286–310.
when members have different information.
Finally, a hidden profile solution is more prob-
able when members know one another’s expertise.
When group members are told of the domain in Holocaust
which each member holds unique knowledge, then
members are more likely to discuss and remember The term holocaust derives from the Greek word
this unshared information. Unshared information for “sacrifice by fire” and refers to the systematic,
communicated by an expert may be more likely to state-sponsored attempt by Nazi Germany to
be accepted as accurate and relevant than that exterminate the Jewish inhabitants of Europe, pri-
mentioned by a nonexpert. marily during the World War II years of 1941 to
1945. It marked the final chapter of an escalating
Limitation persecution of Jews that began as early as 1933.
This entry begins with a brief history of the events
One limitation of the hidden profile research is and then discusses social psychological research
that it has been conducted on participants in labo- that attempts to explain how the decision to act
ratory experiments. Little is known about the against the Jews might have been reached and
prevalence and function of hidden profiles in natu- why perpetrators and bystanders participated or
ral decision-making groups. Organizations are stood silent.
relying increasingly on cross-functional teams to
perform work. These teams are composed of mem-
History of the Holocaust
bers who represent different units (and areas of
expertise) in the organization. Often, each member Soon after Adolf Hitler and his Nazi party gained
holds unshared information that, if communicated, power in 1933, German Jews found themselves
could help the group to make a better decision faced with a rapid succession of decrees that
than any member could make alone. We can, increasingly stripped them of their civil rights. The
therefore, speculate that some natural teams expe- Nuremberg Race Laws of 1935 rendered marriage
rience hidden profile tasks. Because members or any sexual contact between Jews and those of
Holocaust 401

German heritage (Aryans) a crime. State-sponsored including history, philosophy, and political science.
violence soon followed the escalating discrimina- Social psychological research has addressed three
tion against Jews. In one of the most massive out- specific and interrelated key issues:
breaks of violence, Nazi storm troopers destroyed
thousands of Jewish businesses and burned hun- 1. The decision issue: How could one group (the
dreds of synagogues during the Kristallnacht German people) become convinced that another
(Night of the Long Knives) on November 9, 1938. group (the Jews) deserved to be killed?
In the wake of this attack, Jews were deprived of
2. The perpetrator issue: How could the
the right to own property.
perpetrators bring themselves to carry out the
Throughout the 1930s, increasing numbers of
systematic killing of men, women, and children,
Jews were incarcerated in concentration camps
and how could they come to terms with what
initially established for the purpose of detaining
they had done?
political opponents and others deemed enemies of
the Third Reich. In the wake of Germany’s inva- 3. The bystander issue: How could so many stand
sion of the Soviet Union in 1941, mobile killing by passively and watch as the Holocaust
units (Einsatzgruppen) moved behind German unfolded?
lines and, aided by the SS (Schutzstaffel), milita-
rized police battalions, and units of Germany’s
The Decision Issue
regular army (Wehrmacht), killed roughly a mil-
lion Jews along with thousands of Soviet and How could the German people become con-
Communist party officials. That same year also vinced that the Jews deserved to be killed? Most
marked increasing deportations of Jews from cases of genocide, the Holocaust included, were
countries under German control to recently estab- preceded by a set of difficult life conditions that
lished concentration camps in Poland. Ghettos in are experienced by a majority. Whether or not dif-
major Polish cities were established to detain those ficult life conditions lead to violence depends on
still awaiting deportation. three factors: whether they are perceived as a
By 1942, most of Europe and with it millions of threat to a group’s collective ego and create wide-
European Jews were under German control, making spread frustration, the extent and nature of preju-
it possible for the Nazis to carry out their extermina- dice against an outgroup, and the influence of
tion with greater speed and efficiency. To that end, powerful instigators of violence.
a group of undersecretaries of state and officials of By almost all accounts, Germany felt humiliated
the Nazi party convened a conference in the Berlin by the terms of the Versailles Treaty that formally
suburb of Wannsee to plan the “Final Solution of ended World War I. It called for harsh financial
the Jewish Problem in Europe.” Europe was to be reparations and the ceding of territories histori-
combed from West to East, and all remaining Jews cally considered German, as well as the occupation
were to be deported to concentration camps in of the Rhineland by France, its former enemy.
eastern Europe where they would be “eliminated by Many Germans found it difficult to reconcile the
natural causes” stemming from a combination of feeling of national humiliation with their deep-
hard labor and starvation. Those who survived this seated belief that their country was the most
treatment were to be “treated accordingly.” The sophisticated, culturally refined, and advanced
“Final Solution” was carried out with lethal effi- nation in Europe. Many individuals respond to
ciency. By the time allied forces liberated the concen- threats to their inflated self with aggression and
tration camps, approximately 6 million Jews—two violence toward others, especially those they per-
thirds of the prewar Jewish population of Europe— ceive as the source of the threat. The political,
had perished in the Holocaust. economic, and social chaos of the Weimar Republic,
along with the worldwide economic depression
that started in 1929, led to a further deterioration
Social Psychological Perspectives
of living conditions and instilled a widespread
An extensive body of scholarship on the Holocaust sense of frustration, another well-known catalyst
can be found in a number of academic disciplines, for aggression.
402 Holocaust

Neither threatened egotism nor widespread frus- never the result of spontaneous and frenzied out-
tration is sufficient or necessary for collective vio- breaks of violence stemming from strong prejudice
lence to occur. Also, neither predicts which group against an outgroup. To date, the Holocaust
will serve as the scapegoat to be singled out for remains the most horrific example of an extermi-
violence. At the time of Hitler’s rise to power, Jews nation project that was well planned, organized,
made up only about 1% of Germany’s population. and coordinated. It took an opportunistic leader to
Most of them were highly assimilated, thinking of increase the propensity for violence and further
themselves as Germans by nationality and Jews by escalate it once it was started, thus creating a con-
religion, and many had records of distinguished tinuum of destructiveness that allowed perpetra-
military service during the First World War. They tors to become increasingly brutal in the treatment
did not comprise an outgroup that could be identi- of their victims. Social psychologists have identi-
fied based on easily observable features or by virtue fied several key processes that help explain how
of living in different areas than the majority, like perpetrators may proceed along the continuum of
most Jews in eastern Europe. destructiveness. Chief among them are reduction
The integration of Jews into German society of cognitive dissonance, dehumanization, and
was so complete that many had attained positions action identification.
of power and prominence in business, politics, and Cognitive dissonance results whenever indi-
the arts. However, this may have rendered them viduals’ actions conflict with their attitudes. To
subject to envious prejudice, a form of prejudice solve this conflict and reduce the dissonance, indi-
generally directed at high-status groups that are viduals frequently change their attitudes to match
perceived to be in a competitive relationship with their behavior (to the extent that the behavior has
the majority. Targets of envious prejudice are often not been compelled, has already occurred, and
feared, yet grudgingly admired for their compe- cannot be undone). For example, a soldier asked
tence and achievements. It was all too easy for to round up Jews for relocation may have found
Germans to accept the Nazi propaganda that the that he could not do so without being coercive.
Jews had the power to work in secret to undermine Although he may initially have been reluctant to
the nation’s political and economic institutions for handle his victims in a rough manner, if given the
their own gain. assignment again, he may be more willing to be
Unlike the virulent eliminationist anti-Semitism coercive and even violent from the start. The rea-
some erroneously suspected to have been prevalent son is that he may have adjusted his attitude
among a majority of Germans prior to 1933, envi- toward his victims in light of his earlier behavior.
ous prejudice provided a form of resentment that He may have justified his action by adopting the
was amplified by propaganda and escalating dis- attitude that his victims deserved the treatment he
criminatory policies devised by powerful instiga- dispensed.
tors. The combination of these forces rendered the Attitude change of this sort was likely aided by
Jews the scapegoat for Germany’s poor social and the pervasive dehumanization of the Jews during
economic conditions. A simple sharing of this senti- the Nazi years. The escalating elimination of civil
ment among the population may further have rights may have been the first step in adopting the
increased the strength and confidence with which view that the Jews were unlike the Germans. Nazi
the ingroup endorsed anti-Semitic prejudice by way propaganda stressed the nonhuman nature of the
of group polarization, that is, the tendency of atti- Jews by comparing them to a cancer that was
tudes to intensify as a result of group discussion. growing within Europe. And the infamous 1930s
propaganda movie The Eternal Jew interspersed
images of Jewish businessmen going about their
The Perpetrator Issue:
work with images of plague-infested rats squirm-
The Continuum of Destructiveness
ing through the alleys of German cities.
How could the perpetrators carry out the sys- Just as important, the inhuman conditions of
tematic killing of men, women, and children, and the concentration camps, as well as the similarly
how could they afterward come to terms with inhuman conditions under which Jews were
what they had done? Genocidal killings are almost rounded up at gunpoint and herded into railcars
Holocaust 403

designed for transporting animals, further con- changed their attitudes to justify their inaction. At
tributed to the perception that the victims were, the same time, many bystanders may have com-
indeed, less than human. Ironically, the perpetra- plied with the Nazi policies because of coercive
tors may have been oblivious to the fact that pressures in the form of stiff penalties for failure to
they themselves created the inhuman conditions obey them.
they subsequently used to justify the inhuman Although conformity has often been cited as
treatment. contributing to the widespread apathy, it is per-
At least some perpetrators may have been able haps better explained by reference to pluralistic
to aid in the Holocaust because they were in denial ignorance. Because the Nazis went to great lengths
about the meaning of their actions. Generally, indi- to disguise the Holocaust from the majority of the
viduals can identify their actions on several levels population, many Germans may have been unsure
of abstraction. Loading people on trains, for about what was really going on and may have
example, could be construed as simply following taken a lack of concern or action on the part of
orders (a low level of abstraction) or contributing others as an indication that perhaps nothing was
to the manifest destiny of the German people (a wrong (for example, that Jews were merely being
high level of abstraction). This undoubtedly resettled rather than sent to their deaths).
allowed many perpetrators to think of what they Finally, inaction may also have been promoted
were doing as something other than “killing Jews.” by an ego-defensive belief in a just world. This
Related to that, individuals’ self-deception about belief implies that people get what they deserve,
the nature of their actions may have further especially when we are unable to help them. To the
reduced any reluctance to aid in the killing. The extent that the Germans, by and large, failed to
Nazi death machine relied heavily on euphemisms take action, they may have adopted the view that
(for example, “relocation for labor duty in the the Jews deserved what they got.
East”), and the highly organized nature of the Although social psychologists have discovered a
Holocaust further promoted obedience to a malev- number of processes among individuals and groups
olent authority. Thus, even Adolf Eichmann, the that help explain why and how the Holocaust hap-
architect of the “Final Solution,” could proclaim pened, their attempts in this regard should not be
at his trial in Jerusalem that he never personally taken as trying to “explain it away.” Rather,
killed a Jew. understanding these processes may ultimately aid
in keeping the promise “Never again!”
The Bystander Issue: The Continuum of Passivity Ralph Erber
Although the massive scale of the Holocaust
required the active participation of thousands of See also Anti-Semitism; Bystander Effect; Cognitive
perpetrators, it could not have been carried out Consistency; Dehumanization/Infrahumanization;
without the passive complicity of millions of Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis; Genocide; Group
Polarization; Relative Deprivation
bystanders who stood by as increased discrimina-
tion turned into genocide. Their acquiescence can
be best understood through the psychological pro-
cesses that lead bystanders along the continuum of Further Readings
passivity. Chief among them are dissonance reduc- Arendt, H. (1965). Eichmann in Jerusalem: A report on
tion, obedience, conformity, pluralistic ignorance, the banality of evil (Rev. ed.). New York: Viking.
and a belief in a just world. Browning, C. R. (1998). Ordinary men: Reserve police
Just as perpetrators may have changed their atti- battalion 101 and the final solution in Poland. New
tudes toward their victims based on their actions, York: HarperCollins.
bystanders may have changed their attitudes to Hilberg, R. (1961). The destruction of the European
match their inaction. Not speaking up against leg- Jews. New York: Harper & Row.
islation that discriminated against Jews or failing to Newman, L. S., & Erber, R. (Eds.). (2002).
intervene when neighbors were dragged from their Understanding genocide: The social psychology of the
homes could be rationalized by bystanders who Holocaust. New York: Oxford University Press.
404 Homophily

In naturally occurring groups and relationships,


Homophily it often is difficult to know how much observed
homogeneity occurs as a result of induced homoph-
Homophily is the tendency for there to be higher ily and how much results from choice homophily.
rates of contact between similar people than So, in empirical contexts, researchers often begin
between dissimilar people. It is the social process by taking account of baseline homophily. We can
reflected in that old bit of folk wisdom: “Birds of think of baseline homophily as the amount of
a feather flock together.” Homophily is crucial to similarity within relationships that would be
the study of group processes because it conditions expected by chance, given the choices available.
every interaction. It affects who people interact For example, taking into account population
with, how interactions are structured, the process information only, we would not expect any base-
of group formation, and the course of interactions line homophily based on sex, since sex is an equally
between groups. This entry describes the basic distributed characteristic. Baseline expectations
types of homophily, their origins, and their social would be that an individual would have 50% male
implications. friends and 50% female friends. Therefore, if 90%
The observation that “like attracts like” is by of a woman’s friends are female, it indicates that
no means a recent pronouncement. It was Plato something other than chance is guiding formation
who stated that “similarity begets friendship” and of her friendships. That “something” is called
Aristotle who noted that some people like those inbreeding homophily. Inbreeding homophily
who are like themselves. Stated another way, refers to any amount of homophily over and above
homophily means that similarity breeds connec- what probability would predict based on the rela-
tion. Similarity in the case of homophily refers to tive sizes of the groups in the population. In the
ascribed characteristics, such as gender, race, and example above, we would interpret the difference
age, and achieved characteristics, such as educa- between the expected and observed rates of simi-
tion, social class, and occupation. In essence, larity (40%) as evidence of inbreeding homophily.
homophily organizes society. Because individuals Baseline homophily reflects induced homophily.
are more likely to interact with those similar to It tells us about the most basic, population-level
themselves, traits are concentrated in groups. constraints on our choices of interaction partners. It
At this point it is useful to distinguish between is more difficult to isolate choice homophily.
homogeneity and homophily. Homogeneity is a Inbreeding homophily can reflect choice homophily,
descriptive term that refers to the degree of similar- or ingroup preferences. However, inbreeding
ity within a group or relationship. Thus homoge- homophily can also be induced by social structures.
neity is a way to characterize similarity in groups, Consider the example of race in the United
while homophily describes the mechanism that States. Taking into account the differential sizes of
leads to homogeneity. In other words, groups various racial and ethnic groups in the United
become homogeneous due to homophily. States, a baseline model would predict a substan-
tial degree of homophily based on race for mem-
bers of the largest group (Whites), simply because
Types of Homophily
of higher rates of exposure to ingroup members.
Some of the tendency to associate with similar oth- In the 2000 census, 74% of U.S. residents self-
ers is a by-product of our more limited opportuni- identified as White only, while 12% self-identified
ties to interact with people who are different from as Black or African American only. Based only on
ourselves. This type of homophily is called induced these population distributions, high rates of base-
homophily. Induced homophily refers to the ten- line race homophily among Whites and low rates
dency for interaction partners to be limited by of baseline race homophily among Blacks would
social structure in ways that generate homogeneous be expected. Whites whose networks are more
groups and relations. Induced homophily stands in than 74% White or Blacks whose networks are
contrast to choice homophily, which refers to the more than 12% Black would provide evidence of
tendency of people to choose interaction partners inbreeding homophily. Such inbreeding homophily
who are similar to themselves. could not automatically be interpreted as reflective
Homophily 405

of choice homophily, however. Individuals interact often more meaningful contact, with people who
within families, neighborhoods, schools, religious are similar to us in a variety of ways.
institutions, and workplaces that are all segregated It is important to keep in mind that homogene-
to various degrees by race and ethnicity. Taking ity has sources other than homophily. Over time,
into account the amount of segregation within we are likely to become more similar to those with
these various institutional settings, a substantial whom we interact regularly. We learn things from
degree of homophily can be predicted on the basis one another and influence each another’s ideas and
of race and ethnicity, simply because of higher attitudes and so become more similar in the
rates of exposure to ingroup members—well above amount of shared knowledge, attitudes, and values
and beyond the constraints imposed by population- over time. We also have more of the same experi-
level distributions. ences and become members of groups to which
Inbreeding homophily can also reflect the simi- our friends and acquaintances already belong. In
larity that arises indirectly as a result of (induced these ways, individuals can become more like their
or choice) homophily along other social dimen- friends and associates over time through a process
sions that are correlated with the dimension under of social influence rather than through homophily.
consideration. For example, friendships, romantic With nonascribed characteristics such as attitudes,
relationships, and group associations tend to be values, hobbies, and so on, it can be difficult to
homophilous along the dimensions of wealth and distinguish homophily from social influence.
education. In the United States, there is a correla- Consequently, some of the more compelling evi-
tion between race and wealth and between race dence for homophily comes from the study of
and education. Consequently, when individuals ascribed characteristics. Ascribed characteristics
choose interaction partners who are more like are aspects of individuals, such as gender, race,
themselves in education, this will tend to consoli- ethnicity, and religion, that it is difficult or impos-
date relations along dimensions of race as well. In sible to change in response to interactions with
sum, then, inbreeding homophily reflects a variety others. Accordingly, when there is homogeneity
of processes including both induced and choice based on ascribed characteristics researchers can
homophily. more confidently interpret the differences as result-
How exactly does the social environment induce ing from a combination of induced and choice
homophily? The primary means is through oppor- homophily rather than from social influence.
tunity structures. The most basic constraint on
homophily is proximity. It is easier for us to form
Bases and Patterns of Homophily
connections with individuals and groups that are
closer in physical distance. Distance shapes our In the United States, a variety of different types of
relationships on a local and global scale. At the network relations (including romantic relation-
most basic level, it is easy to see that a child living ships, friendships, discussion partners) tend to be
in Estonia and a child living in Canada have a very homophilous with regard to ascribed characteris-
slim chance of becoming close friends. At a more tics. Race- and ethnicity-based homophily in our
local level, though, proximity remains a powerful culture is observed at rates that are well above
constraint on homophily. We tend, in general, to baseline expectations. Blacks’ networks show
like better those with whom we are more familiar. higher rates of inbreeding homophily than do
We feel more positively toward people we see more Whites’ networks. Due to the drastically lower
often at school, at work, where we live, and at rates of baseline homophily discussed above, how-
businesses and other institutions we patronize. As ever, Blacks nonetheless have much more heteroge-
mentioned above, these environments, along with neous networks. In contrast, because male and
other groups and organizations (e.g., book clubs, female groups of equal size were observed, it is
athletic teams, volunteer groups, religious institu- clear that homophily based on sex is almost entirely
tions), tend to be already segregated along a vari- a result of inbreeding homophily. Gender homoph-
ety of dimensions like class, race, religion, and ily becomes visible in childhood and starkly struc-
sometimes sex. Therefore, the activities of our tures friendships and play groups among school-age
daily life tend to put us into more contact, and children. Age is one of the strongest bases of
406 Homophily

homophily within friendships in the United States. most from the social support of network members
Our closest friends, especially, tend also to be close who are similar to themselves in important ways.
to us in age. Our friendship and marriage relations People who are going through major life transi-
are also homophilous by religion in the United tions, for example, tend to handle those changes
States, as in many cultures. As with race and ethnic better when they have support from people who
homophily, the largest groups (e.g., Protestants in have experienced those same changes.
the United States) display less inbreeding, but A potential negative outcome for decision-
nonetheless end up with more homogeneous net- making groups is groupthink. Groupthink is a type
works than smaller groups (e.g., Catholics and of decision making that happens when a group
Jews in the United States). tries to reach a consensus without properly and
Some research suggests that it is not just similar- critically analyzing all possibilities. A cohesive
ity, but the right amount of similarity, that is group that is composed of highly similar individu-
important for forming and maintaining ties. als may reach a faulty conclusion when little or no
Marilynn Brewer’s theory of optimal distinctive- dissent is expressed.
ness proposes that a balance is struck between fit- Homophily is critically involved in the processes
ting in and standing out. While being too unique described by social identity theory. Social identity
may result in expulsion from the group, being too theory states that people cognitively place them-
similar may contribute to loss of autonomy. A bal- selves and others into categories. Then, individuals
ance may happen naturally with homophily on one will form groups according to those categories.
dimension complemented by heterophily on other Finally, a group will compare itself to other groups,
dimensions. in an effort to view itself as superior. Homophily
Research has shown that, as an impetus for may drive people to categorize others according to
structuring networks and guiding interaction, their similarity to and difference from themselves.
homophily’s effects can become more or less People’s need to distinguish between those who are
important throughout the life course. Gender and similar to them (i.e., the ingroup) and those who
race are influential in homophilic processes in peer are dissimilar (i.e., the outgroup) and to assign
group formation during childhood. As individuals value to these similarities and dissimilarities (i.e.,
enter adolescence and adulthood, gender homoph- “my group is better than your group”) can lead to
ily becomes less forceful in structuring relation- polarization between groups.
ships. Specifically, most individuals in romantic Because homophily increases people’s chances
relationships pursue members of the opposite sex. of forming bonds with others who are similar to
Research has also addressed how homophilic pro- themselves, it tends to localize traits within net-
cesses change as individuals adopt new identities works. When people spend more time with those
and roles. For example, a new mother may seek who are similar to themselves in age, gender, reli-
out social groups where other individuals are also gion, and/or ethnicity, they are also spending more
new mothers. time with people who are similar in terms of shared
The effects of homophily may also vary over experiences, attitudes, knowledge, beliefs, and so
time. While it is true that homophily still rules as a on. This increases homogeneity within networks.
guiding force in many kinds of interpersonal rela-
tionships, there is evidence to suggest that its Dawn T. Robinson and Laura Aikens
effects are lessening, at least in certain domains.
For example, while race homophily is still power- See also Common-Identity/Common-Bond Groups;
ful in structuring intimate relationships, marriage Group Formation; Groupthink; Optimal
Distinctiveness; Social Identity Theory; Social
between individuals of different races is becoming
Networks; Sociometric Choice
increasingly common.

Consequences of Homophily Further Readings


Homophily may have some benefits for individu- Blau, P. (1977). Inequality and heterogeneity. New York:
als. Research suggests that people may benefit Free Press.
Homophobia 407

Blau, P., & Schwartz, J. (1984). Crosscutting social While earlier scholarship typically employed the
circles: Testing a Macrostructural theory of intergroup term homophobia to describe the antigay attitudes
relations. Orlando, FL: Academic Press. of individuals, currently it is more often used to
McPherson, J. M., & Smith-Lovin, L. (1987). Homophily refer to the attitudes, social ideologies, behaviors,
in voluntary organizations: Status distance and the and belief systems of groups. At the societal level,
composition of face-to-face groups. American the term homophobia has been used in congruence
Sociological Review, 52, 370–379. with the terms heterosexism and heteronormativity—
McPherson, J. M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. (2001). all of which refer to the social opposition to same-
Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks.
sex desire. Gender theorists further assert that this
Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–444.
opposition is highly associated with patriarchal
Verbrugge, L. (1977). The structure of adult friendship
ties and male dominance.
choices. Social Forces, 56, 576–597.
Homophobia is manifested at both the individ-
ual and social levels. At the individual level,
homophobia is the fear of being identified as
homosexual or as valuing homosexuality. However,
Homophobia the individual level and social level are linked,
since society and culture dictate what is considered
The term homophobia refers to the fear of or con- to be “gay” or “homosexual” and the treatment of
cern about being associated with homosexuality. certain classes of people. Thus, when homophobia
Definitions used by social science researchers and occurs at the individual level it is still nested within
theorists vary with regards to semantics. For the social level.
example, some definitions state the fear as irratio- Attitudes toward homosexuals and homosexual
nal; others specify that the fear is directed toward issues are not evenly distributed among individuals
homosexual persons, homosexual behaviors, gen- and subgroups in society. Empirical research sug-
eralized belief systems, or some combination of gests that attitudes toward gay men and lesbians
these. However, there is overwhelming consensus vary based on sex, age, race and ethnicity, social
that the term homophobia stems from the notion class, education, political and religious affiliation,
that homosexuality (actual or perceived) is deval- and whether or not an individual has known a gay
ued by society and that heterosexuality is the person. Cross-culturally, men are generally more
norm. There is also agreement among sociologists homophobic than women. Studies in the United
and gender theorists that attitudes and actions States consistently find that individuals who are
that result from this fear are a form of social older, less educated, and reside in rural areas
control that supports intolerance. It should also express relatively high levels of prejudice against
be noted that this term has no direct clinical or gay men and lesbians. Also, those with fundamen-
medical association. talist religious affiliations, those who frequently
attend religious services, and those affiliated with
conservative and Republican political parties tend
Background and History
to have higher levels of antigay prejudice.
Seeking to label the prejudice toward homosexuals, Individuals who have personally known a gay per-
psychologist George Weinberg (1972) coined the son manifest the lowest levels of prejudice, espe-
term homophobia to explain the “irrational fear or cially if the person is a close friend or family
hatred of homosexuals.” Consistent with this term, member. Individuals with lower levels of prejudice,
early applications framed homophobia as an indi- such as women and the highly educated, are more
vidual attribute, in which antigay prejudices are likely to experience interactions with an openly
rooted in a person’s psychological makeup, without gay person. Research exploring levels of prejudice
regard to wider structural sources of antigay preju- among racial and ethnic minorities is less consis-
dices and variations in attitudes held toward gay tent. It suggests that racial and ethnic minorities
men and lesbians. Critics of the term argued that its are more prejudiced against gay men and lesbians
suffix, phobia, implies that such fears and attitudes than are their White counterparts. It has been sug-
are inherently irrational and dysfunctional. gested that this difference is due to White women’s
408 Homophobia

more favorable attitudes toward gay men and les- gay men and lesbians but also intolerance of any-
bians; however, there may also be a spurious rela- one not within the dominant culture, and foster a
tionship with class and education. Research also climate of prejudice including sexism and racism.
shows that interpersonal contact may not be as From a micro-level viewpoint, homophobia should
significant in shaping attitudes in all cultures. For then be lessened in individuals through education,
example, the belief that homosexuality is a choice and larger scale social change would have to occur
is a greater predictor of Black prejudices against to affect homophobia at the macro level.
gay people in America than the lack of interper-
sonal contact.
Social Distance
Some cultures view homosexuality as a White
or American and European phenomenon. For In addition to conveying antigay prejudices and
example, Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad attitudes, homophobia is a way to solidify ingroup
claimed in a 2007 speech that there are no homo- or outgroup associations and individual identities.
sexuals in Iran. This statement followed the 2005 Social psychological theories of identity suggest
execution of two men for alleged homosexual that behaviors can protect identities and indicate
activity. These actions not only legitimated individuals’ social group while simultaneously
homophobia in Iran, but also illustrated how distancing members from outgroups. Thus,
social institutions, including but not limited to the homophobic actions are a way to socially distance
media, religion, and governments, perpetuate individuals from homosexuals and to reaffirm
homophobic attitudes and discrimination against heterosexual identities in a heteronormative cul-
gay men and lesbians. ture. This prevents heterosexuals (or people who
Gay men generally encounter more pronounced want to be identified as heterosexual) from being
homophobia than do lesbians. However, in societ- associated with, labeled as, or treated as a homo-
ies where social pressures on women to marry are sexual. In an extension of this concept, a society
great, such as India, lesbians may be more stigma- that devalues homosexuality and associates it
tized than gay men. In America, homosexuals from with negative (e.g., abnormal or immoral) behav-
racial and ethnic minorities and those with lower ior may have members who seek to socially
levels of education and income encounter greater distance themselves from the devalued behavior
levels of homophobia. Studies have found that in order to reaffirm their identity as good and
young homosexuals are more likely to experience moral people.
extreme acts of homophobia than are adult homo- As a category of people, homosexuals are deval-
sexuals. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender ued and have a lower status than heterosexuals
youth are also more likely to use drugs, experience and as such face greater social scrutiny and harsher
homelessness, participate in sex work, and commit punishments. In his work on stigma, Erving
suicide than their heteronormative counterparts. Goffman sought to understand how individuals,
As with racism and sexism, homophobia is including homosexuals, gain, lose, and defend
manifested in many forms, including but not lim- claims of status. Overall he found that homosexu-
ited to malicious gossip, name-calling and bully- als were stigmatized because homosexuality was
ing, acts of intimidation, vandalism, isolation, devalued by society and only when homosexuals
rejection, death threats, and physical assaults at could “pass” as heterosexual were they afforded
the individual level, as well as broad scale dis- the same status and privileges as heterosexuals.
crimination in the workplace, community, or by Status construction theories seek to explain how
authority of the government at the societal level. group interaction contributes to structures of
Homophobia can also be internalized, where indi- inequality. Perceived or actual sexual orientation
viduals struggle to resolve social (and often reli- may be one way in which interaction is ordered,
gious) beliefs concerning homosexuality and their and homophobia is a result of diminished status in
own individual desires. This can lead to depres- that individuals and institutions do not want to be
sion, violence, and even suicide. associated with devalued statuses.
Social theorists argue that homophobia and its Initial definitions of homophobia did not
manifestations not only enforce intolerance toward account for why some groups of people are
Homophobia 409

more homophobic than others. In response to this Another important study regarding homopho-
omission and in seeking to explain why men tend bia, conducted recently by social psychologist
to be more homophobic than women, social and Robb Willer, proposes and tests the masculine
gender theorists began exploring the link between overcompensation thesis, which asserts that men
gender and homophobia. The body of literature display extreme demonstrations of masculinity as
generated by these theorists asserts that homophobia a reaction to masculine insecurities. Drawing on
has important commonalities with sexism—both “reaction formation” and incorporating theories
involve prejudice against gender noncon­formity. of masculinity, Willer applies theories of identi-
General feminist thought suggests that what het- ties to show that overcompensation-type mascu-
erosexuals find threatening about homosexuality line behaviors are exhibited by men in an effort
is that men are not being “men” and that women to protect their identities as men and indicate
are not being “women.” Therefore, one way to their social group while simultaneously distanc-
punish individuals for gender nonconformity is to ing themselves from outgroups, such as women
associate them with homosexuality, which leads to and homosexuals. Willer gave randomly deter-
devaluing their status regardless of their actual mined feedback on a gender identity survey to
sexual orientation. According to Suzanne Pharr, men and women that suggested they were either
homophobia then becomes “a weapon of sexism” masculine or feminine. Participants were then
and gender conformity. asked to fill out a series of surveys designed to
According to this analysis, in affirmation of the assess measures of masculinity, including atti-
male identity, men must reject what is unmanly. tudes toward homosexuals and homosexual
Thus, to be “a man” in contemporary American issues. Women showed no variation based on the
society is to be sexist and homophobic—to feedback; however, men given feedback that
be hostile toward the feminine, toward homosex- threatened their masculinity expressed more neg-
uals and persons perceived as homosexual, and ative attitudes toward homosexuals and homo-
especially toward gay and effeminate men. sexual issues than men given feedback confirming
R. W. Connell introduces the idea of a “hege- them as masculine.
monic” masculinity that is organized around the More research that addresses homophobia has
psychological and social dominance over women, focused on men than on women. In addition, few
but which also enables the domination of other studies explore why attitudes and behaviors toward
men. In explaining demonstrations of masculinity lesbians are generally less negative than those
and dominance, Michael S. Kimmel asserts that toward gay men. There has also been little discus-
men are under constant threat that they may be sion of intentionality and whether individuals are
discovered as insufficiently masculine and there- aware that their homophobic attitudes and behav-
fore they experience extreme pressure to conform iors are homophobic.
to an ideal masculinity that is unattainable.
According to Kimmel, “homophobia” is the fear
Importance
of being “unmasculine,” or feminine. Work focus-
ing on attitudes toward lesbians seems to fit this Homophobia influences many of our daily inter-
fear less well; however, the prevalent suggestion is actions and social identities. Research on
that men are threatened by the idea that women homophobia is important because it reveals an
could live without men. important way in which people and social groups
One of the most cited psychological studies, by are stigmatized and the strength of the stigma to
Henry Adams, Lester Wright, and Bethany Lohr, shape attitudes, behaviors, and social interactions.
found that higher levels of homophobia are associ- Homophobia is especially powerful because it has
ated with greater homosexual arousal in men. It is a pervasive effect on members of society via gen-
argued that this study empirically demonstrates der ideologies. In addition, it affects gay men and
Freud’s “reaction formation,” in which socially lesbians, and those perceived as gay and lesbian,
unacceptable impulses are converted into opposing through acts of intimidation, discrimination, and
behaviors as a way to mask the unacceptable violence. Gay men and lesbians also have less
impulses from society. access to social resources than do heterosexuals
410 Homophobia

and experience higher rates of substance abuse, Adams, H. E., Wright, L. W., & Lohr, B. A. (1996). Is
depression, and suicide. By and large, homopho- homophobia associated with homosexual arousal?
bia provides a basis for unequal treatment, justifi- Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105(3), 440–445.
cations for negative consequences, and support Herek, G. M. (1998). Stigma and sexual orientation:
for the status quo. Understanding prejudice against lesbians, gay men,
and bisexuals. London: Sage.
D’Lane R. Compton Kimmel, M. S. (2000). Masculinity as homophobia.
In M. Kimmel (Ed.), Gendered society reader
See also Deviance; Discrimination; Dominance (pp. 103–109). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Hierarchies; Feminism; Gender Roles; Prejudice; Pharr, S. (1988). Homophobia: A weapon of sexism.
Reference Groups; Sexism; Social Dominance Theory; Inverness, CA: Chardon.
Social Identity Theory; Stereotyping Stein, A. (2005). Make room for daddy: Anxious
masculinity and emergent homophobias in neopatriarchal
politics. Gender & Society, 19(5), 601–620.
Further Readings
Webster, M., Jr., & Hysom, S. J. (1998). Creating status
Adam, B. D. (1998). Theorizing homophobia. Sexualities, characteristics. American Sociological Review, 63,
1(4), 387–404. 351–378.
I
attachment influences people’s desire to remain
Identification and with or leave an organization.
Commitment Over the years, researchers have developed a
variety of approaches to studying people’s commit-
Groups rarely have complete control over mem- ment to groups, resulting in some conceptual
bers and, therefore, need to rely on them to behave ambiguity. This has left lingering questions about
in ways that benefit the group even when they are the attitudes and behaviors constituting commit-
not being monitored. Whether this occurs depends ment, as well as about the factors that cause some
largely on group members’ attitudes toward the people to be more or less committed to a group
group. These attitudes are embodied in two closely and the corresponding consequences of different
related psychological constructs, identification levels of commitment. This entry discusses the
and commitment. Across academic disciplines, approaches psychologists and group researchers
researchers as well as practitioners who work have taken to the concept of commitment and how
with and in groups have investigated the condi- identification relates to commitment. It then exam-
tions under which group members commit to a ines the consequences of commitment for group
group, its work, and its values and the ways in behavior and how groups cultivate commitment
which identifying with a group affects their self- among members.
concept. Researchers have viewed knowledge of
identification and commitment as essential to
Dimension Models of Commitment
understanding how people feel about the groups
to which they belong, what they would be willing In 1986, Charles O’Reilly and Jennifer Chatman
to do for those groups, and what they receive in argued that the myriad definitions of and approaches
return for their loyalty. to commitment contain the unifying premise that a
People’s identification with and commitment to core element of people’s commitment is their psy-
a group corresponds to their performance within chological attachment to a group. Thus committed
it, which is the primary reason why organizational individuals willingly act in the interest of the group
psychologists have been so interested in these phe- because the group provides them with a connection
nomena. Typically, researchers have explored they need; that is, it contributes to their psycho-
the bases for a person’s attachment to a group logical well-being. Seen from this perspective,
and attempted to predict how it influences the commitment is both fundamentally affective, chara­
willingness to transcend strict job descriptions cterized by the bonds that develop between an
to accomplish tasks necessary for the organiza- individual and a group, and motivational, driving
tion’s well-being. They also have examined how individual actions that benefit the group.

411
412 Identification and Commitment

Equally important, O’Reilly and Chatman feel committed to the group are more likely to
stressed that rather than being unidimensional, behave in ways that benefit the group than are
commitment consists of multiple dimensions. those who do not feel a sense of commitment.
Drawing on Herbert Kelman’s research on attitude Groups that foster a sense of commitment, then,
and behavior change, they identified three indepen- should experience more long-term success.
dent dimensions of commitment: compliance, iden- Researchers have focused on two theoretical rea-
tification, and internalization. Subsequently, John sons that commitment should have performance
Meyer and Natalie Allen developed a model of implications for the group. First, commitment
commitment with three similar dimensions of com- helps to create and maintain social control systems
mitment: continuance, affective, and normative. that allow groups to regulate individual behavior
Both the compliance and continuance dimen- more effectively than would formal control sys-
sions suggest the most superficial and transactional tems. Second, commitment to the group encour-
form of commitment, in which an individual ages individuals to align their behavior with the
becomes instrumentally involved with a group to group’s interests.
secure specific, extrinsic rewards. Because activi- Traditionally, organizational researchers have
ties performed in the interest of the group originate focused on formal mechanisms used by groups and
from a desire for rewards from the group rather organizations to coordinate and control members’
than from any personal, private motives, in activities. These formal control systems emphasize
compliance-based commitment there may be a dis- surveillance and expectations about positive and
crepancy between individuals’ private attitudes negative consequences of different behaviors.
and the attitudes and behaviors they exhibit in Through members’ sense of being monitored, as
public on behalf of the group. well as rewarded and punished, organizational
Identification-based or affective commitment is leaders encourage behaviors that benefit the group
more substantive. It involves attachment to the and enforce penalties associated with prioritizing
group driven by a desire for affiliation. Group mem- personal interests over those of the group. From
bership implies certain obligations among members. this perspective, group member commitment is less
Identification suggests that a person is motivated to important than formal mechanisms of control,
act in ways that benefit the group because of a desire such as supervisory monitoring, standardized rules
to nurture and maintain his or her relationship with and procedures, compensation schemes with
the group. With identification, as with compliance, explicit rewards and punishments, and planned
there may be inconsistency between people’s private and budgeted resource allocations.
attitudes and their public actions on behalf of the Formal control systems, however, contain criti-
group; however, in identification-based commit- cal weaknesses that can result in a failure to align
ment, concerns about group affiliation rather than individual and group interests. First, one weakness
private attitudes motivate people’s behavior. is the difficulty involved in specifying ideal behaviors
Finally, internalization or normative commit- and group member or employee roles, particularly
ment occurs when individual and group values in ambiguous or quickly changing en­viron­­ments.
converge. Commitment arising out of such inter- Second, even after these behaviors are identified, it
nalized values does not need to be motivated by can be difficult to match rewards to these behav-
instrumental or affiliative concerns but, rather, iors, and punishments to other behaviors, to pro-
originates from private, personal attitudes that duce desired outcomes. Add to this the fact that
correspond to those of the group. In this way, an most jobs have complex or partially unobservable
individual’s own preferences can lead to behaviors elements, and developing consequences for desired
that benefit the group. and deviant behavior becomes quite difficult, as
does establishing and maintaining legitimate
authority over group members. Finally, in relying
Cultivating Normative Commitment
on individuals’ extrinsic motives for behavior
Through Social Control
that benefits the group, these systems risk under-
Interest in group-member commitment stems mining the intrinsic value of group membership.
largely from the intuition that group members who Even when formal control mechanisms produce
Identification and Commitment 413

individual behavior that is perfectly aligned with and organizational citizenship behavior, as well as
group goals, these controls can be costly in terms lower levels of stress and work–family conflict.
of time, energy, and legitimacy and difficult to Taken together, these studies confirmed that mem-
maintain over long periods of time. Instead, culti- ber commitment can have important consequences
vating strong normative commitment among mem- for groups.
bers can be a highly efficient method of organizing
for groups and organizations.
Group Identification
Cultivating normative commitment requires
using social, rather than formal, control. Researchers Groups benefit from members’ commitment, but
have explored social control systems that use a what do members receive in return for their com-
group’s norms and values to achieve these efficien- mitment? Normative commitment based on psy-
cies. Not only do these norms and values serve a chological attachment suggests that those who
similar function to formal control systems by com- commit themselves to the group receive psycho-
municating desirable and undesirable actions, but logical benefits from their affiliation with the
they do so in an informal manner, drawing atten- group. In exchange for their commitment, group
tion away from formal group leaders and toward members gain membership in the group and satisfy
qualities that group members have in common. their need to belong.
Thus, these informal mechanisms also increase One reason this belonging can be so rewarding
social cohesion within the group. Strong social is that it helps to define and enhance a person’s
control systems, however, depend on group mem- social identity. Social identity theorists have argued
bers sharing norms and values regarding important that rather than just perceiving one, unitary per-
attitudes and behaviors that benefit the group. sonal self, people actually perceive themselves as
having multiple “selves,” corresponding to their
memberships in various groups. Thus, an individual
How Groups Benefit From
can perceive him- or herself as having a personal
Members’ Normative Commitment
self, a family self, a work self, a national self, and
The most striking and robust benefit of cultivating so on. Social identity theory refers to the process by
normative commitment among group members is which people define their self-concept in terms of
that it promotes organizational citizenship behav- their memberships in various social groups. It can
ior, or members’ willingness to transcend formal be situationally based, because different aspects of
job or role definitions to perform additional acts a person’s self-concept may become salient in
beneficial to the group. Because psychological response to the distribution of characteristics of
attachment based on normative commitment others who are present in a situation. When a per-
enables people to take the perspective of the group, son identifies with a group, the group’s goals and
rather than just their own perspective, they are values influence that person’s perception and behav-
more likely to act in the interests of the group. ior as well as how others treat him or her.
Without such prosocial or extrarole behavior, The idea of individuals perceiving themselves as
groups would have to incur additional costs either composed of many social selves is important
to have those extra or unanticipated tasks per- because it means that membership in social groups
formed or to create monitoring systems to ensure helps to form one’s self-concept, that is, how one
their performance by specified group members. sees and defines oneself. To the extent that a par-
Substantial research has shown that commit- ticular ingroup membership is salient, one’s per-
ment based on identification and internalization is ceived similarity to others in the ingroup is
positively related to prosocial behaviors—behaviors increased. Increasing the salience of ingroup mem-
that benefit the group—and negatively related to bership causes a depersonalization of the self,
member turnover. A meta-analysis found that all which refers to perceiving oneself as an interchange-
three forms of commitment led to reduced inten- able exemplar of a social category. Identifying
tions to exit an organization and decreased overall with a group can satisfy one’s attachment and
turnover. In particular, affective and normative com- belonging needs and can also foster pride, accom-
mitment predicted better attendance, performance, plishment, and self-esteem.
414 Identification and Commitment

Researchers have also examined identification earthworm to converting religions—by asking


at the organizational level. Here the focus is on them to commit to small acts of participation that
defining what an organization stands for, and it is gradually lead to larger acts of commitment.
typically viewed as the top leaders’ role to create Some companies have learned how to use this
clarity for members about the organization’s iden- incremental approach to building commitment.
tity. This is the content that is the basis for an For example, they use multiple steps to recruiting
individual’s level of identification with a group or new employees, leading potential recruits to
an organization, and, while it is an important per- increase their commitment to the firm with each
spective, the psychological impact of such identifi- step, long before these individuals are asked to
cation is the critical determinant of behavior. commit to joining the organization. Other compa-
Similar to findings on commitment, those who find nies avoid discussing salary before an employee is
their organization’s identity more appealing behave hired, emphasizing the relational benefits of group
more cooperatively, are more concerned with the membership before introducing instrumental incen-
favorability of collective outcomes than with pro- tives such as money.
cedural justice, and have better relationships with Rosabeth Moss Kanter has identified several
external groups. commitment mechanisms used by utopian com-
Clearly, there is overlap between the constructs munities to recruit new members, including requir-
of commitment and identification. Both imply an ing new members to abandon their prior lives,
individual’s attachment to the group. While identi- move to secluded areas, and live in accordance
fication specifies the content that is the basis for with unconventional practices at odds with the
that attachment and helps people answer the ques- wider society. Many of these mechanisms require
tion, “Who am I?” through membership in a new members to abandon elements of their previ-
group, commitment, as a construct, is broader. ous lives through calls for abstinence or extreme
Commitment encompasses the expression of atti- austerity. Others asked new members to invest in
tudes and behaviors that further the interests of the the community, often in an irrevocable way, or to
group. Some conceptual ambiguity exists about the renounce the outside world, their family, and their
construct of identification, with researchers calling prior lives. Many communities took steps to dein-
for a more rigorous multidimensional conceptual- dividualize new members, stripping them of their
ization. But, given the conceptual overlap between previous personal identities through processes of
commitment and identification, researchers should mortification, criticism, and punishment and mak-
be careful not to needlessly proliferate redundant ing their group-based identity more salient. Finally,
constructs rather than clarifying existing ones. most communities used rituals, traditions, ideol-
ogy, and charismatic leadership to help create feel-
ings of communion or belonging within the
Cultivating Commitment
communities and to reinforce group members’
Among Group Members
identification with the group. These mechanisms
In considering how groups promote member com- made individuals more likely to commit to the
mitment, most research has focused on normative communities and more susceptible to the groups’
commitment. This is because increasing instrumen- values. In addition, the successful utopian commu-
tal commitment is fairly straightforward, involving nities, those that lasted longer, implemented more
allocating sufficient extrinsic rewards to motivate a of these commitment mechanisms than did less
person to stay, whereas increasing normative com- successful communities. Interestingly, Kanter
mitment is more nuanced. Gradually increasing argued that while these mechanisms may be exag-
levels of participation in a group’s activities can gerated within these utopian communities, more
produce normative commitment, as research using mild forms of the same mechanisms could regu-
incremental commitment to induce attitude and larly be found in other groups and organizations.
behavior change has found. For example, the foot- These commitment mechanisms have substan-
in-the-door strategy has been shown to convince tial influence on behavior. For example, one study
people to engage in a wide range of behavior they found that individuals who made volitional and
ordinarily might refuse to do—from eating an irrevocable job choices were more committed than
Identity Control Theory 415

those who did not, a difference that endured for


over a year. Further, mentoring programs for group Identity Control Theory
members were associated with higher commitment
and lower turnover of members. In addition, blur- Identity control theory (ICT) focuses on the
ring the lines between work and family and nature of people’s identities (who people are) and
strengthening networks among employees increased the relationship of these identities to people’s
normative commitment to work groups. These behavior. It also focuses on how people’s behavior
findings suggest that groups can take steps to is an outcome of the meanings people attach to
encourage commitment among their members. the world around them. People not only name and
Studying commitment and identification in classify the world but also label each other and
groups is clearly important to understanding and themselves in terms of the positions they occupy
predicting how people are likely to behave within in society, organizations, and groups. Each of
groups. Research has focused, appropriately, on these self-labels represents an identity, which is a
the underlying psychological bases for this attach- set of meanings a person uses to define him- or
ment and has usefully clarified our understanding herself as a group member (e.g., American), as a
of commitment and identification in groups. role occupant (e.g., student), or as a unique indi-
vidual (e.g., honest). Moreover, the social struc-
William T. Self and Jennifer A. Chatman ture is a combination of the many role and group
See also Compliance; Conformity; Culture; Group positions people hold in society, and these posi-
Cohesiveness; Group Socialization; Normative tions carry behavioral expectations that people
Influence; Norms; Organizations; Personnel Turnover; internalize as their identities.
Social Identity Theory Each identity is made up of both meanings
shared by members of society and each individual’s
own meanings for him- or herself. The shared
Further Readings
meanings allow others in society to understand the
Caldwell, D. F., Chatman, J. A., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1990). identity a person is enacting in a situation, while
Building organizational commitment: A multifirm study. the idiosyncratic aspect of an identity allows a
Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 245–261. person to enact the identity uniquely. In addition,
Kanter, R. M. (1972). Commitment and community: people possess multiple identities, each of which is
Communes and utopias in sociological perspective. linked to the social structure through these shared
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. meanings and expectations. It is therefore through
Kelman, H. C. (1958). Compliance, identification, and their identities that people are intimately tied to
internalization: Three processes of attitude change. the social structure.
Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2, 51–60.
Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component
conceptualization of organizational commitment. Meaning
Human Resource Management Review, 1, 61–89.
Central to ICT is the concept of meaning around
O’Reilly, C. A., & Caldwell, D. F. (1981). The
which identities are formed. What does it mean to
commitment and job tenure of new employees: Some
evidence of postdecisional justification. Administrative
be a “father” or “son”? What does it mean to be an
Science Quarterly, 26, 597–616.
“American”? An identity is a set of meanings applied
O’Reilly, C., & Chatman, J. (1986). Organizational to the self as a unique individual (e.g., honest), in a
commitment and psychological attachment: The social role (e.g., student), or as a member of a social
effects of compliance, identification, and group (e.g., American); together, these meanings
internalization on prosocial behavior. Journal of define who one is. In ICT, meaning is a response to
Applied Psychology, 71, 492–499. a stimulus in the situation. In other words, a stimu-
O’Reilly, C. A., & Chatman, J. A. (1996). Culture as social lus in a situation evokes meaning in an individual. A
control: Corporations, cults, and commitment. In stimulus becomes a symbol when it evokes the same
B. Staw & L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in meaning in different people. When people have the
organizational behavior (pp. 157–200). Greenwich, same response to a stimulus, they understand each
CT: JAI. other through this shared meaning.
416 Identity Control Theory

For example, thinking about oneself as a student identity standard represent goals or the way the
(stimulus) calls up a set of responses (meanings) situation is “supposed to be.” People behave in the
similar to those called up in others who understand situation to create and maintain the situation in
what it means to be a student. These responses the way it is supposed to be. By verifying identities,
define what it means to be a student—for example, people create and maintain the social structure in
being studious, responsible, or social. These com- which the identities are embedded. Note that by
mon responses lead to common expectations and controlling perceived situational meanings, people
understandings about what a student is, what a are bringing about and maintaining the situation,
student does, how a student relates to a professor, not behaviors. It is the outcome that is important,
and the position of a student in the university. not the means that accomplish the outcome.
For example, when thinking about yourself as a
student, you may see yourself as studious. To verify
Control of Perceptions
your identity as a studious student, you may study
Each identity is a control system with four compo- 12 hours a week, or read all the readings, or talk
nents: an identity standard, perceptions, a com- to your professors. Any of these behaviors can
parator, and behavioral output. The identity verify your identity of studious student. Perhaps
standard is the set of meanings defining a given one week you are unable to read all the readings
identity. Input perceptions are of meanings in a for your class. This would represent a discrepancy
situation that are relevant to an identity (mostly because your self-meanings as a student require
feedback from others about how a person is com- you to do all of your homework. To fix this dis-
ing across in the situation). The comparator is a crepancy, you may go back and finish the reading
mechanism that compares the perceived meanings after your class, or you may start reading earlier in
with the meanings in the identity standard and the week next week. You will somehow compen-
outputs any difference as an error or discrepancy. sate for this discrepancy to align your self-meanings
Behavioral output is a function of the discrepancy. and situational meanings.
In any given situation, people enact behavior
that conveys meanings consistent with their iden-
Bases of Identity
tity meanings but modified by the discrepancy. If
people perceive that how they are coming across in ICT distinguishes between three bases of identities.
the situation (meaning) is congruent with the These are role identities, based on roles such as
meanings in their identity standard, the discrep- father; social identities, based on groups or catego-
ancy is zero and people continue to do what they ries such as American; and person identities, based
have been doing. If there is a disturbance to the on the unique biological individual, such as being
meanings in the situation and the discrepancy is honest. Identities formed on each of these bases
not zero, people feel distress and change their operate in the same way, adjusting situations to
behavior to counteract the disturbance and reduce seek verification. If the identity is a role identity,
the discrepancy toward zero. By changing their then appropriate role behavior will bring about the
behavior, people change meanings in the situation. changes in the situational meanings to make them
These altered meanings are perceived and again consistent with the identity standard. If the iden-
compared to the meanings in the identity standard. tity is a group- or category-based identity, behavior
In this way, each identity is a control system that that maintains group boundaries and divisions in
controls perceptions to match meanings in the the social structure will verify the identity. If the
identity standard. identity is a person identity, then behavior exem-
plary of how an individual sees him- or herself will
verify the identity.
Identity Verification
This process of people controlling their percep-
Multiple Identities
tions of identity-relevant meanings to produce
congruency with meanings in the identity standard People have many identities, one for each of the
is called identity verification. The meanings in the many personal characteristics they claim, roles
Ideology 417

they have, and groups or categories to which they examines the role of identity verification in the
belong. Each identity has its own perceptions, production of self-worth, self-efficacy, and feelings
standard, and comparator. This complexity of of authenticity. It is also developing predictions
the self with its many identities reflects the com- about the specific emotions that may be felt when
plexity of society. In ICT, the multiple identities identities are verified and not verified.
are arranged into a hierarchy of control systems
in which some identities are higher than other Peter J. Burke and Allison M. Cantwell
identities. See also Affect Control Theory; Looking-Glass Self;
Higher level identities act as general principles Social Identity Theory
that guide the programs of lower level identities.
The output of the comparator of higher level iden-
tities alters the standards (identity meanings) for Further Readings
lower level identities, while the output of the com-
parator of lower level identities produces behavior Burke, P. J. (1991). Identity processes and social stress.
that maintains or alters meanings in the situation. American Sociological Review, 56(6), 836–849.
Higher level identities include such master statuses Burke, P. J. (2004). Identity and social structure: The
as one’s gender, race, or class as well as many per- 2003 Cooley-Mead Award Address. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 67, 5–15.
son identities that are enacted across situations,
Stryker, S., & Burke, P. J. (2000). The past, present, and
roles, and groups. One may, for example, be not
future of an identity theory. Social Psychology
just a friend, but a female friend; one may be not
Quarterly, 63(4), 284–297.
just an American, but a Black American; one may
be not just a student, but an honest student. In
each case, the master status of gender or race or
the person identity of being honest acts to change
the manner in which friend, American, or student Ideology
is played out.
Ideology is a term widely used in everyday lan-
guage, in philosophy and literature, and in the
Identity Change
social sciences. It is well represented in research in
The basic rule is that identities act quickly to coun- political psychology, and more recently it has
teract disturbances to meanings in the situation by attracted attention in social psychology. Definitions
altering behavior to bring perceived meanings of the concept vary considerably. A common
back into alignment with meanings in the identity theme in the research literature is that an ideology
standard. However, sometimes people are in situa- is a set of beliefs, shared by members of a group
tions in which they cannot change their behavior or collective movement, organized into a doctrine
to fix a discrepancy. In these situations, ICT recog- that guides thinking and behavior. In social psy-
nizes that the identity standard itself also slowly chology, the term refers to a systematic and inte-
changes to match the meanings in the situation and grated set of beliefs whose primary function is
reduce the discrepancy to zero. Often, both pro- explanation. This explanatory function of ideol-
cesses occur simultaneously to verify identities. ogy links the concept to social psychological theo-
ries of how people attribute causes to behavior.
An ideology circumscribes thinking and entails
Emotions
commitment; hence an adherent will usually find
In ICT, the verification of identities is tied to emo- it difficult to escape its grip. Literature dealing
tional outcomes that help guide the process. When with ideology is mainly in the arena of politics,
the discrepancy between identity relevant percep- where discussion of ideology usually includes ref-
tions and the identity standard is small or decreas- erence to social or political plans and means of
ing, people feel positive emotions. When the putting these plans into action. This entry looks at
discrepancy is large or increasing, people feel nega- characteristics of ideology, reviews its expression
tive emotions or distressed. Current work in ICT in politics, and discusses its importance.
418 Ideology

Features of an Ideology guiding doctrine for one group, then a different


group with a different ideology can be a sufficient
As commonly employed in social psychology, the condition for intergroup conflict. Indeed, we are
concept of ideology is connected to discussion of very familiar with the political and religious ide-
the process of attribution, since both are forms of ologies that serve as rallying points for many of
social knowledge and knowledge construction. the world’s most intransigent factional and inter-
This connection is clearest in the case of societal national clashes.
attributions, the explanations that people give for
large-scale social phenomena. Such attributions
are located within and shaped by wider, socially Ideologies and Politics
constructed belief systems. For example, explana- An early political ideology was Machiavellianism,
tions for poverty can be subject to attributional named after Niccolò Machiavelli, a 16th-century
bias: Both the rich and the poor tend to explain Florentine diplomat considered by some to have
poverty in terms of the way poor people behave been the first social scientist. Machiavellianism is
rather than in terms of wider economic forces. the notion that craft and deceit are justified in pur-
There is some overlap between the terms ideol- suing and maintaining power in the political
ogy and value. Both are used in social psychology world. The term itself was first used by Destutt de
to denote a higher order concept that provides a Tracy at the time of the French Revolution and
hierarchical structure for organizing attitudes. In meant “the science of ideas.”
Norman Feather’s view, a value consists of a set of The conceptualization of ideology was devel-
beliefs about desirable behavior and goals, and oped further by the political philosophers Karl
these beliefs have an “oughtness” or prescriptive Marx and Friedrich Engels, and acquired the con-
quality to them. A value transcends attitudes, and notation of a social structure that enabled a group
it influences the form that attitudes take. This is with power to retain control with the least
partly echoed by Alice Eagly and Shelly Chaiken amount of resistance. According to Marx, an ide-
when they describe an ideology as a cluster of atti- ology suggests a world system that is in accord
tudes and beliefs that are interdependent. They with the nature of things. It should be seen as an
add that an ideology is formed around a dominant example of progress, unfolding from history and
societal theme. John Jost and his colleagues also having the prospect of eternity. The Marxian
emphasize the fact that an ideology is a belief sys- view is that for an anticapitalist revolution to be
tem that is shared by members of a specific group, successful, people need to understand that the rul-
class, or community. It is also possible that not ing class has an ideology based on domination
only beliefs and attitudes but also values can be over subordinate classes. Thus the key to the suc-
subsumed by an ideology. cess of the ruling class prior to the Russian
The important influences on the way a person Revolution was that its members had found ways
acquires knowledge of the content of an ideology to legitimize the social order.
are the same as those that help shape a person’s How is an ideology constructed? This question
attitudes and values: parents, peer groups, and has been addressed differently by political scien-
major reference groups (such as ethnic and reli- tists and by social psychologists. According to John
gious groups). Although an ideology provides an Jost and his colleagues, political scientists argue for
overarching structure, not all of its detailed con- top-down processing, in which political attitudes
tent is required before a person has some ideologi- are acquired through exposure to ideological clus-
cal understanding and commitment. ters that are established by political elites. Social
Perhaps the most interesting aspect of ideolo- psychologists point to bottom-up processing, in
gies is that their very existence invites confronta- which people’s psychological needs and motives
tion. If an ideology defines an organized body of make them receptive to particular ideological posi-
beliefs (and attitudes and values) held by its adher- tions. In both approaches, an ideology requires
ents, the chances are great that there will be other that people are taught how to think and how to act
available ideologies that are different from and and to accept where they fit into society; in other
even opposed to it. If an ideology represents a words, the populace is reprogrammed. Historical
Ideology 419

examples of mass political education abound. In myths and attitudes, fosters particular values, and
the 20th century, anti-Semitism was carefully is elaborated in an ideology that enhances hierar-
articulated during the rise of Nazism, and Mao chical social relations and maintains prejudice. A
Zedong orchestrated a “reeducation” of the popu- dominant group, such as the rich, is disproportion-
lace to provide the basis of his cultural revolution. ately advantaged (e.g., by the status or power of its
From the perspectives of social, personality, and members), whereas subordinate groups, such as
political psychology, there have been three areas of the poor, are disproportionately disadvantaged
intensive research. The earliest of these was research (e.g., by lack of access to health care). A society’s
on authoritarianism. Two modern conceptual institutions can enhance the existing hierarchy. For
developments are social dominance theory and example, the criminal justice system may be biased
systems justification theory. toward harsher penalties for members of socially
disadvantaged minority groups.
The Authoritarian Personality Social dominance theory also accounts for
variation between individuals in the extent to
In their work The Authoritarian Personality
which they accept societal ideologies that legiti-
published in 1950, Theodor Adorno, Else Frenkel-
mize hierarchy and discrimination, on one hand,
Brunswik, and their colleagues described what
versus equality and fairness on the other. The
they believed to be a personality syndrome that
underlying motivation is a view of intergroup rela-
predisposed certain people to be authoritarian.
tions that is exploitative and power based. People
The historical context for this theory was the role
who want their own group to be dominant and
of fascist ideology in the Holocaust—Adorno and
superior to relevant outgroups have a high social
Frenkel-Brunswik were both Jewish and had fled
dominance orientation (SDO). This encourages
Hitler’s regime (in Germany and Austria, respec-
them to reject egalitarian ideologies. People with a
tively). The theory proposed that autocratic and
high SDO are more inclined to be prejudiced than
punitive child-rearing practices were responsible
people with a low SDO. The SDO construct is cor-
for the emergence in adulthood of various clusters
related with measures such as ethnocentrism,
of beliefs. These included: ethnocentrism; an intol-
nationalism, authoritarianism, racism, and sexism;
erance of Jews, Blacks, and other ethnic and reli-
with behaviors such as racial discrimination and
gious minorities; a pessimistic and cynical view of
the stereotyping of minorities; and with social
human nature; conservative political and economic
policies such as death penalty views, welfare
attitudes; and a suspicion of democracy.
reform views, and support for military conquest.
With the publication of The Authoritarian
The theory as originally framed was about the
Personality, Adorno reported that his group had
desire for the ingroup to be in command—to rule
constructed an instrument known as the California
and govern outgroups. Recently, however, social
F-scale, intended at first to assess tendencies toward
dominance theory has been extended to account
fascism, it was eventually purported as a measure
for a more general desire of group members for
of general authoritarianism. Despite substantial
unequal relations between groups, irrespective of
methodological and conceptual flaws, this work
whether members’ own group is at the top or the
stimulated huge research interest in the 1960s and
bottom of the status hierarchy. In other words,
beyond. In later years, Robert Altemeyer developed
both dominant and subordinate groups are parties
a more restricted but better designed and more
to subordination. The ideologies adopted justify
useful measure of right wing authoritarianism.
on moral and intellectual grounds the customs and
conventions that determine what is valued in a
Social Dominance Theory
society. This extension makes social dominance
According to this theory, developed by Jim theory look more like system justification theory.
Sidanius and Felicia Pratto, societies are generally
structured as group-based hierarchies, in which
System Justification Theory
dominant groups have higher social status, and
more political authority, power, and wealth. According to John Jost and his colleagues, most
Justification for the social structure incorporates political ideologies are located on a left–right
420 Idiosyncrasy Credit

dimension, with the two poles also often called hands of policymakers whose judgments are
liberal, which calls for social change and rejects affected by their ideological commitments.
social inequality, and conservative, which resists
social change and endorses social inequality. The Graham M. Vaughan
basis of a particular political ideology rests on the See also Attribution Biases; Authoritarian Personality;
differences in thinking and motivation that go Dogmatism; Nationalism and Patriotism; Norms;
with being either a liberal or a conservative. Power; Protestant Work Ethic; Right Wing
Liberals prefer progress, rebelliousness, chaos, Authoritarianism; Social Dominance Theory; System
flexibility, feminism, and equality; conservatives Justification Theory
prefer conformity, order, stability, traditional
values, and hierarchy.
Consequently, system justification is more com- Further Readings
mon among conservatives than among liberals. Bluhm, W. T. (1974). Ideologies and attitudes: Modern
Conservatives justify and protect the existing political culture. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
social system—the status quo—even if this means Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1998). Attitude structure
upholding an unfavorable position for their own and function. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, &
group. There is an irony here. Why protect such an G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology
ideology when it maintains their position of disad- (Vol. 1, pp. 269–322). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
vantage? Jost has suggested that one motivation Jost, J., Federico, C. M., & Napier, J. L. (2009). Political
for this may be to reduce uncertainty—better to ideology: Its structure, functions, and elective
live in reduced circumstances and be certain of affinities. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 307–337.
one’s place than to challenge the status quo and Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An
face an uncertain future. intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tetlock, P. E. (1998). Social psychology and world
Are Ideologies Important? politics. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey
Ideologies certainly are crucially important—they (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2,
frame polarized worldviews and can be the source pp. 868–912). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
of intergroup behaviors that are highly conflict-
ual. For example, the cold war spanned almost
half a century—a period in which the world was
balanced precariously, caught between two dia- Idiosyncrasy Credit
metrically opposed ideologies. Their adherents
possessed an arsenal of nuclear weapons capable The term idiosyncrasy credit was first coined by
of destroying life on this planet. One espoused Edwin Hollander in a 1958 Psychological Review
Marxism–Leninism and the other described itself article in which he addressed the issue of how
as “the free world.” individuals gain support for their innovative ideas
More recently an old ideological difference from other group members. The idea was particu-
between Eastern Islam and primarily Western larly influential in the field of leadership research
Christianity has joined the mix to split the globe in where, in light of evidence that those who deviate
different ways. The “Threat to the West” now from group norms are often rejected, a critical
extends to China and various “terrorist” nations theoretical and practical question centers on how
in the Middle East, whose lethal power is mea- leaders encourage followers to support and
sured in a nuclear currency. As Philip Tetlock has embrace new practices. Hollander’s answer to this
noted, the older bipolar world has evolved quickly question revolves around the idea that to initiate
into one that is multipolar. It is unlikely that these change, individual group members (leaders) need
various nations can be nicely aligned as units on a to build up psychological credit with other group
left–right political continuum. It is more likely that members (followers), so that the latter will be
hawks (conservatives) and doves (liberals) will be open to their idiosyncratic ideas. In this way, idio-
found in each. The future of humankind is in the syncrasy credit gives individuals latitude to deviate
Idiosyncrasy Credit 421

but also ensures that when they do, their sugges- embrace them and their new plans immediately.
tions are taken seriously. Instead, they must first build up a support base
This entry considers the theoretical origins of and win the confidence of followers. That is, lead-
Hollander’s ideas and outlines some of the research ers need to build up credit—to be understood,
that has supported his arguments. It also reviews respected, and trusted—before they can influence
some criticisms of Hollander’s work—notably followers to move in a new direction. There are
those that question the theoretical integrity of his two ways in which leaders typically do this: by
analysis and its view that influence flows only displaying competence and by conforming to
from conformity and interpersonal exchange. group norms.
In effect, then, idiosyncrasy credit constitutes a
line of psychological credit that is built up early in
Theoretical Origins
a leader’s tenure and then cashed in later in return
Hollander’s ideas originated in theories of leader- for influence and license to deviate from estab-
ship and influence that were developed in the after- lished norms. Moreover, like other forms of credit,
math of World War II. Previously, much of this not only are leaders able to use idiosyncrasy credit
theoretical work had revolved around an apprecia- for this purpose, but they are also expected to do
tion of the “great person”—arguing that those so. Along these lines, Hollander argued that a
individuals who were able to orchestrate and bring leader who has gained credit in the eyes of follow-
about change were distinguished from others by ers needs to use it to take the group in new direc-
virtue of their superior character. Within this tradi- tions or else that credit will be diminished. Not
tion, research was defined by an almost exclusive only do leaders have to accumulate idiosyncrasy
focus on leaders themselves. credit, they also need to “use it or lose it.”
A key contribution that Hollander made to lead-
ership theory was to challenge the prevailing focus
Related Research
on leaders and throw the analytic spotlight onto
followers. If leadership is defined as the process of Over the last 40 years, a range of studies have
influencing group members in a way that contrib- examined and tested these ideas. Those reported
utes to the achievement of group goals, then, he by Hollander and James Julian in 1970 are prob-
argued, the followership of those members should ably the best known. These studies showed that
be every bit as important as the actions of leaders. leaders who had been elected to their position, and
From this perspective, the basis of leadership is hence had the explicit backing of group members
seen to lie not in the qualities of the individual (idiosyncrasy credit), were more likely to challenge
leader per se, but rather in the quality of relations poor group decisions than leaders who had been
between leaders and other group members. appointed to their position, and hence had no
In this way, Hollander advocated a transac- direct mandate from the group. On the basis of
tional approach to leadership. This approach such findings, the authors argued that without the
incorporates principles of interpersonal social backing of followers, leaders lack the security to
exchange, suggesting that effective leadership flows display genuine leadership when managing the
from a maximization of the mutual benefits that group’s interests and that the group as a whole will
leaders and followers afford each other. So, on the suffer.
one hand, the leader acts in the interests of However, even in these studies, it can be seen
the group and its members but, on the other hand, that the phenomenon of idiosyncrasy credit is not
the group validates and empowers the leader. examined directly and is confounded with other
A central notion here is trust, since Hollander potentially important factors (e.g., status, author-
argued that before followers are prepared to go ity, involvement). In line with this observation, it is
out on a limb for their leader, they need first to be apparent that empirical research has invoked the
confident that the leader is going to act in the notion of idiosyncrasy credit to account for a par-
group’s best interests and take it on an appropriate ticular pattern of results more often than it has
path. Leaders, Hollander stressed, cannot simply tested Hollander’s ideas directly. Indeed, while
barge into a group and expect its members to Hollander’s original article has been cited more
422 Illusion of Group Effectivity

than 250 times (making it a “citation classic”), identified with Hollander’s original formulation of
Web of Science lists only three papers with the term the concept, which he faulted for placing too much
in their title (of which the original article is one). emphasis on conformity and thereby being too
In this respect, one particular difficulty with conservative.
Hollander’s ideas pertains to the lack of theoretical These objections notwithstanding, it is apparent
specificity regarding the precise source and nature that the notion of idiosyncrasy credit has proved
of idiosyncrasy credit. For example, Hollander to be of enduring value for the study of leadership
noted that in organizational settings, men typically and influence. Even if it does not fully explain the
have more credit than women, as do those with underlying process, it speaks to two apparent
seniority and status and those who are participa- paradoxes at the heart of effective social influ-
tive rather than autocratic. He also observed that ence: that deviation tends to be driven by those
individuals can have “derivative credit” as a result who are not seen as deviant, and that the capacity
of their membership in other groups. At the same to influence others tends to be enhanced by their
time, he cautioned that credit is always negotiated perception that they have influenced the person
and proven in the immediate group context and so leading them.
is fluid and context specific. These things may all
be descriptively true, but what is the explanatory S. Alexander Haslam and Michael J. Platow
logic that binds them together? See also Great Person Theory of Leadership; Leadership;
Recently, one answer to this question has been Minority Influence; Social Exchange in Networks and
proposed by advocates of a social identity approach Groups; Social Identity Theory of Leadership;
to leadership. These researchers have argued that Transactional Leadership Theories; Trust
leaders’ capacity to engender followership derives
from their capacity to present themselves, and be
seen, as prototypical representatives of a salient Further Readings
group membership that is shared with followers.
Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D., & Platow, M. J. (2009).
In these terms, idiosyncrasy credit is grounded in The new psychology of leadership: Identity, influence
group members’ categorization of the leader as and power. New York: Psychology Press.
“one of us”—a category-based perception that can Hollander, E. P. (1958). Conformity, status, and
change as a result of normative and comparative idiosyncrasy credit. Psychological Review, 65,
factors that determine the meaning of that 117–127.
ingroup. Hollander, E. P. (2006). Influence processes in leadership–
The social identity analysis is consistent with followership: Inclusion and the idiosyncrasy credit
many of the observations that Hollander made model. In D. A. Hantula (Ed.), Advances in social and
about the dynamics of idiosyncrasy credit. organizational psychology: A tribute to Ralph Rosnow
Critically, however, it argues that the underlying (pp. 293–312). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
process is not one of interpersonal exchange; Hollander, E. P., & Julian, J. W. (1970). Studies in leader
rather, it centers on a higher order sense of group legitimacy, influence and innovation. In L. Berkowitz
identity that leaders and followers share. Among (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology
other things, this helps explain how leaders are (Vol. 2, pp. 485–537). New York: Random House.
able to gain support for novel projects outside the Moscovici, S. (1976). Social influence and social change.
small-group contexts in which idiosyncrasy credit London: Academic Press.
is typically studied and where interpersonal
exchange is not possible. The capacity for a leader
to acquire credit by championing novel social iden-
tities (e.g., Nelson Mandela’s vision of postapart- Illusion of Group Effectivity
heid South Africa) also explains the capacity for
individuals who represent minorities and radical The illusion of group effectivity is the persistent
groups to bring about change, even under condi- and widespread belief, despite some evidence to
tions where they have no established credit with the contrary, that group performance is superior
the majority. This is a problem that Serge Moscovici to individual performance. The popular media
Illusion of Group Effectivity 423

and quasi-scientific press often express strong and confusion. After a group brainstorming session,
optimistic beliefs regarding the effectiveness of group members might no longer recall exactly who
group-based work, and these beliefs seem widely has generated which idea and may take credit for
shared within society. Sometimes, however, the a disproportionate share of the group’s perfor-
scientific literature clearly shows that groups do mance. Consequently, group members think that
not perform well at all and that certain tasks they have done quite well and come to believe that
might be better left to individuals. The illusion of group interaction stimulates their idea generation.
the superiority of the group over the individual In support for this explanation, it has been shown
may persist even when the individual has had that group members often are uncertain about the
extensive experience with a particular task, and source of specific ideas. Furthermore, group mem-
therefore, it is not just due to cultural beliefs that bers claim that many of the ideas suggested by
are easily falsified through experience. others had also occurred to them, whereas people
The illusion of group effectivity has been stud- who have brainstormed individually make this
ied widely within the context of group brainstorm- claim less often.
ing. However, it seems to be a more general The second explanation suggests that the effect
phenomenon. It has been argued that group mem- is due to social comparison processes. During a
bers routinely experience both social–emotional group brainstorming session, group members will
and competence-related benefits from working in compare their performance with that of other
groups, and that these benefits lead people to members. They will, on average, find that they
believe that group-based work is particularly effec- have performed similarly and consequently are
tive. This entry discusses research on this illusion quite satisfied with their performance. Individuals
in brainstorming groups, examines evidence that generating ideas on their own, however, cannot
the illusion of group effectivity is a more general compare their performance with that of others
phenomenon, and considers some implications of and therefore might feel insecure and worry that
this illusion. they have not done well. In support for this expla-
nation, it has been shown that providing informa-
tion about how someone else performed on the
Brainstorming
brainstorming task has a positive influence on the
One of the most robust findings in group research satisfaction of those who brainstormed alone. For
is that people generate fewer ideas and fewer good example, just saying how many ideas another per-
ideas when they brainstorm in a group than when son generated reduces the individual brainstorm-
brainstorming alone. Furthermore, the bigger the er’s uncertainty and leads to higher levels of
group, the less effective each member becomes. For satisfaction after a brainstorming session.
most people, this finding comes as a surprise The final explanation suggests that during a
because they believe that group interaction stimu- brainstorming session, it will often happen that
lates idea generation. Research has indeed shown someone tries to generate more ideas but can tem-
that across different cultures (e.g., in the United porarily think of nothing new. When brainstorming
States, Europe, and Japan), people strongly believe as an individual, these failures to come up with new
that brainstorming is best performed in groups. ideas are highly salient and may lead people to con-
Furthermore, even after people have participated clude that they are not performing well. In groups,
in a brainstorming session, those who worked in in contrast, people can listen to others when these
groups indicate more satisfaction with their per- failures occur, and failures are consequently not so
formance than those who brainstormed alone, salient. Because people experience fewer such fail-
despite the fact that objective performance mea- ures in a group setting, they come to believe that
sures show that those who brainstormed alone had group interaction actually stimulates idea genera-
more reason for satisfaction. tion (i.e., it appears to be easier to come up with
Three different explanations have been sug- ideas in a group). Consistent with this explanation,
gested for the illusion of group effectivity in brain- group members report fewer failures to generate
storming, and all have received some support. ideas than do individuals. However, manipulations
The first suggests that the effect is due to memory that increase the number of failures (such as greater
424 Illusion of Group Effectivity

topic difficulty) decrease satisfaction with the group own group as superior to other groups: Well over
brainstorming session. 50% of groups agree with the statement “My
group is better than most other groups.” In addi-
tion, working in a group decreases uncertainty
The Romance of Teams
about individual performance. In decision mak-
While the evidence for the illusion of group effec- ing and problem solving, for example, group
tivity is strongest in brainstorming research, it has members learn about other members’ preferences
been suggested that the phenomenon is much and problem solutions. When these are similar to
broader. Specifically, many organizations enthusi- their own, group members often take this simi-
astically embrace the idea that teamwork is highly larity as evidence about reality; that is, when
effective, and more and more organizations struc- most members agree about a decision or solu-
ture their work around teams. Popular sayings, tion, it is likely to be correct. As a consequence,
such as 1 + 1 = 3, two heads are better than one, groups often are quite confident about their deci-
and together everyone achieves more (TEAM), sions and problem solutions, even when objec-
reflect such beliefs about the benefits of group- tively they have not performed well at all and
based work. However, this contrasts with empiri- have failed to identify the best alternative or
cal data from laboratory as well as field research solution.
showing quite mixed support for the effectiveness
of group-based work.
For example, laboratory results indicate that Implications
groups often fail to reap the potential benefits of
Does this imply that groups or teams should not be
collaboration when it comes to decision making
used at all because performance benefits are merely
and problem solving. And field research has shown
an illusion? Clearly, this is not the case. For some
that the implementation of team-based work leads
tasks, it simply is necessary to work together (e.g.,
to modest productivity improvements at best.
shooting a movie can usually not be done alone).
How might this “romance of teams” (i.e., faith in
Furthermore, working in teams does seem to have
the effectiveness of team-based work that is not
certain benefits to team members, such as increased
supported by, or even inconsistent with, relevant
levels of satisfaction. However, simply using
empirical evidence) be explained?
teamwork or performing certain tasks in groups
One explanation is that team-based work is
does not guarantee high levels of performance.
fashionable and that teams are just a passing fad.
Consequently, it cannot be safely assumed that
However, Natalie Allen and Tracy Hecht have pro-
when people feel good or are satisfied it means that
posed that teams provide social–emotional as well
the team is actually performing well—performance
as competence-related benefits to their members.
has to be shown explicitly.
These, in turn, make teamwork enjoyable and cre-
Further, true performance benefits might only
ate the illusion that teamwork is effective. For
emerge after team members receive appropriate
example, being a member of a team satisfies cer-
training and have experience in working together,
tain social needs, such as the need for affiliation
and when they work under conditions that foster
and belongingness. Teamwork might thus enhance
high levels of performance (e.g., with good leader-
satisfaction and well-being rather than perfor-
ship and appropriate feedback and reward struc-
mance. Increased satisfaction, however, might be
tures). It is important to keep all this in mind
taken as evidence that group work is effective,
when one is involved in group-based work
while more objective performance indicators do
arrangements.
not support this.
Besides these social–emotional benefits, there Bernard Nijstad
also are competence-related benefits of working
in groups. For example, team members take per- See also Brainstorming; Common Knowledge Effect; Fads
sonal credit for the success of the team, whereas and Fashions; Group Performance; Group Problem
they blame failures on other team members. Solving and Decision Making; Group Task; Social
Further, groups often have a tendency to see their Comparison Theory; Social Loafing; Teams
Illusory Correlation 425

Further Readings the time. For instance, pervasive social norms for
Allen, N. J., & Hecht, T. D. (2004). The “romance of polite and pleasant social interactions make
teams”: Towards an understanding of its psychological unpleasant, negative social interactions infrequent.
underpinnings and implications. Journal of Occupational A good example of a distinctiveness-based illusory
and Organizational Psychology, 77, 439–461. correlation involves the period before desegrega-
Hackman, J. R. (1990). Teams that work (and those that tion in the United States, when a person rarely
don’t). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. interacted with someone of another race. If a
Nijstad, B. A., Stroebe, W., & Lodewijkx, H. F. M. White individual experienced or witnessed a nega-
(2006). The illusion of group productivity: A tive social interaction with a Black person (two
reduction of failures explanation. European Journal of infrequent and distinctive co-occurring events), he
Social Psychology, 36, 31–48. or she might have overestimated the frequency
Paulus, P. B., Dzindolet, M. T., Poletes, G., & Camacho, with which these events co-occur. In this case, the
L. M. (1993). Perceptions of performance in group illusory correlation between Blacks and unpleas-
brainstorming: The illusion of group productivity. antness would become a mental association, or
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 78–89. stereotypic belief, about Blacks as a negative
Stroebe, W., Diehl, M., & Abakoumkin, G. (1992). The group. This type of illusory correlation explains
illusion of group effectivity. Personality and Social one processing mechanism by which stereotypes
Psychology Bulletin, 18, 643–650. about social groups are formed.
The original research to demonstrate the dis-
tinctiveness-based illusory correlation simulated
group perception in a laboratory setting. The
Illusory Correlation researchers used fictitious groups, A and B, to
avoid any influence of participants’ preexisting
Illusory correlation refers to the tendency for beliefs. Participants read sentences that described
someone to overestimate the frequency with which desirable and undesirable behaviors of members of
two events co-occur. The correlation is illusory Groups A and B. In reading the list, the partici-
because it is the product of biased information pants witnessed two infrequently occurring events:
processing on the part of the perceiver rather than There were more sentences about Group A than
an accurate perception of the stimulus environ- Group B and more sentences with desirable than
ment. An illusory correlation can result from undesirable behaviors overall. Importantly, the
aspects of the events or from biases of the per- researchers made sure that Group A and Group B
ceiver. When the perceiver overestimates the fre- had the same ratio of desirable to undesirable
quency with which two infrequent and distinctive behaviors. If participants relied on proportionality
events co-occur, it is called a distinctiveness-based to make judgments in an unbiased manner, they
illusory correlation. Conversely, when a perceiver would have rated Groups A and B with equal
expects certain events to occur frequently, and favor. However, participants overestimated the
consequently misremembers the number of times frequency with which members of Group B engaged
they co-occur, it is described as an expectancy- in undesirable behaviors. Furthermore, Group B
based illusory correlation. With respect to social was rated more negatively than Group A on sev-
perception, both types of illusory correlation shed eral personality dimensions. This study presented
light on the cognitive mechanisms that underlie evidence for a cognitive processing mechanism
stereotyping and prejudice. The research demon- that can result in biased evaluation of groups.
strating how illusory correlation can lead to ste- However, it is possible that the results were due
reotyping pioneered the social cognition approach to the fact that familiarity breeds liking (called the
to the psychology of intergroup relations. mere exposure effect); that is, increased exposure
to Group A could have led participants to think
more positively of Group A than Group B. Another
Distinctiveness-Based Illusory Correlation
study was conducted to rule out this alternative
Events that occur rarely are more likely to grab an explanation. Participants in this study read a list in
individual’s attention than events that happen all which sentences about members of Group B and
426 Illusory Correlation

sentences about desirable behaviors were infrequent. groups resulted from biased memory of the infor-
As a result of this change, the two competing expla- mation, then participants who had seen the fre-
nations for the previous results—distinctiveness quency table would be able to correct for the
and mere exposure—should have led to different memory bias and, consequently, would perceive the
outcomes. The distinctiveness explanation predicts two groups as roughly equivalent. However, par-
that participants would overestimate the desirable ticipants who saw the frequency table persisted in
behaviors by members of Group B, leading to more liking Group B significantly less than they liked
positive feelings about Group B in general. However, Group A. This biased judgment of Group B could
if mere exposure were responsible for the differen- not have resulted from biased memory of their
tial perception of the groups in the first study, then behaviors, since participants knew from the fre-
participants would end up liking the more fre- quency tables that the groups had behaved equiva-
quently occurring group (Group A). Indeed, despite lently. The fact that participants did not use the
the fact that the ratio of desirable to undesirable frequency information to override their biased
behaviors was the same for both groups, partici- judgments of the groups provides evidence that the
pants overestimated the frequency with which differential perception of groups was based on
Group B had performed desirable behaviors. biased encoding of the distinctive information.
Participants also rated the personality traits of Another study provided further support for the
Group B more positively. This study demonstrated distinctiveness mechanism by showing that the dis-
that illusory correlation could be formed with dis- tinctive stimulus events are more easily accessed
tinctive positive events, resulting in positive stereo- from memory.
types, in addition to excluding mere exposure as Nevertheless, alternative explanations have been
the mechanism by which illusory correlation results proposed to explain the illusory correlation effect.
had occurred. Some researchers have demonstrated that biases in
Further research was conducted to support the retrieval from memory can produce the illusory
distinctiveness explanation for illusory correlation. correlation effect. Others have argued that the
This explanation argues that the co-occurrence of unequal amount of information alone is the reason
two distinctive events attracts the perceiver’s atten- that the most infrequent behaviors are overesti-
tion, which leads to deeper processing and greater mated. Because participants will naturally forget
accessibility from memory. As a result of being some of the behavioral information that they have
able to easily remember these instances, perceivers learned about the groups, they will tend to overes-
are likely to overestimate how often they actually timate the frequency with which the rarest events
occur. That is, perceivers will misattribute the ease occurred. By this account, the asymmetry of the
of retrieval of the co-occurrence to the frequency stimuli presented, rather than the distinctiveness of
with which those behaviors occurred. Thus the certain information, may be responsible for the
distinctiveness explanation proposes that differen- formation of an illusory correlation. The debate
tial perceptions of groups result from biased about the process underlying illusory correlation
encoding of social information rather than preju- remains unresolved, and it is possible that multiple
diced memory of it. cognitive processes lead to the formation of illu-
Critics of the distinctiveness explanation have sory correlations. Furthermore, a number of fac-
argued that perceivers may be accurately encoding tors can influence whether or not an illusory
the behavioral information, but that the differential correlation is formed. Aspects of the perceiver—
group perceptions result from biased memory of such as mood, attitudes, and group membership—
that information. To show that the bias occurs at as well as the nature of the social information
encoding, researchers used the illusory correlation affect the formation of an illusory correlation.
paradigm with one important addition: After read-
ing the list of behaviors (in which Group B and
Expectancy-Based Illusory Correlation
undesirable behaviors were infrequent), some of the
participants were shown a frequency table in which Whereas the distinctiveness-based illusory correla-
the ratio of desirable to undesirable behaviors was tion speaks to the formation of stereotypes, the
equal across groups. If the differential perception of expectancy-based illusory correlation details a
Immigration 427

mechanism by which stereotypic judgments are processes in stereotype formation: A common model
maintained and strengthened. Once stereotypes for category accentuation and illusory correlation.
have been formed, they are resistant to change and Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(2),
influence the individual’s processing of new infor- 305–323.
mation about the group. In one study, researchers Stroessner, S. J., & Plaks, J. E. (2001). Illusory correlation
used groups about which people already have ste- and stereotype formation: Tracing the arc of research
reotypes (e.g., accountants). Participants read a list over a quarter century. In G. Moskowitz (Ed.),
of sentences that used equal numbers of stereotype- Cognitive social psychology: The Princeton
Symposium on the Legacy and Future of Social
consistent and stereotype-unrelated traits to
Cognition (pp. 247–259). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
describe the group members. When they were
Erlbaum.
asked to estimate the number of stereotypic and
neutral traits that had been used, participants reli-
ably overestimated the frequency with which the
stereotype-consistent traits had been used, com-
pared to the neutral ones. Another study presented Immigration
participants with equal numbers of stereotype-in-
consistent and stereotype-unrelated traits. In this Immigration involves the voluntary and nonvol-
case, participants reliably underestimated the fre- untary long-term relocation of people across
quency with which the stereotype-inconsistent national boundaries. It may be instigated by a
traits had appeared. These findings speak to the variety of factors, including those that push indi-
robustness of stereotypes; once they are formed, viduals to leave their country of residence and
stereotypes can bias information processing so that those that pull individuals toward a new home
the individual continually confirms them. nation. Immigration levels have reached histori-
The studies on distinctiveness-based and cally unprecedented levels in recent years, often
expectancy-based illusory correlations demonstrate involving movement from less economically devel-
the ways in which cognitive information-process- oped countries to more highly developed coun-
ing mechanisms can produce biased perceptions tries. Immigration has a major impact not only on
and evaluations of groups. Illusory correlation those who relocate but potentially on both the
research has demonstrated that there is a cogni- source and target nations.
tively based propensity for erroneous judgments in When individuals leave developing countries to
the intergroup context. The findings demonstrate find new opportunities in more economically
that the cognitive component of prejudice is easy developed regions of the world, their countries of
to develop and difficult to overcome. origin may lose highly skilled personnel. This is
known as the “brain drain,” and it may have a
Jacqueline M. Chen and David L. Hamilton major impact on the economy of these countries.
Immigrant-receiving nations differ markedly in
See also Categorization; Prejudice; Racism; Stereotyping their approach to immigrants and in their immi-
gration policies. Nations like Canada see immi-
grants, particularly those who are highly skilled, as
Further Readings a valuable commodity and accept a large number
Hamilton, D. L., & Gifford, R. K. (1976). Illusory of immigrants into the country each year on the
correlation in interpersonal perception: A cognitive basis of their potential economic contributions.
basis of stereotypic judgments. Journal of Others, such as the United States, place more
Experimental and Social Psychology, 12, 392–407. emphasis in their immigrant policies on family
Hamilton, D. L., & Rose, T. L. (1980). Illusory reunification. While still others, such as Germany,
correlation and the maintenance of stereotypic beliefs. have historically denied that their country is an
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, immigrant-receiving nation and have defined
832–845. nationality on the basis of ethnic heritage (formal
Sherman, J. W., Kruschke, J. K., Sherman, S. J., Percy, E. J., policies for accepting immigrants have only recently
Petrocelli, J. V., & Conrey, F. R. (2008). Attentional been put into place in Germany).
428 Immigration

This entry first discusses the motivations that power, and particularly those who consider work
may lead individuals to migrate, and the forms central to their lives, are especially likely to desire
that acculturation in their new home country may to emigrate for economic reasons. In contrast,
take. It then describes factors that influence the those who are motivated by affiliation, and par-
attitudes of members of host societies toward ticularly those who consider family relations cen-
immigrants and immigration. These factors include tral to their lives, are especially likely to desire to
economic and cultural considerations, perceptions stay in their country of origin.
of threat to physical health and safety, and the
framing of national identity. Next, the entry
Acculturation: Immigrants and
focuses on the consequences of discrimination
Members of the Host Society
against immigrants, particularly its effects on the
contributions that immigrants can make to their When immigrants arrive in a new country, they are
new country. It concludes with a discussion of the often faced with two important cultural issues:
increasing recognition by developed nations of (1) whether to maintain their cultural heritage and
their need for immigrants, and the resulting shift in potentially pass it on to the next generation and
the discourse of immigration. (2) whether to take on their new country’s culture.
Models of acculturation were initially developed
to examine how immigrants resolve these two
The Push and Pull Factors of Immigration
issues. Immigrants who wish to maintain their cul-
One may choose to leave one’s country of resi- tural heritage and do not wish to take on aspects
dence and resettle in a new country for a variety of of the new culture have been described as endors-
reasons, some of which may be considered push ing separation. In contrast, those who do not wish
factors—those that drive individuals from their to maintain their cultural heritage but do wish to
country of origin, and others may be considered take on the new culture have been described as
pull factors—those that attract individuals to a endorsing assimilation. Immigrants who strive to
new country. Major push factors include sources have the best of both worlds—those who wish to
of trauma or disaster that migrants wish to leave maintain their cultural heritage and take on the
behind them as they search for a better life, such new culture—have been described as endorsing
as life-threatening poverty, natural disaster, envi- integration. Finally, those who wish to neither
ronmental degradation, persecution, and war. maintain their cultural heritage nor take on the
Individuals who leave their country of origin new culture have been described as choosing mar-
because of a well-founded fear of persecution on ginalization (separation from both cultures) or,
the basis of race, religion, nationality, membership alternatively, as proponents of individualism (pre-
in a particular social group, or political opinion ferring to focus on the personal characteristics of
are defined as convention refugees under the individuals rather than on cultures).
United Nations Convention Relating to the Status Recent models of acculturation acknowledge
of Refugees. Less severe push factors primarily that immigrants are often subject to the conditions
include poor economic conditions in one’s country of their host society, with both the immigration
of origin, and lack of educational and employment and integration policies of host nations likely to
opportunities. In contrast, pull factors are those influence immigrant acculturation. Thus, the accul-
that attract migrants to a new home country. These turation strategies preferred by immigrants are
may include educational and employment oppor- most likely to be successfully practiced when they
tunities, a high standard of living, the presence of are compatible with the preferences of the host
family members, a safe environment, and political society. When members of the host society prefer
and cultural freedoms. that immigrants give up their cultural heritage and
Not all individuals respond to these push and fully take on the new culture, this is described as
pull factors in the same way, suggesting that there the melting pot. In contrast, when members of the
may be a “migrant personality.” For example, it host society prefer that immigrants maintain their
has been demonstrated that individuals who are cultural heritage and do not take on the new cul-
motivated by opportunities for achievement and ture, this may result in segregation. When the host
Immigration 429

society values cultural diversity and immigrants the economic class of immigration, and are thus
are encouraged to both maintain aspects of their specifically selected to be highly skilled and to fill
cultural heritage and take on aspects of the host needs in the labor market. Under these conditions,
culture, this represents multiculturalism. Finally, one would expect that immigrants would be more
attempts to prevent immigrants from maintaining likely to contribute economically to their new
their cultural heritage or taking on the new culture society (though underemployment of new immi-
can be defined as a form of exclusion or as a pref- grants may reduce this likelihood). In contrast,
erence for individualism. Of note, not all immi- employment-based immigrants do not constitute
grant groups within a country are treated similarly, the majority of immigrants to the United States, so
with a host society’s preference for acculturation that concerns about the economic contributions of
depending on whether a particular group is valued these immigrants may be greater. Thus, when eco-
or devalued in that society. For example, research nomic times are challenging and unemployment
has shown that Anglo-Canadians seem to be more rates are higher, members of host societies are
supportive of welcoming acculturation orienta- more likely to support restrictive immigration
tions (e.g., integration) for British immigrants than policies.
for Arab Muslim immigrants. Irrespective of the actual economic contributions
of immigrants, an important factor in determining
attitudes toward immigrants and immigration
Factors Influencing
among members of the host society is the perceived
Attitudes Toward Immigrants
economic contributions and costs of immigration.
and Immigration in the Host Society
Immigrants who do not do well economically are
Attitudes toward immigrants and immigration likely to be seen as a drain on social services (e.g.,
among members of a host society are important welfare), leading to negative attitudes toward
because they may influence support for immigra- immigrants and immigration. In addition, research
tion policies within a nation, the treatment and has shown that immigrants who do well economi-
acceptance of immigrants, the success of immigra- cally may also be seen as a threat to the economic
tion policies, the life outcomes for immigrants, conditions of the host society because their suc-
and, ultimately, the degree of harmony or discord cesses may at times be seen as coming at the
within a nation. Two important theories that have expense of those who are not immigrants. These
addressed attitudes toward immigrants and immi- “zero-sum beliefs”—beliefs that the more immi-
gration are the unified instrumental model of grants obtain, the less is available for others—have
group conflict and the integrated threat theory of been shown to lead to negative attitudes toward
prejudice. Both have aimed to explain the variety immigrants and immigration. This means that
of factors that may influence immigration atti- immigrants may face a dilemma: Whether they fail
tudes, including those discussed below. or succeed economically, they may be perceived
negatively by some members of the host society.
Fundamentally, it is the belief that immigrants are
Perceived Economic Costs and Contributions
taking resources from members of the receiving
Over the past few decades, there have been society that drives these negative attitudes. Such a
repeated debates as to whether immigrants con- belief may be more or less likely to be part of the
tribute economically to their new society or are a dominant discourse within a country, may be more
drain on resources and compete for jobs with or less likely to be promoted by the media, and
those who are native born. Of course, a general may depend on individual difference variables,
answer to this question is difficult to provide such as social dominance orientation. Research
because the effects of immigration on a local has shown that individuals who score higher in
economy are likely to depend on the immigration social dominance orientation (i.e., support inequal-
policy of the host nation, the concomitant type of ity in society and believe in group hierarchies) are
immigrants who predominate, and the local eco- especially likely to see the world in general, and to
nomic situation. For example, as described earlier, see relations with immigrants in particular, as
many immigrants to Canada are accepted under zero-sum in nature. As a result, they are especially
430 Immigration

likely to hold negative attitudes toward immigrants practices and values, it will weaken the culture
and immigration. and values of the host society. Research has dem-
onstrated that these zero-sum beliefs about cul-
ture and values lead to negative attitudes toward
Perceived Threats to Physical Safety and Health
immigrants and immigration, particularly toward
Two other types of threats associated with those who are ethnic and religious minorities and,
immigrants are (1) threats to physical safety and therefore, more obviously different from the host
(2) threats to the health of members of the receiv- majority. Just as with tangible resources, the
ing society. While the former has become particu- belief that immigrants threaten the dominant cul-
larly salient in the last few years, the latter has a ture and values may be more or less likely to be
long history of influencing attitudes toward part of the dominant discourse within a country,
immigration policies and immigrants. Concerns and may be more or less likely to be promoted by
about threats to safety posed by immigrants have the media. In recent years, the claim that immi-
become more prevalent since September 11, grants are a potential threat to the dominant cul-
2001, due to the salient association of immi- ture and values of host countries has become
grants and terrorists caused by media depictions particularly prevalent within European discourse,
of the terrorist attacks at that time. Thus, it is resulting in increased support for restrictive immi-
now the case that immigrants, particularly those gration policies.
from Middle Eastern countries, are more likely to
be viewed with suspicion and even hostility.
The Framing of National Identity
Concerns that immigrants may bring in diseases
that will spread to members of the host society How national identity is defined within a par-
have influenced immigration policies over the last ticular country and by specific individuals within
century, despite the fact that immigrants are no that country plays an important role in determin-
longer a major vector of disease (particularly ing whether immigrants are seen as beneficial or
compared to tourism and military travel). detrimental. Two important forms of national
Nonetheless, groups that wish to promote nega- identity are nativist/ethnonational and civic/
tive attitudes toward immigrants, as seen on anti- cultural national identity. Nativist identity involves
immigrant Web sites, continue to take advantage the belief that national identity is based on having
of host members’ fear of disease by highlighting been born in a country, or at least having lived
cases of unhealthy immigrants and those who are there for a long time, and on being a member of
stricken with communicable diseases. This results the dominant religion. This is closely tied to eth-
in the dehumanization of immigrants and the nonational identity, in which national identity is
promotion of negative attitudes toward immi- defined on the basis of bonds of kinship and a
grants and immigration. common ethnic heritage. In contrast, civic/cultural
national identity is based on the belief that national
identity is based on a voluntary commitment to the
Perceived Cultural and Value-Related
laws and institutions of the country, and on the
Costs and Contributions
feeling of being a member of the national group.
In addition to being seen as a potential threat By definition, then, nativist/ethnonational national
to tangible resources, immigrants are at times identity is much more narrow in its construal of
seen as threatening to the culture and values of who is, and who is not, a member of the national
the host society. Thus when immigrants maintain ingroup than is civic/cultural national identity. As
and celebrate their cultural heritage, some mem- a result, countries with a history of promoting a
bers of host societies may find this threatening. nativist/ethnonational national identity (e.g.,
Just as some people under some conditions may Germany) are more likely to have restrictive immi-
see tangible resources as zero-sum in nature, some gration policies and to reject immigrants as mem-
individuals may also see their nation’s culture and bers of the national ingroup. In contrast, countries
values as zero-sum. As a result, they may believe that have a history of promoting a civic/cultural
that if immigrants are allowed to maintain their national identity (e.g., Canada) are more likely to
Immigration 431

have relatively open immigration policies and to Reciprocal Relations Between


accept immigrants as members of the national Immigrants and Members of the Host Society
ingroup soon after their arrival.
The process of immigration has potentially large-
Definitions of national identity may also change
scale influences on both immigrants and members
over time. For example, it has been demonstrated
of receiving societies. In the process of accultura-
that in times of national crisis and threat, the psy-
tion, it is likely that immigrants and host members
chological boundaries defining the national ingroup
will be affected, with more or less influence on
tend to narrow and nativist sentiments tend to
each, depending on the acculturation preferences
increase, resulting in more negative attitudes
that predominate. By limiting the life choices of
toward immigrants and immigration. In addition,
immigrants, discrimination not only affects immi-
large-scale immigration, particularly from new
grants and their families, but also affects host soci-
and unfamiliar source countries, can increase con-
eties by influencing the type of society in which
cerns about national identity and nativist beliefs,
both immigrants and host members live and plac-
so that negative attitudes toward immigrants and
ing limits on the contributions that immigrants can
immigration become evident. Thus, narrow defini-
make. Developed nations increasingly have a need
tions of national identity and unfavorable views of
for immigrants, particularly highly skilled immi-
immigrants and immigration may be mutually
grants, to fill their labor market needs and contrib-
reinforcing.
ute to their diminishing populations. Thus, the
discourse of immigration within these countries is
Discrimination Toward Immigrants rapidly changing from a discussion of “tolerance”
to a discussion of “attraction and retention.” That
Negative attitudes toward immigrants and immi-
is, immigrants are becoming a commodity for
gration are likely to lead to acts of discrimination.
which developed countries must compete. As a
Immigrants to new countries have historically
result, questions of immigration must now focus
experienced a variety of forms of discrimination,
on how to best optimize the contributions of immi-
including relatively blatant acts of violence and
grants and promote positive relations with mem-
exclusion. Today, the discrimination that immi-
bers of the receiving society so that immigrants and
grants face is often more subtle, but it continues to
members of the host country alike fully benefit.
limit their life choices. This discrimination may
affect all phases of the immigration and integra- Victoria M. Esses and Andrea Lawson
tion process, from the restrictiveness of immigra-
tion policies to limitations on citizenship to more See also Assimilation and Acculturation; Cooperation
and Competition; Dehumanization/Infrahumanization;
subtle discrimination in everyday encounters.
Multiculturalism; Nationalism and Patriotism;
Subtle discrimination may manifest in crucial
Realistic Group Conflict Theory; Social Dominance
aspects of immigrants’ settlement and integration, Theory
including their ability to secure housing, to have
their skills and credentials recognized, and to gain
access to educational opportunities and social ser- Further Readings
vices. As with other forms of subtle bias, this dis- Bourhis, R. Y., Montreuil, A., Barrette, G., &
crimination is most likely to be evident when Montaruli, E. (2009). Acculturation and immigrant/
justifications other than prejudice are readily host community relations in multicultural settings. In
available. Thus, for example, research has shown S. Demoulin, J. P. Leyens, & J. Dovidio (Eds.),
that employers may discount the skills of an immi- Intergroup misunderstanding: Impact of divergent
grant applicant due to prejudice, while using the social realities (pp. 39–62). New York:
uncertainty of foreign qualifications as a seem- Psychology Press.
ingly legitimate justification for this behavior. Deaux, K. (2006). To be an immigrant. New York:
Whether blatant or subtle, however, discrimina- Russell Sage.
tion may have a severe impact on immigrants and Esses, V. M., Dovidio, J. F., & Dion, K. L. (Eds.). (2001).
limit the contributions that they can make to their Immigrants and immigration. Journal of Social Issues,
new country. 57(3), 375–387.
432 Implicit Association Test (IAT)

Esses, V. M., Hodson, G., & Dovidio, J. F. (2003). Public been in the analysis of unconscious intergroup atti-
attitudes toward immigrants and immigration: tudes and stereotypes and group identity. Notably,
Determinants and policy implications. In C. M. Beach, the IAT has been used to study many aspects of
A. G. Green, & J. G. Reitz (Eds.), Canadian implicit intergroup cognition, including its rela-
immigration policy for the 21st century tionship to self-report, its development, neural
(pp. 507–535). Kingston, ON, Canada: John Deutsch correlates, and ecologically realistic behaviors.
Institute for the Study of Economic Policy.
Frieze, I. H., Boneva, B. S., Sarlija, N., Ferligoj, A.,
Kogovsek, T., Miluska, J., et al. (2004). Psychological Description of the Method
differences in stayers and leavers: Emigration desires
The IAT is a computer-based reaction-time task
in Central and Eastern European university students.
that measures the relative strength of associations
European Psychologist, 9, 15–23.
between concept–attribute pairs by instructing
Stephan,W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (2000). An integrated
threat theory of prejudice. In S. Oskamp (Ed.),
participants to classify four sets of stimuli into two
Reducing prejudice and discrimination: Claremont
superordinate categories using just two response
Symposium on Applied Social Psychology (pp. 23–46). keys. During a typical IAT, participants use two
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. response keys to classify concept stimuli presented
sequentially on a computer screen (e.g., faces of
Blacks and Whites, representing the concept race);
for example, pressing the left key to indicate the
face is Black and the right key to indicate the face
Implicit Association Test (IAT) is White. In addition, participants use the same
two keys to classify attribute stimuli (e.g., good
The idea that human thinking and feeling can words such as happy, nice, pleasant or bad words
operate outside conscious awareness and without such as terrible, awful, violent).
conscious control is well established. Researchers For half the trials, a particular concept category
arrived at this conclusion less from complex (White) and attribute category (good) share the
theorizing about the nature of the mind than same response key, while the contrasting categories
from evidence generated by several unique meth- share the other response key. And for the second
ods. This evidence revealed that much of social half of the trials, the pairings reverse so that the
cognition occurs without conscious awareness, opposite categories share the same response key
control, intentional thought, or self-reflection. (Black with good, and White with bad). The logic
Thus implicit forms of preference of both indi- of the IAT is simple: When two concepts are more
viduals and social groups have come to form a strongly associated with each other, it should be
critical component in the understanding of inter- easier for participants to classify them when they
group relations. share the same response key than when they share
One method that contributes to this under- different response keys. In other words, partici-
standing is the Implicit Association Test (IAT). pants should be both faster to respond and more
The IAT is a measure of implicit cognition, assess- accurate when two closely related concepts share
ing the relative strength of a associations between the same response key.
semantic concepts that may not be consciously The IAT stimuli can appear in several formats,
accessible. For example, the IAT might provide including pictures and words presented either visu-
evidence that, in the person being tested, the cate- ally or aurally. Response latencies and errors are
gory “woman” is associated more with family recorded and compared to those generated by the
than with career, while the category “man” reveals first set of trials. The particular pairings described
the opposite association. Indeed, the presence of above are counterbalanced across participants to
such associations can be detected by the IAT even control for potential order effects. (For a sample
if the person is not aware of them or if the person IAT task, visit http://implicit.harvard.edu)
consciously endorses an opposing belief. Each participant receives a single score upon com-
The IAT has been used to study a diverse range pleting an IAT, called the IAT score or the D-score.
of psychological concepts, and its primary use has This score is a measure of effect size computed by
Implicit Association Test (IAT) 433

calculating the difference between the mean response egalitarian views. These results are particularly
latency for the two double-categorization blocks and common in the United States when researchers are
dividing that difference by its associated pooled stan- studying socially sensitive topics such as race atti-
dard deviation. The D-score indicates the strength of tudes and stereotypes. Indeed, research has docu-
an individual’s association between categories and mented that people are reluctant to endorse views
attributes, with larger scores indicating stronger that are frowned upon in their culture when ano-
associations. (For more information about how to nymity is not assured (e.g., stating a preference for
score an IAT, please see the recommended readings Whites over Blacks or agreeing with a negative
at the end of this entry.) stereotype about Blacks).
Thus, while race bias is typically detected using
the IAT, such bias is more difficult to detect, if it is
Discoveries About Intergroup Cognition
detected at all, using self-report measures. Such
Perhaps because the IAT was first introduced using data relating the IAT to self-report measures of
social groups as the target domain, it has been bias support the idea that social cognition derives
most heavily used by those interested in the implicit from two independent pathways, one that is rela-
intergroup attitudes, stereotypes, and self-concepts tively automatic, unconscious, and inaccessible
of numerous groups: race/ethnicity, gender, age, and another that is readily available to introspec-
nationality, religion, body weight, disability, sexual tion and to willful efforts of control. Notably,
orientation, and political ideology, to name just a when the groups involved are not socially charged,
few. As such, the IAT has been instrumental in the IAT and self-report measures of bias tend to
generating a vast body of descriptive work to report similar findings.
document the nature of implicit social cognition in
intergroup contexts. Evidence About Bias
Researchers interested in understanding dual-
process theories of social cognition and intergroup Majority and Minority Intergroup Bias
relations have used the IAT to measure the degree Research with the IAT has revealed a striking
to which (and the conditions under which) explic- finding among adult participants—only majority
itly stated prejudices and implicitly measured asso- group members from socially valued groups exhibit
ciations are consistent. Moreover, the IAT has positive implicit ingroup bias. Thus, White
helped shed light on intergroup cognition by pro- Americans consistently show strong ingroup bias,
viding key insights into the nature of implicit bias whereas Black Americans do not. Similar observa-
among majority and minority populations, includ- tions have been obtained for other majority–
ing the developmental origins and neural basis of minority group contrasts in the United States and
implicit social cognition as well as the effect of in numerous other countries around the world.
intergroup contact on the reduction of implicit
intergroup bias. Notably, the IAT has been imple-
Development of Implicit Intergroup Bias
mented online at http://implicit.harvard.edu, which
serves primarily as an educational site with an A child-friendly version of the IAT (Child IAT)
attached spin-off research site, allowing data to be was developed to measure the acquisition of
gathered from samples well beyond the conve- implicit associations as they emerge. Collectively,
nience of college. this research has demonstrated that implicit inter-
group biases emerge surprisingly early in life at
adultlike levels of magnitude, casting doubt on the
Dissociation With Explicit Evaluation
conventional view that such implicit associations
Assessments of bias as measured by the IAT do form only over a protracted period of exposure to
not always produce results consistent with self- cultural beliefs. While implicit attitudes emerge
report measures. In fact, a weak correlation or no very quickly and undergo little change across
correlation at all is obtained between the IAT and development, implicit stereotypes seem to take
self-report measures of bias when there is a strong longer to form, appearing to be much more flexi-
desire on behalf of the participant to self-report ble. Ongoing developmental research using the
434 Implicit Association Test (IAT)

Child IAT promises to shed light on the cognitive an identity IAT (measure of association of self with
and cultural origins of implicit intergroup bias, another) predicted activation in the medial pre-
while revealing how and when such implicit asso- frontal cortex, showing the activation of different
ciations can be modified. neurons when individuals thought about someone
similar to or different from them based on group
Malleability of Implicit Intergroup Bias membership.
The IAT measures the relative strength of asso-
Considerable research has been concerned with ciation between different concepts. Research has
understanding the malleability of implicit inter- revealed that differences in the magnitude of these
group bias. Research using the IAT has shown that associations correlate with differences in actual
although the IAT taps an aspect of intergroup cog- behavior. In answer to questions concerning the
nition that is difficult to control, this implicit cog- predictive validity of the IAT using real-world
nition, contrary to intuition, is likely quite malleable. samples, a review of all peer-reviewed published
Indeed, studies have shown that the mere presence papers exploring the predictive validity of the IAT
of members of an outgroup (Black) can reduce the has shown that although both explicit and implicit
degree of implicit anti-Black IAT bias, that imagery measures predict intergroup discrimination, the
exercises can lower the degree of stereotypes of IAT outperforms explicit measures in this context.
women, and that consistent exposure to women In particular, implicit intergroup bias measured by
teachers can change girls’ stereotypes. the IAT is a better predictor of nonverbal behav-
iors and decisions made under pressure than are
explicit measures of intergroup bias.
Construct and Predictive Validity of the IAT
Research examining the construct validity of the Andrew Scott Baron and Mahzarin R. Banaji
IAT has demonstrated that it is difficult to produce
See also Children: Stereotypes and Prejudice; Implicit
a desired outcome (i.e., fake the test) and that the Prejudice; Modern Forms of Prejudice; Prejudice; Self-
strength of implicit associations are often uncor- Esteem; Social Identity Theory; Social Representations;
related with a person’s self-professed beliefs, espe- Stereotyping
cially when the domain of interest is susceptible to
the common desire to appear unbiased in the eyes
of friends, family, and peers. This is precisely the Further Readings
sort of finding one would expect from a measure
of implicit bias. Categories expected to elicit posi- Banaji, M. R. (2001). Implicit attitudes can be measured.
tive attitudes (e.g., flowers) compared to other In H. L. Roediger III, J. S. Nairne, I. Neath, &
categories (e.g., insects) do so. Known-groups tests A. Surprenant (Eds.), The nature of remembering:
Essays in honor of Robert G. Crowder (pp. 117–150).
give further support to the IAT by showing that
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
those expected to have stronger positive associa-
Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2003).
tions between concept and attribute indeed show
Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test:
such effects (e.g., members of dominant social
I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of
groups show greater implicit positivity toward Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 197–216.
their ingroup than do members of nondominant Greenwald, A. G., Poehlman, T. A., Uhlmann, E., &
social groups). Banaji, M. R. (in press). Understanding and using the
The IAT is also known to be related to several Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-analysis of
measures of brain activity, with the first studies predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social
demonstrating greater amygdala activation to Psychology.
Black faces in those participants who also showed Lane, K. A., Banaji, M. R., Nosek, B. A., & Greenwald,
stronger anti-Black IAT bias. Given the strong A. G. (2007). Understanding and using the Implicit
involvement of the amygdala in emotional learn- Association Test: IV: Procedures and validity. In
ing, such a result (the correlation between amygdala B. Wittenbrink & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Implicit
involvement and degree of attitudinal bias) ought measures of attitudes: Procedures and controversies
to be expected from an attitude measure. Recently, (pp. 59–102). New York: Guilford Press.
Implicit Prejudice 435

Nosek, B. A., Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (2005). harbors negative feelings toward, say, Blacks.
Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: These are feelings he doesn’t readily acknowledge
II. Method variables and construct validity. and wouldn’t admit to others; indeed, he may ada-
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(2), mantly deny them. However, in interactions with
166–180. Blacks, he appears somewhat distant and aloof.
Nosek, B. A., Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (2007). Although he doesn’t mean to, he makes less eye
The Implicit Association Test at age 7: A contact, smiles less, and generally exudes less
methodological and conceptual review. In J. A. Bargh warmth with them than he does with Whites.
(Ed.), Automatic processes in social thinking and
We would consider this person to be relatively
behavior (pp. 265–292). New York: Psychology Press.
low in explicit prejudice—he would claim, and
Nosek, B. A., & Smyth, F. L. (2007). A multitrait-
would perhaps believe, to feel neutrally or positively
multimethod validation of the Implicit Association Test:
toward Blacks, and he would certainly disavow
Implicit and explicit attitudes are related but distinct
constructs. Experimental Psychology, 54, 14–29.
blatantly racist notions like racial discrimination in
housing and employment. However, he exemplifies
implicit prejudice because of his negative feelings
and behavior toward Blacks and his lack of aware-
Implicit Prejudice ness of these feelings and behaviors. It is the cou-
pling of unintentional negativity and a lack of
Although there is some debate among psycholo- awareness that is the hallmark of implicit prejudice.
gists as to what implicit prejudice is and how best This entry describes the concept of implicit preju-
to define it, implicit prejudice is most commonly dice, explores its manifestations and measures, and
described as a prejudice (i.e., negative feelings summarizes critiques of the idea.
and/or beliefs about a group) that people hold
without being aware of it. One can harbor implicit
Origins and Prevalence
prejudice on the basis of race (implicit racism), sex
(implicit sexism), age (implicit ageism), ethnicity Most researchers would agree that, to some extent,
(implicit ethnocentrism), or any number of other socialization processes affect us all. That is, our
social groups. Of the various forms of implicit parents, teachers, peers, television, and other forms
prejudice, implicit racism has probably received of media have an impact on our attitudes and
the most research attention. beliefs. Implicit prejudice researchers point to the
Implicit prejudice is thought to operate auto- negative depiction of various groups, particularly
matically, with little intention or control on the Blacks, in popular culture and the media as a pri-
part of the person. In addition, people are often mary origin of implicit prejudice. Overhearing
unwilling or unable to acknowledge their implicit prejudicial remarks from our peers and parents is
prejudice. Implicit prejudice can be contrasted also thought to influence our racial attitudes. These
with explicit prejudice, which is prejudice of which cultural associations are likely incorporated into
people are aware and that they agree with and memory without our awareness or consent, and the
endorse consciously. As discussed below, implicit process is said to begin in childhood. By adulthood,
prejudice can have a wide range of effects on judg- negative associations in memory involving Blacks
ments and behavior toward members of different (and other stigmatized groups) have become so
groups. It tends to appear in people’s judgments ingrained that they are capable of being automati-
and behavior toward targets of their prejudice cally activated upon seeing a Black individual.
both subtly and accidentally. Because it seeps into While many people are aware of the fact that some
the behavior of people who see themselves as minority groups are negatively depicted in society,
unprejudiced, it is believed to be a particularly people tend to be unaware of the impact of these
insidious form of prejudice. negative associations on their attitudes. In fact, it is
For example, consider a White individual common for people to overtly deny that media and
who considers himself a relatively open-minded, other socialization factors influence their attitudes.
prejudice-free person. He tries to be fair to every- However, research shows that humans are capa-
one and treat people equally. However, imagine he ble of learning associations implicitly—without
436 Implicit Prejudice

their awareness or intention—in as little as 20 rep- interesting study demonstrated that Whites who
etitions, and that racial attitudes can form and scored high on a measure of implicit prejudice were
change implicitly as well. more likely to interpret a neutral facial expression
People also tend to claim that they “choose” on the face of a Black individual as angry or hostile
their attitudes based on personal experience, facts, than the same expression on the face of a White
and other forms of evidence, but implicit prejudice individual (the faces in this study were computer
is a case of a person’s attitudes forming without generated, so we can be certain that the only way
any consideration of facts or evidence. In contrast in which they differed was race). In another classic
to explicit prejudice, which tends to be based on study, White participants were more likely to inter-
deliberately held beliefs (e.g., that Blacks are vio- pret an ambiguous shove on the part of a Black
lent or unintelligent), implicit prejudice is primar- individual as an act of hostility; the same shove
ily feeling based. It is the sum of the large number performed by a White individual was more likely
of negative depictions of a given group, not the to be construed as playful. It is likely that implicit
product of a single fact or negative experience with prejudice was at work here because people were
a given member of a negatively evaluated group. probably unaware of the fact that they interpreted
As such, it tends to take the form of “vague feel- these behaviors differently based on race.
ings” that exist without any specific reason However, implicit prejudice can also influence
(although after-the-fact justifications can easily be people’s deliberate judgments and behavior. This
generated to rationalize a person’s prejudices). is because people will not attempt to correct their
An implication of this analysis is that nearly all prejudices if they are not aware of them or their
members of the culture are thought to have some biasing influence. For example, in making hiring
degree of implicit prejudice. Because people— decisions, employers often take pains to avoid bias
particularly children—are often unaware of the and attempt to treat all applicants equally. But if
effects of socialization on their attitudes, they do while reviewing applications, the race of an appli-
little to prevent socialization processes from influ- cant becomes apparent (through a name, photo, or
encing them. Thus, most members of a culture that affiliation), implicit prejudice may be activated in
negatively depicts a given group will harbor the mind of the employer, who would then have to
implicit prejudice against that group. In fact, actively correct that bias to maintain equal treat-
research designed to measure implicit prejudice ment of the applicants. Given that people are often
indicates that the vast majority of White Americans unable or unwilling to admit to implicit prejudice,
show implicit prejudice against Blacks. Furthermore, it is unlikely that the employer will attempt to cor-
there is some evidence that these socialization pro- rect it. Hence, he or she may inadvertently evaluate
cesses similarly affect Blacks, leading to implicit Black applicants more negatively than White
prejudice against their own group. applicants.

Manifestations Measuring Implicit Prejudice


Because implicit prejudice tends to be more feeling Traditionally, paper-and-pencil-based survey ques-
based than fact based, it tends to appear in behav- tionnaires have been used to measure prejudice.
ior where emotions tend to manifest. Nonverbal Such questionnaires typically ask respondents to
behavior in particular has been implicated as a indicate how much they like or dislike various
common outlet for implicit prejudice. In the exam- groups, or their agreement with such statements
ple mentioned earlier, the implicitly prejudiced as, “Blacks should not push themselves where they
individual smiled less and made less eye contact are not wanted.” This was, and still is, an effective
with Blacks than with Whites. Research has shown way to measure explicit prejudice because it is a
that implicit prejudice relates to these and other form of prejudice people are aware of and are at
nonverbal indicators of negativity and discomfort, least somewhat willing to report to others.
such as body orientation, fidgeting, and the like. However, researchers cannot effectively use ques-
Implicit prejudice is also likely to influence judg- tionnaires to measure implicit prejudice. This is
ments in ambiguous or uncertain situations. One because implicit prejudice is a form of prejudice that
Implicit Prejudice 437

people are either unwilling or unable to report. making people quicker to identify other negative
People are often unwilling to report their implicit items. In other words, quickness to respond on
prejudice on a questionnaire because they con- Black–bad trials indicates negative implicit associ-
sciously disapprove of their own prejudice and do ations to Blacks. By comparing response times to
not wish to appear prejudiced to others, even on a Black–bad, White–bad, Black–good, and White–
questionnaire. They are sometimes unable to report good trials, researchers can arrive at an index of a
their implicit prejudice if they themselves are not given individual’s degree of implicit prejudice.
consciously aware of their own prejudices. So if One might ask what a high score on an implicit
someone appears to be low in prejudice according to measure of prejudice might imply in terms of behav-
a questionnaire, it could be because they truly are ior in intergroup contexts. That is, do implicit mea-
low in prejudice, because they do not wish to confess sures predict behavior? Research has shown that
their prejudice, or because they do not know that they do. Recall the example mentioned earlier of
they are prejudiced. Questionnaire measures cannot someone who is high in implicit prejudice but low
differentiate between these three possibilities. in explicit prejudice toward Blacks. This individual
Owing to the drawbacks of questionnaire mea- smiled less, made less eye contact, and exuded less
sures, researchers have turned to implicit measures warmth while interacting with Black individuals.
(sometimes called indirect measures) to assess Also mentioned earlier was the finding that White
implicit prejudice (see, for example, the entry on respondents scoring high in implicit prejudice were
the Implicit Association Test). Implicit measures more likely to perceive Black faces as having more
are capable of identifying a person’s degree of hostile expressions. It is precisely these sorts of per-
implicit prejudice without having to ask directly ceptions and behaviors that implicit measures pre-
any questions having to do with prejudice. In fact, dict. Specifically, behaviors that are less controllable
implicit measures typically do not ask any ques- and less consciously monitored (like many nonver-
tions at all. Instead, they assess people’s reaction bal behaviors) tend to relate to implicit measures of
times to various prejudice-related stimuli and infer, prejudice; hence, individuals who score high in
based on those reaction times, the degree to which implicit prejudice smile less, make less eye contact,
an individual is implicitly prejudiced. and so on while interacting with a Black person
One kind of implicit measure involves prime than with a White person. Explicit measures, in
images that are presented for short durations on a turn, tend to predict more deliberate and thoughtful
computer screen (typically less than half a second), behavior. For example, people who score high in
followed by target words that mean something explicit prejudice are more likely to report not liking
good (e.g., excellent) or bad (e.g., horrible). The a Black individual, and to consciously evaluate that
respondent’s task is to identify the meaning of the individual negatively.
target word as either good or bad by pressing one Much research has examined how explicit and
of two buttons on a keypad. The image that pre- implicit prejudice are related (for example, if some-
cedes the target is typically a picture of a person, one is high in explicit prejudice, does it mean that
for example, a White or Black person. A respon- person is also high in implicit prejudice?).
dent would undergo many such trials of prime Interestingly, there is often little relation between
image–target word, all the while responding as the two forms of prejudice. Someone can be high in
quickly as possible to the valence of the target one or both, low in one or both, or high in one and
word (good or bad). Implicit prejudice would be low in the other. Because of the pervasive impact of
revealed in the pattern of response times to the socialization processes on implicit prejudice, it is
target words. particularly common for someone to be relatively
Specifically, people who are implicitly preju- high in implicit prejudice but low in explicit preju-
diced against Blacks are relatively quick to identify dice, as the earlier example illustrates.
negative words preceded by Black primes (and
positive words preceded by White primes). This is
Critique of the Concept
because the racial group “Black” is automatically
linked in memory to a negative evaluation; seeing Although implicit prejudice research has received a
the face of a Black individual activates negativity, lot of research attention in recent years, substantial
438 Implicit Prejudice

controversy surrounds it. The debate has centered implicit prejudice, particularly those people who
on three key issues: (1) the prevalence of implicit both have a lot of it and are motivated not to be
prejudice (that is, is everyone implicitly preju- prejudiced; these individuals would not be able to
diced?), (2) whether people are actually unaware correct for their prejudice if they were unaware of
of their implicit prejudice, and (3) whether implicit it. Also, people who are particularly unmotivated
prejudice and explicit prejudice are truly indepen- to correct for their prejudice exhibit a similar
dent (that is, is implicit prejudice really a different degree of prejudice on both implicit and explicit
form of prejudice from explicit prejudice?). measures; they appear to have a good deal of
Regarding the question of prevalence, many prejudice, and are comfortable admitting it.
researchers believe that implicit prejudice is an Finally, evidence from other areas of research
inevitable consequence of socialization, that every- shows that when people are implored to be hon-
one is at least “a little bit racist” (and sexist, and est, they will report attitudes on an explicit mea-
homophobic, and so on). Corroborating this claim sure that correspond to their implicit attitudes,
is evidence from some implicit measures, like the suggesting that people are aware of their implicitly
Implicit Association Test, indicating that approxi- measured attitudes, but that sometimes they don’t
mately 90% of Whites show evidence of implicit want to report them to others.
prejudice against Blacks. However, the priming The third criticism of implicit prejudice is per-
measure described earlier reveals that only 50% to haps the most divisive. Although some researchers
60% of Whites harbor implicit prejudice. Moreover, who advocate the concept claim that people essen-
as has been described, the variability revealed in tially have two attitudes toward a given group
implicit measures relates to behavior: People with (e.g., Blacks, women, homosexuals, etc.), one
more negative implicit prejudice scores tend to act explicit and the other implicit, other researchers
more negatively to members of the negatively have wondered whether implicit prejudice and
evaluated groups, and people with more positive explicit prejudice really do amount to separate and
implicit prejudice scores tend to act more posi- distinct attitudes. Specifically, these researchers
tively toward members of those groups. Hence, argue that prejudice at the implicit level gets at
implicit prejudice does vary among people—some something closer to the “truth,” that is, people’s
have strong levels of it, some none at all, and some true feelings about a given group. Explicit preju-
show implicit positivity toward groups that most dice, because of its susceptibility to motivational
other members of a society dislike. effects (as when people claim not to be prejudiced
“Culture” and “socialization” are simply not out of a concern that they might appear preju-
unitary, one-size-fits-all entities, and people vary in diced), is not really “prejudice” at all, but is really
the extent to which they are exposed to negative comprised of people’s values or motivations con-
depictions of various groups. So it is not surprising cerning intergroup contexts.
that although a good number (perhaps even the So instead of two attitudes toward Blacks,
majority) of members of a culture that depicts homosexuals, or whomever, people have one true
some groups negatively eventually come to have “gut” attitude, and it is a matter of whether people
implicit prejudices toward those groups, others wish to be honest as to whether their levels of
will not be exposed to (or at least will not be as explicit prejudice look any different from their
exposed to) these socialization processes, and implicit prejudice. From this perspective, implicit
hence will not be as affected by them. prejudice is “true” prejudice, and explicit preju-
The second issue—awareness of implicit dice is an amalgamation of strategies people
prejudice—stems from the many claims that have employ to appear a certain way in public. The
been made that people are not consciously aware issue then becomes whether to consider this amal-
of their implicit prejudice. However, there is no gamation an attitude toward a given group. This
documented evidence that people are, indeed, debate—the relationship between implicit and
unaware of their implicit prejudices (and it would explicit prejudice and whether they really are
be difficult to provide such evidence). In fact, distinct—continues in the scientific literature.
there is evidence precisely to the contrary. For
example, some people try to “correct” for their Michael A. Olson
Inclusion/Exclusion 439

See also Implicit Association Test (IAT); Modern Forms extent, our lives depend on our ability to get along
of Prejudice; Prejudice; Racism; Stereotyping with and feel included by others. In our evolution-
ary history, exclusion from a group meant almost
certain death. It therefore follows that people
Further Readings should be strongly motivated to gain inclusion in
Blair, I. (2001). Implicit stereotypes and prejudice. In groups and avoid exclusion. Roy Baumeister and
G. B. Moskowitz (Ed.), Cognitive social psychology: Mark Leary have suggested that people have a
The Princeton Symposium on the Legacy and Future basic desire for positive and lasting relationships.
of Social Cognition (pp. 359–374). Mahwah, NJ: According to this perspective, people try to think,
Lawrence Erlbaum. feel, and act in ways that enable them to gain social
Dovidio, J. F., Kawakami, K., & Gaertner, S. L. (2002). inclusion and avoid exclusion. Moreover, inclusion
Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial is linked to a variety of positive outcomes, whereas
interactions. Journal of Personality & Social exclusion often results in negative outcomes.
Psychology, 82, 62–68.
Hugenberg, K., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2003). Facing
prejudice: Implicit prejudice and the perception of Examining Inclusion and Exclusion
facial threat. Psychological Science, 14, 640–643. Inside and Outside the Laboratory
Olson, M. A. (2009). Measures of prejudice. In It is common for members of a group to exclude
T. D. Nelson (Ed.), Handbook of prejudice,
certain people. People apply for membership in a
stereotyping, and discrimination (pp. 367–386).
country club, only to be told that they are not
New York: Psychology Press.
wanted. College students experience exclusion
when a desirable college fraternity or sorority
rejects their application to join the organization.
Children are not picked to join a team for games
Inclusion/Exclusion on the playground or are told they cannot sit next
to another person in a school bus. Exclusion is also
Inclusion refers to being accepted as part of a a common theme in movies and television shows.
group, organization, or two-person relationship, For example, most reality television shows involve
whereas exclusion refers to being rejected. inclusion or exclusion: Some people are excluded
Inclusion tends to have positive effects on behav- because they have terrible singing voices, whereas
iors, cognitive activity, physical health, and emo- others are excluded because they do not work well
tions, whereas exclusion tends to have negative with other members of a group. These examples
effects. Making excluded people feel that they are suggest that inclusion and exclusion are familiar
able to gain inclusion reduces the negative effects experiences for most people.
of exclusion. This entry discusses the importance Psychologists investigate inclusion and exclu-
of inclusion and exclusion for understanding sion using several different methods. In contrast to
group processes, reviews the types of inclusion the types of exclusion people experience outside of
and exclusion people experience inside and out- the laboratory (e.g., not being invited to a friend’s
side the scientific laboratory, and discusses the party), the methods psychologists use to under-
positive and negative consequences of inclusion stand inclusion and exclusion involve exposing
and exclusion. people to situations that are less distressing and of
lesser importance. The main reason for using mild
forms of exclusion in laboratory research is that it
Belonging to Groups as a
would be unethical to expose people to extreme
Fundamental Human Need
events, such as learning that a loved one does not
People depend on others for much of their well- reciprocate one’s feelings, for the purpose of
being. Most humans do not grow the food they research. Despite the fact that most laboratory
eat, make the clothes they wear, or build the shelter manipulations involve rather weak exclusion expe-
in which they live. People obtain these basic neces- riences, the effects of these manipulations tend to
sities from members of their group. To a large be quite strong. In what follows, the six most
440 Inclusion/Exclusion

popular methods used to study exclusion and inclu- typically negative. This section reviews evidence
sion are described. In each method, people who regarding these negative effects.
experience exclusion are compared to people
who experience inclusion (or some other event), in
Behaviors
terms of their behaviors, cognitive activity, physi-
cal health, or emotions. Aggression is one of the strongest and most
The first method (“lonely future”) involves par- negative consequences of exclusion. Case studies
ticipants completing a personality test and then suggest that the majority of students who shoot
learning that they have a personality type that pre- classmates (such as those at Columbine High
dicts they will end up alone later in life. Other School) experienced chronic exclusion. Laboratory
participants learn that they can anticipate a future manipulations of exclusion produce similar results.
filled with positive and lasting relationships, whereas In one study, people who were told that no one
still others learn that they will have negative experi- from a group chose them as a partner blasted a
ences unrelated to their relationships, such as car stranger with louder and more intense bursts of
accidents. The second method (“group exclusion”) white noise than did people who were told that
involves participants completing a group interac- everyone chose them as a partner. Another study
tion and learning that no other member chose to found that people who were excluded in a virtual
work with them on a later task, whereas other par- ball-tossing game behaved more aggressively than
ticipants learn that all other members chose to did people who were included in the game. In this
work with them. The third method (“personal ver- study, aggression took the form of doling out large
sus impersonal exclusion”) involves participants amounts of hot sauce to a person who expressed
expecting to interact with a same-sex partner. strong dislike for spicy foods. Further research
After exchanging initial information with the part- indicates that exclusion increases aggression
ner, some participants are told that the partner toward both people who are involved in the exclu-
refused to work with them, whereas other partici- sion experience and people who are not.
pants are told that they will not be able to meet the Exclusion also tends to influence helping in a
partner because he or she had to leave unexpect- negative way. Compared to people who have expe-
edly due to a forgotten appointment. The fourth rienced inclusion, excluded people donate less
method (“virtual exclusion”) involves participants money to charity, volunteer less, and cooperate
playing an online ball-tossing game with two other less on activities with others. Excluded people
players (whose actions are programmed by the cooperate less with others even when it is finan-
researcher) and receiving very few tosses from the cially costly to do so and when cooperating will
other players. Other participants receive an earn them money. Moreover, exclusion reduces
expected and appropriate number of tosses from helping mostly when the recipient of help does not
the other players. The fifth method (“think of a represent a potential source of social inclusion.
time you were excluded”) involves having some People usually control their impulses because
participants write an autobiographical essay doing so increases their chances of being included
describing a time when they felt excluded, whereas in a group. They wait their turn in line, for exam-
other participants write about a time when they felt ple, because people who follow rules and act
included. Finally, the sixth method (“chronic lone- politely are more likely to be included than are
liness”) involves asking participants how much people who do not follow rules and act rudely.
they tend to feel excluded. Researchers then exam- When people experience exclusion, however, they
ine the relationships between participants’ feelings are much less likely to control their impulses. One
of exclusion and their behaviors, cognitive activity, reason may be that excluded people do not believe
physical health, and emotions. that impulse control will earn them inclusion.
Compared to included people, excluded people
persist less on frustrating tasks, are less able to
Negative Consequences of Exclusion
control their attention on listening tasks, and eat
Exclusion thwarts a fundamental motivation for larger amounts of unhealthy foods and smaller
belonging, and hence the effects of exclusion are amounts of healthy foods. Although exclusion
Inclusion/Exclusion 441

reduces impulse control, the relationship between exclusion, people who report feeling chronically
exclusion and reduced impulse control wears off excluded have poorer immune system functioning,
quickly (in less than 45 minutes) for most people. higher resting blood pressure, higher levels of
People who have high levels of social anxiety (i.e., stress hormones, and a lower chance of surviving
are chronically worried about being excluded), 30 days and 5 years after heart bypass surgery.
however, tend to show poor impulse control for up People who feel chronically excluded also have
to an hour after they experience exclusion. poorer sleep quality than people who do not feel
Excluded people are also more likely than chronically excluded.
included people to behave in ways that allow them It is commonly believed that exclusion causes
to avoid thinking about themselves. Results from emotional distress, and inclusion increases positive
one study showed that excluded people sat in a emotions. Indeed, there is evidence that exclusion
chair that was not facing a mirror (thus avoiding causes people to feel negative emotions such as
their own reflection) more often than did included anger, sadness, and hurt feelings, whereas inclusion
people. The implication is that excluded people try is generally related to positive emotions. When
to avoid being reminded of personal flaws that asked how they feel after being excluded, people
caused them to be excluded. use words that commonly describe physical injury.
For example, excluded people typically report feel-
ing “hurt,” “crushed,” or “broken-hearted.”
Cognitive Activity
Evidence from several studies suggests that
Excluded people do not perform as well as describing exclusion as painful extends beyond
included people on various types of cognitive mere metaphor. In one study using brain-imaging
tasks, including analytical reasoning tests, IQ tests, technology, Naomi Eisenberger, Matthew
and reading comprehension tests. Whereas Lieberman, and Kipling Williams showed that the
excluded people perform as well as included peo- same brain regions respond to exclusion and
ple on cognitive tasks that do not require much physical pain. In addition, C. Nathan DeWall and
effort (i.e., easy memorization), they perform more Roy Baumeister demonstrated that excluded par-
poorly on tasks that require large amounts of ticipants have lower physical pain sensitivity and
effort. Just as excluded people do not exert them- higher pain tolerance than do included partici-
selves on impulse control tasks, they are also pants. Excluded participants also show signs of
unwilling to use large amounts of mental energy emotional insensitivity, as indicated by reduced
on cognitive tasks. empathic concern for another person’s suffering
Exclusion also causes people to interpret other and a tendency to predict an emotionally numb
people’s actions as aggressive. In one study, people response to their favorite football team winning or
were made to feel excluded or included and were losing to a rival team. Crucially, excluded partici-
then given vague information about another per- pants’ numbness to physical pain was related to
son. Compared to included people, excluded peo- their emotional insensitivity. Just as the body goes
ple were more likely to perceive the vague actions numb in response to serious physical injury, so
of another person as aggressive. Another study people become numb physically and emotionally
found that chronic feelings of exclusion were in response to exclusion.
related to perceiving others’ actions as aggressive.
The tendency for excluded people to perceive oth-
Positive Consequences of Exclusion
ers’ actions in aggressive terms offers one possible
explanation for why excluded people behave So far, we have focused on how exclusion negatively
aggressively. influences behaviors, cognitive activity, physical
health, and emotions. There are some findings, how-
ever, suggesting positive consequences of exclusion.
Physical Health and Emotions
Most such consequences are due to excluded people
A growing body of evidence links chronic feel- wanting to connect with potential sources of social
ings of exclusion to negative health outcomes. inclusion. Just as hungry people seek out food, so
Compared to people low in chronic feelings of excluded people seek out social acceptance. In so
442 Informational Influence

doing, their behavioral, cognitive, and emotional notion, there is some evidence suggesting that
responses sometimes have positive consequences. exclusion activates a coping response in which
people seek out positive emotional information in
Behaviors others and in their environment. For example,
excluded people are more likely than other people
There is some evidence that excluded people are to complete word fragments (jot) with positive
helpful to others who could be sources of social emotion words (joy) as opposed to neutral words
acceptance. For example, excluded people are (jot). When asked to judge which of two words
more likely than included people to give money to (cheek, smile) is more similar to another word
a stranger when they expect to meet the stranger. (mouth), excluded people are more likely than oth-
When no interaction with the stranger is antici- ers to choose the option related to positive emo-
pated, however, excluded people give less money tion (smile). Excluded people are unaware of this
than included people. Excluded people also tend to coping response, suggesting that this response to
behave in ways that will impress others, possibly exclusion operates at an unconscious level.
as a means of showing that they are worthy of
social inclusion. Women who feel excluded, for C. Nathan DeWall
example, are more likely than other women to
See also Deviance; Families; Group Cohesiveness; Need
work hard on behalf of their group. Exclusion also
for Belonging; Ostracism
increases the tendency for people to agree with
others, which can be interpreted as an effort to
impress others by behaving similarly to them. Further Readings
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to
Cognitive Activity belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a
There is evidence that excluded people are more fundamental human motivation. Psychological
likely than included people to perceive neutral Bulletin, 117, 497–529.
facial expressions as friendly. In addition, people DeWall, C. N., & Baumeister, R. F. (2006). Alone but
who feel chronically excluded are better at identi- feeling no pain: Effects of social exclusion on physical
fying facial expressions and vocal tones than are pain tolerance and pain threshold, affective
people who do not feel chronically excluded. forecasting, and interpersonal empathy. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 1–15.
Excluded people are also faster than other people
Eisenberger, N. I., Lieberman, M. D., & Williams, K. D.
at identifying a smiling face (a sign of social inclu-
(2003, October). Does rejection hurt? An fMRI study
sion) in the middle of many nonsmiling faces.
of social exclusion. Science, 302, 290–292.
When presented with a picture of many faces that
Twenge, J. M., Baumeister, R. F., Tice, D. M., & Stucke,
display various facial expressions (sadness, anger, T. S. (2001). If you can’t join them, beat them: Effects
disgust, smiling), excluded people are more atten- of social exclusion on aggressive behavior. Journal of
tive to smiling faces than are people who have not Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 1058–1069.
experienced exclusion. In addition, excluded peo- Williams, K. D., Cheung, C. K. T., & Choi, W. (2000).
ple have more difficulty pulling their attention CyberOstracism: Effects of being ignored over the
away from smiling faces than do people who have Internet. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
not been excluded. The implication of all this is 79, 748–762.
that excluded people are motivated to seek out
potential relationships. As a result, their attention
becomes captured by signs of social inclusion.
Informational Influence
Emotions
Exclusion thwarts a basic human need for posi- What do we do when we are uncertain about
tive and lasting relationships, which makes it likely how to think or act in a situation? One solution
that people will have a deeply ingrained emotional is to look to the attitudes and actions of other
coping response to exclusion. In support of this people. Informational influence (also known as
Informational Influence 443

informational social influence) is a type of con- viewed in a completely dark room where there are
formity in which individuals use the attitudes or no visible reference points. In Sherif’s studies,
actions of those around them as cues to correct- people were placed in a darkened room either
ing their own behavior. It is contrasted with nor- alone or in groups and asked to state how much
mative influence, where people conform in order the point of light moved. In this ambiguous situa-
to be liked or accepted by others. Informational tion, people were always influenced by the judg-
influence and normative influence are the two ments of other people, even if they first made their
types of influence outlined in Morton Deutsch judgments alone. The groups converged on a norm
and Harold Gerard’s dual-process theory of that was used to make their judgments. Influence
social influence. was accepted readily with little awareness and per-
Characterized as influence to accept informa- sisted in the absence of the group for long periods
tion obtained from others as evidence about real- of time.
ity, informational influence is based on a desire to One early account for informational influence
make informed decisions. This influence is most was offered by Leon Festinger, who suggested that
powerful when being accurate is more important, individuals are motivated to test the validity of
when others are perceived as especially knowl- their beliefs and prefer to do so through a process
edgeable or expert, and when the situation is par- of physical reality testing. However, when we can-
ticularly ambiguous or uncertain. The more not rely on our own direct perceptual and behav-
uncertain people are about the correctness of their ioral contact with the physical world, as is the case
judgments, the more susceptible they will be to in the autokinetic paradigm, the subjective validity
informational influence. However, the more uncer- of our beliefs depends on social reality testing and
tain people are about the correctness of the judg- on the consensual validation of our beliefs by other
ments of others, the less susceptible they will be to people. In such cases, we will become susceptible
informational influence. to influence from others. If we discover that other
Informational influence is not irrational; rather, people do not share our beliefs and opinions, we
it is a functional way of defining a position in the will question whether our beliefs and opinions are
face of limited information or ambiguity and correct.
uncertainty. Indeed, if others have access to more, Informational influence was also illustrated in
different, or more accurate information, it may be Solomon Asch’s seminal work on conformity and
sensible to adopt their opinions or to be influ- independence. In Asch’s studies, a group of seven
enced by their opinions. Informational influence is to nine young men were gathered together, osten-
seen as “true” influence, as the individual accepts sibly for a psychological experiment on visual
and internalizes it—that is, conforms because of a perception. Participants were presented with a tar-
genuine belief that others are correct, and it is seen get line and a set of three comparison lines and
to lead to long-term, private, attitude change. This told that their task was to state publicly which of
is contrasted with normative influence, which is the three comparison lines matched the target
seen as leading to public compliance—that is, lines. However, only one person was a true par-
to conforming to the behavior of others publicly ticipant; the others were confederates of the exper-
without necessarily believing such behavior is imenter, who had been instructed to give a
correct. This entry looks at the history of the con- unanimously incorrect response on certain trials.
cept of informational influence and discusses When alone, participants were able to complete
related controversies. this task with 99% accuracy, confirming that this
was not a difficult or ambiguous task. However, in
groups, participants conformed to the incorrect
History and Background
response of the group on about one third of the
It could be argued that one of the first studies to critical trials, a finding that has been replicated in
demonstrate informational influence was Muzafer many subsequent studies.
Sherif’s work on the autokinetic effect. The autoki- After the studies, participants were asked why
netic effect refers to the way in which a pinpoint of they had conformed to the incorrect majority.
light appears to move of its own accord when it is Many participants reported that they knew that
444 Informational Influence

the group was incorrect but went along with the Information provided by members of our own
group anyway because they did not want to stand groups will be seen as more credible, trustworthy,
out from the group and be subjected to ridicule— and valid than information provided by members
this is normative influence. However, other par- of other groups.
ticipants knew that they were out of step with the Reference group norms establish the validity of
group but thought that their judgments were information; thus, consensual validation (of social
incorrect and the majority was correct, and some reality) is really normative validation. In referent
participants reported actually seeing the lines as informational influence, the theory of social influ-
the majority did. This is informational influence. ence associated with the social identity approach,
The distinction between informational and nor- the focus is not on distinguishing between norma-
mative influence is associated most closely with the tive and informational influence, but rather, on a
work of Morton Deutsch and Harold Gerard. single influence process in which the normative
Deutsch and Gerard argued that prior research on position of people categorized as similar to the self
social influence, such as that conducted by Asch, tends to be accepted as valid information.
had confounded informational and normative Social influence researchers have traditionally
influence. To test this idea, Deutsch and Gerard assumed that informational and normative influ-
conducted a study that incorporated a number of ence produces change through different mecha-
modifications to Asch’s study. Specifically, Deutsch nisms and are associated with different outcomes.
and Gerard compared levels of conformity in face- Specifically, the desire for an informed and correct
to-face situations, in which participants had to position prompts people to process persuasive con-
state their judgments publicly after hearing the tent systematically and produces enduring private
judgments of others, and in anonymous situations, change in judgments. In contrast, the desire to
in which participants had to state their judgments meet normative expectations prompts a more
privately after hearing the judgments of others. superficial analysis of the persuasive content and
Greater conformity was found in the face-to-face produces public, context-dependent, transitory
condition than in the anonymous condition, sug- change. However, this analysis has been chal-
gesting the presence of normative influence. lenged by dual-process models of attitude change,
However, there was greater conformity in the which have demonstrated that informational
anonymous condition than in the control condi- motives, such as the desire for accurate and
tions, suggesting the presence of informational informed decisions, can lead to either extensive or
influence. superficial processing. Thus, the different motives
associated with informational and normative influ-
ence are not preferentially related to the mecha-
Debate and Controversy
nisms or outcomes of social influence.
The distinction between normative and informa-
Joanne R. Smith
tional influence has proven useful in a broad range
of research fields, including consumer behavior See also Asch, Solomon; Conformity; Deutsch, Morton;
and marketing, persuasion and attitude change, Normative Influence; Referent Informational Influence
group decision making, and computer-mediated Theory; Sherif, Muzafer
communication. However, a number of research-
ers have questioned the value of the distinction
between normative and informational influence. Further Readings
Informational influence is seen to be a function Asch, S. E. (1956). Studies of independence and
of the validity of the information that others pro- conformity: A minority of one against a unanimous
vide about reality. A critical question, however, is majority. Psychological Monographs: General and
how the validity of such information is determined. Applied, 70, 1–70.
Researchers who are proponents of social identity Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of
theory, such as John Turner, argue that our judg- normative and informational social influences upon
ments about validity will depend on whether we individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social
share a group membership with these other people. Psychology, 51, 629–636.
Ingroup Allocation Bias 445

Festinger, L. (1950). Informal social communication. prejudice and discrimination toward devalued eth-
Psychological Review, 57, 271–282. nic minorities.
Sherif, M. (1935). A study of some social factors in Within social psychology, Muzafer Sherif devel-
perception. Archives of Psychology, 27, 5–53. oped realistic conflict theory as a functional expla-
Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Milton Keynes, nation of prejudice and discrimination, which
UK: Open University Press. shifted the focus of explanation from a solely
intrapersonal to an intergroup level of analysis.
Sherif and his contemporaries showed that inter-
group cooperation to attain a shared goal or to
Ingroup Allocation Bias avoid a common threat was related to more favor-
able intergroup attitudes and the equal allocation
People have the tendency to favor members of of resources to ingroup and outgroup members,
their own group over members of other groups, while objective competition for scarce resources
This phenomenon, known as ingroup favoritism, (jobs, housing, territories) was related to unfavor-
surfaces not only in more positive evaluation of able intergroup attitudes and antagonistic and
ingroup than ougroup members (i.e., ethnocen- discriminatory behaviors.
trism), but also in the allocation of more As a complementary approach, Henri Tajfel
resources to ingroup than outgroup members, proposed a cognitive and motivational analysis
known as ingroup allocation bias. Given compe- that sought to explain circumstances when preju-
tition for critical resources such as jobs, promo- dice and discrimination prevailed despite the
tions, and housing, ingroup favoritism can have absence of objective conflict of interest. Tajfel and
a profound real and psychological impact; espe- John Turner developed social identity theory in
cially on members of groups that are based on part to explain laboratory studies showing that the
imposed ascriptions such as race, ethnicity, gen- mere categorization of people into “us and them”
der, age, and language. It is precisely because could be sufficient to trigger ingroup favoritism in
discrimination is a pervasive phenomenon in the distribution of resources between anonymous
most societies that social scientists have devoted ingroup and outgroup members. Social identity
so much effort to understanding its mechanisms theory proposed that group members may use dis-
and finding ways of reducing its prevalence. This crimination to achieve a more positive and distinc-
entry describes how the concept of ingroup alloca- tive social identity relative to outgroups in polarized
tion bias was developed and how it has been intergroup settings.
explored through research. The endorsement of racist and nationalistic ide-
ologies that legitimize the glorification of the
ingroup and the disparagement of outgroups has
History
also been related to prejudiced attitudes toward
Early-20th-century social psychologists focused devalued minorities and associated mistreatment
their research not only on discrimination in jobs through social and institutional discrimination.
and housing but also on discriminatory behaviors Taken together, intrapersonal, intergroup, and
such as racist speech, hate crimes, ethnic cleansing, ideological processes contribute to a social psycho-
and genocide. In his seminal work, The Nature of logical account of prejudice and discrimination.
Prejudice, Gordon Allport explored the causes of Such processes also may account for intergroup
prejudice and discrimination from a multidisci- allocation strategies ranging from ingroup favorit-
plinary perspective that included historical analy- ism to parity and outgroup favoritism.
sis, economics, sociology, and psychology. Within
the psychoanalytic tradition, Theodor Adorno and
Discrimination in Minimal Groups
his colleagues, in their classic book The Authori­
tarian Personality, proposed that certain family In the classic minimal group paradigm (MGP)
socialization practices could foster a personality experiments, Tajfel and his colleagues investigated
that was intolerant of ambiguity and of the weak the “necessary and sufficient conditions” for fos-
and powerless; thus creating a framework for tering parity and intergroup discrimination. In the
446 Ingroup Allocation Bias

MGP, participants were randomly categorized before, suggesting that people discriminate to
(e.g., by a coin toss) as members of contrasting achieve a more positive social identity.
groups and assigned meaningless group labels such
as group K and group W. Economic, historical,
Resource Allocations
and ideological factors known to contribute to
Using the Taifel Matrices
ingroup favoritism were systematically eliminated
from the MGP. Thus, other than the “us/them” In the original MGP studies, participants distrib-
categorization, the MGP excluded the following uted valued resources to ingroup and outgroup
elements: objective conflict of interest between the members using the Tajfel matrices. These matrices
groups, personal self-interest, a history of rivalry monitor the reasons for group members’ choosing
between the groups, an ideology justifying the dis- contrasting allocation options, including parity,
paragement or mistreatment of outgroups, intra- maximum joint profit, outgroup favoritism, and
group friendships, or intergroup contact. In three ingroup favoritism strategies—maximum
addition, group membership was anonymous. ingroup profit, maximum differentiation, and min-
In the MGP, categorized participants had the imum outgroup benefit. While parity is always a
task of distributing valued resources such as money clear option within the Tajfel matrices, laboratory
or symbolic points between anonymous ingroup and field studies show that group members choose
and outgroup members. Tajfel originally expected resource allocation strategies representing compro-
that such a minimal situation would foster the mises between the other options depending on the
equal distribution of resources, as this was seen as type of intergroup situation they happen to be in.
the only fair and reasonable allocation strategy. When people award an equal number of
However, results showed that the us/them catego- resources to ingroup and outgroup members, they
rization was sufficient to trigger not only parity as are engaging in parity behavior. Psychologically,
expected, but also discrimination in favor of parity is a fundamental allocation orientation in
ingroup members over outgroup members. These the distribution of resources that is easy to con-
findings have been corroborated and replicated ceive, execute, and justify. Results from real-life
over the subsequent 40 years of research. settings and laboratory experiments show that
Social identity theory proposes that this mini- parity is often endorsed, especially when resources
mal group effect reflects a competition for an are plentiful rather than scarce and when inter-
evaluatively positive social identity. The us/them group relations are cooperative rather than com-
categorization provided participants with the cog- petitive. Ideally, employers should award equal
nitive structure on which to base their social iden- pay to men and women for equal work or for
tities. Individuals’ motivation for a positive social work of equal value. Yet, in most societies, pay
identity is achieved by seeking favorable ingroup– differentials in favor of men persist even when
outgroup comparisons on the only available dimen- men and women show equal qualification, equal
sion of comparison in the MGP experiment, performance, and equivalent involvement in the
namely the allocation of more resources to mem- work setting. Clearly, while parity is the fair and
bers of their own group than to members of politically correct allocation strategy, unequal dis-
another group. tribution of resources between groups remains the
Discrimination in resource allocations allows rule rather than the exception in most intergroup
individuals to establish the differentiation they settings.
need to develop a positive social identity relative to The first ingroup favoritism strategy consists of
outgroup members. MGP studies showed that achieving maximum ingroup profit: awarding the
individuals who identified strongly with their own greatest number of resources to the ingroup with
group discriminated, while those whose identifica- no consideration of awards made to outgroup
tion with their group was weak did not discrimi- members. This strategy is the simplest and most
nate, but instead used only parity. Other MGP common discrimination strategy. Maximizing
studies showed that group members felt happier, ingroup profit is largely a measure of “ingroup
more satisfied, and “liked being members of their love,” without much concern for comparison to or
own group” more after they discriminated than differentiation from the outgroup.
Ingroup Allocation Bias 447

A second ingroup favoritism strategy, maxi- allocations than on positive outcome ones. However,
mum differentiation, involves maximizing the dif- field situations such as civil wars and ethnic con-
ference in resources allocated to ingroup versus flicts testify to the use and abuse of minimum out-
outgroup recipients, with the difference in favor of group benefit strategies. Endorsement of ideological
ingroup members—but at the cost of maximum beliefs such as right wing authoritarianism, social
ingroup profit. Maximum differentiation is a dis- dominance orientation, ethnocentrism, and nation-
criminatory strategy par excellence, as it offers the alism have been invoked to account for the use of
greatest possible difference in the outcomes, and the minimum outgroup benefit strategies toward
fate, of ingroup and outgroup members. Maximum devalued and scapegoated minorities.
differentiation is the consequence of intergroup The choice of maximum joint profit is an
social competition and reflects a concern for the attempt to maximize the total combined alloca-
attainment of a relative advantage of the ingroup tions to both ingroup and outgroup recipients.
over the outgroup. The use of this strategy has Measured using the Tajfel matrices, maximum
been documented in many MGP and field studies joint profit is a more economically advantageous
and is usually associated with strong ingroup iden- and rational strategy than parity. It maximizes
tification, social differentiation processes, and the benefit to both ingroup and outgroup members to
achievement of a positive social identity (as pro- the disadvantage of a third-party distributor of the
posed by social identity theory). resource, whether that is the experimenter in labo-
Minimum outgroup benefit is a discrimination ratory studies, the government, or the corporate
strategy that focuses on allocating as few valued employer. Studies using the Tajfel matrices have
resources as possible to outgroup members, with- shown that participants rarely use the maximum
out being too concerned by the amount of resources joint profit strategy, although self-reports usually
allocated to ingroup members. Minimum outgroup exaggerate the use of this socially desirable strat-
benefit is a vindictive discrimination strategy, as it egy. In contrast, self-reports of parity and ingroup
seeks to deny outgroup members as many valued favoritism usually match the actual use of these
resources as possible. It can be considered an “out- strategies in laboratory and field studies.
group hate” strategy, reflecting the most negative Outgroup favoritism consists of allocating more
consequences of intergroup differentiation: strong valued resources to outgroup members than to
derogation and distrust of outgroups seen as too ingroup members. Outgroup favoritism as mea-
different, socially inferior, or threatening. Thus the sured using the Tajfel matrices is the least eco-
minimum outgroup benefit strategy may be seen as nomically advantageous strategy from the point of
the behavioral outcome of “hot prejudice,” which view of ingroup members, and compared to parity,
is usually based on negative and hostile attitudes ingroup favoritism, and maximum joint profit.
toward devalued outgroups. Laboratory and field studies have shown that
Real-life examples in the 20th century of domi- group members who have internalized their
nant groups having adopted these allocations low-status ascription, relative to high-status or
include institutional discrimination measures such dominant outgroups, are likely to adopt outgroup-
as the Nuremberg Laws of Nazi Germany and the favoring resource allocations, especially on dimen-
apartheid laws of South Africa. These cases had in sions of comparison related to their status or
common the mistreatment of disparaged minori- power inferiority. Recent MGP studies have also
ties, which included exclusion from employment shown that participants who were randomly
and promotion, differential access to state services assigned to a rich group used outgroup favoritism
such as health care and education, housing segre- in distributing their money to outgroup members
gation, and denial of voting rights. A mirror image who were poor, while the latter endorsed ingroup-
of minimum outgroup benefit consists of the strat- favoritism strategies (maximum ingroup profit and
egy of inflicting as many negative and painful con- maximum differentiation) when allocating the lit-
sequences on outgroup members as possible. tle money they had to poor ingroup and rich out-
Studies using modified Tajfel matrices have group members.
shown that undergraduates in MGP studies tend to Taken together, the Tajfel matrices and other
be less discriminatory on such negative outcome resource allocation measures can be used as subtle
448 Initiation Rites

tools for monitoring a broad range of parity, dis- rites of passage, induction, and trial by fire.
criminatory, and outgroup favoritism behaviors in Although initiations may have elements of fun,
both laboratory and field settings, thus contribut- play, and silliness, they are often physically and
ing to a better understanding of group processes emotionally demanding, embarrassing, strange,
and intergroup relations. and even painful. Initiation rites serve to under-
score that the group is an important entity in and
Richard Y. Bourhis and Simon-Pierre Harvey
of itself, helping newcomers to identify with the
See also Categorization; Discrimination; Ethnocentrism; group and helping veterans to accept the newcom-
Minimal Group Effect; Prejudice; Racism; Realistic ers as bona fide members. This entry provides a
Group Conflict Theory; Social Identity Theory; Tajfel, descriptive overview of initiation rites, discusses
Henri some of the reasons research has found for their
effectiveness, and looks at groups that employ this
strategy.
Further Readings
Amiot, C., & Bourhis, R. Y. (2005). Ideological beliefs as
Description
determinants of discrimination in positive and
negative outcome distributions. European Journal of Initiation rites are practiced by many types of
Social Psychology, 35, 581–598. groups, such as athletic teams, work groups,
Bourhis, R. Y., & Gagnon, A. (2001). Social orientation sororities and fraternities, religious groups, and
in the minimal group paradigm. In R. Brown & military units. For example, some football rookies,
S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social on their first day in the locker room, have been
psychology: Intergroup processes (pp. 89–111). required to stand on one leg and sing Christmas
Malden, MA: Blackwell. carols to the starting players; pledges to a college
Bourhis, R. Y., Sachdev, I., & Gagnon, A. (1994). sorority have been asked to undress and allow
Intergroup research with the Tajfel matrices: sorority members to circle areas of body fat with a
Methodological notes. In M. P. Zanna & J. M. Olson
permanent marker; neophyte Marines have experi-
(Eds.), The social psychology of prejudice: The
enced a “blood pinning” on successful completion
Ontario Symposium (Vol. 7, pp. 209–232). Hillsdale,
of jump school, where senior Marines beat the
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
sharp, newly earned golden wing pins into the
Brewer, M. (1979). Ingroup bias in the minimal group
neophytes’ chests; and new fishers on an Alaskan
situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis.
Psychological Bulletin, 86, 307–324.
trawler have been addressed as “new guys” rather
Hewstone, M., Rubin, M., & Willis, H. (2002). than by name, denied pillows and blankets, and
Intergroup bias. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, required to do unnecessary tasks.
575–604. However, despite the stereotype, not all initia-
Tajfel, H., Billig, M., Bundy, R., & Flament, C. (1971). tion rites are harsh or demeaning. Indeed, Roy
Social categorization and intergroup behaviour. Lewicki explains how initiation rites are used in
European Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 149–178. high-status organizations to “seduce” new mem-
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity bers. By hosting welcoming parties, flattering new-
theory of intergroup behaviour. In S. Worchel & comers as the chosen few, and showering them
W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup with gifts and fringe benefits, the organization cre-
relations (2nd ed., pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall. ates a sense of indebtedness and loyalty.
As the above examples suggest, initiations vary
widely not only in form and content but in formality,
spontaneity, and intensity; they can be one-time or
Initiation Rites ongoing events; and they can involve individual new-
comers or a cohort of newcomers. Indeed, it isn’t
Initiation rites are rituals that mark and facilitate always clear where to draw the line in labeling some-
the entry of a person into a group, that is, the per- thing an initiation rite. For example, is the full
son’s transition from the status of outsider to 9 weeks of U.S. Army basic training an initiation
insider. Such rites are often referred to as hazing, rite for membership in the army, or is the initial
Initiation Rites 449

induction—where recruits have their heads shaved attraction to and compliance with the group.
and civilian clothes confiscated—more appropriately Although the precise reasons are unclear, eleven
seen as the initiation rite? major reasons have been suggested. First, initiation
Initiation rites provide one solution to the prob- rites test whether newcomers are willing and able
lem that all groups experience: how to forge a more to fit in by doing what the group requires.
cohesive and effective unit from a collection of dis- Newcomers who prove unwilling or unable to
parate individuals and maintain the unit in the complete the rites are denied inclusion or accep-
face of individual turnover. According to Arnold tance, thereby increasing the compatibility of those
van Gennep, initiation rites are part of a broader set who remain.
of rites of passage, where the initiate is separated Second, initiation rites may be experienced as
from a former group (e.g., goes to a farewell party upending, causing newcomers to question their
held for him or her on leaving an organization), incoming knowledge and readiness, thereby pre-
moves through a transitional state where he or she disposing them to learn from the group and evalu-
is neither of one group nor another (e.g., takes a ate themselves through the lens of the group’s
vacation to create a break between jobs), and is expectations. For example, Edgar Schein reported
then incorporated into the new group (e.g., attends that one engineering manager asked newcomers to
a welcoming party held at the new organization). analyze a circuit that, according to their schooling,
Initiation rites help communicate the identity should not have worked—but did. The incident
and importance of the group to newcomers and demonstrated that the budding engineers still had
encourage newcomers to at least partly define much to learn.
themselves in terms of the group. For instance, a Third, initiation rites often provide clues about
study of a high school sorority by Gary Schwartz what the group values, believes, and expects,
and Don Merten found that the initiation process enabling newcomers to learn about the group’s
sustained the social hierarchy of the school by culture and better assess their degree of fit. Fourth,
defining sorority members as the highest status the unpleasantness of many initiation rites may
group, and induced members to think differently induce dissonance in the newcomers (“Why have I
about themselves. Further, initiation rites can be allowed myself to be put in this position?”),
used early in the socialization process to help thereby rendering the group more attractive as a
facilitate the newcomer’s entry into the group and means of resolving the dissonance (“I guess I must
used later in the process to test and certify that the really like this group”). Ironically, it is precisely
newcomer has learned what was expected (e.g., the because newcomers are debased that they come to
group’s history, goals, values, beliefs, and norms, value the group.
along with role-specific knowledge, skills, and Fifth, and conversely, initiation rites that are
behavior). pleasant, like the “seductive” practices described by
Also, the act of initiating newcomers may rein- Lewicki, may foster a sense of gratitude and obliga-
force veterans’ group identity and loyalty. For tion that effectively binds newcomers to the group.
example, a study of the U.S. Naval Academy by Sixth, initiation rites may induce intense emotions
Jana Pershing found that upperclassmen are respon- and suggestibility, which make the newcomers more
sible for initiating new students, which enables the receptive to the group’s influence. For example,
upperclassmen to practice the leadership skills cen- initiates who are sleep deprived, uncertain about the
tral to the identity of military officers. Further, initiation’s outcome (“Will I be accepted?”), or cut
veterans who suffered severe initiations themselves off from their normal social relationships are more
may desire the opportunity to conduct severe likely to comply with the group.
initiations of others as a means of exacting revenge Seventh, initiation rites dramatize and therefore
and making newcomers “pay their dues.” signal—both to newcomers and veterans—the new-
comers’ low status and dependence on the group,
thereby reinforcing the status hierarchy and encour-
Explaining the Impact
aging obedience. In groups that are isolated and
Research in laboratory and field settings indicates powerful, such as in a military academy, newcom-
that initiation rites may increase the initiate’s ers have few options for relief. Much like children
450 Initiation Rites

of abusive parents, they may devote themselves to or retain evidence, thereby emphasizing the divide
pleasing their “tormentors.” between the gang and society, creating incriminat-
Eighth, sharing the ordeal of initiation with ing information, and training newcomers in gang-
other newcomers may foster an in-the-same-boat related skills.
consciousness, which in turn may promote cohe- In sum, there are multiple routes through which
sion. When peers are subjected to challenging and initiation may increase the newcomer’s attraction
intense experiences, they tend to look to one to and compliance with the group. These routes
another for emotional and instrumental support, are likely complementary in the sense that they
thereby cementing their initial bonds. Indeed, reinforce one another to increase the impact of the
bonds forged under the stress of initiation may initiation. A final irony of initiation is that what
persevere throughout people’s tenure with the may have been experienced as unpleasant at the
group. Ninth, because some types of groups (e.g., time is often recalled fondly later on.
sororities and fraternities) are widely known to
host challenging initiations, many newcomers actu-
Group Characteristics
ally look forward to their initiation as an opportu-
nity to prove themselves, bond with their peers, Groups that partake in initiation rites seem to
and adopt their new status as insiders. In such walk a tightrope, trying to maximize the newcom-
cases, an additional irony of initiation is that new- ers’ commitment without pushing them too far.
comers may feel disappointed and even disrespected The more severe or extreme the initiation, the
if their group forgoes a grueling initiation, and may stronger and more mixed the effects on newcomers
question whether the group is worth joining. and group outcomes are likely to be. Severe initia-
Tenth, successfully passing the initiation may tions are particularly demanding, humiliating,
increase newcomers’ self-esteem and sense of and/or dangerous. On one hand, severe initiations
inclusion, and may induce an afterglow of posi- may increase attractiveness to and compliance
tive feelings that generalizes to the group. The with the group through some mix of the eleven
initiation may test and certify learning, passing causal mechanisms described above. For example,
signals that the newcomer is no longer “on pro- a severe initiation may increase the amount of dis-
bation,” but is a bona fide member of and con- sonance experienced, thereby strengthening the
tributor to the group. Initiations may also, then, newcomer’s conclusion that he or she must really
facilitate the acceptance of newcomers by veteran like the group. On the other hand, severe initia-
members. tions may be perceived by newcomers to be offen-
Finally, Caroline Keating and her colleagues sive, unnecessarily challenging, unduly humiliating,
have argued that certain forms of initiation may or otherwise to have gone too far. In such cases,
foster acceptance of and compliance with the the initiation may backfire, causing newcomers to
group through unique mechanisms. Initiations that withdraw psychologically or physically from the
involve violating societal norms (e.g., binge drink- group (“This is not the place for me”).
ing, petty theft) emphasize the divide between the Thus, severe initiations may polarize newcom-
group and society, thereby underscoring the group’s ers, driving some to bond more firmly with the
identity and distinctiveness. Initiations that involve group and others to withdraw from the group.
telling and keeping secrets help create bonds Further, because severe initiations frequently vio-
between otherwise unfamiliar individuals. And late societal norms, they may attract the unwanted
initiations may be tailored to the unique skills and attention of outsiders and jeopardize the group’s
abilities required of group members, as when an image. Indeed, the public outcry about initiations
athletic team compels newcomers to withstand resulting in psychological damage, physical injury,
physical duress. and even death has caused initiations in some con-
An example that illustrates all three unique texts to be stopped, toned down, or conducted in
mechanisms is violent youth gangs. Full member- greater secrecy.
ship in many such gangs requires committing a What kinds of groups are most likely to utilize
serious crime (e.g., robbery, arson, murder) and initiation rites? First, groups that have strong and
allowing other gang members to witness the crime distinctive identities often need to remake newcomers
Innovation 451

in the group’s image. It’s no surprise, then, that initia- Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (1982). Socialization in
tion rites are common among most of the groups small groups: Temporal changes in individual-group
mentioned earlier: athletic teams, sororities and fra- relations. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in
ternities, religious groups, and military units. experimental social psychology (Vol. 15, pp. 137–
Initiation—and socialization more generally—serves 192). New York: Academic Press.
to inculcate the unique qualities of the group in the van Gennep, A. (1960). The rites of passage (M. B.
newcomers. Second, groups that require high levels of Vizedom & G. L. Caffee, Trans.). Chicago: University
trust, confidence, and cohesion among members may of Chicago Press.
view initiation rites as a means of imparting the
importance of these qualities and getting a “quick
read” on newcomers’ willingness and ability to fit in.
For example, hazing is relatively common among Innovation
groups whose members are highly task interdepen-
dent and who often face danger, such as firefighters To innovate means to change. Change and inno-
and coal miners. vation are necessary to adapt to rapidly changing
Finally, refuting the argument that initiation and challenging environments. Furthermore,
rites are becoming less appropriate and less com- innovations can substantially improve our living
mon in modern society, Wolfgang Mayrhofer and conditions: Think of innovative medical treat-
Alexandre Iellatchitch have argued that the increas- ments that have greatly increased life expectancy,
ing dynamism of careers and the wider social envi- or innovations such as soil fertilizers that have
ronment makes rites of passage even more substantially reduced food shortage. Innovation
important precisely because of the frequency of can be defined as the intentional introduction
occupational changes. Initiation rites can help and application within a particular social unit
combat the anomie associated with transient (e.g., a team or organization) of ideas, processes,
groups not only at work but in other social products, or procedures that are new to that social
domains by embedding individuals socially and unit and that are designed to be useful. Examples
psychologically in these groups. of innovations include the introduction of a
new computer program in an organization, the
Blake E. Ashforth and Kristie M. Boudwin introduction of new products to a market, or
the introduction of a new service to customers.
See also Assimilation and Acculturation; Collective This entry focuses on team innovation (in which
Induction; Cults; Gangs; Group Socialization; the social unit is a work team). A discussion of
Inclusion/Exclusion; Normative Influence; Role some basic distinctions between innovation and
Transitions creativity as well as between different types of
innovation follows. Finally, the entry examines the
factors that determine the level of innovativeness
Further Readings of a team.
Aronson, E., & Mills, J. (1959). The effect of severity of
initiation on liking for a group. Journal of Abnormal Basic Distinctions
and Social Psychology, 59, 177–181.
Ashforth, B. E. (2001). Role transitions in organizational There is a close relationship between innovation
life: An identity-based perspective. Mahwah, NJ: and creativity (i.e., the generation of new and use-
Lawrence Erlbaum. ful ideas). Creativity is often needed for innovation,
Lewicki, R. J. (1981). Organizational seduction: Building but there are two important differences between
commitment to organizations. Organizational creativity and innovation. First, innovation refers
Dynamics, 10(2), 5–21. to change that is new only to the relevant unit of
Mayrhofer, W., & Iellatchitch, A. (2005). Rites, right? adoption; it does not require absolute novelty.
The value of rites de passage for dealing with today’s Thus, adoption in an organization of a computer
career transitions. Career Development International, program that is widely used outside that organiza-
10, 52–66. tion can hardly be called creative but still counts as
452 Innovation

innovation. The second is that innovation, in addi- or clients), but more often by the team leader or by
tion to the generation of ideas, also implies the the team members themselves. Measures include
implementation of these ideas into practice. estimates of quantity (i.e., how many innovations
Thus, innovation often requires both the gen- have been produced by a team) or measures of cer-
eration and the implementation of ideas, and these tain quality dimensions, such as the level of radical-
can be seen as different stages in the innovation ness (on a continuum from incremental to radical
process. It has even been argued that there is an innovations) or effectiveness of innovations.
inherent tension between creativity on the one Researchers have often used an input-process-
hand and innovation implementation on the other: output model of team innovation, arguing that
For creativity to flourish, certain conditions are certain antecedents influence team processes and
needed (such as high levels of job autonomy) that that these team processes in turn determine the
might actually have detrimental effects on imple- innovativeness of a team. Roughly, two types of
mentation (which would be easier with high levels antecedents can be distinguished: team composi-
of centralized control). tion variables and team context variables. These
Related to this is the distinction between the variables, alone and in combination, are assumed
products of innovation: incremental and radical to affect certain team processes, such as collabora-
innovations. Incremental innovations refine exist- tion, interaction, and conflict, which in turn affect
ing products, services, or procedures. Radical the level of innovativeness of a team.
innovations are major transformations of existing
products, services, or procedures that often make Major Findings
previous products, services, or procedures obsolete
Team Composition and Innovation
(e.g., the introduction of MP3 players largely made
Discmans obsolete). A further distinction is between Team members bring certain resources to the
technical and administrative innovations. Technical team, most notably their knowledge, skills, and
innovations (not to be confused with technological abilities (KSAs). These KSAs to a large degree
innovations) are directly related to the primary determine what the team is capable of, given the
work activity of an organization or other social task they have to perform. Not surprisingly, teams
unit. This may be the introduction of new products in which members have more creative abilities
or services or the introduction of new production (e.g., because of their personality or general mental
or service processes. Administrative innovations ability) tend to be more innovative than teams in
are innovations that apply to the social (rather which members are on average not very creative.
than the technical) functioning of organizations or However, the relation between individual-level
other social units. Examples would be new human creativity of team members and team innovative-
resource management practices, new authority ness will depend on certain team processes: Only
structures, and a new reward allocation system. when the team members work together effectively
(e.g., communicate effectively, effectively deal with
conflicts that may arise) will teams benefit opti-
Determinants of Team Innovation
mally from the KSAs of their members to create
Most research on team innovation has studied the team innovations.
factors that make teams more or less innovative. Furthermore, many authors have argued that
Studying the determinants of team innovativeness team diversity may be associated with team innova-
requires assessing the level of innovativeness of a tion. If group members differ from each other on
team. This has been done in several ways. One important task-related attributes, such as knowledge
way is to use more or less objective measures of and skills (for example, because they have different
innovativeness, such as the number of patents an functional backgrounds), combining their different
R&D team has generated within a certain period. resources would result in high levels of performance.
Often, however, this is not possible, in which Especially when tasks are nonroutine and require
case researchers have to rely on subjective judg- different insights, which is often the case when inno-
ments. These judgments are given sometimes by vation is called for, team diversity has been argued
people outside the team (such as department heads to improve performance. However, the relation
Innovation 453

between team diversity and innovation is very com- to shared perceptions of team members about
plex. For example, team diversity is often also associ- team policies, procedures, and practices (i.e., “the
ated with lower levels of trust and cohesion and with way things are done in the team”). Several dimen-
higher levels of conflict, and these negative effects sions of team climate have been suggested, but one
may interfere with effective team functioning. important dimension is participative safety: an
It is therefore likely that team diversity will lead atmosphere of nonthreatening trust and support.
to higher levels of team innovation only under Because in a safe climate team members are more
conditions that foster effective team processes. likely to take interpersonal risks, like suggesting
Partly, these factors might be related to team com- new ways of doing things, such a climate may
position. For example, teams in which members stimulate innovation. Again, however, creating
score high on personality traits such as agreeable- high levels of participative safety might not be
ness (being friendly, prosocial, and trustful) and enough. While a safe climate might ensure that
conscientiousness (being thorough and industri- deviant ideas are taken seriously, instead of being
ous), develop more constructive team processes in rejected or ridiculed, it does not ensure that these
which team members’ resources might be used in ideas will be generated in the first place or that
more effective ways. However, team context vari- they eventually will be implemented.
ables will also influence the extent to which effec- A team process that has been related to team
tive team processes develop. innovation is task conflict, precisely because it will
lead to the generation of new ideas. Task conflicts
(i.e., disagreement in opinions) may increase inno-
Team Context Variables
vativeness because conflicts force teams to recon-
While team members provide the resources sider their way of working. Although there is some
(KSAs) for the team to work with, the team con- support for this, the evidence suggests that con-
text determines whether these resources can and flicts can easily escalate and that only moderate
will be used in effective ways. Some factors that but not high levels of conflict are associated with
have been proposed to be of importance are team innovativeness.
structure and task, team climate, task conflict, and Further, conflicts will increase innovativeness
leadership. only when they are effectively dealt with, which
First, it has been suggested that team innovation may require a positive team climate (e.g., high lev-
can be stimulated by team structure and task con- els of participative safety). One particularly inter-
ditions such as providing teams with enough esting finding is that it is not conflict per se, but
autonomy to carry out their tasks. Further, teams rather minority dissent that leads to innovative-
should be made responsible for a whole task, and ness. Minority dissent occurs when a minority in
not just aspects of it, and the task should be seen the team publicly opposes the beliefs, attitudes,
as meaningful and important. These conditions and ideas assumed by the majority of team mem-
would foster intrinsic motivation (i.e., doing the bers. Often, minorities bring about change (even in
task because it is enjoying and satisfying, rather society at large) because they question the domi-
than because of extrinsic rewards) and would sub- nant way of looking at things. The evidence indi-
sequently lead to higher levels of innovativeness. cates that minority dissent is in fact related to team
Although this seems true to some extent, creating innovativeness, but only when team members fre-
these conditions is no guarantee that teams will be quently discuss their way of working in a non-
innovative. For example, it has been found that team threatening way. What seems essential is that the
autonomy is related to the innovativeness of R&D minority is taken seriously, that their ideas are
teams only when work pressure is high and there is thoroughly discussed, and that useless ideas are
much support for innovation. While work pressure abandoned and promising ones implemented.
creates the need to innovate (i.e., to more effectively Finally, an important factor is leadership.
deal with the pressure), support for innovation Leaders may create the conditions under which
ensures that innovations are in fact implemented. team innovation can flourish. For example, par-
Second, many authors have suggested that team ticipative leaders (i.e., leaders who encourage par-
climate affects innovativeness. Team climate refers ticipation of their subordinates) have been found
454 Institutionalized Bias

to increase team reflexivity (i.e., collective reflec- Taggar, S. (2002). Individual creativity and group ability
tion on the team’s objectives, strategies, and pro- to utilize individual creative resources: A multilevel
cesses). In turn, reflexivity is positively associated model. Academy of Management Journal, 45,
with team innovation, particularly in teams in 315–330.
which minority dissent often occurs. Furthermore, West, M. A. (2003). Innovation implementation in work
leaders can also motivate their followers to be teams. In P. B. Paulus & B. A. Nijstad (Eds.), Group
innovative. For example, recent theories of leader- creativity: Innovation through collaboration
ship distinguish between transformational and (pp. 245–276). New York: Oxford University Press.
West, M. A., & Farr, J. L. (Eds.). (1990). Innovation and
transactional leadership. Transactional leadership
creativity at work: Psychological and organizational
rewards subordinates for performing well, and
strategies. Chichester, UK: John Wiley.
transformational leadership relies on charisma,
intellectual stimulation, and personal consider-
ation to motivate subordinates. These types of
leadership are not independent (i.e., leaders can
use both), and in fact, both types may be associ- Institutionalized Bias
ated with team innovativeness when leaders use
these strategies to motivate their followers to be Institutionalized bias occurs when institutional
innovative. However, definitive support for this practices, scripts, or procedures work to system-
hypothesis awaits further research. atically advantage certain groups or agendas over
Innovation is important for organizations and others. The topic of institutionalized bias is
society at large. Because organizations more and important to those who study intergroup relations
more use team-based work structures, it is impor- in part because it can account for how processes
tant to understand the factors that influence team can advantage dominant groups in the absence of
innovation. From the evidence, it seems that two overt efforts to discriminate against marginalized
things are simultaneously needed: conditions that groups. In other words, even in the absence of any
stimulate the generation or identification of cre- intention to discriminate, institutional practices
ative ideas (e.g., creative team members, minority can produce the same outcomes as discrimination
dissent), and conditions that stimulate the serious by advantaging certain groups over others. This
consideration and eventual implementation of these entry provides a broader context for the concept
ideas (e.g., a safe team climate, good leadership). of institutionalized bias and gives examples of
how such bias can be manifest.
Bernard Nijstad The key feature of institutionalized bias that
distinguishes it from other forms of bias or from
See also Brainstorming; Diversity; Leadership; Minority discrimination is that it is built into the fabric of
Influence; Team Performance Assessment institutions. For example, research has found that
social welfare policy in the United States affects the
access of gay men and lesbians to social services.
Further Readings Two pieces of legislation passed in the mid-1990s,
the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Anderson, N., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Nijstad, B. A. (2004).
Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) and the Defense of
The routinization of innovation research: A
constructively critical review of the state-of-the-science.
Marriage Act (DOMA), appear unrelated but in
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 147–173. fact establish an institutionalized bias that limits
De Dreu, C. K. W., & West, M. A. (2001). Minority the extent to which gay men and lesbians can
dissent and team innovation: The importance of access social services. PRWORA expanded welfare-
participation in decision making. Journal of Applied to-work programs and also placed restrictions on
Psychology, 86, 1191–1201. access to public assistance. DOMA defined mar-
Somech, A. (2006). The effects of leadership style and riage as a legal union between a man and a woman.
team processes on performance and innovation in Together, the acts constitute a national policy con-
functionally heterogeneous teams. Journal of text that on legal grounds blocks access to social
Management, 32, 132–157. services for gay men and lesbians.
Institutionalized Bias 455

Although the concept of institutionalized bias organizations structure in institutionally illegiti-


has been discussed by scholars at least since the mate ways, the result is negative performance and
1960s, current treatments of the concept are typi- legitimacy consequences.
cally consistent with the theoretical principles of When organizations conform to institutional-
the new institutionalism (also called neoinstitu- ized practices, then, the result is greater legitimacy.
tionalism) that emerged in the 1980s. This theory An example of an institutionalized practice is the
is broadly concerned with how institutions, par- Jim Crow laws that mandated separate yet equal
ticularly organizations, are influenced by their status for Black Americans in many Southern and
broader environments. It argues that organizations border states in the United States through much of
feel pressure to incorporate the practices defined the 20th century. State and local laws required
by prevailing concepts of organizational work that separate facilities for Whites and Blacks, most
have become institutionalized in society. notably in schooling and transportation. As more
Institutionalism is the process by which social pro- states and localities adopted these laws, it had
cesses or structures come to take on a rulelike the consequence of increasing the legitimacy of
status in social thought and action. the laws, leading more and more people to see the
Institutional theory asserts that group structures laws as correct. The consequence of the separate
gain legitimacy when they conform to the accepted yet equal laws was nearly always accommodations
practices in their environments. These practices are for Black Americans that were inferior to those for
called social institutions. For example, it is com- White Americans.
monly accepted in the United States that organiza- Institutional theory argues that because institu-
tions should be structured with formal hierarchies, tionalized practices and structures function as
with some positions in the hierarchies subordinate powerful myths, organizations that incorporate
to others. This type of structure is institutional- them increase their legitimacy and their survival
ized. Many institutionalized practices are so widely prospects, regardless of whether or not the prac-
shared, externally validated, and collectively tices meet any efficiency needs. In fact, institu-
expected that they become the obvious and natural tional theory argues that conformity to rules that
course of action. are institutionalized often conflicts with efficiency
The best known statement of the institutional needs. A formally structured hierarchy may not
approach is from Paul DiMaggio and Walter be the most efficient organizational structure for
Powell. According to DiMaggio and Powell, orga- some particular company, for example, but if the
nizations exist in fields of other organizations. As practice is institutionalized in the company’s envi-
these fields become more mature, they influence ronment, the company will feel pressure to adopt
organizations within them. DiMaggio and Powell such a structure. A key argument in institutional
propose that as fields become increasingly mature, theory is that the structures of many organiza-
the organizations within them become increasingly tions reflect the myths of their institutional envi-
homogeneous. In an effort to attain legitimacy, ronments instead of the demands of work
organizations adopt institutionalized structures activities.
and practices that conform to their environments, An element of new institutionalism that has
such as structuring with formal hierarchies. important implications for institutionalized bias is
Institutional theory proposes that change in orga- that it gives less priority than other approaches (or
nizations is constrained by organizational fields, in some cases, no priority) to norms and values.
and when it occurs, it is in the direction of greater Dimaggio and Powell propose that it is not norms
conformity to institutionalized practices. and values, but instead taken-for-granted codes and
The institutional approach argues that organi- rules that make up the essence of institutions. In this
zations that conform to accepted practices and way, institutions shape the behavior of individuals
structures increase their ability to obtain valuable by providing taken-for-granted scripts. Individuals
resources and to enhance their survival prospects. conform to institutionalized scripts not because of
This occurs because conforming with institutional- norms or values, but rather out of habit. Thus insti-
ized practices produces legitimacy. In the same tutionalized bias can exist in the absence of norms
way, the institutional approach argues that when that advantage one group over another.
456 Interactionist Theories of Leadership

Suppose, for example, that a work organization of norms that tolerate or favor discrimination
requires that executives rotate through each sector against disadvantaged group members.
of the organization (e.g., sales, marketing, opera-
tions, and so on) before being eligible for promotion Jeffrey W. Lucas
to top management positions. Such a policy might See also Discrimination; Organizations; Racism
exist so long and be so ubiquitous in an industry
that it has become institutionalized. Organizational
members would thus take for granted that it is Further Readings
proper and reasonable that promotion decisions be
made in accordance with the policy. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage
Although such a policy seems reasonable and revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective
likely would not have been driven by efforts at rationality in organizational fields. American
discrimination, the policy might disadvantage Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.
women, who have been more likely than men to DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1991). Introduction.
take family leave in early stages of their careers. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new
institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 1–38).
Without any efforts at discrimination, or the pres-
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
ence of any norms that advantage men, the policy
Doucouliagos, C. (1995). Institutional bias, risk, and
could establish an institutionalized bias that favors
workers’ risk aversion. Journal of Economic Issues,
men. In this way, institutionalized biases need not
29(4), 1097–1118.
reflect any attitudes that favor more beneficial Lind, A. (2002). Legislating the family: Heterosexist bias
treatment of one group over another. in social welfare policy frameworks. Journal of
Another feature of institutionalized biases is Sociology and Social Welfare, 31(4), 21–35.
that they can lead to accumulated advantages (or Viner, N., Powell, P., & Green, R. (2004).
disadvantages) for groups over time. For example, Institutionalized biases in the award of research
institutionalized biases that limit the access of grants: A preliminary analysis revisiting the principle
some groups to social services will in turn limit the of accumulative advantage. Research Policy, 33,
extent to which members of these groups experi- 443–454.
ence the benefits that result from receiving such
services. Over time, those who received services
may accumulate these benefits, while those who
have been disadvantaged will remain so. An
example of accumulative advantage exists in the
Interactionist Theories
awarding of research grants to academics. of Leadership
Institutionalized biases lead to several sources of
advantage being associated with success in secur- Are leaders of groups or organizations “born” or
ing grants, independent of the quality of a grant “made”? That is, can an individual be trained to
proposal. Those awarded grants become more be an effective leader, or do some individuals
likely to receive future grants. Thus institutional- naturally possess traits, skills, and abilities that
ized biases can produce advantages or disadvan- predispose them to become group leaders? This
tages that have cumulative effects on the outcomes classic question has been the subject of continuous
of group members. debate and controversy among leadership research-
In summary, institutionalized bias exists when ers for decades. Interactionist theorists hold that
taken-for-granted policies or procedures system- a leader is both born and made. Thus, leadership
atically advantage certain interests over others. is held to be a function of both personal and
Rather than stemming from overt attempts at situational forces that are fundamentally inextri-
discrimination, institutionalized bias is instead cable from each other. This entry reviews the
built into the structures of institutions. A conse- debate over “born” versus “made” theories of
quence of institutionalized bias is that it can leadership, then looks at interactive perspectives,
produce outcomes that cumulatively benefit their models of leadership, and the future outlook
advantaged groups over time, even in the absence for this vein of research.
Interactionist Theories of Leadership 457

The Person–Situation Debate The Interactionist Perspective


The idea of a connection between the individual The interactionist perspective holds that individu-
and the environment was originally advanced by als are active agents and perceivers of reality.
social psychologist Kurt Lewin as part of field Personal and situational factors cannot be detan-
theory. In 1951, Lewin outlined the famous for- gled from one another in explaining behavior
mula, B = f (P, E). Lewin held that behavior (B) is because of the nature of the human cognitive sys-
a function (f) of the interconnection between the tem. Individuals cognitively filter the social world
person (P) and the environment (E). Personal fac- based on personal factors such as cognitive pro-
tors include emotions, traits, beliefs, and thought clivities (e.g., how information is processed, what
processes, and the environment refers to both the type of categories are accessible), skills, and past
social and physical atmosphere in which the per- experiences. Based on individuals’ perceptions,
son is located. Lewin argued that the person and situations are imbued with particular meaning and
the environment weave together in a dynamic are actively constructed through behavior.
interplay that operates as a psychological field Thus, interactionists do not view situations as
(called the lifespace) in predicting behavior. physical environments (as Lewin did). Situations
Therefore, to consider the person or the situation are construed as psychological interpretations of
independently would, at best, provide a partial reality. People perceive the situation and are influ-
picture of behavior. enced by the situation. But individuals are not pas-
Lewin’s B = f (P, E) formula echoes the basic sive agents of situational forces. They also actively
proposition of the interactionist perspective. influence the situation through their interpreta-
However, what is known as the interactionist tions and behaviors. Put another way, individuals
perspective was first formalized as a result of a may choose their situations. For example, a poten-
larger person–situation debate in psychology, tial CEO may turn down a job because of a lack of
which was triggered by the publication of Walter perceived fit between him- or herself and the orga-
Mischel’s famous book Personality and Assessment nization. In this way, a bidirectional causation
in 1968. In this book, Mischel criticized the indi- occurs between the individual and the situation,
vidual difference (e.g., in traits, skills, abilities,
whereby personal and situational factors are highly
values) approach to explaining behavior. Mischel
interwoven into an interdependent dynamic that
reviewed various studies on personality and
explains behavior.
behavior and reported that only small correla-
tions (below r = .30) were usually evidenced
between these factors. As a result, he argued that
The Interactionist
personality was a relatively weak predictor of
Perspective and Leadership
behavior and that behavior is too inconsistent
from one situation to another to be accurately The controversy over whether a leader is born or
predicted from personality traits. In advocating made echoes the person–situation debate that contin-
for a situational approach, Mischel held that ues among leadership scholars today. For example,
behavior is more fruitfully examined by consider- in 2002, Robert Sternberg and Victor Vroom
ing situational factors. exchanged letters that were published in the
Scholars who studied individual differences Leadership Quarterly discussing the person–situa-
(e.g., in traits, skills, abilities, values) put forth tion debate in leadership.
various refutations of Mischel’s position. However, Traditionally, scholars who have contended
one scholar refuted the situational approach from that leaders are born have assessed various leader-
a different perspective. In 1973, Kenneth Bowers ship traits or abilities in an effort to unveil a suc-
wrote an article that criticized the methodological cessful leadership profile. Great-person theories
underpinnings of the situational approach, while exemplify this perspective. Conversely, scholars
simultaneously advancing the interactionist per- who have argued that leaders are made have
spective. Since then, the interactionist perspective attempted to show that situational factors alone
(also known as interactional psychology) has been may predict leadership emergence or effectiveness.
refined by a number of scholars. Research has shown that both sides have fallen
458 Interactionist Theories of Leadership

short of explaining leadership effectiveness. Some interactive exposition of how leaders and followers
interactionist leadership scholars (among others) jointly influence social reality. Using an interaction-
have argued that both of these positions are essen- ist framework, Gardner and Avolio advanced a
tially myopic and deficient. Neither position model of leadership that builds on previous theory
addresses why leaders may act differently across and research by emphasizing a dynamic relation-
various situations. For example, why is one leader ship between charismatic leaders and followers. In
successful during crises but not during stability? the literature, charismatic leaders are commonly
Interactionist leadership scholars also have argued credited with having an almost magical ability to
that trait-based or situational accounts of leader- inspire followers to bring about a vision of social or
ship ignore how a leader can affect a situation or organizational change. Results from a substantial
how a situation may influence leaders. number of studies show that charismatic leaders
Many scholars today agree that leadership may are associated with positive performance outcomes
be influenced by both personal and situational fac- and increased follower satisfaction. However, char-
tors. Numerous leadership theories consider both ismatic leadership theories and research often have
person and situation variables, but not all of these been criticized for perpetuating a heroic conception
theories may be considered interactionist. Take, of leaders, and neglecting the important role of fol-
for example, contingency theories of leadership. lowers and the environmental context.
Generally speaking, contingency theories focus on This charismatic relationship model considers
optimizing the match between the leader’s traits how leadership and followership variables come
and behaviors and the situation to increase leader- together in a reciprocal relationship that affects
ship effectiveness (which is usually defined in terms organizational outcomes in a broader environmental
of group performance). Yet interactionist theorists context. Leadership variables such as the leader’s
such as Benjamin Schneider and Jennifer Chatman sense of identity, perceptions of the situation,
have noted that contingency theories do not typify motives, and values are postulated to lead to a series
interactionist models. This is because they tend to of impression management tactics (including vision
(a) overlook how leaders affect situations (e.g., articulation) aimed at portraying an image of cha-
tasks), particularly over time and (b) define risma to followers. These tactics may engage follow-
personal and situational variables in a relatively ers’ identities, promote identification with the leader,
narrow manner. and encourage internalization of the leader’s pro-
The interactionist approach to leadership pro- posed vision of change. Followers’ motives and val-
vides a more complex, interactive, and dynamic ues may also develop more in line with those of the
account of personal and situational factors than do leader and they may experience increased self-esteem
contingency models. While certainly valuable, con- and self-efficacy. As a result, followers may be apt to
tingency models have been likened to limited snap- make attributions of leader charisma. These pro-
shots of the situations in which leadership cesses are theorized to lead to a charismatic relation-
phenomena are embedded. Yet situations are con- ship between the leader and the followers, which
tinuously evolving and changing as a result of promotes collective efforts toward vision attainment
interactions. Interactionist theories of leadership and may result in positive organizational outcomes.
link person–situation variables in a network of
multidirectional relationships that attempt to cap-
Information Processing Model of Leadership
ture the evolving nature of leadership.
Paul Hanges, Robert Lord, and Markus Dickson
provide a compelling account of how connectivist
Interactionist Models of Leadership networks can link leadership behavior and culture
in an interaction that affects followers’ environ-
A Dramaturgical Model
ment perceptions and behaviors. Connectivist net-
of the Charismatic Relationship
works are conceptualized as units that are connected
A charismatic relationship model put forth by in a network of information processing. Units are
William Gardner and Bruce Avolio nicely illustrates responsive to each other and become activated in a
how an interactionist perspective may provide an linked network in response to environmental
Interaction Process Analysis 459

stimuli. Over time, particular patterns of units followers perceived the organizational climate.
become concurrently activated and form schemas Other leadership theories may similarly be
of information processing. Schemas are invoked by expanded to consider the interactive affects of both
contextual stimuli and possess the capability to person and situation variables, which may broaden
evolve and change in response to each situational our understanding of leadership phenomena.
encounter.
Hanges, Lord, and Dickson surmise that indi- Viviane Seyranian
viduals possess leadership schemas (i.e., proto-
types) and cultural schemas. Each of these schemas See also Charismatic Leadership; Contingency Theories
consists of the same network units: values, affect, of Leadership; Great Person Theory of Leadership;
and self-concept. When each schema is activated, Leader Categorization Theory; Leader-Member
it concomitantly awakens the network units, a Exchange (LMX) Theory; Leadership; Path–Goal
Theory of Leadership; Personality Theories of
particular set of beliefs, and specific modes of
Leadership; Social Identity Theory of Leadership;
behavior (known as behavioral scripts) to guide Transactional Leadership Theories; Transformational
the individual in responding to the situation. It is Leadership Theories; Vertical Dyad Linkage Model
postulated that leader behaviors and sociocultural
events (i.e., external events associated with culture)
may add information to the network that may Further Readings
activate leader and cultural schemas simultane-
ously. The activated schemas may influence how Bowers, K. S. (1973). Situationism in psychology: An
the follower perceives the leader. Since schemas analysis and a critique. Psychological Review, 80,
307–336.
are context specific, the leader’s behavior may also
Chatman, J. A. (1989). Improving interactional
influence each activated schema. This means that
organizational research: A model of person-
followers interpret the leader’s behavior and the
organizational fit. Academy of Management Review,
sociocultural event, and in addition, the leader and
14, 333–349.
the event simultaneously possess the potential to Gardner, W. L., & Avolio, B. J. (1998). The charismatic
affect followers’ self-concepts and behavior. As relationship: A dramaturgical perspective. Academy of
such, the focal point of this model is the follower’s Management Review, 23, 32–58.
mind. This perspective is an important contribu- Hanges, P. J., Lord, R. G., & Dickson, M. W. (2000). An
tion to the leadership literature, given the relative information-processing perspective on leadership and
scarcity of follower-based models of leadership— culture: A case for connectivist architecture. Applied
particularly ones that consider the interplay of Psychology: An International Review, 49, 133–161.
leaders, followers, and culture. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Doherty, M. L. (1989). Integration
of climate and leadership: Examination of a neglected
issue. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 546–553.
The Future of Interactionist
Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. New
Approaches to Leadership
York: Harper.
The interactionist approach to leadership pro- Schneider, B. (1983). Interactional psychology and
vides a way to conceptualize leadership as a recip- organizational behaviors. Research in Organizational
rocal relationship between the leader and the Behavior, 5, 1–31.
follower. In addition to adding layers of complex- Sternberg, R. J., & Vroom, V. (2002). The person versus
ity, it also has the potential to expand current the situation in leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 13,
leadership models toward new horizons and levels 301–323.
of analysis. For example, an interactionist
approach was employed by Steve Kolowski and
Mary Doherty to connect the vertical dyad link-
age theory of leadership to organizational climate Interaction Process Analysis
concerns (i.e., perceptions of the atmosphere).
Research results showed that the quality of the Interaction process analysis (IPA) is a method for
supervisor–follower relationship affected how observing and categorizing social interaction among
460 Interaction Process Analysis

the members of small face-to-face groups. This by the pioneering group psychologist Kurt Lewin.
entry summarizes the content of IPA, the history of For many years, Bales taught a popular under-
its development, and some of the ways in which it graduate course on group psychology in which the
has been used to analyze group processes. students were divided into self-analytic groups that
explored their own interactions and made system-
atic observations of the interactions of other
The Content and Coding of IPA
groups using Lewinian concepts.
Using IPA, observers can break down any sequence The kinds of groups that can be analyzed using
of verbal interactions among the members of a IPA vary widely in composition and purpose, and
group into units, and then classify each unit as may include problem-solving teams and work
belonging to one of twelve categories of behavior. groups, policymaking committees and government
These categories are: (1) showing friendliness or councils, recreational clubs and sports teams, chil-
solidarity; (2) displaying tension release or drama- dren’s play groups and school classes, nuclear and
tizing; (3) agreeing or expressing acceptance; extended families, and so on. Bales hoped that in
(4) providing suggestions; (5) offering opinions; studying such a wide variety of groups he might be
(6) giving information or orientation; (7) asking able to identify recurring or common patterns of
for information or orientation; (8) asking for interaction that could be used to predict, and per-
opinion; (9) asking for suggestions or direction; haps even prescribe, how groups might be formed
(10) disagreeing, expressing rejection, or withhold- and managed.
ing help; (11) showing tension; and (12) showing Bales set forth his IPA methodology, and
unfriendliness or antagonism. reported research based on it, in a book published
Six of these categories involve socioemotional in 1950. If observers are well trained, the use of
behaviors that maintain or weaken interpersonal IPA should yield data that are reliable and valid.
relationships in the group. Categories 1, 2, and 3 Reliability refers to consistency of measurement
represent positive socioemotional behaviors, and across time, categories, and raters. For example,
categories 10, 11, and 12 represent negative IPA has interrater reliability if different raters, cod-
socioemotional behaviors. The other six categories ing independently, score a behavior as belonging
involve task-oriented behaviors that focus on the to the same category. Validity refers to whether the
goal the group is seeking to achieve or the problem method measures what it is supposed to measure.
it is trying to solve. Categories 4, 5, and 6 repre- For example, IPA is valid if it measures the extent
sent attempted answers, and categories 7, 8, and 9 to which group members actually pose questions,
represent questions posed. It is worth noting that attempt answers, and exhibit positive and negative
the categories are polarized. Category 1 is the socioemotional behaviors.
opposite of category 12, 2 is the opposite of 11, Over the years, Bales attempted to improve the
and so on. The first three categories involve posi- reliability and validity of the IPA coding system.
tive emotions, and the last three involve negative He revised the IPA categories in 1970, and later
emotions. Categories 7, 8, and 9 request assis- proposed a further elaboration of the entire system
tance, whereas categories 4, 5, and 6 offer it. called SYMLOG, which stands for SYstem for the
Multiple Level Observation of Groups. With
SYMLOG, observers can rate each group member
Development of IPA and Its Extensions
on each of 26 interaction categories. These catego-
IPA was developed beginning in the late 1940s by ries can be combined to yield scores for each mem-
Robert Freed Bales, a professor of social relations ber on three fundamental dimensions: dominance/
at Harvard University. Bales studied under the submission, friendly/unfriendly, and instrumen-
eminent sociologist Talcott Parsons, but his tally controlled/emotionally expressive. SYMLOG
approach in developing IPA was multidisciplinary has become the focus of a consulting group
and drew on work in other fields besides sociol- devoted to the practical application of the method
ogy, such as clinical and social psychology and in managerial settings for the assessment and train-
social anthropology. Bales was particularly influ- ing of team effectiveness, individual leadership
enced by the concepts of field theory, as elaborated potential, and related matters.
Interaction Process Analysis 461

Analysis of Group Processes Using IPA Bales thus regarded leadership as involving two
complementary roles. The first person, who is the
With IPA it is possible to find out how frequently most active and is oriented primarily toward goal
behaviors belonging to each category occur in any achievement, Bales referred to as the task specialist
interaction that is being examined. By examining or task leader of the group. The second person,
the frequency with which behaviors fitting different who is less active but better liked and is focused
interaction categories occur, when they occur, and mostly on sustaining positive social interaction,
how they are distributed among the participants, Bales called the group’s socioemotional leader.
researchers can gain insight into group functioning There is some research suggesting that leadership
and structure. Researchers can study such matters behaviors tend to be gender stereotypic, with
as the nature and sequencing of group activity, the women being more likely to emerge as socioemo-
differentiation in roles among group members, and tional leaders, and men more likely to emerge as
the emergence of leadership in the group. task leaders. Other research, however, finds no
Research by Bales and others has found that gender differences in leadership behavior.
positive emotions (categories 1, 2, and 3) are Moreover, research has shown that in some
expressed much more frequently than negative instances a single person may serve as both the
emotions (categories 10, 11, and 12) and that opin- task and the socio­emotional leader of a group.
ions and information are volunteered far more
often than they are asked for. Moreover, interac-
tion in task-oriented groups tends to progress from Evaluation of IPA
a focus on defining the problem or goal of the
Various criticisms have been leveled at IPA. For
group to a concern with evaluating and making
example, it has been criticized for failing to pro-
decisions about it. As this progression develops,
duce explicit and reliable accounts of the coding
emotions begin to be expressed with increasing
process, for not dealing adequately with interpre-
frequency.
tational problems associated with ambiguous
Bales and others also have found that participa-
behaviors that can fall into more than one analysis
tion is not ordinarily distributed equally among
category, and for lacking sensitivity to the charac-
group members. Typically, there are large differ-
ter of specific interaction environments, such as
ences between the communication patterns of the
medical consultations. In addition, statistical
two most talkative members of the group. In addi-
examinations of IPA using factor analysis have
tion, the amount of talking that group members do
provided no more than partial support for collaps-
tends to be related to perceptions of leadership,
ing the 12 interaction categories into 4 groupings,
with the person who talks the most in the group
or for treating the 12 categories as 6 pairwise
being the most likely to emerge as the perceived
opposites.
leader. (This finding has been referred to as the
Partly as a result of such criticisms, the use of
“big mouth” theory of leadership.)
IPA has diminished in recent years, and new quan-
The person who talks the most and tends to
titative methods for the study of social interaction
be seen by others as the group leader also tends to be
have been developed. The category systems in these
oriented toward attaining the group’s goals, and new methodologies vary, but in all of them social
thus scores very highly on behaviors related to interaction is treated as a process that unfolds in a
attempted answers (directing, summarizing, pro- sequence of identifiable behaviors that can be sorted
viding ideas). Such task-related behavior often cre- into a limited set of categories. Therefore, even
ates some tension and hostility on the part of other though IPA is now mainly of historical interest, its
group members. This raises a need for actions that influence is still felt in most social psychological
help maintain effective working relationships interaction research that categorizes interpersonal
among the members. This need is often satisfied by behavior and counts its frequency. IPA is the origi-
a second talkative person in the group, who tends nal, and still the best known, approach to observing
to be warm and friendly and to engage in positive and understanding social interaction.
socioemotional behaviors (alleviating frustrations,
resolving tensions, mediating conflicts). Charles E. Miller
462 Interdependence Theory

See also Group Problem Solving and Decision Making; talk about each other’s personalities based merely
Leadership; Lewin, Kurt; Socioemotional and Task on random movements of cards and chips? To
Behavior; SYMLOG study social behavior without its context is like
observing a group of poker players without know-
ing the rules of poker. It does not make much
Further Readings
sense. Human interaction always takes place in a
Allen, W. R., Comerford, R. A., & Ruhe, J. A. (1989). social situation, and to fully understand the deter-
Factor analytic study of Bales’ Interaction process minants of behavior, we need to know the basic
analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, features of the situation in which the behavior
49, 701–707. takes place. What are the behavioral options in the
Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A situation? How does each of these options influ-
method for the study of small groups. Cambridge, ence the actors’ and others’ well-being? How do
MA: Addison-Wesley. others’ actions influence the actors’ well-being?
Bales, R. F., & Cohen, S. P., with assistance from S. A. Without understanding these structural properties,
Williamson (1979). SYMLOG: A system for the it is impossible to learn very much about the
multiple level observation of groups. New York: Free actors’ personalities, motives, and relationships
Press. with other interaction partners. Focusing on small,
Bales, R. F., & Slater, P. E. (1955). Role differentiation in
interacting groups, this entry describes interde-
small decision-making groups. In T. Parsons &
pendence theory, which explains how particular
R. F. Bales (Eds.), Family, socialization, and
patterns of social interaction may unfold and be
interaction process (pp. 259–306). Glencoe, IL: Free
sustained between people.
Press.
Perakyla, A. (2004). Two traditions of interaction
Interdependence theory, initially developed by
research. British Journal of Social Psychology, 43,
Harold Kelley and John Thibaut, is one of the few
1–20. theories within the social and behavioral sciences
Roter, D. L. (1991). The Roter method of interaction that provides a taxonomy of interdependence
process analysis: RIAS manual. Baltimore: Johns situations—a conceptual framework for defining
Hopkins University Press. the basic features of situations. The theory explains
Thomas, A. P., Bull, P. E., & Roger, D. (1982). interactions as they take place in the context of a
Conversation exchange analysis. Journal of Language particular situation in which two people influence
and Social Psychology, 1, 141–155. one another’s outcomes by their behaviors. The
way in which partners can influence their own and
others’ outcomes is referred to as the interdepend-
ence structure, which is assumed to be central to
Interdependence Theory understanding the course of interaction that a situ-
ation may afford. Thus by virtue of their interde-
Interdependence theory explains social interac- pendence structure, some situations may call for
tions as they take place in the context of a par- our ability to coordinate well (or poorly) with
ticular situation (i.e., the interdependence another person. An example of such a situation
structure) in which two people influence one would be when little information is available, yet
another’s outcomes by their behaviors. two people are pursuing exactly the same goal—
Imagine a group of people gathered around a such as trying to find each other in a big city when
poker table. The players deal cards and throw neither has a cell phone. Other situations may call
poker chips on the board, and occasionally some- for helping (or not), cooperating (or not), compet-
one collects all of them and smiles. The players ing (or not), sharing (or not), and so on. These
seem to think so hard you can almost see their situations are meaningful because our actions (or
brains ticking; they express disappointment, frus- choices) inform the other (and us) about which
tration, and joy; they call each other aggressive, motives were activated in us. Whether or not to do
conservative, and protective. How can such seem- the dishes (or leave them for your partner, who
ingly meaningless behavior evoke so much atten- comes home late) is one such dilemma in which we
tion and emotion? And how can the players even are confronted with the option to preemptively
Interdependence Theory 463

help or not. In the final analysis, it is the interde- her own or someone else’s outcomes (which is also
pendence structure that activates certain motives in called a mixed-motive situation).
us, and that helps us understand which motives we Basis of dependence is the fourth structural
can communicate to others and which motives oth- property of interdependence, and is defined as the
ers can communicate to us. From this perspective, way in which people’s actions influence others’ out-
a central question is: What are the key features (or comes. Dependence can be based on partner control
dimensions) of interdependence structure? (others’ actions influence a person’s own outcomes)
or joint control (both a person’s own and others’
actions influence the person’s outcomes).
Interdependence Structure
In general, these four properties of interdepend-
The concept of interdependence means that indi- ence systematically characterize the way in which
viduals’ outcomes are influenced by their own as the actor and the partner have control over their
well as by others’ behaviors. The source of individu- own and others’ outcomes (these properties are
als’ outcomes, that is, whether they are controlled fully discussed in Kelley and Thibaut’s 1978 book,
by their own or others’ behaviors, is called control. Interpersonal Relations). There are two additional
Actor control (AC) means that individuals have properties of interdependence that have more
direct control over their outcomes, and partner con- recently been advanced by interdependence theo-
trol (PC) means that individuals’ outcomes are rists. The fifth property concerns response condi-
directly influenced by the actions of their interaction tion, the pattern of when and in what order the
partners. Finally, joint control (JC) means that indi- behaviors can be enacted. Response condition
viduals’ outcomes are influenced by the joint actions represents the sequence and timing of behaviors.
of themselves and their interaction partners. For instance, a person may wait for another per-
Level of dependence is the first structural prop- son to react first.
erty of interdependence—the greater the degree to The final condition represents the degree of
which an individual relies on an interaction part- completeness of information, which consists of
ner, the higher the level of dependency. People are two aspects: (a) the amount of information (who
more independent when situations involve mutual knows what) and (b) possibilities for communica-
actor control. People are more interdependent tion (who can convey information to whom and
when situations involve more mutual partner con- by what means). It should be clear that situations
trol, joint control, or both. It should be intuitively of incomplete information may easily elicit misun-
clear that this definition of dependence can be con- derstanding (i.e., misinterpretations of others’
strued as the converse of power. Individuals are intentions and behaviors), especially if the misun-
dependent to the degree that their partners possess derstanding led to negative outcomes rather than
the power to move them through a wide range of positive outcomes.
outcomes.
Mutuality of dependence is the second structural
Transformation of Situations:
property of interdependence, and describes the
What People Make of Situations
extent to which individuals are equally dependent
on each another. That is, the control an individual A basic assumption underlying interdependence
has over others’ outcomes is not necessarily equal theory is that behavior may be motivated by
for all individuals in the situation, but asymmetries self-interest—the maximization of one’s own
often exist in the extent to which they can influence outcomes—as well as by a variety of other con-
each other’s outcomes. The higher the asymmetry, cerns. In particular, interdependence theory assumes
the lower the mutuality of dependence. that people often seek to transform a given situa-
Covariation of interest is the third very impor- tion into a different (i.e., more effective) situation,
tant structural property of interdependence. It is and that such transformations are affected by
defined in terms of the extent to which interacting broader concerns such as the tendency to maximize
partners’ outcomes correspond or conflict. If outcomes for the other, the tendency to maximize
covariation of interest is negative, a person faces a equality in outcomes, or the tendency to forgo
dilemma as to whether to place weight on his or outcomes in the short term to maximize future
464 Interdependence Theory

outcomes. Transformations can be understood as prisoner’s dilemma game, which is characterized by


“decision rules” that may or may not be con- negative covariance of interest (a mixed-motive
sciously applied. For example, MaxJoint transfor- situation), it has recently been shown by Scott Wolf
mation represents motivation to simultaneously and his colleagues that the discontinuity effect dis-
maximize one’s own and an interaction partner’s appears if the situation allows coordinated turn
outcomes (i.e., cooperation); MaxOwn transforma- taking. They also found that individuals and groups
tion represents motivation to maximize one’s own behaved the same way in situations where mutual
outcomes; MaxRel transformation represents moti- competition was associated with very low out-
vation to maximize the difference between one’s comes. This indicates that the general view that
own outcomes and the outcomes of an interaction groups are more competitive than individuals is
partner (i.e., competition); MinDiff transformation clearly an oversimplification. It is not an invariable
represents the minimization of absolute differences pattern, but depends on a structure of the interde-
between one’s own and a partner’s outcomes. pendence situation. While this study serves as an
Transformations occur for various reasons. interesting start, clearly future research is required
They can be dispositional, in that an individual to systematically compare individual and group
has a stable tendency to engage in a similar trans- transformations over a wide range of interdepen-
formation regardless of the interaction partner dence structures. This would help us to better
and other factors. These dispositions are called understand the exact cognitive and affective mech-
social value orientations and they are usually clas- anisms that differ among individuals and groups.
sified into three main categories: cooperation
(= MaxJoint), individualism (= MaxOwn), and Conclusion
competition (= MaxDiff). These tendencies reflect
individuals’ social experiences, since they undergo Interdependence theory provides a taxonomy of
different experiences with their parents and peers interdependent situations that is important for
and are presented with different opportunities and understanding the structure of situations that
constraints; in short, individuals have different underlies the activation of motives (as well as cog-
histories of interdependence. nition and affect), and it helps us understand
A second type of transformational tendency behavior and social interaction in dyads and
exists at a more partner-specific level. Macromotives groups. Interpersonal behavior and social interac-
are relationship-specific solutions that can regulate tion can be explained in terms of transformation of
individuals’ behavior when dealing with a fairly motivation, the process by which agents (individu-
wide range of specific interdependence problems. als or groups) reconceptualize specific patterns of
For example, commitment and partner-specific interdependence and act on the basis of broader
trust can be construed as long-term orientations interaction goals, such as the pursuit of long-term
that lead individuals to engage in MaxJoint trans- goals or consideration of a partner’s outcomes.
formation in situations of moderate to low corre- The power of the theory also stems from its capa-
spondence. That is, the committed and trusting bility to integrate diverse subfields such as close
individual may fairly automatically accommodate relationships, prosocial behavior, negotiation pro-
rather than retaliate when a partner engages in a cesses, organizational behavior, and intergroup
potentially destructive act, or may fairly unthink- behavior. Interdependence theory provides a way
ingly exhibit willingness to sacrifice desirable out- to analyze structurally parallel situations across
comes for the good of a partner or a relationship. subfields because it emphasizes underlying situa-
Transformations are often different for groups tional structures that are universal to all interper-
and individuals as agents. The interindividual– sonal phenomena.
intergroup discontinuity effect documents that
Paul A. M. Van Lange and Joel H. K. Vuolevi
intergroup interactions are more competitive than
interindividual interactions. Evidently, then, groups See also Commons Dilemma; Cooperation and
engage in a more competitive transformation Competition; Group Task; Interindividual–Intergroup
of motivation than do individuals. While the origi- Discontinuity; Negotiation and Bargaining; Prisoner’s
nal effect was demonstrated in the context of the Dilemma; Social Dilemmas; Trust
Intergroup Anxiety 465

Further Readings about feeling the opposite of anxious—comfort-


Kelley, H. H., Holmes, J. W., Kerr, N. L., Reis, H. T., able and at ease).
Rusbult, C. E., & van Lange, P. A. M. (2003). People experience intergroup anxiety because of
An atlas of interpersonal situations. New York: a cognitive appraisal that intergroup interactions
Cambridge University Press. will have negative consequences. The potential
Kelley, H. H., & Thibaut, J. W. (1978). Interpersonal negative consequences include negative psycho-
relations: A theory of interdependence. New York: logical outcomes for the self (e.g., being confused,
John Wiley. feeling incompetent or vulnerable), negative behav-
Rusbult, C. E., & van Lange, P. A. M. (2003). ioral outcomes for the self (e.g., being taken advan-
Interdependence, interaction, and relationships. tage of or physically harmed), negative evaluations
Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 351–375. from the outgroup (e.g., being rejected or ridiculed
Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social by members of the outgroup), and negative evalu-
psychology of groups. New York: John Wiley. ations from the ingroup (e.g., being disapproved of
van Lange, P. A. M. (1999). The pursuit of joint by members of the ingroup for “associating” with
outcomes and equality in outcomes: An integrative members of the outgroup). Intergroup anxiety
model of social value orientation. Journal of plays a crucial role in intergroup relations because
Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 337–349. it affects the way people feel, think, and act during
van Lange, P. A. M., Otten, W., De Bruin, E. M. N., & intergroup interactions. This entry examines the
Joireman, J. A. (1997). Development of prosocial, causes and consequences of intergroup anxiety,
individualistic, and competitive orientations: Theory then looks at strategies for reducing it.
and preliminary evidence. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 73, 733–746.
Wildschut, T., Pinter, B., Vevea, J., Insko, C. A., & Causes of Intergroup Anxiety
Schopler, J. (2003). Beyond the group mind: A
The degree to which people experience intergroup
qualitative review of the interindividual–intergroup
anxiety depends on their previous experiences with
discontinuity effect. Psychological Bulletin, 129,
698–722.
outgroup members, their expectations concerning
Wolf, S. T., Insko, C. A., Kirchner, J. L., & Wildschut, T. the conditions under which their future interac-
(2008). Interindividual–intergroup discontinuity in the tions with outgroup members will occur, and their
domain of correspondent outcomes: The roles of perceptions of outgroup members. People who
relativistic concern, perceived categorization, and the have had previous negative experiences, few posi-
doctrine of mutual assured destruction. Journal of tive experiences, or no experiences with outgroup
Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 479–494. members experience more intergroup anxiety than
those with extensive prior positive experiences
with outgroup members. For example, if a person
felt uncomfortable or threatened during previous
Intergroup Anxiety interactions with members of an ethnic outgroup,
that person will probably feel the same way in
Intergroup anxiety is the anxiety people feel future interactions.
when interacting with members of social groups In addition to previous experiences, expecta-
different from their own (i.e., outgroups). For tions about future interactions also affect inter-
example, American employees who travel to group anxiety. In general, people who expect their
Japan for work might be worried that they will future intergroup interactions to be voluntary,
unintentionally offend their Japanese counter- cooperative, or pleasant are likely to have less
parts. In essence, then, intergroup anxiety is a intergroup anxiety than people who expect future
negative feeling or affective state. It is usually interactions to be competitive, superficial, or
measured by asking people the degree to which unpleasant. For instance, a person who is about
they would expect to experience anxiety-related to be in a work situation with a member of
emotions, such as feeling uncomfortable, ner- another group will probably express less anxi-
vous, and anxious, during interactions with out- ety when anticipating a cooperative interaction than
group members (counterbalanced with questions when anticipating a competitive situation.
466 Intergroup Anxiety

People’s perceptions of the other group and Moreover, when people are experiencing inter-
themselves also influence intergroup anxiety. group anxiety, they are more likely to rely on their
People who believe that their own group is dis- stereotypic beliefs, which may explain why they
similar to the outgroup or that their own group is are less likely to remember the unusually friendly
superior to the outgroup report higher levels of behavior of an outgroup member. Reliance on ste-
intergroup anxiety. Also, people who strongly reotypes often prevents people from noticing infor-
identify with their own group—those who define mation that contradicts their stereotypes, and it
themselves by their membership in the ingroup— increases the likelihood that they will misinterpret
experience higher levels of intergroup anxiety. or fail to remember behaviors that are inconsistent
Negative stereotypes of the outgroup also can with their stereotypes.
lead people to be anxious when anticipating an Also, in intergroup interactions, people with
interaction with an outgroup member. For exam- high levels of intergroup anxiety tend to perceive
ple, if a Black person believes that Whites are outgroup members as very dissimilar to themselves
typically hostile and untrustworthy, that person and interpret the interaction itself as difficult. The
will probably experience intergroup anxiety when consequence of perceiving, remembering, or inter-
anticipating an interaction with someone new who preting intergroup interactions as less than positive
is White. may affect future intergroup interactions, because
people who believe that their previous intergroup
interactions have been negative experience high
Consequences of Intergroup Anxiety
levels of intergroup anxiety.
Intergroup anxiety affects people’s attitudes, cogni- When their attention is drawn away from the
tions (e.g., perceptions, interpretations, and memo- situation and focused internally on managing and
ries), and behaviors (e.g., aggression or avoidance). coping with anxiety, people experiencing inter-
Experiencing higher levels of intergroup anxiety group anxiety often become more concerned than
leads people to have more negative evaluations usual with how they are being perceived by others
(attitudes) of outgroup members—that is, to be (ingroup or outgroup members). They are also
more prejudiced toward them. Specifically, it has likely to attempt to reduce the anxiety. For exam-
been found that people who experience higher lev- ple, people who experience intergroup anxiety are
els of intergroup anxiety report more hatred and less likely to disclose information about themselves
hostility, as well as less acceptance and warmth, during intergroup interactions. They may also ter-
toward outgroup members than people who expe- minate the interaction sooner than if they were not
rience lower levels of intergroup anxiety. experiencing intergroup anxiety. In addition, the
When people are experiencing intergroup anxi- experience of intergroup anxiety may augment
ety, they focus their attention on that anxiety and their other emotions regarding outgroup members,
pay less attention to the details of intergroup interac- such as annoyance and fear. People’s concern for
tions. With attention drawn away from the situation, how others perceive them, desire to terminate the
people are more likely to rely on information- anxiety, and experience of augmented emotions all
processing shortcuts (heuristics) in perceiving, help to explain why intergroup anxiety affects
interpreting, and remembering the behaviors of their behaviors, and why in some cases, these
others than they otherwise would. People experi- behaviors are amplified or exaggerated in inter-
encing high levels of intergroup anxiety tend to group interactions.
perceive outgroups as homogeneous, which pre- Typically, intergroup anxiety leads ingroup
vents these people from noticing the individuality members to behave in more negative and aggressive
of members of other groups. For instance, if two ways toward the outgroup (e.g., by acting impa-
groups are interacting and one person from the tient, annoyed, or worse) than they otherwise
outgroup behaves in an especially friendly manner would. However, in some circumstances, inter-
(e.g., smiles more, gives more compliments), people group anxiety can lead people to behave in unusu-
experiencing high levels of intergroup anxiety may ally positive ways toward outgroup members. For
not remember the friendly member of the outgroup example, when people wish to appear to be unprej-
and may believe all the members are unfriendly. udiced, intergroup anxiety may lead them to behave
Intergroup Anxiety 467

in especially positive and accommodating ways Unfortunately, positive intergroup interactions


(e.g., by initiating conversation or making eye con- may not occur naturally, and persuading people
tact more often). Due to intergroup anxiety, how- who experience high levels of intergroup anxiety
ever, these positive behaviors may not appear to be to seek out intergroup interactions and attempting
entirely natural, and people who want to appear to ensure that their intergroup interactions will be
unprejudiced may instead be seen by outgroup experienced and remembered as positive may
members as overly soliticious, condescending, or prove to be difficult. It seems likely that creating
just plain awkward. Members of the outgroup may the conditions specified by the contact hypothesis
also perceive this exaggerated positive behavior as (e.g., equal status, cooperative activity, interaction
an attempt to compensate for prejudicial attitudes. of individuals), which have been shown to improve
The negative behaviors, exaggerated positive intergroup relations generally, would also lead to
behaviors, and overall awkwardness created by reductions in intergroup anxiety by providing con-
anxiety during intergroup interactions may make trolled conditions in which positive intergroup
the outgroup members uncomfortable, perhaps interactions can occur.
increasing their intergroup anxiety and negatively In addition, helping people change their cogni-
influencing their behaviors. Thus, the negative or tive appraisals of the expected outcomes of inter-
awkward behavior of the ingroup could lead to a group interactions should help reduce intergroup
self-fulfilling prophecy in which their behavior anxiety. To change these expectations, it may be
leads the outgroup members to feel anxious and necessary to understand what negative outcomes
behave in some of the negative ways that were are expected and address them in advance. For
originally anticipated by the ingroup members. example, people who expect to feel confused or
Although intergroup anxiety can influence a incompetent during intergroup interactions may
person’s behavior during an intergroup interac- benefit from an intervention that helps them
tion, one of the most detrimental consequences of learn about the culture of the other group or
intergroup anxiety is simply the avoidance of inter- learn how to communicate more effectively. In a
actions with outgroup members. People who similar manner, people who believe that out-
anticipate experiencing a great deal of intergroup group members are untrustworthy or who expect
anxiety tend to avoid intergroup interactions alto- to be taken advantage of may benefit from inter-
gether. For instance, students who have higher ventions that help them feel more in control of
levels of anxiety about interacting with foreign the interaction.
nationals at their university will be less likely to
initiate contact with them. This leads to negative
Directions for Future Research
consequences, as avoiding interactions with out-
group members prevents people from having After more than 20 years of research, a substantial
potentially positive experiences that could lead to amount of knowledge about the causes and conse-
reductions in their intergroup anxiety. quences of intergroup anxiety has been acquired.
Yet, there is much to be learned. For example,
attempts to reduce intergroup anxiety through the
Reducing Intergroup Anxiety
use of intergroup relations programs have pro-
and Improving Intergroup Relations
duced mixed results, and further research is needed
There is considerable evidence that lower levels of to determine what program characteristics reduce
intergroup anxiety are associated with more positive intergroup anxiety. Also, we need a full under-
intergroup relations and less avoidance of intergroup standing of the causal interplay between intergroup
interactions, which suggests that one way to improve anxiety and cognitions, emotions, and behaviors. It
intergroup relations is to reduce intergroup anxiety. seems likely that in many instances causality runs
In particular, research indicates that positive inter- in both directions.
group contact is associated with lower levels of Thus, negative stereotypes may create intergroup
intergroup anxiety. For instance, people who have anxiety, but intergroup anxiety may contribute to
friendships across group boundaries report less the creation of negative stereotypes. However,
intergroup anxiety than those who do not. very little is known about how the behaviors of
468 Intergroup Contact Theory

people who experience high levels of intergroup Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (1985). Intergroup
anxiety affect the cognitions, emotions, and behav- anxiety. Journal of Social Issues, 41(3), 157–175.
iors of outgroup members. More research is Tausch, N., Tam, T., Hewstone, M., Kenworthy, J., &
needed about these topics as well as about what Cairns, E. (2007). Individual-level and group-level
types of people are most prone to experience inter- mediators of contact effects in Northern Ireland: The
group anxiety and how this anxiety is affected by moderating role of social identification. British
structural relations between groups. For example, Journal of Social Psychology, 46, 541–556.
it seems likely that power relations between groups Wilder, D. A. (1993). The role of anxiety in facilitating
stereotypic judgments of outgroup behavior. In D. M.
affect intergroup anxiety, but this topic has received
Mackie & D. L. Hamilton (Eds.), Affect, cognition, and
limited attention.
stereotyping: Interactive processes in group perception
Also, because intergroup anxiety is dynamic
(pp. 213–238). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
and changes over time and across situations, it
would be valuable to know what situational fac-
tors influence the experience of intergroup anxiety.
The answers to these questions will provide a Intergroup Contact Theory
deeper understanding of intergroup anxiety and
should make it possible to design effective inter- When people from different groups meet, what
ventions to reduce intergroup anxiety and ulti- are the effects? That is the question that inter-
mately improve intergroup relations. group contact theory sets out to answer. This
C. Lausanne Renfro and Walter G. Stephan theory predicts the effects on participants’ inter-
group attitudes and behavior when members of
See also Identification and Commitment; Intergroup two distinguishable groups interact. What was
Contact Theory; Self-Fulfilling Prophecy; Stereotyping originally a modest “hypothesis” put forward by
Gordon Allport in 1954 has developed into a full-
Further Readings blown theory of considerable complexity.
Popular opinion on the subject is split. Some
Islam, M. R., & Hewstone, M. (1993). Dimensions of
hold that contact between groups only causes con-
contact as predictors of intergroup anxiety, perceived
flict; “good fences make good neighbors” is their
outgroup variability, and outgroup attitude: An
contention. Others believe intergroup interaction is
integrative model. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 19, 700–710.
an essential part of any remedy for reducing preju-
Littleford, L. N., Wright, M. O., & Sayoc-Parial, M. dice and conflict between groups. So this intensively
(2005). White students’ intergroup anxiety during studied area of social psychology is marked by con-
same-race and interracial interactions: A multimethod troversy and is directly relevant for such policy
approach. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 27(1), issues as desegregation and affirmative action. This
85–94. entry looks at how intergroup contact theory devel-
Paolini, S., Hewstone, M., Voci, A., Harwood, J., & oped, explores related findings, reviews critiques,
Cairns, E. (2006). Intergroup contact and the and summarizes future implications and policy.
promotion of intergroup harmony: The influence of
intergroup emotions. In R. Brown & D. Capozza History and Background
(Eds.), Social identities: Motivational, emotional, and
cultural influences (pp. 209–238). New York: The newly emerging discipline of social psychol-
Psychology Press. ogy of the 1930s and 1940s soon began to study
Plant, E. A., & Devine, P. G. (2003). The antecedents intergroup contact. This interest followed from
and implications of interracial anxiety. Personality the field’s emphases on intergroup relations and
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(6), 790–801. interactions between people. Researchers often
Stephan, W. G., Renfro, C. L., Esses, V. M., Stephan, exploited field situations of unfolding intergroup
C. W., & Martin, T. (2005). The effects of feeling change. Thus, after the racial desegregation of the
threatened on attitudes toward immigrants. U.S. Merchant Marine in 1948, it was found that
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 29(1), the more voyages the White seamen took with
1–19. Blacks, the more positive their racial attitudes
Intergroup Contact Theory 469

became. Similarly, White police in Philadelphia studies on intergroup contact that could be located.
who worked with Black colleagues differed sharply It found 516 studies with more than 250,000 sub-
from other White police. They objected less to jects from 38 nations and obtained a mean correla-
Blacks joining their previously all-White police tion (r) between contact and prejudice of –.21. It
districts, teaming with a Black partner, and taking also found that 95% of the studies report a nega-
orders from qualified Black officers. tive relationship between contact and prejudices of
In 1947, the Social Science Research Council many types. That is, greater contact is associated
asked sociologist Robin Williams to review what with less prejudice.
was known about group relations. In his report, Before we can accept this finding, however,
Williams presented the initial formulation of inter- three alternative explanations must be examined.
group contact theory. He stressed that many vari- First, there is the participant selection problem.
ables influence a contact’s effects on prejudice. In Instead of optimal contact reducing prejudice, the
particular, he held that intergroup contact will opposite causal sequence could be operating:
maximally reduce prejudice when (1) the two Prejudiced people may avoid contact with out-
groups share similar status, interests, and tasks; groups and tolerant people may seek such contact.
(2) the situation fosters personal, intimate inter- Indeed, this reverse causal path has often been
group contact; (3) the participants do not fit found, but research using a variety of methods has
the stereotyped conceptions of their groups; and found that the contact-to-reduced-prejudice path is
(4) the activities cut across group lines. generally the stronger causal sequence. Second,
By 1950, research had tested the theory more there is the publication bias problem. Published
rigorously. Major studies of racially segregated studies may form a biased subset of the studies
and desegregated public housing projects by New actually conducted, as the statistical significance of
York researchers provided the strongest evidence. a study’s results influences the probability of its
Striking differences emerged in interviews of White being submitted and published. This points out the
“housewives” in the two sets of projects. The danger that only contact studies with positive
desegregated White women had far more optimal results will be published. However, there are now
contact with their Black neighbors, held them in numerous ingenious methods to test for such
higher esteem, and expressed greater support of a publication bias, and they did not signal such a
interracial housing. The intimacy and frequency of bias in the contact meta-analysis.
the interracial contact were also important. A third potential problem concerns the quality
Armed with Williams’s initial effort and the rich of contact research. If less rigorous research were
findings of the New York studies, Allport intro- largely responsible for the relationship between
duced in The Nature of Prejudice the most influen- contact and prejudice, researchers would hesitate
tial statement of contact theory, which guided to accept it as established. But if the more rigorous
contact research for five decades. He noted the studies produce stronger contact effects, it would
contrasting effects of intergroup contact, which lend credibility to the results. The contact meta-
usually reduced but sometimes exacerbated preju- analysis showed the latter trend. More rigorous
dice. To explain these findings, Allport adopted a and recent research yielded higher mean correla-
“positive factors” approach. Reduced prejudice tions, with experimental studies producing a mean
will result, he held, when four positive features of correlation of –.33.
the contact situation are present: (1) equal status Moreover, many types of intergroup prejudice
of the groups in the situation, (2) common goals, have been studied and found to be lessened by
(3) intergroup cooperation, and (4) the support of contact, including subtle as well as blatant preju-
authorities, law, or custom. dice, and implicit association as well as direct
measures. There is, however, great heterogeneity
in effect sizes, with such affective measures as lik-
Does Intergroup Contact
ing revealing significantly larger effects than such
Typically Reduce Prejudice?
cognitive indicators as stereotypes. Moreover,
A major meta-analysis answered this question majority participants in the contact typically yield
by combining the results of all the 20th-century larger average effects than minority participants.
470 Intergroup Contact Theory

These positive effects emerged not only for the models are now integrated into a single
racial and ethnic target groups for whom the model. For example, if one adopts a time-
original theory was devised, but also for other, sequence perspective, all could operate in inter-
often stigmatized groups, such as homosexuals group contact over time. Thus, in a rough
and people with physical and mental disabilities. sequence, the decategorization strategy seems
This wide applicability suggests that contact effects optimal initially to ease threat; then the categori-
may be linked to such basic processes as the mere zation strategy seems necessary to establish the
exposure effect. Experimenters have repeatedly generalization of effects; and, finally, the com-
shown that greater exposure to targets, in and of mon ingroup identity and dual-identity options
itself, can significantly enhance liking for those become viable once the intergroup interaction has
targets. Work on the relationship between expo- been firmly established.
sure and liking indicates that uncertainty reduction
is an important mechanism underlying the
Generalization of the Effects
phenomenon.
The meta-analysis also revealed that Allport’s If contact effects do not generalize beyond the
optimal contact conditions facilitated, but were immediate situation, then intergroup contact is of
not essential to, the decrease in prejudice. These limited value. Consequently, social psychologists
results and their policy implications have initiated have sought to understand whether intergroup
a focused effort to understand the process and contact effects generalize to the entire groups
maximize its established effect. involved, to new situations, and even to outgroups
not involved in the original contact situation.
The meta-analysis found that contact effects
Explanatory Models
typically do generalize to the entire groups involved.
Four different models for the process have been Following the Hewstone–Brown categorization
advanced. Marilynn Brewer and Norman Miller model, this finding suggests that most intergroup
proposed a decategorization model, which holds contact involves an effective degree of group cate-
that optimal intergroup contact reduces the salience gorization. Ingroup participants come to like the
of the group categories while it encourages an outgroup participants, and this generalizes to more
interpersonal orientation instead of an intergroup acceptance of the outgroup itself. Prejudice reduc-
one. Samuel Gaertner and John Dovidio proposed tion is not the only indication of this outgroup
that optimal intergroup contact will result when acceptance; greater trust and a more differentiated
the original two groups develop a common ingroup view of the outgroup also often emerges.
identity. Later these theorists revised their model Contact effects from one contact situation also
and proposed a dual-identity model in which the typically generalize to new contact situations. And
original group identities are retained within several studies have shown that reduced prejudice
the new superordinate group (“different groups on against one outgroup can generalize to other out-
the same team”). groups that were not involved in the original con-
Finally, Miles Hewstone and Rupert Brown tact. Thus, Germans who have had positive contact
offered a categorization model in which the origi- with Turks reveal more favorable attitudes not
nal group memberships retain a sufficient degree only of Turks but also of West Indians, a group
of salience, with an intergroup orientation operat- that does not live in Germany.
ing instead of an interpersonal one. These theorists How could this happen? One proposal involves
had generalization as their primary concern. deprovincialization; that is, coming to like and
Maximum generalization to the whole group trust an outgroup makes you less provincial about
occurs when the outgroup participants in the con- your own group. This new view of your ingroup
tact are perceived as prototypical of their group, may open you up to accepting other outgroups—
and this is only possible when the initial group even those with whom you have never had con-
categories are sufficiently salient. tact. This type of broad generalization may
Although these models appear to conflict, require some degree of similarity between the two
there is research support for each of them, and outgroups.
Intergroup Contact Theory 471

When and How Do These optimal conditions for positive contact effects: It
Contact Effects Occur? typically involves cooperation and common goals
as well as repeated equal-status contact over an
Allport’s optimal conditions specify when inter-
extended period and across varied settings.
group contact is likely to have positive effects. His
Friendship also facilitates self-disclosure, and self-
situational specifications all moderate the contact
disclosure is an important mediator of intergroup
and prejudice relationship. More recent research
contact’s positive effects.
has uncovered additional moderators: Prejudice is
Contact theorists have long stressed the role
more likely to be diminished when intergroup con-
intimacy plays in reducing prejudice. And research
tact is not superficial and group salience is suffi-
studies throughout the world have uncovered the
ciently high.
special power of cross-group friendships to dimin-
To answer how intergroup contact generally
ish intergroup prejudice and distrust. Moreover,
has positive effects, investigators have searched for
such friendships lead to strong, positive attitudes
the effect’s mediators. Allport’s original idea was
toward the outgroup that are especially accessible
that contact led to greater knowledge of the out-
and resistant to change. Consider research con-
group, and this cognitive change in turn lessened
ducted in Northern Ireland. It found that inter-
prejudice. But research shows that knowledge is a
group friendship engendered forgiveness and trust
minor mediator. More important are two broad
of the other religious group even among Catholics
classes of largely affective mediators. One type
and Protestants who suffered personally from the
involves positive predictors of prejudice that opti-
province’s sectarian violence.
mal contact reduces; the other involves negative
predictors of prejudice that optimal contact
increases. Physiological evidence shows that posi- Indirect (or Extended) Contact Effects
tive intergroup contact alleviates anxiety over
Intergroup contact can also trigger a process of
interacting with outgroup members. This decrease
indirect effects. Studies in Germany, Northern
in anxiety in turn decreases prejudice. Other nega-
Ireland, and the United States demonstrate that sim-
tive emotions, such as fear, anger, and particularly
ply having ingroup friends who have outgroup
threat to the ingroup, can also serve as mediators
friends relates to diminished prejudice. Recalling bal-
that intergroup contact alleviates.
ance theory, the friend of my friend is my friend. This
Positive contact also enhances empathy for the
phenomenon is partly a result of changing norms.
outgroup and adoption of the outgroup’s perspec-
Seeing your friend have contact with an outgroup
tive. One begins to sense how outgroup members
person helps to make it normatively acceptable.
feel and view the world. This increase in empathy
But the changed attitudes produced by indirect
and perspective taking diminishes prejudice.
contact are not as strong as those from direct con-
Intergroup contact can also increase other media-
tact; that is, the new attitudes from indirect contact
tors that decrease prejudice—such as positive
are not held with the same degree of certainty and
intergroup emotions.
can be changed more easily. Nevertheless, indirect
In addition, intergroup contact itself can act as
contact effects are important for those who live in
an important mediator for major predictors of
segregated areas and have no outgroup friends; and
prejudice that develop early in life. For instance,
it may act to prepare them for later direct contact.
contact mediates in part the universal finding that
authoritarianism predicts prejudice. Authoritarians
carefully avoid intergroup contact, and this con- Negative Intergroup Contact Effects
tributes to their rejection of outgroups.
Not all intergroup contact reduces prejudice. Some
situations engender enhanced prejudice. Such
The Importance of Cross-Group Friendship
negative intergroup contact has received less
The contentions of intergroup contact theory research attention, but renewed consideration of
are further supported by the special importance the issue has shed light on this phenomenon.
of cross-group friendship in promoting positive Negative contact typically involves situations
contact effects. Friendship invokes many of the where the participants feel threatened and did not
472 Intergroup Contact Theory

choose to have the contact. These situations fre- intergroup contact in reducing intergroup ten-
quently occur in work environments where inter- sions. First, they often hold that separation is an
group competition exists. effective means of reducing intergroup conflict,
Given the existence of these negative contact situ- but walls and segregation have historically failed.
ations, why does the meta-analysis on intergroup Consider the repeated failures of “fences” from
contact report such generally positive effects? Several the Great Wall of China and Scotland’s Hadrian’s
factors explain this apparent puzzle. First, surveys Wall to the more recent examples of the Berlin
with probability samples demonstrate that respon- Wall, the Green Line of Cyprus, and Israel’s new
dents report far more positive than negative inter- West Bank Wall. “Good neighbors” hardly
group contact. These results may seem surprising resulted from any of these prominent experi-
since negative contacts are often publicized, while the ments with “good fences.”
more numerous positive contacts go unrecognized or More important, critics focus on the problem of
are not viewed as newsworthy. But they help to establishing effective intergroup contact in the first
explain why contact leading to increased prejudice is place after centuries of intergroup strife and dis-
so relatively rare in the research literature. crimination. This point, of course, raises a separate
Second, the effects of negative intergroup con- issue that intergroup contact theory was not ini-
tact are moderated by whether the participant has tially designed to address. Yet the criticism is well
entered the contact freely. When the contact taken. To be relevant for social policy, intergroup
involves voluntary contact, the effects of negative contact theory must be expanded to include how
contact are far smaller than when the contact to bring past adversaries together in optimal con-
involves involuntary contact—again suggesting the tact situations.
importance of threat. Third, those who have lots
of intergroup contact tend to report both positive
Future Directions
and negative contact; and they tend to reveal less
prejudice comparable to those who report only Despite the rapid progress of intergroup contact
positive contact. Given these factors, the role of theory and research, there is still much to be done.
negative intergroup contact may not be as crucial Numerous directions for future work are indi-
as critics have assumed. cated. First, there is a continuing need to specify
the processes of intergroup contact that explain its
many effects. This is a call for continued efforts to
Criticisms of Intergroup Contact Theory
determine the many mediators and moderators
Some critics of intergroup contact theory seem not that are involved beyond those already uncovered
to understand the theory. They mistakenly believe and to integrate them. Second, a greater focus on
that intergroup contact theory simply predicts posi- negative contact is required. Cross-group interac-
tive outcomes under all conditions. But important tion that leads to increased prejudice has not been
criticisms have been leveled by more informed crit- studied systematically. Third, rather than just a
ics. For instance, Hugh Forbes, a political scientist, situational phenomenon, intergroup contact needs
maintains that intergroup contact often lowers to be placed in a longitudinal, multilevel social
prejudice at the individual level of analysis but fails context. Thus, not just personal friends but the
to do so at the group level of analysis. Hence, he social networks in which people are enmeshed
argues that contact can cure individual prejudice but must be considered. Researchers now possess the
not group conflict. Social psychologists take issue statistics and computing software to achieve this
with Forbes’s distinction. If reductions in prejudice goal. Fourth, more study of contact’s lasting effects
generalize broadly from intergroup contact, the on actual intergroup behavior is needed. Finally,
group level of analysis is necessarily involved. more direct applications to social policy are needed
Many critics are from nations, such as in which the intergroup contact is viewed within
Northern Ireland and South Africa, that have specific institutional settings. This initiative would
witnessed intense ethnic conflict in the past. include addressing the problem that critics raise of
They raise two interesting points that compel a how to bring old enemies together to achieve suc-
broader perspective in considering the role of cessful intergroup contact.
Intergroup Emotions Theory 473

Policy Implications ingroup), which could be a committee, a frater-


nity, or a national, ethnic, or religious group, the
Specialists specifically deny that intergroup contact
group membership becomes part of the psycho-
is a panacea for intergroup conflict. But it is clear
logical self. Like any aspect of the self, the group
that cross-group contact is an essential, if insuffi-
therefore attains emotional significance. As a
cient, component for lasting remedies. Strict segre-
result, when people think of themselves as group
gation between groups, limiting positive intergroup
members, they appraise social objects (such as
contact, has failed around the globe. From the
competing groups) or events (such as group suc-
southern United States and Israel to India and
cesses or failures) in terms of their implications for
South Africa, intergroup separation guarantees
their group. Appraisals of the situation as positive
smoldering resentment and eventual conflict.
or negative, certain or uncertain, deserved or
Active structural remedies to achieve equal group
undeserved (and so on) result in the experience of
access to high-quality education, good jobs, and
distinct emotions, such as anger at a rival group’s
comfortable housing necessarily involve intergroup
threatening behavior or pride at a success experi-
contact in multigroup societies.
enced by one’s ingroup. These emotions (like all
Thomas Fraser Pettigrew emotions) are in turn linked to desires or tenden-
cies to take specific types of action. For example,
See also Authoritarian Personality; Decategorization; anger at a rival group may produce a desire to
Extended Contact Effect; Intergroup Anxiety; attack that group or its members. The unique
Prejudice aspect of this conceptualization is that emotions
are produced by appraisals of situations in terms
of their implications for the ingroup as a whole,
Further Readings
not implications for the individual group member.
Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, Therefore, intergroup emotions can be generated
MA: Addison-Wesley. even when the individual is not personally affected
Brown, R., & Hewstone, M. (2005). An integrative by the situation in any way.
theory of intergroup contact. Advances in Intergroup emotions are distinct from emotions
Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 255–343. experienced on the basis of empathy with other
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Reducing people. When our national team wins an Olympic
intergroup bias: The common identity model. medal, we do not feel happy because the individual
Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press. members of the team are feeling happy and we
Pettigrew, T. F. (1998). Intergroup contact theory. empathize with them as individuals. Rather, we
Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 65–85. feel happy because the victory is a positive event
Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic for our national ingroup, a group that helps define
test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of
our own self.
Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751–783.
Williams, R. M., Jr. (1947). The reduction of intergroup
tensions. New York: Social Science Research Council. Historical Perspective
In its broadest context, intergroup emotions theory
renews a focus on emotions as key components in
prejudice and intergroup relations. Even casual
Intergroup Emotions Theory observation suggests that intense emotions are fre-
quently aroused in situations of intergroup conflict.
Intergroup emotions theory, developed by Eliot Emotions based on underlying psychodynamic con-
Smith, Diane Mackie, and their collaborators, flicts were postulated as contributing to prejudice
focuses on the role of emotions in prejudice and by theories of authoritarianism, popular in the
intergroup behavior. The fundamental idea under- 1950s, but received less emphasis over time as psy-
lying the theory, borrowed from social identity chologists in general turned away from psychody-
theory and self-categorization theory, is that when namic approaches and came to favor more cognitive
people identify with an important social group (an viewpoints. Thus, from the 1960s and 1970s
474 Intergroup Emotions Theory

onward, prejudice and negative intergroup relations by breaking down inaccurate negative stereotypes of
were thought to depend largely on stereotypes (i.e., the outgroup, as is often assumed; stereotypes play
beliefs, often negative, about the characteristics of little or no role in mediating effects of contact once
outgroups) and on cognitive processes favoring group-based emotions are taken into account.
positive differentiation of the ingroup from compet- Second, research has found that general group-
ing outgroups. In these conceptualizations, emo- based emotions (i.e., reports of how satisfied, anx-
tions played at best a secondary role. By the 1990s, ious, proud, disgusted, and so forth people feel as
however, there was a resurgence of theoretical and an American or a member of another group) dis-
empirical interest in emotion throughout psychol- play a distinct pattern, compared to the emotions
ogy. Intergroup emotions theory fits with this that the same people report feeling as individuals.
renewed emphasis on the role of emotions. This finding demonstrates that the shift from an
individual to group identity is associated with a
change in general feeling states.
Focused Versus General Emotions
Third, positive group-based emotions as well as
Individual emotions can be experienced in response anger directed at an outgroup are experienced
to a specific object or event, such as fear at the more strongly by people who identify more strongly
sight of a snake or joy upon opening a much- with the ingroup—that is, for whom the group
desired birthday gift. In addition, people can constitutes a more significant and meaningful part
experience individual-level emotions that are more of the self. In contrast, negative emotions (other
general and less focused. That is, people may than anger at the outgroup) are only weakly
report feeling relaxed, anxious, depressed, ener- related to group identification. This suggests, as
gized, excited, or annoyed as a general affective other research has shown, that people who identify
state, not linked to any specific object or event. strongly with the group are motivated to reappraise
Emotions based on group memberships include and reevaluate situations in order to avoid feeling
the same two types. Intergroup emotions may be negative group emotions such as anxiety, dissatis-
focused on specific group-relevant events (disap- faction, or guilt.
pointment at a group’s failure, guilt regarding the Fourth, when a number of members of the same
group’s historical wrongdoings) or objects (such ingroup (e.g., Americans, men, women, or students
as anger, fear, or disgust toward threatening out- at a given university) are asked to report the gen-
groups). Group-based emotions may also be more eral emotions they feel as members of the group,
general, corresponding to feeling excited, proud, their responses tend to converge toward a group-
worried, or irritable when considering oneself as a typical profile of emotions. Thus, group emotions
group member. Research regarding intergroup are socially shared to some extent: Levels of hap-
emotions theory has examined both of these types piness, anxiety, guilt, and so on are more similar
of group-based emotions. when people report their emotions as members of
a common ingroup than when they report the
same emotions as individuals. This convergence is
Evidence Supporting
found to be stronger for people who identify more
Intergroup Emotions Theory
with the group, as would be expected.
Several types of evidence support key postulates of Fifth, patterns of group emotions, as specified in
the theory. First, it is well established that a history the theory, do predict group-relevant attitudes and
of positive, friendly contact with members of an behavioral tendencies, such as tendencies to sup-
outgroup reduces prejudice against that outgroup. port and affiliate with fellow ingroup members, to
Research shows that this effect is mediated by inter- attack or confront outgroup members, or to avoid
group emotions. That is, a history of friendly con- the outgroup. Notably, individual emotions are
tact with members of a racial outgroup leads to largely ineffective in predicting these types of
increases in positive emotions and decreases in nega- behavioral tendencies, supporting the fundamental
tive emotions toward the outgroup. In turn, these tenet of intergroup emotions theory that group-
emotions are associated with reduced levels of prej- based (rather than individual) emotions play the
udice. Notably, contact does not reduce prejudice key role in directing group-relevant actions.
Intergroup Empathy 475

Sixth, group emotions play a regulatory role by that the changes in emotions are not merely super-
motivating and reinforcing appropriate group- ficially learned responses, but meaningful feelings
relevant behavior. For example, anger motivated that actually drive behavior.
by an outgroup dissipates when confrontational
action is taken against the group, and the anger is Eliot R. Smith and Diane M. Mackie
replaced with satisfaction. If, however, confronta- See also Collective Guilt; Intergroup Anxiety; Prejudice;
tional behavior does not occur, anger toward the Self-Categorization Theory; Social Identity Theory
outgroup remains high and increased anger may
also be directed at the ingroup until it takes appro-
priate action. In this way group-level emotions, Further Readings
like individual emotions, regulate and are regu- Frijda, N. H., Kuipers, P., & ter Schure, E. (1989).
lated by emotion-triggered behavior. Relations among emotion, appraisal, and emotional
action readiness. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 57(2), 212–228.
Conclusion Mackie, D. M., Devos, T., & Smith, E. R. (2000).
In summary, two key insights arise from inter- Intergroup emotions: Explaining offensive action
group emotions theory and the research that has tendencies in an intergroup context. Journal of
been conducted to date to support the theory. One Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 602–616.
is differentiation: Members of a group are likely to Mackie, D. M., Maitner, A. T., & Smith, E. R. (2009).
feel distinct emotions toward different outgroups Intergroup emotions theory. In T. D. Nelson (Ed.),
or toward the same group on different occasions. Handbook of prejudice, stereotyping, and
These emotions, which might include anger, fear, discrimination. New York: Psychology Press.
Mackie, D. M., & Smith, E. R. (Eds.). (2002). From
disgust, resentment, or even positive emotions
prejudice to intergroup emotions: Differentiated
such as pity and sympathy, constitute qualitatively
reactions to social groups. Philadelphia: Psychology
different types of reactions to outgroups that will
Press.
be associated with different types of behavior. For
Smith, E. R. (1993). Social identity and social emotions:
example, fear or disgust may lead to avoidance of Toward new conceptualizations of prejudice. In D. M.
the outgroup, whereas anger may lead to confron- Mackie & D. L. Hamilton (Eds.), Affect, cognition, and
tation and attack. Prejudice against an outgroup is stereotyping: Interactive processes in group perception
not simple negativity or antipathy; rather, it can (pp. 297–315). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
take multiple, highly differentiated forms. Smith, E. R., & Mackie, D. M. (2006). It’s about time:
The second insight is that shifts in identity from Intergroup emotions as time-dependent phenomena. In
one group membership to another, or from an R. Brown & D. Capozza (Eds.), Social identities:
individual to a group identity, produce shifts in Motivational, emotional, cultural influences
appraisals, emotions, and emotion-driven behav- (pp. 173–187). New York: Psychology Press.
iors. It has long been known that people tend to Smith, E. R., Seger, C. R., & Mackie, D. M. (2007). Can
act in somewhat different ways when a group emotions be truly group-level? Evidence regarding
membership is salient, and to hold distinct patterns four conceptual criteria. Journal of Personality and
of attitudes. Complementing those findings, inter- Social Psychology, 93, 431–446.
group emotions theory holds that emotions are
similarly enabled and patterned by group identi-
ties. The implication is that emotions are tied to a
psychological identity, susceptible to rapid shifts Intergroup Empathy
over time, rather than to a stable, unchanging bio-
logical entity. When shifting from thinking about Intergroup empathy occurs when members of
oneself as American to thinking about oneself as a one social group identify with the emotions or
woman, for instance, one’s experienced emotions perspectives of members of another social group.
will shift. In addition, group-relevant behavioral Empathy plays a crucial role in intergroup rela-
tendencies (such as actions toward non-Americans, tions because it helps members of groups with
or toward men) change accordingly—indicating differing worldviews, interests, and histories to
476 Intergroup Empathy

develop an understanding of one another. Empathy concern. These emotions generally lead to improve-
holds great promise as a means of improving ments in intergroup relations. However, personal
intergroup relations because of its potential to distress responses are composed primarily of nega-
reduce prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimina- tive feelings, such as anxiety, threat, and revulsion.
tion. It is not a simple panacea, however, but Personal distress often leads to a distancing between
rather a complex and subtle process involving ingroup and outgroup members and, as a result, is
cognitive, affective, and communicative elements unlikely to lead to improvements in intergroup
that develop over time. Understanding the causes relations.
and consequences of intergroup empathy will One especially complicated personal distress
make it possible to facilitate interactions between response is guilt, which may occur when a person
members of different groups and refine intergroup perceives that injustices experienced by the out-
relations programs. This entry describes the con- group were caused by his or her ingroup. Guilt
cept and looks at related research as well as some might motivate actions to redress the wrongs
practical implications. against the outgroup, but it could also lead to
defensive avoidance.
The two types of affective empathy are not
Types of Intergroup Empathy
mutually exclusive and can occur simultaneously.
There are three distinct types of intergroup empa- An ingroup member may experience positive
thy: cognitive, affective, and behavioral. Cognitive re­active empathy, such as compassion for the suf-
empathy refers to the ability to see the world from fering of an outgroup member, while at the same
the perspective of a member of another group (i.e., time feeling the parallel emotional reaction of
an outgroup). It is useful in acquiring knowledge resentment toward his or her ingroup for causing
about the cultural practices, norms, values, beliefs, the suffering. Mixed emotions elicited while expe-
standards, and views of outgroup members. Thus, riencing emotional empathy may be confusing to
cognitive empathy can make an outgroup seem less ingroup members and limit the degree to which
alien and lead to humanizing and individualizing improvements in intergroup relations occur.
outgroup members, thereby reducing cognitive Intergroup empathy also has a behavioral com-
biases in intergroup perception. ponent. Behavioral empathy involves overtly com-
There are two subtypes of affective empathy: municating a comprehension of or insight into
parallel empathy and reactive empathy. Parallel an outgroup member’s experiences or emotional
empathy occurs when an ingroup member experi- reactions. An outward show of concern in word and
ences emotions similar to those being experienced deed in response to another’s suffering would be an
by the outgroup member, although often of lower example of the communicative aspect of empathy.
intensity. For instance, if an outgroup member is
feeling depressed and this leads the ingroup mem-
Research Findings
ber to feel a corresponding sadness, that is parallel
empathy. Parallel empathy can involve identifying Although it is clear that there are individual differ-
with others’ hopes and joys as well as their anger, ences in empathy, it is equally clear that contextual
fear, and pain. factors can activate or inhibit empathy in most
In reactive empathy, the emotional response of people. As is true for empathy in general, it is most
the ingroup member differs from that of the out- likely that individual ability in intergroup empathy
group member. For example, if an outgroup mem- has a developmental trajectory because it is acquired
ber is suffering due to discrimination and an gradually over time. Recent studies of twins have
ingroup member feels sorrow in response to that found that environmental factors, such as parental
person’s plight, that is reactive empathy. In the socialization, play a more important role in the
context of others’ suffering, reactive empathy can development of general empathic abilities than
involve two contrasting affective responses: com- genetic factors. It also appears that experiences
passion and personal distress. Compassion-related with empathy have a cumulative effect—the more
responses are composed of emotions that are posi- frequently empathy is experienced, the more
tive in nature, such as sympathy, kindness, and empathic the individual becomes.
Intergroup Empathy 477

Research indicates that when intergroup empa- individual attitudes and behavior, thereby contrib-
thy is activated in people, more favorable attitudes uting to improvements in intergroup relations. For
toward the outgroup often result. This finding has example, interacting with an individual from a
been obtained for a variety of outgroups, including disadvantaged group, such as the disabled, may
ethnocultural groups, people with terminal illness, activate compassionate reactive empathy leading
homeless people, and even prisoners on death row. to a concern for the individual outgroup member,
However, researchers have found that empathy which may then generalize to the outgroup as a
may not reduce attitudinal bias toward groups in whole. Likewise, a person’s anger toward his or
which membership is seen as transitory and under her ingroup that is created through parallel empa-
individual control; for instance, empathy does not thy due to the injustices suffered by an ethnic out-
reduce negative attitudes toward obese people, group can lead to a reappraisal of more general
apparently because obesity is thought to be both beliefs, such as beliefs in a just world.
temporary and under these people’s control.
Empathy has also been shown to play a role in
promoting prosocial and preventing antisocial Practical and Policy Implications
behavior. For example, in situations where people Because of its potential beneficial influence on atti-
experience empathic concern, they are likely to tudes, emotions, and behavior, empathy is often an
engage in prosocial (i.e., altruistic) behavior. explicit element of programs designed to improve
Research indicates that people who are experienc- intercultural relations, intergroup relations, diver-
ing empathy for others allocate more resources to sity in the workforce, and conflict resolution skills.
them. In contrast, a lack of empathy is associated For instance, in multicultural education programs,
with a greater willingness to inflict pain and suffer- information regarding the similarities and differ-
ing on others (e.g., sexual aggression, child abuse, ences between various racial, ethnic, and cultural
and violence). One study found that adolescent groups is presented from the perspective of each
sexual offenders had low levels of empathy for group. Intergroup dialogue programs provide
their victims. members of two groups that have a history of con-
Because empathy can create conflicts between flict, such as Muslims and Christians, with an
individuals’ prior attitudes, emotions, and behav- opportunity to discuss their own experiences and
iors and their current attitudes, emotions, and listen to the experiences of others. Participation in
behaviors, it can lead to cognitive dissonance. For such groups has been shown to increase empathy.
instance, when an ingroup member experiences a Likewise, participants in multiethnic cooperative-
positive empathic connection with a member of a learning groups display an increase in empathy.
previously disliked outgroup, a discrepancy is cre- For intergroup empathy to fulfill its promise as
ated between his or her prior attitude and current a tool to improve intergroup relations, there are
positive emotional response to the other. To reduce many questions that remain to be answered. Do
the internal conflict created by this dissonance, an the different types of empathy have different con-
individual may change the attitude so that it is in sequences for intergroup cognitions, emotions,
accord with the positive valence of his or her and behaviors? What are the most effective tech-
empathic response. Yet, there is also a danger that niques of teaching empathy? At what ages can it be
feelings of dissonance may lead to the dismissing or employed? What types of situations are most likely
downplaying empathic reactions to make current to activate it? How can the pitfalls of defensiveness
behavior consistent with prior negative attitudes. and personal distress responses be avoided? Are
Empathy does not operate in isolation, but there other types of empathy that need to be exam-
rather can be viewed as an intervening variable ined? And, finally, how long do its effects last and
that helps to explain a complex web of causation how can enduring effects be maximized? As the
between situational experiences and their ultimate answers to these questions emerge, intergroup
effects. Intergroup contact, intergroup relations empathy will come to play an ever more prominent
training, or acquiring knowledge of outgroup role in our understanding of intergroup relations.
members may create intergroup empathy. This
empathic response can then lead to changes in Marisa Mealy and Walter G. Stephan
478 Intergroup Violence

See also Collective Guilt; Dehumanization/ up to the present day, the inability to prevent
Infrahumanization; Intergroup Anxiety; Intergroup intergroup violence poses perhaps the greatest
Contact Theory; Intergroup Emotions Theory challenge to humanity. This entry begins by pro-
viding some background information on inter-
group violence, particularly from an evolutionary
Further Readings
and historical perspective. It then describes a num-
Batson, C. D., Polucarpou, M. P., Harmon-Jones, E., ber of factors that have been shown to cause and
Imhoff, H. J., Mitchener, E. C., Bednar, L. L., et al. increase the likelihood of intergroup violence, and
(1997). Empathy and attitudes: Can feeling for a discusses remedies that hold promise as interven-
member of a stigmatized group improve feelings tions to reduce intergroup violence and prevent
toward the group? Journal of Personality and Social escalation into its most extreme forms.
Psychology, 72, 105–118.
Dovidio, J. F., ten Vergert, M., Stewart, T. L., Gaertner,
S. L., Johnson, J. D., Esses, V. M., et al. (2004). Background and Origins
Perspective and prejudice: Antecedents and mediating There is considerable agreement among research-
mechanisms. Personality and Social Psychology ers that the formation of groups or coalitions of
Bulletin, 30, 1537–1549. individuals dates back to our prehuman ancestors.
Duan, C., & Hill, C. E. (1996). The current state of
What is more controversial, however, is whether
empathy research. Journal of Counseling Psychology,
early hominids engaged in intergroup violence and
43, 261–274.
whether this violence should be viewed as evolu-
Stephan, W., & Finlay, K. (1999). The role of empathy in
tionarily adaptive. One position suggests that early
improving intergroup relations. Journal of Social
Issues, 55(4), 729–743.
groups used violent means to defend or extend
their territory, thus increasing their inclusive fit-
ness. The position’s proponents point to archeo-
logical evidence, and evidence of intergroup
violence among modern chimpanzees, our closest
Intergroup Violence living relatives, as supporting the position, and
they suggest that competition for scarce resources,
Intergroup violence is aggressive behavior com- particularly food and reproductive females, lay at
mitted by one group against another that causes the heart of this aggressive behavior.
or is intended to cause physical and/or psycho- An alternative position is that the archeological
logical harm. Intergroup violence takes place at evidence does not speak to the intergroup nature
the group level; it involves individuals within a of violence, and that early hominids benefited
group taking into account group interests and act- more from intergroup cooperation than conflict.
ing together at the group rather than individual According to this perspective, peaceful interactions
level. Because it occurs at the group level, inter- between neighboring groups entailed a significant
group violence is likely to be large scale and to fitness advantage in terms of allowing full utiliza-
have a direct impact on numerous individuals. tion of food resources along group borders that
This violence can take a variety of forms, includ- would otherwise need to be avoided, and peaceful
ing discrimination, deprivation, harassment, exchange of females for mating, without the costs
destruction of personal property, bodily injury, incurred by violent encounters.
and murder. In its most extreme form, intergroup It is difficult to definitively determine the validity
violence may constitute such large-scale destruc- of one position or the other because of the dearth
tion as ethnic cleansing and genocide. of available evidence. It is certainly the case, how-
Indeed, although humans have evolved as so­­ ever, that since the beginning of recorded history,
cial beings, and groups serve a variety of positive there have been accounts of intergroup violence,
functions for group members, the seemingly inevi- including raids on other groups, wars, and geno-
table nature of intergroup violence is a significant cide. These violent encounters were often described
negative consequence of group formation. One as involving competition over resources including
might even suggest that throughout history and land, wealth, and power. This presages the causes
Intergroup Violence 479

and precursors of intergroup violence identified by Thus, although intergroup violence may result
psychologists and other social scientists. from competition for relatively tangible resources,
such as land or economic resources, it can also be
Factors That Promote Intergroup Violence the result of perceived competition over relatively
intangible resources, such as religious dominance
Realistic Group Conflict and group status. For example, many instances of
As suggested in historical accounts of inter- intergroup violence seem to at least partially stem
group violence, one of the basic factors identified from competition between groups over establish-
as a cause of this violence is competition for ing which religious system holds more “truth,”
resources. Scarcity of resources, or the perception which value system will be followed in a region, or
that there are not enough resources to go around, which political system should be instated. In many
has been shown to lead to intergroup conflict and cases, competition between groups seems to occur
violent encounters. Competition for resources as a over both tangible resources and these more sym-
cause of intergroup conflict was first described by bolic resources, so that competition over a variety
psychologists under the rubric of realistic group of resources becomes the trigger for intergroup
conflict theory. This theory states that intergroup violence.
threat and conflict increase as perceived competi-
tion for resources increases between groups, and as Difficult Life Circumstances
the conflicting groups have more to gain from suc- and Authoritarianism
ceeding. In addition, the theory proposes that the
greater the intergroup threat and conflict, the more In general, difficult life circumstances have been
hostility is expressed toward the source of the described as frustrating basic human needs, lead-
threat. Finally, and of particular importance, the ing groups to turn against each other. For example,
theory suggests that when competition over economic crises within a society may lead to scape-
resources is present, proximity and contact increase goating—blaming an innocent group for the diffi-
intergroup hostility rather than decreasing it. culties. Groups are especially likely to be
scapegoated to the extent that they are viewed as
powerful and ill intentioned. Devaluation of the
Unified Instrumental Model of Group Conflict
group and exaggeration of the threat that it poses
Relatively recently, the unified instrumental then allow the scapegoat to be harmed without
model of group conflict has been developed to tie censure.
together the variety of factors that have been Political leaders and those who aspire to these
found to promote group competition and hence positions may take advantage of difficult life cir-
intergroup violence. This theory emphasizes that it cumstances within a group to boost their own
is not necessary that actual competition over tan- cause by blaming members of an outgroup and
gible resources exist in order for intergroup hostil- promoting intergroup violence. In this way, under
ity and violence to occur. Rather, it is the perception the guise of ingroup protection, they are able to
of competition that is crucial—the belief that when rally supporters, boost their own power, and pro-
one group gains, other groups necessarily lose out. mote the development of a strong ingroup iden-
This perception may be driven by situational fac- tity. When such identity leads group members to
tors, such as societal instability (e.g., economic believe that their group is superior to all others,
upheaval) and challenges to the status quo (e.g., a intergroup violence may be further legitimated on
group’s attempt to gain a larger share of the avail- the basis of obtaining and protecting group status.
able resources). It may also be driven by socially Individuals with high levels of authoritarianism
prevalent ideologies, particularly belief systems who are especially willing to obey authority fig-
that promote group dominance (e.g., the belief ures are the ones particularly likely to follow lead-
that one’s group is entitled to a larger share of ers who promote extreme behavior and thus
resources) and exclusive cultural worldviews (i.e., engage in intergroup violence. It is also the case
the belief that one’s cultural worldviews are better that when deindividuation occurs within groups
than others’ worldviews and hold more “truth”). (that is, when group members feel that they are
480 Intergroup Violence

not acting as individuals but instead experience an Strategies for Promoting


increased focus on their group identity), group Intergroup Harmony
members are especially likely to act on behalf of
In his 1995 book Long Walk to Freedom, former
their group, at times facilitating extreme forms of
president of South Africa and Nobel Peace Prize
intergroup violence.
laureate Nelson Mandela stated that, “People
must learn to hate, and if they can learn to hate,
Historical Inequality and Conflict they can be taught to love, for love comes more
naturally to the human heart than its opposite.”
A history of unequal group relations and prior These words by Mandela, which question the
conflict, whether recent or centuries ago, also has inevitability of intergroup conflict and put forward
the potential to promote intergroup violence and the possibility of intergroup harmony, seem incon-
to ensure that, once initiated, intergroup violence sistent with this entry’s discussion of intergroup
is likely to escalate. Groups may remember past violence. Although the discussion here suggests
conflicts through the generations and these con- that intergroup conflict has been a constant in
flicts, particularly the sense of having been mis- human history, there are reasons to believe in the
treated by another group, may become part of the promise of Mandela’s words. In this section, the
group lore. As a result of this sense of having been focus is on intergroup conflict resolution strategies
a “victim” of another group historically, group that have been shown to hold promise.
members may find it easy to justify violence
against that group as necessary to protect their
Intergroup Contact
own group.
An important strategy that can be used to
reduce intergroup conflict and violence is to
Dehumanization
increase contact between the conflicting groups.
Whether a cause of intergroup violence or a To be effective, however, contact must take place
means of justifying violence that has already been under clearly specified positive conditions. If mem-
initiated, extreme devaluation of a group to the bers of two groups are brought together by a sup-
point of dehumanization serves to allow inter- portive authority (e.g., a governmental body) to
group violence to continue unabated, without the engage in personal, cooperative, and equal status
normal constraints on harming fellow human interaction, then group differences can potentially
beings. Dehumanization involves viewing mem- be resolved and peace between the two groups can
bers of another group as less than human and thus be achieved. These specified positive conditions
not deserving of humane treatment. In the process have been shown to be essential for group contact
of dehumanization, groups may portray each other to promote intergroup harmony. If contact between
as animalistic and subhuman, and use terms such the two groups is not sanctioned by the governing
as “cockroaches,” “rats,” “gooks,” and “terror- body, is only superficial rather than personal, is
ists” to refer to them. When members of other characterized by competition between the groups,
groups are removed from humanity, they may be or allows one group to have more control or
excluded from the scope of justice and moral con- power than another in the intergroup communica-
sideration, so that violence against them is accept- tions, then hostilities can actually be exacerbated.
able. Thus, dehumanization plays an important Present-day South Africa and Rwanda illustrate
role in the escalation of intergroup violence and the benefits of using positive intergroup contact as
the legitimization of its most extreme forms, a means of reducing extreme violence between
including genocide. opposing groups. In the past, both countries have
Despite all of these factors that seem to point to been marked by large-scale intergroup violence.
the inevitability of intergroup violence, there are Apartheid in South Africa was characterized by
also remedies that have been shown to hold prom- fighting between White Afrikaners and groups of
ise in reducing intergroup violence and preventing oppressed people designated as Black, Colored, or
escalation into its most extreme forms. These rem- Indian. Long-term ethnic hostilities between the
edies are examined next. Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda led to a genocide in
Intergroup Violence 481

which the marginalized but majority Hutus killed undermine perceptions of intergroup competition
in 100 days more than 800,000 Tutsis as well as and actually change the functional relationship
Hutu “moderates” who opposed the massacre. between groups from one of opposition to one of
Intergroup contact was one strategy that these unity. Given that perceived competition is a key
countries implemented to promote reconciliation source of violence between groups (as discussed
and reduce intergroup violence. In both countries, earlier), reductions in perceived competition can
a governing body organized and supported inter- generate reductions in intergroup violence.
group contact and reconciliation. The Truth and
Reconciliation Commission in South Africa and
Common Ingroup Identity
the Gacaca tribunals in Rwanda facilitated the
coming together of the opposing factions. The gov- Through its promotion of cooperation and inhi-
erning bodies provided an opportunity for victims bition of perceived competition, positive interac-
and perpetrators to speak and to listen to each tion between groups can also inhibit processes that
other. Victims could tell about their suffering and encourage “us versus them” categorizations. As
losses. Perpetrators could admit their crimes, ask groups of people pool their efforts toward achiev-
forgiveness from their victims, and request amnesty ing a common goal, they are more likely to see
from prosecution. themselves as members of a superordinate or com-
In other words, victims and perpetrators were mon group (e.g., national group) than as two sepa-
brought together to engage in public but highly rate and competing groups (e.g., ethnic groups
personal discussions in which they had equal sta- within a nation). Because inherent in social catego-
tus to discuss the harm they had experienced or the rization processes is the tendency to perceive mem-
harm they had done. They were encouraged by the bers of one’s own group in a more positive light
governing body to share their experiences in order and as more varied than members of other groups,
to heal past intergroup hostilities, which could recategorization of smaller groups as part of a
otherwise become incorporated into the group lore larger group can greatly alter perceptions between
of being victim or perpetrator. Intergroup cooper- groups. As “they” become incorporated into
ation was emphasized by the commission. Victims “we,” a one-time enemy can become an ingroup
and perpetrators together were directed toward member and can be seen through the lens of posi-
the mutual goal of rebuilding their country and tive rather than negative biases.
working toward national peace and unity. Thus, with the basis of categorization changed
It is not yet possible to definitively conclude that to an inclusive identity that encompasses both
the reconciliation processes implemented in South groups, positive contact via cooperation can be a
Africa and Rwanda have been fully successful; powerful way to improve relations and reduce vio-
however, intergroup relationships have improved lence between groups. This strategy is being put
to some degree in both countries. The current into practice in Rwanda, where “Hutu” and
promise of these forms of reconciliation has led “Tutsi” are being deemphasized in favor of a
other countries to adopt similar processes to “Rwandan” superordinate identity.
reduce between-group conflict within their own
nations.
Individuation
In addition to promoting recategorization into a
Intergroup Cooperation
shared identity, positive contact can produce
There are several reasons why positive contact another important shift in identity: from group
between previously hostile groups may help pro- members to individuals. Because personalized
mote the reduction of intergroup violence. One intergroup contact exposes group members to oth-
important feature of positive intergroup contact is ers’ unique perspectives and experiences, it becomes
that it encourages cooperation between groups. apparent how each individual varies from other
Because cooperation shifts the attention from com- group members. Moreover, interpersonal interac-
peting goals between groups to a superordinate or tion enhances a focus on the individual rather than
common goal among groups, this process can the group and allows people to see others as
482 Interindividual–Intergroup Discontinuity

unique. In other words, intergroup contact can that ensures that the basic human needs of its citi-
reduce the salience of intergroup boundaries by zens are met is more likely to maintain peace
encouraging decategorization and reducing the among its constituents.
importance of a group membership such as ethnic- Although intergroup violence might seem to be
ity. Because decategorization shifts attention to an inherent part of human life, it need not be
individual rather than group identity, it also inevitable. People may be able to achieve inter-
reduces perceptions of intergroup competition and group harmony if they are given the opportunity to
can thereby reduce intergroup violence. engage in positive interactions and come to see oth-
Inducing people to see others as individuals ers as individuals who share a common humanity.
rather than members of oppositional groups can
have other benefits. The personalization of others Victoria M. Esses and Donna M. Garcia
can combat previous dehumanization practices See also Categorization; Cooperation and Competition;
that reduced opposing group members to “cock- Dehumanization/Infrahumanization; Genocide;
roaches” or “rats,” undeserving of moral consider- Intergroup Contact Theory; Realistic Group Conflict
ation. As people individualize or personalize others, Theory; Scapegoating; Social Dominance Theory
they are more likely to see these others as humans
who should be included rather than excluded from
the scope of justice. Further, as people personally Further Readings
interact and accept others’ humanity and individu-
ality, they are more able to engage in perspective Crisp, R. J., & Hewstone, M. (2006). Multiple social
taking, and put themselves in the others’ shoes. categorization: Processes, models, and applications.
New York: Psychology Press.
Being able to adopt the perspective of another
Esses, V. M., & Vernon, R. A. (Eds.). (2008). Explaining
allows people to experience empathy for the others’
the breakdown of ethnic relations: Why neighbors kill.
suffering and loss. When individuals experience
Malden, MA: Blackwell.
this emotion, they are more likely to engage in
Mandela, N. (1995). Long walk to freedom: The
positive, helping behaviors toward the targets of autobiography of Nelson Mandela. Boston: Little,
their empathy, rather than negative, harmful Brown.
behaviors. That is, seeing others as individuals can Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2005). Allport’s
reduce intergroup violence and promote helping intergroup contact hypothesis: Its history and
behaviors. These positive effects of decategoriza- influence. In J. F. Dovidio, P. Glick, & L. Rudman
tion reinforce the importance of personal contact (Eds.), On the nature of prejudice: Fifty years after
between group members. People from different Allport (pp. 262–277). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
groups need the opportunity to get to know each Staub, E., & Bar-Tal, D. (2003). Genocide, mass killing
other—to see each other as individuals—for their and intractable conflict: Roots, evolution, prevention
initial negative attitudes and stereotypes to be and reconciliation. In D. Sears, L. Huddy, & R. Jervis
changed. (Eds.), Handbook of political psychology (pp. 710–754).
New York: Oxford University Press.

Role of the State


The State has a potentially important role to
play in putting into place the conditions for pro-
moting intergroup harmony within a nation. Just as
Interindividual–Intergroup
political leaders can incite intergroup violence as a Discontinuity
means of furthering their own agendas, these lead-
ers may be able to do much to prevent intergroup The interindividual–intergroup discontinuity effect
conflict and advance cooperation. As indicated by is the tendency in some settings for relations
the contact hypothesis, for positive intergroup con- between groups to be more competitive, or less
tact to occur, the governing body must support and cooperative, than relations between individuals.
encourage cooperative, equal status interactions The discontinuity effect has been the subject of
between the groups. In addition, a strong civil State systematic research for a little over two decades,
Interindividual–Intergroup Discontinuity 483

but its history in intellectual thought spans centu- involve the isolated individual and the isolated
ries, as this entry shows. The entry also documents group. Rather, the appropriate test involves a con-
evidence from both laboratory and nonlaboratory trast between interindividual interactions and
contexts. Three questions are asked and answered intergroup interactions. Research on interindividu-
regarding the discontinuity effect. First, what is al–intergroup discontinuity has examined this
the generality of the effect across different situa- contrast in laboratory and nonlaboratory settings,
tions and samples? Second, what are the psycho- both of which are discussed in this entry.
logical mechanisms responsible for the effect?
Third, what are possible ways of reducing the
Laboratory Evidence
effect and promoting intergroup cooperation?
Most of the laboratory research has structured the
social interaction with the use of the prisoner’s
Historical Background
dilemma game (PDG). With the PDG, each of two
The question of whether individuals are prone to players, A and B, has two choices, X and Y, yield-
behave in a more hostile, competitive, and aggres- ing a total of four possible choice combinations.
sive manner when banded together in a group can Each choice combination yields a unique set of
be traced through centuries of intellectual history. payoffs or outcomes for the two players. If both A
Plato placed his faith in the rule of an enlightened and B select X, they both receive a moderate pay-
individual (the Philosopher King) rather than in off, say $3. If, on the other hand, one player selects
democracy because he believed that democracy Y while the other player selects X, the player who
offers power to irrational mobs. In the Federalist chose Y, whether A or B, may receive $4 and the
Papers, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and other player may receive only $1. Finally, if both
John Jay expressed a similar wariness of groups in players select Y, they may both receive $2.
the political arena. They were particularly con- The 2 x 2 matrix of four choice combinations
cerned with safeguarding the rights of political thus presents a dilemma. Either A or B can improve
minorities and placing checks on the power of the outcome by selecting Y, but if both A and B are
majorities. guided by self-interest, they will receive less than
In a similar vein, the first systematic treatises of could have been obtained by mutual X choices.
group psychology, formulated in the late 19th and The X choice is a cooperative choice, and the
early 20th centuries, proposed that people assembled Y choice is sometimes referred to as a competitive
in a group are apt to act more instinctively, more or defecting choice. If the Y choice is motivated by
primitively, and more destructively than are isolated greed, or a concern with improving the outcome,
individuals. Gustave LeBon, for example, argued the competitive label is appropriate. However, if
that because people behave differently in groups the Y choice is motivated by fear, or a concern for
than they do in isolation, they are clearly caught in minimizing a possible reduction in the payoff
the sway of a crowd mind—a mental entity that resulting from the other player’s Y choice, the
takes possession of group members. Floyd Allport is defecting label is appropriate.
well known among social scientists for his critique The PDG models situations in which individual
of this crowd-mind concept. Nevertheless, in his selfishness can lead to collective detriment. The
later writings, Allport referred to the difference PDG and N-person generalizations of the PDG
between individual and group behavior as the mas- have been used as abstract representations of such
ter problem of social psychology. actual-life problems as military confrontation,
Much work has since focused on comparing the political disputes, consumption of natural resources,
task performance of individuals and groups, as provision of public services, competitive advertising
illustrated by research on social facilitation, indi- and pricing in business, and resource distribution
vidual versus group problem solving, social loaf- within organizations. Laboratory research has dem-
ing, and brainstorming. However, when the goal onstrated that when individuals communicate prior
of research is to determine whether groups are to each PDG trial, they tend to be fairly coopera-
more hostile, competitive, and aggressive than tive. This communication has sometimes involved
individuals, the most useful comparison does not face-to-face meeting, sometimes exchanging notes,
484 Interindividual–Intergroup Discontinuity

and sometimes talking through an intercom. significantly smaller in the latter case. It occurred
However, groups that are required to reach within- when the PDG was substituted by a functionally
group consensus regarding the X or Y choice on equivalent set of rules governing the exchange of
each trial have generally been found to be less folded origami products.
cooperative, or more competitive. Typically the Research has also examined the role of the cor-
communication between groups has involved the relation between the outcomes for the two players
meeting of group representatives, but as with indi- across the four cells of the PDG matrix. The more
viduals, sometimes it has involved exchanging negative this correlation, the greater the conflict of
notes or talking through an intercom. interest between the players. With the PDG, the
correlation is always negative, but the degree of
Nonlaboratory Evidence negativity can be manipulated. Research has found
that as the correlation becomes more negative (and
The nonlaboratory research has had participants higher outcomes for one player are increasingly
record in diaries all social interactions in which associated with lower outcomes for the other
they were involved that fell into one of five catego- player), intergroup competitiveness and the dis-
ries: one-on-one (participant interacting with continuity effect increases.
another individual); within-group (participant Still, the effect also occurred in the game of
within a group interacting with other group mem- Chicken, for which the correlation between play-
bers); one-on-group (participant interacting with a ers’ outcomes is slightly positive. The effect did not
group); group-on-one (participant within a group occur in two other well-known experimental
interacting with an individual); and group-on- games: Leader and Battle of the Sexes. These
group (participant within a group interacting with games are characterized by a strong positive cor-
another group). After classifying each social inter- relation between players’ outcomes, and they
action, participants then evaluated the interaction allow players to maximize outcomes by coordi-
as cooperative or competitive. Data collected over nated alternation of X and Y choices. Finally, the
a number of days revealed that one-on-one and effect occurred when interindividual interactions
within-group interactions were less competitive, or were contrasted with interactions between group
more cooperative, than one-on-group, group-on- leaders, even when these leaders could not interact
one, and group-on-group interactions. with the other members of their group. Within-
group communication, therefore, is not a neces-
Three Questions sary condition for the effect.
What Is the Generality of the Effect?
What Are the Possible Mechanisms
Research on the generality question has found
Producing the Effect?
that the discontinuity effect occurred among both
male and female participants. It occurred not Research has sought to understand what dif-
only in the United States but also in Europe and ferences between interindividual and intergroup
Japan. It occurred when groups were composed relations could account for the finding that inter-
of two, three, four, or five participants. It occurred group relations are often more competitive. In
when monetary payoffs were relatively small or considering this question, it is important to
large, when monetary payoffs were positive or remember why either player might in the context
negative, and when payoffs were points rather of a PDG select the competitive, or defecting,
than money. It occurred when communication Y choice. One possible reason for selecting Y is
between sides was present or absent, although the the self-interest, or greed, associated with receiv-
effect was significantly smaller in the latter case. ing the highest possible payoff ($4 in the above-
It occurred when communication was face- described example). Another possible reason is
to-face, involved the exchange of notes, or the fear of receiving the lowest possible payoff
involved talking through an intercom. It occurred ($1). Greed is based on the expectation that the
when participants expected to interact only other player will select X and is therefore vulner-
once or multiple times, although the effect was able to exploitation. Fear, however, is based on
Interindividual–Intergroup Discontinuity 485

the expectation that the other player will select Y Another possible approach to reducing the dis-
and therefore poses a threat. continuity effect is to encourage group members
To date, evidence for five different explanations to think beyond the immediate situation to the
of the discontinuity effect has been obtained. One of long-term consequences of their behavior. Research
these centers on the greater fear in intergroup than has found that when participants are told to
in interindividual relations. The remaining explana- expect multiple interactions with the other player
tions center on the greater greed in intergroup than (as compared to a single interaction only), the
in interindividual relations. First, the schema-based discontinuity effect is reduced by a decrease in
distrust, or fear, explanation suggests that there is intergroup competition.
greater distrust in intergroup than in interindividual Finally, there is evidence that intergroup coop-
interactions because the actual or anticipated inter- eration increases in matrices where outcomes
action with a group activates learned beliefs and associated with mutual competition are markedly
expectations that groups are relatively competitive, low compared to matrices where such outcomes
deceitful, and aggressive. Second, the social-sup- are higher. This finding is consistent with the doc-
port-for-shared-self-interest explanation suggests trine of mutual assured destruction, which relies
that, unlike separate individuals, group members on deterrence to promote cooperation. Note that
can and do obtain active support for a competitive all these approaches relate to outcomes; it is just
choice. Third, the identifiability explanation pro- that mutual assured destruction points to a way to
poses that the group context provides a shield of avoid a drastic reduction in outcomes, consider-
anonymity allowing group members to avoid per- ation of long-term consequences points to a way
sonal responsibility for a selfish, competitive choice. to increase outcomes over time, and tit-for-tat can
Fourth, the ingroup-favoring-norm explanation be said to combine the concerns with increasing
suggests that membership in a group implies norma- and not decreasing outcomes. Of these three
tive pressure to act so as to benefit the ingroup. approaches, the emphasis on long-term conse-
Finally, the altruistic-rationalization hypothesis pro- quences is potentially the least confrontational
poses that group members can rationalize their self- and carries with it the obvious advantage of not
benefiting competitiveness as flowing from a concern flirting with mutual disaster.
for benefiting ingroup members.
Tim Wildschut and Chester A. Insko

How Can the Effect Be Reduced by See also Cooperation and Competition; Crowds;
Increasing Intergroup Cooperation? Interdependence Theory; Intergroup Violence;
Prisoner’s Dilemma; Realistic Group Conflict Theory;
Research has identified a number of possible Social Identity Theory
approaches to reducing the discontinuity effect by
increasing intergroup cooperation. One way of
achieving this is by responding to groups (and indi- Further Readings
viduals) with a tit-for-tat strategy. A tit-for-tat Insko, C. A., Kirchner, J. L., Pinter, B., Efaw, J., &
strategy selects the cooperative choice on the first Wildschut, T. (2005). Interindividual–intergroup
trial, and on subsequent trials reciprocates which- discontinuity as a function of trust and categorization:
ever choice the other player made on the preceding The paradox of expected cooperation. Journal of
trial. Research has demonstrated that when indi- Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 365–385.
viduals and groups are confronted with a tit-for- Wildschut, T., & Insko, C. A. (2007). Explanations of
tat strategy (as compared with a naïve other interindividual–intergroup discontinuity: A review of
player), the discontinuity effect is reduced by a the evidence. European Review of Social Psychology,
decrease in intergroup competition. Tit-for-tat is 18, 175–211.
thought to promote intergroup cooperation because Wildschut, T., Pinter, B., Vevea, J. L., Insko, C. A., &
it is both firm and fair, that is, it undermines the Schopler, J. (2003). Beyond the group mind: A
role of greed because it cannot be exploited for any quantitative review of the interindividual–intergroup
period of time, and it undermines the role of fear discontinuity effect. Psychological Bulletin, 129,
because it will not initiate competition. 698–722.
486 Islamophobia

Western societies was a paper and a subsequent


Islamophobia book, The Clash of Civilization (1993), written by
Samuel Huntington. Huntington argued that future
Islamophobia is a phobic reaction of non-Islamic conflicts in a globalized world would be fought
people toward Muslims, as well as feelings of between the Western and Islamic worlds. Although
negative emotions such as anger and contempt heavily criticized as clichéd, Huntington’s ideas
toward Islam and Muslims. The term is derived contributed to Western fears of the Islamic East.
from the Greek word phobos, denoting overanxi- The term Islamophobia was first formally intro-
ety in relation to an object (such as being more duced in the late 1980s in Great Britain to distin-
anxious about Muslims than is justified by real- guish public discourse about xenophobia (the
ity). In social psychology, the meaning of the general fear and dislike of people from other coun-
term is even broader; it may refer to rejection tries) from the increasing enmity directed specifi-
and devaluation of Islam and Muslim people cally toward Muslims after the Iranian revolution
and may be synonymous with prejudice against in 1979. Such fears dramatically intensified after
Muslim people. In recent years, Islamophobia the terrorist attacks in the United States on
has become a more prominent topic in political September 11, 2001, and the subsequent attacks in
and social debates. This entry briefly outlines Madrid in 2004 and London in 2005. These attacks
the history of Muslim–Christian history and its were said to have been supported by Islamist extrem-
effect on Islamophobia describes some social ists. Since September 2001, the public discourse in
psycho­logical causes that explain the emergence politics and in the media has distinguished between
of Islamophobia, and identifies ways to prevent or “Islamic beliefs” (referring to a religious orientation)
reduce Islamophobic attitudes. and “Islamist behaviors,” which are seen as the
result of an extremist religious ideology.
Historical Background
Psychological Causes of Islamophobia
Islamophobia is associated with a long history of
conflict that distinguishes Islamophobic prejudice A scientific understanding of the causes of
from many other types of bias. Although the term Islamophobic attitudes has to take into account
Islamophobia was coined relatively recently, nega- the specific historical background of East–West
tive attitudes toward Muslims in the Western relations. Islamophobic prejudice can also be
world have been observed for centuries, dating traced to personality, intergroup, and societal fac-
back to the different Arabic and Osmanic occupa- tors. Two of the most prominent personality vari-
tions of larger parts of southern Europe from the ables related to Islamophobia are authoritarianism
early 8th to the 19th century. During the colonial and social dominance orientation. Highly authori-
period, however, the Islamic world was largely tarian people tend to emphasize conventionalism,
dominated by European rulers. These historical which includes adhering to traditional religious
conflicts shaped collective memories with embed- beliefs (in the context of Islamophobia, Christian
ded threat on both sides. beliefs), rejecting deviants such as religious minor-
After World War II and the decline of the colo- ities, and supporting aggression against such out-
nial empires that followed in the late 1940s, mil- siders, or outgroups. Very socially dominant people
lions of Islamic immigrants from North Africa and support inequality between different groups, thus
the Middle and Far East settled in Europe, Australia, upholding an ideology that justifies the devalua-
and North America. These immigrants from for- tion of the Islamic religion and its followers.
mer European colonies had access primarily to Beyond personality variables, feelings of inter-
low-skilled jobs and were paid rather poorly. As a group threat play a prominent role in Islamophobia.
consequence of this ethnic and religious stratifica- The feelings of threat associated with Islamophobia
tion, the native and the immigrant populations have a number of psychological origins. Walter
were also residentially segregated. Stephan and his coworkers have distinguished
One of the milestones in the Western public between realistic and symbolic threat experienced by
debate on the relationship between Muslim and people when confronted with an outgroup. According
Islamophobia 487

to their analyses, the level of Islamophobia is directly focus especially on intergroup relations bring stu-
related to the extent that people feel their physical dents from different ethnic and/or religious groups
security or their culture and their way of living is together to work in small working groups to solve
threatened by the influence of the Islamic culture. a specific problem. To ensure cooperation, a dif-
Currently, many forms of outgroup rejection, ferent piece of the needed background information
such as xenophobia and anti-Semitism, do not is distributed to each working group member; this
come from people’s experiences so much as from way, the working group can only adequately solve
images and stereotypes transported by the media. its problem if each participant shares his or her
This also holds true for Islamophobia. The media unique piece of knowledge.
often contribute to feelings of threat through the Because of Islamophobia’s long history and its
portrayal of dramatic terrorist attacks (e.g., in continuous reinforcement in recent public, politi-
New York, Washington, Madrid, and London) or cal, and scientific debates in Western societies,
more local stories about Muslims, such as a Islamophobia has increasingly become a collective
Muslim thief captured by the police, protests of attitude pattern in the Western world. Its wide-
Muslim parents against school swimming lessons spread distribution in different societies and social
for girls, and rumors about plans of a Muslim contexts makes Islamophobia a very special kind of
community to build a new mosque in the neigh- prejudice. Thus, changing Islamophobic attitudes
borhood. In other words, threats often originate and ideologies will require not only psychological
from indirect exposure to Muslims through media interventions but also political and societal endeav-
reports, which can depict Muslims in different ors that counteract negative Western political pro-
ways. For example, either the media can present paganda and media images. The successful public
their news about a deviant minority member in a intervention of American and European politicians
rather neutral manner, deemphasizing the Islamic against impending hostility toward Muslims imme-
religious and cultural differences, or they can diately after September 11 and the later attacks are
describe the situation in a way that gives the examples of good practice in this field.
impression that the deviance displayed is typical of
the Muslim outgroup. Ulrich Wagner and Jürgen Leibold
A critical societal reason for Islamophobia See also Authoritarian Personality; Immigration;
involves the segregation of Muslims, which limits Intergroup Anxiety; Intergroup Contact Theory;
intergroup contacts. Outgroup rejection is stronger Prejudice; Racism; Social Dominance Theory;
when group members have only a little or no con- Terrorism; Xenophobia
tact with outgroup members. In other words, peo-
ple with non-Islamic backgrounds who have
personal contact with Muslims are generally more Further Readings
accepting and positive in their attitudes toward
Huntington, S. (1993). The clash of civilizations? Foreign
Muslims. In addition, those who have personal con-
Affairs, 72, 44–57.
tact with Muslims also tend to be more resistant to
Pettigrew, T. F. (1998). Intergroup contact: Theory,
political propaganda against Muslims and Islam.
research and new perspectives. Annual Review of
Psychology, 49, 65–85.
Prevention and Reduction of Islamophobia Sheridan, L. P. (2006). Islamophobia pre- and post-
September 11th, 2001. Journal of Interpersonal
Intergroup contact is a primary way of preventing Violence, 21, 317–336.
or reducing Islamophobia. As specified by contact Slavin, R. E., & Cooper, R. (1999). Improving intergroup
theory, Islamophobia is most effectively reduced relations: Lessons learned from cooperative learning
when the members of the different groups pursue programs. Journal of Social Issues, 55, 647–663.
a common goal in a cooperative way, with equal Stephan, W. G., Ybarra, O., Martinez, C. M.,
status, and with the support of authorities. These Schwarzwald, J., & Tur-Kaspa, M. (1998). Prejudice
preconditions for effective intergroup contact are toward immigrants to Spain and Israel: An integrated
realized, for example, in cooperative school teach- threat theory analysis. Journal of Cross-Cultural
ing programs. Cooperative learning programs that Psychology, 29, 559–576.
J
lead members of underprivileged groups (such as
J-Curve Hypothesis the proletarian working class) to realize that they
have “nothing to lose but their chains” and there-
The J-curve hypothesis is one of the best-known fore rise up in a desperate attempt to better their
theoretical attempts in sociology and political sci- living and working conditions. By contrast, de
ence to specify the conditions under which per- Tocqueville believed that overwhelming oppression
ceived victims of injustice will rise up against the only bursts into rebellion when there is a glimmer
social system to engage in collective rebellion. of light at the end of the tunnel. Davies endeavored
First proposed by James C. Davies in 1962, it sug- to integrate insights from both of these perspec-
gests that social and political unrest is most likely tives, hypothesizing that revolutions would be most
to occur when a prolonged period of improvement likely to occur when a period of improvement is
in living conditions is followed by a brief but followed by a sharp worsening of circumstances.
sharp period of decline. Davies sought to illustrate the explanatory
The basic argument is that persistent growth power of the J-curve hypothesis in several paradig-
and improvement leads people to develop psycho- matic cases, including Dorr’s Rebellion of 1842, in
logical expectations that things will continue to get which it seemed that a period of industrial prosper-
better. When such expectations are suddenly ity in Rhode Island was followed by an economic
thwarted, people experience an intolerable gap depression, causing an uprising against the govern-
between what they have come to expect and the ment on the part of frustrated workers. Davies also
realities of their circumstances. At this point, argued that the events surrounding the Russian
Davies suggested, people are most likely to engage Revolution of 1917 adhered to the pattern predicted
in revolutionary activity. This entry looks at the by the J-curve hypothesis. Until 1905, Russians had
historical context of this idea, compares it to other enjoyed the benefits of several decades of rapid
theories, and examines some of its weaknesses. industrial growth and greater political emancipa-
tion, before being confronted with a severe down-
turn in economic circumstances (due in part to war
Background and History
with Japan) and a return to political repression. The
In an article entitled “Toward a Theory of rapidly increasing gap between the people’s subjec-
Revolution,” Davies sought to expound on the tive expectations of continued economic and politi-
writings of two prominent political thinkers, Karl cal development and the objective reality of strict
Marx and Alexis de Tocqueville, who offered deprivation imposed by the czarist regime, accord-
seemingly alternative visions of the causes of col- ing to Davies, led Russian workers and intellectuals
lective violence. In The Communist Manifesto, to band together in the revolutionary effort that
Marx claimed that long-lasting deprivation would succeeded in abolishing czarism in 1917.

489
490 J-Curve Hypothesis

Soon after the publication of Davies’s article in In an impressive series of cross-national studies,
1962, the J-curve hypothesis became one of the Gurr and his collaborators showed that both
most (if not the most) popular of the social scien- short-term economic deprivation and long-term
tific accounts of revolutionary antecedents. The strains, such as social and economic discrimina-
basic logic of the hypothesis was incorporated into tion, contribute to an increased likelihood of
several versions of relative deprivation theory. The political insurrection. They also found that larger
central tenet of relative deprivation theory, shared group-based inequalities, including differential
by proponents of the J-curve hypothesis, is that opportunities for advancement of various social
collective frustration results from the failure to groups, can intensify feelings of envy and frustra-
meet subjective rather than objective standards. tion directed against those who are privileged.
However, relative deprivation theorists have These feelings can also create elevated and often
offered significantly more complicated explana- unrealistic expectations of redress on the part of
tions of political violence arising from the frustra- underprivileged groups.
tion that is believed to accompany the sudden The role of intergroup dynamics in the arousal
thwarting of rising expectations. of political violence remains unclear, however, as
most of the research conducted to investigate the
J-curve hypothesis has not systematically differen-
The J-Curve and Relative Deprivation Theory
tiated between what Gary Runciman and others
Due to the theoretical overlap between relative have referred to as egoistic deprivation—the feel-
deprivation theory and the J-curve hypothesis, ing of personal deprivation relative to other indi-
social scientists have disagreed about how closely viduals, and fraternalistic deprivation—the feeling
the two theories are related. Davies made no direct of group deprivation relative to other groups.
reference to relative deprivation theory in his
groundbreaking article, but many of the most
Weaknesses of Research
influential statements of the theory were published
on the J-Curve Hypothesis
after he wrote the article. In any case, relative
deprivation theory addresses how objective social The J-curve hypothesis has received little empirical
situations are translated into subjective feelings of support that can be considered unequivocal. Many
deprivation; it also examines the effects of depriva- of the studies attempting to support it have been
tion and frustration on consequential behaviors criticized for having imprecise theoretical concep-
such as political violence. As a result, some of the tualizations and inadequate empirical assessments.
most prominent researchers of relative deprivation The J-curve hypothesis focuses on the rising and
theory have directly relied on the J-curve hypoth- falling of the subjective expectations of individu-
esis, treating it as an apt description of one specific als, but research has generally made use of archival
manifestation of relative deprivation. sources of data containing no direct measures of
For example, in his 1970 book Why Men Rebel, individual expectations.
Ted Gurr argued that feelings of relative deprivation For example, Gurr estimated feelings of depriva-
arise from a perceived discrepancy between what tion on the basis of objective measures such as
“is” and what “should be.” In his model, a signifi- growth in the GNP rather than subjective percep-
cant gap between people’s expectations and their tions. The lack of overlap between the theoretical
capabilities creates “the necessary precondition for variables as they were defined in classic statements of
civil strife of any kind.” However, Gurr argued that the J-curve hypothesis, as well as the ways in which
the J-curve example is only one possibility for the those variables were operationalized and empirically
creation of such a gap; he referred to it as a case of investigated, has raised serious questions about the
“progressive relative deprivation.” Furthermore, validity of the evidence offered in support of the
whereas Davies emphasized individuals’ past expe- J-curve hypothesis. Some studies that were designed
riences in setting their expectations, Gurr and other specifically to address these criticisms by using more
researchers of the phenomenon of relative depriva- theoretically appropriate measures of relative depri-
tion have emphasized that intergroup comparisons vation failed to replicate many of the original find-
can also contribute to a sense of frustration. ings that seemed to support the hypothesis.
Jigsaw Classroom Technique 491

There also have been critiques of the inherent Miller, A. H., Bolch, L. H., & Halligan, M. (1977). The
reductionism in any attempt to explain group- J-curve theory and the Black urban riots: An
based behavior in terms of individual processes empirical test of progressive relative deprivation
such as violation of expectations. In line with these theory. American Political Science Review, 71(3),
critiques, some studies have shown that social vari- 964–982.
ables (such as the degree of intergroup discrimina-
tion in society) are better predictors of political
behavior than is short-term deprivation. Further­
more, research on relative deprivation theory in Jigsaw Classroom Technique
social psychology has indicated that fraternalistic
but not egoistic forms of deprivation are associ- The jigsaw classroom technique restructures tradi-
ated with support for collective action. tional classrooms to engineer reductions in ten-
Critiques of research on the J-curve hypothesis sions between groups of students and to improve
have put its essential claims into fairly serious doubt. academic performance. It is the clearest and most
Despite its captivating promise to integrate a num- potent operationalization of the contact hypothe-
ber of different perspectives and historical findings sis, which itself is social psychology’s preeminent
concerning the antecedents of revolution, the J-curve theoretical perspective on reducing intergroup
hypothesis has failed to attract consistent and valid hostilities. This entry describes the jigsaw class-
empirical support. As everyday life seems to suggest, room technique’s historical and theoretical con-
it is not the case that every form of injustice or viola- text, as well as the implementation, outcomes, and
tion of expectations brought on by a sudden setback evaluations of the technique.
produces support for collective action. Viewed in Social psychology has long been concerned with
this light, one of the main strengths of the J-curve understanding prejudice and working toward its
hypothesis, namely its theoretical parsimony, is also reduction and elimination. Gordon Allport’s 1954
the source of its weakness. volume, The Nature of Prejudice, provided the
Collective action, it seems, is extremely rare, landmark social psychological analysis of preju-
and most likely involves the dynamic interplay of dice and its etiology, as well as a framework—the
a complicated set of social, psychological, and contact hypothesis—for developing interventions
political variables. The attempt to explain group- to reduce prejudice and intergroup hostilities. The
based political rebellion solely (or even primarily) contact hypothesis asserts that prejudice and inter-
on the basis of an aggregation of individual-level group conflict may be reduced by giving conflict-
processes such as violation of expectations has so ing groups equal status, common goals to pursue,
far been tried and found wanting. no competition along group lines, and the sanction
of relevant authorities. All four conditions must be
John T. Jost and Avital Mentovich satisfied; otherwise intergroup conflict may be
exacerbated rather than ameliorated.
See also Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis; Relative Coinciding with Allport’s 1954 book was the
Deprivation; System Justification Theory U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board
of Education, which was intended to end state-
sanctioned segregation in U.S. schools. This court-
Further Readings ordered desegregation led to significant conflict in
Davies, J. C. (1962). Toward a theory of revolution. U.S. school systems, as some school districts fought
American Sociological Review, 6, 5–19. in courts and elsewhere to avoid desegregation.
Davies, J. C. (1969). The J-curve rising and declining One school system, in Austin, Texas, was closed in
satisfaction as a cause of some great revolutions and a 1971 because of the extent of the conflict over
contained rebellion. In H. D. Graham & T. R. Gurr desegregation. This led to psychologist Elliot
(Eds.), Violence in America (pp. 690–730). New York: Aronson being asked to devise an intervention to
Bantam Books. reduce the hostility wracking the system, and to
Gurr, T. R. (1970). Why men rebel. Princeton, NJ: the development of the jigsaw classroom technique
Princeton University Press. as such an intervention.
492 Jigsaw Classroom Technique

Because of housing segregation, desegregation picture. After the jigsaw groups have operated for
of schools was being achieved by busing children a fortnight or so, students are reorganized into
across neighborhoods into different schools to other jigsaw groups that expose them to a different
achieve a racial mix within each school. Aronson group of students.
and his colleagues noted that classrooms are typi- The jigsaw technique places considerable onus
cally very competitive environments. Minority on the children to learn the material to be covered
group children were systematically disadvantaged in the lesson, and to teach it to each other. This
in those competitive environments because of the departs from standard classroom operations, in
accumulative effects of previous segregation and which it is the teacher’s role and responsibility to
disadvantage. The rewards in a traditional class- teach the children. The role of the teacher in a jig-
room, such as good grades, praise from the teacher, saw classroom is to prepare the material for use in
and the esteem of fellow students, are scarce, are jigsaw and expert groups, and to ensure that the
usually controlled by the teacher, and are obtained jigsaw and expert groups operate effectively,
competitively. This microcosm of the classroom including helping the children in the expert groups
violated the conditions of the contact hypothesis. learn their material before taking it back to the
The jigsaw technique changes the structure, and jigsaw groups. This is not to discount the impor-
consequently the interactional dynamics, of the tance or difficulty of the teacher’s new role—on
classroom to meet the conditions of the contact the contrary, the role is demanding, and it requires
hypothesis. However, it does not vary the curricu- considerable ability to manage the apparent chaos
lum to be taught, and it still allows the assessment of simultaneous groups in the classroom. Teachers
of individual students’ academic performance. The often require assistance in managing student learn-
technique is typically applied in classrooms con- ing in several simultaneous groups, especially
taining students from a diversity of racial and when there are tensions between students.
ethnic backgrounds. This involves dividing the Children also often require assistance in manag-
whole class into jigsaw groups of about six stu- ing the group processes, especially when there are
dents, with each group capturing the diversity of tensions between some students and when children
the broader classroom and of academic talents. are unaccustomed to working in jigsaw (or other)
Each student in a jigsaw group is also a member of groups. A common early reaction of some children
a separate expert group. in the jigsaw groups is to belittle other children
The material for the lesson is divided into six who are having trouble expressing what they
pieces. For example, if the lesson is on the life and know in language readily understood by their
times of Albert Schweitzer, the material to be cov- peers. Aronson notes that this reaction quickly dis-
ered is divided into six parts—Schweitzer’s child- sipates once the children realize that belittling oth-
hood, his work as a missionary, and so on. Each ers deprives them of the knowledge those others
expert group is provided with one of the six parts hold, and consequently means that they are not
of the day’s lesson. Children in each expert group able to do well on the end-of-class assessment.
learn their material together, with help from the Belittling behaviors are soon replaced with behav-
teacher, before reconvening in their jigsaw groups. iors designed to elicit information from students
These students each have a unique set of informa- who are having trouble teaching what they know
tion, and they now have to teach their fellow jig- to their peers. An important role of the teacher is
saw group members what they learned in the to facilitate this process.
expert group. The lesson ends with a test—an indi- Aronson and his colleagues report that rela-
vidual, not a group test of the whole lesson (in this tively small experiences of learning in jigsaw
case, of all six parts of the lesson on the life and groups—as little as a one-hour lesson three times a
times of Albert Schweitzer). week for a couple of months—is enough to lessen
The name jigsaw group comes from the meta- students’ intergroup prejudices, tensions, and hos-
phor that each of the children in the group holds a tilities (compared to students in traditionally struc-
unique piece of a jigsaw puzzle, and the task facing tured classrooms). Furthermore, and again relative
all the children in the group is to put the pieces of to students in traditional classrooms, students in
the puzzle together so that they all share the whole jigsaw classes show significant gains in academic
Job Design 493

performance. Most of these academic gains technique to produce large effects, and when we
appear in minority group children, but majority ought not to expect the technique to have any
group children also show gains, or at worse effect.
show no decrements. This last result is impor-
tant, as without it, it is unlikely that the jigsaw Iain Walker
technique would ever be supported politically.
Also, compared to children in traditional class- See also Children: Stereotypes and Prejudice; Cooperative
rooms, children in jigsaw classrooms have been Learning; Desegregation; Discrimination; Intergroup
Contact Theory; Prejudice
shown to like their classmates more, like school
more, have higher self-esteem, and empathize
more.
The jigsaw technique differs from other peer Further Readings
tutoring and cooperative learning programs that Aronson, E. (2004). Reducing hostility and building
have been shown to be effective in improving compassion: Lessons from the jigsaw classroom. In
educational outcomes for all students involved. A. G. Miller (Ed.), The social psychology of good and
Although the jigsaw technique relies on peer evil (pp. 469–488). New York: Guilford Press.
tutoring, it has the additional characteristic of Aronson, E., & Patnoe, S. (1997). The jigsaw classroom:
forcing the interdependence of students within Building cooperation in the classroom (2nd ed.). New
jigsaw groups. Aronson asserts, and is supported York: Longman.
by an occasional study, that it is this interdepen- Weyant, J. M. (1992). Social psychological approaches to
dence, and not the experience of working in a the integration of culturally different and handicapped
peer relationship with another student, that pro- students in schools. In F. C. Medway & T. P. Cafferty
duces the positive changes in intergroup rela- (Eds.), School psychology: A social psychological
tions. This is theoretically consistent with the perspective (pp. 449–469). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
contact hypothesis.
Most studies evaluating the effectiveness of jig-
saw classroom interventions have worked with
primary school children, usually around age 10 or
11. However, the social psychological principles Job Design
underlying the technique ought to be applicable to
people of any age, and indeed a couple of studies Job design refers to the actual structure of jobs that
have shown the jigsaw technique to be effective in people perform. At its most basic level, job design
university environments. focuses squarely on the work itself—on the tasks
Some authors have suggested that the attraction or activities that individuals complete in their orga-
of the jigsaw classroom technique stems more nizations on a daily basis. Individuals may be able
from the power of the jigsaw metaphor than from to avoid contact with many aspects of the context
the learning technique. This view gains some sup- in which they work, but not with their jobs.
port from a close analysis of the effect sizes Therefore, the way jobs are structured and designed
reported in most jigsaw studies. Although most plays a significant role in determining how people
studies report statistically significant differences on respond in their employing organizations.
a variety of measures between students in jigsaw This focus on the work itself is undoubtedly
classes compared to students in traditional classes, most responsible for the popularity of job design as
the size of those differences is often modest. a research topic. For the past 50 years, few topics
Nonetheless, no other intervention routinely pro- in the organizational sciences have received as
duces such positive effects. It is also the case that it much attention. This entry summarizes the most
is one of very few interventions designed to reduce significant historical and contemporary develop-
prejudice and discrimination without relying on ments related to this topic. It begins by defining job
changing the beliefs and attitudes of individuals. It design and discussing its importance to the man-
remains for future research to specify the condi- agement of organizations, presents a contemporary
tions under which we would expect the jigsaw approach to the design of jobs, and concludes with
494 Job Design

a discussion of the benefits of this approach when compromised its usefulness. For example, Herzberg
considering the possibility of redesigning jobs in did not provide an instrument for measuring the
organizations. presence or absence of motivators in jobs. Thus, it
was difficult to diagnose a job’s status on the moti-
vators prior to redesign, or to measure the effects
Early Work on Job Design
of redesign activities on the job after the changes
Most of the early ideas about job design origi- had been implemented. In addition, Herzberg did
nated in work by industrial engineers such as not provide for differences in how responsive peo-
Frederick Taylor. Taylor and his associates were ple would be to jobs with many of the motivators,
primarily concerned with maximizing the produc- suggesting that all individuals would respond in
tive efficiency of employees by structuring jobs so the same way. Yet early studies demonstrated that
that any unnecessary work was eliminated and the some people respond more positively than others
quickest and most practical work methods were to positions that are responsible and challenging.
standardized for all employees who performed the
same job. By standardizing and simplifying work,
Job Characteristics Theory
the prerequisite qualifications for a job are
reduced, and worker efficiency is maximized In an attempt to overcome some of the shortcom-
because all resources needed to complete a task ings of earlier approaches to job design, Richard
can be centrally located. Hackman and Greg Oldham developed job char-
The industrial engineering approach to job acteristics theory (JCT). This theory focuses on
design gained tremendous popularity in many several measurable characteristics of jobs and rec-
organizations during the first six decades of the ognizes that people may respond differently to
20th century. Yet despite the popularity, early these job characteristics.
research showed that employees were often very According to JCT, employees must simultane-
unhappy with standardized, simplified work. ously experience three psychological states if desir-
Employees often were late to work or restricted able personal and organizational outcomes are to
their productivity on such jobs, or they sabotaged emerge. The employee must (1) experience the
their work or equipment, resulting in productivity work as meaningful and worthwhile by some sys-
losses. As a result, the gains in productive efficiency tem of values that he or she accepts, (2) experience
that were expected by early industrial engineers personal responsibility for the results of the work,
were more than offset by the losses incurred when and (3) have knowledge of the results of his or her
these engineering principles were implemented. work efforts. When all three of the psychological
To address problems that resulted from job sim- states are present, JCT predicts the employee
plification and standardization, behavioral scientists should be internally motivated at work (i.e., feel
began considering ways to redesign jobs by expand- good when performing well and feel bad when
ing both their content and scope. Much of this early performing poorly), be satisfied with the opportu-
work was based on ideas developed by Frederick nities for personal and professional growth at
Herzberg, who argued that the primary determi- work and with the job, and perform effectively. If
nants of employee productivity and satisfaction were one or more of the psychological states is absent,
factors intrinsic to the work itself, often referred to the theory predicts that fewer desirable outcomes
as motivators. These motivators included recogni- should result.
tion, achievement, responsibility, advancement, and The three psychological states are internal to
personal growth in competence. Redesigning a job individuals and therefore not directly open to
by increasing its standing on these motivators was manipulation in designing jobs. Thus, the theory
expected to lead to beneficial outcomes, including suggests five measurable, changeable characteris-
enhanced productivity and employee satisfaction. tics of jobs that prompt the psychological states
The results of several research projects provided and, through them, enhance work outcomes. The
some support for these arguments. three characteristics expected to be especially pow-
However, despite its merits, there were several erful in influencing individuals’ experience of
difficulties with the Herzberg approach that meaningfulness at work are skill variety (i.e., the
Job Design 495

degree to which the job requires a variety of differ- provide some support for the major tenets of the
ent activities in carrying out the work, involving theory. In particular, results indicate that the
multiple skills and talents), task identity (i.e., the higher the job scores on each of the five character-
degree to which the job requires completion of a istics, the higher the employees’ satisfaction, inter-
whole, identifiable piece of work), and task sig- nal motivation, and work effectiveness. Moreover,
nificance (i.e., the degree to which the job has a research shows that job characteristics affect work
substantial impact on the lives of other people). outcomes via their effects on the three psychologi-
The fourth characteristic, which is expected to cal states specified by the model. Finally, some
prompt feelings of responsibility, is autonomy, evidence suggests that individuals with high GNS
which is the degree to which the job provides sub- respond most positively to jobs with a high score
stantial freedom, independence, and discretion to on the five characteristics.
the individual in scheduling the work and in deter- In summary, JCT overcomes several of the
mining the procedures to be used in carrying it out. shortcomings associated with earlier approaches
Finally, knowledge of results is the fifth character- to job design. First, the theory suggests five char-
istic and is proposed to be affected by the amount acteristics that might be boosted in order to
of job feedback, that is, the degree to which carry- enhance work outcomes. Second, the theory iden-
ing out the work activities required by the job pro- tifies three individual differences that clarify the
vides the individual with direct and clear information conditions under which jobs with high scores on
about the effectiveness of his or her performance. the five characteristics should have their strongest
JCT identifies three individual differences that effects. Finally, the JDS instrument that accompa-
influence the way employees react to jobs with nies the theory can be useful in (1) diagnosing jobs
high scores on the five characteristics. First, the prior to redesign to determine which characteris-
theory posits that employees must have the knowl- tics (if any) require change, (2) determining whether
edge and skills necessary for jobs with the core the employees are ready for job redesign and are
characteristics. When employees have such skills, likely to respond positively to it (i.e., whether they
they have the opportunity to complete successfully have sufficient GNS and context satisfactions),
complex, challenging jobs and, therefore, to reap and (3) evaluating the effects of a job redesign pro-
the psychological rewards these jobs provide. gram on the job characteristics, satisfaction, and
Second, JCT argues that only jobholders with high motivation.
growth need strength, or GNS (i.e., the strength of
Greg R. Oldham
an individual’s need for personal development and
learning at work) value the opportunities for self- See also Group Performance; Group Task; Identification
direction and personal accomplishment provided and Commitment; Organizations
by complex jobs and, as a result, respond posi-
tively to them. Individuals with low GNS may
experience jobs with high scores on the five char- Further Readings
acteristics as threatening and balk at being
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work
“stretched” too far by the work.
redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Finally, JCT suggests that employees who are Humphrey, S. E., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P.
satisfied with aspects of the work context (such as (2007). Integrating motivational, social, and
pay, job security, managers, and coworkers) are contextual work design features: A meta-analytic
likely to focus their attentions on and respond summary and theoretical extension of the work design
positively to the properties of complex jobs. literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92,
Dissatisfaction with these contextual factors may 1332–1356.
distract employees’ attention from the work itself Oldham, G. R. (1996). Job design. In C. Cooper & I.
and instead cause them to focus on coping with Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial
the problems they experience. and organizational psychology (Vol. 11, pp. 33–60).
More than 200 studies have tested JCT using New York: John Wiley.
the Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS), a companion Parker, S., & Wall, T. (1998). Job and work design.
instrument to the theory. Results of these studies Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
496 Juries

from social conformity to persuasion to bargain-


Juries ing, hence the direct relevance of the study of jury
decision-making for the science of group processes.
Jury research is relevant to the study of group pro- This entry reviews group processes in the specific
cesses and intergroup relations for several reasons. context of legal decision making by first examining
The first psychological work on juries, the unique problems involved in studying juries.
Munsterberg’s treatise on testimony, was pub- Next, the individual juror will be treated briefly, as
lished in 1908. During the century since then, knowledge of jurors is important if we are to
juries have played an important role in the study understand juries. The bulk of this entry will then
of group processes and intergroup relations both deal with the jury experience as a group process,
as topics for investigation and as a setting in which focusing on the critical aspects of jury dynamics
to study group processes. Trial juries have intrin- that have been discovered and the structural fac-
sic interest for their role in a democratic society. tors that moderate these dynamics.
Juries are unique among decision-making groups
in several ways. They have a public function, as
serving on a jury is a prime means for citizens to
Problems in Studying the Jury
play a role in government. In the U.S. tradition, Because the jury is a real-world institution with
harking back to colonial times, juries not only unique rules and goals, a question arises concern-
apply law to specific cases but, by their actions, ing the ecological validity of research: Can we
they sometimes can be the impetus for changing apply research-based conclusions to real juries?
laws. Use of the principle of jury nullification, Since the requisites for an experiment, control and
whereby juries can blunt the effect of a disliked manipulation, and even mere observation are
law via contrary verdicts, has waxed and waned in legally proscribed in real juries, how can we know
U.S. history, but is still alive. Jury actions also we are replicating a real jury if instead we study
have real effects on people and issues, and at artificial or mock juries? Some studies use sum-
times, literally make life or death decisions. mary data of real juries, but this tells little about
Juries are prime venues for studying group pro- intragroup processes, and because field studies
cesses. Juries make group decisions governed by lack experimental control, they cannot yield causal
rules that prescribe the information input, verdicts conclusions. In mock juries, real juries can be mir-
that may (or may not) be reached, presumption of rored by incorporating underlying characteristics
innocence, voting quorum for a verdict, and that distinguish real juries. For example, mock
threshold of certainty for verdicts. Trial rules limit juries can mimic in an experiment the real-world
information to evidence presented in courts, which rules by which evidence is presented and consensus
is subject to examination and cross-examination decisions are reached.
by trial adversaries. Jurors may apply past experi- But the central difference between real and
ence to interpreting and weighing facts. Thus, such mock juries is that the latter decide the fate of
prior experience can have an impact on construals hypothetical litigants in an artificial setting, with
of the information, inferences about how it fits no real-world consequences. Generally speaking, a
into a coherent story, and the credibility assigned high degree of involvement by mock jurors will
to different pieces of evidence. Though all mem- enhance ecological validity. For example, research-
bers of a jury are exposed to the same information, ers may create a situation in which mock jurors
the interpretation and weight assigned to conflict- think they are making decisions with real conse-
ing information is very much in their hands; differ- quences, even though they are not in a real court
ent jurors will make different inferences and (e.g., participants could be told that they are judg-
construct different stories of the case. ing real student infractions of a university judicial
Deliberation is designed for jurors to resolve code to see if random jurors can make decisions
these differences in reaching a group decision similar to those of actual jurors).
according to a prescribed voting rule such as una- Another drawback of research on juries is that
nimity or a 10–2 margin. Discussion among jurors most of it has been conducted on North American
evokes a wide array of social influence processes, juries, which operate under unique procedural
Juries 497

rules and with legal and social cultures that differ and socioeconomic status. It is safe to conclude
from those of other nations. Many jury trials occur that the impact of jurors’ personal variables
in North America and many scholars there have depends on factors such as judicial instructions,
studied them, but the resulting knowledge of the the nature of the issues evoked by the case, and the
U.S. jury might well not describe juries or tribunals amount and strength of trial evidence.
in other cultures. Fortunately, the rest of the world Two basic value orientations of jurors are
has been expanding jury research recently. important because both are at the core of many
Most research has focused on the behavior of legal disputes. The first is concern for the individ-
individual jurors. The consensus-reaching group ual versus the common good. No issue has bedev-
process has sometimes been studied as an after- iled the United States since its founding as much as
thought, and rarely as a main focus, consequently the distinction between providing for the welfare
there has been too little attention paid to group and interests of the individual (the “pursuit of hap-
dynamics. This is partially because studying groups piness”) and the welfare of the collective. In other
is harder than studying individuals, requiring more words, how much individual regulation should be
resources to conceive, design, and carry through a imposed in the name of the general welfare? Much
study, and employing more participants. Moreover, of history and politics, and many court cases, both
it is popular to study the potential shortcomings, criminal and civil, are marked by this issue; unsur-
the “dark underside” of trial juries, such as juror prisingly, many jurors go to trial with a disposition
prejudices, and the effects of impermissible influ- favoring one side or the other.
ences, such as defendant attractiveness, pretrial The second value orientation is adherence to
publicity, and the introduction of inadmissible evi- letter of the law versus conscience of the commu-
dence during trial. Such impediments to a fair trial nity. This refers to the conflict between strict
prompt researchers to track the attitudes and adherence to the letter of the law and people’s
biases of the individual juror. sense of justice, or what they see as the communi-
ty’s values. This distinction is now a major crite-
rion in selecting Supreme Court justices, and if it is
Jurors as Individuals: A Brief Survey
a source of conflict for the Court, it must be even
Research findings can be organized according to more troublesome for lay jurors.
the unique personality and values of jurors and to Jurors clearly can be affected by situational fac-
the situational variables that affect juror behavior. tors that are legally irrelevant to the trial, such as
Great effort, much of it in vain, has gone into the heinousness of the crime, pretrial publicity,
identifying the personality characteristics that can and identity of the victims and defendants. Though
predict individual jurors’ judgments. It is common such factors may be psychologically relevant to
to believe that a juror’s final decision can be pre- jurors in passing judgment (that is, they seem to be
dicted by knowing his or her attitudes, values, valid indicators of culpability), for complex rea-
personality, or particular demographics. Moreover, sons the courts have determined that these factors
to assume that juror behavior is largely deter- should not bear on the legal issues being tried, and
mined by personal factors reflects the fundamental may indeed be unfairly prejudicial. Courtroom
attribution error—the simplifying tendency to conditions such as attorney behavior and trial
assume that most human behavior is internally length can also affect juror decisions.
caused. A sizable lawyer folklore and jury consul- To summarize, the same conclusion can be
tant industry has crystallized around this assump- reached for situational as for personal factors:
tion. Researchers have had some limited success The more information provided at trial that is rel-
relating the leniency or stringency of individual evant and reliable, the less the effect of irrelevant
jurors to broad personal variables such as author- internal and external variables. Jurors’ careful
itarianism, locus of control, identification with the examination and understanding of plentiful and
defendant, and belief in a just world. There has relevant facts will reduce use of simplifying heuris-
been less robust evidence linking judgment ten- tics such as personal values and biases and obvious
dencies to demographic markers of personality but legally irrelevant trial events. Thus, juries’
and attitudes such as gender, race, age, education, systematic examination of relevant information is
498 Juries

dependent on their having optimum conditions for most members think the accused is guilty, then the
group processes during deliberation. accused must be guilty” or “Anyone who opposes
the jury’s majority will suffer rejection.” Such con-
formity to the opinions of others is called norma-
Juries as Groups tive influence, a tendency to take other people’s
The jury must reach consensus on an overall ver- judgments as evidence of correctness. These
dict (i.e., guilt or innocence in a criminal case or processes—of people’s modifying their position
liability in a civil case) and often on additional based on the information provided by others and
questions posed by the court (e.g., “Are there spe- of their changing to comply with the group’s
cial circumstances associated with a crime, such as norms—are central to understanding group dynam-
use of a firearm?”). To do this, juries deliberate, ics, and apply not only to polarization but to any
sharing the information each member considers shift in a consensus-seeking group.
relevant, using influence strategies, bargaining,
and so on.
Type of Influence
Dynamic jury processes that have been investi-
gated by researchers include the tendency of jurors Juries are charged with reaching consensus on a
to move in extreme directions after deliberation, specified legal issue (e.g., whether the defendant
the types of influence used during discussion, intentionally killed the victim). Thus, they are
jurors’ overall deliberation style, and the level of social groups that must reach a decision that is
reasoning used within juries. These processes will both accurate (that is, consistent with the evidence
be examined here with reference to the structural and the applicable law) and satisfying to the group
features that produce them. (that is, one that all or most can agree on). This
Structural features of trials include the timing of dictates that two forms of influence, normative
the first jury vote, the quorum necessary for con- influence and informational influence, will simul-
sensus (unanimity vs. other voting rules), and the taneously emerge during deliberation. As a social
composition of the jury vis-à-vis differential status group, jurors are exposed to social pressures to
and faction size. Perhaps the most important struc- conform to the norms or expectations of others. In
tural features are the nature of the issues underly- this normative influence, jurors compare their
ing the case and the types of evidence available to positions to others’ positions, using those positions
jurors. to evaluate the adequacy of their own behavior. As
a group charged with reaching a correct decision,
jurors will also seek to maximize relevant informa-
Group Polarization
tion about the case issue, thus being liable to infor-
Polarization is frequently observed in group mational influence.
decision making. After discussion, both individual The form of influence most practiced, and in
and group decisions move toward a more extreme turn, most effective in a particular trial is at the
position than that expressed by individuals prior heart of group dynamics, and is determined by a
to group discussion. Polarization is not a simple number of situational conditions. Of these condi-
process but an outcome dependant on several tions, the most important is the nature of the case
potential processes. First, if jurors are leaning in a being decided. Judgmental issues are matters of
particular direction (e.g., guilt), most of the facts ethical, aesthetic, and normative preferences that
and inferences they offer will likely be in that depend on individual, cultural, and societal con-
direction, and jurors will begin to use more facts of sensus for confirmation or denial. For example,
that nature in subsequent decisions. The tendency does a particular behavior constitute harassment?
for an individual to rely on information provided Does a negative act rise to the level of a hate crime?
by other group members to make his or her judg- Will a certain verdict serve the cause of justice?
ment is called informational influence. Second, Such issues are ultimately decided by reference to
jurors are guided by the decision preferences of norms, and are therefore more liable to normative
others in modifying or strengthening their voting influence. However, intellective issues are a matter
preferences. For example, jurors may reason, “If of fact, and can (at least in principle) be resolved
Juries 499

by arguments appealing to trial evidence such as Finally, jury composition can affect dynamics.
the defendant’s motive, opportunity, and ability to In many instances the initial vote is unbalanced,
commit the crime. The question of whether a cer- that is, the jury is divided into majority and
tain act violates a social norm is a judgmental minority factions. The strength of majorities is in
issue. Whether an act took place and whether a their numbers, and majorities optimize their
certain party is responsible is an intellective issue. power through normative influence, whereas
Hence, the way in which jury members influence minorities have to support their position by
one another depends strongly on whether the jury appeal to facts. Though this question has not been
will center on the group’s preferences or on the directly tested, we do know that minority dis-
task of being correct. agreement produces discussion of a greater range
Though juries are provided with a formal deci- of facts in the numerical majority, while majority
sion rule ranging from simple majority to unanim- argumentation leads minorities to focus on the
ity applying to their final vote, they may devise arguments and norms of the majority. If broad
their own functional rules for determining how and thorough discussion of evidence is desirable,
they move from disagreement to consensus (a social having a numerical minority in the jury is benefi-
decision scheme). Intellective issues prompt a “truth cial. However, this benefit is blunted if the deci-
wins” scheme, with consensus reached when some- sion requires a less than unanimous vote or if the
one communicates “truth,” whereas judgmental minority wavers, failing to argue a consensual
issues evoke a “majority wins” scheme. Overall, and consistent position.
criminal juries seem to adhere to a “majority wins” Minorities may also be comprised of jurors with
decision scheme; that means that in most juries, lower status, expertise, or power. While this is not
whatever verdict has a majority at the start of delib- a great concern in North America, it is in Europe,
eration will be the jury’s final verdict. There is also where juries are often a mixture of laypersons and
some indication that higher status jurors may be judges. Researchers have found that expert, higher-
more influential than lower status ones, and that status jurors are more active and exert more nor-
proacquittal factions may be more influential than mative influence, and thus are more influential in
proconviction factions in criminal juries. judgmental cases, which favor such influence. In
The amount of information available to jurors addition, during the trial lower-status jurors concen-
is important. If the trial was information poor, trate more on evidence that will bolster their weaker
that is, critical information to build a story of case position than on the total range of evidence.
events is sparse, the jury must fall back on norma-
tive influence to judge the correctness of its assess-
Deliberation Style
ments. In addition, the trial process itself is
adversarial, with each side presenting only that Juries may engage in a verdict-driven or
evidence that supports its position and discrediting evidence-driven deliberation style. A verdict-driven
the other side’s evidence. The situation is ripe for style focuses discussion on the alternative verdicts,
jurors to discount much of the evidence and with jurors tending to refer to evidence only to
instead rely on normative influence, and perhaps support their preference. An evidence-driven style
preexisting personal biases. focuses on the evidence, with jurors aiming to
Influence type is also affected by jury instruc- reach consensus on the “story” of the case before
tions. Judges and attorneys can choose to empha- agreeing on a verdict. As expected, evidence-driven
size the factual or normative nature of the jury’s juries deliberate longer and attend more to numer-
task. For example, a common instruction to dead- ical minorities. Though the styles correlate with
locked juries is to continue deliberation and give timing of the first jury ballot (verdict-driven dis-
weight to the verdicts of other jurors, a clear invi- cussions are more likely in juries that take a vote
tation to normative influence. However, in many early in deliberation), the timing of that ballot may
cases the jury may be asked to consider a number not determine the deliberation style. Instead, issues
of subissues, such as “Was the defendant aware of involving judgment rather than intellectual delib-
his actions at the time?” Highlighting specific eration may produce both earlier votes and more
questions would enhance informational influence. verdict-driven discussion.
500 Justice

Level of Reasoning Brewer, N., & Williams, K. D. (Eds.). (2005). Psychology


and law: An empirical perspective. New York:
The level of reasoning refers to how thoroughly Guilford Press.
jurors think about the legally relevant evidence. At Kaplan, M. F. (1989). Task, situational, and personal
one end of this continuum is systematic reasoning, determinants of influence processes in group decision
in which people examine a broad range of evi- making. In E. J. Lawler & B. Markovsky (Eds.),
dence (not only that which supports their position) Advances in group processes (Vol. 6, pp. 87–105).
in an integrated manner, delving in depth into the Greenwich, CT: JAI.
meaning of the information. This requires that Kaplan, M. F., & Martin, A. M. (Eds.). (2006).
jurors be motivated and exert effort to reach the Understanding world juries through psychological
most accurate decision. At the other end of the research. New York: Psychology Press.
continuum is heuristic reasoning, in which a nar- Ohtsubo, Y., & Masuchi, A. (2004). Effects of status
rower range of evidence is explored superficially differences and group size in group decision making.
by using rules-of-thumb to simplify decision mak- Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 7, 161–172.
ing. Examples include stereotypes, descriptive Stasser, G., Kerr, N. L., & Bray, R. M. (1982). The social
norms (such as how many jurors interpret a fact in psychology of jury deliberations: Structure, process,
a specific way), and superficial guides such as and product. In N. L. Kerr & R. M. Bray (Eds.), The
defendant or victim attractiveness, attorney cha- psychology of the courtroom (pp. 221–256). New
risma, and number rather than quality of argu- York: Academic Press.
ments for each side. There is a tendency for
numerical and powerful majorities to expend less
effort in their arguments, thus using more heuristic
reasoning, and for numerical minorities to discuss Justice
the facts and issues more systematically. But more
powerful trial factors may determine the extent to
The psychology of justice explores judgments
which the jury carefully scrutinizes all the relevant
about the principles used to decide what is fair or
evidence. Inclusion of expert, experienced jury
unfair within social settings. Issues of justice have
members—as in European mixed juries—should
been important in psychology ever since the
promote careful reasoning, as should the overt
World War II era, a period during which there
instruction to decide on the truth of each of several
was an explosion of psychology theory and
propositions needed to support a certain verdict.
research involving the study of social settings and
Conversely, complex cases with an overload of
group processes. During the same historical period,
information can encourage use of simpler rules for
psychology also moved beyond psychological
dealing with a plethora of facts and convoluted
models that paid little attention to people’s subjec-
issues. Consider the O.J. Simpson trial, where one
tive evaluations of the world and became more
heuristic—“if the glove don’t fit, you’ve got to
concerned with how people interpreted and reacted
acquit”—may have carried the day in the face of
to their social experiences. This increasing atten-
information overload.
tion to intrasubjective issues led researchers to
Martin F. Kaplan recognize that people were strongly influenced by
their assessments of what is just and fair when
See also Group Polarization; Group Problem-Solving and they were dealing with others. Recognizing the
Decision-Making; Informational Influence; Justice; central role of thought and feeling about justice in
Minority Influence; Normative Influence; Social shaping behavior, psychologists made efforts to
Decision Schemes understand what people mean by justice and how
it shapes their thinking, their emotions, and their
behavior.
Further Readings The field of justice has become divided into
Abbott, W. F., & Batt, J. (Eds.). (1999). A handbook of three primary areas, each of which has been impor-
jury research. Philadelphia: American Law Institute– tant at one time during the historical evolution
American Bar Association. of the field. The first and earliest is the study of
Justice 501

distributive justice. Distributive justice is concerned linked to justice. Theories of distributive justice
with the fair allocation or distribution of resources supply this missing link because they tie compari-
or opportunities within a social setting. The sec- sons to issues of justice. They do so by arguing
ond, and subsequently developed area, is proce- that people compare their outcomes to standards
dural justice, which studies the fairness of different of what is a fair or deserved outcome. In other
procedures for making decisions. Finally, most words, people have a sense of what they are enti-
recently studied is retributive justice, which focuses tled to receive, and they evaluate their outcomes
on when and in what way it is fair to punish people against this standard.
for breaking social rules. This entry describes the The core premise of distributive justice theory is
background of research on justice and examines its that people react to what they receive in relation to
principal theoretical perspectives. what they deserve. There are two potentially
unhappy groups: those who receive too little and
those who receive too much. As might be expected,
The Roots of Justice Research
those who receive less than they feel they deserve
Concerns about justice emerged once the impor- are found to be angry and to engage in a variety of
tance of subjective assessments of social situations behaviors in reaction, ranging from working less
was clearly recognized. Central to that recognition to rioting. Justice researchers have studied many
was the development of the idea of relative depri- instances in which people have received less than
vation (i.e., people’s feeling of being deprived of they deserve, and have shown that this leads to a
something they deserve). Building upon research strong negative emotional reaction and to efforts
conducted during World War II, social scientists to seek restitution. Among disadvantaged groups,
found that it was difficult to understand people’s complex psychological dynamics are unleashed,
feelings and behaviors as a simple result of their because the disadvantaged often lack the power to
objective situations. This work has led to more compel justice and must therefore find ways to
modern research on subjective well-being that manage their feelings of unfairness.
shows, for example, that well-being is not strongly Interestingly, and less predictably, those who
related to income. receive too much are also found to be unhappy,
A core idea, first articulated by Walter Runciman and they engage in efforts to restore distributive
in his relative deprivation theory, is that people justice either by mechanisms such as working
can focus upon personal outcomes (egoistic depri- harder or giving resources away or, if those solu-
vation) or they can be concerned about the out- tions are not practical, by leaving the situation.
comes obtained by the groups of which they are This latter finding from distributive justice research
members (fraternal deprivation). Subsequent is especially important because it suggests that the
research has suggested that this distinction is desire to act fairly can influence the advantaged to
important because collective action, such as rioting take actions on behalf of others.
or in a more positive vein, the civil rights move- Distributive justice research also develops the
ment in the United States, is primarily motivated important distinction between psychological and
by fraternal deprivation. Hence, the manner in behavioral responses to wrongdoing. When some-
which people interpret their experience is impor- one receives or provides unfair outcomes to others,
tant. If people feel that they are relatively deprived a conflict is created. There are two types of
as individuals, they react individually. If they feel response. One is for outcomes to be reallocated so
relatively deprived due to group membership, their as to be fair. The victim frequently advocates this
response is collective. response, while harm-doers have mixed feelings—
they believe in justice but are also benefiting from
the situation and thus reluctant to change it.
Distributive Justice
Hence, harm-doers are motivated to psychologi-
Although relative deprivation theory makes it cally justify the situation, coming to believe that
clear that people’s reactions to social situations they deserve the outcomes they have.
depend upon their comparison standards, it is not This motivation to justify brings harm-doers
clear whether those comparison standards are and victims into conflict because victims want
502 Justice

redistribution, whereas harm-doers seek to justify of important group attitudes and behavior.
their gains. An important function of social author- Procedural justice has been especially important in
ities is to lend support to victims, or at least avoid studies of decision acceptance and rule following.
social conflict, by supporting the application of One reason that people might comply with rules
objective standards of fairness, which resolves con- and authorities is that they receive desirable
flicts, and by discouraging psychological justifica- rewards for cooperating and/or fear sanctioning
tion, which leads to long-term hostility. from the group for not cooperating. Such instru-
Of course, while the distributive justice litera- mental motivations can be effective in motivating
ture argues that people react to deviations from compliance in a wide variety of social settings.
standards of fairness, that argument can be tested Another reason that people might comply is
only if the standards being used to determine fair- that they are motivated by their sense of justice to
ness can be determined. Morton Deutsch has pre- accept what they feel is fair, even if it is not what
sented three core principles of distributive justice: they want. A key question is whether justice is
equity, equality, and need. Equality involves giving effective in resolving conflicts and disagreements
everyone similar outcomes, while equity and need when people cannot have everything that they
differentiate among people in terms of either their want. To the degree that people defer to rules and
productivity or their needs. Deutsch suggests that authorities because allocation decisions are seen as
the use of each principle promotes different social fair, justice is an important factor in creating and
goals: equity leads to productivity, equality to maintaining social harmony. Research on proce-
social harmony, and need to social welfare. dural justice suggests that social justice can act as
While most distributive justice research focuses a mechanism for resolving social conflicts.
on individual judgments about personal outcomes, John Thibaut and Laurens Walker conducted
it is recognized that people also make judgments the first experiments designed to show the impact
about the overall distribution of outcomes in a of procedural justice. Their studies demonstrated
group or society. This has been referred to as mac- that people’s assessments of the fairness of third-
rojustice. Research on macrojustice reveals an party decision-making procedures predicted their
interesting inconsistency between levels of justice satisfaction with the procedures’ outcomes. This
judgments, with people viewing the macro-level finding has been widely confirmed in many subse-
(i.e., group) distributions that result from micro- quent laboratory and field studies of procedural
level (i.e., individual) principles as unjust. In par- justice—when third-party decisions are fairly made,
ticular, people strongly endorse rewarding people people are more willing to voluntarily accept them.
based on merit or productivity (the equity princi- What is striking is that such procedural justice
ple), but find the overall distribution of resources effects are widely found in studies of real disputes,
that results to be unfair. in real settings, involving actual disputants and are
found to have an especially important role in shap-
ing adherence to agreements over time.
Procedural Justice
In addition to people’s acceptance of decisions,
Procedural justice is the study of people’s subjec- procedural justice also shapes their values concern-
tive evaluations of the justice of procedures— ing the legitimacy of the authorities and institu-
whether they are fair or unfair, are ethical or tions with which they deal. Values and the feelings
unethical, and otherwise accord with people’s they engender determine people’s willingness to
standards of fair processes for social interaction defer to those authorities and institutions. Studies
and decision making. Procedural justice should be of the legitimacy of authority suggest that people
distinguished from distributive justice, which decide how much to defer to authorities and their
involves subjective assessments of the fairness of decisions primarily by assessing the fairness of
outcomes. these authorities’ decision-making procedures.
Subjective procedural justice judgments have Hence, using fair decision-making procedures is
been the focus of a great deal of research attention the key to developing, maintaining, and enhancing
by psychologists because these judgments have the legitimacy of rules and authorities and gaining
been found to be a key influence on a wide variety people’s voluntary deference to social rules.
Justice 503

Studies of procedural justice also indicate that it within society. They want their dignity as people
plays an important role in motivating commitment and as members of the society to be recognized
to organizations. As a consequence, procedural and acknowledged. Surprisingly, such assessments
justice is important in encouraging people’s pro- of respect are largely unrelated to the outcomes
ductivity and extrarole behavior in work organiza- they receive. Thus, the importance that people
tions. Hence, procedural justice is a key antecedent place on this affirmation of their status is espe-
of a wide variety of desirable behaviors in groups, cially relevant to conflict resolution. Unlike the
organizations, and societies. outcomes that determine distributive justice, dig-
What do people mean by a fair procedure? Four nity and respect is something that authorities can
elements of procedures are the primary factors that give to everyone with whom they deal.
contribute to judgments about their fairness: Studies of procedural justice have also explored
opportunities for participation, a neutral forum, why people care so much about the fairness of
trustworthy authorities, and dignity and respect. procedures. Early studies, such as the research of
People feel more fairly treated if they are allowed Thibaut and Walker, argued that people seek fair
to participate in the resolution of their problems or procedures as a way of ensuring fair outcomes.
conflicts. They are primarily interested in present- Subsequent studies, including those of Tom Tyler
ing their perspective and sharing in the discussion and his colleagues, have found that people are also
of conflicts that affect them, not in controlling interested in their social ties to others and value
decisions about how to handle such conflicts. That fair procedures, because those fair procedures
is, people often look to authorities for resolutions. communicate both that the group to which they
They expect authorities to make final decisions belong is a desirable one and that they are valued
about how to act based upon what those who are members of that group.
affected by those decisions have said.
People are also influenced by judgments about
Retributive Justice
neutrality—the honesty, impartiality, and objectiv-
ity of the authorities with whom they deal. They One of the core features of organized groups is
believe that authorities should not allow their per- that they create rules and enforce those rules by
sonal values and biases to enter into their deci- punishing those who break them. While societies
sions, which should be made based upon rules and differ widely in what their rules are and in how
facts. Basically, people seek a “level playing field” they punish those who transgress, punishment for
in which no one is unfairly disadvantaged. If they wrongdoing is central to the maintenance of social
believe that the authorities are following impartial order and is found in all societies. The nature of
rules and making factual, objective decisions, these punishments is the central focus of the study
people think procedures are fairer. of retributive justice.
Another factor shaping people’s views about the A first reaction to rule breaking is an effort to
fairness of a procedure is their assessment of the restore the prior material balance between peo-
motives of the third-party authority responsible ple. The simplest way to do so is to right a wrong
for resolving the case. People recognize that third by compensating the victim or victims for the
parties typically have considerable discretion to harm done. When people react to rule breaking
implement formal procedures in varying ways, and that is judged to be unintentional or without mal-
they are concerned about the motivation underly- ice, and where it is possible to do so, people often
ing the decisions made by the person in authority endorse such an approach to righting wrongs.
with whom they are dealing. Important assess- However, when rule-breakers are viewed as hav-
ments include whether the person is benevolent ing deliberately broken rules, either intentionally
and caring, is concerned about their situation and or because of negligence, their victims and society
their concerns and needs, considers their argu- generally believe that some type of punishment
ments, tries to do what is right for them, and tries beyond compensating victims is appropriate.
to be fair. Studies exploring the nature of the motivation
Studies suggest that people also value having to punish often link punishment to the issues of
respect shown for their rights and for their status deterrence and incapacitation. Some studies argue
504 Just World Hypothesis

that people punish to prevent future wrongdo- Further Readings


ing. Other studies suggest that the desire for
Darley, J. M., & Pittman, T. S. (2003). The psychology
revenge is a key issue. Recent studies have sug-
of compensation and retributive justice. Personality
gested that, on the contrary, people’s primary
and Social Psychology Review, 7, 324–336.
reason for punishing is to uphold societal values. Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What
Rule breaking is viewed as a threat to those val- determines which value will be used as the basis for
ues, and appropriate punishment restores them. distributive justice? Journal of Social Issues, 31, 137–149.
Evidence suggests that people are motivated to Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology
punish when they view wrongdoing as undercut- of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.
ting moral and social values, and that they Runciman, W. G. (1966). Relative deprivation and social
choose the type and severity of punishment they justice. Berkeley: University of California Press.
believe will restore an appropriate moral bal- Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice.
ance. A consequence of this is that those people Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
whose actions and demeanor show a defiance of Tyler, T. R. (2000). Social justice: Outcome and
or disrespect for society, social values, and/or the procedure. International Journal of Psychology, 35,
social status of their victims will be punished 117–125.
most severely. Tyler, T. R., & Smith, H. J. (1998). Social justice and
The study of punishment is of particular societal social movements. In D. Gilbert, S. Fiske, & G.
relevance in the United States because, compared Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (4th
to other nations, America is a highly punitive cul- ed., Vol. 2, pp. 595–629). New York: Addison-Wesley.
ture with generally severe punishments for a wide Vidmar, N., & Miller, D. T. (1980). The social
variety of crimes. The United States has one of the psychology of punishment. Law and Society Review,
largest prison populations in the world, relative to 14, 565–602.
population size, and America is one of the few Walster, E., Walster, G., & Berscheid, E. (1978). Equity.
Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
remaining major countries to retain the death
penalty. Understanding the psychology underly-
ing this view of wrongdoing is therefore both
important to theorizing and central to major social
issues and policies both in the United States and in Just World Hypothesis
the world.
The different aspects of the psychological study The belief in a just world refers to the view that
of justice that have been outlined are united by the world is a fair place in which people generally
their finding that people are very sensitive to issues get what they deserve. This belief helps people feel
of justice and injustice in their dealings with other that they have control over their lives and will not
people in social settings. In fact, such justice-based suffer unjustly; as such, it serves a protective func-
judgments are found to be key drivers of a wide tion. People are motivated to hold onto their
variety of reactions, including attitudes, emotions, belief in a just world and attempt to interpret the
and behaviors. John Rawls famously argued that events in their own and others’ lives in ways that
“justice is the first virtue of social institutions,” and are consistent with it. For example, when people
the findings of psychological research on justice see others suffering, they will try to help, but if
strongly support the parallel suggestion that people they cannot compensate the victims or ease their
view justice as pivotal in shaping their evaluations suffering, they will persuade themselves that the
of their relationships with one another. victims deserve to suffer. This has important soci-
etal implications. To maintain just world beliefs,
Thomas R. Tyler people react to innocent victims by blaming them
for the injustices they face. Thus, this motivation
See also Civil Rights Movement; Collective to believe in social justice could actually under-
Movements and Protest; Distributive Justice; mine real social justice. This entry looks at the
Legitimation; Loyalty; Procedural Justice; Relative history and social significance of the just world
Deprivation; Trust hypothesis.
Just World Hypothesis 505

History and Background beliefs in a just world are more authoritarian, sup-
porting the strong and powerful (societal “win-
Melvin Lerner formulated the just world hypothesis ners”) and denigrating the weak and powerless
on the basis of a series of experiments he began in (“losers”). They are also more politically conserva-
the mid-1960s. In the first experiment, participants tive, consistent with their preference for order,
were asked to observe two people completing a control, and the status quo. In addition, people
task, one of whom was randomly chosen to be paid who strongly believe in a just world are more reli-
for the work. Even though participants knew that gious. The authors reason that religious tenets
payment was awarded by chance, they still believed emphasizing the existence of an active God (who
that the worker who was paid was actually more rewards and punishes) promote the notion that the
deserving of payment. world is a just place where good deeds are
In a second experiment, Melvin Lerner and rewarded and bad deeds punished.
Carolyn Simmons found that people will reinter- The belief in a just world shares essential fea-
pret events so they are consistent with their belief tures with the Protestant work ethic, which reflects
that people get what they deserve. When given the faith in the value of hard work both for its own
opportunity to restore justice and compensate a sake and for its role in ensuring success. Also cen-
victim for her suffering, most participants in the tral to the belief in a just world is an internal locus
experiment chose to do so. However, when par- of control, which is people’s view that they can
ticipants could not compensate the victim and control what happens to them through their own
instead saw her suffering continue, they derogated actions.
the victim, especially when they thought the victim In the decades since these early studies, a great
had agreed to endure such suffering out of altruis- deal of research has examined just world phenom-
tic motives. According to the just world hypothe- ena. The literature suggests that the belief in a just
sis, watching an innocent person suffer threatens world is fairly stable across the life span and
observers’ just world beliefs. To restore the view prevalent in many cultures across the globe. In
that people get what they deserve, observers will their recent review of just world research, Carolyn
devalue the victim. The less deserved or compen- Hafer and Laurent Begue offer two current con-
sated the suffering, the greater the devaluation of ceptualizations of the belief in a just world. One
the victim. refers to the belief in a just world as an explicitly
This early experimental work emphasized the endorsed individual-difference variable, assessed
motivation that all people have to believe in a just by standard self-report scales and correlated with
world, especially when they find themselves in cer- various measures of well-being, personality, and
tain situations. In the mid-1970s, Zick Rubin and social attitudes in correlational research designs.
Anne Peplau proposed that, in addition to situa- According to this view, people are assumed to vary
tions varying in the degree to which they evoke just in the degree to which they believe in a just world,
world concerns, individuals vary in the degree to presumably because they differ in their basic need
which they endorse just world beliefs. To measure to believe that the world is a just place.
these enduring individual differences, they devel- A second view contends that most people need
oped the Just World Scale with items such as to believe that the world is a just place. Thus, they
“Basically, the world is a just place” and “By and are motivated to act in ways to preserve this
large, people deserve what they get.” “belief,” even though they may not explicitly
In their first study, groups of draft-eligible men endorse a belief in a just world on standard self-
listened to the live radio broadcast of the 1971 report measures. This second view, which empha-
national draft lottery to hear their priority num- sizes the common need that people have to believe
bers for the draft. In reacting to the lots of others, in a just world rather than individual differences in
participants with high just world scores were more an explicitly measured construct, is examined
likely to believe that the lottery was fair and con- through experimental studies in which people are
demn those who lost the lottery. confronted by certain situations, such as those
Rubin and Peplau also reported correlates of involving innocent victims, that evoke just world
the belief in a just world. Those who have stronger concerns.
506 Just World Hypothesis

Hafer and Begue argue that the latter conceptu- They also blame various types of victims (rape
alization of the belief in a just world is closer to the victims, AIDS patients, poor people) for their mis-
essence of just world theory. The theory proposes fortunes in order to restore just world beliefs,
that children learn to delay gratification so they especially when the victims’ suffering cannot be
can achieve greater rewards in the future. Implicit ameliorated.
in this “personal contract” is the belief that they If people with strong just world beliefs think
will get what they deserve in the end. In return for that the victims’ suffering is deserved, they will be
the effort they expend delaying gratification and less likely to try to improve the victims’ situation
working toward long-term goals, children feel they through social action. Thus the tendency to per-
are deserving of expected outcomes. ceive that people deserve the suffering they endure
This early link between deservingness and out- may serve to perpetuate social injustice. However,
comes sets the stage for the development of a gen- when people are given the opportunity to restore
eral justice motive in adults, a motivation to see justice and compensate victims for their suffering,
the world as a just place where they as well as oth- most will choose to do so. Therefore, strong
ers get what they deserve. If others do not get what believers in a just world may try to help those in
they deserve, then individuals are confronted with need if they perceive that their efforts are likely to
the threatening possibility that they too may not be successful.
get what they deserve. This would violate the per-
sonal contract that has guided so much of their Shana Levin and Miriam Matthews
past behavior and future expectations. People need
See also Attribution Biases; Cognitive Consistency;
to believe in a just world so that they may preserve
Conservatism; Distributive Justice; Ideology; Justice;
their commitment to deservingness. To maintain Procedural Justice; Protestant Work Ethic; System
the view that even unjust outcomes are deserved, Justification Theory
people employ a variety of tactics, such as derogat-
ing suffering victims or denying the existence of
victims’ suffering. Further Readings
Although previous research has emphasized the
Furnham, A. (2003). Belief in a just world: Research
negative consequences of just world beliefs, more
progress over the past decade. Personality and
recent research highlights the psychological benefits
Individual Differences, 34, 795–817.
of these beliefs. They appear to reduce stress and
Furnham, A., & Procter, E. (1989). Belief in a just world:
depression and promote life satisfaction, well-being,
Review and critique of the individual difference
and achievement motivation. People may be reluc- literature. British Journal of Social Psychology, 28,
tant to alter their just world beliefs because these 365–384.
beliefs serve such important adaptive functions. Hafer, C. L., & Begue, L. (2005). Experimental research
on the just-world theory: Problems, developments, and
Importance future challenges. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 128–167.
Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A
The belief in a just world has important conse- fundamental delusion. New York: Plenum Press.
quences for the way people feel and behave toward Lerner, M. J., & Miller, D. T. (1978). Just world research
members of both socially valued and devalued and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead.
groups. Strong believers in a just world admire suc- Psychological Bulletin, 85, 1030–1051.
cessful people such as political leaders and support Rubin, Z., & Peplau, L. A. (1975). Who believes in a just
powerful social institutions such as the U.S. military. world? Journal of Social Issues, 31, 65–89.
K
many people—in industry, in business, in sports,
Köhler Effect and in government—are naturally very interested in
better understanding such effects. This entry exam-
The Köhler effect is a kind of group motivation gain ines several aspects of the Köhler effect, such as its
effect—an instance where a person works harder as history, why it occurs, and when it occurs.
a member of a group than when working individu-
ally. In the Köhler effect, that person is, to some
degree, a “weak link” for the group—that is, if he
Historical Context
or she fails to do well, the group will not do well. The Köhler effect was first discovered by German
There are many tasks where a bad performance industrial psychologist Otto Köhler in the 1920s.
by a single member can ensure a bad group per- He was interested in how differences in group
formance; social psychologists refer to these as members’ abilities affected group performance.
conjunctive group tasks. For example, a mountain- He asked members of a Berlin rowing club to
climbing team that is tethered together cannot climb perform a hard persistence task—to do standing
any faster than the slowest climber in the group. curls with a heavy weight (44kg per rower) until
The Köhler effect is the finding that incapable they were so exhausted they could not go on.
members—the “weak links”—tend to exert extra Sometimes they did this alone; other times they
effort, especially at such conjunctive tasks; for did it in two- or three-person groups. When they
example, a slow climber should climb harder and worked in groups, they held a single weighted
faster when tethered to faster climbers than when bar. The bar was twice as heavy for dyads; three
climbing alone. times as heavy for triads. This group task was
Because there is a great deal of research that conjunctive; as soon as any group member quit,
shows the opposite pattern—group motivation the rest of the group could not continue very
losses, often referred to as social loafing—some long. Köhler found that the groups persisted lon-
scholars have suggested that members of perfor- ger than their weakest members had persisted as
mance groups or teams may be generally less individuals. This surprising motivation gain was
strongly motivated than individual performers. But biggest when the members of the groups were
the Köhler effect, like other motivation gain effects, moderately different in ability. If the difference in
shows that this is untrue—under the right condi- ability was very small, or it if was very big, the
tions, members of performance groups can be motivation gain was not as large.
exceptionally motivated workers. Because many These provocative findings were largely for-
important tasks are carried out by groups (more and gotten for more than 60 years, until a 1989
more often in modern organizational work teams), article by Erich Witte rekindled research interest.

507
508 Köhler Effect

Since Witte’s article, Köhler’s motivation gain The indispensability mechanism appears to be
effect has been replicated repeatedly, not only for relatively more important to females, whereas the
physical persistence tasks, like those used origi- social comparison mechanism appears to be rela-
nally by Köhler, but for several other tasks (e.g., tively more important to males. It has been sug-
simple computations, visual attention tasks). gested that these gender differences reflect more
general gender differences in levels of concern for
others and for relationships (stronger in females)
Causes of the Köhler Effect
versus for social status and dominance (stronger
Much research suggests that the Köhler effect may in males).
have at least two causes, one rooted in the process Certain aspects of the work group setting seem
of social comparison, the other rooted in the to facilitate both causal mechanisms. For example,
effects of individual members being indispensable the Köhler effect is stronger when group members
to the group. First, simply learning that others are are able constantly to monitor one another’s level
performing better than you, can often be sufficient of performance, compared to when monitoring is
to boost your efforts. Such upward social com- difficult or impossible. Such monitoring makes it
parisons can lead you to set a higher performance easier to make upward social comparisons, and
goal to try to compete with those others, or it may for incapable group members to be reminded that
simply remind you of some of the stigmas that they are indeed “weak links” in the group’s chain.
attach to those who are less capable. This process Likewise, the effect is stronger when group mem-
occurs in groups where you are less capable than bers are physically in one another’s presence than
your fellow group members, but it can also occur when they are not (e.g., as in so-called virtual
when the others with whom you compare yourself work teams, becoming ever more popular in
are not actually working with you. the Internet age). Such physical presence seems
Second, knowing that your work group is to enhance concerns with how we are likely to
depending on you to perform well can also boost be evaluated by others, either because we are not
your efforts, if you care about how well the group as capable as they are (upward social comparison)
does or about how the rest of the group will evalu- or because we may be holding the group back
ate you. Although both processes seem to contrib- (indispensability).
ute independently to the overall Köhler effect,
certain characteristics of the group performance
Other Group Research
situation and of the group members can affect their
relative importance. For example: Otto Köhler’s original interest was in how group
The motivation gain is larger when the group’s composition would affect group member perfor-
task is conjunctive, and the least capable members’ mance. And he showed that the relative abilities
efforts are highly indispensable, than when the of group members were critical for the motiva-
group’s task is additive (e.g., a group tug of war), tion gain effect that now bears his name. In more
where every members’ efforts matter to some recent research, other aspects of group composi-
degree and, hence, the least capable members are tion have also been shown to affect the Köhler
not uniquely indispensable. effect. For example, an incapable male working
As Köhler showed in his original work, the at a physical-strength task produces a much larger
motivation gain is largest when members’ abilities Köhler effect when his more capable partner is a
are moderately different (vs. about the same or female than when this partner is another male.
very different). This appears mostly to be due to Apparently, it is more embarrassing to males to
the social comparison mechanism; for example, we be outperformed by a woman than by a man, at
stop comparing ourselves with others if they are least at a task that requires physical strength.
too much more capable than we are because we And when social comparison is possible, the
see the task of matching or competing with them Köhler effect is larger when one’s more capable
as unachievable. dyad partner is a member of an outgroup (a group
Köhler Effect 509

to which one does not belong) than when he or than are those of the capable member who works
she is a member of one’s ingroup. Apparently, it is hard in the social compensation effect.
more embarrassing to be bested by someone in a
“competing” group than by someone who is not. Norbert L. Kerr
Both of these aspects of group composition appear
See also Group Composition; Group Motivation; Group
to alter the social comparison mechanism, but Performance; Group Task; Social Comparison Theory;
some aspects of group composition also alter the Social Compensation; Social Facilitation; Social Loafing;
indispensability mechanism. For example, if your Work Teams
more capable partner rejects or ostracizes you,
you tend to become less concerned about the fact
Further Readings
that your efforts are indispensable to the group.
The Köhler effect is in some ways like another Hertel, G., Kerr, N. L., & Messé, L. A. (2000).
well-documented group motivation gain—the social Motivation gains in performance groups: Paradigmatic
compensation effect. In both phenomena, being and theoretical developments on the Köhler effect.
indispensable to the group’s success prompts higher Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(4),
levels of effort. In social compensation, that higher 580–601.
level of effort comes from a relatively capable group Kerr, N. L., Messé, L. A., Seok, D., Sambolec, E. J.,
member who believes that the others in the group Lount, R. B., Jr., & Park, E. S. (2007). Psychological
either cannot or will not work hard enough for the mechanisms underlying the Köhler motivation gain.
group to succeed. Conversely, the higher level of Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(6),
effort in the Köhler effect comes from a relatively 828–841.
incapable group member. Köhler, O. (1926). Kraftleistungen bei Einzel- und
Gruppenabeit [Physical performance in individual and
Another interesting difference between the two
group situations]. Industrielle Psychotechnik, 3,
phenomena is the emotional reactions of the peo-
274–282.
ple working extra hard. For social compensation,
Stroebe, W., Diehl, M., & Abakoumkin, G. (1996). Social
if the rewards of group success are shared equally
compensation and the Köhler effect: Toward a
in the group, then the capable and hard-working theoretical explanation of motivation gains in group
group member is likely to feel exploited, and hence productivity. In E. Witte & J. Davis (Eds.),
upset, when he or she works harder than others Understanding group behavior: Consensual action by
but receives no more reward than those others. small groups (Vol. 2, pp. 37–65). Mahwah, NJ:
The tables are turned, however, for the incapable Lawrence Erlbaum.
and hard-working group member in the Köhler Weber, B., & Hertel, G. (2007). Motivation gains of
effect. He or she has to worry about a more capa- inferior group members: A meta-analytical review.
ble partner feeling frustrated by being “held back” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(6),
by a less capable partner. In general, however, 973–993.
when the incapable group member works hard in Witte, E. H. (1989). Köhler rediscovered: The anti-
the Köhler effect, his or her emotional reactions Ringelmann effect. European Journal of Social
are more likely to be positive (e.g., relief, pride) Psychology, 19, 147–154.
L
also keep our accents, phrases, or language unal-
Language and tered when talking with others to maintain social
Intergroup Relations distance, or even intensify our use of these forms
to further increase social distance. These mainte-
Language is a tool people use to realize goals in nance and withdrawal moves are referred to as
groups. These goals can manifest in socially con- speech divergence.
structive ways such as democracy, cooperation, Originally, sociolinguists thought that such
and altruism, but they can also manifest in socially shifts were dictated by social situations. More for-
destructive ways such as totalitarianism, hate mal situations, for example, might lead one to use
speech, and genocide. The ways in which these more “correct” pronunciation than less formal
social structures and behaviors evolve depends on situations. This idea was overturned, however,
the relations between groups, and it depends on when Howard Giles proposed his speech accom-
language. Language can also be a defining attribute modation theory, now called communication
of a group that distinguishes it from other groups. accommodation theory. According to this theory,
This entry describes some of the ways in which people are motivated to use accommodating lan-
language is used to manage social distance, and guage when they want to express similarity and
reviews research on language and prejudice. Then, it attraction, and they do so when they believe their
discusses relationships between language and power, interaction partner has legitimate social status.
with reference to gender, status hierarchy formation Conversely, when people believe the social status
in small groups, and linguistic devices used to mask of others is low or illegitimate, they are likely to
acts of power. Finally, it describes some relations use divergent language.
between language and social cognition. In a now classic demonstration, Richard Bourhis
and Howard Giles asked Welsh second-language
learners, who were highly committed to their
Welsh identity, to participate in a study on second-
Language and the language learning. In one experimental condition,
Management of Social Distance an English experimenter who employed received
People use language to socially approach or dis- pronunciation (i.e., nonregional accented English)
tance themselves from others. For example, we can challenged participants’ reasons for studying
mimic the idioms others use (“Dude, that is rad”) Welsh: “Why study a dying language with a dis-
or approach their accents by changing our pronun- mal future?” These participants answered in a
ciation, speech rate and/or volume, lexical diver- broader Welsh accent, used more Welsh terms in
sity, and so on. These linguistic approach moves their replies, and referred to their Welsh identity
are referred to as speech accommodation. We can more often than those not so provoked. The Welsh

511
512 Language and Intergroup Relations

speakers’ divergent replies can be understood as derisive verb forms (e.g., to gyp, to go Dutch),
attempts to maintain their ethnic heritage in the proverbs (e.g., beware of the Hun in the sun), chil-
face of a threat from what they considered to be dren’s stories, and ethnic jokes. Ethnophaulisms
the illegitimately high-status English. are a form of hate speech that is typically applied
There is now a wealth of evidence that such to ethnic and especially immigrant groups.
linguistic shifts are driven by motivations and per- Brian Mullen’s research shows that eth-
ceptions of status relations between groups. In the nophaulisms vary in complexity (some groups have
case of intergenerational relations, the elderly many ethnophaulisms that refer to many qualities,
commonly experience patronizing speech from some relatively few), and they vary in terms of the
younger generations. Mary Lee Hummert and degree of negativity, although they are typically
Ellen Ryan have shown that nonaccommodating quite negative. A number of variables have an
language follows from negative stereotypes of the impact on ethnophaulisms. The smaller the immi-
elderly (e.g., as lacking intelligence and basic com- grant group, the less complex the ethnophaulisms.
petence); this then increases the likelihood that the So, for example, in the United States, there is one
elderly will further enact behaviors that confirm ethnophaulism for Pakistanis (paki), whereas five
this stereotype (e.g., being helpless and confused), have been identified for Greeks (asshole-bandit,
which, in turn, has a negative consequence for greaseball, grikola, johnny, and marble-head).
elderly cognitive functioning, health, and self- Groups with low-complexity ethnophaulisms also
esteem. The bitter twist to this phenomenon is that tend to have more negative representations, and
these outcomes can then reinforce the original ste- both complexity and the negative valence are asso-
reotype, producing a cycle of negative intergenera- ciated with the degree of familiarity of the group
tional relations that is difficult to prevent. within a culture (in terms of representations in
In the case of policing, evidence suggests that books and songs) and the degree of foreignness of
police officers who use accommodating language— the group (in terms of linguistic difference, facial
who are polite, listen, and show respect—are more appearance, and complexion). Smaller, less famil-
trusted, are viewed as more competent, instill iar, and more foreign groups have more negative
greater satisfaction in civilians, and are more likely and less complex ethnophaulisms applied to them.
to gain compliance than are nonaccommodating Ethnophaulisms have been linked with various
officers. This has proven to be the case in the indicators of social exclusion. Groups with less
United States, Taiwan, South Africa, and China. complex ethnophaulisms were more likely to have
In these three examples, and indeed many oth- lower immigration quotas from the 1920s through
ers, it is evident that the management of linguistic to the 1960s, and they were proportionately less
distance affects the nature of relations between likely to become naturalized U.S. citizens from the
groups. An important conclusion here is that early 1900s to 1930. Research has shown that less
accommodating language is not just a path to ame- complex ethnophaulisms are associated with lower
liorating tensions between groups; it is also a path rates of intermarriage and employment in more
to producing positive and socially constructive hazardous occupations. More negative eth-
relations between groups. nophaulisms are associated with greater ethnically
segregated housing. Most disturbingly, rates of
suicide among immigrants are higher than rates of
Language and Prejudice suicide of people in the immigrants’ home country,
and the more negative the ethnophaulisms for any
Hate Speech: The Case of Ethnophaulisms
given group, the higher the rate of suicide.
People are creative in their use of disparaging
terms to refer to one another: wetback, frog, mick,
Language Attitudes
limey. These ethnic slurs are ethnophaulisms, a
term derived from the Greek words meaning In the United States, people of British heritage
“a national group” and “to disparage.” Ethno­ are often delighted to find that their accent, while
phaulisms can take many forms: derisive adjec- often misunderstood, confers social prestige that
tives, metaphors (e.g., Italian perfume for garlic), implies that the user is sophisticated, cultured, and
Language and Intergroup Relations 513

intelligent. Extra service in stores, opportunities to higher the group scores on these factors, the higher
persuade, and the receipt of glowing admiration— the group is said to be in vitality. High-vitality
Oh, I just love your accent!—are not uncommon. groups tend toward competitive social relations
For immigrants in other ethnic groups, less flatter- with others and thus upgrade the ingroup relative
ing evaluations are the norm. These evaluations of to outgroup in language attitudes, whereas groups
ethnic accents and accompanying discrimination lower in vitality either avoid direct comparison
are language attitudes—evaluations of speakers with dominant groups or actually identify more
based not on individual personality or skills, but on strongly with the high-vitality outgroup.
stereotypes.
Language attitudes became a focus for study
Language and Power
when Wallace Lambert devised the matched guise
technique. In this experimental situation, bilingual Sik Hung Ng and Jim Bradac have described five
speakers were recorded speaking in one of two ways in which the relationships between language
languages or accents. Research participants were and power can be understood, and these can be
then informed that these speakers were different grouped under two general headings. First, there is
people and asked to evaluate the speakers’ person- the idea of power behind language. In this case,
alities. The first study to use this method was pub- language is incidental in comparison to the power
lished in 1960 and presented French- and that the individual or group is thought to possess.
Anglo-Canadian respondents with tapes of four So, the perceived power of language ebbs and
French-English bilinguals to evaluate on 14 traits flows with the power of the group, and this is
(e.g., height, good looks, leadership, intelligence). reflected in people’s attitudes toward a particular
Both French- and Anglo-Canadian research par- variety of language.
ticipants rated the English guise speakers higher The first study conducted on the language atti-
than French guise speakers on almost all attributes. tudes associated with French-Canadian speakers
For Anglo participants, the only exception was suggested a very negative appraisal. Since the
sense of humor, and for French participants, the 1960s, however, there has been a linguistic revival
only exceptions were religiousness and kindness. of French language and culture in Quebec, and with
Even so, the French-Canadian participants rated this increase in cultural power, there has been an
the English guise speaker much more strongly on accompanying elevation of perceived prestige of the
good looks, leadership, intelligence, self-confidence, language. Language can also be used to reveal the
and character. power of a speaker. “Everybody freeze! This is a
Subsequent research showed quite different pat- hold up!” conveys to listeners that the speaker has
terns. For example, around the same time, research the power that comes from having a loaded gun.
in Israel revealed a pattern of mutual downgrading Language itself can serve as a source of power—
among Palestinian and Israeli respondents. Later the power of language. People can use language to
research in the U.K. revealed a pattern where the create power where they had none, to depoliticize
English were rated high on status variables (wealth, acts of power that others might find distasteful,
intelligence) but low on solidarity variables (friend- and to construct or express social arrangements.
liness, warmth), whereas the reverse was true for
the Scots. While this area of research has yielded
Power Behind Language
inconsistent patterns, these and other patterns of
language attitudes ultimately became interpretable There is a large body of research on powerful
using the ethnolinguistic identity theory developed and powerless language styles. Powerless language
by Giles and his colleagues. The fundamental idea is characterized by the relatively frequent use of
of ethnolinguistic identity theory is that groups hedges (e.g., “sort of,” “maybe”), disclaimers
vary in status factors (e.g., economically and his- (e.g., “I’m no expert, but . . .”), and tag questions
torically), demographic factors (e.g., numbers of (e.g., “That’s interesting, isn’t it?”). Research has
group members and rates of birth), and institu- shown that the absence of these features—powerful
tional factors (e.g., representation of groups in language—is typically associated with the belief
government and educational contexts), and the that the speaker is credible, intelligent, competent,
514 Language and Intergroup Relations

and knowledgeable. The obvious expectation here be evident in the pattern of interruptions within
is that people who use powerful language are more the group. Indeed, those who emerged as high in
likely to be influential. There is evidence to sup- status were more likely to have successful rather
port this, but there is also evidence that women than unsuccessful interruptions when using proac-
who use powerless language with men are more tive language. When those same high-status group
likely to be persuasive than those who use power- members used reactive language (i.e., requested
ful language, despite the negative evaluations of information or agreed with others’ suggestions),
powerless language users. they were more likely to have unsuccessful than
Other research has focused on the evaluation of successful interruptions. This suggests that the
language as spoken or written by men and women. ability to gain turns in the group depends on what
This work shows a gender-linked language effect. others in the group are willing to concede. Those
Feminine language (e.g., greater use of questions) presumed to have status are granted the right to
is typically seen as being more aesthetically pleasing speak if they are proactive, but they are blocked in
and intellectual but less dynamic than male lan- their attempts to interrupt if what they say is reac-
guage (e.g., greater use of directives). Interestingly, tive, and thus inconsistent with that status.
when given samples of male and female written Language is also used to depoliticize acts of
language, even when people are unable to discern power. There are a number of techniques available
the gender of the writer, samples written by to power users to maintain their power. When tak-
women are evaluated as nice and sweet and those ing an unpopular action, leaders may employ the
by men as strong and active. passive voice transformation. So, instead of saying
“I expelled the illegal aliens from the country,” the
speaker might choose to say “The illegal aliens did
Power of Language
not have the correct paperwork.” The passive
Language conveys the material power of users, voice transformation can effectively remove the
and it can be used to create power. A common actor from the act of power, and this can decrease
situation is group-based decision making. People the degree to which such actors are seen as respon-
often find themselves in ad hoc situations with sible for their actions.
relative strangers and a task at hand. This is the A second device is permutation. One might say,
case in juries, committees, and interdepartmental “Employers always quarrel with unions,” or
discussion groups at work. In these situations, “Unions always quarrel with employers.” Clearly,
people will typically create a psychological group the entity at the beginning of the sentence is
with a consensually established status hierarchy assumed to have been the party responsible for
with or without much knowledge of each other. the action. A third device is generalization. A
Robert Bales, in the 1950s and 60s, showed that speaker may say, “John punched Chris,” “John
people who took more speaking turns, indepen- hurt Chris,” or “John is an aggressive person.”
dent of the content, were more likely to emerge as Each sentence may be a reasonable description of
influential in the discussion. the same behavior, but the sentences produce dif-
Subsequent research has demonstrated that the ferent impressions.
content of what is said is important. Research by Over time, language can be used to routinize
Scott Reid and Sik Hung Ng has suggested, consis- social relations, whereby powerful language con-
tent with expectation states theory, that groups sistently used over time may blend into the social
form these status hierarchies very quickly. Use of landscape. In the case of English and many other
proactive language early in the discussion (i.e., languages, there are, as a matter of convention,
offers of task suggestions, disagreement, and replies masculine generics: “One small step for a man, one
to questions) suggests that an individual has some giant leap for mankind.” Of course, these words
expertise at the task and creates performance are intended to speak for all of humanity, not just
expectations. These early expectations suggest sta- men. Nonetheless, the use of masculine generics
tus difference in the group, and these status dis- means that women may be rendered less visible
tinctions determine who gets to speak. Reid and and of secondary importance to men because of
Ng reasoned that if this is the case, then it should the way in which language is structured. Indeed,
Leader Categorization Theory 515

there is evidence that people who hear these mas- Further Readings
culine generics do not mentally picture women. Giles, H., & Coupland, N. (1991). Language: Contexts
and consequences. Milton Keynes, UK: Open
Language and Social Cognition University Press.
Harwood, J., & Giles, H. (Eds.). (2005). Intergroup
Gün Semin and Klaus Fiedler have shown that we communication: Multiple perspectives. New York:
can choose four linguistic forms to describe any Peter Lang.
behavior. These forms vary in abstraction, but all Maass, A. (1999). Linguistic intergroup bias: Stereotype
could potentially be used to describe the same perpetuation through language. Advances in
behavior. Starting at the most concrete level, we can Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 79–121.
use descriptive action verbs (e.g., find, run, kiss), Ng, S. H., & Bradac, J. J. (1993). Power in language:
interpretive action verbs (e.g., help, offend, loot), Verbal communication and social influence. Newbury
state verbs (e.g., believe, love, hate), or adjectives Park, CA: Sage.
(e.g., honest, helpful, aggressive), with the latter Reid, S. A., & Ng, S. H. (1999). Language, power, and
language forms considered increasingly abstract. intergroup relations. Journal of Social Issues, 55,
Ann Maass and others have shown that people 119–139.
tend to describe positive ingroup and negative out- Reid, S. A., & Ng, S. H. (2006). The dynamics of
group behaviors in relatively abstract language, intragroup differentiation in an intergroup social
but negative ingroup and positive outgroup behav- context. Human Communication Research, 32,
iors in relatively concrete language. This linguistic 504–525.
Robinson, W. P., & Giles, H. (Eds.). (2001). The new
intergroup bias is particularly likely to manifest
handbook of language and social psychology.
when groups are socially competitive (e.g., envi-
Chichester, UK: John Wiley.
ronmentalists vs. hunters), are of a similar social
standing, and share a history of competition or
conflict (e.g., rival Italian cities). It is believed that
such language use effectively diffuses or maintains
stereotypes. In other words, language is a contrib- Leader Categorization Theory
utor to stereotypes, and thus prejudice.
Other work that more directly investigates ste- Leader categorization theory (LCT), originally
reotyping has focused attention on the degree to proposed by Robert Lord, places emphasis on the
which people discuss and maintain stereotype con- cognitive and perceptual processes underlying
sistent (SC) and stereotype inconsistent (SI) infor- workplace leadership. It proposes that subordi-
mation. Although SI information is novel and nates, through socialization and past experiences
potentially surprising, which would lead one to with leaders, develop implicit leadership theories
erroneously think it memorable, SC information is (ILTs), that is, cognitive representations in the
more likely to persist in communication chains. form of prototypes that specify the traits and
Research suggests that some stereotype content is abilities that characterize an “ideal” workplace
more communicable because it serves psychologi- leader. ILTs represent preexisting cognitive struc-
cal functions. Stereotypes that accurately describe tures or prototypes that are stored in memory and
properties that distinguish groups from one another come into play when subordinates communicate
and that fulfill identity-enhancing functions are with leaders. In other words, when subordinates
those that are more likely to be communicated interact with someone in a leadership position,
interpersonally, and therefore most likely to sur- this activates their ILT from memory, and then
vive and prosper. they can evaluate the person’s leadership qualities
against their ILT. This entry describes leader cat-
Scott A. Reid and Grace L. Anderson egorization theory and related research.
ILTs do not represent objective realities inher-
See also Ethnolinguistic Vitality; Identification and ent in the leader, but rather, are perceptual abstrac-
Commitment; Linguistic Intergroup Bias (LIB); Power; tions, summary labels that subordinates use to
Prejudice; Social Identity Theory; Stereotyping categorize individuals in leadership positions. ILTs
516 Leader Categorization Theory

are, therefore, subjective and reflect each person’s leader. Since subordinates might have differences
assumptions of what characteristics and traits in their ILTs, the perception of the qualities of the
make an ideal workplace leader. same leader might vary among members of
ILTs tend to form around a number of common the same work group.
factors, such as sensitivity, dedication, charisma,
attractiveness, intelligence, strength, tyranny, and
Research Evidence
masculinity. Each person’s ILT represents a belief
that an ideal workplace leader will have certain Some research has suggested that ILTs can act as a
amounts of each of these factors. While people can source of bias in leadership measurement. This is
vary in terms of their ILT profile, each person’s because subordinates might rely on their ILT pro-
ILT tends to be relatively robust, and it does not totype when they complete leadership question-
change markedly over time. In addition, while ILTs naires designed to evaluate their actual leader’s
tend to be relatively consistent within the same behavior. In other words, individuals may simply
culture, they can vary quite considerably between regenerate their ILT prototype of an ideal leader
different cultures—especially between individualist when rating an actual leader, without paying suf-
(e.g., United States, United Kingdom, Australia) ficient attention to the value of the leader’s behav-
and collectivist (e.g., India, China, Japan) coun- iors and traits.
tries. Thus, national culture plays a role in shaping In support of the central tenet of leader catego-
the prototype of an ideal workplace leader. This rization theory, however, research concerning the
has many implications for leaders who manage matching hypothesis shows that the more subordi-
subordinates from different cultures (as is becom- nates rate their actual manager as being close to
ing increasingly common with globalization), as their ILT prototype on several dimensions, the
these subordinates may have different ILTs con- more likely the subordinate will be to report higher
cerning what constitutes an “ideal” leader. job satisfaction and general satisfaction with the
The subordinate’s perception of the leader is leader. However, it might not be the case that every
determined by two processes. First, leadership can subordinate engages in the matching process in the
be recognized from the qualities and behaviors same way. It is likely that there are many individual
revealed through interactions between the leader factors (such as personality) and situational factors
and subordinate (e.g., the way the leader behaves (such as the degree of leader–subordinate interde-
leads to attributions concerning his or her leader- pendence) that might determine the extent to which
ship qualities). Second, leadership can be inferred subordinates evaluate their leader by comparing
from the outcomes of events determined by the him or her to the ideal leader in their ILTs.
leader (e.g., the performance of the leader can give Leader categorization theory provides a differ-
clues concerning the qualities of the leader). ent way to examine workplace leadership com-
Leader categorization theory is a recognition- pared to other approaches. It does not focus on the
based approach to leadership. A person is evaluated style of leadership or the relationship between
as a leader on the basis of the perceived match the leader and subordinate; instead, it focuses on
between the behavior and character of the leader the perception of leadership that results when sub-
and those of the perceiver’s ILT prototype. ILTs are ordinates compare the leader’s traits and charac-
the benchmark subordinates use to form an impres- teristics against their personal ILT prototype of an
sion of their actual leader. Subordinates are assumed ideal leader.
to engage in an “ILT vs. actual manager” matching The theory has many important implications for
process, and any discrepancies identified are subse- leadership development and training. It shows that
quently thought to affect the overall impression that leaders need to understand how their subordinates
the subordinate forms of the leader. perceive their leadership qualities—through their
In other words, when subordinates interact actions and from the outcomes of their perfor-
with a leader, they evaluate that leader against mance. Also, leaders need to understand that each
their own personal ILT profile. The better the subordinate will evaluate their leadership ability
leader matches the subordinate’s ILT, the more by comparing them against his or her individual
positive will be the subordinate’s judgment of the ILT prototype. Since subordinates are likely to
Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory 517

vary in terms of their ILT prototype of an ideal the background of these ideas and discusses the
leader, leaders need to be aware that their behav- Graen theory in some detail.
ior might be interpreted differently by different
subordinates.
Historical Context
Robin Martin Starting with their early work on learning, psy-
chologists have recognized that rewards and pun-
See also Categorization; Leadership
ishments have a strong influence on behavior. At
the end of the 19th century, Edward Thorndike at
Harvard University published research on learning
Further Readings
in cats, done in William James’s basement in
Lord, R. G., Foti, R. J., & Phillips, J. S. (1982). A theory Cambridge, Massachusetts, which established “the
of leadership categorization. In J. G. Hunt, U. law of effect”—the idea that reward stamps behav-
Sekaran, & C. Schriesheim (Eds.), Leadership: Beyond ior in and punishment stamps behavior out, as
establishment views (pp. 104–121). Carbondale: Thorndike put it.
Southern Illinois University Press. A great deal has been made of this basic idea
Lord, R. G., & Hall, R. (2003). Identity, leadership that behavior is under the control of outcomes,
categorization, and leadership schema. In D. van
specifically rewards and punishments, or more
Knippenberg & M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Leadership and
generally, benefits and costs. In social psychology,
power: Identity processes in groups and organizations
George Homans developed the idea that interper-
(pp. 48–64). London: Sage.
sonal behavior is an exchange where one individu-
Lord, R. G., & Maher, K. J. (1993). Leadership and
al’s behavior provides costs or benefits to another
information processing. Linking perceptions and
performance. London: Routledge.
person. Influence happens as a result of rewards
and costs people can provide for each other.
Related work by John Thibaut and Harold
Kelley developed the idea that each person in a
Leader-Member Exchange relationship derives an outcome level (OL) based
on the average degree of rewards minus costs that
(LMX) Theory he or she obtains through the interaction exchanges
in the relationship. Furthermore, they argued that
Leader-member exchange (LMX) theory is rooted the outcome level is evaluated against a compari-
in the idea that leaders and followers exchange son level (CL), based on all the outcomes a person
benefits, and that their relationships are at the knows about through his or her own and other
heart of the leadership process. Social scientists people’s relationship histories. The CL provides a
have long attempted to understand how people baseline, or an expectation, of what level of out-
relate to each other, beginning with explorations come a person will or should get in a relationship.
of costs and rewards, interpersonal behavior, and When the OL exceeds the CL, the relationship is
human relationships. A number of theories have satisfying. If the OL is less than the CL, people are
used the lens of interpersonal relationships to dissatisfied and are likely to leave the relationship,
understand leadership, including Edwin Hollander’s depending on the available alternatives.
focus on idiosyncrasy credits, Tom Tyler’s notion
of procedural justice, Dave Messick’s delineation
Hollander’s Idea
of psychological exchanges, and James MacGregor
Burns’s conceptualization of transforming and The idea that people in relationships engage in
transactional leadership. Most notably, George some kind of exchange, and that each must pro-
Graen and his colleagues constructed the formal vide satisfactory outcomes for the other if the rela-
leader-member exchange theory, which began by tionship is to continue, has been important in
elaborating on the nature of the leader–follower Edwin Hollander’s exchange theory of leadership.
relationship and its outcomes, and later created a The leader provides “adequate role behavior
model for effective leadership. This entry traces directed toward the group’s goal attainment,” and
518 Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory

followers accord the leader “status, recognition, to the follower’s ideas and viewpoints, and by
and esteem.” In effect, the followers give the leader treating the follower with dignity, the leader con-
legitimacy, which obliges them to follow the sug- firms the follower’s good standing in the group. In
gestions and directives of the leader. The key con- return, the follower accords the leader increased
cept in Hollander’s approach is the highly influential legitimacy, and more readily complies with his or
idea of idiosyncrasy credit. Leaders have varying her commands and suggestions.
amounts of credit given to them by followers,
based fundamentally on individual leaders’ compe- Related Research
tence and conformity to group norms. Credit is
essentially legitimacy. It is the resource leaders The distinction between psychological and tan-
need to provide direction for the group. gible exchanges between leaders and followers is
The legitimacy that followers give in exchange highlighted in James MacGregor Burns’s concepts
for leader competence and conformity is called of transactional and transformational leadership.
idiosyncrasy credit, because although credit is built Transactional leadership involves the tangible
up partially on the basis of conformity, followers exchange of benefits—as illustrated by the politi-
expect that leaders will use their credit to innovate— cian who promises no new taxes in exchange for
and that might mean not conforming. A leader election to office or the manager who offers an
who deviates, or acts idiosyncratically, may simply extra vacation day for employees who meet a lofty
spend the credit, or if his or her initiatives lead the quota. In contrast, Burns’s concept of transforma-
group to a better place, to more rewards, the tional or transforming leadership contends that
deviation may actually build up credits rather than leaders empower followers to achieve fundamental
depleting them. change through the exchange of psychological
An example of using idiosyncrasy credit is U.S. benefits that raise both the followers’ and the lead-
President Richard Nixon’s opening a peace initia- ers’ levels of motivation and morality.
tive with China in 1972. The United States had David Messick further delineates the mutually
shunned all public communication with “Red beneficial exchange of psychological benefits
China” for more than 20 years. Conservative between leaders and followers in his social exchange
Republicans had been loudest in their condemna- model of leadership. People follow leaders because
tion of the “Chinese Communists” and their oppo- they get something valuable from them, and leaders
sition to recognizing its government. When Nixon in turn benefit from their followers. For example,
traveled to China, fellow Republicans swallowed leaders give their followers vision and direction in
their opposition and waited to see how the initia- return for focus and self-direction from the follow-
tive would play out. A Democratic president, lack- ers. In addition, leaders give their followers protec-
ing credit with the political right, would have been tion and security, achievement and effectiveness,
pilloried. Nixon’s diplomacy deviated from the inclusion and belonging, and pride and self-respect.
group norm but ended up building credit with his Followers reciprocate these benefits with gratitude
followers for further innovations. and loyalty, commitment and effort, cooperation
Hollander defines the legitimacy given to lead- and sacrifice, and respect and obedience.
ers by followers as the basis for leaders’ ability to
induce their followers to voluntarily comply with
The Graen Team’s Work
their directives for change. A leader without legiti-
macy will not be followed. According to Tom The principal theory that makes the individual
Tyler, the legitimacy of a leader or authority leader-member dyadic relationship the fundamental
depends very heavily on the leader’s using fair pro- component of the leadership process is George
cedures in making decisions, that is, on procedural Graen and his colleagues’ leader-member exchange
justice. Procedural justice provides a benefit, but it (LMX) theory. LMX theory has evolved through a
is a psychological rather than a tangible benefit. number of stages. Originally, it was termed the
Through treating the follower fairly, the leader vertical-dyad linkage (VDL) theory, and at that
signals that the follower is a valuable member of point, researchers examined the vertical linkages, or
the group. By being fair and unbiased, by listening relationships, leaders created with their followers.
Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory 519

They found that followers with positive, high- to the second phase, acquaintance, which is char-
quality relationships consisting of mutual respect, acterized by increased social exchanges such as
trust, and obligation become part of the leader’s sharing information and resources of both a per-
ingroup. Followers in the ingroup become trusted sonal and work nature. Finally, the relationship
assistants going above and beyond their job descrip- can mature to the third phase, mature partnership,
tions for their leader. In return, the leader does which includes even greater social exchanges such
more for ingroup than outgroup members and gives as respect, trust, and obligations. This final stage is
ingroup members more information and influence. marked by high-quality dyadic exchanges, with a
VDL theory subsequently became leader- shift in focus from self-interest to the interests of
member exchange theory, and the focus shifted to the group; thus, the relationship at this stage can
examining the nature of these relationships and the be considered transformational in nature.
organizational outcomes associated with the qual-
ity of leader–follower relationships. At this stage, Crystal L. Hoyt and George R. Goethals
researchers noted that these dyadic relationships See also Charismatic Leadership; Contingency Theories
occur through a role-making process, and they of Leadership; Great Person Theory of Leadership;
identified a number of characteristics and behaviors Idiosyncrasy Credit; Interactionist Theories of
of both leaders and followers that have an impact Leadership; Leadership; Path–Goal Theory of
on the development of these relationships. For Leadership; Personality Theories of Leadership;
example, the quality of these relationships is influ- Procedural Justice; Relational Model of Authority in
enced by the value agreement between leaders and Groups; Social Exchange in Networks and Groups;
followers, communication patterns and frequency, Social Identity Theory of Leadership; Transactional
interaction patterns, and influence tactics, as well Leadership Theories; Transformational Leadership
as by followers’ optimism, dependability, and effi- Theories; Vertical Dyad Linkage Model
cacy. High-quality relationships between leaders
and followers are associated with a great variety of
Further Readings
positive outcomes, including organizational perfor-
mance, job satisfaction, and career progress. Burns, J. M. (2003). Transforming leadership: A new
The next stage in the evolution of LMX theory pursuit of happiness. New York: Atlantic Monthly
has shifted the focus from a descriptive approach Press.
to a prescriptive approach, emphasizing the devel- Graen, G., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based
opment of effective dyadic partnerships in the approach to leadership: Development of leader-
leadership-making model. Thus, the focus has member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over
shifted from examining how leaders differentiate 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain
among followers to highlighting how leaders can perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6, 219–247.
Hollander, E. P. (1993). Legitimacy, power, and
develop effective relationships with all group
influence: A perspective on relational features of
members. There also has been a shift from a hier-
leadership. In M. M. Chemers & R. Ayman (Eds.),
archical leader–follower approach to viewing lead-
Leadership theory and research: Perspectives and
ership as a partnership of group members. This
directions (pp. 29–48). San Diego, CA: Academic
model suggests that leadership making occurs pro- Press.
gressively over three phases. The first phase, Messick, D. M. (2005). On the psychological exchange
termed the stranger phase, is characterized by rule- between leaders and followers. In D. M. Messick &
bound, formal interactions focused on purely con- R. M. Kramer (Eds.), The psychology of leadership:
tractual exchanges; leaders give followers what New perspectives and research (pp. 81–96). Mahwah,
they need to do their job, and followers do only NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
the basic requirements of their job. This phase is Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social
akin to the transactional model of leadership and psychology of groups. New York: John Wiley.
is characterized by low-quality exchanges and self- Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of
interested motivations. authority in groups. Advances in experimental social
When one of the dyad members makes an offer psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 115–191). San Diego, CA:
for improved relations, the relationship can move Academic Press.
520 Leadership

19th-century belief that leaders are born not made is


Leadership no longer in vogue—research has failed to find
“great leader” genes. However, the idea that some of
We are consumed with interest in leaders. We us have personalities, however acquired, that predis-
animatedly gossip about “the boss”; airport book- pose us to lead effectively in all or most situations,
shops bulge with leadership books; current affairs whereas others do not, has attracted enormous
dissect the actions of leaders; and much of the research attention. For example, modern transfor-
organizational and management sciences is a mational theories of leadership (see below) capture
study of leadership and the role of the CEO (chief this idea with the concept of charisma—a charis-
executive officer). This is not surprising. Our lead- matic personality or leadership style is critically
ers have enormous influence over us—they make important for leaders to be able to transform group
decisions for us and shape the course of our lives goals and practices. James Meindl talks about “the
and even the type of people we are, and so we romance of leadership” to capture our obsession
focus on how effective they are; how we elect, with charisma as a basis of effective leadership.
appoint, and depose them; and whether they lead A definitive review published in 2002 concluded
for good or for evil. This entry defines leadership, that three of the “Big Five” personality dimensions
and then describes the major organizational and identified by personality research are associated
social psychological theories of leadership. with effective leadership: They are extraversion/
surgency, intellect/openness to experience, and
conscientiousness. Overall, however, many leader-
Defining Leadership
ship theorists believe that personality perspectives
Leadership is a process where an individual, or on leadership do not allow us very reliably to dif-
clique, is able to influence others, as a group or ferentiate between effective and ineffective leaders.
as group members, to internalize a collective vision,
and mobilize them toward attaining that vision.
Effective leadership transforms people’s goals
What Do Effective Leaders Do?
and ambitions, even their identity, and replaces self- One reaction to a focus on stable personality cor-
oriented behavior with group-oriented behavior. The relates of effective leadership was a somewhat
exercise of power over people to force them, through extreme stance that we can all lead effectively if the
rewards and punishments, to merely comply with situation is right. Research shows this to be only
commands and bend to one’s will is not leadership. partially true—some people still appear to be more
One important distinction is between effective/ effective across a range of situations. A less extreme
ineffective leadership and good/bad leadership. reaction to personality perspectives is to focus on
The effectiveness of leadership is largely a matter leadership behaviors: Maybe some behaviors are
of fact (the leader can or cannot change attitudes more effective for leadership than others. One reli-
and motivate action), whereas the difference able distinction that has emerged over and over
between good and bad leadership is largely a sub- again in many different guises is between a leader-
jective judgment hinging on whether the leader has ship style that pays more attention to the group
attributes we applaud, uses means we approve of, task and getting things done (task-oriented leader-
and sets and achieves goals we value. Leadership ship), and one that pays attention to relationships
research focuses on leadership effectiveness rather among group members (socioemotional leader-
than the moral quality of the means and ends of ship). Most groups require both types of leader-
leadership. ship and people who are capable of being both
task focused and socioemotionally focused tend to
be the most effective.
Personality Attributes of Great Leaders
Although leadership is a group process (leaders
require followers), leadership research has a long
Contingency Theories
history of focusing on the personality attributes However, different situations and different group
of leaders that make them great leaders. The activities call for different emphases on the task or
Leadership 521

on relationships—in which case the relative effec- A fourth contingency theory is situational lead-
tiveness of task-oriented and relationship-oriented ership theory. A distinction is drawn between
leaders may be contingent on properties of the directive and supportive behavior that produces
leadership situation. This idea is reflected in Fred four leadership behaviors: telling (high directive,
Fiedler’s contingency theory of leadership. Very low supportive), selling (high directive, high sup-
popular in the 1970s, one strength of this theory portive), participating (low directive, high support-
was that Fiedler had a way to measure leadership ive), and delegating (low directive, low supportive).
style—the Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) Scale, Effective leaders need to tailor their behavior to
according to which people who rate their least the situational demands of subordinates’ level of
preferred coworker favorably are relationship ori- task ability and task willingness—for example,
ented, while those who rate their least preferred telling is best suited to low-ability followers, and
coworker unfavorably are task oriented—and to participating to highly motivated followers.
classify how well structured situations were.
Generally, relationship-oriented leadership was
Transactional Leadership
most effective unless the group task was very
poorly structured or very well structured, when a Another way to view leadership is as a transaction
task-oriented style was more effective. between leaders and followers—the leader does
Another contingency perspective is normative something benefiting followers, and followers in
decision theory. Leaders can choose to make deci- turn allow the leader to lead. Underpinning this
sions autocratically (subordinate input is not idea is an assumption that leadership is a process
sought), consultatively (subordinate input is of exchange, similar to contractual relations in
sought, but the leader retains authority to make economic life that are based on good faith. Leaders
the final decision), or as a genuine group decision transact with followers to get things done, setting
(leader and subordinates are equal partners in expectations and goals and providing recognition
shared decision making). The efficacy of these and rewards for task completion. There also is an
strategies is contingent on the quality of leader– equity dimension to the leader–follower relation-
subordinate relationships (which influences how ship. Because effective leaders play a greater role in
committed and supportive subordinates are), and steering groups to their goals than do followers,
on task clarity and structure (which influences followers may reinstate equity by rewarding the
the leader’s need for subordinate input). Autocratic leader with social approval, praise, prestige, status,
leadership is fast and effective if leader–subordinate and power—the trappings of effective leadership.
relationships are good and the task is well struc- An early transactional approach is Edwin
tured. When the task is less clear, consultative Hollander’s analysis of idiosyncrasy credit. Leaders
leadership is best, and when leader–subordinate who initially conform to group norms, and there-
relations are poor, group decision making is best. fore serve the group well, lay the groundwork for
A third contingency theory is path–goal theory. a transaction in which they are subsequently
It assumes that a leader’s main function is to moti- rewarded by the group by being allowed to be
vate followers by clarifying the paths that will help idiosyncratic and innovative—key features of effec-
them attain their goals—leaders do this by direct- tive leadership.
ing task-related activities (structuring) or by Another well-known transactional leadership
addressing followers’ personal and emotional theory is the vertical dyad linkage (VDL) model.
needs (consideration). Structuring is most effective Leaders develop different exchange relationships
when followers are unclear about their goals and with specific subordinates, in which the subordi-
how to reach them, and consideration is most nate can either be treated as a close and valued
effective when the task is boring or uncomfortable. “ingroup” member with the leader or in a more
Structuring can be viewed as meddling and micro- remote manner as an “outgroup” member who is
management when tasks are well understood, and separate from the leader.
consideration can be considered distracting and This model quickly evolved into the now better-
unnecessary when followers are already engaged known leader-member exchange (LMX) theory
and motivated. in which the dichotomous ingroup/outgroup
522 Leadership

transaction was replaced by a continuum of qual- Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ),


ity of exchange relationships ranging from ones which has been extraordinarily widely used and is
that are based on mutual trust, respect, and obli- the leadership questionnaire of choice of the orga-
gation (high-quality LMX relationships), to ones nizational and management research communities.
that are mechanically based on the terms of the
formal employment contract between leader and
Perceptions, Schemas,
subordinate (low-quality LMX relationships).
and Stereotypes of Leaders
Effective leadership hinges on high-quality LMX
relationships. High-quality relationships motivate There are a number of perspectives on leadership
subordinates to internalize the group’s and the that focus on the causes and consequences for
leader’s goals, whereas low-quality relationships leadership of our cognitive representations of what
lead subordinates to simply comply with the makes an effective leader. According to Robert
leader’s goals, without internalizing them as their Lord’s leader categorization theory, we have ste-
own. However, from a leader’s point of view reotypical expectations (schemas) and implicit
high-quality relationships are labor intensive; so theories about the attributes an effective leader
over time leaders tend to develop them with only should have in general, or in specific leadership
a small subset of group members and develop low- situations. Once we categorize someone as a leader
quality relationships with the rest of the group. we automatically engage the relevant leadership
schema—the better the match between the leader’s
actual characteristics and the leadership schema,
Transformational Leadership and Charisma
the more favorable are our evaluations of the
Typically, effective leaders are innovative and able leader and his or her leadership, and the more
to mobilize followers to buy and implement their likely we are to follow his or her lead.
new vision for the group—they are transforma- There are two other ways in which stereotypical
tional. Transformational leadership is characterized expectations (schemas, implicit theories) might
by (a) careful attention to followers’ needs, abilities, affect leadership. According to status characteris-
and aspirations; (b) challenging followers’ basic tics theory, in a task-oriented group our evalua-
thinking, assumptions, and practices; and (c) exer- tions of effective leadership rest on whether we
cise of charisma and inspiration. Charisma is critical believe the leader has the attributes to perform the
for transformational leadership (there is much talk group task, called specific status characteristics,
about charismatic or visionary leaders and leader- and whether the leader is a member of a high-
ship), which has engaged a debate among scholars status group in society generally and therefore pos-
about (a) whether this is a return to older personal- sesses attributes that are valued in society, called
ity perspectives on leadership and (b) how one can diffuse status characteristics. Influence, or leader-
distinguish between charisma in the service of evil ship, is an additive function of perceived group
(e.g., Slobodan Milosevic) and charisma in the ser- task competence and perceived societal status.
vice of good (e.g., Nelson Mandela). Role congruity theory focuses primarily on gen-
Transformational leadership and transactional der and leadership. The argument is that social
leadership are foci on leadership, but both are stereotypes of women typically do not match well
also leadership styles that can be contrasted to with schemas of effective leadership, and thus in
other leadership styles. Transformational leaders many leadership situations women find it difficult
inspire followers to adopt a vision, whereas trans- to be endorsed, by both males and females, as
actional leaders appeal more to followers’ individual effective leaders. There is a lack of congruity
self-interest. A third leadership style—laissez- between the attributes of the leadership role and
faire (noninterfering) leadership, which involves the stereotypical attributes of women.
not making choices or decisions, and not reward-
ing others or shaping their behavior—has recently
Social Identity and Leadership
been added to transactional and transformational
leadership. The components of transactional and A number of approaches to leadership assign fol-
transformational leadership are measured by the lowers a key role—as noted above for transactional
Leadership 523

theories and schema-based approaches. Other per- identify as relevant comparison outgroups those
spectives have argued that “followership” is critical that are most favorable to their own prototypi-
to good leadership, as effective followers can guide cality, and engage in a discourse to raise or
leaders in the “right” direction—helping to contain lower the salience of the group for its members
any tendency for corrupt or ineffective leadership. (raising salience benefits more prototypical lead-
One aspect of leadership that is often under­ ers, lowering salience benefits nonprototypical
emphasized is its identity function—groups furnish leaders). Nonprototypical leaders engage in group-
members with a sense of identity, and people look oriented behaviors to strengthen their member-
to groups and their leaders to fulfill this function. ship credentials.
This idea has been pursued by Michael Hogg’s Although leadership can be a matter of weaving
social identity theory of leadership. According to a collection of individuals into a group with a
the social identity theory of leadership, a key func- single identity and vision, more often than not it is
tion of leadership is to forge, transform, and con- matter of transcending intergroup divisions that
solidate one’s identity as a group member—one’s can sometimes be deep and conflictual—for exam-
social identity. The implication of this is that if ple, the challenge of providing national leadership
membership in a group is important to you, par- in Iraq to Sunnis, Shi’ites, and Kurds. The chal-
ticularly to your sense of self, you are more likely lenge of successful intergroup leadership is the
to be influenced by a leader who matches your wider challenge of building social harmony and a
understanding of what the group stands for (a common purpose and identity out of conflict
leader who is prototypical of the group) than one among groups. A key issue is that intergroup lead-
who does not. Effective leadership in such groups ers are often viewed as representing one group
rests significantly on the leader’s being perceived more than the other; they are outgroup leaders to
by followers as being prototypical—even to the one subgroup, and thus suffer compromised effec-
extent that general attributes of good leadership tiveness. To overcome this problem, intergroup
decline in importance. One reason leaders who are leaders need to build a common ingroup identity
prototypical members of subjectively important that does not threaten the identity of subgroups—a
groups can be effective is that followers believe careful balancing of the superordinate identity and
that because their identity and that of the group associated vision with recognition of the integrity
are closely matched, these leaders treat members and valued contribution of subgroup identities.
fairly and must be acting in the best interest of the
group—they are therefore trusted and allowed to
Trust and the Group Value Model
be innovative.
For the social identity theory of leadership, and A key dimension of leadership is trust. Can we
in line with James Meindl’s “romance of leader- trust our leaders; if we are to follow their lead
ship,” charisma is an attributional consequence of surely we should trust them? One important basis
effective leadership, not a cause—people unduly of trust is shared group membership, and so we
attribute leadership behavior to the leader’s dispo- tend to trust leaders who we view as being “one
sitions rather than situational or contextual fac- of us”—prototypical members of a group we
tors. Charisma constructed in this way further identify with.
facilitates leadership. We are also more likely to trust our leaders if
Overall effective leaders are, or learn to be, they treat us fairly and with respect. According to
what Steven Reicher has termed “entrepreneurs of Tom Tyler’s group value model and his relational
identity”—they are adept at being able to maintain model of authority in groups, fairness and justice
the group’s perception that they are highly proto- perceptions are critical to group life. Trust in lead-
typical of the group. They can do this in different ership is particularly influenced by members’ per-
ways: talk up prototypical aspects of their behav- ceptions that leaders have used fair procedures
ior and talk down nonprototypical aspects, char- (procedural justice) in their dealings with them.
acterize as marginal those members who do not Distributive justice (the fairness of resource alloca-
share their prototype of the group, vilify and cast tions within the group) is important, but proce-
as deviant those who are contending for leadership, dural justice is more important. One reason for
524 Legitimation

this is that procedural justice serves a social iden- Hogg, M. A. (2007). Social psychology of leadership. In
tity function—it conveys a favorable social evalua- A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Social
tion of followers as group members. The respect psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed.,
for group members conveyed by procedural fair- pp. 716–733). New York: Guilford.
ness builds member identification and thus feeds Hogg, M. A. (2010). Influence and leadership. In
into cooperative and compliant behavior. As mem- S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The
bers identify more strongly with the group, they handbook of social psychology (5th ed.). New York:
care more that the leader is procedurally fair, and John Wiley.
Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W.
care less that the leader is distributively fair. This
(2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and
asymmetry arises because with increasing identifi-
quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology,
cation, instrumental outcome-oriented consider-
87, 765–780.
ations (distributive justice) become less important
Kellerman, B. (2004). Bad leadership: What it is, how it
relative to intragroup relational and membership happens, why it matters. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
considerations (procedural justice). Business School Press.
One ramification of this analysis is that leader- Northouse, P. G. (2007). Leadership: Theory and practice
ship can be an effective structural solution to social (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
dilemmas. Social dilemmas are crises of trust in Riggio, R. E., Chaleff, I., & Lipman-Blumen, J. (Eds.).
which people fail to make short-term personal sac- (2008). The art of followership: How great followers
rifices for the longer term greater good of the create great leaders and organizations. San Francisco:
group as a whole—instead they pursue their own Jossey-Bass.
short-term selfish interests. Social dilemmas are van Knippenberg, D., van Knippenberg, B., De Cremer, D.,
notoriously difficult to resolve. However, enhanc- & Hogg, M. A. (2004). Leadership, self, and identity:
ing a sense of common social identity can build A review and research agenda. The Leadership
trust that resolves the dilemma. Leadership plays Quarterly, 15, 825–856.
an often critical role in this process precisely Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in organizations (6th ed.).
because a leader can transform selfish individual Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
goals into shared group goals by building a sense
of common identity, shared fate, interindividual
trust, and custodianship of the collective good.
Legitimation
Michael A. Hogg
See also Charismatic Leadership; Contingency Theories When something is legitimated, such as an employ-
of Leadership; Great Person Theory of Leadership; ment practice in an organization (e.g., a family
Interactionist Theories of Leadership; Leader leave policy) or a particular person in a manage-
Categorization Theory; Leader-Member Exchange rial position, this means that its existence and
(LMX) Theory; Path–Goal Theory of Leadership; prevalence is taken for granted by a “social audi-
Personality Theories of Leadership; Relational Model ence” (i.e., real other people or the presence of
of Authority in Groups; Romance of Leadership; others implied by social norms and ideologies).
Social Identity Theory of Leadership; Socioemotional Thus, legitimation refers to the taken-for-granted
and Task Behavior; Status; Status Characteristics/
support of an aspect of social life (e.g., acts, indi-
Expectation States Theory; Transactional Leadership
viduals, a position, or a structure of positions) by
Theories; Transformational Leadership Theories;
Vertical Dyad Linkage Model
real or implied other people. Questions of legiti-
macy repeatedly arise in studies pertaining to
political and organizational structures, status rela-
Further Readings tions in and between groups, and inequality.
Chemers, M. M. (2001). Leadership effectiveness: An The early 20th-century sociologist Max Weber
integrative review. In M. A. Hogg & R. S. Tindale noted that people feel obligated to obey the norms
(Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: or rules associated with a legitimated object (e.g.,
Group processes (pp. 376–399). Oxford, UK: the rules of an authority structure in an organiza-
Blackwell. tion), even when they personally disagree with
Legitimation 525

them. This taken-for-granted aspect of social life (communicated verbally or nonverbally) toward
often becomes seen as what is right. For example, high-status members. This interaction creates a
a person in a managerial position is perceived to be process where everyone believes that everyone else
legitimate when there is a real or perceived consen- supports the person who is more worthy and who
sus that this person is the appropriate person for gets more influence (this process is called endorse-
the job. Subordinates, then, obey the manager’s ment of the group status hierarchy). If no one chal-
commands, even when they personally disagree lenges this deference, members will continue to act
with him or her. as if this should happen, and the hierarchy will
Many things can be legitimated. For example, a become implicitly legitimate.
particular act, such as a manager firing a subordi- Sometimes, members who do not possess the
nate or an individual holding a position (e.g., floor more highly valued states of social characteristics
supervisor), or a structure of positions in groups or still become high-status members because they pos-
organizations, or intergroup status relations in a sess specific skills that are relevant to the group’s
society become legitimated through a social pro- task (e.g., a Black member who is a legal expert
cess. This process involves people assuming that working on a legal task). These people are at a
other people in general accept the object for what disadvantage, however, in trying to gain legitimacy
it is and, often over time, for what it should be. in their positions, because it is not typical or usual
Scholars who study legitimacy processes in for people like them to occupy high-status posi-
groups focus on how the legitimacy of groups’ sta- tions. As a result, although they are influential,
tus hierarchies emerges and how authorities acquire they face more obstacles in becoming legitimated in
legitimacy in the eyes of their subordinates in orga- their positions. Members’ endorsement (i.e., sup-
nizations. Status hierarchies develop in groups port) for these people’s leadership is weaker, as are
(e.g., committees, task forces, gangs), where some expectations for compliance with their directives.
members are seen as more worthy and esteemed Researchers also examine how individuals in
than other members. Scholars also investigate the authority positions acquire legitimacy. Previous
consequences of the legitimacy of status hierarchies studies have shown that individuals in authority
in groups and status relations among groups, as positions are more likely to be legitimated when
well as the conditions under which these legitimate their appointments are based on qualifications and
orders become inefficient and perpetuate inequal- past achievements and are designated by someone
ity within groups, organizations, and society. They at the top of the authority structure. Authorities
also examine the consequences of the legitimacy of also acquire legitimacy based on the ways they
authorities for interaction in organizations. interact with subordinates—two specific ways are
the use of fair procedures when making decisions
and the benevolent use of power. Authorities use
Emergence of Legitimation
fair procedures when they make decisions that are
Legitimacy theories argue that low- and high- seen as unbiased, respectful, and consistent across
status members in a group expect that those with individuals and that take into consideration the
highly valued states of social characteristics (e.g., subordinates’ views.
men in regard to the social characteristic gender, An authority’s use of fair procedures and treat-
and Whites in terms of race) will occupy highly ment ensures that subordinates feel respected
valued positions within the group because this is within their group, which in turn increases subor-
what they perceive to be typical around them dinates’ feelings of self-worth. Many social psy-
(e.g., in groups within occupational, political, and chologists assume that individuals are motivated
religious structures). Consequently, when these by and desire positive social identities from their
individuals become high-status members within a standing in a group and the value of their group.
group, low- and high-status members tend to The use of fair procedures signals to the subordi-
react to this as if it should have happened this nates that they are respected within their group.
way because they, in fact, expected this to hap- Therefore, when an authority uses fair procedures
pen. Thus, low-status members express deferen- to make decisions and treats subordinates fairly,
tial behaviors such as esteem, respect, and honor the legitimacy of that authority is enhanced. For
526 Legitimation

example, when a floor supervisor acts respectfully persistence of inequality. Group members who
toward assembly-line workers and treats them all possess more highly valued states of social charac-
consistently, those workers are more likely to see teristics are likely to be more assertive and influen-
that supervisor as legitimate. tial in decision making than members who are
An authority also gains legitimacy by providing status disadvantaged. Yet, this consequence often
resources to subordinates that benefit their wel- leads to inefficient decision making because the
fare. Authorities typically have more resources members who are in fact most competent are not
than subordinates, and therefore have opportuni- always those who are most influential. Also, group
ties to contribute to subordinates’ welfare by dis- members who actually may not be as competent at
tributing rewards that assist their subordinates in the group’s task may still receive deferential behav-
being successful in their jobs. For example, author- ior from other group members that, in effect,
ities often have access to valuable knowledge, maintains the status quo. These patterns of defer-
skills, training, and strategic information that is ence are backed by the threat of informal sanctions
useful to subordinates. They may also offer guid- from group members, creating a context where
ance, assistance, and advice to enhance and facili- valuable opinions by status-disadvantaged mem-
tate subordinates’ work, and may be able to bers are ignored and poor decisions are made.
benefit subordinates in other ways, such as by In addition, studies show that women and
allowing extra time for lunch, giving credit to sub- minorities who become high-status members in
ordinates for successful outcomes, providing groups because they possess specific skills needed
bonuses, and upgrading offices. by the group are more likely to face resistance
When authorities provide rewards that contrib- from others when they become “too directive.”
ute to the collective interest of subordinates, this This resistance faced by members with status
creates obligations between the authority and the disadvantages is a reflection of a problem of the
subordinates. Repeated successful exchanges legitimation of the group’s status structure. As a
(exchanges of rewards and cooperation) between consequence of their lack of legitimacy, women
authorities and their subordinates are likely to and minorities are more limited in the range of
stimulate perceptions of trust and fairness and feel- their behaviors accepted by the other group
ings of social obligation, leading to perceptions of members.
the legitimacy of authorities. Taken together, using In regard to authorities, legitimacy is undoubt-
fair procedures in decision making and distribut- edly a key factor in predicting their success with
ing valued rewards fairly among subordinates their subordinates. Subordinates who perceive
contribute to a collective sense of the legitimacy of their boss as legitimate are more likely to comply
an authority. That is, subordinates perceive that and defer to his or her requests. Also, legitimated
other subordinates support the authority (i.e., give authorities are perceived as more effective and
the authority their endorsement) and this, in turn, influential by their subordinates than authorities
perpetuates the authority’s legitimacy. without legitimacy. They also have more leeway in
Scholars recognize that women and minorities, in the directives (e.g., work assignments, evaluations,
many contexts, are at a disadvantage in acquiring and/or demands of performance) subordinates
legitimacy compared to their White male counter- accept from them, even though these directives
parts. Women and minorities are more likely to must fall within the scope of their authority.
receive fewer resources, support, and positive evalu- Legitimacy, then, obligates the subordinates to
ations from their superiors, which is referred to as obey the authority’s commands, and this social
lack of authorization. As a result, they have fewer obligation is enforced through informal sanctions
opportunities to benefit their subordinates and to cre- by the subordinates and through formal sanctions
ate the joint obligations needed to gain legitimacy. by those from above.
When authorities are not legitimated, subordi-
nates are more likely to go over their heads or
Consequences of Legitimation
form coalitions with each other to resolve conflicts
Researchers show how the legitimacy of groups’ than when authorities are legitimated. Notably,
status hierarchies can lead to the maintenance and research shows that the benefits of legitimacy are
Leniency Contract 527

greater for women and minorities in authority See also Charismatic Leadership; Contingency Theories
positions, in that they are less likely to receive of Leadership; Great Person Theories of Leadership;
cooperation and deference unless they are legiti- Interactionist Theories of Leadership; Leader-Member
mated in their positions. Yet, ironically, they have Exchange (LMX) Theory; Path–Goal Theory of
Leadership; Personality Theories of Leadership; Power;
the most difficulty in acquiring legitimacy.
Procedural Justice; Relational Model of Authority in
In addition to reporting the findings of their
Groups; Romance of Leadership; Social Identity
studies on the emergence and consequences of Theory; Social Identity Theory of Leadership; Status
legitimation, scholars also note that not all legiti- Characteristics/Expectation States Theory;
mated aspects of social life remain so. New prac- Transactional Leadership Theories; Transformational
tices, procedures, and ways of doing things Leadership Theories; Vertical Dyad Linkage Model
emerge as the legitimacy of old ones is challenged.
For example, status hierarchies in groups may
become delegitimated when an authority external Further Readings
to the group negatively evaluates the leader’s Berger, J., Ridgeway, C. L., Fiske, M. H., & Norman, R. Z.
work and, in effect, questions the leader’s right to (1998). The legitimation and delegitimation of power
his or her high status position. Research also sug- and prestige orders. American Sociological Review,
gests that when members of status-disadvantaged 63, 379–405.
groups within society believe that their group’s Johnson, C., Dowd, T. J., & Ridgeway, C. L. (2006).
position is illegitimate and unstable, and that a Legitimacy as a social process. Annual Review of
different social order is possible, they are likely to Sociology, 32, 53–78.
engage in intergroup competition that directly Jost, J. T., & Majors, B. (Eds.). (2001). The psychology
challenges the legitimacy of current intergroup of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology,
status relations. justice, and intergroup relations. Cambridge, UK:
The arguments above show that legitimation of Cambridge University Press.
certain aspects of social life can lead to negative Suchman, M. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and
consequences. The acceptance of widespread con- institutional approaches. Academy of Management
sensual beliefs in the larger society, such as status Review, 20, 571–610.
beliefs associated with social characteristics and Weber, M. (1968). Economy and society (G. Roth &
cultural beliefs about intergroup status differences C. Wittich, Eds.). Berkeley: University of California
within a society, fosters nonoptimal decisions and Press. (Original work published 1918)
practices and also fuels the reproduction of inequal- Zelditch, M., Jr. (2001). Processes of legitimation: Recent
ity in and between groups. Thus scholars in inter- developments and new directions. Social Psychology
group relations examine how dominant groups Quarterly, 64, 4–17.
with high status and power in a society continue to Zelditch, M., Jr., & Walker, H. A. (1984). Legitimacy
and the stability of authority. Advances in Group
impose the dominant value system that benefits
Processes, 1, 1–25.
these groups and, in turn, uphold the legitimacy of
the status quo (i.e., the existing status differences
between groups). However, legitimation of other
social aspects can lead to positive consequences.
The legitimacy of authority relations in organiza- Leniency Contract
tions, for example, can foster stability and coop-
eration in interaction among organizational The leniency contract is an influential model of
members. Whether legitimacy is bad or good in a minority influence. It is designed to identify fac-
particular context, however, it is a fundamental tors that affect the likelihood that a minority
process that is basic to social organization. group will be able to persuade the majority to
adopt its point of view. The essence of the con-
Cathryn Johnson tract is that majority members agree to hear a
See also Power; Procedural Justice; Social Identity minority view they might otherwise dismiss out of
Theory; Status; Status Characteristics/Expectation hand—thus, the term leniency—on the implicit
States Theory condition that the viewpoint is provided by a
528 Leniency Contract

member of the ingroup, and with the proviso that Elements of the Leniency Contract
the majority will not be expected to change. In
some cases, despite this understanding, the minor- The leniency contract was created to identify the
ity does influence the majority. This entry describes conditions under which the minority’s message
the theoretical background that gives rise to the will have an immediate influence on majority
leniency contract, and then considers elements of group members’ focal attitudes (the beliefs that are
the contract in detail and summarizes some the target of persuasion), a delayed influence on
research that bears on its validity. focal attitudes, an indirect influence (i.e., an influ-
ence on attitudes related but not identical to the
focus of the minority’s message), or no influence at
Theoretical Context
all. All these outcomes are found in minority influ-
Typically, the majority can bring considerable ence research. Prior to the leniency contract, no
pressure on errant members to act in ways that theory could account for all of them.
most other group members consider appropriate. The contract leans on social identity theory and
The majority can sanction members’ beliefs and the elaboration likelihood model to generate pre-
actions in many ways, including physical punish- dictions. It uses information concerning the ingroup
ment and social ostracism, so it is natural that we or outgroup status of the minority and the strength
think of the effects of the majority on the minority of its persuasive message. Minority status can be
when we think of ways groups influence people. based on number, demographic features (race, sex,
Even so, the influence of the minority on the ethnicity), or the relative deviance of a position. In
majority bears consideration. Think of the early most research on minority-based persuasion, the
Christian church: In the beginning, it had little factors of number and opinion deviance are com-
power. Its members were ignored or ostracized bined, in that a small numerical minority advo-
and sometimes put to death for their beliefs. By the cates a deviant opinion. The leniency contract was
3rd century, however, Emperor Constantine had devised to pinpoint the psychological processes
become a Christian, and the Christian church was that occur when a minority source voices a posi-
the unofficial religion of Imperial Rome. tion at odds with established majority views.
How did this change occur? Social psycholo- The contract holds that the majority’s first
gists have been actively studying how minorities response to a persuasive message coming from a
exert influence, trying to understand how groups minority source is to determine the source’s ingroup
with no power to enforce their views can prevail. or outgroup status. If the source is an outgroup,
According to many thoughtful researchers, this their standing must be established: Is the outgroup
issue is important because minority groups are favored or despised? If the group is despised, its
responsible for most creative and innovative social message will be dismissed outright, unless it repre-
changes. sents a severe threat to the ingroup. In that case,
To understand the power of minorities, we the majority might bolster its position to overcome
must acknowledge the importance of our group the threat presented by the outgroup. If the out-
memberships, which we value because they help us group is favored, its message may be influential if
define ourselves and present ourselves to others. I the topic is one in which the majority believe the
am a teacher, a runner, a Democrat; she is a nurse, minority source possesses great expertise. This
a black belt, a Steelers fan—our group identities influence is not the result of much thought, so
help us create a picture of ourselves and present minority influence in this circumstance will be
ourselves to the outside world. temporary and easily undone.
In early minority influence research, individu- A different set of decision processes occurs
als’ membership in the majority or minority was when the minority source is part of the ingroup
recognized, but the significance of these groups (that is, part of the majority group, but voicing a
as a source of self-identity was underappreci- position that is at variance with the position of
ated. Today, the importance of group member- most of the other group members). First, the
ship in explaining minority influence is better minority’s message is considered carefully or elab-
understood. orated. Elaboration involves determining if the
Leniency Contract 529

message threatens the group’s continued existence. attitude. The message had no effect on the group’s
If so, then to preserve the group, the majority will attitudes toward gays in the military, but that it
attempt to bring the deviant ingroup minority back had a powerful effect on their attitudes toward gun
into the fold. If this attempt proves unsuccessful, control. Earlier research had established that these
the ingroup minority is recast as an outgroup. two attitudes were strongly related, although par-
If the ingroup minority’s message is not deemed ticipants were only dimly aware of this.
threatening to the group’s existence, a second When the same message was attributed to an
elaboration phase begins. In this situation, the outgroup minority or presented as the majority’s
quality of the minority’s message determines the position, no attitude change was evident in those
outcome. Weak or uninvolving messages will have receiving the message. The leniency contract holds
transitory effects, if any, on indirect attitudes that indirect change in group members’ response
(beliefs that are associated with the topic of the to a minority ingroup’s counterattitudinal message
persuasive message but not identical to it). occurs because of the implicit rules of conduct that
Consider, for example, a persuasive message on guide behavior in groups. To placate the rebellious
the right to choose abortion that is contrary to the ingroup minority while maintaining group integ-
general beliefs of the majority. The message might rity, which is vital if the group is a source of social
not change anyone’s mind about abortion, but it identity, the majority will consider the ingroup
might affect views regarding contraception. minority position leniently, with no disapproval of
Messages from minority sources will not affect the messenger.
focal attitudes because majority members are hesi- Ordinarily, such open-minded responses facili-
tant to be associated with the minority’s position, tate attitude change, but the leniency contract
which may attract considerable flak. However, holds that this tolerant orientation is adopted
indirect attitude change may ensue—but it will not because of the quid pro quo that is part of all con-
persist if the persuasive message is not strong and tracts, namely, that in payment for a lenient recep-
compelling. tion of deviant (i.e., minority) views, no change will
If the ingroup’s message is strong, however, a ensue. It is as if the majority were to say, “We will
number of interesting effects will occur. The mes- allow you to speak your piece, courteously and
sage will be viewed positively; it also might result with little critique. In turn, we will not change.”
in a more positive evaluation of the minority and This contractual system placates the minority while
very likely will cause immediate indirect attitude simultaneously maintaining the stability of the
change. Immediate focal change will not occur. majority group’s belief structure. The contract need
So, for example, a message in favor of a woman’s not be explicit or even conscious. It is a convention
right to choose abortion that is delivered by an that fosters group preservation while allowing con-
ingroup minority to the anti-abortion majority siderable ingroup attitudinal variation on noncriti-
may result in a more positive majority view of cal issues.
contraception, even though the minority’s This is not to suggest that the minority is an
prochoice message never mentioned contracep- impotent change agent. When the majority open-
tion. This indirect attitude-change effect, which mindedly considers a counterattitudinal message
only occurs in response to an ingroup minority’s without condemning the source, it creates consid-
message, is one of the most remarkable features of erable pressure to change. Although focal change
minority influence research. is precluded by the leniency contract, the reality of
the pressure cannot be denied. The leniency model
holds that this pressure to change spreads to other,
Related Research
closely related attitudes, and this is why ingroup
Research consistent with these predictions was minorities produce immediate changes on related
presented in 1997 by Eusebio Alvaro and William attitudes.
Crano, who prepared a strong counterattitudinal Such changes can have substantial, if delayed,
message, attributed to an ingroup minority, which effects on focal attitudes. Strong minority-induced
advocated disallowing gays in the military. This indirect attitude change will bring about delayed
position was contrary to the group’s established focal attitude change because attitudes are linked in
530 Levels of Analysis

a cognitive network. Thus, a large change in one competitive nature), as well as by the characteris-
attitude will affect related attitudes. This delayed tics of the institution within which the group
focal change pattern is common in the minority exists (e.g., its pay and promotion structure).
influence literature. The leniency contract supplies Thus, a full understanding of group and inter-
a plausible explanation of this pattern, while also group processes requires attention to multiple
explaining immediate direct change, or no change levels of analysis. This entry describes those levels
at all. and their interrelationships.
William D. Crano
Multiple Levels of Analysis
See also Anticonformity; Categorization; Idiosyncrasy
Credit; Informational Influence; Innovation; Minority The eight levels of analysis relevant to group and
Influence; Opinion Deviance; Social Identity Theory intergroup processes vary from macro to micro
(see Figure 1). In between the macro and micro
levels lies the intermediate, meso level of analysis.
Further Readings In his 1996 book, How to Think Like a Social
Scientist, Thomas F. Pettigrew argued that the
Alvaro, E. M., & Crano, W. D. (1997). Indirect minority
meso level operates as a link between the macro
influence. Evidence for leniency in source evaluation
and micro levels of analysis. This may be why
and counterargumentation. Journal of Personality and
social psychologists are often most interested in
Social Psychology, 72, 949–965.
Crano, W. D., & Chen, X. (1998). The leniency contract
examining group and intergroup processes at the
and persistence of majority and minority influence. meso level. Some historians of the field, such as
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, Rob Farr, have suggested that social psychology is
1437–1450. a marriage of the sociological and psychological
Crano, W. D., & Seyranian, V. (2008). Majority and perspectives. This suggests that social psycholo-
minority influence. Social and Personality Psychology gists give special attention to the meso level
Compass, 1, 572–589. because it may be the level where sociological and
Martin, R., Hewstone, M., Martin, P. Y., & Gardikiotis, A. psychological phenomena meet.
(2008). Persuasion from minority and majority Although it is typically referred to only in sci-
groups. In W. D. Crano & R. Prislin (Eds.), Attitudes ence fiction, the most macro level of analysis pos-
and attitude change (pp. 361–384). New York: sible for the study of group and intergroup
Psychology Press. processes is the interglobal level. When researchers
examine people’s attitudes toward space explora-
tion and the existence of extraterrestrial life, they
are examining the potential intergroup relation
Levels of Analysis between beings on our globe and those on another.
In practice, the most macro level of analysis stud-
Although groups necessarily contain individuals ied is the intraglobal level. Research on people’s
and have some relation to the larger institutional, concern for the effects of the warming of the
cultural, and societal forces around them, group earth’s atmosphere is an environmental concern at
processes occur at the group level of analysis the intraglobal level of analysis. At this level of
rather than at the individual or societal level. analysis, global warming’s differential impact on
Likewise, intergroup processes are those that societies, as well as on plants, humans, and other
occur between groups, rather than between indi- animals, is put aside to emphasize the ways in
viduals or within a group, institution, culture, or which global warming affects everyone and every-
society. And yet it seems clear that both group thing everywhere on this planet.
and intergroup processes may be affected by fac- Psychological approaches to group and inter-
tors at other levels of analysis. For example, the group processes often emphasize the intraglobal
way in which a work group operates may be level of analysis. Because a good deal of psychology
affected by the characteristics of the individuals presumes that people operate in much the same
who make up the group (e.g., their cooperative or way, regardless of how they vary at less macro levels
Levels of Analysis 531

This level of analysis is most common in his-


Macro Interglobal torical, political, and economic studies, where
there is concern for empires, continents, and geo-
graphical regions. For example, historical studies
Intraglobal
of the Roman Empire’s relations to competing
empires, such as those of Carthage, Macedon, and
Egypt, focus on the intersocietal level of analysis.
Although social psychologists may wish to use
Intersocietal their research to comment on group and inter-
group processes at the intersocietal level, psycholo-
gists rarely study the relations between large-scale
Intrasocietal societal-level groupings. However, there are excep-
tions. During the cold war, a number of peace and
Meso political psychologists examined people’s attitudes
toward a potential nuclear war between “the
Intergroup West” and the “Russian bloc.”
A clash of civilizations may also be examined at
an intrasocietal level of analysis. The notion that
Intragroup two civilizations are in conflict necessarily pre-
sumes that each civilization is a coherent entity
within which individuals and (ethnic, religious,
and economic) groups are unified enough to see
Interindividual themselves as part of two opposing societies in the
world. Thus, at the intrasocietal level, one may
examine the degree to which individuals and
Micro Intraindividual groups view themselves and their interests as con-
nected to that of other Westerners or Muslims. For
example, research at the intrasocietal level might
Figure 1   Levels of Analysis assess to what degree people from around the
world viewed the September 11th attacks on the
Source: Author.
World Trade Center in New York as an attack on
of analysis, psychology is able to propose universal “the West.” Or, it might examine the degree to
theories that aim to explain people at the most which the notion of a clash of Western and Islamic
macro, global level. This perspective is often referred societies leads Sunni, Shiite, and other Muslims to
to as the psychic unity of humankind. view themselves as a coherent category of like-
The intersocietal level of analysis operates at minded people whose interests are aligned against
one step less macro than the intraglobal level. At those of “the West.”
the intersocietal level, attention is given to the The intrasocietal level of analysis is most com-
similarities and differences between societies in mon in sociology, anthropology, economics, and
norms; values; practices; and social, political, and political science, although it is also the focus of
economic structures. Recent political rhetoric some social psychological research. For example,
about a purported clash of civilizations between studies of the degree to which people from differ-
“the West” and “Islam” claims that countries ent countries in Europe identify themselves as
around the world can be characterized as either European (rather than, for example, British,
Western or Islamic. These two broad types of soci- French, or Spanish) and participate in European
eties are presumed to be very different from each politics examine the intrasocietal level of analysis.
other. The clash of civilizations rhetoric also sug- The intergroup level of analysis is often pursued
gests that the two societies are locked in mortal by social psychologists, who have a long-standing
combat, with each society seeking to impose its concern about how ethnic, gender, religious, and
agenda on the other. other groups within societies relate to each other.
532 Levels of Analysis

Many sociologists and political scientists, and individuals think, feel, and act over time or across
some anthropologists and economists, also study situations. This represents the intraindividual level
intergroup relations within complex societies made of analysis. For example, research on the commit-
up of many groups. Unlike other social scientists, ment of individual workers to a political campaign
however, social psychologists tend to focus on the might examine how consistently these workers
intergroup level to the near exclusion of the intra- come to work and perform their duties over the
societal level within which intergroup relations course of a month during the campaign.
typically operate. Thus, social psychologists that
examine phenomena at the intergroup level pay Relations Among Levels
special attention to the relation that a specific
ingroup has to one specific outgroup. How the Nested
members of this ingroup compare themselves to, It may be apparent from the above that each
compete against, or act toward members of the level is contained (or nested) within the more
outgroup are of particular interest. macro levels above it. For example, phenomena at
Intragroup processes were studied widely by the intergroup level necessarily occur within the
social psychologists in the first half of the 20th societies within which multiple groups exist. And,
century. Topics such as conformity, compliance, differences between individuals necessarily occur
and group polarization all focus on the ways in within the groups to which these individuals
which interactions within groups affect individuals belong. Indeed, part of the way in which individu-
differently from interactions within society or als know that they differ from others is by compar-
between individuals. Based in the group dynamics ing themselves to other members of their reference
tradition of research, championed by influential group.
figure Kurt Lewin, social psychological work at Early social psychological work on group
the intragroup level of analysis examined individu- dynamics was concerned with the way in which
als’ interactions within small, co-acting groups. individuals being nested within small- and large-
Based in a different tradition, called symbolic scale groups affected them. Today, advanced sta-
interactionism, microsociology also focused on the tistical techniques, such as multilevel modeling,
group-level processes present in small co-acting enable researchers to carefully examine nested lev-
collections of individuals, such as families, clubs, els of analysis. For example, many studies of stu-
and work groups. This differentiates microsociol- dents’ self-concepts now examine students not only
ogy from most of the rest of sociology, which tends as individuals but also as nested within classrooms,
to focus on more macro levels, such as the inter- which are nested within schools, which are nested
group or intrasocietal level. within neighborhoods, which are nested within
Although they operate at more micro levels countries, which are nested within one globe.
than group or intergroup processes, the interindi-
vidual and intraindividual levels of analysis are
Independent
relevant to such processes. For example, interindi-
vidual differences in the motive to gain power, Although the levels of analysis are nested within
achieve, or affiliate with others help determine to one another, what occurs at one level is not neces-
what degree individuals work toward group goals sarily associated with what occurs at another level.
that facilitate or impede their individual motives. Thus, phenomena at each level of analysis can
Thus, a good deal of social psychological work operate independently of phenomena at other lev-
on group and intergroup processes takes the inter- els. This is part of the reason that it is important to
individual level of analysis into account. Not sur- be clear about which level of analysis is being
prisingly, however, most research combines examined in a given piece of research. For exam-
examin­ation of the interindividual level with a ple, studies of the association between economic
focus on the more macro levels of analysis at prosperity and satisfaction with life show some-
which group and intergroup processes occur. what different patterns at the interindividual level
In a similar way, research may also take account of analysis than at the intersocietal level. Although
of similarities and differences in the way that being richer than other individuals within your
Lewin, Kurt 533

country does not seem to bring much life satisfac- Pettigrew, T. F. (1996). How to think like a social
tion, people in rich countries tend to be much scientist. Addison-Wesley.
more satisfied than those in poor countries. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical
Without an understanding that the former finding linear models: Applications and data analysis methods
is specific to the interindividual level of analysis, (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
whereas the latter finding is specific to the interso-
cietal level, one might be perplexed by the appar-
ent inconsistency of these results. Lewin, Kurt
Interactive (1890–1947)
That group and intergroup processes may oper- Kurt Lewin is remembered as a “practical theorist”
ate independently at different levels of analysis also and considered the intellectual father of the modern
raises the possibility that there is an interaction discipline of social psychology. Born in 1890 in a
between different levels of analysis. Contemporary German village that is now part of Poland, Lewin
multilevel modeling statistics enable researchers to was educated in Germany and served as an infantry
examine such interactions, although these complex soldier during World War I. His experience grow-
analyses remain relatively rare. It is clear, however, ing up as a Jew in an authoritarian society rampant
that a full understanding of group and intergroup with anti-Semitism shaped his view of human
processes requires examination of the multiple lev- behavior and his focus on group processes. Trained
els of analysis relevant to the process of interest. If in philosophy and experimental psychology, and
this examination can analyze the ways in which influenced by the German Gestalt theorists, Lewin
individual-level phenomena interact with group- did his pioneering work in the development of field
and societal-level phenomena to determine the pro- theory, a framework for understanding human
cess of interest, then the examination will begin to behavior that focuses on how an individual concep-
approach the complexity of life as it is lived. As we tualizes and responds to physical and social envi-
are all, at one and the same time, individuals, mem- ronments. Field theory provides a paradigm for
bers of many groups, and members of at least one understanding and conducting studies of group
society, research methods that account for this mul- processes and intergroup relations.
tilevel reality will be best positioned to analyze it. Lewin is known as the practical theorist because
Colin Wayne Leach he linked the study of applied problems to theory.
He saw theory as essential for understanding prac-
See also Group Performance; Group Structure; tical social problems, and he viewed the conduct of
Organizations; Research Methods and Issues
empirical studies of applied problems as essential
for the development of theory. He was vitally con-
Further Readings cerned with the central social and political issues
of his era, in particular the role of democracy in
Bolger, N., Davis, A., & Eshkol, R. (2003). Diary
promoting effective interpersonal relations and
methods: Capturing life as it is lived. Annual Review
group dynamics. His maxim was that “there is
of Psychology, 54, 579–616.
Farr, R. (1996). The roots of modern social psychology
nothing so practical as a good theory,” and he was
1872–1954. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. as concerned with the problems faced by world as
Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Bolger, N. (1998). Data he was with developing theory to explain human
analysis in social psychology. In D. T. Gilbert, behavior.
S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of
social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 233–265). Boston: Lewin’s Paradigm Shift in Social Psychology
McGraw-Hill.
Leach, C. W., & Vliek, M. L. W. (2008). Group Lewin epitomizes Thomas Kuhn’s description of a
membership as a “frame of reference” for scientific revolutionary. He was acutely aware of
interpersonal comparison. Social Psychology and the gaps in our understanding of human behavior
Personality Compass, 2(1), 539–554. and our ability to predict and change relations
534 Lewin, Kurt

among people. In 1914, shortly after he completed is influenced by a person’s perception of the envi-
his PhD, World War I began. As his biographer and ronment continues to be a central influence on
daughter, Miriam Lewin, has written, he had a social psychology and, in particular, on the study
“strong revulsion” to militarism, but joined the of group processes. In its time, his approach was
military and served in an artillery unit. He was seri- revolutionary and led to a host of discoveries about
ously wounded and spent nearly a year recovering how human behavior is influenced by culture, edu-
in a hospital. Although we do not know precisely cation, and small group dynamics. Today, Lewin’s
how his time on the front lines of this conflict approach is well represented in modern cognitive
between groups affected his outlook, it is not sur- social psychology and in a variety of applications
prising that his subsequent theorizing and empirical of psychology to group and societal problems.
studies focused on intergroup relations. His experi- Lewin’s theorizing also spawned new ways of
ence was exacerbated by the discrimination he viewing collective behavior. In some ways it was
experienced as a Jew, which in 1934 led him to flee more sociological than psychological, as it led to
Nazi Germany and immigrate to the United States. ascribing to groups the same kind of life space
No doubt, other psychologists and social theo- analysis that was used to analyze individual behav-
rists were similarly affected by the tumultuous ior. Thus, a group or institution could be seen not
events of the first part of the 20th century. What simply as the sum of the individuals or other units
made Lewin unique and led to his enormous influ- who make up the group, but as an entity that
ence on modern thinking about group behavior is could be quite different. Groups could, for exam-
that he developed a broad theoretical framework ple, have their own norms, and the dynamic pro-
that was linked to experimental methods. In cesses of the group were not necessarily predictable
Kuhnian terms, he created a paradigm that enabled from understanding the life space of individuals.
us to think differently about human behavior and
gave us the tools to study the complexity of social
Lewin the Empiricist
interaction. He was committed to developing psy-
chology as a science but also mindful of the ways Integral to his theorizing about person–environment
in which a science of the mind had to differ from relationships was his commitment and approach
physical science. His lasting contribution was to empirical research and, in particular, to experi-
reframing how we think about groups and the mentation. He pioneered the integration of labora-
relationship of individuals to groups. tory and field research. Lewin created a science of
studying group behavior that has persisted for
more than half a century. He was a master of tak-
Lewin’s Field Theory
ing the most complex social phenomena and creat-
The fundamental postulate of Lewin’s field theory ing paradigms to study them in simple ways. Two
was that human behavior should be understood as of his research efforts, both conducted after he
a function of the interaction between an individual came to the United States, illustrate his theoretical–
and his or her psychological understanding of the methodological approach to the study of group
physical and social environment. He used mathe- processes and dynamics.
matical symbols to explicate his theory, and sum- In the late 1930s, Lewin and his students con-
marized the essence of field theory in this formula: ducted a series of studies to investigate the impact
B = f (P, E). Behavior (B) was broadly construed of different ways of organizing groups. Initially, his
(including action, thinking, and valuing) and per- focus was to understand the impact of democratic
son (P) and environment (E) were dynamically versus authoritarian group leadership, operational-
related. Together, the person and the environment ized in terms of whether the leader engaged the
form the life space. Understanding the structure group in decision making or directed them without
and influences on the life space became the focus explanation; later, he studied what he called laissez-
of Lewin’s work. faire leadership, in which a group was allowed to
The mathematical language used by Lewin function without direction from a leader. He stud-
(which was drawn from topological geometry) has ied the problem by conducting a series of experi-
not survived, but his perspective on how behavior ments in which different leadership styles were tried
Linguistic Category Model (LCM) 535

with groups of young boys. He demonstrated that rich legacy. He changed our conception of indi-
distinctive “group atmospheres” could be created vidual behavior and identified how, while experi-
with each leadership style. The democratic style ences may shape a person, the key to understanding
was the most effective, and the authoritarian style behavior is to understand a person’s life space—
yielded the most aggression among the boys. how individuals perceive the world, and how
In a later program of research, conducted dur- changes in the environment affect their perceptions
ing World War II, he studied ways to change food and behavior. The range of Lewin’s work is
preferences to mitigate the impact of rationing and extraordinary, in terms of both the issues he inves-
food shortages. It began as a study of food habits tigated and his efforts to integrate theory and
and “channels” of influence in decision making, method. When Kurt Lewin died in 1947, at the age
and evolved into a series of studies of group deci- of 57, he headed the MIT Center for Group
sion making. Parallel to his studies of democratic Dynamics; after his death, the center moved to the
and authoritarian leadership, his food habit stud- University of Michigan. His students and research
ies experimentally compared lecturing and group colleagues went on to become central figures in
discussion methods as approaches to changing psychology and applied social science. His legacy
behavior. Groups of women were exposed to dif- is evident today, as it is difficult to view any topic
ferent presentations and discussions of food pref- in group processes and dynamics without seeing
erences. He demonstrated that the way in which the influence of Lewinian thinking.
the group was engaged predicted behavior change.
Active involvement in group discussion led to sig- Leonard Saxe
nificantly more change in participants than did See also Action Research; Anti-Semitism; Culture; Group
passive listening to a lecture. Performance; Group Problem Solving and Decision
Making; Minority Groups in Society; Organizations;
Lewin’s Action Research Research Methods and Issues; Sensitivity Training
Groups
One of Lewin’s lasting contributions was his devel-
opment of action research. It was based on his view
Further Readings
that social problems should be central to the con-
cerns of psychologists and that, to understand a Gold, M. (Ed.). (1999). The complete social scientist.
phenomenon, one had to try to change it. Through Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
action research, he promoted the systematic study Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving social conflicts. New York:
of social problems and their solution. He saw it as Harper & Row.
a spiral process of data collection, theorizing, and Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science: Selected
assessment. Action research was, for Lewin, rooted theoretical papers (D. Cartwright, Ed.). Chicago:
in principles of group dynamics. He proposed that University of Chicago Press.
change occurred by phases: unfreezing, moving, and Lewin, M. (1992). The impact of Kurt Lewin’s life on the
place of social issues in his work. Journal of Social
refreezing. His goals, democratized by engaging
Issues, 48(2), 15–29.
researchers and practitioners, were to create knowl-
Marrow, A. J. (1969). The practical theorist: The life and
edge, intervention principles, and support for those
work of Kurt Lewin. New York: Basic Books.
who carry out organizational and institutional
change. One outcome of this work was the creation
of the National Training Laboratory for Group
Development (now known as the NTL Institute),
dedicated to improving organizational effectiveness
Linguistic Category
and the development of sensitivity training. Model (LCM)
The linguistic category model (LCM), which clas-
The Legacy of Kurt Lewin
sifies predicates on a scale from abstract to con-
Lewin, through both his theoretical work and his crete, is a tool for systematic analysis of language.
approach to empirical studies of behavior, left a It has been used extensively to analyze not only
536 Linguistic Category Model (LCM)

communication in experimental settings but also were in such events, and the features of those
newspaper editorials and transcripts of current involved in a social event.
and historical court cases. The availability of the While we have only three groups of lexical pos-
LCM opens novel ways of analyzing written and sibilities (verbs, adjectives, and nouns), the range
spoken language in communication by clarifying of events that we can cover with the multitude of
the processes driving linguistic choices in formu- distinct words that we can find in each category is
lating messages and the impact of these messages virtually limitless. When we are talking about
on recipients. This entry begins by explaining the social events, we can access a lexicon, which con-
language processes underlying the model, and tains virtually thousands of verbs, adjectives, and
then discusses how the model works and some nouns. This vast range permits us to capture the
research applications. nuances of each event with considerable flexibility.
Are there some general features of this linguistic
domain that allow us to systematically examine
Using Language to Describe People
such language use? The linguistic category model
What types of words are available to describe oth- provides such a handle.
ers, their interactions, and their makeup? What
types of words do people use when they are
How the Model Works
describing something that happens to a member of
their ingroup or of an outgroup? Is there a system- In the LCM, verbs are classified into two broad
atic difference in how people communicate an groups, namely, verbs of state and verbs of action.
event that happens to their ingroups or outgroups? State verbs (SV) are verbs that refer to invisible
Do such differences in the language they use pro- states, such as respect, hate, dislike, and love, iden-
vide any insights into their motives and their thought tifying specific affective or mental states that a per-
processes? son feels or experiences toward another (e.g., “Jack
To answer such questions, we have to know hates Homer”). Action verbs (AV) are verbs describ-
something about the general properties of the lan- ing activities with a clear beginning and end.
guage we use to describe ourselves, others, interac- These verbs have been subdivided into three
tions between people, and people’s makeup and to separate categories with distinct characteristics.
use this knowledge to examine how people repre- Verbs in the first category, descriptive action
sent social events when they communicate about verbs (DAV), have the unusual quality of mapping
them. the action directly and retaining an unambiguous
There are three different types of words or lexi- perceptual feature of the action. Examples would
cal categories that serve these purposes, namely, be lick, kick, and pick, involving, respectively,
verbs, adjectives, and nouns. With verbs, we can references to very specific actions involving the
describe not only the interactions between two or mouth, foot, and hand. Generally, these terms
more people but also the types of feelings or states have no evaluative meaning but can acquire
people have regarding others. Thus, we can describe such meaning in specific contexts (e.g., “Jack
an event, such as somebody’s fist traveling rapidly push­ed Homer under an oncoming bus” or
in space only to connect hard with another per- “Jack pushed Homer away from an oncoming bus
son’s chin, with “Jack punched Homer,” or “Jack which Homer had not seen”).
hurt Homer” describing the action. It is also pos- The second action verb category is interpretive
sible to describe the very same event with the feel- action verbs (IAV). These also refer to actions with
ings or emotions that drove the action, as in “Jack a clear beginning and end; however, these verbs
hates Homer.” Alternatively, we can represent the subsume a large range of different actions. For
same event with “Jack is aggressive” or “Jack is a instance, cheat is a verb that can refer to a wide
bully,” respectively with an adjective or a noun. range of different behaviors, as can the verb help.
These lexical categories exhaust the possible range The direct perceptual correspondence between
of word options that we have to represent interper- verb and action is lost in this category.
sonal events, that is, terms by which we can cap- The third category, state action verbs (SAV),
ture what happened, what the psychological states contains verbs that refer to the affective consequences
Linguistic Category Model (LCM) 537

of actions (e.g., amaze, thrill, stun, and surprise) “Bill is aggressive”), the most abstract term, then
but conceal the nature of the action that led to the responses on all these variables are at the other
the emotion. Nevertheless, these verbs describe end of the scale compared to DAV, with IAV,
emotional consequences (e.g., “Homer bored SAV, and SV falling in between. Finally, it should
me to death”) in ways that allow the reasons to be noted that abstractness–concreteness is a generic
be easily specified (e.g., “with his lecture”). dimension on which the linguistic categories can
There is a difference in this respect between be represented—that is, it constitutes a property
SAV and SV, since with SV it is perfectly possi- that runs across all words in the interpersonal
ble to say, “I like him very much, but I really domain.
cannot explain why.” One of the chief uses of the LCM is in examina-
The final category describes attributes of people. tions of strategic category use in communication.
This category includes adjectives (ADJ), which A prominent example is the linguistic intergroup
describe qualifiers of people such as friendly, bias (LIB). The question this research addresses is
aggressive, and helpful, as well as nouns (NOUN) why and how people shape specific linguistic fea-
such as thief, father, and athlete. tures of their communicative acts in the context of
communicating stereotypes. How do people use
different linguistic categories strategically and in
Features and Applications
particular how do they do so in the context of ste-
One distinctive way in which these categories vary reotyping? The LIB involves a tendency for indi-
systematically is along the abstractness–concreteness viduals to describe positive ingroup and negative
dimension, with DAV being the most concrete cat- outgroup behaviors in relatively abstract terms.
egory, IAV next, followed by SAV, SV, and finally, The choice of abstract words (e.g., ADJ) implies
ADJ and NOUN as the most abstract categories. that the behavior is attributable to internal factors,
Abstractness–concreteness has been operational- that is, to the actor’s stable characteristics.
ized in terms of different inferential features in Conversely, negative ingroup and positive out-
which these terms vary. These features are mea- group behaviors are found to be typically described
sured by asking people to respond to a set of ques- in relatively concrete terms. Concrete terms imply
tions about simple subject-verb-object sentences in situational specificity, and hence an external attri-
which verb types and adjectives are varied. bution of the behavior. In this context, the system-
These questions are (1) How enduring is the atic investigation of strategic language use reveals
characteristic describing the sentence subject? two things. First, these differences in abstractness
(2) How easy/difficult is it to confirm and discon- and concreteness reveal possible psychological
firm statements constructed with these verbs or processes driving biased language use. One possi-
adjectives? (3) What is the temporal duration of ble mechanism underlying the LIB is motivational,
the interpersonal event depicted by these terms? based on the desire to see the ingroup as more
(4) How informative is the sentence about situa- positive than the outgroup. Thus, abstract descrip-
tional pressures or circumstances? and (5) What is tions of positive ingroup behaviors and of negative
the likelihood of the event reoccurring at a future outgroup behaviors portray the ingroup in favor-
point in time? These variables have been shown to able terms and the outgroup in unfavorable terms,
form an abstractness–concreteness dimension on implying that these behaviors are due to enduring
which the categories of the LCM are ordered characteristics. In contrast, concrete descriptions
systematically. of negative ingroup behaviors minimize their sig-
Thus, DAV is the most concrete category and, nificance as evidence for corresponding group
when used in sentence form (e.g., “Bill punched characteristics, as do concrete depictions of posi-
David”), does not describe an enduring character- tive outgroup behaviors. In other words, those
istic of a person. Rather, the event these verbs linguistic (and conceptual) tendencies serve to pro-
describe is easy to confirm and of short duration, tect the perception that the ingroup is superior to
is highly informative about the situation, and is the outgroup. Second, the analysis of strategic lan-
less likely to occur at a future point in time. If the guage use informs us also about how stereotypes
same event is represented by an adjective (e.g., are transmitted in communication and recent
538 Linguistic Intergroup Bias (LIB)

research shows that systematic differences in lan- discovered that in addition to directly expressing
guage use shape the inferences of receivers to such our thoughts and feelings about other individuals
messages. (e.g., by labeling them as heroes or villains), we can
The LCM has been shown not to be restricted use more subtle ways to convey our opinions, such
to Indo-Germanic languages, but to be applicable as varying the verb tense we use in describing their
across diverse linguistic communities, including behavior, choosing active versus passive voice, or
Japanese, Chinese, and Turkish. shifting the abstraction level.
LIB is an example of the latter strategy. Positive
Gün R. Semin ingroup behavior is described more abstractly
(e.g., “I always told you that he is fantastic!”) than
See also Ethnocentrism; Language and Intergroup
Relations; Linguistic Intergroup Bias (LIB); Prejudice; positive outgroup behavior (e.g., “Look, he man-
Stereotyping aged to shoot a basket!”). In contrast, negative
ingroup behavior is described more concretely
(e.g., “Oh no, he pushed him accidentally!”) than
Further Readings negative outgroup behavior (e.g., “What a dirty
player he is!”). Whereas a concrete description
Maass, A., Salvi, D., Arcuri, L., & Semin, G. (1989).
implies a single event with little or no consequence
Language use in intergroup contexts: The linguistic
for future situations, abstract language suggests
intergroup bias. Journal of Personality and Social
stable behavior that is likely to be repeated in the
Psychology, 57, 981–993.
Semin, G. R. (2000). Agenda 2000: Communication.
future. In this subtle way, the LIB leads to ingroup
Language as an implementational device for cognition. favoritism and outgroup discrimination.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 595–612. This entry describes the theoretical context of
Semin, G. R., & Fiedler, K. (1988). The cognitive LIB and examines its measurement, underlying
functions of linguistic categories in describing persons: mechanisms, and applications.
Social cognition and language. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 54, 558–568.
The Linguistic Category Model
Semin, G. R., & Fiedler, K. (1991). The linguistic
category model, its bases, applications and range. In The assumptions of the LIB are based on Semin and
W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review Fiedler’s linguistic category model (LCM), which
of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 1–30). Chichester, postulates an abstraction continuum with four dif-
UK: John Wiley. ferent levels. For example, you can describe the
See www.cratylus.org (resources) for a detailed coding same situation in the following ways: (1) the basket­
manual of the LCM. ball player hits his opponent during the game,
(2) the basketball player hurts his opponent during
the game, (3) the basketball player hates his oppo-
Linguistic Intergroup Bias nent, and (4) the basketball player is aggressive.
All four statements are accurate descriptions of
(LIB) the observed situation, yet they differ in abstrac-
tion. At the concrete end of the abstraction con-
Linguistic intergroup bias (LIB) is the tendency of tinuum are descriptive action verbs (e.g., hit),
speakers to describe the actions of individuals at which provide an objective description of a single
different abstraction levels depending on the actor’s observable behavior. Descriptive action verbs are
group membership and the valence of the action. typically defined by at least one invariant physical
For example, imagine that you are watching your feature of the action (e.g., one person hits another)
favorite basketball team and one of the players and refer to a specific object (e.g., the opponent)
makes a slam dunk. A few minutes later, a member and situation (e.g., the game).
of the opposing team also dunks the ball. Would Interpretative action verbs (e.g., hurt) represent
you describe these two actions in exactly the same the second abstraction level. They likewise refer to
way? What if the player’s action was negative, an observable behavior, but, in contrast to descrip-
such as committing a foul? Researchers have tive action verbs, they describe a more general class
Linguistic Intergroup Bias (LIB) 539

of behaviors. For instance, there are many different settings independent of the specific measure used
ways to hurt somebody, such as by hitting or by to assess the LIB.
kicking the person, or by attacking him or her ver-
bally. As a consequence, interpretative action verbs
Underlying Mechanisms
generally go beyond mere description, allowing
different interpretations of a given situation. Two different mechanisms have been proposed to
State verbs (e.g., hate) represent the next abstrac- explain the LIB, involving either motivation or
tion level. They describe a lasting emotional or cognition. The motivational approach assumes
mental state, are interpretative and evaluative, and that ingroup protective motives operate in the
are independent of the specific action and context, LIB. Social identity theory postulates that one’s
but they maintain a reference to a specific object. self-concept is, in part, defined by one’s group
In the example above, the basketball player hates membership, so that positive evaluations of one’s
his opponent outside the specific game and can group lead to a positive self-concept and negative
express his feelings in many different ways. evaluations lead to a negative self-concept.
Finally, at the abstract pole of the continuum According to this perspective, the LIB can be used
are adjectives (e.g., aggressive). They are not only as a subtle means to enhance or protect one’s
independent of the situation but also of the object social identity. Describing positive behavior of
of the action. They describe abstract characteris- one’s own group and negative behavior of an
tics and offer a wide range of interpretations. In opposing group in abstract terms implies that the
the example cited above, the aggressiveness of the behavior in question is typical for the group and
basketball player is directed at his opponent in this stable over time. In contrast, describing negative
specific game and also represents an enduring ingroup and positive outgroup behavior in a more
characteristic of the player that generalizes across concrete way suggests that the behavior is atypical
targets and situations. and unlikely to be repeated in the future. Such
language-based favoritism of the ingroup relative
to the outgroup contributes to a positive evalua-
Measuring the LIB
tion of one’s own group and, hence, to a positive
The LIB, namely that ingroup and outgroup social identity.
behaviors are described at different abstraction The social cognitive approach assumes that the
levels depending on the valence of the behavior, LIB is driven by differential expectancies about
has been assessed by the cued sentence completion ingroup and outgroup members. Regardless of its
procedure and by the multiple-choice method. In valence, behavior consistent with prior expectan-
both cases, study participants are presented with cies about a group is considered to reflect typical
cartoons showing a member of their own group or and stable action tendencies and is therefore
another group acting in either a socially desirable described in relatively abstract terms. In contrast,
or undesirable way. The participants’ task is to behavior inconsistent with prior expectancies is
describe the scene. considered atypical and hence is described in a
In the cued sentence completion procedure, par- more concrete way.
ticipants are instructed to complete a sentence such In many intergroup settings, the two explana-
as, “A member of team Y . . .” in their own words. tions lead to the same predictions, because in gen-
Responses are then scored for abstraction by inde- eral people expect more positive and fewer negative
pendent raters on a continuum ranging from 1 to behaviors from their own group than from other
4, with higher values reflecting higher levels of groups. Therefore, experimental studies were con-
abstraction. In the multiple-choice method, four ducted to identify the actual mechanism underlying
descriptions are presented, constructed according the LIB. To test the two accounts against one
to the four classes of the linguistic category model, another, some researchers investigated individuals
and participants are asked to choose one. In recent in intergroup settings for expectancies involving
years, additional methods have been developed to stereotypes, that is, beliefs that associate a given
measure the LIB, but comparable language biases social group and its members with specific traits or
have been obtained in a wide variety of intergroup behaviors.
540 Linguistic Intergroup Bias (LIB)

For instance, gender stereotypes are beliefs Interaction of Speaker Goals


about the differential behaviors that men and and Recipient Inferences
women are expected to perform. If ingroup protec-
When people say something to someone else, their
tive motives underlie the LIB, men and women
message is influenced by their individual motives,
should describe positive behaviors of their own
beliefs about the world, and communication goals.
gender (he/she is assertive; he/she is helpful) and
As described in the preceding paragraph, the LIB
negative behaviors of the opposite gender (he/she
can satisfy self-enhancing motivations by causing
is rude; he/she is dependent on others) more
one’s own group to appear in a more favorable
abstractly than in the reversed cases, regardless of
light, and the LEB can serve as a vehicle to express
whether the behavior is viewed as typical of males
one’s beliefs or expectancies. Moreover, irrespec-
or of females. In contrast, if the differential expect-
tive of whether biased language use is intended or
ancy explanation is correct, people should describe
unconscious, it is likely to have an impact on the
role-congruent behaviors (he is assertive/rude; she
recipient of the message. Describing actions more
is helpful/dependent on others) more abstractly
concretely suggests a situational explanation,
than role-incongruent behaviors (he helps some-
whereas describing actions more abstractly implies
one/asks for advice; she expresses her opinion/
that the behavior occurs more frequently and
insults someone) regardless of whether the behav-
reflects enduring characteristics of the actor.
ior is positive or negative.
Mass communication is a domain in which a
Research has generally shown that in intergroup
single message can have an impact on thousands of
settings (such as those involving gender relations)
people. Let’s consider the two headlines: “Our
in which stereotypical expectancies prevail, the dif-
secretary of state will not attend the peace talks”
ferential expectancy approach offers the most con-
and “Rebels’ boycott of peace talks continues.” In
vincing account because people share very similar
both cases the peace talks do not take place, but
expectancies about typical behaviors of different
the inferred reasons can be very different for the
groups independent of their own group member-
secretary of state and the rebels. The concrete
ship. In contrast, the motivational approach plays
description (“Our secretary of state will not attend
an important role in competitive or hostile inter-
the peace talks”) suggests that the behavioral epi-
group settings. Under highly competitive circum-
sode is an isolated event that can be attributed to
stances, such as conflicting interests of hunters and
many different causes and contextual factors not
environmentalists or hostile relations between
necessarily linked to the secretary of state’s per-
nations in times of war, ingroup protective motives
sonal characteristics or psychological states.
come to the fore, and positive ingroup behaviors as
Describing the case in abstract terms (“Rebels’
well as negative outgroup behaviors are described
boycott of peace talks continues”), however,
at a higher abstraction level.
implies that the act of not attending the peace talks
Thus, there is support for both explanations,
reflects an enduring negative characteristic of the
with cognitive processes being predominant when
rebels, such as hostility or aggressiveness.
socially shared expectancies exist, as in the case of
By this subtle means, the recipient of the message
stereotypes, and motivational processes becoming
forms a very different impression of the same situation
relevant when the ingroup is threatened by highly
depending on the level of abstraction in the language
competitive conditions. The two processes can
used by the speaker. This interplay between what the
operate both independently and additively. In
speaker says and what the recipient infers contributes
order to distinguish between the two mechanisms,
to ingroup favoritism and outgroup discrimination (in
the term linguistic intergroup bias (LIB) is now
the case of LIB) as well as to the maintenance and
used to describe differences in abstraction level
perpetuation of stereotypes (in the case of LEB).
evoked by ingroup protective motives. In contrast,
language biases produced by differential expectan- Christiane Schoel and Anne Maass
cies are now labeled by the term linguistic expect-
ancy bias (LEB). Empirical evidence for both See also Language and Intergroup Relations; Linguistic
mechanisms has been found in a wide range of Category Model (LCM); Social Identity Theory;
intergroup settings. Stereotyping
Looking-Glass Self 541

Further Readings imagination of his judgment of that appearance;


Maass, A. (1999). Linguistic intergroup bias: Stereotype and some sort of self-feeling, such as pride or mor-
perpetuation through language. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), tification.” He developed the concept through
Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 31, careful observation of his own children, particu-
pp. 79–121). New York: Academic Press. larly his third child, a daughter, “M,” whom he
Maass, A., Milesi, A., Zabbini, S., & Stahlberg, D. systematically observed from shortly after her birth
(1995). The linguistic intergroup bias: Differential until she was almost 3 years old. Cooley was par-
expectancies or ingroup protection? Journal of ticularly struck by the development in children’s
Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 116–126. speech of the personal pronouns I, me, and mine,
Maass, A., Salvi, D., Arcuri, L., & Semin, G. R. (1989). which he reasoned could come only from children’s
Language use in intergroup contexts: The linguistic awareness of others and of themselves in contrast
intergroup bias. Journal of Personality and Social to others, and thus as distinct from others.
Psychology, 57, 981–993. For example, he worked extensively with what
Semin, G. R., & Fiedler, K. (1991). The linguistic he called appropriation, which refers to children’s
category model, its bases, applications and range. In taking and owning of things. Cooley observed that
W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review children begin appropriative processes with
of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 1–30). Chichester, attempts to control the things closest to them,
UK: John Wiley. including their own bodies, and then move out-
Wigboldus, D. H. J., & Douglas, K. (2007). Language, ward to the people in their vicinity, just as infants
stereotypes, and intergroup relations. In K. Fiedler exert their social power to attract attention. From
(Ed.), Social communication (pp. 79–106). New York:
this observation, he reasoned that people’s sense of
Psychology Press.
self emerges from relations with their immediate
Wigboldus, D. H. J., Semin, G. R., & Spears, R. (2000).
group (loved ones, caregivers, mothers) in particu-
How do we communicate stereotypes? Linguistic bases
lar, and continues to develop as they relate to an
and inferential consequences. Journal of Personality
increasingly wide set of acquaintances. As children
and Social Psychology, 78, 5–18.
learn what they can and cannot control, they begin
to define themselves in terms of the images they see
others assigning to them; thus they begin to manip-
Looking-Glass Self ulate those around them, beginning with the ones
who are easiest to control.
The looking-glass self is a concept introduced by Adults, he reasoned, are not that much differ-
Charles Horton Cooley in 1902. Cooley was ent; their imaginations are merely more complex
working to develop a theory of self as essentially and specific, and their manipulations of others
social, and he used the image of a mirror to cap- more subtle. The process of imagining others’ per-
ture the idea of people imagining what they look ceptions and judgments and reconciling them with
like to others, then incorporating what they imag- what one knows becomes a dynamic process of
ine into their own self-concept. This concept of building self-concept. It includes reflection, but it
self as a product of interaction with environment, puts emotional responses and feelings at the center
and reflection based upon that interaction, has of the development of self-concept. The self is
come to occupy a pivotal role in both psychology inextricable from society, “twin-born,” as Cooley
and sociology. Group interaction studies, a strain called it, because it emerges in interaction and
of sociology known as symbolic interactionism, becomes meaningful only in contrast to the society
and studies of both empathy and prejudice have that is not of self.
all relied heavily on its core idea that people This idea furthered the work of William James,
develop a self-concept based on their emotional and encompassed more than the processes involved
reactions to what they believe others are thinking in the concept of the looking-glass self. However,
about them. despite this and other major contributions to socio-
Cooley described three components or “princi- logical thought (including the idea of the primary
pal elements” of the looking-glass self: “the imagi- group), Cooley is today best known for the concept
nation of our appearance to the other person; the of the looking-glass self, if only because it captured
542 Looking-Glass Self

the imaginations of so many. His use of a couplet identities called upon in personal interactions,
by Ralph Waldo Emerson was often repeated, and and then, in wider circles, in increasingly larger
even mistakenly attributed to Cooley: groups. People can thus be expected to behave
differently in personal interactions and in differ-
Each to each a looking-glass ent groups. They will also act differently within
Reflects the other that doth pass. groups, depending on several factors, among
them the extent to which they consider the group
Critics of Cooley point out that when carried an ingroup, that is, a group to which they feel
to its furthest dimension, the concept of the looking- they belong. Finally, people can behave differently
glass self makes the developing human appear to depending on the roles they assume, or tend to
be passive, dependent upon others for approval, assume, within those groups—for example, leaders
and constantly changing to fit his or her environ- versus followers.
ment. Cooley argued, however, that the self-image Ideas such as the relative nature of concepts of
also encompasses a more stable, autonomous self and the notion of concentric circles, with an
image, one that resists the easy influence of rare individual’s relationships moving from personal
or extraordinary events, and that is more heavily and family relationships outward into more imper-
relied upon by the person of substantial character. sonal groups, draw heavily on Cooley’s work.
In Cooley’s conceptualization, children learn how Social identity theory has also expanded to encom-
to sympathize with others through their primary pass ideas of national identity. How people come
groups (caregivers and family members). Through to see their own nation in relation to other nations
early processes of appropriation and attribution or groups is an evolving image that may or may
of images, eventually children come to fuse their not be unified. It is certainly collective, however,
individuality to that common whole, and develop and important in the shaping of national opinions
the kind of respect for the feelings of others that and actions.
Cooley argued would make them mature mem- Symbolic interactionism, a branch of sociology
bers of society. Ultimately, they apply that sense with its genesis in the theorizing of the philosopher
of empathy to increasingly wider circles of George Herbert Mead and its dissemination in a
acquaintances. book with that title by Herbert Blumer, builds
Some have pointed out that it is ironic that upon Cooley’s idea by saying that we impute
Cooley himself would be aghast at the idea of a meaning to things around us, including other
person whose self-image had been entirely created people, based upon our idea of what others are
by the impressions of others. But his colorful and thinking. In taking the role of the other, especially
dramatic use of the image of mirrors, and of the the generalized other, we develop a sense of self in
rhyme, so engaged the thinkers of his era that it interaction, which can then be understood as
ensured his fame for ensuing generations. With dynamic and influenced by those with whom we
the concept of the looking-glass self, he had are interacting. It is generally accepted that Mead
shown the way society and its values were taken built upon the work of Cooley, with Cooley pro-
in by individuals and internalized by their own viding the mechanism by which the mind internal-
mental processes. izes and appropriates the values and views of
His analysis continues to have great appeal to a society, whereas Mead’s elaboration shows how
wide swath of sociology, psychology, and group society is in turn influenced and changed by the
behavior studies. Relying on and expanding on values of the individuals within it.
Cooley’s work, many branches of thought in many Cooley’s looking-glass self, with its emphasis on
areas have flowered in the time since. For example, individual reflection and the emotional aspects of
social identity theory, a foundational concept in developing one’s identity, has strongly influenced
the study of group processes and intergroup rela- all of symbolic interactionism, but was especially
tions, holds that in interactions within and between instrumental in the ensuing development of what is
groups, an individual calls on more than one iden- now known as the sociology of emotions. This
tity. These identities start with the self, alone, branch of sociology studies how social situations
but move outward in concentric circles to include affect emotions, the cultural rules and norms that
Looking-Glass Self 543

we learn about what emotions we can or should each group in turn, and observed the children
express and when it is appropriate to do so, how doing the same, even as their test scores rose and
emotions shape action and interaction, and the fell accordingly.
collective emotions that maintain or alter social This established the role of prejudice in devel-
structures. Cooley called the feelings intrinsic to oping not only one’s sense of community and
the looking-glass self “social sentiments,” and his one’s role in it, but also a view of one’s own
focus on the cultural shaping of reflection and abilities and, presumably as a result of that, one’s
interpretation laid the foundation for the later test scores and success or failure in quantitative
work of C. Wright Mills, Erving Goffman, and measurements of skills and abilities. By artificially
Arlie Russell Hochschild. establishing groups, rules, and social norms that
Cooley’s concept of the looking-glass self reinforced prejudice, Elliott’s experiment proved
stressed the role of the child’s attribution of others’ quite directly that images of oneself, attributed to
images, the first stages of empathy in the develop- members of one’s community or social group and
ment of the child’s understanding. Empathy stud- based on their reactions, can undermine one’s
ies have furthered Cooley’s work by taking his self-esteem so dramatically as to influence one’s
description of the child’s development of empathy, measurable performance levels on tests in such
of seeing others’ perspectives and reacting accord- basic areas as math and reading. Test scores
ingly, and building on it. These scholars have would presumably be based on one’s skills and
stressed the role empathy can play in improving abilities, which by other theories should be inde-
relations among, between, and within groups. pendent of the influence of the vagaries of one’s
Cooley considered increasing empathy for wider day-to-day emotional variation. Prejudice, in
and more distantly related groups to be the essence other words, by undermining our self-image at its
of human progress; therefore, studying the nature, very heart, can influence and undermine us so
essence, and origin of empathy should be a worthy thoroughly as to affect every aspect of our perfor-
pursuit in and of itself. Empathy is now divided mance in society.
into two kinds, cognitive and emotional, with Cooley relied on the image of the mirror, or
emotional empathy further divided into parallel looking glass, to express the idea that the image we
(feeling what others feel) and reactive (reacting to create of ourselves is primarily the product of
what others feel). Cooley’s work in noticing that other images: the images we imagine that others
children’s development of self is based on their have of us. The dramatic image of the looking
immediate observation of others and others’ reac- glass attracted many thinkers of his time, partly
tion to them, and the role of emotion in developing because he carefully captured the process by which
this sense of self, was instrumental in the develop- we internalize society’s values as part of our very
ment of this field. core. It was also popular because it captured the
Perhaps one of the most profound manifesta- way a society, particularly the small town, Midwest
tions of Cooley’s description of a dynamic, evolv- America of which he was a part, was displaying
ing sense of self, a self based upon the way one’s increasing absorption with appearance and the
self-image interrelates with the images of one’s impressions of others. For this, the concept of the
acquaintances, lies in the field of the study of looking-glass self, and the shallow obsession with
prejudice. Prejudice was well known to be both appearance that it represented, were roundly criti-
deeply ingrained in human consciousness, and cized. The concept survived, however, due to its
enormously destructive as a social force, by the utility in accurately portraying both the develop-
time third-grade teacher Jane Elliott did the class ment of the self-concept of the child and the inter-
exercises in 1968 that ultimately became the 1985 relationship of the society and the human perception
Frontline program “A Class Divided.” In her that tries to make sense of it.
social experiment, based on a lesson on prejudice
given to a class of children in Iowa the day after Jennifer L. Dunn
the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.,
she divided her students into a brown-eyed group See also Collective Self; Multiple Identities; Roles; Social
and a blue-eyed group. She discriminated against Identity Theory; Symbolic Interactionism
544 Loyalty

Further Readings group loyalty but infer it based on the observation


Cooley, C. H. (1930). Sociological theory and social of biased evaluations. Despite these differences,
research. New York: Henry Holt. there is an underlying similarity in much of the
Cooley, C. H. (1964). Human nature and the social research on group loyalty, which is that loyalty is
order. New York: Schocken. (Original work published an adherence or faithfulness to a group, even in the
1902) face of countervailing pressure or when personal
Cooley, C. H. (1998). The social self—the meaning of sacrifice must be made. That is, loyalty can be
“I.” In H. J. Schubert (Ed.), Charles Horton Cooley: inferred when an individual chooses to remain in a
On self and social organization (pp. 155–175). group even when the individual would benefit more
Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Original work personally by leaving it.
published 1902) Likewise, loyalty to a group can also be inferred
Franks, D. D., & Gecas, V. (1992). Autonomy and when an individual leaves the group even when the
conformity in Cooley’s self-theory: The looking-glass individual would gain more by staying in it. Of
self and beyond. Symbolic Interaction, 15(1), 49–68. course, loyalty is not always inferred based on
Gutman, R. (1958). Cooley: A perspective. American decisions to remain in or leave groups. Individuals
Sociological Review, 23(3), 251–256. may defend their current groups from attack or
Jandy, E. C. (1942). Charles Horton Cooley: His life and criticism, and loyalty is inferred when doing so
social theory. New York: Dryden. would endanger the defenders. Essentially, then,
Mead, G. H. (1930). Cooley’s contribution to American loyalty is putting the interests and image of the
social thought. American Journal of Sociology, 35(5), group ahead of personal interests.
693–706.
Social psychological research examining group
loyalty includes investigations of cooperation versus
competition in social dilemma paradigms. In a typi-
cal social dilemma paradigm, individuals are con-
Loyalty sumers of a shared resource and must decide
between individual self-interest and the collective
Loyalty is a term used to describe an individual’s good. In the short term, a strategy of maximizing
orientation toward something or someone, where personal outcomes may be beneficial to individuals.
that orientation is characterized by faithful adher- Over time, however, this strategy proves to be disas-
ence, devotion, allegiance, commitment, and a trous. By contrast, placing group concerns above
merging or overlap between the individual’s inter- personal interests can extend the life of the resource
ests and those of the target of the loyalty. Loyalty and optimize outcomes for everyone involved.
can be extended to individuals, such as leaders, Roderick Kramer and Marilynn Brewer have shown
partners, spouses, friends, coworkers, or family, that identification with a group predicts whether
or it can be extended to groups or categories, such individuals will exercise personal restraint in the use
as companies, religions, volunteer organizations, of a common resource and assign greater weight to
professional societies, or countries. Loyalty can group outcomes than to personal outcomes.
also occur with respect to ideals or principles, Social psychologists Bozena Zdaniuk and John M.
such as justice, fairness, freedom, honesty, equal- Levine examined group loyalty by creating labora-
ity, honor, and truth. This entry looks at these tory groups in which members were randomly
different kinds of loyalty and discusses related assigned (a) to identify weakly or strongly with the
dilemmas and future research directions. group, and (b) to have few or many resources,
relative to other group members. Group members
were asked to make a decision about whether to
Loyalty to Groups
remain in or leave the group. If they remained in
There have been different operationalizations of the group, their resources would be divided among
loyalty across relatively few scientific examinations. all group members. If they left the group, however,
For example, group loyalty is sometimes equated they would take their individual resources, leaving
by researchers with group commitment. Other the remaining group members to divide what they
researchers do not formally define or operationalize had left among themselves.
Loyalty 545

For participants with many resources, it was constructive versus destructive responses and
considered loyalty to stay in the group because if active versus passive responses. The active destruc-
they stayed, their many resources would raise the tive response is called exit, which is separation or
average payoff within the group (even though it leaving the relationship. The active constructive
would mean a personal sacrifice). By contrast, for response, voice, is discussing problems and work-
participants with few resources, it was considered ing toward solutions. The passive destructive
loyalty to leave the group because if they left, the response, called neglect, refers to ignoring the
average potential payoff within the group would partner, treating the partner badly either emo-
be raised (but at a personal cost to the one who left tionally or physically, and refusing to discuss
the group). They found that, regardless of the level problems. Finally, the passive constructive
of resources, those who identified more strongly response is called loyalty, which is waiting opti-
with the group were more likely to stay in the mistically for the relationship to be mended and
group than those whose identification with the problems to be solved.
group was weak. Rusbult and her colleagues have found that this
Related research by Mark van Vugt and Claire type of loyalty increases as a function of relation-
Hart also has demonstrated that strength of identi- ship satisfaction and the magnitude of tangible and
fication with a group is a robust predictor of group emotional investments in the relationship but
loyalty, or choosing to stay in a group even at a decreases as a function of the quality of alternative
personal cost. In addition, they found evidence that partners. Thus the concept of relationship loyalty
loyalty behavior was strongly correlated with posi- differs slightly from the concept of group loyalty,
tive group perceptions. Thus, it may be the case which involves staying in the group even when bet-
that identification with a group leads to greater ter alternatives are available.
liking for the group, as well as a consequent desire As a conceptual subset of relationship research,
to remain even when attractive alternative options social scientists who study organizational dynamics
exist. also examine loyalty to leaders or superordinates.
Loyalty is also an important topic in organiza- This type of loyalty is typically conceptu­alized as
tional research. In this arena, loyalty is conceptual- subordinates’ public expressions of support for
ized in a similar manner, namely, as the willingness superordinates and their policies. Loyalty in sub-
to forgo more attractive work alternatives and stay ordinate–superordinate dyads has been shown to
with a company, organization, or union. Loyalty is be distinct from organizational loyalty.
also inferred when observing “organizational citi-
zenship behaviors,” which are discretionary acts
Loyalty to Principles
that benefit the organization. By definition, these
behaviors are not required and received no imme- Loyalty to principles, like the various forms of
diate tangible compensation. loyalty discussed above, is inferred when an indi-
vidual behaves according to a ideal or standard
even when there is pressure to do otherwise, or
Loyalty to Relationships and Individuals
when adhering to a principle requires a cost or
Close relationships can be thought of as a type of sacrifice on the part of the individual. Organi­
group—an intimacy group—in which two people zational whistleblowing is a quintessential exam-
are similar, interdependent, and often goal ori- ple of loyalty to moral principles over loyalty to
ented. In relationship research, the concept of loy- an organization.
alty has many similarities to the analogous concept
in group research. That is, during difficult times in
Related Constructs
a relationship, or when attractive alternative part-
ners are available, remaining in the relationship As discussed above, identification with a group is
constitutes loyalty. a strong predictor of group loyalty. That is, the
Caryl Rusbult, Isabella Zembrodt, and Lawanna stronger an individual identifies with his or her
Gunn have proposed four responses to relationship ingroup, the more that person can be expected to
dissatisfaction. These vary along the dimensions of be loyal to the group.
546 Loyalty

Apart from strength of ingroup identification, Loyalty Dilemmas


other social processes are likely to yield group and
Individuals may experience extreme psychological
relationship loyalty. Groups may exert normative
conflict if they have to choose between competing
influence on members to remain loyal. For exam-
loyalties, where outcomes are in a zero-sum-like
ple, the motto of the U.S. Marine Corps is semper
arrangement. For instance, if a child of divorced
fidelis, often shortened to semper fi, which means
parents is asked by both parents to spend a holiday
“always faithful” in Latin. Such a motto makes
with them, the child is forced to choose between
loyalty cognitively accessible and thus influential
pleasing one parent and necessarily hurting the
on behavior. Religious groups sometimes publicly
other. Likewise, individuals may simultaneously
shame or shun those who fall away from or leave
belong to two groups that have conflicting values
their faith, and such acts serve the function of com-
or behavioral expectations. In such cases, total
municating to remaining adherents that a similar
loyalty to each group is not possible. If an indi-
fate awaits them if they choose disloyalty.
vidual’s fraternity or sorority expects group mem-
Another process likely to yield loyalty is being
bers to engage in behaviors that are prohibited by
the recipient of trust and loyalty. Over time and
his or her religious group, for example, the indi-
through experience with an organization, group,
vidual must make a choice regarding the relative
or relationship partner, individuals may see that
importance of each group loyalty. Immigrants or
others are willing to trust them, defend them, and
exiles may also feel a sharp sense of conflict
stay with them even when they could do otherwise.
between loyalty to their country of origin and loy-
This creates a sense of obligation, and reciprocal
alty to their new host country.
loyalty can be expected.
Of course, many loyalty dilemmas occur not
Dissonance-based justification processes are
between competing groups or relationships, but
also likely to be involved in the creation of loyalty.
instead between a group or relationship and some
In a classic effort-justification experiment by Elliot
principle or ideal, as in the case of organizational
Aronson and Judson Mills, participants had to
whistleblowing or of soldiers who must decide
earn membership in a group by performing a mild
whether to be loyal to a superior and follow illegal
or severe initiation. Those who performed the
orders or to be loyal to the law and refuse to fol-
more embarrassing tasks (i.e., the severe initiation)
low orders. Although there has been empirical
rated the group more favorably than did those
research examining group and relationship loy-
who completed relatively mild tasks to gain entry
alty, very little research, if any, has been conducted
to the group. If individuals can be induced to sac-
on the approach–avoid dynamics of competing
rifice freely for a group or relationship, they will
loyalties.
justify that behavior by endorsing it and by coming
Whereas loyalty conceptually represents an
to like the group more. Group or relationship loy-
intriguing behavioral phenomenon, namely, the
alty is then a likely consequence.
willingness to incur personal costs to protect, pre-
Although loyalty is typically considered a ben-
serve, or benefit a relationship or group, it is rela-
eficial behavioral orientation toward a group or
tively understudied. Further research is needed not
partner, it can also be maladaptive in some circum-
only to refine the operationalization of loyalty, but
stances. As a consequence of expressed or implied
also to develop a broader understanding of when
loyalty, individuals may feel pressure to engage in
loyalty is likely to arise, what other constructs are
unethical, immoral, or destructive behaviors. For
associated with it, and what various cognitive,
example, loyal employees may feel obligated to lie
affective, and behavioral consequences arise as a
and cover up corporate wrongdoings. Many mem-
function of it.
bers of Jim Jones’s Peoples Temple cult were so
loyal that they took their own lives by drinking the
famous cyanide-laced Flavor Aid. The extent of Jared B. Kenworthy
true loyalty is unclear in this case, however,
because those who resisted suicide were shot or See also Cooperation and Competition; Identification and
injected with cyanide. Commitment
Loyalty 547

Further Readings dilemma. Journal of Personality and Social


Psychology, 46, 1044–1057.
Aronson, E., & Mills, J. (1959). The effect of severity of Rusbult, C., Zembrodt, I., & Gunn, L. (1982). Exit,
initiation on liking for a group. Journal of Abnormal voice, loyalty, and neglect: Responses to dissatisfaction
and Social Psychology, 59, 177–181. in romantic involvements. Journal of Personality and
James, K., & Cropanzano, R. (1994). Dispositional Social Psychology, 43, 1230–1242.
group loyalty and individual action for the benefit of van Vugt, M., & Hart, C. (2004). Social identity as social
an ingroup: Experimental and correlational evidence. glue: The origins of group loyalty. Journal of
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 585–598.
Processes, 60, 179–205. Zdaniuk, B., & Levine, J. M. (2001). Group loyalty: Impact
Kramer, R. M., & Brewer, M. B. (1984). Effects of group of members’ identification and contributions. Journal of
identity on resource use in a simulated commons Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 502–509.
M
distribute his or her visual attention equally
Mediation between the parties while making that statement.
Another view of mediation is that it is a role in
Mediation is a process whereby a person becomes a specific setting: “I am the mediator in today’s
involved in a dispute or decision between two or pretrial court proceeding.” Mediation can also be
more others and attempts to affect the outcome. a career choice, such as divorce or labor media-
This person, the mediator—also known as the tion, that entails specialized training and profes-
third party and sometimes referred to as the neu- sional credentials and is guided by formal rules
tral, depending on the context—has no authority and regulations. Seen broadly, mediation occurs
to dictate the outcome but rather exercises influ- every day, informally, anytime someone attempts
ence to affect an outcome. Mediation is a special to influence the outcome of a decision being made
case of negotiation in which the mediator helps by others. This entry looks at the history of media-
the disputants, or negotiators, reach an agree- tion, describes the mediation process, and discusses
ment that they might otherwise not reach on their its effectiveness.
own. It preserves the voluntary, joint-decision
features of negotiation: The disputants retain the
right to accept or reject any suggestion made by
Background and History
the mediator. As such, mediation is a form of Mediation appears to occur everywhere, among all
assisted negotiation, and it is helpful to under- peoples, in all societies and cultures. It is a univer-
stand negotiation as a precursor to understanding sal, within and between cultures and within and
mediation. between groups, organizations, and nations. The
There are many interesting aspects of mediation primatologist Frans de Waal has reported that
that reflect the complex social, cognitive, and emo- even chimpanzees and other nonhuman primates
tional processes of how people think, feel, and act mediate their disputes. Among humans, mediation
toward members of their own and other groups. has been important for quite some time. The earli-
Additional complexity derives from the fact that est known writing, about 4,500 years ago, includes
mediation often occurs in the context of complex a stone carving that describes a Sumerian ruler in
social, organizational, institutional, political, and Mesopotamia who helped avert a war and develop
legal systems that have constraints and historical an agreement between neighboring groups in a
underpinnings. Mediation always involves com- dispute over land and water. Indeed, mediation is
munication processes, both verbal and nonverbal. arguably the oldest and most common form of
A mediator, for example, might say to the parties, dispute resolution.
“Let me make the following suggestion to The 1960s and 1970s saw a revolution of
you about how to settle your problem” and may mediation in U.S. society, stimulated by passage of

549
550 Mediation

state and federal laws. For example, public employ- In international disputes, the use of mediation
ees earned the right to bargain collectively, which by organizations such as the Organization of
led to the advent of state agencies such as the African Unity, the Organization of American
public employment relations boards and the public States, the International Committee of the Red
employment relations commissions that provide Cross, and many other nonstate organizations has
mediation, often as a required step in the event of also increased. Moreover, representatives of orga-
a labor contract dispute. The landmark 1964 Civil nized religion often play a role in mediating inter-
Rights Act provided, in Article X, for the creation national disputes, as the Vatican did in the early
of the Community Relations Service of the U.S. 1980s in the dispute between Chile and Argentina
Department of Justice. This organization provides over property rights in the Beagle Channel.
mediation in community disputes that relate to
discriminatory practices based on race, color, or
national origin. The Study of Mediation
The 1970s also saw the advent of community Researchers have studied what mediators do, when
mediation centers, such as the Conflict Resolution they do it and why, and with what effect. In address-
Center in Chicago, which provide mediation ser- ing these issues, researchers often consider differ-
vices in a variety of disputes and are often associ- ences between contexts of mediation. Following a
ated with the courts. Family mediation has increased, distinction made by the political scientist Saadia
as well as divorce mediation, which is required for Touval, many researchers distinguish between con-
all divorces in some states. And public resource tractual mediation and emergent mediation.
mediation of environmental disputes has grown.
This growth reflects U.S. chief justice Warren E.
Burger’s comments in the 1970s that the existing The Context of Mediation:
judicial system was too costly and inefficient, which Contractual and Emergent
encouraged the use of alternative methods of dis- Contractual mediation occurs within a set of
pute resolution, such as mediation, especially in rules and guidelines that have been previously
disputes involving divorce, child custody, adop- established by the community. It is usually done by
tions, personal injury, landlord and tenant cases, a professional who has received formal training and
and probate of estates. It is not surprising that law is available for more than one case. Labor media-
schools, and business schools as well, offer courses tion, divorce mediation, community mediation, and
in alternative dispute resolution, including negotia- any mediation that occurs in the courts are exam-
tion and mediation training. Middle and high ples. The term neutral is often used to describe
schools often offer mediation training and pro- mediators in such cases because neutrality is a key
grams in peer mediation, and many colleges and source of mediator influence in these contexts.
universities now include mediation training and In emergent mediation, the mediator typically
programs for residence hall and other disputes. has an ongoing relationship with the disputants
Mediators are guided and aided by professional and is an interested party who emerges from the
societies. For example, the document Model organization or system in which the dispute has
Standards of Conduct for Mediators was prepared occurred. Examples include a dispute between two
jointly in the 1990s by the American Arbitration coworkers in a business and another coworker who
Association, the American Bar Association, and steps in to help as a mediator or a dispute between
the Society of Professionals in Dispute Resolution. two nations over the location of a common border
Regional organizations, such as the Southern and a third nation that offers to mediate.
California Mediation Association (SCMA), pro-
vide guidance and support to professional media-
What Do Mediators Do?
tors and to the legal community. For example, the
SCMA filed in 2003 an amicus curiae brief with A good deal of research on mediation deals with
the California Supreme Court in a case (Rojas v. descriptions and taxonomies of mediator behavior.
Superior Court) that led to a seminal decision The mediation literature offers many typologies and
affecting mediation confidentiality in California. distinguishing factors of mediator interventions. The
Mediation 551

social psychologist Ken Kressel developed an early and when the parties are highly motivated to reach
influential framework that classifies mediator behav- settlement, as they are in a hurting stalemate, an
ior into three categories: (1) behavior that addresses intolerable impasse so painful or costly that the
the substance of the issues (e.g., making an outcome parties search for a way out. Mediation also is
suggestion to the parties or putting pressure on the more effective when the issues do not involve gen-
parties to make concessions), (2) behavior that eral principles and when the parties are relatively
affects the context of negotiation (e.g., attempting to equal in power.
restructure the agenda of issues in discussions), and There is evidence that direct, forceful mediator
(3) behavior that lays the foundation for later success behavior is effective when the conflict between dis-
(e.g., developing rapport with parties or meeting putants is so intense that they are unable to engage
with the parties separately in a caucus). The ability in problem solving. However, such intervention is
of mediators to control communications and modify counterproductive when the disputants are capable
information exchange is seen as a key element. of engaging in problem solving. In a study of divorce
Other work has adapted research on social mediation, agreement was more likely to be reached
power and influence to mediation. For example, if the mediator interrupted the disputants when
some scholars note that mediator behavior can their discussion became hostile and refrained from
reflect the use of rewards (carrots) and punishment interrupting when their discussion was friendlier.
(sticks), as well as the application of information The traditional view that mediator bias is totally
in solving the disputants’ problem (problem solv- incompatible with success has been challenged by
ing). Social psychologist Peter Carnevale developed several authors, who note that a biased mediator is
a series of studies suggesting that a perceptual fac- sometimes the only one available to mediate the
tor (the mediator’s estimate of the likelihood of a conflict and is often the person with the greatest
win–win agreement) and a motivational factor (the influence over the party that most needs to change.
mediator’s concern for the parties’ needs and inter- There is evidence, which may apply mainly to
ests) together predict the occurrence of different emergent mediation contexts, that a mediator who
forms of mediator behavior. is seen as biased in favor of the opponent at the
outset of mediation is seen in a very favorable light
if that mediator acts clearly in an evenhanded
Contingent Effectiveness of Mediation
manner during the mediation and is seen even
Mediator behavior can be adaptive, that is, media- more favorably than a mediator who was initially
tors often act with contingency, in the sense that they perceived as completely impartial.
first attempt to understand the problem they face Mediation has also been shown to be more
and then try one thing or another to achieve their effective when arbitration is a next step. Arbitration
goals. In one study, an analysis of actual transcripts is a procedure in which the intermediary listens to
of a labor negotiation revealed that labor mediators the arguments of both sides and makes a decision
adopted a more forceful style of intervention when for the disputants. One exciting avenue for future
the disputing parties became more intransigent. work is the development and assessment of hybrid
Other evidence indicates that mediators become forms of third-party roles in disputes, such as com-
more forceful when time pressure increases. binations of mediation and arbitration.
Many studies have also revealed that disputants
adapt to mediation, which indicates that mediator Peter J. Carnevale
behavior is contingently effective. In an early study See also Cooperation and Competition; Distributive
by social psychologist Dean Pruitt, negotiators Justice; Negotiation and Bargaining; Procedural
were especially receptive to a third party’s sugges- Justice; Relative Deprivation; Team Negotiation; Trust
tion if they simultaneously had impression man-
agement concerns and a strong need to reach
Further Readings
agreement. This situation is referred to as the face-
saving function of mediation. Bercovitch, J. (Ed.). (2002). Studies in international
There is evidence that mediation is more effec- mediation: Essays in honor of Jeffrey Z. Rubin.
tive when conflict is moderate rather than intense London: Palgrave-MacMillan.
552 Mergers

Carnevale, P. J., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (Eds.). (2006). was previously important to them and shift their
Methods of negotiation research. Leiden, The allegiance to the newly merged organization. To
Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff. account for the fact that between 60% and 70% of
Carnevale, P. J., & Pruitt, D. G. (1992). Negotiation and mergers fail to achieve their economic aims, com-
mediation. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, mentators have proposed that relying on a strictly
531–582. economic point of view is unlikely to provide
de Waal, F. B. M. (1989). Peacemaking among primates. insights into why mergers so often fail. Researchers
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. have proposed that there is a considerable amount
Donohue, W. A. (1991). Communication, marital dispute
of unexplained variance in predicting why mergers
and divorce mediation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
fail or succeed and that various noneconomic fac-
Erlbaum.
tors need to be taken into consideration to account
Kressel, K., & Pruitt, D. G. (Eds.). (1989). Mediation
for what goes on during organizational mergers.
research: The process and effectiveness of third-party
intervention. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
A number of psychological approaches have
Moore, C. (2003). The mediation process: Practical
been proposed to explain employees’ reactions to
strategies for resolving conflict (3rd ed.). San organizational mergers. Studies using a stress and
Francisco: Jossey-Bass. coping approach have focused on variables such as
Rojas v. Superior Court for the State of California, employees’ appraisals or subjective judgments of
County of Los Angeles, 33 Cal. 4th 407 (2004). the merger situation and the coping strategies used
Touval, S., & Zartman, I. W. (1985). International to deal with it. Researchers who have studied
mediation in theory and practice. Boulder, CO: mergers from the perspective of job characteristics
Westview Press. have stressed that after a merger, jobs should be
designed in a way that sustains or increases
employees’ job satisfaction and commitment dur-
ing this change. To design jobs in this way, man-
Mergers agement should directly involve employees in the
job redesign process, train them to adjust to this
Mergers are now commonplace in the corporate change, and provide a clear rationale for the
world as organizations seek to enhance their com- change. Such strategies should facilitate employ-
petitiveness and effectiveness in an increasingly ees’ support for and adjustment to the merger and
complex and globalized corporate environment. A hence minimize resistance and conflicts.
merger takes place when two previously separate Other approaches have focused more directly on
organizations combine to form a single organiza- the conflict and the rivalries that may develop
tional entity. Over the past two decades in par- between employees from the merging organiza-
ticular, numerous mergers have occurred. In both tions. The goal of such approaches is to understand
media reports and scientific papers, negative the processes by which two merging organizations
employee reactions to mergers are frequently come to fit together and form a new superordinate
reported. Moreover, although they are typically entity. The acculturation perspective on mergers,
justified in terms of sound business assumptions, for instance, focuses on the intergroup dimension
it is not unusual for mergers to be less successful of the merger by proposing that the successful inte-
than anticipated in business terms. Indeed, they gration of both organizations into an overarching,
may ultimately be dissolved. Hence, it is now merged entity depends on the degree of fit between
widely accepted that mergers may be less success- the values and the practices endorsed by the man-
ful than expected and that they may in fact fail agement of the two merging organizations. From
because of the “us-versus-them” dynamics engen- this perspective, when employees feel threatened by
dered by the situation. a merger and fear losing their accustomed way of
Most organizational changes create stress and doing things, acculturation stress and conflict will
job insecurity, but organizational mergers repre- result, a state referred to as culture clash.
sent a particularly stressful kind of change, given An intergroup approach goes further in an
the large-scale nature of this change and the fact effort to clarify the conflict that may emerge dur-
that employees must relinquish an identity that ing mergers. Mergers involve the imposition of a
Mergers 553

new superordinate identity on employees, at the organization. Furthermore, like many other inter-
same time as they require the employees to relin- group contexts, mergers often involve organiza-
quish their premerger organizational identity. For tions that differ in status—that is, one organization
this reason, mergers are likely to trigger the social is likely to be more productive, resourceful, and
identification processes that are central to inter- competitive than the other. During a merger, such
group theories. Because employees of the two differences are likely to be accentuated. This means
organizations will be motivated to establish an that members of the lower-status group are con-
optimal position for their own group in the new fronted with the reality of their disadvantaged
organization, a merger may engender competitive position in the new intergroup structure. In con-
and antagonistic intergroup relations. Case studies trast, members of the higher-status group are moti-
of mergers suggest that these negative us-versus- vated to ensure their dominant position in the
them dynamics and responses may well undermine merged organization and, as a consequence, to
the success of the merger. impose their own premerger identity on the new,
A social identity perspective focuses on identifi- merged organization. Doing so will directly threaten
cation and recategorization processes as key fac- the survival of the lower-status group’s identity
tors that need to be considered in an effort to within the new organization. Hence, members of
understand intergroup conflict in response to an the lower-status group should be particularly
organizational merger. Social identity, which threatened by a merger situation, a finding that has
can be defined as that part of the individual self- emerged in a number of studies. Nevertheless, if
concept that derives from memberships in social they see that the merger situation will improve or
groups, is a fundamental psychological variable enhance their social identity (e.g., through open
that shapes individuals’ feelings and behaviors. boundaries, in the new organization, between the
Organizational identity, as one specific type of lower- and higher-status premerger organizations),
social identity, represents an important basis for then responses of the members of the lower-status
self-definition. group to the merger will be more positive.
Because the self is defined in terms of the group The temporal dynamics that emerge during the
membership, a social identity perspective assumes course of a merger and that influence intergroup
that people are motivated to favor their ingroup relations are also important for understanding the
over the outgroup. This self-enhancement motive impact and success of organizational mergers. The
means that group members are motivated to temporal dimension is important given that inter-
acquire or to maintain a positive social identity for group relations are likely to change as the merger
their ingroup. People seek to belong to groups that evolves, which will influence how employees will
compare well with others. That is, to the extent come to identify (or not) with the new, merged
that one’s ingroup is perceived as better than the organization. Longitudinal merger research has
outgroup, a person’s social identity becomes more revealed interesting trends over time. There is evi-
positive. For this reason, people seek to belong to dence that just before a merger, employees are moti-
high-status groups. The desire for a positive social vated to perceive continuity between their premerger
identity means that whereas members of a low- organizational identity and the anticipated identity
status group are motivated to acquire a more posi- that will define the new, merged organization.
tive social identity, members of a high-status group The intergroup tensions between the groups and
are motivated to maintain such an identity, which the us-versus-them dynamics become more marked
involves maintaining both their membership in the as the merger becomes a reality. At this point, the
group and its continued existence. specific differences between the premerger organi-
The nature of an organizational merger chal- zations become salient, and status differences have
lenges employees’ organizational identity, which is tangible implications for members of each pre-
likely to result in antagonistic and conflictual inter- merger organization. Increasingly, longitudinal
group perceptions and behaviors. In fact, the merger research is revealing that identification with
merger situation implies a direct confrontation the new, merged organization is likely to decrease
between the two organizations as they both seek to from the premerger implementation or anticipation
optimize their position and standing in the new stage to the stage when the merger is implemented.
554 Mergers

In fact, over time, employees’ views of the antici- also recognizes the unique contributions of each
pated new organizational identity are likely to be organization to the new superordinate whole.
revised, particularly because during the implemen- Some commentators have suggested that keeping
tation stage, the threatening aspects of the merger positive features from both premerger groups,
are likely to become more salient and hence an rather than trying to erase all preexisting organiza-
issue of concern for employees. A merger is an tional characteristics or retaining only the features
important change that is likely to trigger feelings of of the higher-status premerger organization, is key
uncertainty and threat because of its unstable to facilitating positive intergroup relations during
nature and the risks that it potentially poses to a merger and establishing a productive and suc-
employees’ work conditions and social benefits. In cessful new, merged organization. In fact, research
addition, the fact that a merger poses a potential has demonstrated that the more employees identify
threat to one’s identity can be felt more specifically. with their new, merged organization and come to
Such feelings of threat are important to address recognize that the new, merged organization repre-
within organizations undergoing mergers because sents one united group, the more positive the con-
they are likely to undermine efforts to build both a sequences, whether these consequences are
sense of identification with the new, merged orga- intrapersonal in nature (e.g., higher job satisfac-
nization and the view that the new, merged organi- tion, well-being) or involve entire groups (e.g.,
zation represents one united social group. lower ingroup bias).
Organizational mergers require employees from
the two premerger organizations not only to iden- Deborah J. Terry and Catherine E. Amiot
tify with a new social group but also to manage
different organizational allegiances, namely, their See also Categorization; Common Ingroup Identity
identity as a member of their premerger organiza- Model; Cooperation and Competition; Group
tion and the developing identification with the Boundaries; Identification and Commitment;
new, merged organization. In investigating how Intergroup Contact Theory; Multiple Identities; Social
Identity Theory
employees attempt to reconcile these different
social identities, researchers have found that
employees from the lower- and higher-status pre- Further Readings
merger organizations differ in how they come to
see these identities fitting with each other rather Amiot, C. E., Terry, D. J., & Callan, V. J. (2007). Status,
than being in opposition to one another. In fact, fairness, and social identification during an intergroup
merger research has shown that these two identi- merger. British Journal of Social Psychology, 46,
ties are more difficult to reconcile for members of 557–577.
the lower-status premerger organization, whose Cartwright, S., & Cooper, C. L. (1992). Mergers and
premerger organizational identity is more likely to acquisitions: The human factor. Oxford, UK:
Butterworth/Heinemann.
be erased in the context of the new, merged orga-
Haunschild, P. R., Moreland, R. L., & Murrell, A. J.
nization. In contrast, members of the higher-status
(1994). Sources of resistance to mergers between
premerger organization are more likely to see
groups. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24,
these organizational identities as compatible and
1150–1178.
as continuous, given that the new, merged organi- Marks, M. L., & Mirvis, P. H. (1998). Joining forces:
zational identity is likely to retain more of the Making one plus one equal three in mergers,
features (e.g., name, logo) of the higher-status pre- acquisitions and alliances. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
merger organization. Seo, M.-G., & Hill, N. S. (2005). Understanding the
One solution to reconciling these potentially human side of merger and acquisition: An integrative
conflicting social identities involves developing a framework. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 41,
new, merged organizational identity that is com- 422–443.
plex and inclusive of the specific premerger organi- Terry, D. J., Carey, C. J., & Callan, V. J. (2001).
zations that constitute it. Such a superordinate Employee adjustment to an organizational merger: An
organizational identity accounts for the specific intergroup perspective. Personality and Social
characteristics of each premerger organization and Psychology Bulletin, 27, 267–280.
Minimal Group Effect 555

After being informed of their group member-


Minimal Group Effect ship, participants are asked to allocate points to
members of their own group (the ingroup) and/or
Intergroup discrimination is a feature of most members of the other group (the outgroup). In
modern societies, and the question of why indi- some studies, these points represent actual out-
viduals seem to favor their own groups over other comes, such as money or course credit, but in
groups, as expressed in phenomena such as preju- other studies, the points are meaningless. At no
dice and discrimination, is one that has interested point during the experiment can participants allo-
researchers in many disciplines for many years. cate points to themselves, which rules out self-
There have been many accounts of the motivations interest as an explanation for point allocation.
for prejudice and discrimination, some focusing on In order for researchers to assess responses in
aspects of the individual and some focusing on the the MGP, participants are asked to make their
role of conflict between groups over resources. It allocation decisions using a series of matrices.
was in attempting to investigate why prejudice and These matrices, known as Tajfel matrices, contain
discrimination occur that Henri Tajfel and Michael pairs of numbers that represent points to be allo-
Billig developed the minimal group paradigm cated to a member of the ingroup and a member of
(MGP) and first observed the minimal group the outgroup. The targets of the allocation deci-
effect. The minimal group effect refers to the fact sion are identified only by group membership and
that individuals will express ingroup favoritism an identification code. Participants are asked to
even when there is minimal ingroup affiliation, no choose the pair of numbers that represents the
interaction among group members, anonymity of points that they wish to allocate to the ingroup
group members, no conflicts of interest, and no member and the outgroup member.
previous hostility between the groups. Thus, it There are three types of Tajfel matrices, which
appears that the mere perception of belonging to are presented twice to participants on separate
two distinct groups—social categorization—is suf- pages of a booklet, and responses on these matri-
ficient to trigger intergroup discrimination. ces represent four basic strategies of intergroup
behavior. Parity–fairness is a strategy that awards
equal points to ingroup and outgroup recipients.
History and Background
Maximum ingroup profit is a strategy that awards
Tajfel and his colleagues developed the MGP to the highest absolute number of points to the
establish the baseline conditions for intergroup ingroup, regardless of the points awarded to the
discrimination. The idea was to strip two groups outgroup. Maximum joint profit is a strategy that
of the features identified as important in triggering maximizes the total number of points distributed
group discrimination, such as interaction among to both the ingroup and the outgroup. Finally,
group members, group history, and conflict maximum differentiation is a strategy that maxi-
between the groups, to create minimal social cate- mizes the difference in points awarded to the two
gories. Then, different features of intergroup rela- recipients, with the difference favoring the ingroup
tions would be added cumulatively to determine at but sacrificing absolute ingroup profit. Thus, the
which point intergroup discrimination occurs. strategy of intergroup differentiation is in competi-
In the MGP, individuals are classified as mem- tion with strategies based on more “rational” prin-
bers of two mutually exclusive groups, ostensibly ciples, such as being fair or obtaining maximum
on the basis of some rather arbitrary performance benefit for all.
criterion (e.g., overestimators vs. underestimators One might expect that participants placed in
of dots projected on a screen, fans of the painters this situation, in which group membership is arbi-
Klee and Kandinsky) or by a completely random trary and meaningless, would allocate points on a
procedure such as a coin toss. Thus, the groups are random basis or allocate the points in a fair man-
truly minimal: They have no content, there is no ner. However, this was not what was found.
interaction among group members, group mem- Rather, participants tended to give more points to
bership is completely anonymous, and the groups members of the ingroup than to members of
have no history or future outside the laboratory. the outgroup. Indeed, participants preferred the
556 Minimal Group Effect

maximum differentiation strategy, even though it salary increases, to members of the ingroup and the
meant fewer absolute points for the ingroup com- outgroup than when they are distributing negative
pared with the maximum ingroup profit strategy. outcomes, such as ostensible salary cuts. This phe-
This striking finding, published in 1971, was con- nomenon has been called the positive–negative
trary to predictions based on traditional theories asymmetry effect. The presence of the positive–
of intergroup relations but has been found to be an negative asymmetry effect suggests that the MGP
extremely reliable effect. may be better suited to the assessment of ingroup
The explanation of the minimal group effect favoritism than to outgroup derogation.
was an important part of the development by
Tajfel and John Turner of social identity theory.
Debate
Drawing on the results of the minimal group stud-
ies and Tajfel’s earlier work on categorization, The use of the MGP as a tool to study intergroup
Tajfel and Turner suggested that the process of relations has been a topic of considerable debate.
making salient us-and-them distinctions changes The MGP has obvious strengths: It eliminates the
the way people see themselves. When social cate- impact of external factors such as group history
gories are salient, individuals see themselves in and prior bonds, and it reduces the cost and time
terms of their social identity (rather than their per- associated with the use of real groups. However,
sonal identity) and are motivated to attain a posi- the MGP is not without its critics.
tive social identity. Thus, the motivating principle One major criticism is that the minimal group
underlying competitive intergroup behavior is seen effect is due simply to demand characteristics asso-
as a desire for a positive and secure self-concept. ciated with the paradigm. That is, when a partici-
One way to achieve a positive social identity is pant receives the information that there are two
through intergroup differentiation—favoring your groups, one to which she or he belongs and one to
own group relative to other groups. Social iden- which she or he does not belong, and is asked to
tity theory is often interpreted as stating that dis- allocate money to anonymous members of these
crimination and ingroup favoritism are an groups, the participant may believe that intergroup
inevitable consequence of categorization. differentiation is the only logical response to such
However, although social categorization is a nec- a situation or is the response that is expected by
essary precondition for discrimination, it is not the experimenter. However, studies by social iden-
sufficient—people must identify with the category tity researchers have demonstrated that demand
and see it as part of their self-concept in order for characteristics are not solely responsible for the
discrimination to occur. minimal group effect.
Early research on the social identity approach Another criticism of the MGP rests on the crite-
was dominated by studies using the MGP. One rion used to categorize individuals into the two
reason is that the MGP made it possible to manip- groups. Early studies categorized participants into
ulate the variables thought to be important in groups on the basis of preferences (e.g., for the
intergroup relations, such as status, legitimacy of painter Klee or Kandinsky) or on the basis of per-
status differentials, and permeability of group formance (e.g., overestimators or underestima-
boundaries, and to test their independent effects tors). Thus, it is possible that participants perceive
on individual and collective behavior. However, similarity with other group members, and this
this approach led to criticisms that the results of similarity underpins intergroup discrimination, as
minimal group research might not be valid in opposed to mere categorization into “us” and
broader, “real-world” contexts. Nevertheless, sub- “them.” However, other research, in which arbi-
sequent research that has used real-world groups trary assignment to groups is used, such as a coin
and conflicts has borne out many of the insights toss, has found the same minimal group effect.
obtained in minimal group research, demonstrat- Jacob Rabbie and his colleagues have argued
ing the power of social identity theory. that the minimal group effect results from mutual
One point to note about the minimal group effect interdependence among individuals for the achieve-
is that it is more reliable when participants are ment of particular needs. The behavioral interac-
distributing positive outcomes, such as ostensible tion model suggests that although participants
Minority Coping Strategies 557

cannot allocate points directly to themselves, they Rabbie, J. M., Schot, J. C., & Visser, L. (1989). Social
can benefit indirectly through beliefs about reci- identity theory: A conceptual and empirical critique
procity. That is, if participants allocate points to from the perspective of a behavioural interaction
fellow ingroup members, they may believe that model. European Journal of Social Psychology, 19,
they will be allocated points by fellow ingroup 171–202.
members. However, research has generally found Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundy, R. P., & Flament, C.
greater support for the explanations of the mini- (1971). Social categorization and intergroup
mal group effect offered by social identity theory, behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1,
149–178.
based on identification and the need for a positive
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory
social identity, than for the explanations given by
of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel
the behavioral interaction model.
(Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations
In sum, several explanations other than social
(pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole.
identity theory have been given for the minimal
group effect. However, research has not supported
alternative explanations based on conformity to
cultural norms, the type of criterion used to cate- Minority Coping Strategies
gorize respondents, the unfamiliar character of the
MGP, demand characteristics within the MGP, Social groups such as ethnic and religious groups
expected discrimination from outgroup members, vary in a variety of ways, including whether they
or implied interdependence among participants. represent a numerical minority or majority within
Despite criticisms, the MGP remains an impor- a culture and whether they are valued (high sta-
tant tool for researchers interested in studying tus) or devalued (low status) within that culture.
intergroup relations. Recent research has incorpo- In this entry, the term minority is used to refer to
rated additional features designed to improve the a social group or social identity that is devalued or
external validity of the paradigm, such as placing stigmatized rather than numerically underrepre-
the groups within a social context (e.g., branches sented. Minority coping refers to strategies that
within an organization) and by placing values on members of devalued groups use to manage emo-
the points allocated in the matrices (e.g., salary tion, thought, behavior, and their environment in
increases and decreases). The minimal group effect order to deal with stress associated with possess-
is not merely an historical or experimental artifact ing a devalued social identity.
but continues to be demonstrated and to influence Being (or being perceived to be) a member of a
current thinking on intergroup relations. devalued minority group is often stressful. Members
of minority groups are targets of negative stereo-
Joanne R. Smith types, social exclusion, prejudice, and discrimina-
tion, all of which can lead individuals to conclude
See also Categorization; Discrimination; Identification
and Commitment; Ingroup Allocation Bias;
that their social identity as a group member is
Self-Categorization Theory; Social Identity Theory; devalued by society. Members of minority groups
Tajfel, Henri also often have poorer educational and occupa-
tional outcomes, less access to adequate housing
and health care, and worse physical and mental
Further Readings health compared with members of socially valued
Bourhis, R. Y., Sachdev, I., & Gagnon, A. (1994). groups. Some scholars believe that as a result of
Intergroup research with the Tajfel matrices: their negative experiences, members of devalued
Methodological notes. In M. P. Zanna & J. M. Holmes minority groups inevitably suffer negative psycho-
(Eds.), The psychology of prejudice: The Ontario logical effects, such as low self-esteem. Research
symposium on personality and social psychology does not support this view. Although there is ample
(Vol. 7, pp. 209–232). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. evidence that membership in a devalued minority
Mummendey, A., & Otten, S. (1998). Positive-negative group has many negative effects, it does not uni-
asymmetry in social discrimination. European Review formly or invariably lead to negative psychological
of Social Psychology, 9, 107–143. outcomes. Indeed, members of some devalued
558 Minority Coping Strategies

minority groups (e.g., Black Americans) report discrimination is likely), or changing others or the
higher self-esteem than do members of advantaged social context (e.g., confronting people who discrimi-
majority groups (e.g., White Americans). nate). Emotion-focused coping efforts are geared
This entry addresses theory and research about toward regulating negative or stress-related emotions
the ways that members of minority groups cope rather than changing the problem that is causing the
with their predicament. Perspectives on coping stress. An example of emotion-focused coping is less-
with social devaluation are discussed first, fol- ening the sting of rejection by de-emphasizing the
lowed by a review of specific coping strategies. The importance of a domain from which one is excluded.
entry concludes with a discussion of factors that In the next section, research examining minority
influence the type of coping strategies that indi- coping strategies is organized according to the
viduals employ and the effectiveness of coping. broad distinction between problem-focused and
emotion-focused coping. The distinction is often
blurred, however, because a single coping strategy
Coping With Minority-Related Stressors
may serve multiple functions. In addition, people
Individuals differ in how they respond to member- typically use multiple coping strategies rather than
ship in a devalued minority group. Responses dif- a single strategy.
fer depending on how individuals appraise their
situation—for example, how much they perceive
Problem-Focused Minority Coping
their identity to be threatened in a given situation.
Stress appraisals can lead people to experience Problem-focused coping strategies attempt to cre-
involuntary responses such as increased anxiety, ate an environment in which stressors (e.g., preju-
increased blood pressure, vigilance for threat- dice and discrimination) associated with minority
related stimuli, decreased working memory capac- group membership are reduced or absent. Some
ity, and impaired performance on intellectually problem-focused coping efforts target the self to
demanding tasks. Stress appraisals also lead to cop- reduce the likelihood of experiencing the negative
ing. Coping refers to voluntary attempts to regulate effects associated with membership in a devalued
emotion, thought, behavior, and the environment. minority group. One example of a self-directed
Coping is distinct from its outcomes—just because coping strategy is trying to shed the identity that is
people engage in efforts to cope with a stressor producing stress, such as by leaving the devalued
does not mean their efforts are successful. minority group or attempting to shed the attribute
People who are targets of negative stereotypes, that qualifies one for membership in a minority
prejudice, and discrimination engage in a wide vari- group. There are many examples of people attempt-
ety of cognitive and behavioral coping strategies. ing to cope with a devalued identity in this way.
Classic texts such as Erving Goffman’s Stigma: Overweight individuals, for example, spend mil-
Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity and lions of dollars each year on diet books and diet
Gordon Allport’s The Nature of Prejudice discuss programs in order to be slim. People who regard
some forms of coping used by targets of stigma themselves as physically unattractive spend mil-
and prejudice. Although scholars use different lions of dollars on plastic surgery, and people who
labels, several core dimensions of coping have are addicted to drugs spend millions of dollars on
been identified. One key distinction is between therapy. This coping strategy of identity elimina-
problem-focused and emotion-focused coping. tion, of course, is available only to individuals who
Problem-focused (or active) coping efforts are have (or perceive themselves to have) control over
geared toward changing the problematic relation- shedding their stigma.
ship between the person and the environment that Another coping strategy is to attempt to conceal
is causing stress. For example, members of devalued or disguise a minority identity from others in order
minority groups may attempt to eliminate the stress to “pass” as a member of a more highly valued
associated with their group membership by chang- group. This strategy may enable people to protect
ing themselves (e.g., attempting to shed a devalued themselves from personally experiencing discrimi-
identity), changing aspects of the situation that is nation and prejudice and allow them to preserve
generating stress (e.g., avoiding environments where jobs or relationships with others who would reject
Minority Coping Strategies 559

them if their true identity were known. Conceal­ minority individuals who claim they are victims of
ment, however, does not protect people from discrimination are perceived to be hypersensitive
observing that others like themselves are rejected. or troublemaking, even when it is very clear that
Further, coping by concealment can be psycho- they are in fact discriminated against. Thus mem-
logically costly. Concealment prevents individuals bers of minorities are afraid of being socially dero-
from receiving social support from other minority gated and mistreated for complaining about
group members. Concealing an identity also can discrimination.
make people feel inauthentic and untrue to them- Problem-focused coping efforts also can attempt
selves. In addition, attempting to conceal an aspect to structure situations so as to avoid encountering
of the self can lead, ironically, to increased intru- minority-related stressors. For example, individu-
sive thoughts about precisely the thing one is try- als may avoid situations in which they might be
ing to conceal. This development in turn can lead exposed to prejudice and discrimination or will be
to increased stress and poorer mental and physical the sole member of their group. Overweight peo-
health. The coping strategy of concealment is ple, for example, may avoid places such as the
available primarily to individuals whose stigmatiz- beach or health club, which are especially likely to
ing social identity is not readily visible. expose them to censure, and ethnic minority
A third self-directed strategy used to cope with groups stereotyped as less intelligent may avoid
a devalued social identity is attempting to compen- academic settings. Members of minority groups
sate for a devalued identity, such as by working also may selectively affiliate with members of their
harder, preparing more, or persisting longer in own group, thereby gaining a respite from preju-
domains in which one is negatively stereotyped so dice. Complete segregation within one’s minority
as to improve one’s likelihood of obtaining desired group, however, may cut people off from many
goals. People may also compensate by behaving in important life domains.
ways designed to disprove negative stereotypes of
their group. Although the extra effort involved in
Emotion-Focused Coping
compensation can help a person achieve desired
outcomes, it can also backfire. Trying extra hard Emotion-focused forms of coping attempt to mini-
to overcome negative group stereotypes can lead to mize negative affect associated with minority-
increased stress, impair working memory, and, related stressors and protect individual and collective
ironically, cause poorer intellectual performance. self-esteem. Several forms of emotion-focused cop-
Problem-focused coping efforts also can be tar- ing with minority-related stressors have been iden-
geted at others or the larger social context. For tified. One is altering one’s identification with the
example, members of devalued minority groups minority group by either strengthening or weaken-
may cope by seeking to change others’ negative ing it. Identification refers to the extent to which
attitudes toward their group through education or individuals value a social group to which they
confrontation. They may try to prevent others belong and integrate that group into their self-
from acting on prejudice or may engage in collec- concept. Perceiving discrimination against the
tive action to combat discrimination and change ingroup has been shown to lead to increased group
laws. Confrontational strategies aim to communi- identification among individuals already highly
cate discontent to others, thereby reducing the identified with their group but to decreased group
likelihood that threats to identity will reoccur. identification among those not highly identified
Confrontation can range from simply expressing with their minority group initially. In general,
displeasure with a discriminatory comment to par- members of lower-status minority ethnic groups
ticipating in action to produce social change. (such as African Americans and Latinos) report
Directly confronting perpetrators of discrimina- being more highly identified with their ingroup
tion has been shown to produce feelings of guilt in (i.e., say that their group is more important to
the perpetrator and reduce the likelihood that he them) than do members of higher-status majority
or she will subsequently discriminate. Nevertheless, groups (such as Whites). When under stress,
confronting discrimination is a relatively uncom- minority individuals may increase identification
mon coping strategy. Research has shown that with their group because it provides them with
560 Minority Coping Strategies

social support resources such as a sense of belong- In addition, individuals who attribute negative
ing, emotional support to cope with discrimina- outcomes to discrimination are often perceived
tion, and a positive conceptualization of the negatively by others as complainers who fail to
ingroup to contrast with the negative views pres- take responsibility for their own outcomes.
ent in the dominant culture. Hence selective affili- Members of minority groups also may cope
ation with the ingroup may allow minority groups with their situation by psychologically disengag-
to reject negative stereotypes of their group that ing from domains in which they and other group
are present in the larger society. High identifica- members fare poorly. Psychological disengage-
tion with the ingroup often relates to positive ment refers to separating one’s self-esteem from a
outcomes such as greater self-esteem. particular evaluative domain such that one’s self-
Another form of coping with devalued minority views are not affected by performance in that
status is to selectively engage in social compari- domain. For example, members of minority
sons, that is, to compare one’s own situation with groups that are stereotyped to be less intelligent
that of other members of one’s minority group may disengage from academic situations by deval-
rather than with the situation of members of dom- uing the importance of academic performance or
inant groups who have higher status and better by discounting the validity of academic perfor-
outcomes. Comparing oneself to minority, rather mance evaluations. Through disengagement,
than majority, group members can protect self- minority individuals may preserve their self-
esteem and diminish negative affect in part because esteem when they receive negative evaluations by
disparities between oneself and others are less deeming those evaluations insignificant. Although
likely to be noticed. However, socially comparing psychological disengagement can protect against
solely with minority group members can maintain threats to self-esteem, it may be a difficult strat-
the status quo by preventing minority individuals egy to employ when the culture highly values a
from becoming aware of inequalities in society domain in which one’s group fares poorly.
between their own group and other groups. Disengagement may also reduce individuals’ moti-
Another coping strategy minority individuals vation to succeed in domains vital to success in
may use is to attribute negative outcomes to dis- broader society.
crimination based on minority status rather than
to internal, stable features of the self, such as a
Moderators of Coping
lack of ability. In general, attributing negative
events to external causes protects self-esteem How a person copes with membership in a deval-
better than does attributing negative events to ued minority group is shaped by characteristics of
internal causes. Attributing rejection to another the person, situation, group, and larger sociocul-
person’s prejudice is a more external attribution tural context. Individual factors that influence
than attributing rejection to one’s own shortcom- how a person copes with minority-related stressors
ings. Research has shown that blaming negative include (a) the person’s goals in a particular situa-
outcomes on prejudice instead of oneself can be an tion (for example, whether his or her goal is to feel
effective way of buffering self-esteem in the face of good about the self or to get along with others),
rejection if there are clear cues in the situation that (b) the extent to which a person is identified with
prejudice was present. Attributing outcomes to the minority group, (c) the extent to which a per-
prejudice in the absence of clear cues is not protec- son expects to be a target of discrimination based
tive of self-esteem. Furthermore, since group mem- on his or her group membership, (d) the extent to
bership is an aspect of the self, attributing negative which the person internalizes society’s negative
outcomes to discrimination is not as protective of views of the group, and (e) the person’s beliefs
self-esteem as is making an attribution to a cause about the stability and legitimacy of group status
completely external to the self. There are also differences and the permeability of group bound-
other downsides to attributing negative outcomes aries. Situational factors that influence how people
to discrimination. Doing so can dampen individu- cope include the extent to which negative stereo-
als’ awareness of their own strengths and short- types and prejudice are blatant or subtle in the
comings and hence hinder accurate self-knowledge. situation and whether members of the ingroup or
Minority Coping Strategies 561

outgroups are present. For example, minorities are See also Ageism; Collective Movements and Protest;
more likely to blame negative outcomes on dis- Collective Self; Discrimination; Homophobia;
crimination when they are alone or with members Identification and Commitment; Minority Groups in
of their own group than when they are with mem- Society; Prejudice; Racism; Sexism; Social Identity
Theory; Stereotype Threat; Stereotyping
bers of a dominant outgroup. Characteristics of
the minority group also may influence coping.
Minority groups differ in the extent to which Further Readings
membership is readily visible to others, perceived
Allport, G. W. (1979). The nature of prejudice.
as under a person’s control, and associated with a
Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books. (Original work
recognizable group identity. Concealment is not an
published 1954)
option for individuals whose group membership is
Crocker, J., & Major, B. (1989). Social stigma and self-
readily visible to others but is frequently used by
esteem: The self-protective properties of stigma.
those whose membership is not visible. Individuals
Psychological Review, 96, 608–630.
who perceive they have some control over or can Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management
change their group membership are more likely to of spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
cope through self-focused efforts than are those Hall.
who perceive no control over their group member- Link, B. G., Mirotznik, J., & Cullin, F. T. (1991). The
ship. Members of groups that are entitative, or effectiveness of stigma coping orientations: Can
have a recognizable group identity, are more likely negative consequences of mental illness labeling be
to identify with ingroup members, attribute nega- avoided? Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 32,
tive outcome to prejudice, seek out similar others 302–320.
for affiliation, and engage in collective efforts on Major, B., & Gramzow, R. (1999). Abortion as stigma:
behalf of their group than are those whose group Cognitive and emotional implications of concealment.
has a less recognizable group identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77,
735–745.
Major, B., Quinton, W. J., & McCoy, S. K. (2002).
Conclusion Antecedents and consequences of attributions to
discrimination: Theoretical and empirical advances. In
Members of devalued minority groups engage in
M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
varied efforts to regulate their emotion, cognition,
psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 251–330). San Diego, CA:
behavior, and the environment. Coping efforts
Academic Press.
are influenced by characteristics of the person, the Major, B., Spencer, S., Schmader, T., Wolfe, C., &
situation, the group, and the social context. Crocker, J. (1998). Coping with negative stereotypes
Research on coping portrays members of deval- about intellectual performance: The role of
ued minority groups as active, motivated agents psychological disengagement. Personality & Social
rather than passive victims. Current research does Psychology Bulletin, 24(1), 34–50.
not point to a single minority coping strategy that Miller, C., & Kaiser, C. (2001). A theoretical perspective
is most effective. Rather, certain strategies are on coping with stigma. Journal of Social Issues, 57,
more appropriate depending on the person’s goals 73–92.
and the particular situation encountered. Further, Miller, C. T., & Major, B. (2000). Coping with stigma
coping strategies that are successful in achieving and prejudice. In T. F. Heatherton, R. E. Kleck,
one desired outcome (e.g., decreasing negative M. R. Hebl, & J. G. Hull (Eds.), The social psychology
affect) may lead to other undesired outcomes of stigma (pp. 243–272). New York: Guilford.
(e.g., social isolation). Because prejudice and dis- Miller, C. T., Rothblum, E. D., Felicio, D., & Brand, P.
crimination are social problems, the most effec- (1995). Compensating for stigma: Obese and nonobese
tive strategies for coping are likely to be those women’s reactions to being visible. Personality and
that are directed toward changing the sociocul- Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 1093–1106.
tural context that fosters stereotyping, prejudice, Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity
and discrimination. theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel &
W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup
Brenda Major and Dina Eliezer relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson Hall.
562 Minority Groups in Society

Minority groups get a smaller share of benefits but


Minority Groups in Society a larger share of social and economic burdens. For
example, members of minority groups have less
Minorities are social groups whose members have access to education, health care, and well-paid jobs
less control over their fate than do members of than do members of the dominant segments of a
dominant segments of society, who commonly society. At the same time, they are more likely to
hold minorities in low regard. Thus, minorities be unemployed, in poorer health, and incarcer-
are defined with respect to their position within a ated. It is not uncommon for a minority group to
society’s hierarchy in terms of (a) power or con- be kept apart (e.g., Jewish ghettos) or even directly
trol that group members have over their lives, persecuted (e.g., the Holocaust).
(b) status or prestige afforded to group member-
ship, or (c) both.
Frequently, minority groups are smaller than
Minorities as Targets:
other groups in the society. African Americans in
The Dominant Group’s Reactions
the United States and the French-speaking citizens In addition to these tangible disparities, there are
of Canada are examples of numerically small important intangible burdens of being in a minority.
minorities. Minorities, however, may be compa- These have been documented in social-psychological
rable in size to the rest of the society, as is the case research on dominant groups’ reactions toward
with women in most societies. Or they can be minorities. Members of dominant groups tend to
more numerous than the rest of the society, as, for perceive minorities in a uniform, stereotypical way.
example, were Blacks in South Africa or Shiites in Although characteristics believed to be associated
Iraq during Saddam Hussein’s regime. Size in itself with membership in a minority group need not
does not make a group a minority. Rather, it is the always be negative, they tend overall to portray
group’s social position. Some groups with rela- minorities as inferior. Minorities tend to be stigma-
tively few members may hold power or be high in tized, and membership in a minority group becomes
status. Numerically small groups that exert dispro- a discrediting attribute. Minorities are suspected of
portional power over the rest of the society (e.g., being “less worthy until proven otherwise.”
top military, political, or business leaders) or that Negative views of minorities tend to be perpetu-
enjoy high status (e.g., aristocracy in some European ated through the process called stereotype confir-
countries) constitute a separate social category mation. Members of the dominant group who enter
that can be termed elites. interactions with minority members frequently
Salient characteristics shared by members of a hold negative expectations about the outcomes of
minority group can be social, psychological, or such interactions. In a form of self-fulfilling proph-
physical. Thus, we may talk about racial, ethnic, ecy, prejudiced individuals’ expectations lead them
gender, and religious minorities, as illustrated by to behave in a way that causes minority members
the aforementioned examples. In addition, minor- to confirm their expectations. This is especially
ity position may stem from political orientation likely in social contexts that emphasize power and
(e.g., Libertarians), sexual orientation (e.g., gays), status differences (e.g., police interrogations, job
mental health (e.g., people with schizophrenia), interviews). For example, stereotypical expecta-
physical health (e.g., AIDS patients), or physical tions about minority members’ violence may cause
disability (e.g., deaf people). For a minority to a police officer to treat a minority member aggres-
become a distinguishable social entity, most of its sively. In response, the member may become vio-
members must become aware of characteristics lent, thus confirming the stereotype and feeding the
that distinguish them from the rest of the society vicious cycle of minority derogation.
and perceive that they are treated in the same, Stereotype threat is another mechanism that may
typically negative, manner by the dominant mem- perpetuate negative stereotypes. Being aware that
bers of the society. their negative behaviors, including their failures, are
Disparity in power that distinguishes minorities explained in terms of their group membership,
from majorities leads to disparities in the distribu- minorities may develop the fear that their perfor-
tion of positive and negative societal outcomes. mance on achievement tasks will confirm the
Minority Groups in Society 563

stereotype. For example, being aware that they are a positive view of themselves and their group.
stereotyped as inferior in mathematics, women tak- However, being targets of largely negative reac-
ing a math test may become concerned that they tions, minorities need to protect their sense of
may confirm the stereotype. Preoccupied with this worth. Strategies they use to protect their sense
concern, minority members end up underperform- of personal worth (self-esteem) and value of group
ing and, therefore, confirming the stereotype. membership (social identity) range from disen-
Negative stereotypes and prejudice against gagement from the dominant segments of a society
minorities serve several purposes. Discrediting, for to reinterpretation and restructuring of their
example, immigrants or gays makes those who mutual interactions.
devalue minorities feel superior. In addition to this In a form of disengagement, minorities learn to
symbolic benefit, those who devalue minorities discount as irrelevant the negative feedback they
may reap tangible benefits from doing so. Because repeatedly receive. For example, minority students
of their group’s historically privileged position, failing in schools learn to attribute their failing to
members of the dominant group often have a sense prejudice. Attribution of the failure to external
of entitlement to scarce resources in a society (e.g., factors rather than dispositions protects minority
jobs, education). When they perceive minorities as members’ sense of self-worth, at least temporarily.
a competitive threat to what they believe “belongs” However, its long-term effect may be detrimental
to them, members of the dominant group derogate in that it may undermine students’ motivation
minorities, especially if dominant-group members and a sense of self-efficacy, ultimately resulting in
value hierarchical relations among groups in a helplessness.
society (high social dominance orientation). Their Minority members who discount stereotypically
reactions justify their privileged positions and a negative feedback as irrelevant still need a point of
view of existing power and status arrangements as reference to evaluate themselves. They find it in
fair. Interestingly, this system justification ten- their own group. In addition to protecting their
dency need not be unique to members of the sense of self-worth, this ingroup comparison
dominant group. Paradoxically, it sometimes may strengthens minority members’ identification with
be observed among minority members who, in an the group. In turn, increased identification may
apparent defiance of self-interest, may defend the further increase investments in the group and dis-
status quo in the power hierarchy. counting of the dominant group, thus creating a
Tokenism is another mechanism that perpetu- self-sustaining cycle of reactions.
ates the status quo. Members of the dominant Withdrawing from the dominant culture is not
group may admit very few, very qualified minority the only way minorities can protect themselves
members (tokens) to positions that dominant- against derogation. A strategy that allows them to
group members usually occupy, while denying remain engaged but protected is to be selective
access to all other members of the minority. about dimensions of social comparison. For exam-
Because they tend to perceive tokenism as a legiti- ple, members of the Latino minority in the United
mate meritocracy, the dominant group members States may emphasize their group’s family orienta-
can use it to justify existing inequality. Although tion, a dimension valued by the dominant group,
they are less likely to perceive tokenism as legiti- too. This strategic choice of a comparison dimen-
mate, minority members, including successful sion allows them to compare favorably with the
tokens, are less likely to challenge existing inequal- dominant group and to be different on their own
ity through a collective action when positions of terms and not the terms imposed by the dominant
power are open to tokens than when they are com- group.
pletely closed to minorities. When the context narrows the choice of com-
parison dimensions to those on which a minority
group is negatively stereotyped, minority members
Minorities as Agents:
may protect themselves through downward com-
Identity Protection Strategies
parison to another (typically minority) group that
In spite of many disadvantages associated with fares even worse on the salient dimension. For
their position, minority members can and do have example, members of an older wave of immigrants
564 Minority Groups in Society

may compare their achievements with those of dominant members’ unbiased, nonprejudiced self-
“new arrivals.” Although useful in protecting the image. Tensions arising from such concerns tend
older immigrant group’s social identity, this strat- to make their reactions toward minority members
egy may be an obstacle to forging coalitions among extreme (overly negative or overly positive) and
minority groups that the older group needs in highly variable.
order to improve its position in society. Minority members, on the other hand, learn to
In a direct defiance of the stereotype imposed anticipate negative reactions from the dominant
by the dominant group, members of a minority group. As a result, they tend to be vigilant for signs
group may reevaluate the stereotyped dimension, of prejudice. Their “on guard” interaction style is
replacing the imposed negative interpretation a form of preemptive strike against possible preju-
with a new, favorable interpretation. An illustra- dice and discrimination. Dominant group mem-
tion of this strategy is the “Black is beautiful” bers’ anxiety and minority group members’
motto espoused by African Americans. By cele- sensitivity make their interactions challenging,
brating their distinct characteristics, they turn even when both sides enter them with the best of
what used to be marks of stigma into badges of intentions.
honor. One challenge that dominant and minority
Reevaluation of the stereotyped dimension, groups face in a pluralistic society is coming to an
more than any other identity-protective strategy, agreement about the value of their respective identi-
may be a double-edged sword in intergroup rela- ties, customs, and cultures. The two most frequently
tions. It may be a first step in changing the domi- advocated solutions are minority assimilation and
nant group’s view of the minority and improving multicultural integration. Assimilation occurs when
intergroup relations, but it also may exacerbate minority members abandon their group values to
intergroup conflict. Improvement is more likely adopt those of the dominant group. In contrast,
when the reevaluated characteristic contributes to integration occurs when minority members retain
realization of common goals shared by both their group values and incorporate them into the
minority and dominant groups. larger society. The pros and cons of these two
When they feel threatened, members of minor- forms of intergroup relations are hotly debated in
ity groups may attempt to conceal their identity. pluralistic societies, especially those with a large
For example, hiding their identity may well be the influx of immigrants. For example, members of the
best survival strategy for gays in a homophobic dominant groups in the United States and the
environment or for Christians in present-day Iraq, European Union advocate assimilationist policies
as it was for Jews in Europe during the Nazi era. that require minorities to adopt a common identity
Although protective, this strategy is highly taxing as defined by the dominant group. In contrast,
because it requires that minority members hide minorities prefer policies that allow them to inte-
who they are while trying to act what they pretend grate into the larger society by adopting a common
to be. Thus, there may be time limits to how long identity that incorporates rather than negates their
this strategy can be successfully employed. culture of origin.
These differential preferences have important
implications for interventions aimed at improving
Rules of Engagement: Minority Group
intergroup relations. Most likely to succeed are
and Dominant Group Perspectives
those interventions that encourage members of the
Although negative stereotypes about minorities are minority and dominant groups to work together
pervasive, they are not harbored by all members of toward common goals whose realization requires
the dominant group. However, even if their reac- the distinct strengths of each group. This approach
tions are positive at the explicit, conscious level, creates positive interdependence between groups
dominant group members may have negative reac- such that each group benefits from the other
tions at the implicit, unconscious level. When this group’s distinct qualities. Groups with comple-
is true, dominant members’ interactions with mentary strengths and common goals are likely to
minorities will be anxiety provoking. Every encoun- develop mutual appreciation and therefore improve
ter with minority members puts to the test the their relationships.
Minority Groups in Society 565

Social Change Strategies: related issues. Over time, these changes on related
Minority Influence and Social Movements issues may accumulate to put pressure on the tar-
gets to accept minority’s core requests. The targets’
Active minorities strive not only to protect them- eventual conversion represents a genuine, privately
selves but also to reverse their position in society, accepted change in its position.
from powerless and stigmatized to powerful and Minorities are likely to adopt a collective strat-
valued. As many historic examples illustrate, suc- egy of social change to the extent that their mem-
cessful minorities try to engineer social change by bers perceive that the only way to improve their
altering existing power and status arrangements in condition is by acting together as a group. This
a society. For example, the civil rights movement typically happens when individual paths to social
and the women’s movement in the United States mobility are blocked. Once a large number of
changed significantly the positions of African minority members joins forces to improve collec-
Americans and women in U.S. society. This is not tively their position in a society, they become a
to say that every minority-instigated change social movement. Social-psychological research
improves the human condition. Minority advocacy shows that in addition to complex political, socio-
may fall anywhere along the ideological spectrum. logical, and organizational factors, identity factors
Regardless of their agenda, however, all minorities play an important role in social movements. It is
advocating social change succeed when they sway not identification with the minority group per se
dominant views so that many of their central tenets that turns minority members into activists. Rather,
become commonplace, mainstream positions. it is identification with a minority movement that
Given the disregard associated with being in a underlies minority members’ activism. Thus, a first
minority, active minorities advocating change challenge in minority groups’ quest for change is to
must first address their targets’ fear of being asso- articulate their plight as a movement.
ciated with a minority. This may be achieved by Successful minorities improve their position
casting themselves as, for example, innovators or within a society, and in doing so, they change the
advocates of positions reflective of the zeitgeist. society as a whole. If social change is framed in
Emphasizing a common higher-order identity or zero-sum terms such that minority gains are also
values that they share with the targets increases the the dominant group’s losses, it likely will destabi-
likelihood that the minority message is heard lize society. If, however, social change is framed in
rather than immediately dismissed as deviant. For non–zero-sum terms of increased mutual accep-
example, in their plea for acceptance, gays in tance and benefits, the overall increased integra-
Ireland emphasized “traditional Irish tolerance,” tion may strengthen society.
evoking ethnicity and a core value they shared
with their targets.
Conclusion
Minorities also must offer strong, cogent argu-
ments for their position. Consistently repeating Minorities are social groups low in power and sta-
these arguments attracts their targets’ attention. By tus that receive a smaller share of social goods but
persisting in their advocacy, especially in the face a larger share of social burdens than the dominant
of possible punitive reactions, minorities demon- group. Negative stereotypes and prejudice against
strate that they are certain of their position and minorities serve to boost the dominant group mem-
committed to social change. This strategy may bers’ sense of superiority and justify inequality
force their targets to think about the merits of the between groups. To protect their sense of personal
minority’s request for change. If targets cognitively worth and value of their group membership,
elaborate the minority’s request and if the request minorities use strategies that range from disengage-
is supported by strong arguments, targets may ment from the dominant segments of a society to
start questioning their view of the minority. reinterpretation and restructuring of their mutual
Although they are not likely to accept immediately interactions. These interactions are most likely to
the minority’s core requests, the targets’ relatively be mutually satisfactory in the context of collab-
open-minded consideration of the minority advo- orative efforts toward shared goals whose realiza-
cacy is likely to change the targets’ position on tion requires that minority and dominant groups
566 Minority Influence

pull together their distinct but complementary unexplored by social scientists until the 1970s.
strengths. Although minorities may exert social Most prior research addressed the obvious impact
influence under a highly constrained set of condi- that majorities have on the minority. Then French
tions, they nonetheless may sway dominant views psychologist Serge Moscovici challenged this
to effect social change. Their chances for success orthodox approach by reminding psychologists of
increase when they adopt a collective strategy of the enormous power that minority groups some-
social change through a social movement. Clearly, times wield. Think of the women’s movement, the
in spite of or perhaps because of their position of struggle for racial equality waged by African
low power and victimization in a society, minority Americans, Freud’s psychoanalytic circle of adher-
groups can often serve as agents of social change. ents, Galileo’s scientific advances, even the early
Christian Church, and the (positive and negative)
Radmila Prislin reactions they stimulated. All these groups or
individuals began as feeble minorities, as voices in
See also Assimilation and Acculturation; Collective
Movements and Protest; Minority Coping Strategies; the wilderness, but over time emerged as power-
Minority Influence; Multiculturalism; Self-Fulfilling ful forces.
Prophecy; Social Comparison Theory; Social Moscovici maintained that the source of cre-
Dominance Theory; Social Identity Theory; Stereotype ativity, innovation, and social progress is the
Threat; Stigma; Tokenism minority. He argued that if we are to understand
how society changes, how innovations are adopted,
then we had better understand the ways minorities
Further Readings wield their influence. This entry provides a histori-
cal context, defines some important terms, and
De Dreu, C. K. W., & De Vries, N. K. (2001). Group
then explores the growing body of research on
consensus and minority influence: Implications for
minorities and their impact.
innovation. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., & Saguy, T. (2007).
Another view of “we”: Majority and minority group Background
perspectives on a common ingroup identity. European
Review of Social Psychology, 18, 296–330.
For many years in psychology, social influence
Prislin, R., & Christensen, P. N. (2005). Social change in research was much like a broad one-way street.
the aftermath of successful minority influence. Researchers focused on the impact of the powerful
European Review of Social Psychology, 16, 43–73. on the powerless, the strong on the weak, the
Simon, B., & Klandermans, B. (2001). Politicized expert on the uninformed, the majority on the
collective identity: A social psychological analysis. minority. It was obvious that the powerful major-
American Psychologist, 56, 319–331. ity could exert tremendous pressure on the minor-
Steele, C. M., Spencer, S. J., & Aronson, J. (2002). ity to do its bidding. This orientation assumed that
Contending with group image: The psychology of most people wanted to belong to the majority
stereotype and social identity threat. In M. Zanna (Ed.), group, an assumption borne out in considerable
Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 34, research. Threats of ostracism or expulsion from
pp. 379–440). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. one’s social group are taken very seriously. They
Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories: are a major source of the majority’s persuasive
Studies in social psychology (especially The social strength.
psychology of minorities, pp. 309–343). Cambridge, The stress on majority influence in social psy-
UK: Cambridge University Press. chology was long-standing. It was encouraged by
Solomon Asch’s famous line of judgment studies
and carried forward by Carl Hovland’s persuasion
experiments of the 1950s. Most influence studies
Minority Influence focused on factors that affected the success (or
failure) of the majority to induce the minority to
Minority influence is the impact that minority do its bidding—or at least to agree publicly with
groups have on majorities, an area relatively the majority’s position.
Minority Influence 567

Definition of Minority Group Research Studies

Minorities have been defined in a number of ways, The early research on minority influence was con-
along a number of dimensions, the most important cerned with determining whether the minority
of which are number, power, and normativeness. actually could affect the perceptions or attitudes of
The simplest and most widely used dimension in the majority. Because this had not been estab-
research on minorities is number. The group with lished, it was a necessary first step to jump-start
the most members is the majority, and those with this area of investigation. In an early representative
fewer members constitute minority groups. study, Moscovici and his colleagues had groups of
Power matters as well. The majority typically six judges view a series of 36 colored slides and
has considerably more clout than the minority. It report their perceptions of the color of each slide
has the muscle to reward or punish, to include or immediately after it was presented. The slides were
ostracize, and it uses this power to get its way and uniformly blue, but two of the six judges (a minor-
to maintain its superior position. Sometimes power ity) reported them as being green on each of the
and number are not synonymous. Before the end trials. Of course, these two judges were confeder-
of White rule in South Africa, for example, the ates of the experimenter. Over the course of the
Black population was considered to be the minor- judgments, this two-person minority affected the
ity, even though Blacks vastly outnumbered the estimates of the other participants. The effect was
White ruling class. The White power structure, not great—about 9% of the time, the naive par-
however, wielded sufficient control to maintain its ticipants agreed with the confederates—but it did
superior position. In this case, number did show that the minority could influence the major-
not define the minority, whereas a lack of power ity, even when the correct judgment was clearly
certainly did. obvious.
Finally, there is the normative dimension. The two-person minority could not impose its
Typically, the majority defines what is right or will on the four-person majority, so how did it
wrong, proper or improper. It is unusual for lead- have any influence? Perhaps the consistent minor-
ers of a victorious army to prosecute their soldiers ity was viewed as confident, certain, or brave, and
for war crimes. Usually, it is the soldiers of the los- thus worthy of respect. A second study bolstered
ing side who are defined as criminals—as those this possibility. It showed that when the minority
who violated the norms of good conduct, as respondents were not absolutely consistent—that
defined by the winners (the majority). As such, the is, when they responded “green” on only 24 of the
majority often views the minority as holding 36 judgment trials, their impact on majority
improper or illegitimate positions relative to the respondents’ judgments evaporated. They had no
majority’s definition of what is good and proper. effect at all.
Putting all this together, we can define the From this research, social psychologists deduced
typical minority group as one that is less numer- two important facts: First, the minority can affect
ous, wields less power, and holds counternorma- the majority, even when the majority’s view is
tive beliefs relative to a larger, more powerful, clearly correct; second, unless the minority is
and norm-defining comparison group, the major- unanimous and unequivocal, it is unlikely to have
ity. Sometimes, a group can be in the minority much of an effect. These results are difficult to
even if it does not satisfy all these criteria. For understand from a rational perspective, but a num-
example, in many counties of the pre-Civil War ber of useful theories have been devoted to captur-
South, Blacks far outnumbered Whites. Yet given ing this understanding.
their lack of power, Blacks clearly were the minor- Moscovici’s theoretical explanation for minor-
ity group, despite their numeric superiority. ity influence effects was based on majority group
Further, their behavior often was branded as members’ curiosity. When members of their own
quaint, improper, or demonic (depending on the group advocate a position at odds with the major-
orientation of the perceiver) because it was con- ity’s view, the members of the majority respond,
trary to standards defined by the majority as “Why do they think that?” They focus on the
proper, appropriate, or godly. minority’s position and try to make sense of it. In
568 Minority Influence

so doing, some might be persuaded by the minor- position of a liberal Episcopal priest, especially on
ity. There is a problem, however, with agreeing issues of abortion and contraception.
with the minority, because it forces the person What really would happen? At best, they would
who has been persuaded to move from the safe, simply disregard the priest’s position and view it as
majority camp to that of the minority, an uncom- unworthy of their consideration. Who is this per-
fortable spot sometimes. As such, immediate son to tell us what to believe? This response is
agreement with the minority is most often resisted. common when the majority reacts to an outgroup
However, as time goes by, the minority’s argu- minority’s deviant views. To put it another way,
ments sometimes are accepted. Somehow, the the majority members would not see a dissident
threat of being associated with the minority dissi- priest as part of their group—this person is an out-
pates, and minority influence becomes evident, sider, and what he or she has to say about these
even though it is delayed. issues is not only false but irrelevant.
An interesting alternative to this explanation
was proposed by Charlan Nemeth, whose theory
Factors That Affect
on the workings of the minority still claims adher-
Response to Minority Groups
ents today. She argued that being exposed to a
minority viewpoint caused the majority group This likely response introduces another impor-
member to think divergently—to consider a wide tant feature of minority influence research that
range of possible solutions to the problem that was was neglected in early studies, namely, the mem-
posed by minority dissent. On the other hand, bership group of the minority dissident. In many
being exposed to the majority viewpoint caused circumstances, the minority may not belong to the
the deviant member to think convergently—to group it is trying to influence. This is important
focus on the specific solution or perception sug- because we use our membership groups to help us
gested by the majority and to ignore other possi- identify who we are. As such, we are more sensi-
bilities. Viewed in this way, minority dissent may tive to disagreements with members of our own
be seen as stimulating creative thinking and prob- group (the ingroup) than to disagreements with
lem solving, whereas the majority fosters conserva- members of other groups (outgroups).
tive, rote, well-learned responses. We can safely ignore the rants of outgroup mem-
The implications of Nemeth’s ideas are interest- bers unless they are threatening the ingroup, in
ing and anticipate the results found in the minority which case they have to be engaged and discredited.
influence literature. First, her theory, like However, disagreement with members of the
Moscovici’s, suggests that minority influence, if it ingroup is unexpected and uncomfortable—they
occurs, should come about after some amount of are, after all, just like us. In those circumstances, we
cognitive work. That is, it will not happen imme- carefully consider what they have to say. When the
diately but will be delayed. In addition, if the disagreement does not threaten the very existence
minority’s unexpected position causes divergent of the group in which we share a common member-
thinking in majority group members, then it seems ship, and from which we derive our social identity,
likely that it might have an effect on beliefs that are we will consider the ingroup dissidents’ position.
associated with, but not identical to, the topic Response to the dissident position depends on a
under consideration. number of factors. One of the most important of
So if a liberal Episcopal priest argues for a lib- these is the strength of their message. Obviously, if
eralization of abortion policy to a group of conser- the position is weak and unconvincing, it is not
vative Roman Catholic bishops, it is not likely that going to be influential. Out of politeness, the
they would adopt his or her position. However, majority might acknowledge the importance of the
Nemeth’s research suggests that the bishops might ingroup minority’s position, and certainly its right
become slightly more liberal on the issue of contra- to raise the issue, but in the end, the majority will
ception, a practice that is related to abortion, in not concede to the minority.
that both have to do with reproduction. This Much the same outcome is apparent when the
example seems far-fetched. Conservative bishops minority’s message is strong and cogent. The
would probably never be swayed by the dissident change the minority seeks through its persuasive
Minority Influence 569

presentation rarely occurs—at least not immedi- effect after a delay of some time. It also should be
ately. However, as time passes, some researchers said that there are plenty of studies in this literature
have found that the initial rejection of the minori- that do not show this delayed effect.
ty’s position later gives way to acceptance. How What accounts for this irregular pattern of
this happens can tell us much about the ways results? Why should the minority sometimes cause
minority influence works and has been the focus of delayed focal change and sometimes fail to do so?
considerable debate. There are many possible explanations for this
When confronted with a dissident ingroup com- apparent irregularity, but the one that seems most
munication, the majority will process the informa- probable is derived from the leniency contract.
tion carefully and with little defensiveness. This This explanation begins with some easily accepted
course allows the minority the chance to vent and propositions. First, attitudes are not held in isola-
to attempt to alleviate a perceived injustice. tion but rather are linked in people’s minds.
However, the majority is unlikely to accept the People’s beliefs regarding global warming, for
minority’s position, for to do so might destabilize example, probably are linked to their attitudes
the group, resulting in a shift in the power structure regarding conservation. This set of linkages may
in the group and generally threaten the status quo. be viewed structurally, with some attitudes more
So a convention is set up that allows the rela- closely linked than others. Changing one element
tively free exchange of ideas between ingroup of the attitude structure may unbalance the struc-
minorities and the majority, but with the implicit ture. People do not like imbalance, and so this
understanding that no change will occur. This unpleasant state will be redressed somehow.
would seem a recipe for consistent minority fail- If an element of the structure (an attitude or a
ure, but there is more to it than this. Considerable belief) is changed, but not too drastically, the iner-
research has shown that as a result of their open- tia of the overall belief system might be sufficient
minded processing of the ingroup minority’s infor- to undo the change as time goes on. Thus, the
mation, majority attitudes and beliefs that are changed belief will revert to its original position.
related to (but not identical with) the focus of the However, if the change is drastic, this simple rever-
minority’s position might be affected. sion is not likely. In that case, the change will pres-
For example, if the minority were arguing for sure the entire structure to adjust to the newly
the elimination of capital punishment, a practice of revised belief, and the attitudes that are most likely
which the majority approves, the minority’s posi- to change to accommodate this new belief are the
tion might have no immediate effect on majority ones that were the focus of the original persuasive
group members’ attitudes. However, if the ingroup communication.
minority’s message is strong and persuasive, it is In terms of minority influence effects, this expla-
probable that the majority will move to a more nation, which was proposed and supported in
lenient position on attitudes that are related to research by William Crano and Xin Chen, illus-
capital punishment, such as beliefs regarding pun- trates how the process works. First, the ingroup
ishment on noncapital offenses. Indirect attitude minority proposes a position that is contrary to the
change of this nature is a common feature of much general opinion of the majority. The minority’s
research on minority influence. It is an extremely message, however, is strong and compelling and
intriguing feature of minority influence because thus is difficult to ignore or brush off. In reaction,
the change on related attitudes can occur even if the majority refuses to budge on the focal issue;
those particular attitudes are never even mentioned however, it does modify its position on beliefs
in the minority’s persuasive appeal. related to the focal issue. A few weeks later, those
This is not to suggest that the minority can never who have shown the greatest change on the related
persuade the majority on the issue that is the focus attitudes have readjusted their attitudes on the focal
of the minority’s complaint. Rather, the influence is issue as well. The attitude change the minority was
not immediate. It is conceivable that the minority seeking takes time, but it does occur. However, a
will prevail on the focal issue; however, it will not different pattern is evident among those in the
prevail immediately. Many studies in the minority majority who showed rather little indirect change.
influence literature reveal a clear minority influence For these individuals, the small changes in indirect
570 Modern Forms of Prejudice

attitudes apparently were not sufficient to unbal- See also Anticonformity; Asch, Solomon;
ance the overall system of beliefs. Thus, when these Conformity; Leniency Contract; Minority Coping
participants return later, their focal attitude remains Strategies; Moscovici, Serge; Opinion Deviance;
unchanged, and the indirect attitude change that Social Deviance
was observed has returned to the original position.
The work of the minority was undone by the inertia
of the overall belief structure. Further Readings
Crano, W. D., & Chen, X. (1998). The leniency contract
and persistence of majority and minority influence.
How Minority Groups Bring About Change Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74,
So how does the minority bring the majority to its 1437–1450.
way of thinking? First, it establishes its identity Crano, W. D., & Hannula-Bral, K. (1994). Context/
comparison model of social influence: Majority and
with the group it is attempting to influence. The
minority influence in the formation of a novel
minority must convince the majority that they are
response norm. Journal of Experimental Social
one and the same, that they all share the same
Psychology, 30, 247–276.
identity. This is more difficult in some instances
Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953).
than in others, but failure to establish this connec- Communication and persuasion. New Haven, CT:
tion seriously reduces the likelihood that the Yale University Press.
minority will prevail. Then, the minority must Martin, R., Hewstone, M., Martin, P. Y., & Gardikiotis, A.
present its case as persuasively as possible. A (2008). Persuasion from majority and minority
strong and compelling message is essential. groups. In W. D. Crano & R. Prislin (Eds.), Attitude
Further, the minority must never deviate from and attitude change (pp. 361–384). New York:
its position. Compromise or a break in the una- Psychology Press.
nimity of the minority is a recipe for failure. Moscovici, S. (1976). Social change and social influence.
Having presented its case, the minority should not London: Academic Press.
expect immediate results but rather attend to Nemeth, C. J. (1985). Differential contributions of
changes on issues related to the thrust of its mes- majority and minority influence. Psychological
sage and endeavor to enhance these changes as Review, 93, 23–32.
well. Doing so will facilitate a delayed change on
the central issue.
Obviously, this is not a quick or easy process,
but it is essential if the minority hopes to influence
the majority to adopt its position. On some issues,
Modern Forms of Prejudice
the first step is the hardest—how can a disadvan-
taged minority “prove” that its members are part Significant improvements in intergroup relations
and parcel of the majority? Often, they adopt a during the past century have been spurred by
higher-order identification. In the civil rights move- heightened awareness of the problem of prejudice
ment in the United States, the minority gained trac- and its inherent injustice, legal prohibitions
tion when it shifted the terms of identity. Sure, against discrimination, changing norms, and
members argued, we are of different races, but we individuals’ adoption of less prejudiced personal
share the common bond of being Americans. This attitudes. Nonetheless, an undercurrent of inter-
took some time to sell, but when enough of the nalized bias remains for many people. Individuals
majority accepted this simple fact, progress toward who may not outwardly express traditional
racial equality was facilitated. Minority influence forms of prejudice may harbor internal preju-
is not immediate, and the process is not easy, but dices. Theories of modern prejudice seek to pro-
it can be done and may indeed be, as Moscovici vide a psychological account of this incongruity.
suggested, a major source of creativity, social This entry reviews the historical context of preju-
progress, and innovation. dice, discusses a number of forms of modern
prejudice, and looks at tools for detecting these
William D. Crano less overt attitudes.
Modern Forms of Prejudice 571

History and Background example, surveys showed that 68% of White


people supported racially segregated schools in
Many societies proudly profess that they are 1942, compared with 4% in 1995. In fact, this
founded on principles of democracy and fairness, decline was so marked that the researchers claimed
although prejudice is often a deeply ingrained part that racial stereotypes in the United States were
of their history and practices. For example, Gunnar fading. Researchers also noted declines in negative
Myrdal wrote of the “ever-raging conflict” in U.S beliefs related to women and, to some extent, in
society in his 1944 book, An American Dilemma. prejudice toward gay men and lesbians.
On one hand are general principles of fairness, Despite the evidence suggesting prejudice is
Christian precepts, and equality; on the other hand becoming a thing of the past, the story is not quite
are the realities of individual and group motiva- that straightforward. Researchers found that nega-
tions, needs, and habits that foster prejudice. tive stereotypes were not fading but rather chang-
Historically, individuals’ prejudices have been ing in content and that prejudice was decreasing in
encouraged and legitimized with the support not outward expressions only. More subtle measures
only of norms and customs but of laws. Such wide- uncovered biased behavior in many forms. For
spread sanctioning of inequality helped to keep any example, an influential review article published in
conflict people might experience over their preju- 1980 summarized many studies of subtle bias con-
dices at bay. Prejudice was expressed in unabashed ducted around that time. These experiments showed
and uncensored ways during these times, yielding that White people in the United States treated Black
consequences ranging from open verbal disparage- people in the United States more negatively than
ment and segregation to lynching and genocide. they treated Whites in helping situations (i.e., were
Such overt prejudice is often referred to as “old- less likely to give help to Blacks than to Whites), in
fashioned” prejudice. interpersonal aggression studies, and in their non-
After World War II and the Nazis’ attempt to verbal communication.
exterminate the Jewish people, many started to see This phenomenon is certainly not confined to
prejudice in a different light and to entertain the the United States. Similar findings are widely
idea that it might be wrong and illegitimate. In reported between nationals and immigrant groups
1954, Gordon Allport published his eminent book, in many European countries and, more recently,
The Nature of Prejudice. Allport treated prejudice between nationals and immigrant groups in
as a social problem and, among many other contri- Canada. Researchers began to wonder whether
butions, described the concept of “prejudice with people were complying with egalitarian and non-
compunction.” Specifically, Allport contended that prejudiced ideology when they were obviously
most people experience compunction or remorse in under surveillance but had not truly internalized
connection with their prejudices because they real- the motivation to respond without prejudice and
ize at an intellectual level that prejudice is wrong. whether they had actually reduced their prejudiced
In U.S. society, important movements soon fol- feelings and beliefs. Researchers suggested that
lowed Allport’s publication that further reinforced prejudice remained solidly entrenched beneath a
the idea that individual and institutionalized preju- veneer of professed egalitarianism.
dice was unethical and immoral. The U.S. civil Against this backdrop, researchers proposed a
rights movement (1955–1968) especially encour- variety of theories, starting in the mid-1980s, that
aged greater egalitarianism and reductions in sought to describe and explain these modern forms
prejudice. The “American dilemma” about which of prejudice. The predominant theories of modern
Myrdal had written became a salient reality for forms of prejudice are modern/symbolic racism,
many people as the conflict between their self- aversive racism, racial ambivalence, and prejudice
image as decent and fair people and their continu- with compunction.
ing prejudice toward certain groups became more
apparent.
Conceptualizations of Modern Prejudice
With changing laws (e.g., desegregation) and
social norms, people’s outwardly expressed atti- An element of intrapersonal conflict is inherent in
tudes eventually became less prejudiced. For the various conceptualizations of modern prejudice.
572 Modern Forms of Prejudice

That is, modern forms of prejudice are distinct from Aversive Racism
old-fashioned, blatant prejudice in that people expe-
rience a conflict between forces that encourage The theory of aversive racism describes a form
them to appear to others and perhaps even to them- of prejudice toward Blacks that many White
selves as if they are nonprejudiced and forces that people in the United States with liberal ideologies
encourage negative outgroup evaluations and behav- and strong egalitarian values are thought to hold.
ior. This conflict may be consciously recognized, or Given their strong desire to treat all people as
people may be unaware of their conflicting tenden- equals, aversive racists desire to maintain a non-
cies and resulting coping responses. This is in con- prejudiced image in the eyes of others and also in
trast to old-fashioned prejudice, in which people are how they see themselves. Aversive racists therefore
at liberty to openly express their inwardly felt biases. do not consciously act in obviously unfavorable or
What is common to each conceptualization of discriminatory ways toward Blacks. However,
modern prejudice is that certain factors discourage aversive racists have unacknowledged prejudiced
an individual from holding and expressing preju- tendencies related to negative feelings toward
dices while, simultaneously, other factors act to Blacks in the form of discomfort, uneasiness, dis-
sustain prejudice. Although the various forms of gust, and sometimes fear.
modern prejudice are conceptually and empirically Three primary factors play a role in fostering
distinct, the same people may vacillate at different and sustaining aversive racists’ prejudiced tenden-
times in their lives or across situations in the form cies. The first is the human need to simplify the
of modern prejudice that they exhibit. complex social world by categorizing and stereo-
typing people. Second, motivational factors such as
the need for self-esteem and superior status encour-
Modern/Symbolic Prejudice
age racial bias. Third, sociocultural factors such as
The theory of symbolic racism (which is very learning negative societal stereotypes at an early age
similar to another theory, called the modern rac- and unfavorable media depictions of Blacks foster
ism theory) describes a form of prejudice thought aversive racists’ negative feelings toward Blacks.
to apply mostly to the prejudice of right-wing The theory of aversive racism maintains that
White conservatives in the United States toward people engage in nondiscriminatory behavior and do
Black people. According to this form of prejudice, not show their negative racial bias when social
people adhere to abstract principles of justice and norms clearly dictate what would be appropriate
so do not want to be seen as prejudiced, which behavior and when it is not possible to rationalize
leads them to avoid expressions of outright big- prejudicial biases. However, aversive racists will
otry. At the same time, symbolic racists experience treat Blacks unfavorably when the normative struc-
anti-Black feelings that they acquired in preadult ture is not salient or is ambiguous or when a negative
life through socialization. These feelings are not response can be rationalized as unrelated to race.
necessarily consciously recognized and are experi- Consider an example. A well-known finding in
enced as racial anxiety and antagonism. In addi- social psychology called the bystander effect indi-
tion, symbolic racists adhere strongly to traditional cates that people are much less likely to help some-
conservative values, including individualism (the one (e.g., someone who has dropped a large stack
idea that hard work brings success), and believe of papers) if other bystanders are present who
that Blacks violate such values. might also offer their aid. Applying this effect to
The theory of symbolic racism maintains that aversive racism theory, researchers demonstrated
negative feelings toward Blacks are justified and that Whites showed the traditional bystander effect
rationalized in a political belief system with the when the person who needed help was also White.
tenets that (a) discrimination toward Blacks is More important, when the person who needed help
largely a thing of the past, (b) Blacks’ lack of prog- was Black, White participants not only helped less
ress stems from their unwillingness to work hard when bystanders were present than when bystand-
enough, (c) Blacks are making too many demands ers were absent, but Whites were less than half as
and want results too fast, and (d) what Blacks get likely to help a Black person than a White person
outweighs what they deserve. when bystanders were present.
Modern Forms of Prejudice 573

Presumably, norms clearly dictated helping Prejudice With Compunction


regardless of victim race when there were no
bystanders present, so equal help was given to The three forms of modern prejudice discussed
Blacks and Whites. With other bystanders, the thus far all posit that prejudice is maintained
excuse “I thought someone else would help” through rationalization and justification processes.
becomes possible. This nonracial rationalization People are either unwilling or unable to recognize
results not only in less help for Whites and their racial biases, so they persist unchallenged.
Blacks alike (i.e., the bystander effect) but in Borrowing from Allport’s classic notion of preju-
especially low rates of helping for Blacks. Aversive dice with compunction, other researchers have
racists differ from modern/symbolic racists inas- argued that people may become aware of their
much as they do not deny the existence of preju- racial biases, feel guilty about their inherent incon-
dice and discrimination but seek to attribute sistency with egalitarian principles and nonpreju-
their discriminatory actions to factors other than diced personal motivations, and attempt to change
prejudice. their prejudiced ways. This conceptualization is
rooted in Patricia Devine’s distinction between the
automatic and controlled components of stereo-
Ambivalent Racism Theory
typing and prejudice. Devine argued that, due to a
The theory of racial ambivalence maintains lifetime of socialization and a multitude of factors
that many White people in the United States are that encourage intergroup stereotyping and preju-
socialized to hold two conflicting value orienta- dice, cultural group-based associations come to be
tions that have conflicting implications for their automatically activated among most people.
attitudes toward and responses in relation to Black For example, most Whites learn early in life the
people. One value orientation is humanitarianism– stereotype that Blacks are unintelligent. This asso-
egalitarianism, which has the ideal of social justice ciation becomes strong through repeated activa-
and concern for others’ well-being at its core. This tion until it can be activated automatically (i.e.,
value orientation encourages sympathetic reac- with little conscious attention, awareness, or
tions and attitudes among Whites toward Blacks, intent). In contrast, people’s low-prejudice atti-
given their plight as a disadvantaged and mis- tudes often come to mind only with the operation
treated minority group. The other value orienta- of controlled processes, which require conscious
tion is individualism, which involves adherence to attention, awareness, and intention for their acti-
elements of the Protestant work ethic, including vation. The result is that people may apply their
personal freedom, self-reliance, discipline, dedica- automatically activated associations to intergroup
tion to work, and achievement. This orientation situations before they have had the input of their
feeds anti-Black prejudices because people attri- low-prejudice attitudes. Thus, much like a bad
bute negative behaviors that are stereotypically habit, stereotypes and biased evaluations of vari-
associated with Blacks (e.g., crime and unemploy- ous groups may determine impressions, judgments,
ment) to personal weaknesses rather than to situ- and behaviors before people can consciously take
ational factors. their low-prejudiced attitudes into account.
Awareness of one’s simultaneous tendencies However, researchers have also found that
toward pro- and anti-Black attitudes is experi- many people become aware that they are respond-
enced as psychological ambivalence. Individuals ing in ways that are more prejudiced than their
are motivated to alleviate the discomfort produced personal standards suggest are appropriate. For
by their ambivalent attitudes and do so by amplify- example, a White woman may find herself clutch-
ing their positive or negative responses toward ing her purse when passing a Black pedestrian on
Blacks, thereby discrediting whichever attitudinal the street and then may realize that her behavior is
inclination is not being acted on. For example, inappropriate. Much research has shown that
Whites may evaluate a Black criminal particularly people experience guilty feelings when they realize
harshly and link a multitude of personal faults to that they have responded with prejudice despite
the criminal, thereby discrediting the relevance of their personal low-prejudiced standards. Studies
their pro-Black attitudes to their evaluations. have also shown that such guilt often instigates
574 Modern Forms of Prejudice

attempts to learn how to control and change pat- Finally, because prejudice with compunction
terns of prejudiced responding or to de-automatize involves an awareness of the discrepancy between
the “prejudice habit” through self-regulation. how one actually responds in biased ways and
how one personally believes one should respond, it
Beyond White–Black Prejudice can be assessed more directly. Specifically, the
Should–Would Discrepancy Scale asks individuals
Although modern prejudice has been studied in to consider various situations and indicate how
large part in the White–Black U.S. context, the they would respond in the situations and how they
theories can be applied to other intergroup preju- should respond. For instance, Whites may report
dices within and outside the United States. Some that they find themselves feeling uncomfortable
research has indicated that the tenets of symbolic around Blacks even though they believe that they
racism also apply to modern prejudice toward should not and such discrepancies lead to feelings
women in the United States and to modern preju- of guilt.
dice in Europe. For example, although there are Regardless of the form of modern prejudice, all
norms against discrimination and overt racism in entail negative feelings and beliefs that can
the Netherlands, symbolic and aversive racism be assessed with implicit measures. Relying on
have been reported as distinct phenomena among computer-based reaction-time methods, these
Dutch residents toward ethnic immigrants. Symbolic measures tap into the automatic activation of
racism is expressed toward Asians and West associations and attitudes in ways that largely
Indians in Britain, and aversive racism toward cannot be altered or inhibited. One such measure
Asians has been studied in Canada. Prejudice with involves stereotype or evaluative priming. For
compunction has been studied in connection with example, a stereotype-priming task involves the
women and gays in the United States, and it has rapid (and sometimes subliminal) presentation of
been applied in other countries also. group exemplars (e.g., a picture of a Black person)
followed by targets (e.g., the word lazy). Reaction
Tools for Measuring Modern Prejudice times to targets are measured, and bias is indi-
cated when responses to stereotypic words are
Explicit measures such as surveys and opinion faster when the prime is a member of the stereo-
polls rely on individuals’ willingness and ability to typed group compared with when it is not. The
accurately report their attitudes and beliefs. well-known Implicit Association Test measures
Modern forms of prejudice cannot be assessed the ease with which people can associate category
directly with such obvious questions about inter- exemplars (e.g., Blacks vs. Whites) with evaluative
group attitudes because of people’s desire to main- concepts (e.g., positive vs. negative words). Bias is
tain a nonprejudiced image. Thus, a variety of calculated by the difference in reaction times
indirect means for assessing modern prejudice between evaluatively congruent pairs (e.g., Blacks
have been devised. and poison) and evaluatively incongruent pairs
Symbolic racism is assessed according to extent (e.g., Blacks and paradise).
of agreement with political attitudinal items such The Weapons Identification Task assesses speed
as “Blacks are getting too demanding in their push and errors when individuals are asked to quickly
for equal rights.” The aversive form of racism can- identify whether various targets (typically Black
not be measured with any sort of explicit opinion and White males) are holding guns or neutral
or attitudinal items, because people sincerely objects. The typical finding is that White people
embrace nonprejudiced attitudes. However, it can are faster to identify Blacks holding guns than
be assessed indirectly through behavioral responses Whites holding guns, and White people are more
when norms for nonprejudiced responding are likely to erroneously decide that Blacks are holding
ambiguous or racial bias can be justified in non- guns than they are to reach the same decision for
prejudiced ways—such as in the helping research Whites. These implicit measures and similar others
described earlier. Ambivalent racism can be assessed all bypass people’s consciously held intergroup
by measuring pro- and anti-Black attitudes related attitudes to reveal biases that may be deeply rooted
to egalitarianism and individualism, respectively. in the subconscious.
Modern Racism 575

Conclusion
Modern Racism
Theories of modern forms of prejudice provide
explanations for the incongruities between many
Modern racism is a form of prejudice against
individuals’ nonprejudiced outward expressions
African Americans that developed in the United
and internalized feelings of bias. The new measure-
States after the civil rights movement of the 1950s
ment techniques that tap these internal and often
and 1960s. It is characterized by beliefs that rac-
unconscious biases enable researchers to explore
ism is not a continuing problem, that African
the impact of these internalized biases on behavior
Americans should put forth their own efforts to
and the extent to which they are amenable to
overcome their situation in society without special
change. Understanding the psychological under-
assistance, and that African Americans are too
pinnings of modern forms of prejudice, combined
demanding and have gotten more than they
with skillful measurement techniques, provides a
deserve. At the roots of modern racism are basic
framework and the tools for developing and evalu-
beliefs that Blacks violate cherished U.S. values.
ating interventions for the reduction of prejudice
The idea that the quality of prejudice toward
and discrimination.
Blacks can shift over time has spawned important
Margo Monteith and Anna Woodcock generalizations of the theory to other groups, such
as women (see the entry titled “Modern Sexism”),
See also Ambivalent Sexism; Aversive Racism; recent immigrant groups (including Asians and
Conservatism; Implicit Association Test (IAT); Implicit Latinos in North America and Turks in Europe),
Prejudice; Modern Racism; Modern Sexism; Prejudice; the obese, and gays, among others.
Protestant Work Ethic; Racial Ambivalence Theory; The term modern racism was introduced in
Racism; Stereotyping; Symbolic Racism 1981 by John McConahay in the literature on
group processes and intergroup relations, but the
theory behind it had emerged in 1971 with the
Further Readings
name symbolic racism. Because modern racism
Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. New theory was derivative of symbolic racism theory,
York: Addison-Wesley. the two positions were originally closely aligned
Crosby, F., Bromley, S., & Saxe, L. (1980). Recent conceptually and, in fact, difficult to distinguish
unobtrusive studies of Black and White discrimination substantively. However, in recent years, develop-
and prejudice: A literature review. Psychological ments in symbolic racism (e.g., concerning the
Bulletin, 87, 546–563. origins of the attitudes) have distinguished the
Devine, P. G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their positions more clearly. This entry examines mod-
automatic and controlled components. Journal of ern racism and relevant criticisms, describes mea-
Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 5–18. surement tools, and contrasts the concept with
Devine, P. G., & Elliot, A. J. (1995). Are racial related theories.
stereotypes really fading? The Princeton trilogy
revisited. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
21, 1139–1150. The Nature and Origins of Modern Racism
Dovidio, J. F. (2001). On the nature of contemporary
Modern racism is among the most widespread
prejudice: The third wave. Journal of Social Issues, 57,
826–849.
forms of verbally expressed negative racial atti-
Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (1986). Prejudice,
tudes in the United States today. It is thought to
discrimination, and racism. San Diego, CA: Academic have replaced, to a substantial degree, older and
Press. more blatant forms of prejudice, characterized by
Fazio, R. H., & Olson, M. A. (2003). Implicit measures beliefs that Blacks are a biologically inferior race
in social cognition research: Their meaning and use. and that institutionalized segregation and formal
Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 297–327. discrimination against Blacks are appropriate
Monteith, M. J., & Mark, A. Y. (2005). Changing one’s social policies. The civil rights movement made
prejudice ways: Awareness, affect, and self-regulation. these old-fashioned beliefs largely socially unac-
European Review of Social Psychology, 16, 113–154. ceptable, and although old-fashioned racism still
576 Modern Racism

exists in the United States, it largely has been for the construct, with the conclusion that racism is
replaced by modern racist beliefs. not an important political force today. Although
Modern racism is also one of the most powerful strong evidence exists for an important link between
influencers of racial politics in the United States raw negative racial attitudes and modern racism
today. It powerfully predicts voting against politi- attitudes, this controversy is yet unresolved.
cal candidates who are Black or sympathetic A second major criticism takes the exact oppo-
toward Blacks and voting on policies designed to site position, suggesting that modern racism really
assist Blacks, such as affirmative action and school is racism, but not a particularly “modern” form of
integration programs. It also strongly influences racism. These critics say that it is the same thing as
policies that do not directly mention Blacks but old-fashioned racism but put in more socially
disproportionately impact the African American acceptable terms. As they see it, regardless of the
community, including those involving welfare, language used, modern racism serves the same
unemployment, crime, and the death penalty. It function of rationalizing continuing discrimination
predicts these political attitudes better than conser- against Blacks. However, although blatant preju-
vatism, education, identification as a Democrat or dice toward Blacks and modern racism have some
Republican, and, most important, personal inter- connection, they still act independently in predict-
ests in the outcomes of a vote. ing political attitudes. A person does not have to
One important characteristic of modern racism hold deep-seated blatantly racist views to react in a
is the assumption that it is learned during socializa- punitive manner on perceiving that Blacks (or any
tion. In other words, people acquire modern racist group) undermine cherished values. Nevertheless,
attitudes through their parents, their peers, and the this controversy, too, is an ongoing one.
media. Emerging research suggests that modern
racism is acquired as early as adolescence (earlier
The Modern Racism Scale
than other political attitudes, such as conservatism)
and that it is stable throughout the life span. Modern racism is probably most well known
As a theoretical construct, modern racism is not through the Modern Racism Scale, which is among
tied to threats to a White person’s interests or per- the most commonly used methods for identifying
sonal experiences with African Americans. This is modern racism. The original intent of the scale was
a point of some confusion: Some concepts such as to create a theoretically driven and more indirect
symbolic threat, which seem to be similar to mod- measure of racism relative to old-fashioned, or
ern racism, assert that prejudiced beliefs are rooted blatant, forms of racism. The scale is typically
in threats that Blacks pose to Whites’ worldview. administered using paper-and-pencil surveys or
To be clear, the theory of modern racism was through telephone interviewing. The items capture
designed from the beginning to demonstrate the the themes described earlier, such as agreement
opposite, namely, that powerful negative racial with the statement “It’s really a matter of some
attitudes can be rooted in constructs other than people not trying hard enough; if Blacks would
threat, fear, or personal interests. only try harder, they could be just as well off as
Whites.” The original scale (developed in 1986)
has since been updated with the Symbolic Racism
Theoretical Criticisms
2000 Scale.
Naturally, a construct as popular as modern racism Some psychologists have criticized the Modern
has received considerable critical attention in the Racism Scale, suggesting that it does not capture
literature. These criticisms have helped shape our racism but instead individuals’ sensitivity to giving
understanding of the modern racism construct. politically correct responses about race and their
One major criticism is that the construct of modern motivations to appear unprejudiced. Although the
racism really is not racism at all. Conservatives Modern Racism Scale may not be a true pipeline to
have suggested that modern racism actually cap- people’s negative racial attitudes and other mea-
tures core nonracial principles behind conservatism sures should be considered, the scale and its vari-
(such as opposition to excessive government inter- ants have proven to be useful theoretical tools for
vention and that the mention of Blacks is incidental understanding many race-related processes.
Modern Sexism 577

Relations to Other Forms of Racism Sexism; Prejudice; Protestant Work Ethic; Racial
Ambivalence Theory; Racism; Stereotyping; Symbolic
Modern racism has many similarities to other con- Racism
cepts in use in the social sciences. It is essentially
identical to symbolic racism and racial resentment
and is related to concepts such as subtle prejudice, Further Readings
racial ambivalence, and aversive racism. Although
Dovidio, J. F., Kawakami, K., & Gaertner, S. L. (2002).
these latter theories have their own unique per-
Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial
spectives, they all share the perceptions that the
interaction. Journal of Personality and Social
nature of racist expression has changed over time, Psychology, 82, 62–68.
that current expressions do not appear as much Fazio, R. H., Jackson, J. R., Dunton, B. C., &
like racism as older expressions did, and that these Williams, C. J. (1995). Variability in automatic
newer expressions nevertheless contain a certain activation as an unobtrusive measure of racial
quality of racism. attitudes: A bona fide pipeline? Journal of Personality
Because modern racism is measured by means and Social Psychology, 69, 1013–1027.
of survey methodology and requires deliberate Henry, P. J., & Sears, D. O. (2002). The Symbolic
responses, it is considered an explicit assessment of Racism 2000 Scale. Political Psychology, 23,
prejudice. It can be contrasted with implicit assess- 253–283.
ments of prejudice, such as the Implicit Association McConahay, J. B. (1986). Modern racism, ambivalence,
Test, which measures how easily negative versus and the Modern Racism Scale. In J. Dovidio &
positive concepts are associated with African S. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and
American representations (such as names or faces) racism (pp. 91–126). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
because negative concepts operate at an uncon- McConahay, J. B., Hardee, B. B., & Batts, V. (1981).
scious or automatic level. Although there appears Has racism declined in America? It depends on who is
to be some relationship between modern racism asking and what is asked. Journal of Conflict
and implicit measures of negative racial bias, the Resolution, 25, 563–579.
evidence is mixed. What seems certain is that mod- Sears, D. O., & Henry, P. J. (2005). Over thirty years later:
ern racism is better at predicting voting behavior A contemporary look at symbolic racism. Advances in
and policy preferences, whereas implicit measures Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 95–150.
are better at predicting nonverbal and subtle Sears, D. O., Sidanius, J., & Bobo, L. (Eds.). (2000).
Racialized politics: The debate about racism in
behaviors in Whites’ interactions with Blacks. The
America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
exact theoretical relationship between modern rac-
Sniderman, P. M., & Tetlock, P. E. (1986). Symbolic
ism and implicit associations remains a point of
racism: Problems of motive attributions in political
controversy.
analysis. Journal of Social Issues, 42, 129–150.

Conclusion
Despite the controversies surrounding the theory Modern Sexism
of modern racism and its relatives (most notably
symbolic racism), what is agreed even by the theo- Sexism consists of attitudes, beliefs, behaviors,
ry’s harshest critics is that modern racist beliefs and practices at the individual, institutional, and
represent some of the most powerful attitudes societal level that involve negative evaluations of
underlying current U.S. racial politics. The precise people or promote unequal treatment based on
nature of modern racism, however, is an important gender. Modern sexism, which represents current
lingering question. manifestations of sexism, includes both older,
P. J. Henry overt forms of sexism and more subtle and less
often recognized expressions. By definition, sex-
See also Ambivalent Sexism; Aversive Racism; ism can be directed against both women and men.
Conservatism; Implicit Association Test (IAT); Implicit However, most psychological research focuses on
Prejudice; Modern Forms of Prejudice; Modern antifemale sexism.
578 Modern Sexism

Although gender relations have, as a conse- behaviors that appear harmless, such as flattery),
quence of cultural, political, and social movements, and subjective objectification (women are treated
shifted away from considerable inequality to emerg- as property or sex objects). Finally, covert sexist
ing egalitarianism, particularly in economically behaviors are conscious, intentional attempts to
wealthier countries, egalitarian norms have not undermine women; they are hidden and therefore
resulted in full gender equality. On a societal level, difficult to document. Examples of covert sexist
this is reflected, for instance, by the frequency of behavior are tokenism (hiring a few representative
interpersonal violence against women, the ongoing women to prevent complaints about excluding all
gender-specific division of labor, and the overrep- women) and containment and manipulation (e.g.,
resentation of men in decision-making positions. undermining a woman’s position to discourage her
On an individual level, women report more experi- advancement into higher positions). Several of the
ences with interpersonal forms of sexism than do sexist behaviors described above can be considered
men, with women reporting about one to two sex- as forms of backlash against increasing gender
ist incidents per week traceable to traditional gen- equality.
der stereotypes (e.g., expectations about women’s There is some disagreement about whether cer-
and men’s behaviors and expressions of traditional tain behaviors are forms of modern sexism.
gender stereotypes) and unwanted sexual attention However, it can be argued that those behaviors,
(e.g., staring at body parts or unwanted sexual even when unintentional, are sexist because of
touching). their negative consequences and implications for
Rather than appearing in blatant forms of sexist women on both an individual and a macro level.
behaviors or open endorsement of sexist beliefs, For instance, sexist jokes can elicit negative emo-
sexism has changed its appearance to covert and tional responses in women, and patronizing acts
subtle manifestations. Modern sexism is expressed by powerful men can negatively affect low-power
by a new language and new strategies. These female recipients’ performance. On a macro level,
changes are reflected in researchers’ development paternalistic behaviors can lead to conceiving of
of concepts that mirror contemporary forms of women as incompetent for high-status positions,
sexism. The most important developments during thus maintaining gender inequality.
the past 15 years have been the concepts of mod-
ern sexist behaviors, modern sexist and neosexist
beliefs, and the concept of ambivalent sexist Modern Sexist Beliefs
beliefs, which will be outlined below. Characteristics Modern sexism is expressed not only in behaviors
of current manifestations of sexist behaviors are but also in beliefs. These include modern sexist,
described, and then current manifestations of sex- neosexist, and ambivalent sexist beliefs. All of
ist beliefs are discussed. them reflect contemporary forms of prejudice
against women but do not match the mental pro-
Modern Sexist Behaviors totype of what most people think to be sexist.
Hence, the sexist nature of these beliefs is not as
Modern sexist behaviors consist of blatant, subtle, obvious as the sexist nature of blatant and old-
and covert sexist behaviors. Blatant sexist behav- fashioned sexist beliefs. These beliefs are problem-
iors still exist and consist of unequal and harmful atic because they provide justification for the
treatment of women in family life, employment, status quo and undermine the desirability or need
politics, and religion, as well as quid pro quo sex- to address gender inequality.
ual harassment and interpersonal violence. Subtle
sexist behaviors can be intentional or unintentional
Modern Sexist and Neosexist Beliefs
and may be difficult to detect because many indi-
viduals do not perceive this type of sexist behavior The concepts of modern sexism and neosexism
as serious and harmful. Examples of subtle sexist have been developed to assess “hidden” prejudice
behaviors are condescending chivalry (women are against women. Both concepts derive from
paternalistically protected but treated as subordi- research that was done on modern and symbolic
nates), “friendly” harassment (sexually oriented racism. Modern sexism manifests itself in terms of
Modern Sexism 579

downplaying the existence of discrimination include perceptions of women as seeking control


against women and resentment of complaints over men through sexuality or feminist ideology.
about sexism and efforts to assist women. In the- Hostile sexist beliefs are hidden by their benevo-
ory, neosexism represents a conflict between egali- lent counterparts: Benevolent sexism appears sub-
tarian values and negative feelings toward women. jectively positive. It includes the belief that women
Both of these beliefs represent resistance to efforts should be protected and taken care of by men,
addressing the problem of sexism and imply an characterizes women as wonderful, pure creatures,
inclination to maintain current gender relations. and may flatter women. However, it also rein-
Modern and neosexist beliefs can be regarded forces patriarchy by portraying women as child-
as legitimizing ideologies that provide moral and like, incompetent, needing men to protect them,
intellectual justification for existing social arrange- and therefore best suited for low-status positions.
ments and distributions. For instance, one promi-
nent theory that helps explain endorsement of
these beliefs is system justification theory. System Integration and Implications
justification theorists argue that people are moti- Sexism against women is still prevalent all over the
vated to give a positive evaluation not only to world, but it has changed its appearance, at least in
themselves and their groups but also to the super- economically wealthier countries. Modern sexist
ordinate societal system. People want to believe behaviors include covert and subtle sexist behaviors
that social outcomes and arrangements are fair, that are not easily detected, as well as the continu-
legitimate, and deserved. Believing otherwise would ation of more blatant, obvious sexist beliefs.
imply that people might be treated unfairly and Modern sexist beliefs include those beliefs (e.g.,
that the world is not a predictable place. As a con- denial of discrimination and negativity toward
sequence, members of both advantaged and disad- attempts for change) that legitimize and maintain
vantaged groups (e.g., men and women, respectively) the status quo, as well as ambivalent beliefs that
show a tendency to justify existing status hierar- combine beliefs that appear benevolent but still
chies, even when those hierarchies disadvantage maintain gender inequality with hostile beliefs
their own group. directed at women who challenge inequality and
Methodologically, the Modern Sexism Scale pri- men’s dominance. Whereas people are likely to
marily measures perceptions of discrimination, and identify hostile sexism and endorsement of tradi-
the Neosexism Scale focuses mostly on the resent- tional gender roles as sexist, they often do not iden-
ment of complaints about sexism and efforts to tify other current manifestations of sexism (e.g.,
assist women. Endorsement of modern and neosex- paternalism or denial of discrimination) as serious
ist beliefs in these measures is distinct from endorse- or harmful because these expressions of sexism do
ment of traditional gender roles, but the two not match the mental prototype of sexism.
attitudes have several similar characteristics, such as As a consequence, changing modern sexist
negative reactions toward affirmative action, nega- behaviors and beliefs is a difficult task. Therefore,
tive evaluations of feminists and feminism, greater new types of interventions for both women and
use of sexist language, and lesser likelihood of judg- men are necessary to change the beliefs and moti-
ing particular incidents as sexual harassment. vations that underlie modern sexism. Research on
reduction of sexist beliefs shows that drawing
Ambivalent Sexist Beliefs attention to the frequency of sexist behaviors and
the harm of ostensibly “positive” sexism is a prom-
Ambivalent sexism is another expression of ising way to decrease endorsement of modern and
contemporary sexism. It describes how women benevolent sexist beliefs. However, sexism will
can be oppressed and loved at the same time. decline only through changes on multiple levels.
According to this theory, sexism emerges within That is, besides changes in beliefs, attitudes, and
the context of patriarchal structures and hetero- behaviors at individual levels, changes in roles and
sexual interdependencies between women and opportunities at the societal level are necessary.
men. Ambivalent sexism is composed of hostile
and benevolent sexism. Hostile sexist beliefs Janet K. Swim and Julia C. Becker
580 Moscovici, Serge

See also Affirmative Action; Ambivalent Sexism; Aversive thought and his innovative work, which emphasized
Racism; Feminism; Gender Roles; Implicit Prejudice; the role of social and cultural factors in psychologi-
Modern Forms of Prejudice; Modern Racism; cal phenomena, helped establish what came to be
Prejudice; Racial Ambivalence Theory; Sexism; known as European social psychology. Although
Stereotyping; Symbolic Racism; System Justification
more a mosaic of orientations than a homogeneous
Theory
school of thought, European social psychology is
generally characterized by its emphasis on the social
dimension of human psychological functioning.
Further Readings
This emphasis on studying psychological phe-
Benokraitis, N. V., & Feagin, J. R. (1995). Modern nomena in the social and cultural context is evi-
sexism: Blatant, subtle, and covert discrimination (2nd dent in Moscovici’s entire body of work, which
ed.). Englewood-Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. includes several lines of research. They are tied
Swim, J. K., Aikin, K. J., Hall, W. S., & Hunter, B. A. together by a common theme of a social psychol-
(1995). Sexism and racism: Old-fashioned and modern ogy of knowledge. Examining the role of social
prejudices. Journal of Personality and Social factors in the development, maintenance, and
Psychology, 68, 199–214. change of knowledge, Moscovici developed two
Swim, J. K., Becker, J., Pruitt, E. R., & Lee, E. (2009). influential theories—a theory of minority influence
Sexism reloaded: Worldwide evidence for its
and a theory of social representations—both dis-
endorsement, expression, and emergence in multiple
cussed in this entry.
contexts. In H. Landrine & N. Russo (Eds.),
Handbook of diversity in feminist psychology.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Minority Influence
Swim, J. K., & Hyers, L. L. (2008). Sexism. In T. Nelson
(Ed.), Handbook of prejudice (pp. 407–430). New
Moscovici’s theory of minority influence emerged
York: Psychology Press. from his criticism of the U.S. approach to social
influence, which equated influence with confor-
mity. He rejected the assumption underlying much
of U.S. research at the time that influence can be
Moscovici, Serge reduced to change that individuals or minorities
undergo under pressure from a group. Moscovici
(1925– ) argued that influence also included change in the
opposite direction. From innovators in science to
Serge Moscovici is a leading European social psy- revolutionaries in politics, history abounds with
chologist. Born in 1925 in Romania, he immi- examples of minorities that prevailed in their
grated after World War II to France, where he opposition to a majority.
studied psychology and philosophy. Along with According to Moscovici’s “genetic” model of
Henri Tajfel, Moscovici played a crucial role in minority influence, numerical minorities create
the development of European social psychology. conflict within a group at two levels: At the cogni-
He provided intellectual guidance and organiza- tive level, they question the established (majority)
tional leadership that helped to channel U.S. worldview; at the social level, they threaten inter-
efforts to revitalize social psychology in postwar personal relationships. Initially, people try to
western Europe. Moscovici is one of the founders resolve the conflict by attributing the minority
and the first president of the European Association position to undesirable psychological characteris-
of Experimental Social Psychology, established in tics (e.g., deviance, insanity, naïveté). However, if
1966. the minority continues to advocate its position
In the 1970s, Moscovici was at the forefront of consistently, conveying commitment and certainty,
a quest for social psychology with a distinctly its behavioral style may convince the majority to
European flavor. The goal was to replace then- reconsider its initial reaction and adopt the minor-
prevailing U.S. ideas with theoretical models that ity position as a valid alternative.
would reflect European cultural and historical com- In a revision of his initial model, Moscovici
plexity. Moscovici’s criticism of U.S. individualistic placed less emphasis on behavioral style and
Moscovici, Serge 581

elaborated on the ways that people resolve con- categories. Situating the unfamiliar within existing
flict caused by the dissenting minority. According categories removes the threat of the unknown and
to his conflict theory, the dissenting minority trig- enables people to name it. People are then able to
gers a validation process through which people try objectify the unknown, thinking about it not as an
to understand the minority position and examine abstraction but rather as something real. In doing
their own position. This thorough examination of so, they create social reality. Social representa-
the minority position may cause people to con- tions, therefore, do not mirror reality. Instead,
vert. However, to avoid being associated with a they create it.
minority, they are likely to keep their conversion Social representations are both the outcome and
private. In contrast, when exposed to majority the process of social construction. On one hand,
influence, people are primarily concerned with they emerge as the outcome of the process of social
potentially negative consequences of their devia- interaction. On the other hand, they shape how
tion from the majority. They engage in the com- people think, communicate, and relate during social
parison process, through which they try to fit in interaction. Being a group-specific means of under-
with the majority. Because people change their standing the world, social representations also are a
views without close examination of the majority form of social identification. This becomes espe-
position, their change is superficial in that it rep- cially important when competing representations
resents public compliance and not private accep- from different groups clash. The resultant conflict
tance of the majority position. may stimulate innovation—an idea that Moscovici
Moscovici’s theorizing that minorities, like elaborated in his theory of minority influence.
majorities, can exert influence revitalized research Since its inception in the 1960s, the theory of
on social influence in the early 1970s. Moreover, social representations has generated research and
his ideas continue to stimulate research today. dialogue not only among social psychologists but
also among sociologists, anthropologists, and other
social scientists. Its focus on a dialectic (two-way)
Social Representations
relationship between individuals and social groups
The original impetus for the development of the resonates well with the European orientation in
theory of social representations was Moscovici’s social sciences. Not surprisingly, Moscovici’s the-
attempt to understand how ordinary people gain ory of social representations has been most influ-
ownership of scientific knowledge and how they ential in Europe; it has also gained popularity in a
transform scientific knowledge into public knowl- few Latin American countries.
edge. Moscovici’s concept of social representations In addition to his work on minority influence and
has its intellectual roots in Emile Durkheim’s collectiv- social representations, Moscovici has made signifi-
istic approach to social behavior, which, in turn, was cant contributions to research and theorizing on
influenced by Wilhelm Wundt’s Völkerpsychologie. several other topics, including crowding, conspiracy
Social representations could be understood as a and collective decisions, psychology of language,
form of public (common) knowledge grounded in history of psychology, and philosophy of science. In
group membership. As a result, people have differ- recognition of his intellectual contributions and
ent social representations depending on groups to leadership in the development of the discipline,
which they belong. Moscovici has received numerous professional and
The theory of social representations postulates civic awards. Among other honors, he was awarded
that people need a common frame of reference to the highest decoration in France, the Légion
orient themselves in the world and to communi- d’Honneur (Legion of Honor); the International
cate with others. Social representations provide Balzan Prize; the American Psychological Association
such a reference. They emerge in the process of Wundt-James Prize; and many honorary doctorates.
social interaction as people try to make what is Moscovici is currently director of the European
unfamiliar and unknown into something familiar Laboratory of Social Psychology at the Maison des
and known. This process of making sense of the sciences de l’homme, in Paris.
world is constructive in that it involves anchoring
or classifying the unfamiliar into already existing Radmila Prislin
582 Multiculturalism

See also Conformity; Innovation; Minority Influence; Chinese, English, Spanish), representing a decline in
Socially Shared Cognition; Social Representation diversity that is associated with assimilation.
Multiculturalism and assimilation are topics for
social-psychological investigation because they are
Further Readings supported by assumptions about intergroup behav-
Moscovici, S. (1985). Innovation and minority influence. ior. The original assumptions supporting multicul-
In S. Moscovici, G. Mugny, & E. Van Avermaaet turalism were promoted in Canada, a historically
(Eds.), Perspective on minority influence (pp. 9–51). immigrant-receiving country with a population
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. one tenth the size of the U.S. population. Then
Moscovici, S. (1997). Chronique de années egarées prime minister Pierre Trudeau, in a speech on
[Chronicle of stray years]. Paris: Stock. national unity to the House of Commons in 1971,
Moscovici, S. (2000). Social representations: Explorations argued that individual identity is both the base
in social psychology. New York: New York University from which respect for others develops and the
Press. base for national unity. Although the origins of
multiculturalism as an official government policy
are Canadian, multiculturalism has gained broader
international attention in the United States, in the
Multiculturalism European Union, and well beyond.
This entry assesses the five core assumptions
Multiculturalism as discussed in this entry refers that underpin policies of multiculturalism: (1) a
to policies that support the preservation and cultural free market, (2) heritage culture retention,
egalitarian treatment of intergroup differences (3) ingroup confidence and outgroup acceptance,
and distinct minority and majority group identi- (4) ingroup affiliation and outgroup bias, and
ties within a unified state. People of diverse cul- (5) minority and majority endorsement of multi-
tural and linguistic groups have had contact with culturalism and intergroup attitudes.
one another throughout known human history.
However, contact now takes place in the context
Cultural Free Market
of rapid globalization, involving the movement of
hundreds of millions of people around the world The foundational assumption of multiculturalism
and the global expansion of communications, is that the cultural marketplace is one where
transportation, and trade. A major challenge con- (a) individuals freely select their cultural identities
fronting humankind at local, national, regional, and (b) relations between cultural groups are egali-
and international levels is how to better manage tarian. While cultural groups do not have equal
intergroup contact, as well as cultural diversity. power, they are assumed to have equal merit.
Multiculturalism stands in contrast to assimila- Cultural groups may compete in a free and open
tion, which is defined as the melting away of “market”; the government should not disrupt mar-
intergroup differences through market forces, ket forces by designating an official culture.
govern­ment policy, or both, to create a more homo- This assumption has been criticized for promot-
geneous society. The impact of globalization in ing a form of relativism that threatens both harmo-
many ways reinforces assimilationist trends, so life- nious intergroup relations and social justice. If all
styles around the world become in important ways cultures and cultural practices are given equal
more similar. Just as diversity is decreasing among merit, it may be challenging or even impossible for
plants and animals, so is it decreasing among human a state body to resolve conflicts between cultural
cultures and languages. When Columbus landed in groups. Applying live-and-let-live ethics to minor-
the western hemisphere, there were about 15,000 ity groups that practice forced marriage or honor
living languages in the world; today, only about killings or otherwise relegate women to second-
6,000 survive. Hundreds of languages have one or class status has already presented enormous chal-
just a few speakers and are on the verge of extinc- lenges. The Nazi-led Holocaust is frequently
tion. Most people in the world today speak one of brought forth as the most provocative case of the
only about 10 major languages (e.g., Mandarin harm that can result from applying a free-market
Multiculturalism 583

ideology to the cultural marketplace. Indeed, a leads to acceptance of other groups. The logic of
cultural free market appears to be unrealistic. this assumption supports a rational view of human
beings. Presumably, people have no rational rea-
son to hold biases against outgroups so long as
Heritage-Culture Retention
their ingroup identity is secure. Outgroup bias is
This assumption is that all cultural groups are moti- treated as the rational outcome of an insecure
vated to preserve the culture passed down to them ingroup identity.
by their parents. Empirical evidence testing this However, there are numerous examples of groups
assumption is divided. Studies led by John Berry and that take pride in their identity yet hold extremely
K. G. O’Bryan in 1977 and 1975, respectively, gen- biased views of, and implement aggressive practices
erally support this assumption, at least in samples of against, outgroups. Nazis, the Ku Klux Klan, and
majority culture members in Canada. However, the some religious fundamentalists are a few examples
perspective of minority group members is mixed, that challenge the assumption that ingroup security
and this is particularly true for minorities that are fosters outgroup acceptance. They display intense
physically different from the majority groups (e.g., feelings of ingroup superiority and outgroup con-
because of skin and hair color). tempt, refuting the assumption that love of one’s
More recent studies in the United States, pub- ingroup fosters acceptance of outgroups.
lished by Wallace E. Lambert and Donald M. This critique of the ingroup-confidence–
Taylor in 1990, show that some minorities— outgroup-acceptance assumption begins from an
working-class Blacks, Poles, Arabs, Albanians, irrationalist view of human beings. The argument
Puerto Ricans, and Mexican Americans—hold pos- made is that unacknowledged feelings of intense
itive feelings toward their heritage cultures. Among insecurity drive group members to publicly pro-
minorities living in Europe, however, the trends are claim their superiority. Shocking displays of
more difficult to generalize. The complexity of the ingroup pride mask hidden insecurities. The debate
European situation is important because the num- over whether public displays of group pride are
ber of minorities in Europe has been increasing authentic or part of a system of defenses has not
rapidly, resulting in millions of South Asians living been resolved by empirical testing and hence cur-
in the United Kingdom, North Africans in France, rently depends on the theoretical commitment of
Turks in Germany, and so on. About 20  million the interpreter.
Muslims now live in the European Union.
One reason some cultural groups may not be
Ingroup Affiliation and Outgroup Bias
motivated to retain their heritage culture is fear of
discrimination. Maintaining heritage culture may An optimistic interpretation of the multicultural-
involve public displays and avowals of one’s heri- ism hypothesis is that love for one’s ingroup does
tage, practices that increase one’s visibility as a not lead to hate for outgroups. This hypothesis
cultural minority. This visibility, some minorities has been controversial. The writings of Sigmund
fear, may expose them to discrimination they Freud, for instance, could be interpreted as imply-
would not otherwise experience. Such fears are not ing that love for one’s own group would inevita-
unfounded. Thomas Pettigrew surveyed western bly be counterbalanced with hate for outsiders.
Europeans and reported in 1998 that discrimina- This counterbalancing is thought to hold groups
tion against immigrants persists. It can be argued such as the family together. Social identity theo-
that members of minorities who choose not to rists, too, have weighed in on this hypothesis. One
preserve their heritage culture are rationally pro- interpretation of social identity theory is that the
tecting their interests. more people identify with their ingroup, the less
favorably they look on other groups. Charles
Negy and colleagues reported in 2003 that among
Ingroup Confidence and
Whites and Latinos, the more positive regard they
Outgroup Acceptance
reported for their own groups, the more negative
Multiculturalism is assumed to foster a positive, views they reported having against other groups
strong, and secure heritage identity, which in turn (ethnocentrism).
584 Multiculturalism

These results, like those of many previous stud- Assimilation, which represents a colorblind
ies, support social identity theory predictions and approach, may support the status quo by limiting
refute this aspect of the multiculturalism hypothe- group-based initiatives.
sis. However, Black people in the United States did
not fit this pattern. They displayed no correlation Policy Issues
between ethnic identity and ethnocentrism. They
also reported higher self-esteem and ethnic identity The practical question of how states can best man-
than did Whites or Latinos. Thus, one factor that age cultural diversity will likely persist and become
may moderate the relationship between ingroup more urgent in the next few decades, as globaliza-
affiliation and outgroup bias is the relative per- tion accelerates and intergroup contact increases.
ceived status of each group, which is shaped by Finding adequate policy solutions requires devel-
historical and cultural experiences. oping and testing theories of how members of dif-
ferent groups are likely to respond. Thus, at the
core of sound policy making is an understanding
Minority and Majority Endorsement of of human psychology and, most important, inter-
Multiculturalism and Intergroup Attitudes group dynamics.
In countries where multiculturalism is official pol- Multiculturalism has emerged as an attractive
icy, the focus is on promoting minority rather than alternative to assimilation, and minorities generally
majority group heritage cultures and languages. look on this policy as more democratic and morally
This practice deserves careful scrutiny. The intended, superior. Yet further theory building and empirical
if unstated, goal is often to instill pride and security work are needed to address some of the shortcom-
in ethnic minority groups so that their attitudes ings discussed in this entry. The notion of a culture-
toward outgroups are positive. Outgroups may be free market appears to be unrealistic because in
other ethnic minorities or the majority group. everyday life, groups are not granted equal merit.
However, how does this strategy address dis- The heritage-culture retention assumption is falsi-
crimination on the part of the majority against fied by those ethnic minorities that choose to aban-
minorities? If multiculturalist policy is based on the don their heritage culture. The relationship between
assumption that outgroup bias results from insecu- how one feels about one’s ingroup versus one’s
rity and lack of pride in the ingroup, then to allevi- outgroups is not consistent across samples. There is
ate majority-led discrimination, it follows that the also the complex question of which groups should
majority group rather than minority groups should be targeted in esteem- and confidence-building
be the target of multiculturalist policies. Increasing efforts: the majority, the minority, or both. Perhaps
majority group pride and affiliation should pre- the largest challenge to multiculturalism is the ques-
sumably increase the majority’s acceptance of tion of how diverse groups can develop and main-
minority groups. It could be argued, however, that tain a core shared set of values.
majority groups already enjoy high security and Controlled laboratory experiments offer a cru-
affiliation: To the extent that majority groups are cial but partial picture. Such studies can be comple-
intolerant of others, the hypothesis of ingroup con- mented with field-based analysis of events such as
fidence and outgroup acceptance fails. Indeed, if the formation and expansion of the European
we control for education, majority group members Union, which represents the most recent large-scale
are not any more tolerant of outgroups than are attempt to unify diverse groups. In the North
minority group members. Along these lines, American context, the largest field experiment in
research by Maykel Verkuyten shows that majority recent history is being carried out, involving the
groups tend to favor multiculturalism much less integration of an estimated 40 million to 50 million
than do minority groups. Latinos, their cultures anchored in Spanish-speaking
One might also consider the personal and enclaves in Florida, California, Texas, New Mexico,
group functions of multiculturalist and assimila- and some other states. These developments ensure
tionist orientations. For example, maintaining the that debates about multiculturalism will remain
salience of cultural differences can be important center stage in national and global contexts.
for minority groups to mobilize for social action. Naomi Lee and Fathali M. Moghaddam
Multiple Identities 585

See also Assimilation and Acculturation; Diversity; these perceptions on their level of tolerance for
Ethnocentrism; Group Boundaries; Immigration; those different from themselves.
Intergroup Contact Theory; Social Identity Theory

Social Identity Complexity


Further Readings
The objective relationship between any two bases
Beunker, J. D., & Ratner, L. A. (Eds.). (2005). of categorization can take different forms. Within
Multiculturalism in the United States: A comparative a given domain, groups may be hierarchically
guide to acculturation and ethnicity. Westport, CT: nested; that is, some groups may be completely
Greenwood Press. embedded in others (e.g., all Catholics are
Kymlicka, W., & He, B. (Eds.). (2005). Multiculturalism Christians). In this case, an individual who belongs
in Asia. New York: Oxford University Press.
to one of the subgroups also belongs to the more
Lambert, W. E., & Taylor, D. M. (1990). Coping with
inclusive, superordinate category, and an individual
cultural and racial diversity in urban America. New
who is a member of the outgroup at the subgroup
York: Praeger.
level is an ingroup member at the superordinate
Máiz, R., & Requejo, F. (Eds.). (2005). Democracy,
nationalism, and multiculturalism. London: Frank
level. Antagonism between subgroups (e.g.,
Cass.
Protestants and Catholics) may be reduced if mem-
Moghaddam, F. M. (2008). Multiculturalism and bers of both subgroups also identify with the com-
intergroup relations: Psychological implications for mon superordinate ingroup.
democracy in global context. Washington, DC: Membership in groups that are defined on dif-
American Psychological Association. ferent dimensions of categorization (e.g., religion
Parekh, B. (2006). Rethinking multiculturalism. New or occupation or nationality) may be related to dif-
York: Palgrave/Macmillan. ferent degrees. Some categorizations may be com-
pletely uncorrelated. Knowing, for example, that
people are Muslim does not tell us whether they
are male or female because religion and gender
Multiple Identities memberships are uncorrelated. In other cases,
group memberships may be correlated to some
In large and complex societies, individuals are dif- extent (e.g., gender and occupation; nationality
ferentiated or subdivided along many meaningful and religion). In that case, ingroup members in one
social dimensions, including gender and sexual category (e.g., corporate executives) are also likely
orientation, life stage (e.g., student, worker, retiree), to be ingroup members in the other (e.g., males).
economic sector (e.g., technology, service, academ- Nonetheless, the groups overlap only partially
ics, professional), religion, political ideology, and because some members of the occupational group
recreational preferences. Each of these divisions are of a different gender.
provides a basis for shared identity and group When there is extensive overlap between
membership that may become an important source ingroups defined by different dimensions of cate-
of social identification. Further, most of these dif- gorization (i.e., the categories are highly corre-
ferentiations are crosscutting in the sense that indi- lated), identification is relatively simple—the
viduals may share a common ingroup membership individuals who constitute the ingroup versus out-
on one dimension but belong to different catego- groups are the same for either categorization.
ries on another dimension. Hence, having multiple When ingroups defined by different dimensions of
group memberships reduces the likelihood that categorization overlap only partially, however, the
one’s social world can be reduced to a single implications for social identification become more
ingroup-versus-outgroup distinction. The fact that complex. In this case, some of those who are fel-
people have multiple, crosscutting social identities low ingroup members on one dimension are simul-
has important implications for ingroup identifica- taneously outgroup members on the other. Consider
tion and intergroup relations. This entry looks at the case of a woman who is a corporate executive.
the various ways in which people perceive their When the social context emphasizes professional
multiple identities and then examines the impact of identity (e.g., a management conference), she is
586 Multiple Identities

likely to perceive a male colleague as an ingroup Individual Differences in


member. Nonetheless, she may be aware that in Social Identity Complexity
different circumstances (circumstances that empha-
As illustrated by the bicultural identity example,
size her identity as a woman), that same colleague
two individuals who belong to the same multiple
is an outgroup member.
social groups may differ in how they combine their
How do individuals construct their social iden-
ingroup identities. An individual may perceive his
tities in relation to such multiple, nonconvergent
or her ingroups as having highly overlapping sets of
ingroup memberships? Sonia Roccas and Marilynn
members, such that a set of group memberships
Brewer developed the concept of social identity
may even form a single, exclusive, compound cat-
complexity to refer to a person’s subjective repre-
egory (e.g., White Catholic Republican doctors).
sentation of his or her multiple identities. More
This would be described as a simple identity struc-
specifically, individuals with low social identity
ture. The opposite end of the continuum would be
complexity see their ingroups as highly overlap-
characterized by an individual who recognizes
ping and convergent whereas those with high
that his or her ingroup memberships are com-
complexity see their different ingroups as distinct
posed of distinct and only partially overlapping
and crosscutting membership groups.
member sets. This would be described as a com-
plex identity structure (e.g., Whites and Catholics
Bicultural Identity Patterns
and Republicans and doctors). With a complex
Individuals who are bicultural provide an representation, the individual recognizes that each
illustration of the different ways that multiple of his or her group memberships incorporates a dif-
identities may be combined. The prototypic case ferent set of people as ingroup members and that
here is the member of an immigrant group or an the combined representation is the sum of all these
ethnic enclave whose societal group membership group identities—more inclusive than any one
(country of residence or citizenship) and ethnic ingroup identity considered alone.
or national group membership represent distinct For instance, a woman who is both White and
cultures and partially overlapping group mem- Christian may think of her religious ingroup as com-
berships. One form of bicultural adaptation is to posed primarily of White people (even though,
locate one’s ingroup identity at the intersection objectively, there are many non-White Christians).
of the ethnic and societal categories and thus Conversely, she may think of her racial ingroup as
form a blended (hyphenated) bicultural identity largely Christian (despite the fact that, objectively,
(e.g., African American, Turkish Dutch). In this there are many Whites who embrace other religions).
model, the ingroup is defined exclusively as In contrast, another White female Christian may be
those who share both ethnic heritage and resi- very aware of the fact that many Christians are non-
dence in the host society. The two identities have White (i.e., do not share her racial identity) and that
been combined into a single, convergent social many Whites are not Christians in their religious
identity. affiliation. The difference between these two cases is
The second, more complex form of bicultural- whether the individual perceives her ingroups as
ism is intercultural identity, which acknowledges highly overlapping (convergent) or as only partially
multiple cultural identities simultaneously and overlapping (crosscutting). Roccas and Brewer define
combines and integrates membership, values, and social identity complexity in terms of such differ-
norms of both groups. This conceptualization ences in perceived overlap of multiple ingroups.
equates biculturalism with the acquisition of a Research on social identity complexity indicates
more inclusive, complex group identity than that that high complexity is associated with liberal ide-
represented by any component cultural identity ology, universalistic values, openness, and experi-
alone. With this representation, the cultural ence with diversity. Further, stress and threat
ingroup is expanded to include all fellow country- influence social identity complexity. Under condi-
men (regardless of their ethnic identity) and all tions of felt threat, individuals tend to reduce com-
members of the same ethnic group (regardless of plexity and see their multiple ingroups as more
the country in which they reside). convergent.
Mutual Intergroup Differentiation Model 587

Multiple Identities memberships provides an effective formula for


and Intergroup Tolerance reducing intergroup prejudice.
Roccas and Brewer also speculated that social Marilynn B. Brewer
identity complexity (as represented by perceived
overlap among ingroup memberships) would be See also Collective Self; Common Ingroup Identity
associated with tolerance for outgroups in general. Model; Cross-Categorization; Prejudice; Social Identity
Social identity complexity is based on awareness of Theory
cross-categorization in one’s own social group
memberships and those of others. A simple (con- Further Readings
vergent) social identity is likely to be accompanied
by the perception that any individual who is an Amiot, C. E., de la Sablonniere, R., Terry, D. J., &
outgroup member on one dimension is also an Smith, J. R. (2007). Integration of social identities in
outgroup member on all others. In contrast, if indi- the self: Toward a cognitive-developmental model.
Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11,
viduals are aware that their multiple ingroups do
364–388.
not completely overlap, then they are also aware
Brewer, M. B., & Pierce, K. P. (2005). Social identity
that outgroup members on one dimension may be
complexity and outgroup tolerance. Personality and
ingroup members on others.
Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 428–437.
For both cognitive and motivational reasons, a
Crisp, R., & Hewstone, M. (Eds.). (2006). Multiple social
complex representation of one’s multiple ingroup categorization: Processes, models and applications.
identities should influence intergroup attitudes and Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
behavior in ways that reduce bias and discrimination. LaFromboise, T., Coleman, H. L. K., & Gerton, J.
Multiple group memberships reduce the impor- (1993). Psychological impact of biculturalism:
tance of any one social identity for satisfying an Evidence and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 114,
individual’s need for belonging and self-definition, 395–412.
reducing the motivational base for ingroup bias Roccas, S., and Brewer, M. B. (2002). Social identity
and outgroup prejudice. complexity. Personality and Social Psychology
Results of survey research on the correlates of Review, 6, 88–106.
social identity complexity confirm that social
identity complexity is associated with both
tolerance-related policy preferences and feelings
toward outgroups. The degree of perceived over-
Mutual Intergroup
lap among a respondent’s multiple ingroups Differentiation Model
proved to be significantly correlated with atti-
tudes toward affirmative action, multicultural- The mutual intergroup differentiation model, pro-
ism, and feelings toward outgroups, after posed by Miles Hewstone and Rupert Brown, is
controlling for age, education, and ideology. an extension of the intergroup contact hypothesis,
Holding the number and diversity of ingroups the proposition that contact between members of
constant, individuals who perceive low overlap different groups will reduce intergroup prejudice.
among their ingroups are more accepting of mul- The model states that contact between members
ticultural policies, have more positive feelings of different groups will be most likely to result in
toward ethnic and religious outgroups, and show positive intergroup relations when those involved
less implicit racial prejudice than do individuals embrace their respective group memberships and
who see their multiple ingroups as highly over- acknowledge the differences that exist between
lapping and convergent. the groups.
In sum, then, the way in which individuals think The model draws on social identity theory,
about their own multiple ingroup identities affects which proposes that we are motivated to hold a
the inclusiveness of their social world and their tol- positive perception of groups we belong to and
erance for difference and diversity. Promoting mul- that we tend to favor our own group over other
tiple social identities with awareness of crosscutting groups to achieve this. It is argued that each group
588 Mutual Intergroup Differentiation Model

can view itself positively during the intergroup Given that we tend to show intergroup bias
encounter by considering itself to be superior on when our group membership is salient, the decat-
different dimensions from the other group. egorization approach proposes that intergroup
The model is important for our understanding contact is most likely to reduce prejudice when
of group processes and intergroup relations because those involved focus on one another’s individual
it identifies a key moderator of intergroup contact, characteristics rather than their respective group
highlighting when contact is most likely to improve memberships. It is acknowledged that, in the short
intergroup attitudes. The theoretical and empirical term, information acquired about individual cate-
background of the model, evidence for and draw- gory members is not directly generalized to the
backs of the model, and recent developments that entire outgroup. However, the long-term effect of
extend and clarify the model are outlined in this such interactions is a decrease in category-based
entry. processing in general and therefore reduced inter-
group prejudice.
The recategorization approach, also known as
Background of the Model
the common ingroup identity model, also proposes
The contact hypothesis has generated an extensive that group boundaries are eliminated but argues
body of research over the past 50 years that has, that, rather than removal of category boundaries
by and large, demonstrated that high-quality con- altogether, the categories are altered so that both
tact between members of different groups can groups are included in one superordinate group.
reduce intergroup prejudice. The contact hypoth- This transforms group members’ cognitive repre-
esis has, however, a notable limitation: It fails to sentations from two groups (us and them) to one
specify how the effects of contact would generalize inclusive group (we). In this situation, former
beyond the immediate contact situation to other ingroup and outgroup members now share a new
situations and from the individuals involved in the ingroup membership, and so former outgroup
contact to the entire outgroup. Accordingly, members no longer pose a threat to a positive
research has shown that although participants social identity. Thus, ingroup bias associated with
who engage in cooperative contact with outgroup the original groups is reduced or eliminated.
members develop more positive attitudes toward There are, however, some difficulties with these
the specific outgroup members involved in the con- two approaches to intergroup contact. First, if
tact, their attitudes toward other outgroup mem- group memberships are completely eliminated,
bers and the outgroup in general often remain individual-to-group generalization is unlikely
unchanged. because the connection between individual out-
To identify how and when the positive effects group members and the group to which they
of contact are likely to generalize from individuals belong is broken. One may like an outgroup mem-
involved in the contact to the entire outgroup, ber, but if that person is not recognized as being an
researchers have drawn on social identity theory. outgroup member, attitudes toward the outgroup
According to this theory, when an individual’s in general are unlikely to become more positive.
membership in a given group becomes salient, this Second, group membership is often an important
membership becomes incorporated into the indi- aspect of an individual’s identity. To ignore its
vidual’s self-concept, resulting in a social identity existence or to impose on individuals a superordi-
rather than an individual identity. We are moti- nate category may result in strong resistance from
vated to hold a positive social identity, so when group members, particularly when the two groups
our group membership is salient, we have a ten- differ in size, power, or status.
dency to show a preference for groups we belong
to over groups we do not belong to; in other
Evidence Supporting the Model
words, we show ingroup bias. The social identity
approach has led to the emergence of three diverg- The mutual intergroup differentiation model pro-
ing perspectives with regard to when the positive vides an alternative solution to the issue of contact
aspects of the contact situation result in more generalization that circumvents the problems pre-
positive attitudes toward the outgroup in general. sented by the decategorization and recategorization
Mutual Intergroup Differentiation Model 589

approaches. It contends that the positive effect of differentiation as mutually exclusive, researchers
contact between ingroup and outgroup members now argue that interpersonal (decategorized) and
generalizes to the entire outgroup only when the intergroup (category-based) contact should be
group memberships of those involved remain psy- viewed as orthogonal dimensions, which together
chologically salient during contact. The model can create highly effective conditions of outgroup
acknowledges that group members seek a posi- contact. Specifically, outgroup contact will be most
tively distinct social identity by elevating their effective when contact is both highly intergroup
group compared with other groups. It is, however, and highly interpersonal. In contrast, contact that is
possible for both groups to maintain a positively low on either or both intergroup and interpersonal
distinct social identity by distinguishing them- dimensions is likely to be less successful at general-
selves from the other group on different sets of izing the effect of contact to outgroup attitudes.
traits. In sum, if there is mutual recognition of one That is, high intimacy but low group salience will
another’s superiorities and inferiorities, positive fail to generalize, whereas high salience but low
intergroup contact is possible. Supporting the personalization is likely to result in heightened
model, research has shown that although positive intergroup anxiety. Research has shown that hav-
contact with an outgroup member leads to more ing an encounter with outgroup members who
positive attitudes toward that individual, it leads disclose personal information but who are also per-
to more positive attitudes toward the outgroup in ceived as typical of their group is associated with
general only when those involved acknowledged more positive outgroup attitudes than is contact
their respective group memberships at some point with outgroup members who are typical but do not
during the interaction. disclose personal information or with outgroup
The mutual intergroup differentiation approach members who disclose personal information but
is not, however, without its dangers. First, although are atypical.
intergroup contact with category salience may be
more likely to generalize to the outgroup, if that Conclusion
contact is negative rather than positive, it could
lead to an increase in generalized prejudice toward The mutual intergroup differentiation model has
a group. Second, an overemphasis on group mem- made two important contributions to our knowl-
bership may lead to an increase in intergroup edge of group processes and intergroup relations.
anxiety, the negative emotional reaction that may First, it highlights category salience as an impor-
arise as a result of negative expectations about tant moderator of intergroup contact, enabling the
encounters with members of other groups. In turn, development of more effective contact interven-
this anxiety may lead to an increase in stereotyping tions. Second, by generating a vigorous debate
and prejudice. This creates something of a dilemma: between the diverging perspectives of mutual inter-
Decategorized contact, in which the focus is on group differentiation, decategorization, and recat-
personal characteristics, is likely to induce positive egorization, it has provided a more sophisticated
feelings and therefore liking of individual outgroup understanding of when intergroup contact will be
members, whereas making category membership most effective, recognizing the combined benefits
salient may reinforce stereotypes and result in of interpersonal and intergroup contact.
anxiety. But it is contact that is intergroup rather Rhiannon N. Turner and Miles Hewstone
than interpersonal in nature that is most likely to
generalize to the outgroup as a whole. See also Categorization; Common Ingroup Identity
Model; Decategorization; Desegregation; Intergroup
Anxiety; Intergroup Contact Theory; Prejudice; Social
Recent Developments Identity Theory
The decategorization and recategorization
approaches have recently been integrated with the
mutual intergroup differentiation approach to Further Readings
overcome their respective limitations. Rather than Brewer, M. B., & Miller, N. (1984). Beyond the contact
seeing decategorization and mutual intergroup hypothesis: Theoretical perspectives on segregation. In
590 Mutual Intergroup Differentiation Model

N. Miller & M. B. Brewer (Eds.), Groups in contact: Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Reducing
The psychology of desegregation (pp. 281–302). intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model.
Orlando, FL: Academic Press. New York: Psychology Press.
Brown, R., & Hewstone, H. (2005). An integrative Hewstone, M., & Brown, R. (1986). Contact is not
theory of intergroup contact. In M. P. Zanna enough: An intergroup perspective on the ‘contact
(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology hypothesis.’ In M. Hewstone & R. Brown (Eds.),
(Vol. 37, pp. 255–343). San Diego, CA: Academic Contact and conflict in intergroup encounters
Press. (pp. 1–44). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
N
and newspapers subtly reinforce national categories
Nationalism and Patriotism by giving priority to domestic over foreign affairs.
Patriotism and nationalism are terms that have
Nationalism and patriotism, which are different been used differently, regarding both their valence
aspects of national identification, are group phe- and their specific meaning, in different historical
nomena of both theoretical and applied impor- periods. Scientific disciplines such as history, polit-
tance. Whereas patriotism represents attachment ical science, and psychology also exhibit differences
to one’s country, nationalism refers to the ten- as to the level of analysis—nations, social groups,
dency to favor one’s own country over others. or individuals—implied by these terms. In contem-
National identification can facilitate cooperation porary social psychology, patriotism and national-
and cohesion within one’s country but at the same ism commonly refer to the individual level.
time engender conflict directed at other national Patriotism, paralleling the concept of social
groups. This entry illustrates the relevance of identity, denotes the identification with, and feel-
patriotism and nationalism in present societies ings of attachment and commitment to, one’s
and discusses their functions for individuals and country and the people perceived as belonging to
groups, as well as the conditions determining it. Hence, patriotism is defined by how closely an
whether and when identification with one’s own individual feels linked with his or her national
country translates into the relative devaluation or group. Typical items used in scales measuring indi-
derogation of other countries and their members. viduals’ levels of patriotism are “I love my coun-
try” or “The fact that I am [a U.S. citizen] is an
important part of my identity.”
Distinguishing Patriotism
Nationalism, in contrast, usually denotes a ten-
and Nationalism
dency of individuals to support national interests
Patriotism and nationalism refer to phenomena that of their country to the relative disadvantage of
can be encountered frequently and in various guises. other countries and to see their own country as
In extreme situations such as interstate wars, but superior to other countries. One example is con-
also during international sports competitions, it is sumer nationalism, a tendency of consumers to
quite obvious that belonging to a certain country favor goods and services produced in their own
has a strong impact on people’s emotions, percep- country or by domestic companies over “foreign”
tions, and behaviors. In our everyday life as well, goods and services. Typical items for measuring
national categories are constantly present: To a individuals’ levels of nationalism are “In view of
large extent, politics is founded on national institu- [the United States’] moral and material superiority,
tions and aims at pursuing the interests of one’s it is only right that we should have the biggest say
country. Politicians often appeal to feelings of pride, in deciding United Nations policy” and “The

591
592 Nationalism and Patriotism

important thing for the [U.S.] foreign aid program patriotism is also (and maybe primarily) rooted in
is to see to it that [the United States] gains a symbolic issues. As with other social categories,
political advantage.” identification with one’s country can provide peo-
Regarding patriotism, researchers have distin- ple with self-esteem and meaning. For the individ-
guished between different forms, such as between ual, it can reduce uncertainty relating to self-concept
blind and constructive patriotism or between (e.g., Who am I? What did and can I achieve?), and
iconoclastic, symbolic, instinctive, environmental, it can help fulfill the fundamental need to belong
capitalistic, and nationalistic-symbolic patriotism. to social entities. Moreover, close attachment to
In principle, these differentiations capture (a) to one’s country can affirm relevant cultural world-
which degree patriotism encompasses an active views linked to national entities. From an existen-
and critical versus a passive and uncritical orienta- tialist perspective, the belief in the rightness of the
tion toward one’s country and its authorities and cultural values and standards of one’s group helps
(b) to which degree patriotism is based on certain individuals handle the threat implied by the aware-
features of one’s country, that is, how national ness of their mortality.
identity is defined in terms of normative content. At the group level, patriotism serves important
Often, there is a societal consensus, or at least a functions of unity, cohesiveness, and mobilization,
consensus between large groups within society, which together enable group existence. Because
about which features are (and should be) constitu- groups with members who do not show any patri-
tive of one’s national identity. These can include, otic feelings will have a higher probability of ulti-
for example, national symbols such as the flag, a mate disintegration, groups establish political or
certain ethnicity, a particular ideology, endorse- cultural mechanisms that stabilize and reinforce
ment of democratic aspects such as political insti- such feelings. In other words, attachment to one’s
tutions or basic rights of citizens, certain cultural own group is evolutionarily adaptive.
or religious characteristics, or fundamental beliefs Although evolutionary functions can explain
of group members about the country’s situation why people are patriotic, these functions are also
vis-à-vis other countries. relevant to people’s tendencies to differentiate their
Although both concepts refer to identification own national group from others. Because human
with one’s country and national identity (i.e., social survival strongly depends on cooperation, people
identity based on a national category), patriotism is need to rely on markers indicating whether a
an intragroup phenomenon that exclusively relates potential interaction partner can be trusted and
to one’s own country, whereas nationalism is an expected to cooperate or not. Belongingness to an
intergroup phenomenon, a comparative orienta- ingroup or an outgroup is such a marker. Clear
tion toward one’s own and other countries. Despite group boundaries and, hence, in the case of
this conceptual difference, however, both con- national identifications, the combination of both
structs are often closely interrelated: Under certain patriotism and nationalism provide a good balance
conditions, patriotic feelings can easily lead to between the need to belong and the need to be
nationalistic feelings of superiority of one’s own distinct, thereby enhancing trust, cooperation, and
country. Accordingly, many scholars have argued feelings of security.
that patriotism is primary and nationalism can be Moreover, nationalism helps ensure a positive self-
considered a potential consequence of patriotism. concept by providing positive comparison outcomes
in relation to other countries. The resulting positive
distinctiveness of the one’s own country serves peo-
Functions of Patriotism
ple’s striving for positively valued identities and,
and Nationalism
thereby, reduces uncertainty and buffers self-esteem.
Why are people patriotic, and why do they feel
closely attached to their countries? First of all,
Consequences of Patriotism
belonging to a national group has instrumental
and Nationalism
benefits by providing access to education, eco-
nomic resources, social security, health care, and On a normative level, lay people, but also scholars
so on. Although these benefits can provide a basis, in social psychology, come to different conclusions
Nationalism and Patriotism 593

as to whether patriotism should be seen as a vice given but rather contingent on characteristics of the
or a virtue. Whereas, for example, the former context and the groups involved and on the pro-
German president Johannes Rau was careful to cesses leading to the conclusion that their own
emphasize that he was happy rather than proud to group is positively distinct from others. Therefore, it
be a German, in the United States, there has been is not surprising that studies have revealed, on aver-
probably not a single presidential candidate who age, only moderate correlations between patriotism
did not stress being proud to be an American. and nationalism.
In light of the above-mentioned multiple func- As said before, nationalism implies an inter-
tions that patriotism fulfills for individuals and group comparison between one’s own country and
groups, one can argue that patriotism is quite other countries, whereby the former is typically
healthy and positive. It relates to feelings of secu- seen as superior to the latter. However, such supe-
rity, trust, and solidarity with one’s fellow group riority can be obtained in two ways: by an above-
members as well as commitment to one’s group, average positive view of one’s own country or by
and by satisfying the fundamental need to belong, it an explicitly negative evaluation of other national
can exert positive effects on well-being and health. groups. The latter case is more probable when the
Yet the picture changes when one focuses on the national identity is insecure rather than secure,
implications for intergroup relations. As will be when there is intergroup competition for power or
argued further, patriotism can easily translate into resources, and/or when the groups involved are, as
nationalism and derogation of national outgroups. clearly applies for national groups, political entities.
Nationalism is much more consensually consid- In that case, especially in hierarchically organized
ered a negative and undesirable phenomenon that social systems, the risk is high that political leaders
may sometimes even lead to dehumanization of out- will fuel distrust and hostility against outgroups.
groups and international conflict. It correlates with Moreover, pride in one’s own country need not
negative attitudes toward outgroups and support necessarily be based on intergroup comparisons.
for the use of military force for dominative pur- Research has shown that the link between attach-
poses. Yet nationalism may also be seen as positive ment to one’s own country and negative evalua-
under certain conditions, such as when a country is tions of other countries depends on whether people
illegitimately oppressed by another country and focus on intergroup comparisons or on temporal
strives for liberation. Comparing one’s own country comparisons at the intragroup level. For example,
with other countries and questioning the legitimacy thinking of how one’s own country has developed
of status and power differentials is necessary to economically or politically during the past 10 years
motivate collective action and social change. can enhance national pride without simultaneously
For example, beliefs about being as good as or even fueling negative international attitudes. If, however,
better than the so-called developed countries can help the focus is on how one’s own country developed in
people from poor states in Africa to claim more voice comparison with other countries, feelings of pride
and rights on the international stage. It is therefore imply that other countries are seen as inferior.
important not to confuse scientific and normative Threats to one’s own country’s safety, welfare,
aspects of patriotism and nationalism and instead take and positive regard are powerful contextual condi-
into account moderators that lead to different (posi- tions that can affect both patriotism and national-
tive and negative) consequences of both constructs. ism. Such threats can be symbolic (affecting
Conceptualizing patriotism as identification with personal values or worldviews), materialistic (e.g.,
a country and nationalism as a potential conse- competition for limited tangible resources), or
quence of national identification raises the questions physical (such as in wartime or in the context of
of how closely and in which way the two constructs terrorist attacks). The tragic terrorist attacks on
are correlated and, especially, how far high degrees September 11, 2001, provided a very strong exam-
of patriotism straightforwardly translate into nation- ple for the impact of being reminded of one’s own
alism and derogation of national outgroups. More and one’s fellow country members’ mortality:
generally stated, this question refers to the condi- U.S. citizens’ feelings of belonging, commitment, and
tions under which ingroup love turns into outgroup loyalty to the nation strongly increased, as did the
hate. Clearly, such an interrelation is not a firm relevance of national symbols (e.g., the U.S. flag).
594 Nationalism and Patriotism

Yet even under threatening conditions such as Yet there are some unique characteristics of a
in the aftermath of September 11, 2001, the link country as compared with other social groups.
between attachment and loyalty to the own national First, a country is a very large social category,
group and intolerance toward other groups need which implies that its meaning is much more deter-
not necessarily be strong. It rather depends on how mined by formalized norms (e.g., a constitution)
the country as an entity is defined: If it is concep- and value systems than by the quality of intra-
tualized as having a strong common “essence,” group interactions. Moreover, as alluded to in the
obtained from a small set of shared and well- beginning of this entry, nationality is a feature that
defined norms and common characteristics of its becomes relevant quite often in people’s lives:
members, patriotism and nationalism tend to go when traveling abroad, following the news about
together. If, however, the country is defined by the international economic and political alliances, or
need to address common problems and objectives following international sports competitions. Hence,
requiring cooperation and coordination, being this social category is highly accessible; that is,
loyal toward one’s own country need not translate people will often define themselves and others in
into resenting those who are different. terms of their national affiliation. In addition,
In a similar vein, societies characterized by national groups are quite impermeable: It is often
increasing numbers of immigrants and an increas- difficult, or at least dependent on substantive
ing degree of cultural diversity differ in the extent administrative efforts, to become the citizen of
to which they perceive diversity as a valuable and another country.
constitutive element of their identity. Although in Probably the most distinctive aspect of countries,
Canada or New Zealand, for example, cultural however, is that they are political entities. As such,
diversity is recognized as an important aspect of their meaning has a clear ideological loading, and
the country’s identity, in other countries it is per- their functioning can be strongly determined by
ceived as a threat to the clarity or stability of political leaders, an element that can be especially
national identity. In these cases, high levels of strong in hierarchically structured societies. People
patriotism can lead to within-nation differentiation typically have a need to define the meaning and the
and, possibly, discrimination against national core features constitutive of their country. However,
minorities. The debate over how immigrants should in times of globalization, multiculturalism, and
acculturate often has, as a starting point, the pro- rapid social changes, this is a difficult, controver-
viso that some basic features of the host country sial, and highly ideologically loaded issue.
(such as its language) need to be adopted. Some
characteristics of immigrants and their culture are
Implications
not tolerated by many host society members (e.g.,
Muslim women wearing headscarves at their work- Both patriotism and nationalism are phenomena
place in modern western European countries). with great societal relevance. Both are aspects of
identification with one’s country: Although patrio-
tism is defined by the relation of the individual to
National Identifications as
his or her country, nationalism is comparative in
Social Identity: What Is Unique?
nature and implies that one’s own country is evalu-
In which ways does identification with one’s country ated more favorably than other countries. Although
differ from other social identifications? In fact, the researchers have tried to clearly distinguish healthy
functions of patriotism and nationalism summarized patriotism from dangerous nationalism, it would
earlier are to a large extent general and not specific be an oversimplification to see the outcomes of
to national groups. Both phenomena are in line with patriotism as positive and those of nationalism as
social identity theory, which assumes that people bad. Moreover, a strong link between patriotism
strive for a meaningful and positive self-concept, and nationalism is not a firm given; these concepts
which they derive in part from their memberships in can be distinguished phenomenologically and
social groups. By taking pride in one’s groups and by psychologically. Under certain circumstances,
positively distinguishing them from other groups, such as a physical or economic threat between
one can ensure a positive self-concept. countries, however, patriotism and nationalism
Need for Belonging 595

go hand in hand, and the connection is often and out-group rejection. British Journal of Social
fueled by political leaders. Psychology, 40, 159–172.
Of course, these social-psychological concepts Schatz, R. T., & Lavine, H. (2007). Waving the flag:
can offer only some pieces for the multidisciplinary National symbolism, social identity, and political
undertaking of understanding national and inter- engagement. Political Psychology, 28, 329–355.
national problems such as terrorism, warfare, Sullivan, J. L., Fried, A., & Dietz, M. G. (1992). Patriotism,
security politics, and international unions. Also, politics, and the presidential election of 1988. American
there is still much to learn about patriotism and Journal of Political Science, 36, 200–234.
nationalism. Among other questions, it would be
interesting to systematically compare patriotism,
nationalism, and their moderators across cultures
and political systems and to monitor in longitudi- Need for Belonging
nal studies whether and how these two phenomena
change in rapidly changing societies.
The need for belonging refers to the motivation to
Sabine Otten and J. Christopher Cohrs feel connected to and accepted by other people.
While this need can operate at the interpersonal
See also Collective Self; Discrimination; Essentialism; level (interactions between two people), humans
Identification and Commitment; Optimal are also motivated to feel included in groups. For
Distinctiveness; Realistic Group Conflict Theory; most people, satisfying the need to belong is not
Social Identity Theory; Xenophobia difficult. However, for those who fail to gain accep-
tance, the consequences can be quite negative.

Further Readings
Background and Psychological Bases
Bar-Tal, D., & Staub, E. (Eds.). (1997). Patriotism: In the
lives of individuals and nations. Chicago: Nelson-Hall. The need to belong has been viewed as a critical
Billig, M. (1995). Banal nationalism. London: Sage. motivation since the early 1900s. For example,
Blank, T., & Schmidt, P. (Eds.). (2003). National identity Sigmund Freud highlighted the important psycho-
in Europe [Special issue]. Political Psychology, 24(2). logical benefits of contact between people in
Brewer, M. B. (2001). Ingroup identification and intergroup groups. A few years later, Abraham Maslow, in his
conflict: When does ingroup love become outgroup hate? famous hierarchy of human needs, argued that
In R. D. Ashmore, L. Jussim, & D. Wilder (Eds.), Social only two other basic needs have greater priority
identity, intergroup conflict, and conflict resolution than the need to belong: physiological and security
(pp. 17–41). New York: Oxford University Press. needs. In recent years, the need to belong has been
Druckman, D. (1994). Nationalism, patriotism, and incorporated in many psychological theories.
group loyalty: A social psychological perspective.
To the extent that the need to belong is innate, it
Mershon International Studies Review, 38, 43–68.
should be manifested from a very early age. Research
Esses, V. M., Dovidio, J. F., Semenya, A. H., & Jackson,
on John Bowlby’s attachment theory provides evi-
L. M. (2005). Attitudes toward immigrants and
dence that infants experience a strong need to feel
immigration: The role of national and international
connected to their caregivers. This need is met in very
identity. In D. Abrams, M. A. Hogg, & J. M. Marques
(Eds.), The social psychology of inclusion and
young children who develop secure bonds with their
exclusion (pp. 317–337). New York: Psychology Press. caregivers. Such children have higher social compe-
Kosterman, R., & Feshbach, S. (1989). Toward a tence (they are more socially adept) and fewer prob-
measure of patriotic and nationalistic attitudes. lems developing relationships with other people later
Political Psychology, 10, 257–274. on in life than do children who fail to develop secure
Li, Q., & Brewer, M. B. (2004). What does it mean to be bonds with their caregivers. These latter children often
American? Patriotism, nationalism, and the American experience anxiety and lack of trust in their later social
identity after 9/11. Political Psychology, 25, 727–739. relationships. Thus, meeting the need to belong as an
Mummendey, A., Klink, A., & Brown, R. (2001). infant is important not only for a child’s early survival
Nationalism and patriotism: National identification but also for his or her later social development.
596 Need for Belonging

The need to belong probably functions below con- Group Processes


scious awareness. However, there are also conscious
processes that lead people to affiliate and collaborate In groups, people can coordinate their actions and
with others. These include the desire to compare cooperate to achieve goals that individuals acting
one’s opinions, abilities, and emotional reactions to alone cannot achieve. Groups also serve another
those of others and the motivation to achieve collec- important function: They provide people with a
tive goals (e.g., winning a basketball game). lens through which to understand the world. Stated
Research on the need to belong tends to focus differently, people construct and construe the world
on what happens when people feel that they do not on the basis of the beliefs and values of their group.
belong to (are excluded from) important groups. When people are excluded or made to feel that they
Rejection produces a host of problems. In terms of do not belong to important groups, their ability to
physical health, exclusion from groups is associ- understand the world is reduced, which in turn
ated with increased risk for heart attacks, reduced produces anxiety and decreased self-confidence.
blood pressure regulation, and increased insomnia. Failing to satisfy the need to belong can have a
In terms of psychological effects, feeling that one number of consequences for how people behave in
does not belong is associated with negative feelings groups. For example, research has shown that
about oneself, anxiety, and lowered self-esteem. people who have been excluded from valued
People who fail to meet the need to belong over an groups are more likely to derogate (put down,
extended time are at risk for depression and have make fun of) those who are different from them-
a reduced life expectancy. selves, adopt ingroup stereotypes that make them
According to Mark Leary’s sociometer model, feel like typical group members, and punish people
self-esteem reflects one’s perceived belongingness who break group rules.
in important relationships and groups. High self- So far, we have focused on how people respond
esteem signifies that a person is meeting this need, to being excluded. But it is also important to con-
whereas low self-esteem signifies that he or she is sider why this exclusion occurs in the first place.
failing to do so. Therefore, people with low self- Normal group functioning hinges on the willing-
esteem should be motivated to increase their level ness of members to follow the norms (rules for
of belongingness. Research on the sociometer behavior) of the group. When members do not fol-
model has found that people do indeed seek to low these norms, the entire group is likely to suf-
establish social bonds when their self-esteem has fer. Therefore, groups develop methods to motivate
been lowered, supporting the idea that self-esteem their members to follow norms. One powerful
is an internal index of one’s success in meeting the method for motivating normative behavior is the
need to belong. use (or threat) of exclusion, which capitalizes on
Other theories propose different mechanisms under­ members’ need to belong to the group.
lying the need to belong. According to uncertainty- In all groups, exclusion of one sort or another is
identity theory, people who feel uncertain about used to punish those who deviate from established
themselves, their future, or their place in the world rules for proper behavior. An example is prison
are motivated to increase their identification with sentences for those found guilty of committing
groups—suggesting that one’s level of uncertainty crimes. Prison is a tool to socially isolate people
is the basis of the desire to belong. According to who violate important norms. Even within prison,
terror management theory, the need to belong is exclusion can be used in a punitive way. One of
stimulated by an existential fear of death. By iden- the worst things that can happen to a prisoner is to
tifying with groups, people obtain a sense of sym- be placed in the “hole”—put in social isolation.
bolic immortality. While these theories disagree Even on playgrounds, children use social exclusion
about the psychological mechanism underlying the as a punishment. For example, in the game of
need to belong (self-esteem, uncertainty, fear of dodge ball, children who are slow or uncoordi-
death), they all assume that people possess a social nated are hit with the ball and banished from the
monitoring system that alerts them to their level of group activity until the game is over. Another
belongingness and initiates actions to increase this familiar example involves being chosen last for an
belongingness when it falls below a critical level. athletic team. Being chosen last signifies that one is
Need for Closure 597

not really wanted in the group. Those so designated feel to jump to conclusions and seek quick answers?
excluded and suffer reduced self-esteem as a result. The answer to this question may lie in people’s
The need to belong is an important human need for closure. Need for closure (also known as
motive, which has important implications for group need for cognitive closure) refers to an individual’s
processes. This motive is likely to have evolutionary desire to have any answer on a given topic rather
roots, although personal self-interest plays an than to have confusion and ambiguity. This can
important role as well—people are motivated to be contrasted with need for specific closure, which
belong to groups in order to achieve individual refers to an individual’s desire to have a particular
goals. Groups need people to follow norms and use answer on a given topic.
exclusion to punish members who fail to do so. Need for closure has been found to influence
many aspects of our behavior, from information
Zachary P. Hohman and Jason E. Rivera processing to group behavior, and it has been studied
in many diverse fields, including political attitudes,
See also Attachment Theory; Conformity; Deviance; organizational change, judgments in criminal investi-
Identification and Commitment; Inclusion/Exclusion;
gations, susceptibility to delusions, attitude change,
Ostracism; Social Comparison Theory; Sociometer
intergroup behavior, and consumer behavior.
Model; Uncertainty-Identity Theory

History and Background


Further Readings
The notion that individuals may differ in their
Abrams, D., Hogg, M. A., & Marques, J. M. (Eds.).
motivations toward gaining and using knowledge
(2005). The social psychology of inclusion and
has been of interest to theorists in personality and
exclusion. New York: Psychology Press.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to
social psychology for many years. Early theorists
belong: Desire for interpersonal attachment as a emphasized psychodynamic aspects, linking open-
fundamental human motivation. Psychological ness to new experiences to the successful comple-
Bulletin, 117, 497–529. tion of early stages of development or linking
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Attachment. closed-mindedness to the prejudiced personality.
Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin. In recent years, however, theorists such as Arie
Hogg, M. A. (2007). Uncertainty-identity theory. In Kruglanski, the social psychologist most closely
M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social associated with research in this area, have empha-
psychology (Vol. 39, pp. 69–126). San Diego, CA: sized the motivational aspects of need for closure and
Academic Press. the myriad ways in which need for closure influ-
Leary, M. R., & Baumeister, R. F. (2000). The nature and ences human behavior.
function of self-esteem: Sociometer theory. In M. P. Zanna Need for closure is seen as an individual difference
(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 32, that varies across individuals and across situations.
pp. 1–62). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Individual differences in need for closure may emerge
Levine, J. M., & Kerr, N. L. (2007). Inclusion and because of cultural values and norms, such as in soci-
exclusion: Implications for group processes. In eties where closure is valued highly, or because of
A. W. Kruglanski & T. E. Higgins (Eds.), Social family dynamics and socialization processes. How­
psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., ever, situational factors that influence the perceived
pp. 759–784). New York: Guilford Press. benefits of closure, such as freeing the individual
Williams, K. D., Forgas, J. P., & Hippel, W. V. (Eds.). from further information processing, or the perceived
(2005). The social outcast: Ostracism, social
costs of closure, such as concern about making the
exclusion, and bullying. New York: Psychology Press.
incorrect decision, will influence need for closure. For
example, need for closure may be heightened in cir-
cumstances in which action or quick decisions are
Need for Closure required, such as when group members must work
together to complete a task within a deadline or
Why do some people seem to thrive on uncer- when an individual is suffering from mental fatigue
tainty and ambiguity whereas other people seem or is engaged in a particularly dull task.
598 Need for Closure

Two tendencies are seen to underpin need for Areas of Research


closure: a tendency toward urgency in judgments
Need for closure has a broad influence on the way
and decision making, or seizing, and a tendency
knowledge is constructed and used and, as a result,
toward permanency in judgments and decision
influences a wide range of intrapersonal, interper-
making, or freezing. Need for closure may express
sonal, and group processes.
itself in certain ways, such as a desire for definite
order and structure, feeling uncomfortable with
ambiguity, a desire for urgency in judgment and Information Processing
decision making, a desire for stable and predictable
information, and an unwillingness to have one’s It has been argued that individuals with a high
knowledge challenged or confronted. need for closure have a tendency to seize and freeze
Individuals with a high need for closure may be on early information. As a result, need for closure is
more likely to jump to conclusions because they seek associated with a narrow information search and
quick closure by relying on early cues and the first decreased information processing prior to judgment.
answer available. In addition, a person high in need In addition, individuals with a high need for closure
for closure may exhibit rigidity of thought and a may generate fewer alternative hypotheses to a prob-
reluctance to consider alternative views. Indeed, such lem before reaching a decision. However, such indi-
individuals may react negatively to having their viduals may actually be quicker to attain high levels
sense of closure or order threatened by other people of confidence in their judgments. Need for closure is
or other opinions. In contrast, individuals with a low associated with a tendency to use cognitive shortcuts
need for closure (or a high need to avoid closure) to find solutions and a reliance on early or preexist-
may enjoy the freedom associated with ambiguity ing cues, such as stereotypes, to make judgments.
and uncertainty, express more flexibility in their These information processing biases express them-
ideas, and engage in more creative acts. However, a selves in phenomena such as primacy effects in
person with a low need for closure may prefer to impression formation (impressions are more heavily
suspend judgment on issues and may be reluctant to influenced by initial information), anchoring effects
commit to definite opinion or judgment. in judgments (once made, judgments seem to be
anchored and are slow and difficult to change), and
correspondence biases (the tendency to map people’s
Studying Need for Closure behavior onto underlying personality dispositions).
Need for closure is mainly considered to be an indi-
vidual difference in disposition but one that can be Interpersonal Behavior
strengthened or weakened by situational factors. Need for closure also influences a number of
Thus, it is possible to study need for closure by assess- interpersonal behaviors. For example, people with a
ing dispositional need for closure or by using well- high need for closure may display lower levels of
established experimental manipulations of situational perspective taking and empathic concern for interac-
need for closure. Dispositional need for closure is tion partners. In addition, people with a high need
assessed with the Need for Closure Scale (NFCS), for closure may use more abstract concepts in com-
developed by Donna Webster and Arie Kruglanski. munication, which can create greater interpersonal
The NFCS is a multi-item scale that assesses five distance between communicators and decrease lik-
dimensions considered to underlie need for closure: ing for one another. Finally, research on negotiation
preference for order, preference for predictability, behavior has found that people with a high need for
decisiveness, discomfort with ambiguity, and closed- closure make smaller concessions, engage in less
mindedness. In addition, a number of situational fac- systematic processing, and base their negotiation
tors are known to strengthen need for closure, such as behavior on stereotypes about their opponents.
time pressure, environmental noise, mental fatigue, a
dull task, or the request for a judgment. Research
Political Attitudes
across a number of domains has revealed that either
measuring differences or manipulating differences in One of the areas in which the role of need for
need for closure leads to identical effects. closure has been studied extensively is the domain
Need for Power 599

of political attitudes. Need for closure has been Further Readings


found to be associated with conservative ideolo- Golec de Zavala, A., & Van Bergh, A. (2007). Need for
gies, the endorsement of right-wing political atti- cognitive closure and conservative political beliefs:
tudes, and membership in right-wing organizations. Differential mediation by personal worldviews.
Indeed, in an extensive review of the literature, Political Psychology, 28, 587–608.
John Jost and his colleagues argued that conserva- Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J.
tive political ideologies—those that support a (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social
social order that is hierarchical, stable, and predict- cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375.
able—are more likely to satisfy a psychological Kruglanski, A. W., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., & De Grada, E.
need to avoid uncertainty and ambiguity. However, (2006). Groups as epistemic providers: Need for
it should be noted that the desire for permanent closure and the unfolding of group-centrism.
and stable information suggests that need for clo- Psychological Review, 113, 84–100.
sure should be associated with a preference to Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1996). Motivated
maintain the status quo, regardless of whether it is closing of the mind: “Seizing” and “freezing.”
right wing or left wing. Research by Agnieszka Psychological Review, 103, 263–283.
Golec has found that the way in which high need Roets, A., & Van Hiel, A. (2007). Separating ability from
for closure is expressed does depend on the politi- need: Clarifying the dimensional structure of the Need
cal and cultural context and what is classified as for Closure Scale. Personality and Social Psychology
the traditional position and what is classified as the Bulletin, 33, 266–280.
modern position.

Group Behavior Need for Power


Individuals with a high need for closure desire
firm and definite knowledge about social reality. Individuals differ from one another in the extent
Groups offer a shared social reality, which, for to which they are motivated to control the envi-
individuals high in need for closure, should prompt ronment and influence others. Some individuals
engagement in a range of intragroup and inter- actively seek opportunities to influence everyday
group behaviors. Individuals high in need for clo- situations, events, and people, whereas other indi-
sure are more likely to desire consensus and viduals are more prone to be affected by circum-
opinion uniformity within a group and to react stances and others. This personality tendency is
negatively to people who undermine the shared known as need for power or dominance. It has
social reality of the group by deviating in their implications for the ways individuals process
opinions or by violating group norms. A high need information, how they perceive others, the goals
for closure may also foster positive liking for the they pursue, and ultimately for the ways society is
group and hostility toward other groups because organized in terms of distribution of resources.
the group is the source of firm knowledge about The motivation to attain power reflects a desire
social reality. Moreover, individuals high in need to influence others and have an impact over the
for closure show a preference for autocratic and environment. Individuals who seek power network
hierarchical group processes and strong leaders more, become more visible, define group agendas,
because such processes provide structure and pre- and build alliances. They often attain leadership
dictability. Finally, people high in need for closure positions and are able to create a team spirit.
may show a greater tendency to be task oriented Longitudinal research that assessed the future
and cooperative in problem-solving groups in careers of university students found that those stu-
order to achieve group goals. dents who were high in need for power chose pro-
fessions in which they could exert influence over
Joanne R. Smith others, such as teaching, psychology, clergy, busi-
ness, management, and journalism. The desire for
See also Conservatism; Dogmatism; Uncertainty- power in some individuals is an important ingredi-
Identity Theory ent in groups and in society because it acts as the
600 Need for Power

glue that coordinates interindividual behavior and in levels of testosterone, a steroid hormone respon-
facilitates group action. This entry looks at how sible for physical masculine attributes and for
dominance is conveyed and measured, then exam- aggressive behavior in nonhuman animals. Men
ines how it is expressed in social interactions. produce significantly higher levels of testosterone
Dominance is conveyed by verbal and nonverbal than women do. Furthermore, men who have high
cues. The nonverbal behavior of dominant individu- levels of baseline (rest level) testosterone exhibit
als displays comfort and relaxation. These individu- more dominant behavior, especially involving
als make more use of the space that surrounds them, aggression, than other men do.
including reducing the physical distance to others. Although dominance is a relatively stable attri-
When interacting with others, they speak more, are bute of the person, research shows that there is
louder, interrupt others more, use fewer hesitations, context-specific variability in the behavioral expres-
and have a more varied speech code. They also sion of dominance. When people interact with one
touch others more. In dyadic interactions, dominant another, one person’s level of dominance is affected
individuals exhibit equal amounts of looking the by the level of dominance of the other person. If
interaction partner in the eyes while listening and one person acts in submissive ways, the other per-
looking while speaking. Submissive individuals, in son tends to act in dominant ways, and vice versa.
contrast, look more while listening than while This tendency for complementarity in dominance
speaking. These individuals assume more constricted occurs both on a moment-to-moment basis, with-
body positions and expressions of tension or fear. out the person’s awareness, and in more struc-
Dominance is usually assessed through self-report tured, long-term relationships. In other words,
measures in which individuals are asked to estimate, individuals adapt their level of dominance to that
using rating scales, how much they possess of several of their interaction partners; and they also actively
traits, such as being forceful or domineering. However, seek to establish relationships with those who are
the power motive can be measured in more subtle complementary to them in need for power. An
ways. One implicit measure of power motivation individual who has a high motivation to attain
uses projective tests that display pictures of interper- power tends to surround himself or herself with
sonal scenes. Participants are asked to describe the others who are more submissive and can validate
scenes. Their descriptions are then content analyzed his or her dominant position.
regarding the extent to which they reflect dynamics The extent to which a person is dominant affects
linked to prestige, control, or influence. how he or she makes judgments and decisions.
Gender differences in dominance are complex. Compared with nondominant individuals, domi-
Studies that used implicit measures of need for nant individuals rely more on their gut feelings and
power (i.e., projective tests) did not find significant the subjective experiences that arise while thinking.
differences between men and women. For both For example, when it is easy to generate arguments
gender groups, need for power was associated with in favor of a topic (e.g., when asked to generate a
behavioral indicators of a desire for prestige and few arguments regarding introducing biometric ID
getting formal social power in society. Nevertheless, cards), dominant individuals, but not subordinate
differences were found in the ways dominant men individuals, will express a more positive attitude
and women behaved. Dominant men displayed toward the topic compared with when it is difficult
more incidences of negative impulsive behavior to generate arguments in favor of the topic (e.g.,
such as drinking, aggression, gambling, or sexual when asked to generate many arguments). Merely
exploitation, compared with their female counter- manipulating the number of arguments that indi-
parts. In addition, studies examining nonverbal viduals are asked to generate affects more the atti-
behavior found more gestures of dominance in tudes of dominant than of subordinate individuals.
men than in women. For example, in dyadic inter- Individuals with a high need for power tend to
actions, men usually exhibit the gaze pattern that respond in similar ways to individuals who are
is typical for dominant individuals, whereas women given an actual power position. In both cases, they
display the subordinate gaze pattern. enjoy a sense of entitlement, are prone to use oth-
These differences in overt dominance between ers for their own ends, have difficulty in taking the
men and women are substantiated by differences perspective of others, and pay little attention to
Negotiation and Bargaining 601

others’ needs. Need for power also affects the ways Winter, D. G. (1973). The power motive. New York: Free
individuals perceive others and is often linked with Press.
a tendency to rely on stereotypes rather than on
individuating attributes of other people.
However, dominance can be associated with
social responsibility, as shown by the behavior of Negotiation and Bargaining
many world leaders. The desire to influence others
may serve the attainment of personal goals, ideals, Negotiation and bargaining refer to a communica-
and advantages for the self, or it may serve the tion process between two or more parties to reach
attainment of group goals and ideologies that are agreement or strike a bargain. People frequently
deemed relevant by the individual. For example, negotiate, and many of these negotiations can be
high need for power is frequently found in religious solved in a mutually beneficial, integrative way.
leaders and political or social activists. Whether the Unfortunately, individual negotiators often forgo
behavior of dominant individuals is guided by social such integrative agreements because they fail to be
responsibility or by the desire to attain selfish ends truly concerned about both their own and their
depends, to a great extent, on the values of the indi- counterpart’s needs and interests and because they
vidual. This occurs because dominant individuals are bounded in their rationality. The negotiation
respond in line with activated constructs, including context, however, drives concern for both self and
values and worldviews. Nevertheless, when survival other and motivates negotiators to deliberately
tendencies are activated, dominance creates the con- process information in a systematic way. Thus,
ditions for a fiery pursuit of self-serving goals. when time pressure is mild, when power differences
Finally, asymmetries in dominance impact soci- are weak or nonexistent, when negotiators are
ety at large. Legitimized social positions, such as accountable, and when cooperative incentives are
occupational positions, differ in the extent to which being emphasized, mutually beneficial, integrative
they have an impact on others. Compared with low- agreements are quite likely to emerge. This entry
power positions, high-power positions have a begins with some general parameters and descrip-
greater impact on how economic and social resources tions of negotiation and then discusses the main
are distributed, as well as the development of social theories that have been developed in this area.
norms and ideologies.  Individuals who are moti-
vated to achieve power tend to occupy higher-power
What Is Negotiation?
positions in the social structure and thereby have
more influence on groups and society at large. In a negotiation, parties may be individuals, as in
The tendency for powerful positions to be occu- the bargaining between a buyer and a seller of a
pied by dominant individuals reinforces the status quo Volvo 240 DL Estate, or between a boss and an
and contributes to maintaining social inequality. This employee about training and development opportu-
occurs because dominant individuals tend to focus on nities or career goals and expectations. Alternatively,
their needs and the needs of their groups. Furthermore, parties may be groups of people, as in the negotia-
dominance is linked to an asymmetric participation of tion between prison guards and inmates about cer-
individuals in the development of social norms and tain privileges or between the boards of two large
the distribution of resources. As such, dominance is a companies about the terms of a merger.
central mechanism for maintaining social inequality. When groups become larger or when issues
require specific expertise, representatives may be
Ana Guinote engaged to do the negotiation. Examples of such
See also Dominance Hierarchies; Gender and Behavior; representative negotiation include labor negotia-
Leadership; Power tions between union representatives and repre-
sentatives from management and peace negotiations
between representatives from the Israeli govern-
Further Readings ment and the Palestinian authorities.
Jackson, D. N. (1967). Personality research from a The above examples should not be taken as
manual. New York: Research Psychologists Press. if negotiation is confined to rather formal and
602 Negotiation and Bargaining

infrequent encounters in business and diplomacy. baking. Clearly, had these sisters talked about the
Quite to the contrary, and although often not rec- juice and the peel, they could have reached a more
ognized as such, negotiation is a basic aspect of mutually beneficial agreement (the entire peel to
most interpersonal and intergroup encounters. the one sister and all the juice to the other) than
When settling in for a long air trip, we negotiate they reached by quarreling over one single issue—
with our neighboring passenger about who gets the orange.
what part of the shared armrest. We do not speak Or consider Roger Fisher and William Ury,
to each other about who gets what, but through founding fathers of the Harvard Project on
nonverbal (and gentle) pushing and withdrawing, Negotiation, who tell the story of the Camp David
we coordinate into a mutually comfortably posi- negotiations between Israel and Egypt in 1977.
tion. Likewise, driving down a narrow road may Since the Yom Kippur War in 1973, Israel had
lead us to negotiate with an upcoming driver occupied the Sinai Desert, which Egypt wanted
about who goes first and in what way. But we do back. Instead of dividing the desert in more or less
not get out of our cars to talk and discuss. We equal parts, it was decided that Egypt would get
remain behind the steering wheel and limit our- back the desert so that it could satisfy its historical
selves to shaking our heads, blinking our eyes, claims and restore its reputation in the Arab world.
pointing our fingers, and if all this really doesn’t But, critically, Egypt would keep the desert demili-
work, we finally but reluctantly may use the horn tarized so that Israel’s need for safety and security
and headlights. was satisfied. Put differently, both parties achieved
Neither should the above examples be taken as a much better deal by talking about historical claims
suggesting that negotiation is about one single and reputation as well as about the need for security
issue, such as the price of the Volvo, peace between and safety rather than focusing on the single surface
Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, issue of who gets what part of the Sinai Desert.
or what part of the armrest you get during the
flight from Reykjavik to Johannesburg. Far more
often, negotiations involve several issues. In the Integrative Agreements
case of the Volvo, one may negotiate the price of
the car but also talk about delivery, tune-up cost, Agreements that take advantage of the fact that
and warranty. Labor negotiations usually include several issues are involved that are not all equally
discussions about salary increases, vacation, pen- important to all parties are called integrative agree-
sion plans, and training and development. Israel ments. In integrative agreements, parties trade
and the Palestine Liberation Organization talk unilaterally important issues (important to one
about Jerusalem, the settlements, the borders, party, unimportant to the other—e.g., the peel,
Gaza, and issues concerning trade and security. reputation among Arab neighbors) for bilaterally
And even in the case of the armrest negotiation, we important issues (important to both parties—
may also deal with leg space and whether we are e.g., juice, security). Reaching integrative agree-
going to have long conversations or instead do ments—as opposed to simple split-the-difference
some undisturbed reading. In short, negotiations compromises or victory-to-one settlements—has a
often are about multiple issues, and in case they number of critically important consequences.
are not, parties can bring new issues to the table or First, integrative agreements tend to be rela-
break up issues into several smaller ones. tively stable and to reduce the likelihood of
Negotiating about several issues at the same renewed conflict between the parties. Second, inte-
time may have interesting advantages. Mary grative agreements generate positive feelings of
Parker Follett, a pioneering scholar of negotiation, happiness, satisfaction, and pride and instill a
tells the story of two sisters quarreling over an sense of self-efficacy, allowing parties to approach
orange. After a while, they decide to split the new conflicts and negotiation in a more cool-
orange into two equal parts. One sister squeezes headed and optimistic manner. Third, integrative
her part, throws away the peel, and drinks the agreements are implemented better—parties are
juice. The other squeezes hers, throws away the more committed to their part of the bargain and
juice, and processes the peel to flavor a cake she is more motivated to do the things they promised to.
Negotiation and Bargaining 603

Fourth, integrative agreements create more value to 100 points) than 4,000 (e.g., 75 points), and the
both parties than does any other type of agreement buyer would see that 5,000 yielded lower payoff
and thereby foster economic prosperity and wealth. (e.g., 0 points) than 4,000 (e.g., 25 points).
Fifth, and last, integrative agreements foster mutual Furthermore, the task was set up so that what
understanding, trust, and respect and create a sense was valuable to one party was less valuable to
of collective success. Thus, integrative agreements the other, and vice versa. For example, whereas
create stability, harmony, and economic prosper- the buyer could earn between 0 and 100 on price,
ity; failure to reach (integrative) agreements creates the seller would earn only between 0 and 50, and on
frustration, conflict, distrust, and weakened social delivery the buyer could earn only between 0 and 50
ties and hurts economic progress. whereas the seller could earn between 0 and 100.
Thus, by trading the less important issue for the more
important one, buyer and seller were able to earn
The Nash Equilibrium
more personally and collectively (100 to each = 200
Partly because reaching integrative agreements together) than by splitting the difference on both
is vital to societal functioning, many scholars in issues (25 + 50 to each = 150 together).
psychology, economics, and political sciences have Put differently, these authors created a task with
tried to understand when and why negotiators do integrative potential, allowing parties to integrate
or do not achieve integrative agreements. Much of interests and achieve mutually beneficial agree-
this work traces back to the early 1950s, when ments. But because each side was shown only his
John Nash, as a postdoctoral fellow at the Princeton or her own payoffs and not those of the counter-
Institute for Advanced Studies, published an article part, negotiators could not immediately see the
in which he proposed that many bargaining prob- optimal, integrative outcome; through negotiation,
lems are best solved when individual parties follow exchange of information, and communication,
their self-interest in a strict rational manner: They they had to uncover this possibility. Nevertheless,
would choose those behaviors that maximized according to Nash, rational, self-interested nego-
their personal outcomes and avoid those behaviors tiators should be able to reach this optimally inte-
that would not do so. This would result in the grative agreement.
achievement of a so-called Nash equilibrium, that The integrative negotiation task has been used
is, a solution in which neither party could do better in literally hundreds of studies, and time and time
without the opposing party’s doing worse. Most of again, results have shown that individuals have
the time, integrative agreements are Nash equi- great difficulty achieving integrative agreements.
libria, and according to Nash’s analysis, rational This could mean that Nash was wrong and that
pursuit of self-interest leads parties to uncover rationally self-interested individuals do not achieve
these optimal and mutually beneficial agreements. Nash equilibrium. Alternatively, his theory may
Nash provided a mathematical analysis based have been correct, but the underlying assumptions
on assumptions about human behavior. Soon after were not. Indeed, most of the negotiation litera-
its publication, Sidney Siegel and Lawrence ture has been devoted to understanding the psy-
Fouraker, Harold Kelley, and Dean Pruitt set out chological mechanisms behind (not) achieving
to experimentally test his theory. These authors integrative agreements. A large part of this work
created two-person negotiation tasks in which is predominantly concerned with external condi-
each party was shown a chart depicting several tions, such as time pressure and power differen-
issues (e.g., the price of the car, delivery time, tials that motivate individuals toward certain
method of payment) and for each issue, several behavioral strategies. These works thus question
levels of agreement (e.g., for price, 5,000, 4,500, whether individuals are always and only moti-
3,000, etc.; for delivery time, 1  week, 2  weeks, vated by self-interest or perhaps also, or even
3 weeks, etc.; for method of payment, cash, credit more, by other concerns, such as fairness, reputa-
card, bank transfer, etc.). Each party was also tion, concern for the other and the relationship,
shown the payoff he or she would receive for a and so on.
particular agreement. Thus, for price, the seller Another large part of the literature is predomi-
would see that 5,000 yielded greater payoff (e.g., nantly concerned with the cognitive processes that
604 Negotiation and Bargaining

prohibit or facilitate the discovery of mutually strength are less than that of one’s counterpart, one’s
beneficial, integrative agreements. The cognitive motivation to cooperate and concede increases.
approach thus questions whether humans are Another good example of a factor influencing
rational or, instead, bounded in their rationality. the balance between cooperative and competitive
The cognitive approach focuses more on such incentives is time pressure. Time pressure may
issues as reasoning errors and reliance on more or emerge because the goods (e.g., fish or fruits) that
less inaccurate rules of thumb, how people see the are being negotiated may deteriorate or because an
negotiation and the opponent, and so on. The external or self-imposed deadline is approaching
remainder of this chapter presents some of the key (e.g., the market closes at 5  p.m.; the divorce
findings within each of these approaches. papers are being filed and take effect soon). Time
pressure focuses parties on agreement and the con-
Structural-Motivational Approaches sequences of failing to avoid impasse; it shifts the
focus to the cooperative aspect of the negotiation
The structural-motivational approach heavily and, in general, fosters concession making and
relies on the notion that negotiators simultane- cooperative exchange.
ously face a cooperative incentive to reach agree- It was noted earlier that negotiators often oper-
ment with their counterpart (i.e., agreement is ate on behalf of some constituents. In such repre-
better than no agreement) and a competitive incen- sentative negotiation, negotiators need to take into
tive to do well personally. Whereas the cooperative consideration not only their own and their coun-
incentives motivate negotiators to make and recip- terpart’s needs and desires but those of these con-
rocate concessions, to lower their demands, and to stituents as well. Such accountability to constituents
openly and accurately exchange information, the is another prominent factor influencing the focus
competitive incentives motivate them to withhold on cooperative rather than competitive incentives
and retract concessions, to remain tough in their in the negotiation. Research has shown, for exam-
demands, and to deceive and mislead their coun- ple, that negotiators tend to comply with their
terpart. By implication, if cooperative incentives constituents’ desires—when the constituents want
become relatively more important and available a tough game, representatives negotiate more com-
than competitive incentives, negotiators will engage petitively than when their constituents want an
in more cooperative behavior and are less likely to agreement no matter what. It is interesting that
reach a mutually hurting stalemate. there is quite some evidence that when constituent
Cooperative incentives gain or lose prominence goals and desires are unknown or unclear, negotia-
relative to competitive incentives because of aspects tors tend to assume they should compete rather
of the negotiation setting. Power and bargaining than cooperate. The mere fact that an individual
strength are one good example. When a negotiator represents one or more others generally increases
receives an interesting offer from an outsider, this toughness and competitive behavior.
circumstance may fuel the competitive incentive to
increase personal outcomes from the negotiation.
Dual Concern Theory
Thus, when during the negotiation about the price of
the Volvo 240 your neighbor sends you a text mes- These factors—bargaining strength, time pres-
sage offering to pay 4,500, it is unlikely that you will sure, and accountability to constituents—all affect
settle with your current negotiation partner for any- the extent to which negotiators care for their own
thing less than 4,500. Or when an employee knows outcomes, and these factors lead negotiators to resist
the director controls not only the budget for training making concessions. Other variables have been
and development but also whether annual bonuses shown to influence the extent to which negotiators
are being paid, the employee may be more willing to care for the outcomes of their counterpart. For
give in and offer to follow work-relevant courses example, when negotiators are friends, they may be
during holiday season. Put differently, when their particularly concerned about the outcomes their
bargaining strength and power increase, negotiators counterpart gets, so as not to jeopardize their friend-
generally become reluctant to make and reciprocate ship. Or when negotiators expect to work with the
concessions, and when one’s power and bargaining counterpart in the future, they are more motivated
Negotiation and Bargaining 605

to search for an agreement that satisfies their coun- to integrative agreements. Instead, to achieve integra-
terpart. And to give one final example, when some tive agreements, negotiators need to combine a con-
external party, such as a manager of one’s constitu- cern for their own interests with a concern for those
ent, refers to one’s counterpart as partner, negotia- of their partner. Any structural factor that promotes
tors are more likely to be concerned about the a negotiator’s concern for his or her own outcomes
other’s needs and interests than when the counter- will thus promote toughness when the negotiator has
part is systematically referred to as opponent. a low concern for the other’s outcomes, but it will
Dual concern theory, developed by Dean Pruitt promote a problem-solving approach toward inte-
and Jeffrey Rubin, summarizes these tendencies grative agreements when the negotiator has high
among negotiators to be concerned with their own concern for the other’s outcomes.
outcomes and, independently, to be concerned
with their partner’s outcomes. When concern for
Bounded Rationality and the
one’s own outcomes is high (e.g., there is high bar-
Cognitive Underpinnings of Negotiation
gaining strength) and concern for the other’s out-
comes is low (e.g., one does not expect to work Dual concern theory mainly concerns the role of
together in the future), negotiators are expected to selfishness and prosocial motivation and is rather
engage in tough, competitive behavior aimed at silent on the cognitive underpinnings of integrative
dominating the partner. They are reluctant to negotiation. But recall that in Nash’s theorizing, it
make concessions and fail to listen to the other’s was assumed that negotiators are fully rational and
demands and needs. When concern for one’s own able to see and process all available information opti-
outcomes is low (e.g., there is high time pressure) mally. This assumption is problematic, and research
and concern for the other’s outcomes is high (e.g., has shown time and time again that individual nego-
the other is considered a friend), negotiators are tiators cannot process all relevant information—they
expected to engage in conciliatory, cooperative are bounded in their rationality because their cogni-
behavior aimed at submitting to the partner. They tive ability is limited and because not all relevant
are willing to make (unilateral) concessions and information is or can be made available.
carefully listen to the other’s demands and needs. Also, negotiators may try to mislead and deceive
When parties engage in mutual forcing—when each other, and thus some of the available informa-
they each have high concern for their own out- tion is deliberately inaccurate and cannot be trusted.
comes and low concern for their partner’s—the To deal with the cognitively taxing task, negotiators
negotiation is likely to end in a mutually hurting have been shown to rely on cognitive heuristics—
stalemate, and integrative agreements are unlikely. shortcuts that help them make fast and satisfactory
Likewise, when parties engage in mutual yielding— judgments and decisions. Thus, negotiators may
when they each have a low concern for their own infer their counterpart’s intentions on the basis of
outcomes and high concern for the partner’s—the stereotypic information—if the other is sharply
negotiation is likely to end in a quick, middle-of- dressed as a businessperson, one may be more likely
the-road compromise. Again, integrative agree- to infer shrewdness and toughness than if the other
ments are unlikely. In fact, the theory predicts that is wearing jeans and a college sweatshirt.
integrative agreements come about when the par- Max Bazerman and Maggie Neale developed
ties each have a high concern for both their own the behavioral decision approach, which encom-
and the other’s outcomes. On one hand, they resist passes a great variety of these cognitive shortcuts
making concessions because doing so hurts per- and how they affect the achievement of integrative
sonal interests. On the other hand, they want to agreements. One prominent example is the so-
make concessions because doing so helps the oth- called fixed-pie assumption—at the outset, nego-
er’s interests. This dilemma leads negotiators to tiators tend to assume that what is important to
search for creative solutions that integrate both them (e.g., juice) is equally important to the other
their own and each other’s interests optimally. party, and what is irrelevant to them (e.g., peel) is
Dual concern theory has received strong sup- equally irrelevant to the other. Given such a fixed-
port in numerous studies. It thus appears that a pie assumption, it makes no sense searching for
pure and rational focus on self-interest does not lead integrative agreements; all we need to do is claim
606 Normative Influence

value and try to get the biggest share of the pie (or interaction. It is a form of influence in which pressure
orange). And this is indeed what has been found is exerted to cause someone to conform to the expec-
many times: A large majority of negotiators, nov- tations and preferences of others. The expectations
ices and experts alike, tend to begin with a fixed-pie and preferences of others function as a reference
assumption, and if they do, they search for victory group norm that conveys how individuals ought to
or, when fairness concerns prevail, 50–50 compro- behave or what decision they ought to make.
mises. Only when negotiators realize during nego- Although normative reference groups may exist out-
tiation that their fixed-pie assumption is erroneous side the immediate group setting (e.g., religious
do they start searching for integrative agreements. norms), more frequently the source of the influence
Recent studies have invoked the notion that nego- is a norm established or detected among those people
tiators may switch between more shallow and auto- who are physically present in the group interaction.
matic information processing—in which case they rely It is instructive to contrast normative influence
heavily on cognitive heuristics—and more deliberate with the other major form of influence within
and systematic information processing. Under system- groups. Informational influence refers to changing
atic information processing, the influence of cognitive individual behavior by incorporating information
heuristics is attenuated, and negotiators are more likely about issues as evidence about reality. In contrast
to reach integrative agreements. This work also shows to normative influence, which is social in nature,
that negotiators engage in more systematic informa- informational influence is primarily intellectual,
tion processing when they have low rather than high centering on the issues being considered by the
power, when time pressures are mild rather than group rather than the preferences of people within
intense, or when they are held accountable. Put differ- or outside the group. Having different bases, the
ently, there are quite a number of structural, context- two forms of influence differ in the motives and
related variables that can lead negotiators away from conditions that produce them, their distinctive
their basic tendency to rely on cognitive heuristics that interaction behaviors, and their consequences on
inhibit mutually beneficial, integrative agreements. group process. This entry looks at the conditions
for and consequences of normative influence.
Carsten K. W. De Dreu

See also Coalitions; Cooperation and Competition; Conditions Promoting Normative Influence
Distributive Justice; Group Problem Solving and Decision
Normative influence focuses on the values and
Making; Prisoner’s Dilemma; Team Negotiation
preferences of other people regarding the issues and
tasks facing a group. It is a people-centered form of
influence, and susceptibility to it reflects one or
Further Readings
more of several underlying motives: to be accepted
De Dreu, C. K. W., Beersma, B., Steinel, W., & Van Kleef, G. A. by others, to promote interpersonal harmony, and
(2007). The psychology of negotiation: Principles and to use other people’s behaviors as yardsticks to
basic processes. In A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins gauge the effectiveness of one’s judgments and
(Eds.), Handbook of basic principles in social psychology behaviors. Therefore, conditions that call attention
(2nd ed., pp. 608–629). New York: Guilford Press. to the preferences of others for resolving intragroup
Lewicki, R. J., Saunders, D. M., Minton, J. W., & Barry, B. issues will foster normative influence. Conversely,
(2005). Negotiation. New York: McGraw-Hill. conditions that emphasize the importance of the
Thompson, L. L., & Brett, J. M. (Eds.). (2006). The social group’s decision and its factually correct resolution
psychology of negotiation. New York: Psychology Press.
will favor the use of informational influence.
Chief among conditions determining whether
normative or informational influence prevails is
the type of issue (judgmental versus intellectual)
Normative Influence discussed by the group. Judgmental issues are mat-
ters of preference and values, such as judgments of
Normative influence is one of the two main ways right and wrong. They are not issues capable of
in which people influence one another in group resolution by the application of facts, such as
Normative Influence 607

whether some event or state exists. Judgmental argue on the basis of decision preferences of numer-
issues are resolved by appealing to the normative ical or prestigious majorities in the group (e.g.,
preferences of group members (e.g., numerical “Most of us think Toyotas are better cars” or “Group
majority or high-status members) or to outside members who know about cars prefer Toyotas”) or
authorities (e.g., the Bible). But even intellectual outside the group (e.g., “Toyota sells more cars”).
issues, which rely on the gathering and consider- Arguments are framed in terms of a particular deci-
ation of facts (e.g., “What is the repair record of sion alternative and supported by their internal (to
Toyotas?”), will provoke normative influence if the group) or external normative support. In infor-
they are information poor, a condition in which mational influence, on the other hand, arguments
relevant information is lacking among group mem- are phrased in terms of observable facts and reason-
bers. In such circumstances, the group will resort to ing that support a particular decision alternative (or
normative influence as a criterion for correctness. that disprove other alternatives), such as “Toyotas
Aside from the nature of the issue under discus- have the best gas mileage figures in the industry” or
sion, there are other conditions that foster normative “Fords have a lower life expectancy.” Thus, the style
influence; these include the goal of the group interac- of normative influence practiced in groups is consis-
tion, the personal orientation of group members, tent with the motive to compare one’s decision to
and the style of interaction. If a group considers its that of others to foster group consensus and/or to
goal is to maintain harmony and cohesion, that is, if resolve an issue in the absence of hard evidence.
relations within the group are important, normative
influence is likely to be enhanced. This would be a
Consequences of Normative Influence
likely outcome in enduring groups, compared with
groups convened only for specific, short-term tasks. Generally, predominant use of normative influence
If a group meets repeatedly, there is more opportu- in group discussions can lead to quicker decisions,
nity to get to know one another and more pressure especially when agreement is reached by a vote
to maintain harmony for the sake of group continu- other than unanimity. In issues that inherently
ance, conditions that favor normative influence. require social agreement, such as judgmental issues
Similarly, individuals with strong personal disposi- or intellective issues for which little information is
tions toward interpersonal harmony and the welfare available, normative influence is indeed natural.
of others (communal orientation) would be more But in issues with a factually correct solution, and
likely to take the preferences of other group members where information is available to the group, nor-
into account than those inclined toward finding the mative influence inhibits accurate and creative solu-
correct solution of the issues facing the group (task tions. It places emphasis on satisfaction with the
completion or agentic orientation). Does the individ- outcome rather than the best solution to the issue.
ual (or group as a whole) want to reach a mutually In the real world of decision making—for example,
satisfying decision or a factually correct one? political decisions—there are many striking instances
Finally, if a group takes early and frequent votes in which, in retrospect, poor decisions were based on
on an issue, it is more likely to engage in normative the pursuit of mutual satisfaction with the decision
than in informational influence. Taking an early outcome rather than on incorporating the best avail-
public vote focuses attention on member prefer- able information. Predominant use of normative
ences rather than the facts of the issue, and discus- influence can retard the sharing of critical informa-
sion will be driven by the decision preferences of tion possessed by group members, particularly those
members and defending their votes rather than by in the group’s numerical minority. Normative influ-
thorough discussion of relevant facts. This distinc- ence is a powerful tool of the majority, whereas the
tion in the style of group discussion is referred to minority’s best strategy is to use informational influ-
as verdict-driven versus evidence-driven style. ence on the majority. The critical contribution of a
group minority is to provide the majority with fresh
and novel information to improve decision making.
Forms of Argumentation
The group conflict that is ostensibly avoided by nor-
Normative and informational influences take dis- mative influence can actually be productive in many
tinctive forms. In the former, group members instances, especially for intellective issues.
608 Norms

Normative influence facilitates agreement and Kaplan, M. F., & Wilke, H. (2001). Cognitive and social
reduces conflict, but it also reduces the breadth and motivation in group decision making. In J. P. Forgas,
depth of information being shared during discussion. K. D. Williams, & L. Wheeler (Eds.), The social mind:
It encourages members to think about the issue in sim- Cognitive and motivational aspects of interpersonal
pler, superficial ways. This is called heuristic reasoning, behavior (pp. 406–428). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
which refers to use of simple rules and a narrow set of University Press.
information to make decisions—for example, “What Wilke, H., & Kaplan, M. F. (2001). Task creativity and social
do most people think?” Informational influence, how- creativity in decision-making groups. In C. M. Allgood &
M. Selart (Eds.), Decision making: Social and creative
ever, enables systematic reasoning, a thought process
dimensions (pp. 35–51). Dordrecht, the Netherlands:
whereby group members consider a broad range of
Kluwer.
relevant information, think about it in depth, and
elaborate on the meaning of facts—for example,
“Toyotas cost more than Fords but need fewer repairs
and get better gas mileage, so they must be precision Norms
engineered and cost less in the long run.”
Normative influence can be satisfying, useful, and Norms are social standards that describe and pre-
economical. Were it not, it would not be as widely scribe behavior. Norms serve as guides for one’s own
practiced in groups. It is satisfying because it is a direct behavior, help establish expectations about how oth-
way to achieve consensus, and please the most people, ers will act, and therefore promote greater coordina-
among parties who differ in their decision preferences. tion in social interactions. Norms may be descriptive
It is useful because sometimes we do not have relevant in the sense that they specify the frequency and perva-
information to make a well-considered decision or siveness of some behavior. Norms may be prescriptive
sometimes the issue is one that does not lend itself well in the sense that they specify the behaviors that a per-
to factual resolution—think of religious and moral son ought or ought not to perform. According to
issues. It is economical because it is simpler to find out some theorists, the possibility of informal punish-
what others prefer than to explore the bases of those ments and sanctions for failures to comply with pre-
preferences. In groups composed of experts in differ- scriptive norms is a defining characteristic of a norm.
ent fields that are relevant to an issue (e.g., marketing, This entry examines the distinctions between norms
finance, engineering, design, and aesthetics), using that are primarily descriptive in nature and those that
normative influence makes sense if one assumes that are more prescriptive. Although norms are often
each person’s decision preference is based on system- thought of as social standards, individuals may inter-
atic consideration of the facts in his or her domain. nalize the prescription of social norms and formulate
But normative influence can compromise competent their own personal norms to guide their behavior.
decisions by restricting the systematic use of a broad Certain social norms (the norm of reciprocity and fair-
range of relevant information, considered in depth, and ness norms) are so universal that they have been sin-
with the novel input of group minorities. These are the gled out for special attention because their influence is
very components of creative decision making and seen in such a wide variety of social situations. Finally,
require open sharing of information. characteristics that are related to when and why norms
are most likely to emerge will be discussed.
Martin F. Kaplan
Social Norms
See also Anticonformity; Conformity; Group Polarization;
Group Problem Solving and Decision Making; The distinction between social norms that summa-
Inclusion/Exclusion; Innovation; Minority Influence rize how people behave and norms that specify how
people ought to behave is reflected in the defining
characteristics of descriptive and prescriptive norms.
Further Readings
Descriptive Norms
Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and
informational social influences upon individual judgment. Descriptive norms are inferred by individuals
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629–636. from their day-to-day observations of their own
Norms 609

behavior and the behavior of others. Descriptive It should be made explicit that just because many
norms reflect the frequency and pervasiveness of a others are behaving in a particular way does not
given behavior; they may be thought of as summary necessarily mean that the course of action is correct
statements about how people behave. These descrip- or the best way to act. Furthermore, some norma-
tive norms may be global and apply quite broadly tive beliefs may be inaccurate and yet may still be
across a wide variety of circumstances (e.g., using the used as guides for behavior. For example, many col-
title Mr. or Ms. to address a higher-status person), or lege students believe that the frequency of binge
they may be situational and apply to a more restricted drinking on campus is far greater than it actually is,
set of circumstances (e.g., cheering at athletic events). setting the stage for students to overindulge in the
Global norms are useful when a person must mistaken belief that “everyone is doing it.”
determine his or her standing in terms of some abil-
ity, accuracy of some attitudinal position, or appro- Prescriptive Norms
priateness of some behavior. For example, assume
you are introduced to a stranger and say, “It is nice Prescriptive norms shift the emphasis from the
to meet you, Dr. Johnson.” If Dr. Johnson replies, question of “what is” to the question of “what
“Oh, you can call me Chris,” you may infer that Dr. ought to be.” Prescriptive norms (sometimes called
Johnson considers you to be a social equal. Although injunctive norms) specify what one should do as
a global norm suggests that one shows respect to well as what one should not do. These prescriptive
higher-status others by using a formal title, the norms are informal standards of behavior that have
norm also suggests that the use of first names evolved over time or within a given situation, and
is appropriate when speaking to an equal, and they are expected to be followed and obeyed to
Dr. Johnson’s reply has clarified your standing. promote smooth social interactions. Violations of
Situational norms play a similar role but are prescriptive norms may lead to expressions of dis-
more dependent on the particular setting or context approval from others who observe the transgres-
and more limited in their application. A situational sion. The disapproval after the violation of a
norm defines how people act in a specific setting: prescriptive norm may involve the administration
Patrons are quiet in a library. When in novel situa- of an informal social sanction, such as frowning or
tions, people will often use the actions of others to shaking of the head, comments to let the transgres-
help decide on the appropriate course of action. sor know that the norm violation was observed,
The benefit provided by descriptive norms is that explicit calls for some corrective action, social rejec-
understanding and being able to predict how others tion, or overt retaliation for the offense. Because
are likely to act allows people to coordinate their norms reflect informal standards, there are no for-
actions for smoother interactions. When social mal institutional reactions to norm violations, but
norms are widely shared and the advantages of informal sanctioning systems will often emerge over
social coordination are recognized, certain behav- time that establish how others might appropriately
iors (e.g., queuing behavior, shaking hands when respond to norm violations. The sanctioning sys-
introduced to a stranger, passing to the right when tems, therefore, come to be governed by their own
approaching a person on a sidewalk) are performed prescriptive norms. According to some definitions,
almost mindlessly because they are so deeply the presence of a sanctioning system is a necessary
ingrained within the members of a culture. condition for an observed behavioral standard to be
In addition, people filling a particular social role considered a prescriptive norm.
(e.g., leader, teacher, emergency responder) may come Although the notion of a social norm implies
to define and understand their responsibilities by iden- that a group endorses a particular standard of
tifying the specific norms that are associated with that behavior, this does not necessarily mean that each
role. For example, the norms of being a leader include individual within the group must accept that stan-
maintaining order within the group, promoting the dard to the same degree. A given norm will influ-
interests of the group, and distributing resources ence an individual’s actions most strongly if others
among group members fairly. These norms may then respected by the individual endorse that norm as it
be considered role prescriptions that would apply to applies to a particular behavior. This distinction is
anyone occupying that particular social position. seen in the notion of subjective norms incorporated
610 Norms

into the theory of reasoned action as one of the factors analogous to prescriptive norms, and deviations
that affects a person’s intentions about how to behave. from one’s personal norms can lead to a sense of
According to this approach, people consider guilt for failing to live up to one’s own personal
what they believe to be the normative beliefs of oth- standards. For example, if a person believes that
ers and then decide how motivated they are to meet citizens should exercise their right to vote and has
those normative expectations. For example, a teen- internalized this belief as a personal standard for
ager will consider the normative standards that his behavior, failure to make it to the polls on election
parents, neighbors, teachers, and friends might hold day will make the person feel guilty.
about a particular behavior (e.g., voting in an elec- Once they are internalized, the individual follows
tion, premarital sex) when trying to decide how to these personal norms even when no social sanctions
act. The teenager will also consider how much he or would be possible (e.g., when a person is alone or
she cares about meeting the standards and norma- when in a large group so that no one else can mon-
tive beliefs of these other people. One implication of itor the person’s behavior). If a person has fully
this approach is that the normative standards of accepted and internalized the social norm of com-
those who are not considered to be particularly mitment as a personal norm, that person will follow
important to an individual (e.g., a neighbor) will through with a promise to contribute to a friend’s
exert relatively little influence on behavior. However, favorite charity even though the friend would never
if others close to the individual (e.g., best friend, be able to determine whether the contribution had
parents) have strong feelings for or against compli- really been made. The normative pressure to make
ance with some social norm, the normative beliefs the contribution is driven by the person’s desire to
of these important others will play a greater role in avoid feelings of guilt and pangs of conscience that
influencing the person’s behavior. would arise if the person deviated from the prescrip-
If prescriptive norms and their associated infor- tions of the commitment norm.
mal sanctioning systems are found to be insuffi-
cient to ensure compliance with social standards of
Roles of Norms in Social Behavior
behavior, formal standards may be instituted
within the legal system to accomplish these goals. Social and personal norms play important direc-
The legal system specifies the expected standards tive roles in social behavior, but it is important to
of behavior that are to be displayed by those note that norms do not cause behavior. Instead,
within the system (e.g., laws enacted by legislative norms guide an individual’s course of action by
actions), the mechanisms by which violations are either offering information about what most peo-
identified (e.g., law enforcement agencies), proce- ple do in similar situations (serving the descriptive
dures that determine whether sanctions are required function) or reminding the individual what impor-
(e.g., the judicial system), and the nature of those tant others expect him or her to do (serving the
sanctions (e.g., fines, imprisonment). Within the prescriptive function), with some risk of social
current discussion, these arrangements might be sanction if the person fails to comply with the
considered to be legal norms. social standards. It is also important to recognize
that the existence of a norm per se does not neces-
sarily mean that it will play any role in guiding
Personal Norms
one’s action; according to the focus theory of nor-
Personal norms are internalized standards that have mative conduct, an individual’s attention must be
been adopted as guides for one’s own behavior. At a focused on a particular norm in order to activate
descriptive level, personal norms are roughly equiv- its influence potential.
alent to one’s habits—behaviors that an individual For example, social norms associated with envi-
does on a regular basis (e.g., brushing teeth, buck- ronmental issues (e.g., recycling) may not have any
ling seat belts). Personal norms at this level reflect a impact on a person’s behavior until some event
routine pattern of behavior that serves to simplify calls attention to the need for pro-environmental
life: I have no need to think about whether I am action (e.g., seeing someone throw an aluminum
going to brush my teeth—it is just something that I can in the trash). The individual has a norm-based
do. Personal norms may also include a component potential for pro-environmental action, but for
Norms 611

that norm to be used as a guide for behavior, some of being a part of the group outweigh the per-
situational cue must be present to focus the indi- sonal costs incurred for being in the group. For
vidual’s attention on an existing norm. example, assume a Little League association
Although some norms may emerge that satisfy requires parents to staff the concession stand
the specific needs of a group or of a particular situ- during games. Parents may prefer not to serve in
ation, there is a class of general interaction norms this role, but the league would have to cease
that apply to a broad spectrum of social situations operation if the stand were not open. The conse-
and may be particularly accessible for easy activa- quence of no one’s helping would be the loss of a
tion. Two examples of general interaction norms valuable resource (i.e., the league), but most par-
are the norm of reciprocity and fairness norms. ents recognize that the benefits of giving their
children an opportunity to play ball outweigh the
time spent working in the concession stand.
Norm of Reciprocity
Two closely related fairness norms provide the
The norm of reciprocity is one of the most basis for how the duties required by the group will
prevalent social norms and one that is easy to be assigned. The equal division norm and the
understand. If someone does a favor for another, equity norm are the most frequently applied stan-
the recipient will feel a certain social (normative) dards for the fair allocation of both benefits to be
pressure to return the favor, due to the norm of received and costs to be shared. Application of the
reciprocity. There have been suggestions that there equal division rule results in each group member’s
are evolutionary roots for this norm, with instances receiving an equal share of a reward (e.g., all chil-
of helping and cooperation being based in part on dren can play in the league) or making an equal
what is called reciprocal altruism: If I help you contribution to the group’s common need (i.e.,
when you are in need, I believe—because of my each parent must work one game). The equal divi-
belief in the norm of reciprocity—that you will sion scheme is easily applied and is seen as produc-
help me when I need assistance, and we will both ing a fair outcome in many situations. However,
be better off in the long run because of our compli- imagine how parents who have only one child
ance with this social rule. Returning favors fulfills might feel while working in the concession stand
norm-based social expectations, but an inability to with parents who have three children, all of whom
reciprocate will result in the person who had are playing in the league.
received the favor feeling a continuing sense of Treating everyone the same when there are clear
obligation until the social debt can be repaid. differences in benefits to be gained may not be per-
The norm of reciprocity is particularly impor- ceived as fair. In such cases, the equity norm may be
tant in casual relationships in which those involved more appropriate. According to the equity norm,
are primarily concerned with their immediate out- the relationship between what a person contributes
comes and with making sure that no one has taken to the group and what that person receives in return
advantage of them. The strength and pervasiveness should be proportional to the relationship between
of the norm of reciprocity are so great that those the contributions and returns for others in the
who fail to reciprocate may be punished for their group. An equitable arrangement in the case
failure to meet this social obligation. In extreme described above might involve the parents of an
cases, those failing to reciprocate may even be only child working one game in the concession
expelled from a group if they do not live up to this stand and the parents of three children working
normative standard. three games.

Fairness Norms Additional Characteristics of Norms


There are also fairness norms that govern how Social norms emerge from the experiences of
we deal with others. If social organizations are to people in a group because the norms serve some
keep themselves going by protecting the advan- beneficial function for the group and, more spe-
tages gained by cooperative actions, each mem- cifically, for the individuals within a group.
ber of the organization must feel that the benefits Norms are most likely to emerge in groups in
612 Norms

which members share common values and atti- agreed on standards of behavior that are subject
tudes and generally agree on how people ought to modifications by the group as changing circum-
to act. Because social norms are social construc- stances warrant.
tions based largely on the beliefs and behaviors
of others, norms are most likely to emerge when David A. Schroeder
powerful members of a group have, by their pub-
lic behavior and pronouncements, given their See also Emergent Norm Theory; Group Socialization;
support to a particular course of action. People Normative Influence; Reference Groups; Roles
often use powerful others as sources of informa-
tion about how one ought to behave, and power- Further Readings
ful others are in strong positions to offer
reinforcements for compliance with norms and Bicchieri, C. (2006). The grammar of society: The
for punishment of transgressions. nature and dynamics of social norms. New York:
In other cases, a given behavior may come to Cambridge University Press.
Cialdini, R. B., & Trost, M. R. (1995). Social influence:
be accepted as part of a prescriptive norm with
Social norms, conformity, and compliance. In D. Gilbert,
little justification: The mere fact that the majority
S. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social
of people behave in a uniform manner (i.e., the
psychology (5th ed., pp. 151–192). New York:
descriptive feature of norms) may be taken as suf-
McGraw-Hill.
ficient evidence for a prescriptive social norm to Ellickson, R. C. (1991). Order without law: How
arise and to be seen as “the way things ought neighbors settle disputes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
to be.” Finally, there is a conditional nature to University Press.
social norms that recognizes that people do not Hechter, M., & Opp, K. (2001). Social norms. New
behave in blind obedience to norms in all situa- York: Russell Sage.
tions. For example, most people strongly endorse Miller, D. T., & Prentice, D. A. (1996). The construction
a norm stating “Thou shalt not kill,” but many of social norms and standards. In E. T. Higgins &
people believe that there are circumstances under A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook
which taking the life of another is acceptable of basic principles (pp. 799–829). New York: Guilford
(e.g., self-defense). The degree of conditionality Press.
represents a measure of the generality of the Posner, E. A. (2000). Law and social norms. Cambridge,
norm; in this regard, norms can be seen as socially MA: Harvard University Press.
O
The basic experimental procedure involved
Obedience to Authority three individuals: the participant, a confederate
pretending to be another participant, and the
Obedience to authority refers to the act of follow- experimenter. The experimenter explained to
ing orders or instructions from someone in a posi- the participant and confederate that they would be
tion of authority. Psychologists are particularly randomly assigned to either the role of learner or
interested in situations in which people obey orders the role of teacher. He further explained that the
to perform an act they believe to be wrong. Much study was concerned with the effect of punishment
of the research on obedience to authority has been on learning and that electric shocks would be used
conducted with an eye to understanding morally as the punishment in the experiment. The drawing
questionable acts, and the findings have been used was rigged so that the real participant was always
to explain atrocious events such as the Holocaust. the teacher and the confederate was always the
However, the research also has implications for learner.
everyday situations, such as following question- The experiment was conducted in two rooms
able orders from physicians or airline pilots. separated by a thin wall. On one side of the wall,
the learner was strapped into a chair. Electrodes
supposedly connected to a shock generator in the
Background
adjacent room were attached to his arm. A speaker
The first systematic effort by a social psychologist allowed the learner to hear the teacher’s instruc-
to study obedience to authority was conducted by tions from the other room, but the learner could
Stanley Milgram in the early 1960s. Milgram’s obe- respond only by pressing one of four buttons
dience studies are arguably the most well-known within reach of his strapped-in hands. With the
research in social psychology, both within the field real participant watching, the learner mentioned
and among the general public. The obedience stud- that he had a heart condition and that he was wor-
ies were conducted between August 1961 and May ried about the effect of the electric shocks.
1962. With one exception, all the studies were car- The participant–teacher was then seated on the
ried out on the campus of Yale University. other side of the wall in front of a large machine
Participants were members of the community the experimenter identified as a shock generator.
recruited through newspaper ads and direct mail Thirty switches spanned the front of the machine,
solicitations. All of Milgram’s participants were each identified with the amount of voltage it sup-
between the ages of 20 and 50, and in all but one posedly delivered. The voltage labels started at
version of the study, they were men. Participants 15 volts (V) and continued in 15-V increments to
believed at the outset that they would be participat- 450 V. Labels on the machine identified the shocks
ing in a “scientific study of memory and learning.” as increasingly severe, ranging from Slight Shock

613
614 Obedience to Authority

to Danger: Severe Shock. The 450-V lever was end of the shock generator. However, Milgram
labeled simply with three red Xs. found surprisingly high rates of obedience. In
The teacher read a list of 25 word pairs (e.g., the basic procedure described here, 65% of the
blue-girl) for the learner to memorize. The teacher participant–teachers continued to press the levers
then tested the learner by providing the first word all the way to the end of the procedure. Milgram
in the pair and four possible options for the second argued from these findings that whether a person
word. The learner gave his response to each test engages in seemingly brutal behavior is often not a
item by pressing one of the four switches, which lit function of the individual’s character. Rather, in
up a corresponding light on the teacher’s side of certain situations, good people can be made to do
the wall. If the learner got the test item incorrect, bad things.
the teacher was instructed to deliver an electric Milgram explored some of the causes of obedi-
shock. The teacher was told to give a 15-V shock ence by changing features of the procedure in sub-
for the first wrong answer and to increase the sequent studies. For example, he found obedience
intensity by 15 V for each successive wrong answer decreased when the learner was physically closer
until the learner had memorized all 25 word pairs. to the teacher, such as in the same room. Obedience
In reality, the learner received no shocks. But he also decreased when the experimenter was in
deliberately gave many wrong answers, forcing the another room and delivered his orders over the
teacher to deliver increasingly severe shocks. After phone. Participants were less likely to obey orders
pressing the 75-V lever, the participant heard the from a confederate posing as another participant
learner grunt in pain (actually, a prerecorded than orders from the experimenter. But conducting
sound) through the wall. After the 150-V punish- the study in an office building with no apparent
ment, the participant heard the learner cry out that affiliation to Yale University did not significantly
his heart was bothering him and that he wanted to reduce compliance. In the one study for which he
be released. The learner gave increasingly loud recruited women, Milgram found that they behaved
protests after each successive punishment, includ- very similarly to men.
ing screams of pain and demands to be released.
After the 300-V shock, the learner refused to
Explaining the Effect
answer, which the experimenter said should be
considered a wrong answer. After 330 V, despite Most people find the high rates of obedience in
intense screams earlier in the procedure, the learner Milgram’s studies surprising and disturbing. Before
no longer made a sound when shocked. Whenever conducting the research, Milgram described the
the participant expressed a reluctance to go on, the procedures to a large number of people, including
experimenter instructed him to continue, using a a group of psychiatrists, and asked them to predict
sequence of four prods: Please continue or the results. Everyone agreed that finding even one
Continue, The experiment requires that you con- participant who went to the end of the shock gen-
tinue, It is absolutely essential that you continue, erator would be extremely unlikely. The gap
and You have no other choice, you must continue. between this expectation and the actual results is
The prod sequence started anew after each shock. often held up as an example of what social psy-
If a participant refused to continue the procedure chologists call the fundamental attribution error.
after receiving the fourth prod, the experimenter That is, when explaining the causes of another
ended the session. Otherwise, the experiment con- person’s behavior, people typically fail to fully
tinued until the participant had pressed the highest appreciate the role situational forces play.
shock lever (450 V) three times. Individuals hearing about Milgram’s research
The key measure was the point at which the for the first time are often tempted to attribute the
participant–teacher refused to continue. That is, obedient participants’ behavior to personal char-
how long would the participant obey the experi- acteristics, such as a sadistic personality or a lack
menter’s orders despite the obvious suffering of the of conscience. But Milgram demonstrated that fol-
learner? People hearing about the obedience stud- lowing the experimenter’s orders was the norma-
ies for the first time typically assume that virtually tive response. What people fail to recognize are the
every participant will stop long before reaching the features of the situation that made it difficult for
Obedience to Authority 615

Milgram’s participants to do anything but obey Another explanation for the high rates of obedi-
the orders. ence in Milgram’s research concerns the novelty of
What are these situational features? Milgram the situation and the behavior of the experimenter.
emphasized the power of the authority figure in Most likely, participants had little prior experience
this setting. He argued that people are raised to with psychology experiments or machinery like the
respect and follow orders from authority figures, shock generator. When they first heard the learner’s
such as parents, teachers, or police officers. The protests, participants probably began to search for
authority figure does not need to be forceful or information about how they should respond. In
charismatic but must simply be seen as legitimate. most versions of Milgram’s procedures, the experi-
In the obedience studies, participants granted the menter provided the only source of information, and
experimenter this authority by virtue of his asso- he assured participants that nothing was wrong and
ciation with the experiment, the university, and that they should continue the test. Thus, it was not
perhaps even science. Observers have pointed out entirely unreasonable for participants to conclude
that Milgram’s experimenter also may have been under these circumstances that continuing the proce-
seen as an expert. Because the experimenter pre- dure was the right thing to do. Results consistent
sumably knew all about the dangers of the shock with this interpretation come from one of Milgram’s
generator and apparently was not concerned, par- studies. Before being asked to press the levers them-
ticipants may have deferred to his judgment and selves, participants in one study saw two other
continued to deliver shocks. “teachers” refuse to continue. Obedience declined
Psychologists have identified other features in significantly in this version of the procedure.
Milgram’s procedures that most likely contributed The experimental situation also provided
to the high rates of obedience. One of these is the Milgram’s participants an easy opportunity to dif-
incremental nature of the task. As indicated previ- fuse personal responsibility for any harm that
ously, all participants began with the lowest level came to the learner. Research in a number of areas
of shock—15  V—and worked their way toward finds that people are often motivated to assign
the 450-V lever in 15-V increments. Researchers responsibility for undesirable acts to someone else.
find that step-by-step progression of this sort is an Moreover, removing the burden of personal
effective tactic for changing attitudes and behav- responsibility typically increases the chances that
iors in other settings. Among the processes that people will act in socially inappropriate ways.
come into play in such situations are the need for Although they were the ones pressing the levers,
consistency and a change in the way people think participants in the obedience studies frequently
of themselves as they move through the steps. attributed responsibility for continuing the proce-
In most cases, pressing the next lever on the dure to the experimenter. In the participants’ eyes,
shock generator is different from pressing the last they were just following orders. Indeed, when par-
lever only in degree. If a participant pressed the ticipants asked about responsibility, the experi-
170-V lever, there is no apparent reason he should menter was instructed to say that he himself was
not press the 185-V lever. Consistent with this rea- responsible for any harm that came to the learner.
soning, investigators can identify in Milgram’s data
a few places in the procedure at which participants
Ethical Concerns
were most likely to refuse to continue. Each of
these stopping points corresponds to a qualitative Milgram’s obedience studies played an important
change in the task. For example, the most common role in stimulating debate among psychologists
point for participants to refuse the experimenter’s about the treatment of human participants in
orders is after pressing the 150-V lever. This is the research. Critics pointed to the potential harm to
first time participants hear the learner’s protests Milgram’s participants. Many participants experi-
through the wall and his demands to be released. enced intense stress as they wrestled with what to
Continuing to give shocks at this point is a notice- do while listening to the learner’s apparent suffer-
ably different act than it was earlier. Similarly, ing. Psychologists also worried about the long-
refusals increase when the learner refuses to answer term psychological consequences of going through
and when the learner turns suddenly silent. such an experience.
616 Opinion Deviance

Milgram was not unaware of or insensitive to participants who refused to continue in Milgram’s
these concerns. All participants were debriefed basic procedure did so after hearing the learner’s
about the study immediately after the session, and first verbal protests at the 150-V mark. If partici-
obedient participants were assured that their behav- pants made it past this point, there was a nearly
ior was normal and that their conflicted feelings 80% chance that they would continue to the end
were shared by other participants. Moreover, follow- of the shock generator. Thus, the researcher
up questionnaires found 84% of participants were avoided many of the ethical objections to Milgram’s
glad they had been part of the study, and the vast investigations by stopping the procedure after
majority agreed that more experiments of this kind 150 V. The study, conducted in 2006, found rates
should be conducted. None­theless, the obedience of obedience that were similar to those that
studies are clearly out of bounds by today’s stan- Milgram had found 45 years earlier.
dards. No study using Milgram’s full procedures
has been published since the 1970s. Jerry M. Burger

See also Banality of Evil; Genocide; Holocaust; Just


Implications and Remaining Questions World Hypothesis; Leadership; Norms; Power; Roles;
Stanford Prison Experiment
Milgram’s obedience studies continue to generate
discussions inside and outside psychology, largely
because of their implications for understanding the Further Readings
worst of human behaviors: atrocities, massacres,
Blass, T. (Ed.). (2000). Obedience to authority: Current
and genocide. Milgram often drew parallels
perspectives on the Milgram paradigm. Mahwah, NJ:
between his participants’ behavior and the obedi-
Lawrence Erlbaum.
ence witnessed in Nazi Germany during the Blass, T. (2004). The man who shocked the world: The
Holocaust. However, other psychologists urge life and legacy of Stanley Milgram. New York: Basic
caution when making the leap from findings of Books.
controlled laboratory studies like Milgram’s to Burger, J. M. (2008). Replicating Milgram: Would people
complex social behaviors like those involved in the still obey today? American Psychologist, 64(1), 1–11.
Holocaust. Nonetheless, laboratory studies on Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority: An
obedience provide valuable insights into some of experimental view. New York: Harper & Row.
the conditions that lead people to act in seemingly Miller, A. G. (2004). What can the Milgram obedience
uncharacteristic and sometimes horrific ways. experiments tell us about the Holocaust? Generalizing
Researchers have also applied findings from the from the social psychology laboratory. In A. G. Miller
obedience studies to other important concerns. (Ed.), The social psychology of good and evil
Investigations into airline crashes suggest crew (pp. 193–239). New York: Guilford.
members are often reluctant to challenge a flight Miller, A. G., Collins, B. E., & Brief, D. E. (Eds.). (1995).
captain’s judgment, even when they believe a cap- Perspectives on obedience to authority: The legacy of
tain’s instructions are in error. Similarly, medical the Milgram experiments [Special issue]. Journal of
personnel may follow a physician’s orders, such as Social Issues, 51(3).
administering an unusual dose of medicine, even
when they believe the action might harm the patient.
Milgram’s results have also been used to explain
why followers of a cult leader sometimes obey Opinion Deviance
orders to act in harmful or self-destructive ways.
One persistent question about Milgram’s Deviance can be loosely defined as any conduct
research is whether the results would be replicated that diverges from normative expectations. These
if the studies were conducted today. Ethical con- expectations may originate from observations of
cerns prevent researchers from unequivocally what most people actually do or say in specific
answering the question, but a recent partial repli- situations or from socially transmitted proposi-
cation of Milgram’s procedure provides some tions that are internalized by individuals and
insight. The investigator noted that most of the stipulate what, in general, people ought to do or
Opinion Deviance 617

say. For the present purposes, the important point Social Reality, Group
is that people who fail to meet these expectations Locomotion, and Group Influence
often attract disapproval from other people. Such
disapproval may translate into negative evalua- The foregoing ideas underlie Leon Festinger’s clas-
tions of the deviants or even their expulsion from sic 1950 theory of informal social communication.
their group. In this theory, Festinger stressed the paramount
role of consensus in groups. In many situations, he
argued, we validate our perceptions by means of
Consensus in Small Groups
objective reality checks, through clues that are
Social psychology is typically concerned with the immediately accessible to our senses (e.g., boiling
impact of deviance on people who behave in nor- water burns the skin; hitting a drum makes a
matively appropriate ways and with the conditions noise). However, perhaps our most important and
that shape their reactions toward deviants. Most meaningful beliefs (e.g., whether the death penalty
of what is known about opinion deviance stems is right, whether God exists, whether abortion is
from traditional social-psychological literature on acceptable) cannot be validated by direct evidence.
small-group processes. Small groups are typically Yet, if we could not validate such beliefs, we would
conceived of as social units composed of 3 to experience a permanent state of uncertainty, with
15 interacting individuals who are attached to one associated anxiety, perhaps even helplessness. The
another by reciprocal positive affective ties (e.g., solution is to find an alternative process of valida-
friendship), who interdependently achieve com- tion, and this process is to check our beliefs against
mon goals, who share a common fate, and who the opinions of others (i.e., social consensus).
perceive themselves as a more or less tangible According to Festinger, the stronger the social
entity. Perhaps the clearest way to understand the consensus for our beliefs, the more confident we
impact of opinion deviance is to ask why people are about their accuracy. Therefore, we are moti-
join face-to-face groups in the first place. vated to compare our beliefs, not with those of a
Consider what happens when we enter a new representative sample of other individuals, but
social environment (e.g., a new school, a new job, rather with those of a biased sample of individuals
a new neighborhood). Would we affiliate with who are likely to agree with us. The theory of
anyone at random? Would we affiliate with people informal social communication thus proposes that
who have opinions and attitudes different from group consensus helps fulfill a social reality func-
ours and who might therefore contribute a richer, tion, allowing group members to gain a sense of
more diversified, and, hence, more accurate under- validity for their beliefs through selective affilia-
standing of the world? Or would we affiliate with tion with those who share similar beliefs. Associated
people who, from the outset, are likely to agree with this function, there is also a locomotion func-
with our own views, while we overtly or tacitly tion of consensus, allowing group members to
avoid those who have different opinions? Provided cooperate in order to reach goals that they could
that everyone is equally available (for instance, in not accomplish in isolation. Consensus thus oper-
terms of geographical proximity), the last of the ates as a psychosocial source of subjective validity,
three alternatives is most likely. as well as a means to accomplish one’s aspirations.
Clearly, we do not see everyone as an equally Clearly, the emergence of opinion deviance in such
attractive candidate for affiliation. We usually a context represents a psychological threat because
prefer to affiliate with people who espouse the it generates uncertainty and jeopardizes goal
same attitudes and beliefs as we do. These people achievement.
strengthen our convictions and increase the likeli- Research shows that uniformity among group
hood that we can achieve our goals as group members is facilitated by two forces operating in
members. This is also why, once groups are the group. These are what Morton Deutsch and
formed, their members devote a significant amount Harold Gerard termed informational influence
of time and energy to establishing group norms, and normative influence. Informational influence
reinforcing group consensus, and preventing group is directly related to the social reality function of
deviance. consensus and the motivation to avoid uncertainty.
618 Opinion Deviance

It occurs when we accept information provided by the slider went down. After the discussion, partici-
other people as objective and trustworthy evidence pants were asked to evaluate the confederates. In
about reality. In contrast, normative influence is general, the deviant received more rejection than
associated with the desire to be liked and to avoid the slider or the mode, who were liked about
disapproval by relevant others. It occurs when we equally, and the deviant was generally rejected
comply with their opinions or behavior, not more when the group was cohesive and the discus-
because we agree with them or believe they are sion topic was relevant to the group’s purpose.
telling us the truth, but rather because we wish From the participants’ standpoint, the slider had
them to view us in positive ways. These two forms been “socialized” to accept the group’s views and
of influence facilitate group uniformity. On one hence was treated like a regular member (the
hand, they are based on motivations that lead mode). The deviant, however, was harming the
group members to express similar opinions and to group’s social reality and locomotion and there-
display similar behavior. On the other hand, their fore was rejected.
operation reinforces such motivations, thus reduc-
ing the likelihood that group members will deviate
Inclusive and Exclusive
from the group’s normative views or behavior.
Reactions to Deviants
However, they are not always enough to prevent
divergence on the part of some group members. As suggested by John Levine and his colleagues,
How do other members react when such diver- groups may deal with deviants in a variety of
gence occurs? ways, depending on the relative power of the nor-
mative members and the deviants in the group.
Some of these involve inclusive attempts to reinte-
Deviance and Strategies
grate the deviants into the group, whereas others
to Restore Group Uniformity
involve exclusive reactions, in which the group
A classic study conducted by Stanley Schachter, in redefines its boundaries by expelling the deviants.
1951, illustrates the typical social-psychological Schachter’s communication data illustrate a
experiment designed to study reactions of group particular type of inclusive reaction, attempted
members to opinion deviance. In that study, influence. The normative members of the group
groups of several university students participated directed their communication to deviants in a per-
in a discussion. Unknown to the other participants, suasive attempt to lead the deviants back to the
three group members were confederates instructed group’s modal opinion. Often, this communica-
to play either a modal role (involving full and con- tion pressure is effective, either because the devi-
sistent agreement with the modal opinion of the ants are truly persuaded by the group consensus or
group), a deviant role (involving full and consist- because they wish to avoid disapproval or a mar-
ent disagreement with the modal opinion), or a ginal status. It is interesting that persuasive efforts
slider role (involving initial disagreement followed toward deviants do not depend on the need for a
by gradual movement to agreement). The issue fully consensual agreement. Other studies show
under discussion was the best strategy to handle a that communication pressures are also strong
case of juvenile delinquency. Schachter varied when the group must reach a majority, rather than
whether the group was high or low in cohesiveness a fully consensual, opinion. Cross-cultural research
and whether the case was relevant or irrelevant to conducted by Schachter and colleagues in Belgium,
the group’s purpose. During the discussion, he France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway,
observed the amount of communication partici- Sweden, and the United Kingdom obtained results
pants directed to each confederate. Results indi- similar to those found in the United States.
cated that the most overall communication was Research has also established several factors
directed to the deviant, the next most to the slider, that increase group members’ motivation to exert
and the least to the mode. Moreover, communica- communication pressures on deviants. For exam-
tion to the deviant tended to increase over time in ple, motivation to persuade deviants increases with
most conditions, whereas communication to the the interpersonal similarity among group mem-
mode remained constant, and communication to bers, with their interdependence for rewards, with
Opinion Deviance 619

their desire to be in the group, with deviants’ per- compromise and minority influence. Compromise
ceived responsiveness to communication pressures, refers to opinion convergence, in which deviants
with the strength of situational demands for con- and normative members shift toward each other’s
sensus, and with the amount of outside threat to position. Compromise is more likely when norma-
the group. tive members are not certain about the validity of
It is interesting that some of the above factors their position, such as in newly formed groups that
also have been shown to affect the propensity to have not yet defined their beliefs and values.
abandon persuasive efforts and to engage in exclu- Minority influence, in which deviants cause nor-
sive reactions toward the deviants through redefi- mative members to move to their position, can be
nition of the group’s boundaries. This latter produced by both high-status and low-status devi-
reaction occurs when, in spite of communication ants. The former kind of influence is illustrated by
pressures directed toward them, deviants persist in Edwin Hollander’s work on idiosyncrasy credits,
their position, thus making it clear that communi- which demonstrates that members taking deviant
cation is ineffective. In this case, deviants may be positions can produce innovation in a group only
deprecated, marginalized, punished, stigmatized, after they acquire legitimacy and status by showing
or even expelled from the group. This process is initial conformity to the group’s norms. The latter
more likely to occur when, for example, a consen- kind of influence is illustrated by Serge Moscovici’s
sual agreement has to be reached quickly. and Gabriel Mugny’s work showing that deviants
Expelling deviants can be beneficial to the without legitimacy or status can produce innova-
group for reasons beyond social reality and group tion if they generate uncertainty in normative mem-
locomotion. To illustrate, in 1984, Patrick Lauderdale bers by using certain kinds of behavioral style. This
and colleagues conducted a partial replication of can involve expressing their position in a consistent
Schachter’s experiment in which the future exist- and committed way, demonstrating its coherence
ence of a discussion group containing a deviant and situational adequacy, and showing flexibility
confederate either was or was not threatened by an by shifting from a prior extreme position to a more
external authority. At the end of the discussion, moderate one. Consistency and commitment to
participants learned that their group had to be their position increase the deviants’ salience. Once
reduced in size and were asked to evaluate other they are salient, deviants must demonstrate that
members in terms of whether they should stay or their position is coherent and adequate and there-
leave. As might be expected on the basis of fore should be attributed externally rather than to
Schachter’s findings, participants evaluated the their personal dispositions. If this demonstration is
deviant confederate unfavorably compared with successful, deviants create uncertainty as to the
the other members and ranked this person first to validity of the modal group position, which encour-
be excluded. In addition, negative evaluation of ages normative members to accept their innovative
and desire to exclude the deviant were stronger views. In showing flexibility, deviants facilitate
when the continuity of the group was threatened movement toward those views.
than when it was not. More important, when the In brief, the kind of strategy groups adopt to
group’s existence was threatened, the more strongly deal with deviance depends on a number of fac-
that majority members advocated the expulsion of tors, including the particular context in which
the deviant, the stronger the solidarity (i.e., cohe- deviance emerges (e.g., whether a quick decision
siveness) they expressed toward each other. This has to be reached, whether the group is under
result suggests that a group’s redefinition of its threat), the internal characteristics of the group
boundaries in the face of deviance can have posi- (e.g., whether members are similar to one another,
tive consequences beyond the removal of a disrup- whether they like each other and the group as a
tive person, in this case an increase in cohesiveness whole), the magnitude of deviance (e.g., the
among normative members. amount of discrepancy between the deviant posi-
Most of the research on reaction to deviants has tion and the modal position), the relative power of
focused on influence pressures and redefinition of the majority and the deviants (based, for example,
group boundaries. However, two types of inclusive on their expertise and status), and the deviants’
responses to deviants deserve mention, namely response to the pressures for compliance (e.g.,
620 Optimal Distinctiveness

whether they consistently defend their point of needs for belonging and differentiation. The upside
view and show some sensitivity to the majority’s of achieving optimal social identity is that secure
reaction). The topic of reaction to deviance, group identity enhances well-being and motivates
although an old one in social psychology, contin- positive social behavior. The downside is that
ues to stimulate new theoretical and empirical insecure group identity motivates exclusion, intol-
work, as illustrated by current research on the erance, and possibly intergroup hatred. This entry
black sheep effect and subjective group dynamics, begins with a fuller description of optimal distinc-
which are discussed in other entries. tiveness theory and then examines how it affects
self-identity and intergroup relations.
José M. Marques

See also Black Sheep Effect; Conformity; Group Definition and Background
Socialization; Informational Influence; Leadership;
Minority Influence; Normative Influence; Subjective For group membership to satisfy an individual’s
Group Dynamics need for meaning and coherence, the clarity of the
boundary that separates ingroup membership from
nonmembership becomes particularly important.
Further Readings This calls attention to the importance of the dis-
tinctiveness of social categories as a factor in group
Festinger, L. (1950). Informal social communication.
identification. Optimal distinctiveness theory pro-
Psychological Review, 57, 271–282.
Levine, J. M. (1989). Reaction to opinion deviance in
vides a model of the psychological motives underly-
small groups. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), Psychology of ing the preference for distinctive social identities.
group influence (pp. 187–231). Hillsdale, NJ: According to the optimal distinctiveness model,
Lawrence Erlbaum. social identities derive from a fundamental tension
Levine, J. M., & Kerr, N. L. (2007). Inclusion and between two competing social needs—the need for
exclusion: Implications for group processes. In inclusion on one hand and a countervailing need
A. E. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Social for uniqueness and individuation on the other.
psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., People seek social inclusion to alleviate or avoid
pp. 759–784). New York: Guilford. the isolation, vulnerability, or stigmatization that
Moscovici, S. (1976). Social influence and social change. may arise from being highly individuated.
London: Academic Press. Researchers studying the effects of tokenism and
Schachter, S. (1951). Deviation, rejection, and solo status have generally found that individuals
communication. Journal of Abnormal and Social are both uncomfortable and cognitively disadvan-
Psychology, 46, 190–207. taged in situations in which they feel too dissimilar
Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Milton Keynes, from others, or too much like “outsiders.” On the
UK: Open University Press. other hand, too much similarity, or excessive dein-
dividuation, provides no basis for self-definition,
and hence individuals are also uncomfortable in
situations in which they lack distinctiveness. Being
Optimal Distinctiveness “just a number” in a large, undifferentiated mass
of people is just as unpleasant as being too alone.
“Everyone needs to belong.” “Everyone needs to Because of these opposing social needs, social
be unique.” That fact that both these statements identities are selected to achieve a balance between
are true is the basis for Marilynn Brewer’s theory needs for inclusion and for differentiation in a given
of optimal distinctiveness, which helps to explain social context. Optimal identities are those that
why we join social groups and become so attached satisfy the need for inclusion within one’s own
to the social categories of which we are part. group and simultaneously serve the need for differ-
Optimal distinctiveness theory is about social entiation through distinctions between one’s own
identity, that is, how we come to define ourselves group and other groups. In effect, optimal social
in terms of our social group memberships. Secure identities involve shared distinctiveness. (Think of
inclusion in a distinctive ingroup serves human adolescents’ trends in clothes and hairstyles: Each
Optimal Distinctiveness 621

teenager is anxious to be as much like others of giving the person feedback that indicates that he
their age group as possible, while at the same time or she is on the margins of the ingroup—results in
differentiating themselves from the older genera- increased levels of self-stereotyping. Adopting the
tion.) To satisfy both needs, individuals will select traits that are considered to be stereotypical of the
group identities that are inclusive enough that they ingroup and considering them to be more self-
have a sense of being part of a larger collective but descriptive align the self more closely with the
exclusive enough that they provide some basis for ingroup and make a person appear more represen-
distinctiveness from others. tative of the group. Thus, enhanced self-stereotyping
(assimilation to ingroup characteristics and
norms) is one mechanism for restoring a loss of
Importance and Implications
inclusiveness.
Optimal distinctiveness theory has direct implica- Because enhancing ingroup similarity also
tions for self-concept at the individual level and for enhances contrast between the ingroup and out-
intergroup relations at the group level. Research groups, self-stereotyping also serves to preserve or
testing the basic assumption of optimal distinctive- restore ingroup distinctiveness. Consistent with the
ness theory has demonstrated that individuals adapt assumptions of optimal distinctiveness theory,
their self-image to maintain or restore optimal iden- research has found that members of distinctive
tities, prefer membership in groups that are rela- minority groups exhibit more self-stereotyping
tively small and distinctive, and defend or restore than members of large majority groups. In addi-
group boundaries if distinctiveness is threatened. tion, people tend to self-stereotype more when the
distinctiveness of their group has been challenged.
Optimal Identity and Self-Stereotyping
Identification With Minority Groups
If individuals are motivated to sustain identifi-
cation with optimally distinct social groups, then Optimal distinctiveness theory accounts for the
the self-concept should be adapted to fit the nor- pervasive finding that social identification and
mative requirements of such group memberships. ingroup favoritism are greater for members of
Achieving optimal social identities should be asso- minority groups than for majority group members.
ciated with a secure and stable self-concept in Further, when individuals belong to multiple social
which one’s own characteristics are congruent categories, they prefer to be associated with their
with being a good and typical group member. smaller, distinctive group memberships rather than
Conversely, if optimal identity is challenged or larger, majority ingroups. This group size effect has
threatened, the individual should react to restore been obtained in both laboratory and field studies,
congruence between the self-concept and the group despite the fact that minority status is often associ-
representation. Optimal identity can be restored ated with other social disadvantages. Experimental
either by adjusting individual self-concept to be evidence indicates that when the need for differen-
more consistent with the group norms or by shift- tiation is activated, individuals value minority cat-
ing social identification to a group that is more egory membership more than membership in
congruent with the self. majority groups, regardless of other status differen-
Self-stereotyping is one mechanism for match- tials between ingroup and outgroup.
ing the self-concept to characteristics that are Because they are distinctive and clearly bounded,
distinctively representative of particular group minority groups meet their members’ needs for
memberships. People stereotype themselves and optimal social identity more effectively than major-
others in terms of salient social categorizations, ity groups do. This helps account for the finding
and this stereotyping leads to an enhanced percep- that identification and attachment to minority
tual similarity between self and one’s own group ingroups is often quite high, even when such
members and an enhanced contrast between one’s groups are socially disadvantaged or stigmatized.
own group and other groups. Results of experi- In fact, evidence suggests that strong social identi-
mental studies have demonstrated that threaten- fication provides a psychological buffer that pro-
ing an individual’s standing in the group—that is, tects self-esteem among members of groups that
622 Optimal Distinctiveness

are devalued or negatively stereotyped by majority likely to adhere to the group’s standards and dis-
group members. Thus, group identity may play a criminate against members of other groups. For
particularly important role in enhancing self-worth example, new pledges to a sorority are often more
and subjective well-being for individuals who have likely than the more senior sorority members to
stigmatizing characteristics or belong to disadvan- wear clothing with sorority letters and to attend
taged social categories. functions held by the sorority. Ironically, these
In effect, some of the potential negative effects noncentral group members may be even more
of belonging to a social minority may be offset by likely than those who truly embody the group
the identity value of secure inclusion in a distinc- attributes to notice and punish others for violating
tive social group. Results of survey research have the norms and standards of the group.
revealed a positive relationship between strength When given the power, marginal group mem-
of ethnic identity and self-worth among minority bers may also be more discriminating in determin-
group members, and some experimental studies ing who should belong in the group and who
have demonstrated that individuals’ self-esteem should be excluded—for example, when it comes
can be enhanced by their being classified in a dis- time to decide on the next group of new pledges.
tinctive, minority social category. In experimental studies, it has been demonstrated
that when individuals are made to feel that they
are marginal (atypical) group members, they
Defending Group Distinctions
become more stringent about requirements for
Finally, because distinctive group identities are group membership and more likely to exclude
so important to one’s sense of self, people are very strangers from their group.
motivated to maintain group boundaries—to pro- When the clarity of the distinction between
tect the distinctiveness of their groups by enhanc- ingroup and outgroups is threatened, highly identi-
ing differences with other groups and limiting fied ingroup members also respond by becoming
membership to “people like us.” When individuals more competitive in dealings with outgroup mem-
are told that their ingroup characteristics are very bers. Ingroup favoritism in the allocation of rewards
similar to everyone else in a larger, more inclusive or resources to ingroup and outgroup members
category, ingroup distinctiveness and clarity are becomes one way to restore the differentiation
threatened. Individuals react to such information between ingroup and outgroup. Under these cir-
by reasserting the distinctive features of their cumstances, a cooperative exchange that would
group, enhancing intragroup similarity and soli- benefit both the ingroup and the outgroup may be
darity, and becoming more stringent about the rejected in favor of a competitive option in which
standards for inclusion in the ingroup. the overall benefit is less but the ingroup gets more
For instance, when students in a particular uni- than the outgroup. Ensuring that the ingroup gets
versity have been given survey data that suggest more in comparison with the outgroup not only
that they are “very typical of college students enhances the status of the ingroup relative to the
everywhere,” they increase the number of traits outgroup but also increases intergroup distance.
that members must have to be “good representa- Thus, preserving the distinctiveness of the ingroup
tives” of their university and reduce the number of may motivate intergroup discrimination and bias.
people who are included as “true” ingroup mem-
bers. Thus, threats to distinctiveness lead members Marilynn B. Brewer
to define the ingroup in a more exclusionary way. See also Inclusion/Exclusion; Need for Belonging;
Being restrictive and excluding others from the Self-Categorization Theory; Social Identity Theory
group may serve an important function for group
members’ own sense of belonging. In effect, exclu-
sion may be one way that individuals are able to
enhance their own feelings of group inclusion. In Further Readings
fact, those who are the least secure in their mem- Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same
bership status (e.g., new members of a group or and different at the same time. Personality and Social
marginalized members) are sometimes the most Psychology Bulletin, 17, 475–482.
Organizations 623

Brewer, M. B. (2003). Optimal distinctiveness, social specific goals is extremely difficult, and most mem-
identity, and the self. In M. Leary & J. Tangney (Eds.), bers do not agree on what the organization’s over-
Handbook of self and identity (pp. 480–491). all goals are, much less the relative priority of goals
New York: Guilford. for the subunits in the organization. Classic orga-
Pickett, C., Bonner, B., & Coleman, J. (2002). Motivated nizational theorists Richard Cyert and James
self-stereotyping: Heightened assimilation and March proposed that organizations deal with this
differentiation needs result in increased levels of by setting a general aspiration level, which is
positive and negative self-stereotyping. Journal of adjusted through experience with the environment.
Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 543–562.
Modern managers implement this idea through
Pickett, C., & Brewer, M. B. (2005). The role of
programs such as management by objectives. This
exclusion in maintaining in-group inclusion. In
approach emphasizes participatively set objectives
D. Abrams, M. Hogg, & J. Marques (Eds.), Social
that are tangible, verifiable, and measurable.
psychology of inclusion and exclusion (pp. 89–112).
New York: Psychology Press.
Managers at all levels participate in setting objec-
tives for each organizational unit, which are
aligned with the overall organizational objectives.
The approach facilitates goal commitment through
Organizations the participation of managers at all levels.
One way that organizations attempt to keep
An organization is a social structure created by members aligned with and focused on objectives is
individuals to support the collaborative pursuit of to base employee rewards on attainment of them.
specified goals. Organizations can be found in a Pay for performance and bonus programs have
variety of shapes and sizes, ranging from very become increasingly popular in organizations,
large, formal, bureaucratic forms in government with rewards based on how many objectives were
to very small, informal, and decentralized collec- met and how well they were met. Although this
tives in cyberspace. Organizations serve as the form of feedback is effective in many situations,
building blocks of modern society and offer the some have argued that overreliance on such sys-
possibility for individuals to accomplish things tems can bring about dysfunctional consequences.
they could never accomplish in isolation. Whatever Pay for performance systems can breed dishonesty
their shape or size, all organizations must address or encourage employees to focus only on specified
a number of common issues in order to work goals while overlooking other activities that would
effectively. This entry discusses the issues that also be beneficial to the organization. Research on
organizations and work groups experience in internal motivation suggests that instead of relying
defining shared objectives, selecting and training solely on monetary rewards, it is important for
members, developing systems for control and management to give employees meaningful work,
coordination, interacting with the environment, knowledge of results, and autonomy in making
and providing leadership. It concludes with an decisions about how work is done. High internal
overview of recent trends with respect to groups motivation leads workers to strive to do good
in organizations and the methods researchers use work even in the absence of significant external
to examine these and other organizational issues. rewards and to complete tasks for the good of the
organization even when those tasks are not for-
mally part of their job.
Defining Objectives
Although having a shared objective is part of the
Selection and Training of Members
definition of an organization, many organizations
struggle to develop clear shared objectives. Research Individuals joining an organization are generally
on goal setting has shown that, at the individual expected to enact a certain role. A role is defined
level, the specificity and difficulty of goals are very by a set of expected behavior patterns, which can
influential in performance, as is the individual’s include individual tasks and responsibilities as well
level of commitment to achieving the goal. At the as the ways in which work relates to that of others
organizational level, however, setting clear and in the organization. Roles and role systems are key
624 Organizations

defining features of organizations. Identifying roles Control and Coordination


and finding the right people to fill various roles in of Member Contributions
an organization occupy a lot of the time and
energy of management in formal organizations. In Once an organization has identified its objectives
more informal or fluid organizations, such as the and the people to carry out those objectives, it
volunteer organizations that work on Wikipedia must go about organizing people to complete the
or Linux, roles are defined and filled through more work. This involves decisions about how to con-
of a self-selection process. trol individuals’ work as well as how to coordinate
As an individual joins an organization and individual contributions so that they lead to the
comes to occupy a role, others in the organization accomplishment of organizational objectives.
attempt to influence the new individual’s behavior Early work on the topic of organizational struc-
so that it will conform to the norms and social ture conducted by theorists such as Max Weber
values of the organization. Just as people living and Frederick Taylor followed an approach best
together in a nation share an identifiable national described as machine theory. The organization is
culture, people working together in an organiza- viewed as a machine that can follow precise speci-
tion develop a shared organizational culture. fications for turning inputs, such as people and
Organizational culture refers to a system of shared materials, into outputs. Work done in this tradi-
meaning developed and perpetuated by members tion assumes that tasks can be broken down into
that distinguishes the organization from other elemental parts, which can be assigned to individu-
organizations. Different organizational cultures als and then coordinated in such a way as to
involve different rituals and social norms for how achieve maximum efficiency and uniformity with
to dress, how to speak, what hours to keep, and no duplication of function. In so doing, command
so on. Organizational cultures vary in terms of is centralized, and supervision is provided in the
their strength, or how intensely held and widely optimal ratio of worker to manager, such that the
shared the members’ beliefs are. Over time, new manager can adequately control all subordinates.
members are socialized to behave in ways that In the middle of the 20th century, theorists such as
conform to the culture of the organization or else James March and Herbert Simon began to observe
are forced out. an increasing number of situations in which rules
Because of this tendency of organizations to could not anticipate all the possible contingencies
bring about conformity in behavior, there is some an organization faced, and in such circumstances,
debate among scholars regarding the costs and control was best decentralized and local, with deci-
benefits of membership turnover. Some research sions made by workers who were closest to the
has demonstrated that membership change can be problems and had the best information. Today’s
costly to an organization or group because it cre- organizations generally use a mix of the two
ates social disruption as well as a loss in knowl- approaches, with some decisions centralized at the
edge and historical information about the top and others made by workers themselves.
organization’s or group’s work. Airline mishaps The particular form an organization takes to
are much more common during a crew’s first flight coordinate and control member inputs is partially
together, and long-standing research and develop- a function of the interdependence required among
ment groups exhibit productivity declines with the different subunits. James Thompson developed a
loss or gain of members, both serving as examples framework to describe the different types of inter-
of the costs of membership change. Other research- dependence characterizing work. Standard factory
ers argue that there can be benefits associated with piecework falls into what Thompson termed
membership change, in the form of new and more pooled interdependence because individual work-
creative ideas as well as the possibility of breaking ers are responsible for a whole piece of work, and
old and dysfunctional patterns. They point out the total output of the workers is added together
that long-standing management teams in organiza- to represent the output for the organization.
tions frequently fall into ruts that they break out of Classic assembly lines, such as those devised by
only when new members are brought in to shake Henry Ford at the beginning of the 20th century,
things up. reflect a sequential interdependence, in which the
Organizations 625

output of one worker becomes the input of results. Since that time, much research has been
another. However, much of the production in done, in both field and laboratory settings, on the
today’s knowledge work economy requires a more use of teams as an approach to organizational
complex level of coordination, what Thompson design. Beyond their initial use in manufacturing
termed reciprocal interdependence, in which work- and service provision, teams have become a major
ers both make use of and contribute to the work of engine of the growing knowledge economy, in
others, often in iterative fashion. Software engi- which new ideas in many sectors, including busi-
neering, product development, and biomedical ness, medicine, and scientific research, are the prod-
research all require this more complex approach to uct of the collaboration of team members who have
coordination. different backgrounds and expertise.
The interdependence requirements of work Although initially managers were concerned
inform the ways in which the organization is bro- that teams left to their own devices would under-
ken into smaller units. Most organizations are perform, researchers have found that team mem-
broken down into subunits, such as departments, bers often hold higher standards for one another’s
projects, or teams. These smaller work groups are behavior than managers could contemplate enforc-
the major building blocks of organizations because ing, delivering tough sanctions to members who
they tend to be more effective for providing the are perceived as not working hard enough. In addi-
supervision and social support that employees tion, teams that are trained together and remain
need. These units can be grouped by function, such intact can evolve very effective systems of coordi-
as marketing, operations, and accounting. How­ nating the knowledge and resources they hold
ever, when highly interdependent work among through the development of transactive memory
units is necessary, organizations frequently create systems, which can operate much more efficiently
product- or client-based groups or teams to facili- than more formal role systems.
tate the reciprocal interdependence necessary
among the different functions. Although tradition-
Interaction With Environment
ally these units were created and headed by a man-
ager who made most of the decisions about how Although the decisions an organization makes
work was conducted, more and more organiza- internally with respect to motivating and coordi-
tions are decentralizing this control to teams, nating work are important to its success, other
which manage themselves. organizations in the environment can be just as, if
Creating small groups within an organization not more, important. Far from existing in a vac-
not only helps management attend to the technical uum, organizations exist in an environment popu-
needs of task interdependence but also enables lated by other organizations and entities with
managers to attend to the social and emotional which they must interact. These other organiza-
needs of employees, which promotes good perfor- tions assert a strong influence in determining an
mance. The emergence of the team idea in organi- organization’s success in attaining its goals. These
zations can be traced back to the late 1920s and other entities might be competitors, suppliers, cus-
early 1930s and the now-classic Hawthorne stud- tomers, or partners. Sometimes the same external
ies. These involved a series of research activities entity might occupy multiple roles; a customer for
designed to examine in depth what happened to a one product, a competitor on another, and a sup-
group of workers under various conditions. After plier on yet another. Those who adopt the open-
much analysis, the researchers agreed that the most systems view of organizational boundaries argue
significant factor was building a sense of group that it can be difficult at times to delineate exactly
identity, a feeling of social support and cohesion where the boundaries of an organization end and
that came with increased worker interaction. Other the “environment” begins. In addition to the mul-
researchers focused on helping to solve some prob- tifaceted relationships organizations have with
lems at the Harwood Manufacturing Company, in each other, the relationships among the people
rural Virginia, by designing group-based interven- who make up any organization can be similarly
tions to increase worker involvement and participa- multifaceted. As more and more organizations are
tion in organizational improvements, with impressive made up of contract, temporary, or even volunteer
626 Organizations

employees, more of these individuals are affiliated that it is challenging to get a group of workers to
with multiple organizations, making the boundar- understand and endorse a new set of goals or pro-
ies among them less easily discerned. cesses and to change their behavior accordingly in
Although organizational boundaries may be a coordinated fashion.
loose at times with respect to employment rela-
tionships, the marketplace is very clear about
Leadership
which entity absorbs the financial impact of its
activities, creating serious competitive dynamics Over time, the understanding of leadership reflected
among organizations. Competition can be very in research has shifted away from an understand-
motivating, but it can also fuel some of the nega- ing of leadership in terms of who a leader is and
tive intergroup dynamics discussed elsewhere in toward an understanding of what leaders do.
this volume. Members of groups that are in com- Traditionally, research on leadership has focused
petition with one another exhibit cognitive biases, on the kinds of people that were the most likely to
in which members overestimate their own group’s emerge as leaders, identifying various personality
abilities and underestimate those of competitors. and behavioral traits that correlated with leader-
Group members also generate stereotypes of the ship emergence. In the 1960s and 1970s, research-
outgroup and judge outgroup members’ actions ers began to explore contingency models of
more harshly and with more negative attributions leadership, acknowledging the importance of the
than their own. In addition to the negative social match between the person and the situation. Even
impact such dynamics can generate, they can ulti- more recent are the behavioral theories of leader-
mately have a negative impact on an organiza- ship, the most comprehensive based on the Ohio
tion’s survival, because biased interpretations of State studies, which narrowed a thousand dimen-
events can lead to a failure to recognize when a sions of leadership behavior down to two: initiat-
change in organizational strategy is needed. ing structure and consideration. Along with this
Many organizational researchers concern them- more behavioral approach, researchers have
selves with understanding how organizations adapt explored different styles leaders can employ for
to changes in their environment. One view, known carrying out these functions, with charismatic and
as the population ecology tradition, maintains that transformational leadership among the more
organizations do not make large adaptations but widely researched styles.
simply die out, and new organizations form to take Leadership scholars generally agree that basic
their place. An alternative view is that organiza- intelligence, courage, and interpersonal skill are all
tions can make even radical adaptations to stay necessary ingredients for effectively carrying out
afloat in a competitive environment. Research on leadership functions and are not easily learned.
organizational learning is concerned with the ways Beyond these basic components, most writers on
in which organizations adapt to the environment the topic argue that leadership skills can be
and improve their processes to enhance their per- acquired through training and experience. Business
formance. The changes that organizations make and professional schools have launched many
can vary in their level of difficulty to implement, courses on leadership on the basis of this premise
with some consisting of single-loop learning, or and strive to teach the best approaches for devel-
changes that are made without altering underlying oping leadership.
practices and routines, and others consisting of In addition to the question of whether leaders
double-loop learning, which involves change in are born or made, leadership scholars debate
fundamental organizational policies and practices. whether leadership is the domain of a single indi-
Some researchers of organizational learning exam- vidual or can be shared. Successful top manage-
ine how organizations progress through learning ment teams, and groups such as the conductorless
curves by accumulating gradual improvements Orpheus Chamber Orchestra, are heralded as
over time and incorporating the learning in the examples of how leadership can be exercised by a
form of new routines, structures, and technologies. collective. Research has explored the conditions
Most agree that learning is difficult for organiza- that promote the success of a team to lead an orga-
tions: Research and experience both demonstrate nization, finding that these conditions are similar
Organizations 627

to those needed for groups and organizations to need to be generated, for example, but generally
succeed in general—a clear purpose, the right underperform face-to-face teams on decision-
people, and the right strategy for coordinating making tasks. Although decision support systems
members’ work. can improve performance slightly, decisions made
from afar still tend to take more time, involve less
exchange of information, and result in less partici-
Recent Trends in Teams and Organizations
pant satisfaction with the outcome than is the case
Although traditional conceptions of an organiza- with face-to-face teams.
tion have involved notions of people working face-
to-face in a shared organizational space, both
Temporary Project Teams and
globalization and the Internet have stretched the
Multiple Team Membership
notion of what it means to be an organization.
Thanks to technology, goods are purchased, ser- A separate but related trend in organizations
vices are rendered, and payments exchanged, all involves membership on temporary or multiple
without tangible evidence of human involvement. simultaneous teams. Although classic research on
Although a growing number of organizations the conditions necessary for team success point to
exist entirely on the Internet, even traditional orga- the benefits of stable, bounded teams that stay
nizations are increasingly convening work groups intact long enough for members to develop a solid
or teams that are “virtual.” In addition, as opposed base of trust and cohesion, organizational struc-
to belonging to one group or department, organi- tures are becoming more dynamic and flexible and
zation members may be participants in multiple hence create the opposite conditions for many
groups within the organization simultaneously, a teams. An increasing number of organizations are
phenomenon that poses new challenges for the structured around projects, involving teams that
development of group identity and the coordina- work on a temporary basis. Although some of
tion of work. Both of these trends enhance the core these temporary teams work well, others struggle,
difficulties that organizations experience. and researchers are only beginning to understand
the conditions necessary for effective temporary
teams. It is also increasingly the case in project-
Distributed Teams
based organizations that individuals divide their
Distributed, or virtual, teams are composed of time among multiple teams simultaneously, lever-
members who reside in different physical locations aging their expertise in different areas as it is
and who carry out their work with few or no face- needed. In such a situation, the employment rela-
to-face meetings. Distributed teams can vary in the tionship as traditionally conceived is turned on its
degree to which members are distributed. Some head: Instead of managers carefully devising roles
teams might simply be split in half, with members and coordinating role systems, individual employ-
at two different locations, and other teams might ees craft their own jobs through involvement in
have members who are each at their own unique different projects and bear much of the responsi-
location. In addition to degree of distribution, dis- bility for coordination.
tributed teams can also vary with respect to how Both these trends pose challenges in the areas
much asynchrony characterizes their communica- that are challenging to organizations more gener-
tions. Synchronous communications consist of ally: how to define and prioritize among compet-
face-to-face meetings, conference calls, or video ing objectives, select individuals and socialize them
conferences, whereas asynchronous communica- in such a diverse environment, coordinate work,
tions occur through e-mail, voice messages, or interface among projects, and provide a unity of
threaded online discussions. As increasing num- leadership when many leaders are involved.
bers of organizations have had experience with Although working in a distributed manner and on
distributed teams, it has become clear that elec- multiple projects can be tolerated well in some
tronic communication among members is not a circumstances, allowing individuals and teams to
panacea. Distributed teams do relatively well with experience increased autonomy and learning and
innovation tasks for which ideas and solutions enriched social networks, other circumstances lead
628 Ostracism

to individual stress and team disintegration. departments, as well as in economics, business,


Ongoing research is investigating the conditions medicine, law, computer science, and public pol-
that allow such systems to operate effectively. icy, among other academic programs. The diver-
sity of approaches to organizational research is
very useful given the diversity of organizations
Studying Organizations
themselves.
The issues discussed so far require an eclectic set of
research tools. Some phenomena are observable Anita Williams Woolley
only in field settings, and so their investigation See also Action Research; Boundary Spanning; Culture;
requires a variety of field research methods, includ- Group Performance; Identification and Commitment;
ing observations, interviews, and surveys. Such Job Design; Leadership; Personnel Turnover; Roles;
research requires a high degree of cooperation Self-Managing Teams; Transactive Memory Systems;
from an organizational sponsor, as well as a broad Virtual/Internet Groups; Work Teams
base of participation from organizational mem-
bers. Conducting a quantitative field study neces-
sitates a relatively large sample size (frequently Further Readings
upwards of 200 respondents) to ensure a broad Argote, L. (1999). Organizational learning: Creating,
cross section of the organization and enough intact retaining, and transferring knowledge. Norwell, MA:
groups for analysis. Researchers dealing with Kluwer Academic.
quantitative data from multiple organizational Argyris, C. (1999). On organizational learning. Malden,
groups often must use advanced statistical tech- MA: Blackwell.
niques to account for the lack of independence of Barker, J. R. (1993). Tightening the iron cage: Concertive
members of the same group, or clusters of indi- control in self-managing teams. Administrative Science
viduals within organizational departments or units, Quarterly, 38(3), 408–437.
because such nonindependence of observations Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory
violates the assumptions of traditional regression of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
models. Locating good measures of performance March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations.
in field research can also be a challenge because New York: John Wiley
most organizations do not maintain systematic Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work
evaluations of performance. In addition to collect- redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
ing survey or observational data, some researchers Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1966). The social psychology of
in organizations conduct quasi-experiments, for organizations. New York: John Wiley.
example, by introducing interventions to alter the Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal
behavior of experimental groups, which is then setting & task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
compared with the behavior of control groups that Prentice Hall.
did not receive the intervention. Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action. New
York: McGraw-Hill.
As an alternative to field research, some organi-
Wageman, R., Nunes, D. A., Burruss, J. A., &
zational researchers isolate variables of interest in
Hackman, J. R. (2008). Senior leadership teams:
an organizational setting but then study them in
What it takes to make them great. Boston: Harvard
the more controlled conditions of a laboratory.
Business School Press.
These researchers typically use traditional experi-
mental techniques commonly employed by
researchers in other traditions of psychology,
manipulating specific independent variables to
observe their effects on dependent variables. Ostracism
Regardless of the methods used, organizational
research is a fascinating and dynamic endeavor, Ostracism occurs when someone is ignored and
one that requires continuous innovation in meth- excluded by others. According to Kipling Williams
ods and theories. Organizational researchers can and his colleagues, the act of ostracism is an adap-
be found in traditional sociology and psychology tive response that occurs within groups as a
Ostracism 629

reaction to burdensome members who threaten Methods to


the group’s strength or safety. Ostracism can allow Experimentally Induce Ostracism
the ostracized individual to correct his or her
Ostracism research employs a variety of research
behavior or seek out other groups to join, thereby
methods, or paradigms. Whereas a robust and
ensuring the individual’s survival. Al­­though con-
consistent response (e.g., pain, distress, negative
sidered largely a group phenomenon, ostracism
emotion) occurs to all manipulations of ostracism,
can also occur within dyadic relationships, where
the variations noted above (emotional numbness,
it is commonly known as the silent treatment.
prosocial vs. antisocial responses) may reflect dif-
Since the mid-1990s, researchers have con-
ferences among the paradigms that are not yet
ducted hundreds of experiments assessing the
fully understood.
impact of ostracism (and the related phenomenon
of rejection) on an individual’s physiological Ball Tossing
responses, cognitions, emotions, and behaviors. A
variety of paradigms have been used to manipulate The ball-tossing paradigm is a face-to-face
ostracism and to measure its outcomes, resulting in interaction among individuals who are typically
converging evidence that even the slightest hint of waiting for an experimenter. The ball-tossing
ostracism is detected quickly and causes immediate emerges, apparently spontaneously, when some-
pain, distress, an embodied feeling of coldness, one (a confederate) notices a ball, picks it up, and
threatened needs (belonging, self-esteem, control, begins throwing it to the other participants. Only
and meaningful existence), and negative emotion. one participant is, in fact, naïve to the situation;
The evidence then diverges into different (some- the other two (both confederates) follow an inclu-
times paradoxical) behavioral responses. sion or ostracism script. Once each person has had
Often, behavioral responses to ostracism appear a chance to catch and throw the ball a few times,
to facilitate future inclusion in a group. For participants randomly assigned to the ostracism
instance, ostracized individuals have been observed condition are never again thrown the ball, nor are
to pay closer attention to social information and to they even looked at or responded to. The confeder-
better interpret nonverbal social signals related to ates continue playing enthusiastically for another
acceptance and liking (e.g., distinguishing between few minutes. In the inclusion condition, partici-
genuine and nongenuine smiles). Further, ostra- pants receive the ball just as often as anyone else.
cized individuals are more likely to mimic (con-
Cyberball
sciously and nonconsciously) others, to conform to
unanimous but incorrect majorities, to comply In the cyberball paradigm, participants are led to
with costly requests, and to behave in ways that believe they are tossing a virtual ball with other
make them appear more socially acceptable. alleged players via computers connected to the
However, researchers have also observed Internet. The cover story for the study is that the
ostracized individuals to feel emotionally numb researchers are interested in the effects of mental
and to be cognitively impaired (on complex visualization on a subsequent task, and the partici-
tasks) or to retaliate and aggress toward nonre- pants are told that a good way to warm up is to
sponsible others. When ostracism appears to be engage in a mental visualization exercise. The par-
permanent or heavily thwarts a sense of control, ticipants are told to use the cyberball experience as a
the emotional system appears to shut down, self- means to visualize the other alleged players, trying to
regulation is impaired, and antisocial responses imagine (for example) where those players are, what
increase. Current thinking is that when future they look like, and so on. Actually, the computer
inclusion is unlikely, desires to control one’s software controls participants’ levels of inclusion or
social environment and force others to acknowl- ostracism. The researcher programs the software to
edge one’s existence can trump desires to be direct the course and speed of the ball-toss game, the
liked, resulting in fewer prosocial actions (e.g., frequency of inclusion, player information, and
less volunteering, fewer donations, less coopera- iconic representations of every player. Ostracism is
tion), increased retaliation (e.g., noise blasts), manipulated by how often the ball is thrown to a
and aggression. participant. Typically, the ostracized participant
630 Ostracism

receives one or two throws at the beginning, but room, or cell phone text messages), role-playing,
after that, the other players throw the ball exclu- scenario descriptions of rejection and social exclu-
sively to one another. Inclusion occurs when a par- sion, relived or imagined rejection experiences,
ticipant receives the ball just as often as anyone else. daily diary entries, and virtual reality worlds.
Typically, the game proceeds for 20 to 40 throws.

Responses to Ostracism
Life Alone
Reflexive Reactions to Ostracism:
The life-alone prognosis paradigm involves a
Pain and Distress
manipulation of ostracism in which participants
respond to a personality questionnaire, receive Reflexive reactions to ostracism are relatively
accurate feedback about their levels of introversion insensitive to individual differences or situational
and extroversion, and then are given one of three context. Thus, they appear to be triggered prior to
additional forms of feedback. The participants in cognitive appraisals. Reflexive measures include
these studies are generally young individuals whose retrospective self-reports (“how were you feeling
lives are mostly still ahead of them. In the accepted, during the experience?”), online affective measures
high-belonging condition, participants are told (“turn a dial to indicate your current feelings of
that they are the type of person who has rewarding positivity/negativity”), and physiological responses
relationships throughout life, a long and stable (blood pressure, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex
marriage, and enduring friendships with people activation). For self-reports, participants are typi-
who care about them. In the rejected, low-belonging cally asked immediately after an episode of ostra-
condition, participants are told that they are the cism how they felt during that episode. These
type of person who ends up alone later in life, and measures contrast with reflective measures that
that although they have friends and relationships ask participants at a later point (between 5 and
now, by the time they are in their mid-20s, most of 45 minutes after an episode of ostracism) how they
these will disappear. Finally, in a negative-feedback are feeling right now. The “during” measures
control condition, participants are told that they assess ostracism’s immediate or reflexive impact;
will endure a lifetime of accidents and injuries. The the “right now” measures assess ostracism’s impact
purpose of this condition is to distinguish the after the initiation of cognitive, emotional, and
effects specific to ostracism from those associated behavioral coping mechanisms. The evidence sug-
with negative outcomes in general. gests that the immediate or reflexive reactions to
ostracism are painful and are not moderated by
individual differences or situational factors.
Get Acquainted Exceptions to unmoderated distress to ostra-
This paradigm involves the use of a small group cism appear to occur when the ostracism is more
of actual participants engaged in a get-acquainted ambiguous. Less severe or more ambiguous manip-
discussion. They are given examples of topics to ulations of ostracism allow individual differences
discuss (e.g., movies, college majors) and take turns (e.g., social anxiety, loneliness, rejection sensitiv-
talking within the group setting. After this discus- ity) and situational constraints (e.g., ostracism
sion, they are separated and asked to identify the from ingroup vs. outgroup members) to moderate
person in the group with whom they would most even immediate reactions. Partial ostracism is
like to work on an upcoming task. A few minutes another way in which the ostracism experience is
later, they are told by the researcher that either more ambiguous. Partial ostracism involves less
everyone wanted to work with them (inclusion) or exclusion than does complete ostracism and simul-
that no one wanted to work with them (rejection). taneously provides the individual with a glimmer
of hope for inclusion. Partial ostracism often
involves “out-of-the-loop experiences,” in which
Additional Paradigms
individuals are included in some, but not all,
Researchers have also employed manipulations aspects of group activity. These experiences
that involved conversations (i.e., face-to-face, chat also appear to engage cognitive appraisals that are
Outgroup Homogeneity Effect 631

sensitive to individual differences among ostracized cognitively impaired. Future research needs to
individuals and situational variations involving, for address the role of personality variables and situ-
example, who is ostracizing whom, and why. ational contexts that steer individuals down differ-
ent behavioral paths. Other factors, such as whether
Reflective Responses to Ostracism: individuals perceive the ostracism to be targeted at
Threatened Needs and Coping them as individuals or at their group memberships,
also merit attention as researchers begin to con-
The available evidence suggests that the reflex- sider ostracism on a larger scale, as when particu-
ive pain or distress signal is quickly followed by lar cultures, religions, and political ideologies are
appraisals and coping mechanisms that direct the the sources (or targets) of ostracism.
individual toward thoughts and feelings that alle-
viate the pain or fortify thwarted needs. In contrast Kipling D. Williams and
to reflexive responses, reflective responses to ostra- Adrienne R. Carter-Sowell
cism are sensitive to situational factors and indi-
vidual differences. Thus, one can repair damage to See also Cliques; Deviance; Discrimination; Inclusion/
Exclusion; Power; Sociometric Choice; Stigma
belonging or self-esteem needs by trying to behave
in ways that will meet the group’s approval, join-
ing a new group, or even thinking about strong
Further Readings
social ties in other realms of one’s life. Repairing
damage to control and existence needs, however, Eisenberger, N. I., Lieberman, M. D., & Williams, K. D.
might involve exerting social control over others, (2003). Does rejection hurt? An fMRI study of social
provoking recognition from others, and even being exclusion. Science, 302, 290–292.
aggressive toward others. Individual differences Williams, K. D. (2001). Ostracism: The power of silence.
can also moderate a broad collection of coping New York: Guilford Press.
responses to ostracism. Social anxiety, for instance, Williams, K. D. (2007). Ostracism. Annual Review of
moderates reflective responses to ostracism and Psychology, 58, 425–452.
Williams, K. D., Forgas, J. P., & von Hippel, W. (Eds).
also affects the rate of recovery. Socially anxious
(2005). The social outcast: Ostracism, social
individuals, when ostracized, are more likely to
exclusion, rejection, and bullying. New York:
ruminate about and thereby prolong the negative
Psychology Press.
impact of ostracism, and to experience threats to
self-regulation, than are individuals who are less
socially anxious.
Outgroup Homogeneity Effect
Conclusion
“They all look the same to me.” This kind of
Research on ostracism, social exclusion, and rejec- statement about an outgroup is often heard. The
tion has proliferated in the past decade, and the tendency to perceive outgroups as more homoge-
field of social psychology has benefited from a neous, or less variable, than ingroups is called the
considerable amount of theory and empirical evi- outgroup homogeneity effect. This entry describes
dence about these processes and their impact. how the outgroup homogeneity effect was first
Clearly, even for brief episodes with minimal mun- experimentally demonstrated, reviews evidence
dane realism, ostracism plunges people into a tem- examining the robustness of the effect, and dis-
porary state of misery, pain, distress, sadness, and cusses some factors that influence the magnitude
anger. It is also clear that exposures to short epi- of the effect.
sodes of ostracism, social exclusion, and rejection
lead to robust behavioral consequences, many of
Background Research
which can be characterized as potentially dysfunc-
tional to the individual’s well-being, such as In some of the first work on the outgroup homo-
becoming socially susceptible to influence, eager geneity effect, men and women were asked to
for social attention, antisocial and hostile, or rate men and women on positive and negative
632 Outgroup Homogeneity Effect

dimensions that were stereotypically masculine perceived to be the group mean on an attribute
or feminine. Results showed that over and above dimension. To make clear this distinction, imagine
any overall ingroup preference (i.e., rating one’s that one person sees a group on average more ste-
own group more positively than the outgroup), reotypically than another person does. It might still
participants judged the outgroup more stereo- be the case that they both agree on the actual vari-
typically than the ingroup. More specifically, ability within the group around the group average.
when participants were asked what percentage of Stereotypicality refers to the extremity of the group
each group had attributes that were consistent mean on stereotypic attributes. Dispersion refers to
with the group’s stereotype and what percentage the perceived variability around that group mean.
had attributes that were inconsistent with that It has been demonstrated that these two compo-
stereotype, they reported that the outgroup had nents of perceived group variability need not be
relatively more consistent group members and highly related to each other. However, outgroup
fewer inconsistent group members than did the homogeneity has been shown for both compo-
ingroup. These results represent strong support nents, although it appears to be larger for perceived
for the outgroup homogeneity effect because rat- stereotypicality than for perceived dispersion.
ings were collected from both groups, and the
effect was found for the men’s ratings and for the
Causes and Consequences
women’s ratings. In addition, the effect was found
of the Outgroup Homogeneity Effect
on positive as well as on negative stereotypic
attributes, indicating that it is independent of any To explain the outgroup homogeneity effect (why
tendency to see the outgroup as having relatively it occurs and what makes it stronger or weaker),
more members who are consistent with only researchers have asked participants to verbalize
negative attributes. And finally, the use of gender their thoughts while making group ratings. When
groups permits one to conclude that the effect reflecting on impressions of their ingroup, partici-
exists even when familiarity is high for both the pants made frequent references to the self and to
ingroup and the outgroup. specific subgroups of the ingroup. When consider-
The outgroup homogeneity effect has been ing the outgroup, mentions of the self or of specific
replicated with a wide variety of social groups in subgroups were notably scarce. From this and
addition to gender-defined groups: sororities, experi­ related results, it has been argued that the out-
­mentally created groups, and groups defined by group homogeneity effect is mainly due to the fact
age, nationality, and ethnicity. A meta-analysis of that people hold a much more complex representa-
the effect across published studies concluded that tion of the groups to which they belong than of
the outgroup homogeneity effect is a small but those to which they do not belong.
nevertheless robust effect. In addition, it appears A difference in familiarity between ingroups
that the effect is smaller with experimentally created and outgroups has been cited as a factor causing
groups than with real groups. the outgroup homogeneity effect, and this seems a
One interesting research development has been reasonable explanation in part. However, the fact
the identification of two different forms of per- that the effect has been shown with groups defined
ceived group variability and, therefore, of the out- by gender suggests that there are other factors that
group homogeneity effect. The first component of are also responsible for the effect, because one is
perceived variability is the degree to which a group likely to be as familiar with the gender outgroup as
is seen as having a relatively large number of peo- with the gender ingroup. In experimental contexts,
ple who confirm the stereotype, compared with the it has also been demonstrated that manipulations
proportion of those who do not. This component, of familiarity (i.e., getting to know more group
referred to as perceived stereotypicality, was origi- members) did not have a major impact on the
nally examined when outgroup homogeneity was magnitude of the outgroup homogeneity effect.
demonstrated with groups defined by gender, as There have also been explanations of outgroup
described above. The other component is the homogeneity that are more motivational in nature,
perceived dispersion of a group, that is, the extent suggesting that, to some extent, one is simultane-
to which group members vary around what is ously motivated to be a part of one’s ingroup and to
Outgroup Homogeneity Effect 633

be distinct or unique as an individual. This means outgroup stereotypes are more likely to be applied
that although one values one’s ingroup membership, to members of the outgroup than ingroup stereo-
one nevertheless also values a unique and distinctive types are to be applied to members of the ingroup.
identity. As a result, one may attribute these same In general, group stereotypes are more potent, in
desires to other ingroup members and hence come to that they have a greater influence on the judgment
see the ingroup as more diverse and variable than of individual group members, the less the perceived
the outgroup. variability of the group.
Some have argued that the outgroup homogene-
ity effect is moderated by the size and status of the Charles M. Judd and Nicolas Kervyn
ingroup relative to the outgroup. What is clear is See also Categorization; Optimal Distinctiveness;
that smaller groups and perhaps lower-status groups Perceived Group Variability; Social Identity Theory;
are sometimes judged to be more homogeneous. Stereotyping
And this effect of size and status on perceived vari-
ability may mean that participants who come from
minority groups may see the outgroup as less Further Readings
homogeneous than the ingroup. However, strictly
Linville, P. W., Fischer, G. W., & Salovey, P. (1989).
speaking, this difference in perceived variability is Perceived distributions of the characteristics of
not attributable to perceiving the outgroup as less in-group and out-group members: Empirical and a
homogeneous than the ingroup, because in this case computer simulation. Journal of Personality and
the outgroup–ingroup distinction is confounded Social Psychology, 57, 165–188.
with group size or status. We can think of this sim- Mullen, B., & Hu, L. (1989). Perceptions of in‑group and
ply as a group size or status effect on perceived out‑group variability: A meta‑analytic integration.
variability: Everyone agrees that smaller and low- Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 10, 233–252.
status groups are more homogeneous, and this Park, B., & Rothbart, M. (1982). Perception of out-
perception does not depend on whether the per- group homogeneity and levels of social categorization:
ceiver is a member of those groups. Memory for the subordinate attributes of in-group
Regarding the consequences of the outgroup and out-group members. Journal of Personality and
homogeneity effect, research has shown that Social Psychology, 42, 1051–1068.
P
(e.g., by emphasizing that certain behaviors are
Path–Goal Theory likely to lead to goal attainment).
of Leadership The term path–goal reflects the belief that effec-
tive leaders clarify the paths necessary for their
Path–goal theory was initially developed by Robert subordinates to achieve the subordinates’ goals.
House to explain workplace leadership. The theory Leaders can do this in two main ways. First, leaders
builds heavily on two theories of work motivation: can engage in behaviors that help subordinates
goal setting and expectancy theory. Goal-setting facilitate goal attainment (e.g., by providing infor-
theory suggests that an effective way to motivate mation and other resources necessary to obtain
people is to set challenging but realistic goals and to goals). Second, leaders can engage in behaviors that
offer rewards for goal accomplishment. Expectancy remove obstacles that might hinder subordinates’
theory explains why people work hard to attain pursuit of their goals (e.g., by removing workplace
work goals. People will engage in behaviors that factors that reduce the chances of goal attainment).
lead to goal attainment if they believe that (a) goal
attainment leads to something they value (e.g.,
Leadership Styles
increase in pay, status, promotion) and (b) the
behaviors they engage in have a high chance (expec- Path–goal theory is a contingency theory, propos-
tancy) of leading to the goal. If people do not value ing that effective leadership is contingent on the
the reward for goal attainment or believe that their leader’s adopting a particular style of behavior to
behavior is unlikely to lead to goal attainment, then match the needs to the subordinate and the situa-
they will not be motivated to work hard. tion in which the subordinate is working. The
Path–goal theory builds on these propositions theory identifies four main types of leadership
by arguing that effective leaders are those who help behaviors, each of which can help subordinates
their subordinates achieve their goals. According to attain their goals. Supportive leadership involves
path–goal theory, leaders have a responsibility to being considerate of the needs of subordinates and
provide their subordinates with the information creating a friendly atmosphere to work in. Directive
and support necessary to achieve the work goals. leadership involves letting subordinates know
One way to do this is to make salient the effort– what is expected of them, giving clear guidelines,
reward relationship by linking desirable outcomes and making sure they know the rules and proce-
to goal attainment (e.g., emphasizing the positive dures to get the work done. Participative leader-
outcomes to the subordinates if they achieve their ship involves consulting with subordinates and
goals) and/or increasing the belief (expectancy) that taking account of their opinions and suggestions
their work behaviors can lead to goal attainment when making decisions. Achievement-oriented

635
636 Perceived Group Variability

leadership involves setting challenging work goals, subordinates’ self-confidence that they are able to
emphasizing the need for excellence in perfor- attain the goals.
mance, and showing confidence that the subordi- According to path–goal theory, leaders, to be
nates will attain high work standards. effective, need to do the following: recognize the
The choice of which style of leadership to use needs of those they manage and try to satisfy these
depends on two groups of contingency variables. needs through the workplace, reward people for
One group concerns environmental factors that achieving their goals, help subordinates identify the
are outside the control of the subordinate (e.g., most effective paths they need to take to reach their
task structure, authority system, work group), and goals, and clear those paths so that subordinates can
the other group concerns individual factors that reach their goals. The particular style of leadership
are inherently part of the subordinate (e.g., person- that is effective in achieving these outcomes will
ality, experience, and abilities). depend on the contingency factors described above.
The theory makes a number of predictions con- The theory has a great deal of intuitive appeal
cerning which style of leadership will be most because it can be applied easily to the workplace.
effective in particular situations and with types of It emphasizes understanding the needs of subordi-
subordinates. Because of the large number of con- nates within the context of their working situation
tingency factors, there are many potential predic- and using the appropriate style of leadership to
tions; some of the main ones are described below. help subordinates achieve their work goals. One
Supportive leadership should be most effective implication of this approach is that leaders need to
when the nature of the work is stressful, boring, or adopt multiple leadership styles and be able to
dangerous. This is because a supportive style by the tailor these styles to the characteristics of the sub-
leader will increase subordinates’ satisfaction and ordinate and the situation. Because of the empha-
self-confidence and reduce the negative aspects of sis on the role of leaders’ behaviors rather than
the situation. This should lead to an increase in the their traits, the theory has many applications for
intrinsic valance of the job and the expectation that leadership training programs.
it will be performed well and lead to the attainment
of goals. However, supportive leadership would Robin Martin
have little benefit for those subordinates who are See also Charismatic Leadership; Contingency Theories
satisfied in their work and find it enjoyable (because of Leadership; Great Person Theory of Leadership;
they already find the work intrinsically motivating). Group Performance; Interactionist Theories of
Directive leadership is most effective when peo- Leadership; Leader-Member (LMX) Theory;
ple are unsure what tasks they have to do or when Leadership; Personality Theories of Leadership; Power;
there is a lot of uncertainty within their working Social Identity Theory of Leadership; Transactional
environment. This occurs primarily because a direc- Leadership Theories; Transformational Leadership
tive style clarifies what the subordinates need to do Theories; Vertical Dyad Linkage Model
and therefore reduces task ambiguity. In addition,
the directive style will make clear the relationship Further Readings
between effort and reward and therefore the expec-
House, R. J. (1971). A path–goal theory of leadership
tancy that effort will lead to a valued outcome.
effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16,
Participative leadership can be effective in
321–338.
unstructured situations because it can increase role House, R. J. (1996). Path–goal theory of leadership:
clarity, and it can also be effective for people who Lessons, legacy, and a reformulated theory.
have a high need to control their environment. Leadership Quarterly, 7, 323–352.
Conversely, this style will be less effective for those
people who like to be directed at the workplace
and do not take on too much responsibility for
their outcomes. Perceived Group Variability
Finally, an achievement-oriented style is effec-
tive when the work is complex and the environ- Stereotypes are beliefs about the attributes of
ment is uncertain. This is because it can increase social categories or groups that potentially affect
Perceived Group Variability 637

how the perceiver judges and behaves toward indi- attributes and then compute the standard deviation
vidual group members. They concern the attri- of that perceived distribution. Research has shown
butes that are typically associated with a social that the two components of perceived group vari-
group. But perceivers differ in the degree to which ability (perceived stereotypicality and dispersion)
they assume that all group members resemble each are far from redundant with each other, which sug-
other. Accordingly, the perceived variability of a gests that they are two different, relatively indepen-
group captures the degree to which stereotypes dent components of perceived group variability.
about that group are strong and, accordingly, the
degree to which group stereotypes influence judg-
Theories of Group Variability Perception
ments of and behavior toward members of that
group. If a group is perceived as relatively low in Interest in perceived group variability started with
variability, then the social perceiver will expect all research on the outgroup homogeneity effect.
members of that group with whom he or she inter- Whether it is measured through group stereo­
acts to closely fit the stereotype of the group. In typicality or group dispersion, people consistently
contrast, if a group is perceived as relatively high perceive outgroups to be less variable than their
in variability, then the social perceiver cannot be ingroup. Studies that have demonstrated the out-
sure that a specific group member fits the stereo- group homogeneity effect have used what are
type and will therefore pay more attention to indi- called full ingroup–outgroup designs, in which
viduating information about the member. Further, members of different groups (e.g., males and
when confronted with a low-variability group, females) rate both their own ingroup and the out-
people are more confident in the behavioral pre- group, using both stereotypicality and group dis-
dictions they make about group members than persion measures. Outgroup homogeneity has been
when confronted with a high-variability group. demonstrated with groups defined by gender, by
ethnicity, and by a host of other group categoriza-
tion variables. It is important to note that this effect
Measuring Perceived Group Variability
is independent of ingroup favoritism, which is the
Different authors have used different methods to tendency to prefer the ingroup to the outgroup. In
measure perceived group variability. Those mea- other words, although the outgroup homogeneity
sures can be grouped into two categories: (1) the effect reflects a difference in the way ingroups and
degree of stereotypicality of the group on a given outgroups are perceived, it is not the same as dis-
dimension and (2) the extent of the dispersion of like of the outgroup relative to the ingroup. Indeed,
the group around the group mean on that dimen- the outgroup homogeneity effect has been found
sion. The stereotypicality of a group is measured by even when an outgroup is rated on dimensions on
questions that ask for the percentage of group which the outgroup stereotype is positive.
members who are consistent with the group stereo- A presumed difference in familiarity between
type and the percentage who are inconsistent with ingroups and outgroups has been identified by
that stereotype. From these two percentage esti- some as the main factor responsible for the out-
mates, a researcher can compute difference scores group homogeneity effect. Yet, as previously men-
(percentage consistent minus percentage inconsis- tioned, an outgroup homogeneity effect has been
tent), with lower scores indicating greater perceived demonstrated even with gender groups, which are
group variability (i.e., those who are inconsistent arguably the two social groups for which there
with the group stereotype represent a relatively exists extensive familiarity with both the outgroup
larger percentage of the group). The dispersion and the ingroup. It is true that not all research has
around the mean can be measured in different been able to replicate the outgroup homogeneity
ways. A researcher can ask about the perceived effect with gender, and the magnitude of the gen-
group range on various stereotypic attributes (where der effect may depend on whether perceived stereo­-
the highest and lowest group members fall) and typicality or group dispersion is the component of
take the difference between these two. Alternatively, perceived group variability that is assessed.
a researcher can ask participants to indicate a per- A persistent question in the perceived variability
ceived distribution of the group on stereotypic literature concerns the informational basis of such
638 Perceived Group Variability

variability inferences. One model that has been references to the self and to different subgroups.
advanced is an exemplar-based model, which In contrast, for the outgroup, participants made
argues that the different exemplars of a social very few references to the self and to subgroups;
group that one encounters are stored as separate instead, the outgroup tended to be discussed as a
memory traces and that when one is asked to give whole entity.
an impression about a group, one retrieves stored Perceived group variability is one of the two
exemplars of that group and computes an impres- main factors that underlie the concept of perceived
sion based on those retrieved exemplars. Others, entitativity. Entitativity is the degree to which an
however, have argued for an abstraction-based aggregate of persons is considered to make up a
model, which posits that one uses each new group meaningful, or real, group. An important compo-
member to compute an impression about the nent of entitativity is common fate, or group
group and then stores that impression. The main essence, defined as the degree to which all mem-
difference between these two models in explaining bers of a group share a common core of values and
perceived group variability is that in the exemplar- outcomes. More homogeneous groups are per-
based model, the variability depends on which ceived as more entitative, and therefore their mem-
exemplars are used at the retrieval stage, whereas bers are treated more as group members than as
in the abstraction-based model, the variability is individuals.
an aspect of the group impression that is computed
at the encoding stage and revised in the light of
subsequent information. Effects of Perceived Group Variability
Experiments have been conducted to test the Perceived group variability has been shown to
different predictions that are made by the differ- have a variety of effects on social judgment and
ent models. In one study, participants were pre- interaction. As already discussed, members of
sented with a group that was either high or low in low-variability groups are judged to more strongly
variability. In addition, the memorability of par- possess the group stereotype and are therefore
ticular group members was manipulated, with responded to in a more stereotypic manner. In
either the more moderate group members being addition, the ease with which stereotypes are likely
more memorable or the more extreme group to change depends on the perceived variability of
members being more memorable. Results were the stereotyped group in ways that may not be
influenced by the variability manipulation but not entirely intuitive. Most models of stereotype change
by the memory manipulation, which lends cre- suggest that one is likely to change a group stereo-
dence to the abstraction-based model’s assump- type if one encounters group members who discon-
tion that variability impressions are constructed firm that stereotype. But the degree to which such
online at encoding and not at the retrieval stage, as group members actually disconfirm a stereotype is
posited by the exemplar-based model. likely to depend in part on the perceived group
Based on the abstraction-based model, an variability. Someone who is discrepant from the
explanation for the outgroup homogeneity effect perceived group mean may actually be seen as
is that social perceivers have low motivation to more discrepant if the group is perceived as very
update their impressions of groups to which they homogeneous than if greater group variability is
do not belong. Accordingly, the variability of the perceived. As a result, that discrepant group mem-
outgroup is computed on the basis of the first ber may actually produce less stereotype change in
few encounters with members of that group and the case of the homogeneous group because of
is thereafter not likely to be updated. For the what has been called subtyping: The individual is
ingroup, in contrast, the social perceiver is moti- judged to be such an exception to the rule that he
vated to construct a more complex and diversi- or she is discounted as atypical. In contrast, in the
fied impression. In support of this, researchers case of a more variable group, that individual may
have asked participants to think aloud about not be discounted, and stereotype change may be
their ingroup and an outgroup. These think- more likely to occur.
aloud protocols were then coded. Results showed
that for the ingroup, participants made a lot of Charles M. Judd and Nicolas Kervyn
Personality Theories of Leadership 639

See also Categorization; Entitativity; Outgroup characteristics that make them ideally suited for
Homogeneity Effect; Stereotyping leadership, and these traits or characteristics are
what differentiate these leaders from everyone else.
Early approaches in this genre included the great
Further Readings man theories, which were based on the assumption
Mullen, B., & Hu, L. (1989). Perceptions of in‑group and that the capacity for leadership is inherent—that
out‑group variability: A meta‑analytic integration. great leaders are born, not made or developed.
Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 10, 233–252. These theories often portrayed great leaders as
Park, B., & Hastie, R. (1987). Perception of variability in heroic, mythical, and uniquely destined to rise to
category development: Instance- versus abstraction- leadership when their skills were needed. The term
based stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social great man reflects an assumption of these early
Psychology, 53, 621–636. theories that leadership was a predominantly male
Park, B., Judd, C. M., & Ryan, C. S. (1991). Social quality, especially in the domains of political and
categorization and the representation of variability in military leadership.
formation. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), One of the first systematic attempts to under-
European Review of Social Psychology (Vol. 2, stand leadership in the 20th century, the great man
pp. 211–245). Chichester, UK: Wiley. theory evolved into personality- or trait-based
Park, B., Wolsko, C., & Judd, C. M. (2001).
approaches as more modern research revealed that
Measurement of subtyping in stereotype change.
leadership was not inherently male dominated and
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37,
that leadership could be found and studied in more
325–332.
common settings rather than at the highest levels
Tajfel, H. (1970). Experiments in intergroup
of organizations or nations. More than a century
discrimination. Scientific American, 223, 96–102.
Yzerbyt, V. Y., Judd, C. M., & Corneille, O. (2004).
of research has been conducted on the traits that
Perceived variability, entitativity, and essentialism: have been associated to a greater or lesser degree
Introduction and overview. In V. Y. Yzerbyt, with leadership, and some traits have received con-
C. M., Judd, & O. Corneille (Eds.), The psychology of sistent support while others have emerged in some
group perception: Perceived variability, entitativity, studies but not in others. An overview of research
and essentialism. London: Psychology Press. on the Big Five personality factors and the degree
to which each has been linked to leadership is fol-
lowed by a summary of the five more-specific traits
that have been most consistently connected to
Personality Theories leadership.

of Leadership
Leadership and the Big Five
Are you born to be a leader? Are you a “natural”? Since the 1960s, researchers have examined
Or is leadership a set of behaviors and competen- whether there is a relationship between the basic
cies that anyone can develop, given the right expe- agreed-on factors that make up personality and
riences, circumstances, and training? The answers leadership. The Big Five personality factors are
to these questions have been debated for centuries. conscientiousness, agreeableness, neuroticism,
Here, we focus on theories of leadership that openness, and extraversion, which some research-
would answer with a resounding yes to the first ers have labeled the CANOE personality model as
two questions, emphasizing that leadership is an easy aid to remembering each factor.
deeply embedded within our personalities or in Conscientiousness is defined as an individual’s
the traits with which we were born. This entry tendency to be organized, thorough, controlled,
defines and reviews personality- and trait-based decisive, and dependable. Of the Big Five factors,
theories of leadership before turning to critiques it is the personality factor that has been related to
of these approaches. leadership second most strongly (after extraver-
Personality- and trait-based approaches to lead- sion) in previous research. Agreeableness, or an
ership argue that certain individuals have innate individual’s tendency to be trusting, nurturing,
640 Personality Theories of Leadership

conforming, and accepting, has been only weakly Self-Confidence


associated with leadership. Neuroticism, or the
Additional research has pointed to a consistent
tendency to be anxious, hostile, depressed, vul-
relationship between a leader’s effectiveness, on
nerable, and insecure, has been moderately and
one hand, and confidence in his or her skills, tech-
negatively related to leadership, suggesting that
nical competencies, and ideas, on the other. Having
most leaders tend to be low in neuroticism.
high self-esteem, a positive regard for one’s own
Openness, sometimes referred to as openness to
ability to lead, and assurance that one’s vision or
experience, refers to an individual’s tendency to
purpose is the right one all help a leader influence
be curious, creative, insightful, and informed.
others. While some studies have examined self-
Openness has been moderately related to leader-
confidence and others have focused on confidence
ship, suggesting that leaders tend to be somewhat
more generally, it is clear that feeling and commu-
higher in openness than nonleaders. Finally,
nicating certainty about one’s own abilities as a
extraversion is the personality factor that has
leader is a common leadership trait.
been most strongly associated with leadership.
Defined as the tendency to be sociable (discussed
in greater detail below), assertive, and have posi- Determination or Perseverance
tive energy, extraversion has been described as
the most important personality trait of effective Leadership is often a difficult, thankless, long,
leaders. and arduous process. Perhaps as a result of this
Although research on the Big Five personality fact, a great deal of research has suggested that
factors has found some relationships between leaders must be determined to complete a task or
these overall personality factors and leadership, get a job done, even in the face of adversity or
focusing on more specific traits has led to when there is less than overwhelming support
more consistent findings between effective lead- from others. Leaders show initiative and drive and
ership and the following five traits: intelligence, frequently constitute the motivational energy
self-confidence, determination, sociability, and behind a project or social change movement. Thus,
integrity. the ability to assert oneself when necessary, be
proactive, and continue to push on in the face of
Specific Traits Associated With Leadership obstacles is a key component of leadership. In
addition, this determination often involves dis-
Intelligence playing dominance and a drive to succeed even in
A great deal of research suggests that leaders the face of initial failures.
have above-average intelligence. Intellectual ability
has been positively associated with cognitive rea-
Sociability
soning skills, the capacity to articulate ideas and
thoughts to others, and the perceptual ability to Sociability is defined as a leader’s desire for
recognize important situational factors. Research high-quality social relationships and the ability to
has focused on the link between intelligence and a maintain and restore positive relationships in dif-
leader’s development of good problem-solving ficult times that often involve adversity and crisis.
skills, the ability to adequately assess social situa- Across studies, leaders often demonstrate the abil-
tions, and the ability to understand complex orga- ity to be friendly, extraverted (outgoing), courte-
nizational issues. Although intelligence has ous, tactful, and diplomatic. In addition, leaders
consistently been shown, in a wide variety of stud- tend to be sensitive to the needs of others, even at
ies, to relate positively to leadership, other research the cost of attending to their own needs. In short,
has pointed out that it is important that the lead- leaders care about the interests of others and put
er’s intellectual ability is not too dissimilar from others’ interests before their own. Leaders have
that of his or her followers. If leaders far surpass good interpersonal skills that communicate their
their followers in intelligence, they may be unable concern for others, and they work to smooth out
to express ideas and issues in ways that appeal to conflicts and disagreements to maintain the group’s
or connect with their followers. social harmony.
Personality Theories of Leadership 641

Integrity people inherit certain qualities and traits that


make them suited to be good leaders. By looking
None of the previous traits addresses the fact
at a range of different leaders in a variety of situ-
that smart, confident, determined, and sociable
ations over time, trait theorists seek to identify
leaders can also be fundamentally immoral and
particular personality or behavioral characteristics
corrupt. The fifth factor, integrity, addresses the
that leaders share. However, this approach has
finding that leaders tend to be honest and trust-
been criticized for its lack of explanatory power:
worthy, inspiring others to respect them and trust
It is unable to consistently distinguish between
them with important decisions and resources.
leaders and nonleaders. If particular traits are key
Leaders are often variously described as loyal,
features of leadership, how do we explain people
responsible, dependable, and honest. These char-
who possess those qualities but are not leaders?
acteristics inspire the confidence of others and
Does an individual need one of these traits, some
provide evidence that leaders are authentic and
of them, or all of them to be a good leader? And
have the best interests of the group at heart. This
how do we explain people who have been leaders
is in stark opposition to individuals who use the
and exerted widespread influence without possess-
efforts and resources of the group for their own
ing some or all of these traits? These questions
prosperity or power and manipulate the group’s
highlight the difficulties in using trait theories to
time and money for their own personal gain (e.g.,
explain leadership.
cult leaders Jim Jones and David Koresh).
Other scholars have pointed out that the recent
interest in charismatic leadership essentially repre-
Leadership and Emotional Intelligence sents a neo-personality approach to leadership.
In the early 1990s, the concept of emotional intelli- Use of the term charisma in the popular vernacular
gence was introduced by Daniel Goleman and oth- focuses primarily on a personalized magnetic
ers, and it has captured a great deal of attention appeal that allows leaders to charm and influence
from practicing leaders and from organizations others. This approach emphasizes the personal
seeking to enhance the leadership abilities of their characteristics of the leader to attract and influ-
employees. Emotional intelligence, abbreviated vari- ence others and suggests that charisma is a quality
ously as EQ or EI, is defined as one’s ability to per- that some leaders can effectively capitalize on to
ceive and express emotions, understand and reason galvanize others into action.
with emotions, and effectively manage emotions, In a similar vein, a prominent critique of the
both in oneself and in others. More recently, a num- trait or personality approach to leadership is that
ber of assessments have been developed to measure it discourages individuals from believing they have
emotional intelligence, and efforts have been made the “right stuff” to become effective leaders.
to link emotional intelligence to one’s leadership Approaching leadership as a relationship between
abilities and even one’s ultimate successes in life. leaders and followers or as a set of behaviors and
There has been considerable debate, however, as competencies that anyone can develop provides a
to whether emotional intelligence represents a much more optimistic, democratic, and inclusive
unique construct that is sufficiently different from picture of leadership. These latter approaches
the five key traits and Big Five personality factors emphasize that given the right experiences, circum-
described above. Despite this debate, it seems likely stances, and training, each of us has both the
that people who are sensitive to both their own capacity and the ability to enact effective leader-
emotions and the emotions of others, and who are ship, regardless of the specific traits and personal-
adept at managing emotions and accurately dis- ity characteristics with which we were born.
cerning their impact, will be more effective leaders.
Michelle C. Bligh

Critiques of the Trait See also Charismatic Leadership; Contingency Theories


Approach to Leadership of Leadership; Great Person Theory of Leadership;
Interactionist Theories of Leadership; Leader-Member
Similar in many ways to the early great man theo- (LMX) Theory; Leadership; Path–Goal Theory of
ries, trait and personality theories assume that Leadership; Power; Social Identity Theory of
642 Personnel Turnover

Leadership; Transactional Leadership Theories; Voluntary employee turnover has been one of
Transformational Leadership Theories; Vertical Dyad the most studied topics in organizational behavior
Linkage Model research, with more than 1,000 studies on the
topic in the past century. Research has addressed
Further Readings questions such as why and how people decide to
quit their jobs, which factors encourage or disin-
Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternate “description of
cline them to do so, and what personal and orga-
personality”: The Big Five factor structure. Journal of
nizational consequences flow from turnover. This
Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216–1229.
entry discusses the turnover decision process, iden-
Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Werner, M. (2002).
Personality and leadership: A qualitative and
tifies important predictors of turnover in groups
quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology,
and organizations, and describes the consequences
87, 765–780. of turnover.
Kirkpatrick, S. A., & Locke, E. A. (1991). Leadership:
Do traits matter? Executive, 5, 48–60. The Turnover Decision Process
Lord, R. G., DeVader, C. L., & Alliger, G. M. (1986). A
meta-analysis of the relation between personality traits Voluntarily turnover happens when employees are
and leadership perceptions: An application of validity dissatisfied with their work and experience low
generalization procedures. Journal of Applied commitment to their organization. The relation-
Psychology, 71, 402–410. ship between satisfaction and commitment on one
Northouse, P. G. (2007). Leadership theory and practice hand and turnover on the other has been docu-
(4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. mented in numerous studies. The relationship
between turnover and these predictors, however, is
not very strong and is mediated by emotional, cog-
nitive, and behavioral processes. One of the early
Personnel Turnover models that has shaped the course of turnover
research was provided by Mobley during the late
In today’s organizations, in which human capa- 1970s. The model describes the experience of dis-
bilities are the key source for competitive advan- satisfaction with one’s work as arousing thoughts
tage, retaining talent has become critical. Turnover, about quitting. These thoughts lead to evaluations
a voluntary or involuntary withdrawal from the of the expected utility of searching for another job
organization, exists in all organizations. The cost and the cost of leaving the current job, to inten-
of turnover in U.S. organizations is estimated in tions to search, and to evaluations of alternatives.
billions of dollars per year. This high cost is pri- Finding an attractive alternative elicits the inten-
marily due to the need to recruit, select, and train tion to quit, which in turn is directly associated
new organizational members as replacements for with quitting. Research provided empirical sup-
those who depart. Turnover may interrupt the port for the model, showed that relationships
efficient management of the organization when among the variables in the model can be recipro-
experienced and knowledgeable employees leave cal, and identified possible moderators that affect
and take with them essential know-how that can- the relationships among the model variables. For
not be easily replaced and can be used by the example, it was found that in times of high unem-
organization’s competitors. Despite its negative ployment rates, the relationship between satisfac-
consequences, turnover has some positive aspects. tion and the decision to quit was weaker than
It creates an opportunity to replace ineffective during times of low unemployment.
employees with more highly skilled ones, opens
promotion opportunities, allows newcomers with
Group Predictors of Member Turnover
new ideas and knowledge to join the organization,
and fosters innovation. It is not surprising, thus, Groups may affect members’ satisfaction with
that the topic of employee turnover in organiza- their work, their commitment to the organization,
tions has received substantial attention from both and, as a result, their decisions to remain in or
researchers and practitioners. leave their jobs. The analysis of turnover in groups
Personnel Turnover 643

includes topics such as the influence of group each other, has also been shown to affect turnover
members’ characteristics and their relative repre- propensities. In most cases, leaving a job also
sentation in the group (i.e., diversity) on the ten- means leaving colleagues. The closer the relation-
dency to leave the group, the effect of group ships with colleagues, the more difficult leaving a
characteristics such as cohesiveness or culture on job is. Indeed, group cohesion is associated with a
members’ decisions to leave, the effect of the fit higher commitment of members to remaining in
between members’ characteristics and characteris- the group. The attraction to group members hin-
tics of the group on turnover, and the effect of the ders member turnover.
group’s supervisor on members’ decisions to quit.
Person–Organization Fit
Group Diversity Person–organization fit is the congruence
Group composition refers to the configuration between personal attributes of the individual and
of members’ attributes in the group, including attributes of the work context. Personal attributes
demographic characteristics, education, experi- may include personality traits, attitudes, values,
ence, and attitudes. Group composition affects goals, and preferences. Work context includes the
members’ attraction to the group, their satisfaction culture, norms, and values, as well as goals and
with other group members, and the social interac- other expectations, in the work environment. A
tion among group members. For example, group better fit between a group member’s attributes and
composition affects the cohesiveness of the group, the attributes of his or her group increases the like-
as well as the level of task and emotional conflict. lihood that the member will feel professionally
Cohesiveness diminishes the tendency to leave the and personally committed to the organization. Poor
group, whereas conflict increases it. person–organization fit is associated with higher
Several studies have shown that homogeneous levels of turnover. For example, it was found that
groups have lower turnover rates than heteroge- creative members who worked in a relatively struc-
neous groups do. The similarity–attraction and the tured environment that encouraged habitual and
attraction–selection–attrition theories provide an systematic thinking were more likely to leave their
explanation for this empirical finding. These theories jobs than were creative members working in a con-
maintain that individuals are attracted to organiza- text that fostered innovation. Similarly, conform-
tions and teams whose members are perceived to be ists and systematic thinkers showed higher turnover
similar to them. Working with similar others con- rates when working in an unstructured environ-
tributes to positive self-identity and job satisfaction. ment than when working in a structured environ-
Compared with similar members, dissimilar ment that fit their preferences.
members are more likely to leave the group.
Specifically, members who are dissimilar on such Satisfaction With the Supervisor
dimensions as age, tenure in the group, date of
entry, work experience, or race are more likely to Research suggests that the immediate supervisor
leave their group than similar members are. plays an important rule in the employee turnover
Individuals who enter the group at the same time decision. Supervisors, perceived as the representa-
or who are the same age are likely to be more tives of the organization, can enhance employees’
tightly bound to one another than are those who positive feelings and attitudes toward the organi-
are demographically different. Dissimilar members zation. Supervisors may also form individual
find it more difficult to integrate with other group relationships with their employees that shape
members and may feel pressure to conform to the employees’ commitment to the organization and
group or to leave it. reduce their intention to quit. Perceived supervisor
support reduces employee turnover and attenuates
the relationship between perceived organizational
Group Cohesiveness
support and employee turnover. Perceived organi-
Cohesiveness, the degree to which members in a zational support becomes more important in the
group are attracted to the group or attached to absence of perceived supervisor support.
644 Personnel Turnover

Consequences of Turnover effect on performance outcomes than in less struc-


tured contexts.
Although research on predictors of turnover has Another important contingency in understand-
accumulated over many years, research on conse- ing the effect of turnover on groups and organiza-
quences of turnover is more recent. Consequences tions is the quality of departing members. Several
include convergent outcomes, such as the extent to studies have found that the performance of employ-
which the group performs its task efficiently and ees who left an organization was lower than that
meets quality standards, and divergent outcomes, of those who remained, even when the turnover
such as whether the group innovates or develops was voluntary. If it is the poor performers who are
new processes and products. Studies finding that leaving an organization, turnover should have a
turnover hurts task performance typically focus on less negative effect on performance. On the other
convergent outcomes, whereas studies document- hand, if it is the high performers who are depart-
ing beneficial effects of turnover generally focus on ing, turnover should have a more negative effect
divergent outcomes. on performance. The position of departing mem-
Studies of sports teams, industrial concerns, bers in the unit’s social network is another variable
and service organizations have documented a likely to affect the relationship between turnover
negative effect of turnover on group and organi- and group performance.
zational outcomes such as the quality and effi- Although studies of convergent outcomes gener-
ciency of task performance. The departure of ally find a negative effect of turnover on those
members disrupts the smooth functioning of the outcomes, studies of divergent outcomes, such as
group and weakens its transactive memory sys- innovation, generally find a positive effect of turn-
tem. In groups with well-developed transactive over. The departure of organizational members
memory systems, members know who knows often triggers the arrival of new members who
what and who is good at what and are able to bring new knowledge and approaches to the
coordinate their activities effectively. When turn- group. Thus, these newcomers can be a source of
over occurs and new members arrive, they must innovation—especially when they are high in abil-
learn not only to perform their individual tasks ity or status, perceived as credible and concerned
but also who in the group is good at what and with the welfare of the group, and share an iden-
how to coordinate their activities with those of tity with other group members. Further, the pres-
other group members. ence of newcomers can stimulate old-timers to
The effect of turnover has been found to develop new ideas and task performance strate-
depend on the extent to which roles in the group gies. Thus, teams that experience turnover have
are well defined and procedures exist for accom- been found to be more creative than teams with
plishing tasks. As examples of contexts that vary stable membership.
along these dimensions, consider two bookstores. In short, although turnover can disrupt task
One is part of a large chain, in which members performance, it can also stimulate creativity and
have clearly defined roles, and procedures are innovation. More research is needed to understand
specified for accomplishing tasks; the other book- the conditions under which turnover has negative
store is an independent establishment owned by or positive effects on group outcomes. Research to
an individual who has not developed task perfor- date has identified important contingencies, includ-
mance routines or specified roles for employees. ing characteristics of departing members and their
Under the latter condition, much of the book- replacements, features of the group’s structures
store’s knowledge is embedded in employees, so and routines, and whether the desired outcomes
their departure would hurt the bookstore’s per- are efficiency, quality, or innovation.
formance. Conversely, in the former case, when
jobs are standardized, turnover has been found to Linda Argote and Ella Miron-Spektor
have a less negative effect on performance out-
comes. When work is standardized, much of the See also Diversity; Group Cohesiveness; Group Learning;
group’s knowledge is embedded in its structures Group Performance; Innovation; Minority Influence;
and routines, so the loss of an employee has less Organizations; Transactive Memory Systems
Pluralistic Ignorance 645

Further Readings private support by individuals. In the extreme


Argote, L. (1999). Organizational learning: Creating, case, it can lead every individual to believe that he
retaining, and transferring knowledge. Norwell, MA: or she is alone in holding an attitude or in practic-
Kluwer. ing a behavior, when in reality every other group
Argote, L., Insko, C. A., Yovetich, N., & Romero, A. A. member does the same in private. Pluralistic igno-
(1995). Group learning curves: The effects of turnover rance is typically measured by asking individuals
and task complexity on group performance. Journal of to indicate on a numerical scale how strongly they
Applied Social Psychology, 25(6), 512–529. agree with a statement or how often they engage
Hom, P. W., Caranikas-Walker, F., Prussia, G., & in a behavior, and then asking them to estimate
Griffeth, R. W. (1992). A meta-analytical structural how much their peers on average espouse the atti-
equations analysis of a model of employee turnover. tude or perform the behavior; the difference
Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(6), 890–909. between the perceived consensus and the aggre-
Jackson, S. E., Brett, J. F., Sessa, V. I., Cooper, D. M., gate of individual ratings captures pluralistic
Julin, J. A., & Peyronnin, K. (1991). Some differences ignorance. This entry looks at how pluralistic
make a difference: Individual dissimilarity and group ignorance is expressed and then discusses its
heterogeneity as correlates of recruitment, promotions causes and consequences.
and turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(5),
675–689.
Levine, J. M., Choi, H. S., & Moreland, R. L. (2003). A Ubiquitous Social Phenomenon
Newcomer innovations in work teams. In P. B. Paulus Many examples of pluralistic ignorance have been
& B. A. Nijstad (Eds.), Group creativity: Innovation
documented in small ad hoc groups. When indi-
through collaboration (pp. 202–224). New York:
viduals witness an emergency in the presence of
Oxford University Press.
others, they are less likely to offer help than when
Mitchell, T. R., Holtom, B. C., Lee, T. W., & Erez, M.
no other bystanders are present (bystander nonin-
(2001). Why people stay: Using job embeddedness to
tervention), in part because when they are trying to
predict voluntary turnover. Academy of Management
Journal, 44(6), 1102–1121.
understand the situation, they stay impassive, but
Moreland, R. L., Argote, L., & Krishnan, R. (1998). they mistakenly interpret other people’s impassiv-
Training people to work in groups. In R. S. Tindale, ity as evidence that the situation is not an emergency—
L. Heath, J. Edwards, E. J. Posvac, F. B. Bryant, Y. a vicious circle leading to less assistance. In a
Suarez-Balcazar, et al. (Eds.), Applications of theory classroom, students confused by a teacher’s utter-
and research on groups to social issues (pp. 37–60). ances often mistake their peers’ silence for compre-
New York: Plenum Press. hension, and, as a result, a majority of students
O’Reilly, C. A., Caldwell, D. F., & Barnett, W. P. (1989). stay silent and confused, not realizing that no one
Work group demography, social integration, and else understands the material (the classroom prob-
turnover. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34(1), lem). When discussing an issue about which they
21–37. initially shared moderate attitudes, group mem-
Ton, A., & Huckman, R. S. (2008). Managing the impact bers typically become more extreme (group polar-
of employee turnover on performance: The role of ization), in part because deviant thoughts are
process conformance. Organization Science, 19(1), suppressed, and discussants think that everyone
56–68. else is more extreme than they are. This phenom-
enon leads groups, in some cases, to a course of
action that virtually no member privately supports,
again because misgivings are kept under wraps,
Pluralistic Ignorance even if the misgivings are shared by all (one cause
of groupthink) or because everyone erroneously
Pluralistic ignorance refers to widespread misper- believes that they are pleasing everyone else (the
ception of the attitudes and behaviors prevalent in Abilene paradox).
one’s group due to public misrepresentation of Pluralistic ignorance also explains the persis-
private attitudes. It can lead to conformity to tence of existing social norms in established social
apparent social norms in the absence of actual groups, which sometimes espouse norms that very
646 Pluralistic Ignorance

few members actually support in private. Thus, Roots of Pluralistic Ignorance


members of a campus fraternity were found to
resist progressive admission policies that they pri- The basic cause of pluralistic ignorance is public
vately approved because of the false assumption misrepresentation of private attitudes. This mis-
that the rest of the group did not approve of the representation takes two forms—what gets said,
policies. A majority of incoming college students and what does not. On one hand, attitudes believed
believe that they are uniquely uncomfortable with to be popular are overrepresented. Individuals are
heavy drinking, but they keep these misgivings to more likely to express attitudes believed to be nor-
themselves, sustaining the illusion and leading mative, even if it means twisting their real prefer-
some to drink excessively in order to match the ences to fit in. Individuals who (earnestly or not)
imaginary heavy-drinking norm. Youth gang mem- embody this perceived norm receive increased
bers believe that their peers support violence and attention and are licensed to advertise their posi-
crime more than they do, which explains the main- tion more freely. Thus, students may boast about
tenance of deviant gang norms despite individual their drinking exploits if they believe them to be
misgivings. Similarly, both prison guards and normative, and the antics of colorful drunkards
inmates believe that their peers hold attitudes are discussed with appreciative gusto.
much more antagonistic to the other group than On the other hand, public misrepresentation
those attitudes really are, explaining the mainte- also involves the silencing of opinions believed to
nance of unnecessarily violent norms. be rare, even if they are really dominant. For
On a more global scale, pluralistic ignorance example, if some students think binge drinking is
explains rapid societal changes, either because a stupid, they may not express this opinion at the
seeming consensus is revealed to have had little breakfast table if they think (erroneously) that they
real support by individuals (conservative lag) or are alone in thinking so. One person’s silence con-
because a minority is able to impose the appear- tributes to the next person’s, and a spiral of silence
ance of consensus on a majority (liberal leap). ensues.
Conservative lags explain why measures no lon- Pluralistic ignorance rests on a basic social-
ger supported by a majority live on until they are psychological principle: We believe that the behav-
suddenly revealed to have little foundation. The ior of others reflects who they are and underestimate
dramatic fall of European Soviet-inspired regimes the role of situations in bringing about their
at the end of the 20th century illustrates this phe- behavior, even when we realize that the same situ-
nomenon. Private misgivings about these govern- ations affect us. Behavior is seen as a more accu-
ments were widespread but hidden for many rate reflection of character for others than for the
decades, and once expressed, might have led to self: During a water shortage when showering was
the governments’ quick downfall. In the United forbidden, individuals who bathed thought that
States, defunct policies such as Prohibition and other bathers cared less about the community than
racial segregation outlasted their popular sup- they did, but nonbathers thought that other non-
port for similar reasons. It has in fact been argued bathers cared more about the community than
that private opinion polling spelled the end of they did. This fundamental attribution error con-
Prohibition. tributes to pluralistic ignorance because individu-
Liberal leaps occur when the establishment of als take the behavior of others at face value and
pluralistic ignorance allows rapid change. Thus, disregard the frequent dissembling and complica-
Tocqueville documented how French revolutionar- tions of social life.
ies managed to strip religion out of daily life with The choices of others are believed to reflect their
apparent support of the majority—although reli- preferences. In fact, when seeing others choose
gious practices were in fact maintained privately between two options, individuals see this choice as
and resurfaced quickly once this illusion was dis- reflecting liking for the chosen option more than
pelled. Revolutionary groups wisely seize first the disliking for the rejected option. This again con-
means of mass communication, which lets the tributes to pluralistic ignorance. Individuals know
revolutionaries create an illusion of wide support that they themselves are choosing the lesser of two
and inhibits reaction by the general population. evils (e.g., in an election between two unpopular
Power 647

candidates) but interpret their peers’ choice as See also Attribution Biases; Bystander Effect; Conformity;
reflecting true enthusiasm for the option that Fads and Fashions; Group Polarization; Groupthink;
receives the most support. Informational Influence; Normative Influence; Norms;
Reference Groups

Consequences of Pluralistic Ignorance


Further Readings
The typical consequences of pluralistic ignorance
Miller, D. T., Monin, B., & Prentice, D. A. (2000).
are that unpopular or immoral norms live on,
Pluralistic ignorance and inconsistency between
suboptimal decisions are made, and a group’s
private attitudes and public behavior. In D. J. Terry &
subjective utility is not maximized. Individuals
M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Attitudes, behavior, and social
put up with things they should not have to,
context: The role of norms and group membership
unnecessarily censor themselves, and conform to (pp. 95–113). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
norms that very few endorse. One of the deepest Monin, B., & Norton, M. I. (2003). Perceptions of a
theoretical questions raised by pluralistic igno- fluid consensus: Uniqueness bias, false consensus, false
rance is: What should count as the true norm— polarization and pluralistic ignorance in a water
the perceived consensus that affects public conservation crisis. Personality and Social Psychology
behaviors or the aggregated private attitudes? Bulletin, 29, 559–567.
What counts as the real standards of a commu- Prentice, D. A., & Miller, D. T. (1993). Pluralistic
nity, for example, was questioned in an obscenity ignorance and alcohol use on campus: Some
trial brought against a Utah video store in 2000, consequences of misperceiving the social norm.
when the defense showed that the number of sig- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64,
natures on a public petition against the store’s 243–256.
rental of adult videos was dwarfed by the number
of individuals from the same aggrieved commu-
nity who privately rented or purchased the offen-
sive material.
Power
Pluralistic ignorance can lead to widespread
alienation due to individuals’ believing they are In social contexts, power may be defined as inter-
alone in their views while they are in reality sur- personal or intergroup control over others’
rounded by a blind crowd of like-minded peers. resources or outcomes. Occupying positions of
The U.S. popularity of the Kinsey reports on sex, power has been shown to affect power holders’
originally published in 1948 and 1953, can in part cognitive, behavioral, and emotional processes.
be explained by their data-heavy appendixes, Findings from research on social power have
revealing as statistically normal some behaviors implications for many psychological outcomes,
believed theretofore to be rare and shameful oddi- ranging from close relationships to intergroup
ties. Ideological isolation can also be felt in polar- relations, as well as outcomes in organizations.
ized debates (e.g., on abortion), in which members
of both sides overestimate the extremity of both Theoretical Background
their opponents’ and their peers’ opinions (false
polarization), often feeling like “lone moderates” Early theorists such as John French and Bertram
who are uniquely able to see the complexity and Raven defined power as the ability to influence oth-
nuances of the issues involved. ers, that is, to change others’ beliefs, attitudes, or
On a more positive note, by creating the illusion behaviors. Theorists in this tradition have focused
that new ideas are embraced by all, progressive on power bases—resources that power holders can
activists, inspired artists, or visionary leaders can use to influence others. Power bases include rewards
use pluralistic ignorance to bring about much- (e.g., offering promotions), coercion (threatened
needed change in a society initially unsure about punishment), legitimacy (obeying authority), refer-
the proposed path. ence (role-modeling), expertise (knowledge), and
information (persuasion). Contemporary theorists
Benoît Monin such as Susan Fiske, Dacher Keltner, and Deborah
648 Power

Gruenfeld have drawn from John Thibaut and power-as-control theory asserts that powerful peo-
Harold Kelley’s classic interdependence theory to ple can be motivated to attend to subordinates
offer an alternative definition of power that focuses when doing so benefits the power holders’ own
on the structural properties—that is, the interde- outcomes (i.e., when subordinates control out-
pendent nature—of relationships between individu- comes of interest to power holders).
als or groups. Specifically, these theorists argue that Power-approach theory, first articulated by
power is best defined as control over outcomes that Keltner and colleagues, provides a framework for
are valued by others. Defining power as outcome understanding the consequences of power across a
control identifies power as a property of relation- broader range of psychological outcomes, includ-
ships, whereas defining power as influence focuses ing social cognition. According to this model, hav-
on the outcomes of power. It is important to note ing or lacking power has consequences for
that defining power in terms of outcome control behavioral regulation—or the tendency to approach
captures the relative nature of power—the amount or avoid outcomes. Specifically, having power acti-
of control any one individual or group has may vates approach-related tendencies, whereas lacking
vary across situations, over time, and across rela- power activates inhibition tendencies. These differ-
tionships with different individuals or groups. This ences in behavioral regulation have important
definition also distinguishes power from potential implications for behavior, emotion, and cognition.
correlates, including status and prestige. For exam- For example, if increased power is associated with
ple, professors typically have control over their less inhibition, people who hold powerful positions
own students’ outcomes (e.g., grades) but no con- should be more likely to act on their own impulses
trol over other students’ outcomes. Moreover, their than should people in less powerful positions.
control over student outcomes is independent of
status (e.g., whether they have tenure) or prestige
Methods: How Do
(e.g., whether they are recognized internationally
People Study Social Power?
by their peers).
Contemporary research on power as outcome Across theoretical perspectives, contemporary
control has been driven primarily by two promi- researchers have employed two basic approaches
nent theories: power-as-control theory and power- to manipulate power differences in laboratory set-
approach theory. Power-as-control theory, first tings. The first approach involves assigning par-
proposed by Fiske and colleagues, was developed ticipants to different power roles (e.g., boss vs.
to explain the role of power in person perception, employee) that vary in terms of relative outcome
how people process information about others and control versus dependence. For example, in a high-
subsequently form impressions. Predicated on dual- power role, participants may be told that they are
process models of impression formation, which the leader and are responsible for directing a given
distinguish between automatic and controlled cog- task, evaluating subordinate workers, allocating
nitive processes, this model argues that social chances to win monetary prizes, and so forth. In
power moderates perceivers’ motivation and ability contrast, participants in a low-power role may be
to process information. According to this theory, assigned the role of worker and told they must fol-
compared with people who are relatively less pow- low the leader’s instructions, be evaluated by the
erful, people who are relatively more powerful are leader, and rely on the leader for any chance of
less motivated to engage in effortful processing winning a prize. In this case, participants are led to
about those in the opposite role because accurate believe that the leader has control over the out-
interpersonal judgments are oftentimes not required comes of workers, whereas workers lack any con-
of them (i.e., their outcomes are not highly depen- trol over leaders’ outcomes. Similar techniques
dent on subordinates). Moreover, because power- involve role-playing, in which participants are
ful people may be subject to greater cognitive asked to imagine themselves in various roles (e.g.,
demands (e.g., supervising multiple subordinates), art gallery director vs. assistant).
they may simply have fewer cognitive resources to Intergroup power—that is, differences in rela-
attend to subordinates and therefore be less able to tive control over group-level outcomes—is typi-
engage in effortful cognitive processing. Finally, the cally manipulated through similar techniques.
Power 649

However, instead of an individual’s having con- behaviors, such as employee evaluations. Thus, it
trol, participants are presented with information will be important to replicate laboratory findings
that a particular group of individuals has relatively in more naturalistic settings.
more control over another group’s outcomes.
Alternatively, researchers may use naturally occur-
ring groups (e.g., men and women) that differ in Interpersonal Power
power. Oftentimes, the use of naturally occurring Interpersonal power refers to power between
groups to study intergroup power conflates out- individuals—when one person controls the out-
come control with other, related constructs (e.g., comes of another (e.g., a boss and employees).
status or identity), with implications for interpreta- Research demonstrates the effects of such power
tion and application of research findings. on behavior, emotion, and cognition, including
Cognitive priming—that is, increasing the cog- tendencies to stereotype and derogate outgroup
nitive activation of power-relevant constructs—is members and to sexually harass women.
often used in lieu of manipulating actual outcome
control. This technique is often easier to implement
Behavior
(e.g., it does not involve highly deceptive cover
stories) and is arguably less susceptible to the Several empirical studies suggest that having
potential confounds of naturally occurring power power inclines people to act, consistent with power-
relations (e.g., status). Research has demonstrated approach theory. That is, people in power are
that priming people to think about specific con- more likely to engage in a given action than are
cepts or goals can influence emotion, cognition, people without power. For example, the priming
and behavior outside conscious awareness. With of power has led participants to be more likely to
regard to priming power, researchers have relied take a hit in blackjack and to stand up to turn off
on a number of techniques. For example, complet- a fan in the room. Parallel effects occur in group
ing word search puzzles that require participants to settings, where high-power group members tend to
identify power-relevant words (e.g., authority, speak more often than low-power group members
boss vs. employee, follower) can increase the acces- do. This action tendency also affects perceptions of
sibility of power-related concepts and subsequently behaviors. Behaviors generally considered risky
influence behavior. Even subtle cues in the environ- (e.g., unprotected sex) are perceived as less risky
ment can prime power—seating participants in a when participants are primed with power.
large, cushioned chair behind a desk versus in a Alarmingly, having power may also incline
small wooden chair in front of a desk can activate people to engage in sexual harassment. Indeed,
high or low power, respectively. Some researchers quid pro quo harassment—when a supervisor
have primed power in more overtly conscious withholds or rewards resources in exchange for
ways, such as asking participants to recall a time sexual cooperation—is defined in part by power.
when they had power over (vs. depended on) Empirical evidence supports a link between power
another person. Regardless of whether power and harassment. For example, researchers have
priming is overt or subtle, the assumption is that found that men who are predisposed to harass are
the influence of the prime occurs outside conscious also likely to cognitively associate the concept of
awareness: Participants are (presumably) not aware power with sex. In addition, in laboratory studies,
that the prime affects their subsequent behavior. men high in the propensity to sexually harass
Manipulating power via either priming or role- females rate female subordinates as more attractive
based techniques typically produces similar results. when the men have been primed to think about
Moreover, manipulating power in a laboratory having power.
setting affords experimental control that cannot be Unfortunately, the effects of power do not
attained in more naturalistic settings where people apply only to men who are inclined to harass.
have power in their daily lives. However, some Additional research has shown that men given
critics have argued that these manipulations and control over a hiring decision and asked to inter-
laboratory settings are too artificial when it view a female job candidate subsequently sat
comes to assessing the impact of power on some closer to her during the interview and asked her
650 Power

more sexualized questions. Power may facilitate priming power produce inconsistent results.
harassment for both motivational and cognitive Further research is needed to resolve these
reasons. For powerful men, motivated to maintain discrepancies.
the status quo, sexual harassment is a way to
enforce the existing hierarchy and keep women in
Cognition
low-power roles. Cognitively, power may shift
perceptions of sexual harassment. For example, Both power-approach theory and power-as-
some research suggests that men primed with control theory predict that power promotes rela-
power rate sexually harassing behaviors (e.g., tively less effortful (i.e., more automatic) information
unwanted touching) as less inappropriate than do processing, whereas powerlessness promotes more
men primed with powerlessness. deliberative information processing. Recent
research, however, suggests that power may have
different effects on cognitive processing in different
Emotion
contexts. According to Ana Guinote’s situated
Research examining the link between power and focus theory, powerful people engage in delibera-
emotion has produced mixed results. Power- tive processing when available information is rele-
approach theory predicts that having power vant to their current goals. Several recent studies
should produce positive emotion, whereas lack- support this argument. For example, power appears
ing power should produce negative emotion. This to moderate perceivers’ ability to narrow or widen
prediction is based on research demonstrating a their attentional focus, depending on the demands
positive correlation between behavioral approach of the task. In one study, participants primed with
tendencies and positive emotion, as well as high power were able either to selectively attend to
between behavioral inhibition and negative emo- background information or to ignore this informa-
tion. Some empirical research supports the hypoth- tion as necessary in order to succeed at a cognitive
esized power–emotion link. For example, one set perception task. In contrast, participants primed
of studies tested this prediction in the context of with low-power concepts were unable to adapt
a dyadic interaction. In an initial study, romantic across tasks. More specifically, they performed
partners rated the extent to which they perceived significantly worse when the task required them to
that they and their partner each had power ignore background information, suggesting an
(defined as amount of influence) in their relation- inability to narrow attention to fit task demands.
ship. These romantic partners then discussed This study and others like it point to the need for
their relationships with one another. As pre- a better understanding of the complex conse-
dicted, participants who were perceived to have quences of power for perception. Moreover, these
more power subsequently reported having more studies demonstrate a heretofore unidentified cog-
positive emotions when discussing their relation- nitive benefit—in the form of cognitive flexibility—
ships, whereas those perceived to have less power for those who have power.
reported more negative emotions. Additional Additional research suggests that power has
research replicated these findings with strangers important consequences for how people think
who were assigned to power roles and with dyads about individuals who belong to different social
engaging in negotiations. Although these studies groups (e.g., racial or ethnic or gender groups).
support the predictions of the approach–inhibition More specifically, occupying positions of power
model, it is important to note that several other can lead to stereotype-based impression forma-
studies have found no effects of power on emo- tion processes. Research suggests these processes
tion. These mixed results may simply reflect dif- occur both by default (i.e., ignoring stereotype-
ferences in methods of inducing power. Although disconfirming information) and by design (i.e.,
priming and role-playing typically yield similar attending more to stereotype-confirming informa-
results, parallel effects may not extend to emo- tion). In other words, power seems to facilitate
tion. Studies that employ manipulations of reliance on stereotypes for both cognitive and
dyadic power roles often produce reliable differ- motivational reasons. Cognitively, power holders
ences in emotion, whereas those that employ may have neither the cognitive resources to form
Power 651

accurate impressions nor the motivation to One of the first studies to investigate the effect
be accurate—using negative stereotypes can legit- of intergroup power on intergroup bias used a
imate the existing power differences. These modified version of the minimal groups paradigm.
attentional differences also translate into evalua- In this paradigm, participants are arbitrarily
tions—power holders are more likely to rely on assigned to one of two groups and are asked to
stereotypic information linked to social categories allocate a valued resource (e.g., cash or candies)
than on individuating traits that distinguish indi- between the two groups. Consistent with the idea
viduals from the social groups to which they that power can facilitate bias, a positive relation-
belong. The link between power and stereotyping ship was found between intergroup power and
seems to be strongest when people feel less respon- intergroup discrimination. As people perceived
sible for their judgments (e.g., responsibility norms their own group to have more power, they were
are weak) and when they feel their powerful posi- more likely to distribute resources in a way that
tions are less legitimate. disadvantaged the less-powerful outgroup. Addi­
Not only do the powerful tend to rely on stereo- tional studies manipulating group status have
types when evaluating subordinates; they also tend found similar results, but group power seems to
to evaluate subordinates negatively. Meta-analytic better predict discrimination against outgroups.
studies (which statistically combine findings across Much research has focused on the role stereo-
a number of studies) confirm the link between types play in maintaining and justifying existing
power and derogation. In one laboratory study, power imbalances. Many theories have addressed
for example, researchers manipulated whether this process, including system justification theory,
members of a dyad believed they had power over social dominance theory, and the stereotype con-
one another while they engaged in a problem- tent model. Most germane to the discussion of
solving task. When participants were aware that intergroup power is the idea that stereotypes of
they had power over their partner, they rated their groups differ in part because of the perceived sta-
partner more negatively and themselves more tus of the groups—which often signals differences
positively. Similarly, meta-analyses of data from in resource control. According to the stereotype
managers have revealed that as power increases, so content model, group status and competition lead
do negative evaluations of others and positive to specific stereotypes about and emotions toward
evaluations of self. different social groups. Specifically, perceptions
of different social groups vary along two dimen-
sions: competence and warmth. For example, in
Intergroup Power
the United States, poor people—who are viewed as
In contrast to interpersonal power, intergroup low in both status and competition for valued
power refers to power between groups—when one resources—are perceived to be low in both compe-
group has more control over resources than tence and warmth. As a result, poor people are
another does (e.g., men typically have more power typically viewed with disdain. It is important to
than women do). Intergroup power can occur note that this theory argues that intergroup power
between small groups (e.g., work groups or sports and stereotypes are mutually reinforcing. Thus,
teams) as well as broader social groups in society controlling resources signals competence, which in
(e.g., groups based on ethnicity or gender). turn justifies disparities in resource control.
Although power refers to control, it oftentimes is
coupled with status at the intergroup level of
Current and Future Directions
analysis. This is particularly true when one is
studying naturally occurring groups as opposed to Because power is a fundamental characteristic
those created in the laboratory. A bidirectional of human relationships, and one that varies
relationship between intergroup power and bias across relationships, its consequences permeate
seems to exist. Intergroup power can facilitate bias daily life. Hence, power has far-reaching impli-
in the form of discrimination. The reverse is also cations for understanding human behavior
true—bias in the form of stereotypes serves to across social science disciplines. Currently, psy-
explain and maintain power differences. chologists who study social power are moving
652 Power–Dependence Theory

forward in a number of directions, studying


power in a number of different contexts, from Power–Dependence Theory
the bedroom to the boardroom. Although much
research tends to focus on the potential for Power–dependence theory is a structural theory
abuse that comes with having power, there is a about power in enduring relationships. It describes
renewed interest in recognizing the benefits of how individuals’ reliance on others for valued
having power. Future research within and resources determines the distribution of power in
beyond the field of psychology will benefit from relationships. Power–dependence theory repre-
current theories that take a more nuanced sents a major shift in the way sociologists think
approach, recognizing both the pros and the about power. Many earlier theories about power
cons of having (or lacking) social power. view it as a trait or property of an actor. Power–
dependence theory treats power as a characteristic
Stephanie A. Goodwin and Ann E. Hoover of a relationship and thus focuses on the relation-
ship rather than on the individuals involved in the
See also Dominance Hierarchies; Interdependence relationship.
Theory; Leadership; Need for Power; Power–
Power–dependence theory was developed by the
Dependence Theory; Social Dominance Theory; Status;
sociologist Richard Emerson in the 1960s. Power–
System Justification Theory
dependence theory builds on earlier work in sociol-
ogy by George Homans and Peter Blau and in
psychology by John Thibaut and Harold Kelley.
Further Readings Power–dependence theory, together with the earlier
Depret, E., & Fiske, S. T. (1999). Perceiving the work, forms the basis of social exchange theory,
powerful: Intriguing individuals versus threatening one of the major sociological social-psychological
groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, traditions.
35, 461–480.
Fiske, S. T., & Berdahl, J. L. (2007). Social power. In A.
Definitions, Assumptions, and Postulates
Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology:
A handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 678–692). Power–dependence theory posits that actors in
New York: Guilford. social relations are dependent on each other to
French, J. R. P., & Raven, B. H. (1959). The bases of meet certain goals or needs. In an exchange rela-
social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social tion, the dependence of one actor on another is
power (pp. 150–167). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for determined by the ratio of how much the actor
Social Research. values the resources controlled by the partner to
Galinsky, A. D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Magee, J. C. the number of alternative sources the actor has for
(2003). From power to action. Journal of Personality those resources (resource value vs. resource avail-
and Social Psychology, 85, 453–466. ability). Power is defined as the potential of one
Goodwin, S. A., Gubin, A., Fiske, S. T., & Yzerbyt, V. Y.
actor to obtain favorable outcomes in an exchange
(2000). Power can bias impression processes:
episode at another actor’s expense. In an exchange
Stereotyping subordinates by default and by design.
relationship, the first actor has power over the
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 3, 227–256.
second actor insofar as the first actor controls
Guinote, A. (2007). Behavior variability and the situated
focus theory of power. European Review of Social
resources that the second actor values. Power,
Psychology, 18, 256–295.
then, is clearly related to the dependence of the
Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Anderson, C. (2003). actors on one another. The key postulate of power–
Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological dependence theory is that the power of A over B is
Review, 110, 265–284. equal to the dependence of B on A (Pab = Dba).
Lee-Chai, A. Y., & Bargh, J. A. (Eds.). (2001). The use Therefore, as A’s power over B increases, so does
and abuse of power. Philadelphia: Psychology Press. B’s dependence on A.
Simon, B., & Oakes, P. (2006). Beyond dependence: An Power–dependence theory has four key assump-
identity approach to social power and domination. tions that allow predictions to be made about the
Human Relations, 59, 105–139. behavior of individuals involved in exchange.
Power–Dependence Theory 653

First, an individual’s behavior is motivated by the networks and the distribution of power. In this
desire to increase gain and to avoid loss of valued early test of power–dependence theory, Emerson
resources. Second, exchange relations develop in and Cook verified that power was an attribute of
structures of mutual dependence. This means that a structural position in an exchange network
both parties have some reason to engage in rather than an individual trait. Despite the fact
exchange with each other to obtain resources of that participants were unaware of their position in
value; otherwise there would be no need to form the exchange network, those participants in high-
an exchange relation. Third, actors engage in power positions behaved in a manner consistent
recurrent, mutually contingent exchanges with with their structural power. That is, those actors in
specific partners over time (i.e., they are not high-power positions acquired more benefits from
engaged in simple one-shot transactions). Last, each exchange than did those actors in low-power
valued outcomes obey the law of diminishing mar- positions. Cook and Emerson did find that con-
ginal utility, meaning that after a certain point, cerns about equity of resources and commitment
each additional resource is of less value. between partners reduced the use of power by the
high-power actors. These findings shaped much of
the subsequent research in the power–dependence
Expansion Beyond the Dyad
paradigm (for more examples, see the entry Social
Most interactions between individuals are not iso- Exchange in Networks and Groups).
lated. Instead, most social relations are embedded
in larger social networks. In his structural theory
Other Key Concepts
of power, Richard Emerson expanded his theoriz-
ing to larger networks. For Emerson, the structure In addition to power and dependence, there are
of the network, or how individuals are connected four other key concepts that are necessary to
to each other and the availability of resources understand behaviors in power–dependence rela-
across the network, are vital factors necessary to tions: reciprocity, cohesion, balance, and power-
understand power dynamics within a network. In balancing operations.
Emerson’s terms, networks are composed of rela- Reciprocity, or the cooperative interchange
tions that are interconnected, so exchange in one between exchange partners, is often considered to
relationship affects interaction in other relation- be a vital part of any study of an exchange system.
ships within the network. These connections can Anthropological studies of exchange networks by
be either negative or positive. Connections are scholars such as Claude Lévi-Strauss, Marcel
termed negative if exchange in one relation reduces Mauss, and Bronislaw Malinowski placed a strong
the frequency of exchange in another relation emphasis on the norm of obligation to reciprocate.
involving one of the original actors. For example, In contrast, Richard Emerson viewed the diffuse
it is a negative connection if exchange in the focal norm of obligation to reciprocate as something
relationship, A–B, reduces the likelihood of that may emerge over time but not as something
exchange in an alternate relationship between intrinsic to social exchange. Emerson argued that
A and C. Conversely, connections are termed posi- the reciprocity observed in ongoing exchange
tive if exchange in one relation increases the fre- interactions is based on principles of reinforce-
quency of exchange in another relation involving ment, such that in any interaction, if the behavior
one of the original actors. In the prior example, a of A (which is rewarding to B) does not elicit a
connection is positive if exchange in the A–B rela- rewarding behavior from B to A, then there are
tionship increases the amount of exchange in the two options: A will change his or her behavior to
A–C relationship. In addition, networks can include elicit a rewarding behavior from B, or the A–B
mixed connections, which involve both positive relationship will be terminated.
and negative connections. Cohesion represents the strength of the exchange
One of the major emphases in the application of relation, as well as the likelihood that the relation-
power–dependence theory, beginning with the ship will survive a conflict. The relational cohesion
work of Richard Emerson and Karen Cook, of a relationship is the average dependence of the
was on the structure of connections in exchange actors in the relation: The higher the mutual
654 Power–Dependence Theory

dependence, the higher the relational cohesion. together in a coalition (or some other form of col-
This concept has been explored further by Linda lective action) and reduce the number of alterna-
Molm and her colleagues, as well as by Edward tives available for A. By decreasing A’s alternatives,
Lawler and his colleagues. Molm and her col- B and colleagues in the coalition have increased A’s
leagues have extensively explored the concept of dependence on the coalition and thus reduced
reciprocity in exchange relations, as well as study- A’s power in relation to the coalition. Of the four
ing the effect of reciprocity on cohesion and soli- power-balancing mechanisms, coalition formation
darity. Lawler and his colleagues have primarily and network extension are the two studied most
been concerned with cohesion and solidarity in commonly.
exchange.
An exchange relationship is balanced if the
actors are equally dependent on one another Influence of Power–Dependence Theory
(Dab  =  Dba). Therefore, an imbalanced relation-
ship is one in which there are unequal dependen- Power–dependence theory has had influence
cies, in which one party is more reliant on the across many domains both inside and outside
other. Balance as described by Emerson is a rare social psychology. It laid the groundwork for
state in exchange relations. The balance in an social exchange theory, which is one of the major
exchange relation is fragile because actors are theoretical programs within sociological social
motivated to maintain or increase their power in psychology. Social exchange theory builds on
order to increase their benefits and minimize the core assumptions and postulates of power–
losses. Thus, relationships (even those that begin in dependence theory to explore micro processes
a power-balanced state) are likely to ebb and flow within social networks. Most recently it has been
between balance and imbalance. concerned with dynamics of exchange, trust,
Richard Emerson argued that power-im­balanced cohesion, emotion, and solidarity.
exchange relationships are unstable and tend Power–dependence theory has also influ-
toward balance. He described four balancing enced organizational studies, particularly through
mechanisms by which the relationships tend to Jeffrey Pfeffer and Gerald Salancik’s resource
balance. The mechanisms focus on changes in the dependence perspective. The key postulate of the
value of the resources exchanged or the alterna- resource dependence perspective is identical to
tives for the resources being exchanged. By altering power–dependence theory’s central argument.
either one of these, the power and dependence of Resource dependence theory asserts that organi-
the actors on each other will be changed, but zations have a fundamental need for resources
maybe not permanently. from both outside and within the organization.
Emerson’s four power-balancing operations are Those entities that exclusively provide the most
withdrawal, status giving, network extension, and needed or valued resources will have the most
coalition formation. In a relationship in which A is power in the organization.
more powerful than B (i.e., Pab  >  Pba and Finally, power–dependence theory has influ-
Dba  >  Dab), the power distribution can move enced the study of social networks within organi-
toward balance by B taking one of the following zations. Illustrative topics of investigation include
actions. First, B can withdraw from the relation- strategic alliances, collaborative manufacturing
ship. The second option available to B is called enterprises, vertical integration of firms, interlock-
status giving. B can balance the relationship by ing directorates, network diffusion of innovative
increasing the value to A of the resources B con- practices, and mergers.
trols. One way B can accomplish this in a relatively As social scientists turn their focus to the effects
low-cost way is by giving status or prestige to A. of social networks, power–dependence theory pro-
The next option available to B is network exten- vides a way to understand the behaviors of actors
sion. By increasing B’s number of alternatives, B within networks and the dynamics of the networks
reduces dependence on A and thus increases B’s that are likely to emerge over time.
power in relation to A. Finally, B can attempt to
form a coalition. B and other alternatives for A join Alexandra Gerbasi
Prejudice 655

See also Power; Social Exchange in Networks and responses to members of one’s own group (the
Groups; Social Networks; Status ingroup) than to other groups (outgroups). Second,
prejudice can involve the lowering of the evalua-
tion of a member of a group who deviates from the
Further Readings stereotypic role of that group (e.g., women who
Blau, P. M. (1986). Exchange and power in social life. succeed in business). This expanded conceptualiza-
New York: Wiley. (Original work published 1964) tion serves to align prejudice closely with processes
Cook, K. S., & Emerson, R. M. (1978). Power, equity of stereotyping and discrimination, and, indeed,
and commitment in exchange networks. American during the past 50  years, studies of these three
Sociological Review, 43, 721–739. processes have been closely intertwined.
Emerson, R. M. (1972). Exchange theory, Part I: A
psychological basis for social exchange. In J. Berger,
M. Zelditch Jr., & B. Anderson (Eds.), Sociological Prejudice as a Product of
theories in progress (pp. 38–57). Boston: Houghton Psychodynamic and Personality Factors
Mifflin. Although topics related to prejudice have been of
Emerson, R. M. (1972). Exchange theory, Part II: long-standing interest to psychologists, research in
Exchange relations and networks. In J. Berger, prejudice came to the fore in social psychology in
M. Zelditch Jr., & B. Anderson (Eds.), Sociological the buildup to and aftermath of World War II. The
theories in progress (pp. 58–87). Boston: Houghton
horrors of the Holocaust fueled a desire to under-
Mifflin.
stand the psychological basis of the Nazis’ views
Homans, G. C. (1974). Social behavior and its
about, and treatment of, the various social groups
elementary forms. New York: Harcourt, Brace and
that they vilified and persecuted: Jews, homosexu-
World. (Original work published 1961)
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control
als, gypsies, the disabled.
of organizations: A resource dependence perspective.
Much of this early theorizing was heavily influ-
New York: Harper & Row. enced by Freudian psychoanalytic theory because
Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social of its prominence as a theoretical approach before
psychology of groups. New York: Wiley. the war. In the first instance, researchers argued
that prejudice was a product of hostility and frus-
tration that was displaced or projected onto mem-
bers of particular groups that then functioned as
Prejudice scapegoats. According to this model, the behavior
of the Nazis was explained by the humiliation that
Prejudice is one of the defining topics of social Germany had experienced after World War I and
psychology and a core theme in the study of inter- the economic turmoil of the early 1930s.
group relations. In common parlance and accord- Among the most influential ideas of this form
ing to the simple definition proposed by Gordon were those of John Dollard and colleagues, who
Allport, prejudice can be thought of as “thinking argued that intergroup hostility and aggression
ill of others without sufficient warrant.” Influenced could be understood as an outpouring of the
strongly by Allport’s definition, prejudice has tra- built-up psychic energy produced by frustration. In
ditionally been conceived of as a negative attitude line with Freudian theory, their model argued that
toward members of a given group, based exclu- an individual’s expression of prejudice had an
sively on their membership in that group. Literally, important cathartic function in releasing pent-up
the term refers to the process of prejudging people energy and restoring the individual to a state of
on the basis of their group membership, so in prin- equilibrium.
ciple, prejudice can be both negative and positive. Refinements of this idea argued that prejudice
Thus, more recently, psychologists have expanded reflected the operation of a general process whereby
the scope of the definition of prejudice in two individuals feel frustration toward individuals and
ways in order to include a broader range of biases groups with power over them and displace those
that do not necessarily involve antipathy. First, frustrations onto members of other groups that are
prejudice may reflect more systematically positive visible, identifiable, and vulnerable. In this way,
656 Prejudice

groups resolve conflict that they cannot deal with that pathologized the prejudiced, representing
through the creation of conflict with a third party. them as abnormal and the “other.” However, this
Other research in this tradition sought to approach was called into question by a number of
explain why particular groups are selected as researchers (notably Roger Brown and, later,
scapegoats. Projection theorists suggested that tar- Michael Billig) on the basis of a reexamination of
gets are chosen on the basis of characteristics that relevant data. Their work indicated that the analy-
they are seen to possess and that prejudiced indi- sis of authoritarianism was oversimplified and that
viduals also see in themselves but disapprove of or prejudice was not confined to this group. Liberals
seek to draw attention away from. In these terms, also demonstrated prejudice in related ways. The
prejudice is a defense mechanism and a form of principal objection to the psychodynamic approach
denial: People are most prejudiced toward those to prejudice was that it sought to explain wide-
who are similar to themselves and who remind spread phenomena in terms of processes that were
them of their own limitations and failings. mainly abnormal and unique to the individual.
However, the most influential work within the The key point about German anti-Semitism—the
psychoanalytic tradition was that of Theodor point that made it so important and so horrific—
Adorno and other members of the Frankfurt was that it was an aspect of an ideology common
School, as articulated in their classic text The to a large number of people. In short, prejudice
Authoritarian Personality. In their exhaustive seemed to be a group-level phenomenon, and its
inquiries into the psychological substrates of anti- analysis needed to speak to the social reality of
Semitism, these researchers interviewed and admin- shared beliefs and practices.
istered a range of psychometric tests to large In line with this logic, researchers started to
numbers of participants. Within these data they formulate theories of prejudice that focused on the
identified a number of distinctive patterns of cog- way in which the psychology of prejudice was
nition that appeared to differentiate between par- structured by a person’s place within a broader
ticipants who were prejudiced (authoritarians) and social system. This endeavor was provided with
others who were more tolerant or open minded. strong empirical foundations by the famous
Specifically, the thought processes of prejudiced Robbers Cave studies of Muzafer Sherif and col-
individuals were characterized by intolerance of leagues. In this research, conducted in the late
ambiguity, rigidity, concreteness (poor abstract 1940s and early 1950s, the researchers assigned
reasoning), and overgeneralization. Such individu- boys at a summer camp to different groups and
als were thus portrayed as being inclined to see the arranged for these groups to compete for goals
social world in black-and-white terms—evincing that only one group could attain. Under these con-
strong and disdainful rejection of others who were ditions, the groups displayed extreme hostility
seen as inferior to themselves and their ingroup. toward each other. Moreover, this hostility was
The origins of the authoritarian personality were underpinned by prejudicial attitudes and stereo-
also traced to individuals’ childhood experiences— types. Significantly, this prejudice was displayed by
specifically, to the hierarchical and abusive rela- normal, healthy youngsters in the absence of
tionships that authoritarians had with their parents. physical, economic, historical, or personal differ-
In contrast, liberals (nonauthoritarians) were ences or a history of frustration, exploitation, or
believed to be the product of a more equalitarian repression.
upbringing and as a result to be more creative and On the basis of these findings, Sherif formulated
sublimated, more flexible, and less likely to endorse his realistic group conflict theory. This theory
stereotypic representations of others. asserted that prejudice is an aspect of social con-
flict and results from social competition for
resources. At the same time, as latter phases of the
Prejudice as a Product
boys’ camp studies revealed, prejudice can be ame-
of Realistic Group Conflict
liorated if group interests are realigned through the
The representation of prejudice as a manifestation introduction of superordinate goals. When the
of a distinct, dysfunctional personality was highly boys had to cooperate and pool resources in order
influential, not least because it fit with lay theories to achieve goals that neither could achieve alone
Prejudice 657

(i.e., if they had superordinate goals), the prejudice with differences in value, the primary source of
that had been displayed when they were in compe- which was a person’s group memberships. We
tition gave way to mutual respect and tolerance. tend to like people who are associated with the
Against the view that prejudice is the product of a groups we belong to (ingroups); we are more
pathological personality, Sherif had shown that it inclined to dislike, distrust, and reject those who
inhabited the minds of normal human beings and belong to outgroups.
that the same minds that expressed prejudice Like Sherif, Allport noted that these things were
toward another group could also treat that group not set in stone and had the capacity to change.
with forbearance and understanding. However, like Adorno, Allport (and most other
Recent work has extended the ideas of realistic researchers) still clung to the view that categories
group conflict theory to systematic differences in could be used in a more or less rational manner
social ideology. In particular, work by Jim Sidanius, and that people who are prejudiced are particu-
Felicia Pratto, and colleagues on social dominance larly inclined to use dichotomous categories (e.g.,
orientation demonstrates that people differ in the believing that ingroups are good and outgroups
extent to which they believe that the world funda- are bad). Indeed, it was only in 1969, when Henri
mentally involves competition between groups and Tajfel published his influential paper titled
that it is appropriate for some groups to dominate “Cognitive Aspects of Prejudice,” that the full
other groups. People higher in social dominance implications of the cognitive analysis that Allport
orientation exhibit more prejudice toward mem- had pioneered came to fruition.
bers of a range of other groups than do people At the core of Tajfel’s treatise was a rejection of
who are lower in social dominance orientation. prevailing accounts that considered prejudice (and
stereotyping) to be irrational and pathological,
and an appreciation that prejudice arose from the
Prejudice as a Product of Categorization
structure of group memberships and intergroup
A further critical step toward recognition of preju- relations that led to particular cognitions. Prejudice,
dice as an aspect of a healthy rather than a diseased he argued, is a reflection of people’s group mem-
mind was advanced by Gordon Allport’s landmark berships and their attempts to understand and
text The Nature of Prejudice, published in 1954. explain features of the social world (in particular,
The central theme of this text was that prejudice the actions of other groups) that impinge on those
was not an aberration but an aspect of normal group memberships.
human psychology. Thus Allport’s answer to the Tajfel saw three processes as central to this pro-
question “Why do human beings slip so easily into cess, categorization, assimilation, and the search
ethnic prejudice?” was “They do so because [its] for coherence, but it was the first of these that his
two essential ingredients—erroneous generalization own empirical work brought to the fore. Coming
and hostility—are natural and common capacities from a background of research into processes of
of the human mind.” Central to the first of these perceptual judgment, his particular contribution
points was Allport’s recognition that prejudice was to show how normal categorization processes
relied on the propensity of individuals to engage in could be the basis for biased judgments of indi-
social categorization, whereby they reacted to other viduals on the basis of their group membership.
people in terms as their group membership rather For instance, when participants were shown a
than as individuals. He observed that the “human series of lines of varying lengths, with the four
mind must think with the aid of categories” but also shortest lines labeled A and the four longest labeled
noted that “once formed, categories are the basis B, and were subsequently asked to recall the length
for normal prejudgment. We cannot possibly avoid of these lines, the participants tended to accentuate
this process. Orderly living depends upon it.” the difference between the two categories of lines
Allport’s major contribution was to expand on by exaggerating the difference between the lengths
the nature of the social categorization process as of the A lines and the B lines and the similarities
an aspect of individual psychology. In particular, between lines that were in the same group (A or B).
he proposed that prejudice was promoted by the The point that Tajfel abstracted from the study
tendency for social categorizations to be associated was that the provision of category labels led to
658 Prejudice

systematic distortion in participants’ judgment: would lead members of one group to discriminate
They saw the two sets of lines as more different in favor of the ingroup to which they belonged and
than they really were, and they saw lines in the against an outgroup. In these studies, participants
same set as more similar than they really were. were assigned to groups that were intended to be as
Moreover, the critical step that Tajfel took was to stripped down and meaningless as possible (e.g.,
recognize the link between these categorization based on participants’ estimation of the number of
effects and features of prejudicial judgment. These dots on a screen or their preference for the abstract
results implied that if judgments of individuals painters Klee or Kandinsky). The plan was then to
were informed by awareness of their group mem- start adding meaning to the situation in order to
bership, then those judgments could be systemati- discover at what point discrimination would show
cally distorted such that, on dimensions perceived its face.
to be correlated with those group memberships, The key finding of the studies was that even
individuals viewed members of the same groups as these most minimal of conditions were sufficient to
more similar to each other and members of differ- encourage ingroup-favoring responses. That is,
ent groups as more different from each other than when assigning points to anonymous members of
they really were. the groups, participants tended to deviate from a
This analysis opened the door to a “cognitive strategy of fairness by awarding more points to
revolution” in the study of prejudice and stereo- people who were identified as ingroup rather than
typing that underpinned the greater part of social- outgroup members. Significantly, too, this pattern
psychological research into these topics in the occurred in the absence of a history of conflict,
1970s and 1980s. Indeed, it paved the way for an animosity, or interdependence between the groups.
appreciation of prejudice as an aspect of general There was also no prospect of personal gain.
social cognition. In line with much of Allport’s Further research also showed that the minimal
reasoning, this view understood prejudice to arise group studies have broader relevance to issues of
from cognitive processes (e.g., the accentuation of social perception and cognition. For example, par-
interclass difference and intraclass similarity) that ticipants assigned to minimal groups have been
were normal but nevertheless problematic because found to describe the outgroup in such studies far
they introduced bias into the processing of infor- less favorably than the ingroup (e.g., as less flexi-
mation about individuals and groups. ble, less kind, and less fair).
A key metaphor here was that of the individual As later argued by John Turner, the most
as a cognitive miser. Proposed by Shelley Taylor important upshot of the original minimal group
and Susan Fiske, this framework characterized studies was that they suggested that the mere act of
prejudicial (i.e., distorted) stereotypes as a product individuals categorizing themselves as group mem-
of the requirement to engage in social categoriza- bers was sufficient to lead them to display ingroup
tion in order to preserve limited cognitive resources. favoritism. In this, the results challenged estab-
Thus prejudice was still seen as erroneous and lished theories of prejudice by demonstrating that
problematic, but it was now explained as an inevi- discrimination in favor of an ingroup need be
table, if unfortunate, outcome of the limitations of underpinned neither by a prejudiced personality
humans as information processors. nor by realistic conflict or deep-seated (e.g., psycho­
dynamic) motives.
Building on these insights, Tajfel and Turner’s
Prejudice as a Product of Social Identity
social identity theory extended this analysis by
At the same time that Tajfel’s ideas were informing specifying how social structural factors deter-
the development of social cognitive approaches to mined, first, what strategy individuals adopted in
stereotyping and prejudice, his own work was their dealings with other groups and, second,
developing in a somewhat different direction. The whether these strategies were personal or collec-
groundwork for this direction was provided by the tive. The theory argued that individuals would
minimal group studies that he conducted with col- engage in direct collective competition with an
leagues in the early 1970s. The purpose of these outgroup (e.g., display discrimination of the form
studies was to identify the minimal conditions that shown in the minimal group studies) only when
Prejudice 659

they believed that intergroup relations were inse- sive racism, modern racism, symbolic racism) that
cure in the sense of being perceived to be unstable are different from traditional prejudice, which is
and illegitimate. In other words, members of low- blatant. In general, many researchers have argued
status groups are predicted to embrace beliefs and that although the overt expression of many preju-
act in ways that directly challenge high-status out- dices toward minority groups has declined over
groups’ status, and those high-status groups are in time, underlying prejudices remain stubborn and
turn predicted to embrace beliefs and act in ways strong but are expressed in covert ways. Researchers
that defend and justify their position. These have thus argued that while perceivers who belong
dynamics can clearly contribute to prejudice by to dominant groups have learned to control their
reinforcing group-based treatment of others that overt displays of prejudice, they are not able to do
disadvantages them relative to one’s ingroup. so on covert measures. Contemporary prejudice is
Critically, though, social identity theorists see such thus typically expressed indirectly, often couched
expressions of prejudice as context-specific res­ in support of system-justifying ideologies (such as
ponses that arise in particular social-psychological meritocracy) that benefit the dominant group, and
conditions and reflect the position of one’s group it produces subtle forms of discrimination (e.g.,
within a particular system of intergroup relations. mainly when negative treatment can be justified on
This analysis was developed though the lens of the basis of some factor other than group member-
self-categorization theory in Penelope Oakes, ship). Nevertheless, there is evidence that, even at
Alexander Haslam, and John Turner’s 1994 text this unconscious level, processes of stereotyping
Stereotyping and Social Reality. This theory argued and prejudice will be sensitive to the identities that
that rather than being irrational, prejudice can be are primed in a particular context and to the mean-
understood to be an aspect of a political process ing of those identities in the particular situation at
that reflects and advances the perceived interests of hand. Consistent with this point, there is evidence
those groups with which a person identities in a that social identity and self-categorization pro-
particular set of social circumstances. In these cesses play a major role in the escalation and
terms, the problem of prejudice is a problem of reduction of prejudice and in determining people’s
politics and ideology (to do with different groups’ willingness to express prejudice openly. In particu-
disagreement about how those interests should be lar, a number of studies have shown that people’s
advanced) rather than of group psychology and willingness to express prejudicial attitudes increases
social perception per se. markedly if they believe that such an expression is
normative for their group and if they identify with
that group.
Prejudice as a Product of Habit of Mind
Recent research on prejudice proposes that because
Conclusion
of the fundamental cognitive and motivational
forces that promote prejudice and the reinforce- In summary, prejudice comes in several forms. It
ment of particular biases (most notably related to can reflect either direct negative feelings about
gender, age, race, and ethnicity) through early members of another group, preference for one’s
socialization and cultural experience, people own group or another group, or lowered evalua-
develop prejudices that represent habitual ways of tions of members of another group who violate
thinking. When individuals are exposed to mem- stereotypic expectations. A number of personal-
bers or symbols of the outgroup, those individu- ity, cognitive, motivational, social, and cultural
als’ biased thoughts are automatically activated. forces contribute to the development and mainte-
This spontaneous prejudice, which may not be nance of prejudice. In addition, prejudice may be
consciously recognized by people who possess it, blatant and overt, or it can be harbored uncon-
is commonly measured with response latency sciously and covert. In fact, many people who
techniques, such as the Implicit Association Test. believe they are not prejudiced may be implicitly
The evidence that people may have unconscious prejudiced. Under certain circumstances, such as
(implicit) biases provides support for a number of when norms change, implicit biases are expressed
perspectives on contemporary prejudice (e.g., aver- more explicitly.
660 Prejudice

Understanding the causes and nature of preju- in a social cauldron of norms, values, and emo-
dice can help guide interventions for reducing tions that group members come to share and that
prejudice. For example, to the extent that preju- fuel their collective actions in the world. Although
dice is based in social categorization and social much of this “heat” has gone out of social-
identity, interventions that alter the way people psychological research in the past 30 years, there
think about groups and their memberships can is little doubt that it is still keenly felt on the front
ameliorate prejudice. Strategies that encourage line of intergroup relations.
people to categorize themselves differently have
been shown to lead to change in the treatment and S. Alexander Haslam and John F. Dovidio
representation of others, even on an implicit level.
This is illustrated by a study in which Samuel See also Authoritarian Personality; Categorization;
Gaertner and colleagues defined participants as Common Ingroup Identity Model; Discrimination;
members of one of two groups, each comprising Hate Crimes; Implicit Association Test (IAT); Implicit
three members. As in the minimal group studies, Prejudice; Intergroup Contact Theory; Realistic
this categorization led to intergroup discrimina- Group Conflict Theory; Social Identity Theory;
tion. After this, however, some participants were Stereotyping
induced to recategorize the people as either one
group of six or as six individuals, and both these
recategorization strategies served to reduce inter- Further Readings
group discrimination and prejudice. Specifically, Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., &
the one-group manipulation increased the per- Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality.
ceived attractiveness of former outgroup members, New York: Harper.
and the separate-individuals redefinition reduced Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice.
the perceived attractiveness of former ingroup Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.
members. Consistent with this point, studies of Gaertner, S. L., Mann, J., Murrell, A., & Dovidio, J. F.
intergroup contact—which examine the relation- (1989). Reducing intergroup bias: The benefits of
ship between people’s exposure to members of an recategorization. Journal of Personality and Social
outgroup and their prejudice toward them— Psychology, 57, 239–249.
generally find that contact is effective to the extent Guimond, S. (2000). Group socialization and prejudice:
that it is associated with a softening of the bound- The social transmission of intergroup attitudes and
aries between ingroup and outgroup and with beliefs. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30,
reduced anxiety about the implications and conse- 335–354.
quences of future contact. Haslam, S. A., & Wilson, A. (2000). Is prejudice really
A key point in the most recent developments in personal? The contribution of a group’s shared
the study of prejudice is that although it is cus- stereotypes to intergroup prejudice. British Journal of
Social Psychology, 39, 45–63.
tomary for prejudice to be thought of as a process
Oakes, P. J., Haslam, S. A., & Turner, J. C. (1994).
that arises from the processing of information
Stereotyping and social reality. Oxford, UK:
about others (“them”), prejudice is also very
Blackwell.
much driven by group members’ understanding of
Reicher, S. D., Haslam, S. A., & Rath, R. (2008). Making
themselves (as “us”). In this regard, as Stephen a virtue of evil: A five-step social identity model of the
Reicher and colleagues have noted, the most per- development of collective hate. Social and Personality
nicious prejudices of the past century have arisen Psychology Compass, 2, 1313–1344.
when group members have been encouraged by Sherif, M. (1967). Group conflict and co-operation:
leaders to develop a theory of their ingroup that Their social psychology. London: Routledge & Kegan
first excludes outgroup members, then defines Paul.
them as a threat to the ingroup, and finally comes Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An
to celebrate prejudicial treatment of others as intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression.
essential for the preservation of that ingroup. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Rather than being a matter of cold, detached Tajfel, H. (1969). Cognitive aspects of prejudice. Journal
information processing, such prejudice is fomented of Social Issues, 25, 79–97.
Prisoner’s Dilemma 661

succinctly captures a fundamental tension between


Prisoner’s Dilemma what theories of rational choice predict and what
behavioral observations reveal about cooperation
In its simplest form, the prisoner’s dilemma refers and competition in the real world. For example,
to a mixed-motive conflict in which two interde- although game theory predicts that both decision
pendent decision makers have to decide whether makers in a prisoner’s dilemma will choose the
to cooperate with each other or to defect. For each defecting option, observed rates of cooperation—at
decision maker, the defect choice strictly domi- least in experimental versions of the dilemma—are
nates the cooperative choice (i.e., regardless of often much higher than expected. Moreover,
what the other person chooses, defection yields a empirical rates of cooperation observed in many
better payoff to the individual than does coopera- natural settings are also greater than predicted by
tion). Yet both decision makers will be better off rational choice and game theory models.
if they each choose cooperation rather than if Recognizing both its simplicity and its richness,
either defects. Hence, there is a choice dilemma. social psychologists have used the prisoner’s
The prisoner’s dilemma derives its name from a dilemma paradigm to conduct a very large number
prototypic situation in which the police have of experiments over the past five decades. These
arrested two people suspected of having commit- experiments have yielded invaluable and reliable
ted a bank heist and have placed them in separate, insights into the antecedents and consequences of
isolated cells so that they cannot communicate. cooperation.
Because the police do not possess adequate mate-
rial evidence for conviction, they offer each pris-
oner the option of testifying against the other. If
Antecedents of Cooperation
one of the prisoners agrees to confess to the crime Much of the early psychological research focused
(and, in effect, betray the other), that prisoner will on identifying the psychological and social ante-
be set free, whereas the other prisoner will receive cedents of cooperation. For example, early studies
the maximum sentence allowable, 12 years. If both examined the role of decision makers’ expectations
prisoners confess, each receives an intermediate about what the other party would do in the situa-
sentence of 6 years. Finally, if neither prisoner con- tion. These studies showed, for instance, that posi-
fesses, both receive a minimum sentence of only tive expectations regarding others’ cooperativeness
4  months for the minor offense of loitering near enhanced an individual’s cooperation rates whereas
the scene of a crime. Obviously, both prisoners expectations of competitive behavior predicted
would be best off if both refuse to confess. defensive competitive behavior in return. Similarly,
However, each is tempted to confess. If both do so, a number of studies showed that trust in the other
however, both are worse off. person’s cooperative motives and intentions made
When first introduced, the prisoner’s dilemma the cooperative choice easier.
was viewed by social scientists as a simple but Still other studies demonstrated that individual
powerful analogue of many real-world situations differences in social values (defined in terms of
involving interdependent social actors for whom people’s distinct preferences for various self–other
mutual cooperation is attractive but problematic. payoff patterns) influenced cooperation rates. In
Such situations include social exchanges, bilateral particular, people with more prosocial and altruis-
negotiations, arms races, and the allocation of tic motives were more likely to cooperate in a
shared but scarce resources. This entry looks at prisoner’s dilemma situation than were those with
this line of research as it has developed over time. more individualistic or competitive social motives.
Other studies using the prisoner’s dilemma investi-
gated how properties of the choice itself influenced
Overview and History
cooperation and noncooperation. For example,
The prisoner’s dilemma game spawned an enor- studies have shown that the way in which a choice
mous amount of empirical research on coopera- is framed (e.g., whether it is framed in ways high-
tion and conflict. Part of the appeal of the lighting prospective gains or prospective losses to
prisoner’s dilemma task as a research tool is that it the individual) influences cooperation levels.
662 Prisoner’s Dilemma

Finally, studies explored how the perceived After a period of rather prolific research activity
social relationship between the interdependent throughout the 1960s and 1970s, enthusiasm for
decision makers influenced their construal of the empirical studies using the prisoner’s dilemma
task and their subsequent choice. For example, paradigm waned somewhat. This decline in interest
studies showed that cooperation rates tended to be reflected, at least in part, a sense among researchers
higher when individuals believed they were inter- that the major research questions and most inter-
acting with other members of their own social esting variables influencing cooperation and non-
category or group (ingroup members) than when cooperation had been investigated in previous
they thought they were interacting with members research.
of another social group or category (outgroup
members).
A Resurgence of Interest:
Another important stream of psychological
Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma Game Research
research on the prisoner’s dilemma investigated
mechanisms for actually increasing cooperation Beginning in the early 1980s, however, innovative
rates. These studies have generally adopted one of research by Robert Axelrod revitalized scientific
two approaches. The first approach has focused on interest in this line of research. This new work,
exploring the efficacy of individual-level behavioral which focused on cooperation in repeated or iter-
strategies for inducing mutual cooperation. For ated versions of the prisoner’s dilemma, used
example, a variety of behavioral strategies employ- a clever and, as it turned out, enormously genera-
ing variations on patterns of reciprocity have been tive computer tournament methodology. Using this
shown to reliably elicit and sustain cooperation. computer tournament approach, Axelrod and his
One particularly famous strategy involved the use associates were able to systematically investigate
of gradually increasing cooperative initiatives. The the comparative efficacy of different choice strate-
premise behind this approach was that a small ini- gies for inducing and sustaining cooperation over
tial offer of cooperation would signal to the other long periods of time.
party the willingness to be cooperative, without His results demonstrated, most dramatically,
exposing the initiator to excessive amounts of risk. that a very simple strategy known as tit for tat was
If the small cooperative gesture was reciprocated, able to outperform even highly complex and cog-
then the decision maker could slowly increase his nitively sophisticated decision strategies. In tit for
or her cooperation levels. As each level was recip- tat, one initially cooperates on the first round of
rocated or matched by the other party, participants play and thereafter does whatever one’s opponent
would move toward higher and higher levels of or partner did in the previous round. Axelrod’s
cooperation. Not surprisingly, studies in this vein systematic research further isolated the properties
also demonstrated that unconditional cooperation of tit for tat that contributed to its strong perfor-
was not effective at sustaining cooperation because mance. In particular, tit for tat is nice (i.e., it
eventually the other party would be tempted to always cooperates initially). It is also provokable
exploit the unilateral cooperator. (i.e., it punishes noncooperation immediately). Yet
A second approach to eliciting cooperation has it is also forgiving (i.e., it is willing to return to
focused on the use of structural changes or cooperation after administering a suitable punish-
arrangements that enhance cooperation. Studies in ment). It also has the advantage, Axelrod sug-
this vein have demonstrated, for instance, that cer- gested, of clarity, thus enabling it to avoid
tain forms of communication and discussion before unintentional cycles of mutual defection. In a nut-
choosing one’s response can improve cooperation shell, tit for tat is effective at promoting coopera-
levels. Furthermore, increasing the salience and tion and deterring exploitation.
certainty of information regarding others’ choices Axelrod’s computer tournament methodology
can affect cooperation. In particular, unequivocal spawned a large number of studies across multiple
evidence that others are cooperating has been disciplines and subfields, including political sci-
shown to increase cooperation rates. Increasing ence, behavioral economics, game theory, sociol-
the perceived duration of the relationship can ogy, and social psychology. It has led also to the
enhance cooperation rates as well. discovery of numerous alternative strategies for
Prisoner’s Dilemma 663

eliciting cooperation across a variety of contexts. increasingly interested in how group or team iden-
Thus, although tit for tat proved to be a powerful tities influence patterns of cooperation and compe-
strategy for eliciting and sustaining cooperation in tition. Similarly, there is a great deal of interest in
Axelrod’s original tournament, subsequent studies how embedded social structures, such as neighbor-
showed that another simple strategy, called hoods and network ties, facilitate cooperation and
win-stay, lose-switch, turned out to be quite capa- its maintenance.
ble of producing strong and resilient results when For example, research in this area has shown that
paired against a variety of other strategies. As its the preservation of social context, even though deci-
name suggests, a player using the win-stay, lose- sion makers within the neighborhood might be
switch strategy continues to use the same strategy changing their individual strategies, can result in
so long as that strategy is producing favorable pay- high levels of cooperation as well as neighborhoods
offs in its transactions. As soon as it begins to that are resistant to invasion by predators or cheat-
produce inferior payoffs, however, the player ers. Other studies have been examining the role of
switches to another choice. sanctions and norms on the stability of cooperation.
Another subsequent and promising wave of The results of these sociological explorations will
research has examined the problem of cooperation undoubtedly be more nuanced and refined psycho-
in what are called “noisy” prisoner’s dilemmas. In logical models of cooperative judgment and choice.
a noisy prisoner’s dilemma situation, players oper- Recently, the prisoner’s dilemma has even been
ate under conditions of uncertainty regarding the viewed as a useful approach for studying cross-
true level of cooperation of the other player or play- cultural or comparative aspects of cooperative
ers. It is interesting to note that when uncertainty of choice in dilemma situations. Increasingly sophisti-
this sort is present, tit for tat performs much more cated agent-based modeling techniques suggest the
poorly than many other strategies because it tends future for prisoner’s dilemma research remains bright.
to set off costly cycles of mutual punishment or
retaliation for perceived defections. Stated differ- Roderick M. Kramer
ently and perhaps somewhat counterintuitively, See also Cooperation and Competition; Negotiation and
strict reciprocity does not work so well when infor- Bargaining; Social Dilemmas; Trust
mation about others’ actions is ambiguous. In con-
trast, strategies that display generosity or leniency
by underreacting to others’ apparent defections are Further Readings
able to sustain high levels of cooperative exchanges
for long periods of time. In a sense, such strategies Axelrod, R. (1984). Effective choice in the prisoner’s
compensate for the deleterious effects of noise on dilemma. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 24, 3–25.
the interpretation of others’ actions. Bacharach, M. (2006). Beyond individual choice: Teams
Simulation work using the Axelrodian para- and frames in game theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
digm is enjoying considerable vogue and continues
Bendor, J., Kramer, R. M., & Stout, S. (1991). When in
to generate new and important insights into the
doubt: Cooperation in the noisy prisoner’s dilemma.
evolution of cooperation and the stability of coop-
Journal of Conflict Resolution, 35, 691–719.
erative regimes.
Komorita, S. S. (1995). Interpersonal relations: Mixed-
motive interaction. Annual Review of Psychology, 46,
Current Developments 183–207.
and Future Directions Messick, D. M., & McClintock, C. G. (1968).
Motivational bases of choice in experimental games.
As a simple but elegant prototype of mixed-motive Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 4, 1–25.
conflict situations, the prisoner’s dilemma game, in Nowak, M., & Sigmund, K. (1993). A strategy of win-
all its variations, continues to occupy a special stay, lose-shift that outperforms tit-for-tat in the
place in the social sciences. Moreover, recent theo- prisoner’s dilemma game. Nature, 364, 56–58.
retical developments promise to enlarge and enrich Rapoport, A., & Chammah, A. M. (1965). Prisoner’s
early game theoretic perspectives. For example, dilemma: A study in conflict and cooperation. Ann
sociologists and political scientists have become Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
664 Procedural Justice

Stahl, D. O., & Wilson, P. W. (1994). Experimental experienced. Voice procedures were seen as fairer
evidence on players’ models of other players. Journal than were procedures that placed all the control
of Economic Behavior and Organization, 25, and input in the hands of the decision maker. In
309–327. addition, regardless of whether the participant’s
team won or lost the trial, and regardless of
whether the outcome of the trial conformed to the
participant’s private knowledge about the team-
Procedural Justice mate’s behavior, the voice procedure led to greater
satisfaction with the verdict and greater perceived
Procedural justice refers to the fairness of decision- fairness in the trial outcome than did the mute pro-
making procedures and of other social and cedure. Of course, winning participants were gen-
organizational processes. In social psychology, erally more satisfied than losing participants, and
virtually all research on procedural justice refers correct decisions were generally seen as fairer than
to subjective procedural fairness—the subjective incorrect decisions, but in each combination of the
feeling that one has been treated fairly under a other factors, the voice procedure prompted more
given procedure. Early psychological studies of positive reactions. Subsequent studies have shown
the impact of justice judgments focused on judg- that such voice effects have a powerful impact on
ments of whether outcome distributions were fair procedural fairness judgments in a variety of orga-
or unfair—a topic called distributive justice— nizational and governmental contexts. When
without paying much attention to the procedures people are given an opportunity to control what
used to arrive at the outcome allocation. In the information is considered by a decision maker,
early 1970s, however, experimental studies of especially when they are given an opportunity to
psychological reactions to various legal proce- express their views about the situation under con-
dures showed that procedures have their own sideration, the procedure is seen as fairer.
impact on feelings of fairness. Psychologist John Subsequent work by Robert Folger and others
Thibaut, law professor Laurens Walker, and their showed that decisions that come from fair proce-
colleagues showed that some procedures result in dures are more readily accepted than those from
feelings of greater fairness, regardless of whether unfair procedures, a phenomenon Folger dubbed
the outcome of the process was fair or unfair, the fair process effect. Later research showed that
favorable or unfavorable. The discovery of proce- when people believe that the process used to reach
dural justice effects was important because it a decision is fair, they are more likely to accept the
showed that it is possible to increase feelings of decision. In many of these studies, the way pro-
fairness by using the right procedure, so that even cesses were made fair was by including an oppor-
those who lose or experience negative outcomes tunity for voice on the part of those affected by the
can feel fairly treated. decision.
A good example of a procedural justice effect is Tom Tyler and his colleagues studied the work-
seen in the first experiment that Thibaut, Walker, ings of the fair process effect in political and social
and their colleagues conducted on the topic. contexts and found that judgments of procedural
Participants in that study found themselves involved fairness were strongly correlated with the accep-
in a complex dispute resolution process because tance of authorities’ decisions. Tyler also showed
another member of their team had been accused of that an important factor in people’s willingness to
cheating. The experiment varied whether the par- obey a law is whether they believe that the process
ticipant knew that his or her teammate had in fact that generated the law was fair. Most of the early
cheated, whether the outcome of the “trial” was studies on acceptance of authority looked at the
favorable or unfavorable (the participant’s team relationship between procedural fairness judg-
was either exonerated or found guilty), and whether ments and the acceptance of political decisions and
the dispute resolution procedure did or did not give laws, but later research showed similar effects for
the participant a voice in determining what evi- reactions to organizational authorities. In many
dence was considered or denied. The results showed of these studies, procedural fairness judgments
a clear effect for the procedure the participant had exerted greater influence on the acceptance of
Procedural Justice 665

authorities’ decisions than did distributive justice the procedure—using a group-value fairness
judgments. While willingness to accept a decision processor. On the one hand, if a procedure seems
or obey a law can be affected by whether the out- to recognize the person’s standing in the group,
come is favorable to the person in question, believ- organization, or institution, then the procedure is
ing that the decision or law was generated by fair seen as fair. On the other hand, a procedure that
process has an even greater impact. seems to deny one’s full standing is seen as unfair.
Early accounts of the psychology of procedural From the perspective of group-value theory, voice
fairness and the fair process effect relied on effects occur because allowing an individual affected
assumptions about the role of procedures in ensur- by a decision to have a say has positive effects for
ing that outcomes would be fair. For example, both the instrumental processor (the voice might
Thibaut and Walker explained the voice effect they convince the authority to make a favorable deci-
found by suggesting that giving voice to litigants or sion) and the group-value processor (voice indi-
defendants enhances the perceived likelihood of a cates that one is a full-fledged member of the
fair verdict. Such “instrumental” theories of proce- group). The fairness effect of the postdecision-voice
dural justice had a difficult time explaining why condition in the Lind, Kanfer, and Earley study can
procedural justice effects were sometimes stronger be explained as follows: Even though the postdeci-
than effects of distributive fairness, however. sion-voice condition had nothing to offer the
The need for noninstrumental explanations of instrumental fairness processor, it still had a fair-
the psychology of procedural justice is illustrated ness advantage for the group-value processor.
by an experiment conducted by E. Allan Lind, Later work on the psychology of fairness turned
Ruth Kanfer, and Christopher Earley. Participants to why people should care so much about fairness
were given work goals, which affected their pay- and why, among fairness judgments, procedural
ments for the experiment, using one of three pro- fairness so often carries more weight than distribu-
cedures. Some participants had an opportunity to tive fairness. One theoretical approach that
voice their preferences for the goals—this is a typi- addresses these issues is fairness heuristic theory,
cal voice procedure. Others had no opportunity to advanced by Lind and Kees van den Bos. Fairness
express their preferences. Instead, they were sim- heuristic theory says that people look at the fair-
ply given a goal and put to work—a typical mute ness of their treatment as an indicator of whether
procedure. Finally, in a postdecision-voice proce- they can trust a group not to exploit or exclude
dure, the goal was announced, but then partici- them. On one hand, when a person receives infor-
pants were given an opportunity to express their mation or experiences treatment that seems fair, he
preferences. After they had voiced their views, the or she goes into a mode of interaction that is coop-
original goal was repeated and the participants erative and supportive of the group in question.
were put to work. Even though the exercise of On the other hand, when a person experiences
postdecision voice could not affect the outcome of unfair treatment, he or she adopts a narrow self-
the goal-setting decision, that procedure was interest approach to the group. Because informa-
viewed as fairer, resulted in greater acceptance of tion is processed early and quickly to serve as the
the goal, and led to better performance than did basis of the fairness heuristic, later fairness infor-
the mute procedure. mation is interpreted in light of earlier fairness
Lind and Tyler have offered a new theory to information. This is where the extra impact of
explain both instrumental and noninstrumental procedural fairness information comes from—we
procedural justice effects. Their group-value model usually know about procedures before we know
suggests that there are two ways that people pro- about outcomes. Van den Bos and others have
cess procedural information to judge its fairness. shown that when outcome information is available
One way is to evaluate the benefit of the process before process information, distributive fairness
for their own interests—using an instrumental has greater impact.
fairness processor, as it were. The other way is to The psychology of fairness, procedural and dis-
look at the procedure as a manifestation or symbol tributive, occupies an important place in the psy-
of how the person in question is valued by the chology of groups and interpersonal relations because
group, organization, or institution that employs it goes to the heart of how people, as individuals,
666 Process Consultation

relate to the groups to which they belong. As Enhancement of Group Performance


researchers explore this area, they learn more
about the rules, norms, and psychological processes Process consultation enhances group functioning
that regulate the person-to-group relationship. because very few individuals are able to focus on a
group’s content and process at the same time.
E. Allan Lind Most members have a vested interest in the group’s
outcome, and all members bring some bias to the
See also Distributive Justice; Justice; Just World
Hypothesis; Relational Model of Authority
group’s interactions. Thus, it is difficult for them
in Groups to be truly objective about how the group is func-
tioning. Moreover, and especially when they have
an interest in the outcome of the group’s work,
Further Readings most individuals simply cannot attend to the
group’s process when they are absorbed in the
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology
group’s content.
of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.
Consider the work of a task force that is assem-
Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice:
bled after a merger of two corporations to make a
A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
recommendation regarding which firm’s informa-
Tyler, T. R. (1990). Why people obey the law. New
Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
tion technology system to use. This is a high-stakes
van den Bos, K., Lind, E. A., & Wilke, H. A. M. (2001). decision: If the two companies have different infor-
The psychology of procedural and distributive justice mation technology systems—say that one uses
viewed from the perspective of fairness heuristic Macintosh computers (Macs) and the other uses
theory. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the PCs—it is likely that employees from the company
workplace: Vol. 2. From theory to practice whose system prevails will get more jobs in the
(pp. 49–66). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. merged organization because they are more famil-
iar with the system that is selected. Members of the
task force will be enthusiastic participants in the
group’s deliberations, pushing for their way of
Process Consultation doing things.
Their focus on the content of the group’s work
Group interactions involve both content and pro- will detract from their ability to attend to the
cess. Content is what the group is doing. Content group’s process. Deficiencies or dysfunctions in
includes the group’s objective, agenda, discussion the group’s process, in turn, can detract from the
topics, and so forth. The content defines the rea- group’s ability to conduct its work. If members do
son the group is getting together. Process is how a poor job of listening to and considering one
the group conducts its work. Process includes how another’s perspectives, then they have defeated the
the group achieves its objective, moves through its very purpose of using a group to make decisions:
agenda, discusses its topics, and so forth. Process to leverage the multiple insights, experiences, and
consultation is an intervention in which an indi- knowledge bases to produce a solution that is
vidual, typically from outside the group, helps the superior to what any individual could generate
group members become more aware of how they independently.
do things and then use this awareness to enhance In cases like this, it is helpful to have a group
how they operate together. facilitator who can attend to and help enhance the
Process consultation is important to group pro- group’s process. The facilitator is unbiased—he or
cesses because it can enhance a group’s ability to she has no vested interest in the group’s decision or
perform its tasks and develop positive relations recommendation. Thus, the facilitator can focus on
among its members. This entry describes how pro- how the group is conducting its work rather than
cess consultation enhances group performance, what the group is deliberating. Another name for a
describes the kinds of behaviors that are observed facilitator is a process consultant—someone who is
during process consultation, and discusses how not a full-time member of the group but who
process consultation is conducted. attends and participates in group meetings with the
Process Consultation 667

express purpose of fostering good group function- answer. Clarification helps sharpen members’
ing. (Sometimes, a member of the group can act as understanding of the specifics involved.
the process consultant. This typically happens with Elaborating on someone else’s inputs is the
effectiveness only when the group is relatively essence of collaboration. By asking for
mature and has spent time in the past addressing clarification and by building on the ideas of
group process issues. For example, an ongoing others, a group moves toward creative solutions
work team might have each member take a turn to complex problems that are beyond any single
being the process consultant at one meeting.) individual’s capability.
4. Summarizing. To further help a group operate
Key Behaviors with full information, effective summarization is
an important function. Reviewing the points
The process consultant is concerned with how the
that have been covered, the ideas under
group is functioning—how it achieves its objec-
consideration, the decisions made and pending,
tives, moves through its agenda, discusses topics,
and so on can help a group determine where it
makes decisions, and so on. As Edgar Schein—one
has been, where it is, and where it needs to go.
of the earliest writers about process consultation—
noted, there are two basic kinds of behavior that 5. Consensus testing. Consensus testing is checking
process consultants look for in examining a group’s to see whether the group is close to a decision.
functioning: task-oriented behavior and maintenance- Even if the group is not ready for a decision,
oriented behavior. testing can still serve the important function of
reminding the group that it is there to achieve
some objective and within some time constraint.
Task-Oriented Behavior This is a productive form of time keeping.
Task-oriented behavior deals with what people
say or do to get something done. There are five Maintenance-Oriented Behavior
major elements of task-oriented behavior:
Maintenance-oriented behavior deals with how
1. Initiating. In order for a group to accomplish or people behave toward one another in performing
make progress on its tasks (the content), there the task and, ultimately, with how cohesive the
must be some initiating behavior. Examples of group members feel. There are four main elements
initiating behavior include stating the objective of maintenance-oriented behavior:
or definition of the problem, offering
1. Gatekeeping. Group members often behave in
alternatives for working on or solving the
ways that make it difficult for others to make
problem, setting time limits, building an agenda,
their own contributions. For example,
and so on.
repeatedly interrupting a person and dominating
2. Information and opinion seeking and giving. the conversation can create a situation in which
Communication is the essential process by the interrupted person stops contributing.
which the group accomplishes its tasks. Gatekeeping—that is, regulating the
Information seeking and giving, and opinion communication gates—ensures that everyone
seeking and giving, are vital task-oriented has at least the opportunity to contribute. For
behaviors. Examples include questions and example, a member may state, “We haven’t
statements such as these: What more do we heard everyone’s opinion on this, so let’s go
know about this problem? I’ve got more data around the table and see what people think.”
that may help. What do people think about
2. Encouraging. Encouraging can serve a function
these alternatives? Here’s my opinion on that
similar to that of gatekeeping. For various
issue.
reasons, some individuals do not jump in as
3. Clarifying and elaborating. The reason for quickly or consistently as others do as the group
calling the group together in the first place rests conducts its work. These individuals may need
on the assumption that no individual has the some encouragement if they are to be willing
668 Process Consultation

and able to make a contribution or to continue or dysfunctions in group interactions. For example,
making contributions if their first attempts fall a group that repeatedly falters at implementing
flat, sound disorganized, or are immediately decisions made by its members may suffer from
discounted by others. problems associated with clarifying support during
the decision-making process. In other cases, process
3. Harmonizing and compromising. Harmonizing
consultation can be used to make a relatively effec-
and compromising are efforts to bring the group
tive group even better. In these cases, the process
together in a shared perspective. However, their
consultant observes the group in action, provides
use and value must be carefully examined in
the group members feedback on the observations,
each particular situation. When used too hastily,
and then engages the members is discussing and
they can detract from the group’s effectiveness.
applying the observations to their situation.
In some situations, it may be very important
Although process consultation has been prac-
first to confront the fact that a serious
ticed for 40  years, only a modest amount of
disagreement exists and then to strive to find a
research has been conducted to assess its effective-
creative, integrative solution before resorting to
ness in improving the ability of groups to accom-
a compromise or next-best solution. When used
plish work. Findings of research on process
as a mechanism to avoid real differences of
consultation are unclear, especially when the find-
opinion, harmonizing and compromising result
ings relate to task performance. A number of dif-
in a state of false security.
ficulties arise in trying to measure performance
4. Standard setting and testing. These are efforts to improvement as a result of process consultation.
test whether the group is satisfied with its One problem is that most process consultation is
procedures or to suggest procedures and conducted with groups performing mental tasks,
standards. Standard setting and testing can such as decision making; the outcomes of such
involve pointing out explicit or implicit norms tasks are difficult to evaluate. A second issue is
that have been set in the group. that process consultation typically is combined
with other interventions; isolating the impact of
process consultations from those of the other inter-
How Process Consultation Is Conducted
ventions is difficult.
Process consultation also involves observing pat- Literature reviews on the effectiveness of pro-
terns of interaction among group members. One of cess consultation have concluded that it has
the easiest aspects of group process to observe is positive effects on participants, according to self-
the pattern of communication. Who talks in the reports, in areas including greater personal involve-
group, for how long, and how often? Who do ment, higher mutual influence, and enhanced
people look at when they talk—single others (pos- group effectiveness. One recent study noted that
sibly potential supporters of their point of view), process consultation tends to be most effective
the full group, or no one? Who talks after whom when managers have the personal resources to
or who interrupts whom? What style of communi- engage in self-evaluation and personal develop-
cation is being used (assertions, questions, tone of ment and thus to participate in such a process.
voice, gestures, etc.)?
Process consultation is done most often through Mitchell Lee Marks
direct observation of the group and, at appropriate
times, through raising questions or making obser- See also Group Development; Group Performance;
vations about what has been happening in the Group Problem Solving and Decision Making; Team
Building; Teams; Work Teams
group. The group could be ongoing, such as a
regular work team, or it could be temporary, such
as the task force described earlier, charged to rec-
ommend whether the merged company should go Further Readings
with Macs or PCs. Schein, E. (1969). Process consultation: Its role in
In some cases, process consultation is used to organization development. Reading, MA:
identify and address deficiencies in group effectiveness Addison-Wesley.
Process Gain and Loss 669

Most social-psychological research on groups


Process Gain and Loss has used potential group performance as the base-
line against which process gains and losses are
Process gain and loss are labels covering a long measured. In problem-solving situations in which
research tradition in social psychology that exam- a particular choice alternative can be considered
ines how and to what degree group processes correct or best, a common baseline used is truth
affect group performance, with the earliest work wins; that is, if any member of the group initially
occurring over 100  years ago. Sometimes, group favors the correct or best answer (i.e., has truth),
processes can lead to performance that exceeds then the group will choose that alternative. Based
expectation, referred to as process gains. More on this baseline criterion, most groups show pro-
often, group processes lead to performance that cess losses in problem-solving situations.
falls below expectations, referred to as process Although groups typically perform better than
losses. Work on process gains and losses has their average member, they often do not perform
focused on both performance by the group as a as well as their best member. Research has shown
whole and the effects on the performance of an that groups rarely perform as well as a truth-wins
individual who is working as a member of the model predicts they should. On problem-solving
group. tasks, groups often perform near the predictions of
This entry looks at research about process gains a truth supported wins model (i.e., a group will be
and losses in two principal categories, coordination able to solve the problem only if at least two of the
and motivation. Coordination gains and losses members can solve the problem). This level of per-
result from how well the group coordinates its formance is still better than the average individual
efforts or resources while performing the task. but is below the group’s potential performance.
Motivation gains and losses stem from the effects
that group membership has on the amount of effort
Brainstorming
each individual member contributes to the task.
A second area in which results were interpreted
Coordination Gains and Losses initially as process gains but were later seen as
process losses involved brainstorming in groups.
Group Problem Solving
Early research showed that groups asked to gener-
Early work on group problem solving seemed to ate ideas or solutions generated far more items
show that group interaction led to process gains, in than did single individuals working alone. How­
that groups were two to three times as likely as ever, many later studies have shown that sets of
individuals to be able to solve basic logic and word noninteracting individuals, or nominal groups,
problems. However, both gains and losses are rela- often perform better than interacting groups of the
tive and must be defined in terms of some baseline, same size. In regard to brainstorming, two of the
or expectation. This early work used the “aver- major reasons for these performance losses are
age” individual as the baseline to which group production blocking and cognitive interference.
performance was compared. Research has shown Production blocking occurs because group mem-
that many basic group processes can lead groups bers try to produce responses at the same time, so
to perform better than their average member. For someone must wait to contribute. This creates a
example, simple majority or plurality processes coordination loss. In addition, ideas presented by
(i.e., the alternative that has the most support in other members tend to interfere with individual
the group gets chosen by the group) often lead to cognitive processes used to generate ideas.
superior performance by groups compared with
the performance of the average individual. Such
Information Sharing
processes are quite commonplace in group decision-
making situations because of their high level of A third area in which coordination problems
accuracy relative to the amount of information lead to performance decrements involves informa-
gathering and cognitive effort that they require tion sharing in groups. A number of group tasks
from the group. require members to share information in order to
670 Process Gain and Loss

reach an optimal solution or decision. However, Motivation Losses


research has shown that members tend to discuss
and place more weight on information that they all Much of the early research on process losses
share than on information that is uniquely held by assumed they were due to coordination problems.
each individual member. Shared information is However, research designs using tasks that allowed
often relevant and valid, but if group members do for estimates of performance decrements due to
not share task-relevant information that only they lack of coordination showed that actual group
know, then their group is less likely to perform up performance was often below estimates based on
to its potential. A number of studies have shown coordination problems alone. Thus, researchers
that groups will choose inferior options supported began to focus on motivation losses as well and
by shared information even though they have coined the term social loafing to describe them.
enough information to demonstrate that a differ- Social loafing occurs when group members are
ent alternative is superior. working on a common task in which individual
If group members each have unique task-relevant contributions are difficult to assess and the odds of
information and subsequently share that informa- the group’s achieving its goal are high or the goal
tion during group discussion, then their groups can is of little value to group members. Under these
perform at levels above what is possible for any circumstances, members put less effort into the
individual members. Recent research has argued task than they do when working on the task as an
that the unique information brought by members individual. The actual presence of other group
of multidisciplinary scientific research teams affords members is not necessary. Simply knowing that
such teams better odds of making significant scien- other people are working on the task and that
tific contributions compared with teams whose there are no specific or assessable individual mem-
members are drawn from a single scientific disci- ber goals can lead members to loaf. Loafing has
pline. Recent empirical and simulation findings also been observed on physical and cognitive tasks, by
show that members who bring complementary both males and females, and in many different
strategies to a decision problem can produce deci- cultures.
sion outcomes that are superior to those possible by Social loafing can also stem from more strategic
groups sharing a single strategy. Unfortunately, if aspects of behavior in groups. Free riding occurs
most of the members share a particular strategy or when members can reap the benefits of the groups’
orientation toward a problem, then that particular behavior regardless of the amount of effort they
strategy or orientation will dominate other strate- extend. For example, if others refrain from dump-
gies that may be available to the group, even if the ing their garbage into a common lake, then the
shared strategy is suboptimal or invalid. lake will remain usable, even if one member con-
tinues to dump garbage in it. Many group settings
allow for free riding, so some groups create nega-
Implicit and Explicit Coordination
tive incentives (penalties or expulsion from the
A final area in which coordination losses have group) to reduce its prevalence. Free riding can
been demonstrated involves implicit and explicit also lead to further motivation losses by others
coordination. Most groups rely on implicit coordi- who feel they are being played for suckers. If typi-
nation, which simply evolves (without discussion) cally conscientious members think others are free
as the group works on the task. Although groups riding, then the conscientious members will exert
learn to coordinate their actions, the process can less effort themselves to avoid being taken advan-
be slow, and coordination rarely becomes optimal. tage of.
Explicit coordination or planning is often viewed Although social loafing is probably the most
as a positive way for groups to begin a task. widely studied form of motivation loss in groups,
However, left to their own devices, groups rarely other processes can also lead to effort reductions.
spend much time planning and often spend no For example, social anxiety created by evaluation
time at all at it. Forcing groups to plan in advance apprehension can lead group members to limit
of attempting to perform a task can thus improve their participation. In situations in which members
performance. are not confident of their abilities or ideas, they
Protestant Work Ethic 671

may hold back to avoid the appearance of incom- scientist who first discovered the phenomenon.
petence. Fear of evaluation can stem from charac- For such effects to occur, lower-ability members
teristics of the specific group (e.g., other members must be able to compare their performance to that
are of higher status) or a general anxiety that some of higher-ability members, and they must believe
people have about working in groups. Groups that their extra effort will lead to performance
composed of members who enjoy working in comparable to the performance of more capable
groups tend to perform better than groups of com- members.
parable ability whose members feel uncomfortable
in group environments. R. Scott Tindale and Rebecca Starkel
Motivation losses can also occur because of See also Brainstorming; Common Knowledge Effect;
social comparison among group members. Often, Group Memory; Group Motivation; Köhler Effect;
group members do not know exactly how much Ringelmann Effect; Social Compensation; Social
time and effort they should devote to a task. In Facilitation; Social Loafing
such situations, they will look to the other mem-
bers of the group for cues. On idea generation
tasks, for example, if one member of the group Further Readings
appears to have given up, then other members of
Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing:
the group will soon cease their performance as A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration.
well. In highly cohesive groups, members may Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65,
actually ostracize a member for expending more 681–706.
effort than others in the group are. And when Larson, J. R., Jr. (2007). Deep diversity and strong
groups set goals for themselves and for individual synergy: Modeling the impact of variability in
members, people often set lower goals for others members’ problem-solving strategies on group
than they do for themselves, maybe to ensure that problem-solving performance. Small Group Research,
all members can reach their goals. Thus, groups 38, 413–436.
can generate norms for effort expenditure that are Laughlin, P. R., Bonner, B. L., & Miner, A. G. (2002).
well below potential effort levels. Groups perform better than their best member on
letters-to-numbers problems. Organizational Behavior
and Human Decision Processes, 88, 605–620.
Motivation Gains Nijstad, B. A., & Streobe, W. (2006). How the group
Although much of the research on motivation in affects the mind: A cognitive model of idea generation
groups has focused on losses, recent evidence in groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review,
points to circumstances that produce motivation 10, 186–213.
gains. These situations tend to be the opposites of Stasser, G., & Stewart, D. D. (1992). The discovery of
those that lead to losses. When group goals are hidden profiles by decision making groups: Solving a
highly valued and some members feel that they problem vs. making a decision. Journal of Personality
have more resources than other members have, and Social Psychology, 63, 426–434.
they will put in extra effort to compensate for the Steiner, I. (1972). Group process and productivity. New
York: Academic Press.
potential limitations of those other members. Such
Weber, B., & Hertel, G. (2007). Motivation gains of
compensation effects occur when a group member
inferior group members: A meta-analytical review.
fears that others will loaf or free ride, especially if
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(6),
the group goal is important for that member.
973–993.
Another situation in which motivation gains
have been observed involves tasks in which the
least competent member determines the group’s
performance (conjunctive tasks). When members
do not differ greatly in ability, lower-ability mem- Protestant Work Ethic
bers will work harder so as not to keep the group
from reaching its full potential. This has been The Protestant work ethic (PWE) is an ideology or
referred to as the Köhler effect, after the German worldview that emphasizes self-discipline and
672 Protestant Work Ethic

commitment to work. Its main tenet is that hard groups who are committed to and disciplined in
work leads to success. A core value in the United their work will achieve success) and prescribes
States and many Western countries, this view is how they should behave (i.e., that hard work
embodied in sayings such as “the early bird gets should lead to success and that idleness should
the worm” and stories such as The Little Engine lead to failure).
That Could, a classic children’s book. Shared A variety of self-report scales have been used
endorsement of the PWE helps create a common to measure the PWE. Most measures primarily
belief system that can explain both individuals’ focus on the value of hard work, which is the
status within a group and different groups’ rela- fundamental dimension of the PWE. However,
tive status positions within society (i.e., higher- other scales also measure the related concepts of
status individuals and groups must have acquired leisure, religion and morality, and independence
their status through hard work). Consequently, from others. One of the first and best-known
belief in the PWE is related to attitudes toward scales was created by Herbert Mirels and James
both advantaged and disadvantaged individuals Garrett. Recent assessments divide the PWE into
and groups and has different meanings as a func- two component meanings. The opportunity-
tion of an individual’s own status and the status focused component is thought to be primary and
of a social group. stresses the equal opportunity individuals and
groups have to succeed through hard work. The
status-focused component uses the PWE to explain
History and Background
existing status differences between individuals
The term Protestant ethic was coined by Max and groups.
Weber in his book The Protestant Ethic and the Endorsement of the PWE is related to a variety
Spirit of Capitalism (first published in 1904 of psychological and demographic variables.
in German). Weber argued that Reformed Prot­ Specifically, individuals who endorse the PWE tend
estantism, through the teachings of Martin Luther also to score higher on measures of self-
and John Calvin, redefined the value and meaning discipline and willpower, perseverance and endur-
of work in humans’ lives and created a new work ance, and autonomy. High-PWE people are also
ethic, the PWE. In this belief system, work and the more likely to endorse other status-justifying
prosperity resulting from it were accorded a high beliefs, such as meritocracy and belief in a just
value because they were taken to be evidence that world. Strength of endorsement of the PWE also
an individual or group had been given the grace of differs among different groups in society (e.g.,
God and was among “God’s elect.” In turn, PWE among racial or ethnic groups or between political
helped bring about and support economic growth liberals and conservatives). Therefore, although
through capitalism. the PWE is a pervasive belief system in many
Contemporary social-psychological definitions Western societies, meaning that the majority of
and uses of the term commonly strip it of its reli- individuals endorse it to some extent, there is also
gious foundations. Instead, it is conceptualized as considerable variability in level of endorsement
an ideology or worldview whose main tenet is that among individuals and groups. In particular, low-
hard work leads to success. It is often studied in status individuals and members of low-status
conjunction with other core U.S. values and beliefs groups are somewhat less likely to believe in the
(e.g., meritocracy, individual economic mobility) PWE (or to believe in it to a lesser degree).
that justify the status quo. The PWE provides a
meaningful way in which individuals can perceive
Consequences for Group Processes
and interpret their social world, furnishing them
with a sense of order and predictability. Within groups, a shared belief in the PWE serves
As many ideologies do, the PWE contains both several important functions. First, it contributes
descriptive and prescriptive elements. Endorsers of to a common meaning system for understanding
the PWE think that it both describes the true the world and provides an explanatory mecha-
nature of the world (i.e., that individuals and nism for individuals’ status within a group. For
Protestant Work Ethic 673

group members to communicate effectively, they Consequences for Intergroup Relations


must have a shared system of meaning for inter-
preting and acting in the world. The PWE pro- Belief in the PWE also influences several intergroup
vides this system of meaning. Through a mutual processes. First, endorsement of the PWE influ-
endorsement of the PWE, group members share ences perceptions of outgroups and their members.
an implicit value of hard work and diligence. This If the cause of differential group status in a society
common understanding helps foster a shared set is generally thought to be the efforts of groups and
of priorities and behavior patterns. For example, their members, then belief in the PWE is often
members of a group are able to take for granted accompanied by the belief that a group’s high or
that people will strive for success through hard low status is deserved or legitimate. Through such
work, and they will agree that such behavior a belief, the approbation of high-status groups and
should be rewarded. In addition, group members their members, as well as the derogation of low-
can rest assured that if they themselves work hard, status groups and their members, becomes justi-
they will be rewarded. fied. The more that individuals endorse the PWE,
Second, belief in the PWE justifies the status the more negative their attitudes tend to be toward
hierarchy of the individual members within the groups that hold lower status in society, such as
group. Given a shared endorsement of the PWE, Blacks and people who are overweight, poor, home-
group members will be in agreement concerning less, or living with AIDS.
each individual’s position within the group. High Individuals who strongly endorse the PWE are
status will be conferred only on those who work also more likely to exhibit negative behavior
hard, and any individual who works hard will be toward low-status individuals and groups. For
assigned such status. Conversely, low status will example, the more individuals who are not them-
be accorded to those who do not work hard. A selves homeless endorse the PWE, the less charita-
common belief in the PWE will lead group mem- ble behavior they display toward homeless people.
bers to share the belief that status positions are The PWE also is associated with greater ingroup
just and accurate reflections of each individual’s blame among members of low-status groups.
hard work and merit, which will help maintain Blaming their own group’s low status or disadvan-
order and harmony within the group and legiti- tage on their group’s lack of hard work or discipline
mize the status quo. Thus, although low-status may lead individuals to lessen their identification
individuals will be seen as unable or unwilling to with or commitment to their group.
succeed, belief in the PWE means that all group Despite the negative effects that the PWE may
members, low and high status, will agree with have for attitudes toward and treatment of lower-
these attributions. status groups and their members, low-status indi-
Finally, belief in the PWE can impact self-esteem. viduals may continue to endorse the PWE given its
This can happen through an increase (or decrease) explanatory power, its prevalence in the broader
in individuals’ personal self-esteem after their own society (see above), and the sense of personal con-
successes (or failures), for which they are given trol over outcomes it may provide.
“credit” because of their individual efforts and It is important to note that the relation between
perseverance (or idleness and apathy). The PWE endorsement of the PWE and derogation of low-
can also affect group members’ collective self- status groups and their members may depend
esteem through attributions made by self or others on the particular aspect of the PWE that indi-
for group-level success or failure. Endorsement of viduals endorse (e.g., opportunity focused or status
the PWE can heighten a successful group’s level of focused). Whereas the opportunity-focused form of
collective self-esteem by crediting the group for the the PWE is egalitarian and does not address status
group’s superior performance. However, for poor- differences between groups, the status-focused form
performing groups, endorsement of the PWE can explains existing status differences between groups
have the opposite effect. It can lead groups to be and individuals as resulting from differing levels of
blamed for their failure, consequently lowering ability and/or effort. This latter form thus justifies
group members’ collective self-esteem. high-status groups’ advantages and low-status
674 Protestant Work Ethic

groups’ disadvantages. It is only this latter dimen- Further Readings


sion of the PWE that, when endorsed, leads to Furnham, A. (1990). The Protestant work ethic: The
derogation of low-status groups and individuals. psychology of work-related beliefs and behaviours.
Endorse­ment of the former, the egalitarian and New York: Routledge.
opportunity-focused dimension, leads to a belief Katz, I., & Hass, R. G. (1988). Racial ambivalence
that all groups and individuals are equal in their and American value conflict: Correlational
ability and chance to succeed. and priming studies of dual cognitive structures.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55,
Brenda Major and 893–905.
Sarah Sachiko Martin Townsend Levy, S. R., West, T. L., Ramirez, L., & Karafantis, D. M.
(2006). The Protestant work ethic: A lay theory with
See also Ideology; Just World Hypothesis; Status; System dual intergroup implications. Group Processes and
Justification Theory Intergroup Relations, 9, 95–115.
R
deviant—due to apparent lack of effort on their
Racial Ambivalence Theory own behalf—and disadvantaged.

Racial ambivalence theory is an explanation of Ambivalence Amplification


White people’s attitudes and behavior toward
Black people. The theory holds that many Whites Katz and colleagues demonstrated that people’s
are fundamentally ambivalent about Blacks. That ambivalent attitudes toward Blacks can result in
is, their attitudes toward Blacks are a potent mix- amplification of positive or negative evaluations,
ture of extreme positive and negative evaluations. as manifested in actions directed at members of
Also, compared with their behavior toward other that minority. In a series of studies, Katz and col-
Whites, about whom they are not ambivalent, leagues demonstrated that Whites—especially if
Whites’ behavior toward Blacks is extremely posi- they were high in racial ambivalence—behaved in
tive or negative. Hence, there is an ambivalence either extremely negative or extremely positive
amplification effect. Although racial ambivalence ways toward Blacks. Dependent measures included
theory is grounded in race relations in the United Whites’ tendency to (a) help a Black phone sur-
States, it may, to some extent, be applicable in veyor, (b) do a favor for a Black person whom they
other contexts. This entry describes the theory and unintentionally harmed, and (c) denigrate a Black
its application. person whom they harmed.

Background and History Mechanisms of Ambivalence Amplification


Irwin Katz, his colleagues, and other social scien- Katz and colleagues’ explanation for ambiva-
tists noted that White people’s attitudes toward lence amplification is largely psychodynamic:
Blacks in the United States are not evaluatively Whites experience psychological discomfort caused
straightforward. The researchers reasoned that by their ambivalence, akin to the psychological
Whites’ complex attitudes toward Blacks are best discomfort caused by cognitive dissonance. This
understood as ambivalent. Katz and others found psychological discomfort can be resolved by elimi-
evidence that this ambivalence is based on conflict- nating the cognitive inconsistency that caused
ing values. Whites’ negative attitude toward Blacks it—that is, by strengthening one side of the con-
is the result of the former’s endorsement of the flict. Thus, Whites act in accord with either their
Protestant work ethic, whereas their positive atti- extreme positive or extreme negative evaluation.
tudes toward Blacks are the result of their support This behavior strengthens one side of the conflict,
for humanitarian–egalitarian values. These values thereby reducing dissonance and the experience of
come into conflict because Blacks are viewed as discomfort.

675
676 Racial Ambivalence Theory

Other researchers have proposed alternative Racial ambivalence theory and its findings
explanations for the amplification effect. Walter demonstrate that Whites’ attitudes toward Blacks
Stephan and Cookie Stephan argued that inter- cannot be understood simply as more or less nega-
group contact (e.g., between Whites and Blacks) tive. Rather, Whites’ attitudes are a mixture of
results in heightened anxiety. An increase in anxi- both positive and negative evaluations. This con-
ety leads, in turn, to a host of consequences, tention introduces a significant but essential com-
including norm-based behavior (either good or plexity to any understanding of relations between
bad) and biased information processing (due to a the two races.
narrowing of attentional focus). Patricia Linville Moreover, the existence of these ambivalent
and Ned Jones, in contrast, highlighted the role of attitudes does not mean that Whites’ behavior
schema complexity in amplification effects. They toward Blacks will simply be some sort of average
argued that Whites’ schemata for Blacks are less of Whites’ positive and negative attitudes. To the
complex, resulting in a greater impact of positive contrary, this ambivalence means that Whites’
or negative evaluative information about the behaviors toward Blacks will often be extreme
minority. In support, the researchers demonstrated and seemingly arbitrary. Katz and his colleagues’
that White people have simpler cognitive schemata analysis is trenchant and compelling and has
for Blacks than they do for Whites. Linville and informed subsequent thinking and research on
Jones also established that possession of a simple attitudes and behaviors involving minorities, racial
schema for a group results in comparatively or otherwise.
extreme evaluations of that group.
Ian Newby-Clark
Applications and Extensions See also Ambivalent Sexism; Aversive Racism; Implicit
The ambivalence amplification hypothesis has Prejudice; Intergroup Anxiety; Modern Forms of
Prejudice; Modern Racism
been applied to other domains, including research
on White Canadians’ ambivalence about native
Canadians, people’s ambivalence about feminists, Further Readings
and behavior toward people with disabilities.
Racial ambivalence theory is arguably the progeni- Bell, D. W., & Esses, V. M. (2002). Ambivalence and
tor of subsequent theories of racism, including response amplification: A motivational perspective.
symbolic racism (Don Kinder and David Sears), Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28,
aversive racism (Sam Gaertner and Jack Dovidio), 1143–1152.
and (in)congruencies in implicit and explicit racial Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (1986). The aversive
attitudes (L. S. Son Hing). form of racism. In J. F. Dovidio & S. L. Gaertner
(Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism
As with racial ambivalence theory, those
(pp. 61–89). Toronto, ON, Canada: Academic Press.
accounts hold that Whites’ attitudes toward Blacks
Katz, I., & Hass, R. G. (1988). Racial ambivalence
are a volatile mixture of contradictory cognitions
and American value conflict: Correlational and
and behavioral inclinations. Gaertner and Dovidio,
priming studies of dual cognitive structures.
for example, have argued that Whites’ attitudes Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55,
toward Blacks are positive and based on egalitar- 893–905.
ian values and sympathies for past injustices. Also, Katz, I., Hass, R. G., & Wackenhut, J. (1986). Racial
however, Whites have negative attitudes toward ambivalence, value duality, and behavior. In
Blacks—of which they are unaware. J. F. Dovidio & S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice,
Similarly, Son Hing and colleagues have identi- discrimination, and racism (pp. 35–59). Toronto, ON,
fied people who have positive explicit attitudes Canada: Academic Press.
toward Asians but negative implicit attitudes. Linville, P. W., & Jones, E. E. (1980). Polarized appraisals
Compared with people who are truly low in preju- of out-group members. Journal of Personality and
dice, these aversive racists show prejudiced behav- Social Psychology, 38, 689–703.
ior and exhibit less prejudice when they are made Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (1985). Intergroup
mindful of their hypocritical stance. anxiety. Journal of Social Issues, 41, 157–175.
Racism 677

broader social levels, as well. James Jones has iden-


Racism tified three applications of the term racism. The
first is individual racism, which relates to the joint
Racism represents an organized system of privi- operation of personal stereotypes, prejudice, and
lege and bias that disadvantages a set of people on discrimination to create and support disparities
the basis of their group membership. Racism is between members of different groups. The second
enforced by the intentional or unintentional is institutional racism, which refers to the inten-
actions of individuals and the operation of institu- tional or unintentional manipulation or toleration
tional or societal standards that, in concert, pro- of institutional policies (e.g., poll taxes, admissions
duce disparities, by race or by social categories criteria) that unfairly restrict the opportunities of
such as national origin, ethnicity, religion, and particular groups of people. The third is cultural
cultural beliefs or ideologies, that are racialized racism. Cultural racism involves beliefs about the
and assumed to reflect biological differences. superiority of one’s racial cultural heritage over
There are two defining elements of racism. The that of other races and the expression of this belief
first element is the culturally shared belief that in individual actions or institutional policies. Thus,
groups have distinguishing race-based characteris- cultural racism includes elements of individual and
tics that are common to their members. The sec- institutional racism. Because of its broad scope
ond factor is that the perceived inherent racial and emphasis on institutions as well as individuals,
characteristics of another group are held to be racism is a common focus of research in political
inferior or that those of one’s own group are supe- science and sociology, as well as in psychology.
rior to those of other groups. In its very essence, These three applications of racism—individual,
racism involves not only negative attitudes and institutional, and cultural—are considered in sepa-
beliefs but also the social power that enables these rate sections of this entry.
attitudes and beliefs to translate into disparate
outcomes that disadvantage other races or offer
unique advantages to one’s own race at the
Individual Racism
expense of others. The term racism was popular- Individual racism is closely affiliated with racial
ized by its use in the 1968 Report of the National prejudice. Although prejudice has generally been
Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders. conceptualized as an attitude, prejudice scales
Racism is related to concepts such as discrimi- often include items concerning the defining ele-
nation (unjustified negative behavior), prejudice ments of racism—specifically, endorsement of
(an unfair attitude associated with group member- statements about innate group differences, the rel-
ship), and stereotypes (generalized beliefs about a ative inferiority of the other group, and policies
group and its members), but it is a more encom- that reinforce or exacerbate group differences in
passing term than any of these. Because racism is a fundamental resources (e.g., employment opportu-
culturally shared system of beliefs, it may be sup- nity, health). Approaches to individual racism have
ported by “scientific evidence” of group difference emphasized both blatant and subtle influences.
and inferiority and may be sanctioned by social Some of these approaches focus on functional
norms, policies, and laws. Although racism typi- aspects of individual racism that fulfill personal
cally involves negative attitudes, it may instead needs and desires. Much of the traditional work on
reflect a paternalistic orientation, which fosters the personality and prejudice was based on a Freudian
dependency of a group or a set of beliefs that may psychoanalytic model that assumes that prejudice
ostensibly be favorable in some ways but that sys- is an indicator of an underlying intrapsychic con-
tematically limits the opportunities for group flict. The consequences of this conflict are projec-
members and undermines their dignity. tion, displacement, and the development of an
Whereas psychologists have typically studied authoritarian personality—and ultimately the
stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination in terms expression of individual racism. Alternatively,
of intrapsychic (e.g., cognitive, motivational, or nonpsychodynamic models have proposed that
psychodynamic) processes and interactions bet­ prejudice and racism are the result of motivations
ween individuals, racism operates significantly at to restore feelings of self-esteem, achieve a sense of
678 Racism

superior status, or support a social hierarchy that A dissociation between automatic responses and
favors one’s group. Social dominance orientation self-reported prejudice is also consistent with other
represents an individual difference in support for conceptions of the contemporary nature of indi-
group-based systems of social stratification that vidual racism among Whites. In contrast to “old-
typically benefit one’s own group. Other appro­ fashioned” racism, which is blatant, aversive racism
aches, which have focused on commonalities represents a subtle, often unintentional form of
across people rather than on individual differences, bias that characterizes many White people in the
have viewed prejudice and individual racism as United States who possess strong egalitarian val-
attitudes, which, like other attitudes, are acquired ues, endorse a politically liberal ideology, and
through socialization and are functional. believe that they are nonprejudiced. Aversive rac-
Many contemporary approaches to individual ists also possess negative racial feelings and beliefs
racism acknowledge the persistence of blatant, inten- (which develop through normal cognitive biases
tional forms of racism but also consider the role of and socialization) of which they are unaware or
automatic or unconscious processes and indirect that they try to dissociate from their nonprejudiced
expressions of bias. For example, because of com- self-images. Because aversive racists consciously
mon socialization experiences that involve repeated endorse egalitarian values, they will not discrimi-
exposure to racial stereotypes, Whites automatically nate directly and openly in ways that can be attrib-
activate stereotypes of Blacks on the actual or sym- uted to racism; however, because of their negative
bolic presence of Blacks. Although both high- and feelings, they will discriminate, often unintention-
low-prejudiced people, distinguished by their scores ally, when their behavior can be justified on the
on self-report measures of prejudice, are equally basis of some factor other than race (e.g., question-
aware of cultural stereotypes and show similar levels able qualifications for a position). Thus, aversive
of automatic activation, only low-prejudiced people racists may regularly engage in discrimination
make a conscious attempt to prevent those negative while they maintain a nonprejudiced self-image.
stereotypes from influencing their behavior. More­ Whereas aversive racism represents subtle bias
over, low-prejudiced people are more likely to have among generally liberal Whites who endorse non-
personal standards prescribing that they behave in a prejudiced values and beliefs, symbolic racism
nonprejudiced way toward Blacks, internalize these reflects subtle prejudice associated with tradition-
standards more strongly, and experience more com- ally conservative values. Specifically, symbolic rac-
punction and guilt when they deviate from these ism reflects the unique assimilation of politically
standards—which in turn motivates efforts to behave conservative, individualistic values and negative
in a less biased way in the future. racial affect. It involves the denial of contempo-
Regardless of conscious motivations, implicit rary discrimination and negative beliefs about
stereotypes and prejudice form a foundation for Blacks’ work ethic, which produces resentment
pervasive bias associated with racism. In fact, of Blacks’ demands and special benefits given to
implicit (automatic or unconscious) and explicit Blacks because of their race. Like aversive racism,
(deliberative or conscious) prejudice and stereo- the negative effects of symbolic racism are observed
types are largely unrelated. Implicit attitudes are primarily when discrimination can be justified on
typically assessed through techniques that tap ste- the basis of factors other than race. Thus, even
reotypic associations and require split-second though aversive racism and symbolic racism per-
responding that is usually beyond an individual’s spectives often predict similar behaviors, such as
control; explicit prejudice is commonly measured resistance to policies designed to benefit Blacks,
through self-reports. Whereas the vast majority of they hypothesize different underlying processes.
White people in the United States, for instance, Both traditional overt forms of individual rac-
report explicitly that they are not racially preju- ism and contemporary subtle forms can contribute
diced, the majority of Whites show implicit racial to social policies that form the basis of institutional
biases. However, there is some debate as to whether racism. In particular, blatant racial prejudice
these implicit measures reflect merely knowledge relates to support for policies that unconditionally
of culturally shared stereotypes or the personal restrict the rights and opportunities of minority
endorsement of these beliefs. groups, whereas subtle racism is associated with
Racism 679

support for the status quo or for restrictions when Institutional racism is typically not widely rec-
other justifications (e.g., lack of credentials) are ognized as being racist or unfair because it is
available. embedded in laws (which are normally assumed to
be right and moral), is ritualized, and is accompa-
nied by racial ideologies that justify it. The media
Institutional Racism
and public discourse often direct attention away
Institutional racism involves the differential impact from potential institutional biases and instead
of policies, practices, and laws on members of focus on common connections or shared identities
racial groups and on the groups as a whole. that can promote more harmonious group rela-
Institutional racism can develop from intentional tions while preserving group-based disparities,
racism (e.g., limiting immigration on the basis of privilege, and disadvantage in the status quo. Once
assumptions about the inferiority of other groups), social norms, laws, and policies are established,
motivations to provide resources to one’s own awareness of unfair treatment and consequences is
group (e.g., attempts to limit another group’s vot- needed to stimulate individual or collective action
ing power), or as a by-product of policies with one for social change toward equality.
explicit goal but with unintended systematic race- Because institutional racism is not necessarily
based effects (e.g., differential mandatory penalties intentional or explicitly race based, its operation
for trafficking crack and powder cocaine). often must be inferred from the presence of sys-
Explicitly race-based policies are typically asso- tematically different outcomes for different racial
ciated with the development of ideologies that groups—outcomes that can logically be traced to
justify them. Historically, for example, White the differential and unfair impact of policies, even
people in the United States developed racial ideolo- those that might appear not to be race related.
gies that helped justify the laws that enabled them These effects may appear economically (e.g., in
to achieve two important types of economic loan policies), educationally (e.g., in admission
exploitation: slavery and the seizure of lands from and financial aid policies), in the media (e.g., over-
native tribes. Thus, although the belief that race is representation of groups associated with violence
a biological construct is fundamental to racism, or poverty), in the criminal justice system (e.g.,
race is also regarded as a social construction that racial differences in receipt of the death penalty),
permits and ideologically justifies the exploitation and in mental and physical health (e.g., social
of one group by another. The particular group that stress). Racial ideologies and values often also
becomes racialized (e.g., Blacks, Italians, Jews) become deeply embedded in the fiber of one’s cul-
depends on the function it serves for the dominant ture and thus define what is normal and appropri-
group. For instance, during the period of signifi- ate for the society in general.
cant immigration from southern Europe to the
United States during the early 1900s, which gener-
Cultural Racism
ated social and economic threats to many people in
the United States, Italians were characterized as Cultural racism occurs when one group exerts the
racially intellectually inferior. In Nazi Germany, power to define cultural values for the society. It
Jews were racialized and dehumanized for eco- involves not only preference for the culture, heri-
nomic and political gain. tage, and values (ethnocentrism) of one’s own
Moreover, although individual racism may pro- group but also the imposition of this culture on
duce actions such as political support for laws and other groups. As a consequence, the essence of rac-
policies that lead to institutional racism, institu- ism is communicated to and by members of all
tional racism operates at a level independent of racial groups in everyday activities and is passed
individual racism. Institutional racism does not on across generations.
require the active support of individuals, intention James Jones, for example, has identified five fun-
to discriminate, or even the awareness of discrimi- damental domains of human experience on which
nation. Racism becomes ritualized in ways that cultures differ: time, rhythm, improvisation, oral
minimize the effort and energy individuals and expression, and spirituality (the TRIOS model).
groups must expend to support it. Dominant U.S. culture has valued a future time
680 Racism

orientation, stable and predictable rhythms of activ- Conclusion


ity, planning ahead rather than improvising, written
In summary, racism represents a particular constel-
over oral expression, and a belief in personal control
lation of racial stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimi-
instead of an emphasis on spirituality. Beyond this
nation. Stereotypic differences are assumed to
model, cultures differ systematically in their empha-
reflect racial differences; prejudicial attitudes may
sis on individual outcomes or collective outcomes.
be in the form of negative attitudes toward other
The United States reflects an individualistic culture.
racial groups or reflect positive beliefs in the racial
To the extent that adherence to these cultural stan-
superiority of one’s own group; discrimination may
dards is valued, rewarded, and defined as normal at
occur intentionally or unintentionally and person-
the expense of racial groups who express other cul-
ally or impersonally. Whereas individual racism is
tural values, cultural racism may be operating.
closely affiliated with prejudice, institutional racism
Racism that is institutionalized and becomes
involves the operation of social and institutional
embedded in the culture can also affect the personal
policies that unfairly benefit the dominant group
identities and ideologies of minority group mem-
and/or unfairly affect other racial groups adversely.
bers in fundamental ways. In particular, racial iden-
Cultural racism, which includes elements of both
tities develop as a function of one’s experiences as a
individual and institutional racism, represents the
group member and how one interprets, internalizes,
imposition of the dominant group’s cultural stan-
and adjusts to those experiences. The racial identity
dards on other racial groups in the society.
and the culture of Blacks in the United States, for
Although racism may involve overt antipathy
example, have been hypothesized to reflect an evo-
and bigoted intent, it also can operate uncon-
lutionary component, which developed from the
sciously but pervasively at the individual, institu-
cultural foundation of an African past, and a reac-
tional, or cultural level. Because it can become
tionary component, which is an adaptation to the
ritualized in custom and policy and rationalized by
historical and contemporary challenges of minority
racial ideologies, racism can often go unrecognized
status in the United States. Because of the pervasive-
or unacknowledged. Also, because these ideologies
ness of racism, Blacks in the United States may
are so embedded within the fabric of society, once
internalize racial stereotypes, which when activated,
their consequences are recognized, there may be
even without endorsement, can adversely influence
resistance to the changes that may be necessary to
their performance in significant ways (e.g., through
ameliorate the problem.
the adverse impact of stereotype threat on achieve-
ment test performance). John F. Dovidio and Samuel L. Gaertner
Under some circumstances, members of the tar-
get racial group may adopt system-justifying ide- See also Authoritarian Personality; Aversive Racism; Civil
ologies of the dominant cultural group that distract Rights Legislation; Discrimination; Modern Racism;
attention from group-based disparities and ineq- Prejudice; Slavery; Social Dominance Theory; Symbolic
uity. Thus, members of a disadvantaged group Racism
may develop a “false consciousness,” in which
they fail to recognize and not only comply with
but also endorse cultural values that systematically Further Readings
disadvantage them. For example, an exclusive Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., &
emphasis on individually oriented meritocracy Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality.
may obscure cultural and institutional forces in New York: Harper.
racism and lead to an overreliance on individual Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading,
rather than collective action needed to address rac- MA: Addison-Wesley.
ism. Thus, the unique power of racism resides in Bonilla-Silva, E. (2006). Racism without racists: Color-
how it can persuade members of different groups blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in
to think, interpret, behave, and react in ways that the United States. Lanham, MD: Rowman &
contribute to the perpetuation of racial disparities Littlefield.
and reinforce racism, without necessarily involving Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (2004). Aversive racism.
their intention, awareness, or active support. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
Realistic Group Conflict Theory 681

psychology (Vol. 36, pp. 1–51). San Diego, CA: of superordinate goals, mutually desired outcomes
Academic Press. that are unobtainable without such cooperation,
Dovidio, J. F., Glick, P., & Rudman, L. A. (Eds.). (2005). has the potential over time to reduce intergroup
On the nature of prejudice: Fifty years after Allport. conflict and to create positive relations among
Malden, MA: Blackwell. members of cooperating groups. This entry describes
Feagin, J. R. (2006). Systemic racism: A theory of the background of RGCT, examines major research
oppression. New York: Routledge. findings, and discusses the theory’s importance.
Frederickson, G. M. (2002). Racism: A short history.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (1986). The aversive Background, History,
form of racism. In J. F. Dovidio & S. L. Gaertner and Major Research Findings
(Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism
RGCT was given its name by anthropologist
(pp. 61–89). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Jones, J. M. (1997). Prejudice and racism (2nd ed.). New
Robert LeVine and psychologist Donald Campbell,
York: McGraw-Hill.
who formulated and cross-culturally tested propo-
Jost, J. T., & Major, B. (Eds.). (2001). The psychology of sitions based on existing psychological, sociologi-
legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, cal, and anthropological research on ethnocentrism
and intergroup relations. New York: Cambridge and group conflict. In the course of this work, they
University Press. grouped theories explaining ethnocentrism into
National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders. several categories (reference group theory, frustration–
(1968). Report of the National Advisory Commission aggression–displacement theory, etc.), including
on Civil Disorders. New York: Bantam Books. one they dubbed realistic group conflict theory.
Sears, D. O., & Henry, P. J. (2005). Over thirty years They used this term to refer to “the set of all theo-
later: A contemporary look at symbolic racism. In ries that generate the ethnocentrism syndrome from
M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social the competitive struggle of groups with incompati-
psychology (Vol. 37, pp. 95–150). San Diego, CA: ble interests” (LeVine & Campbell, 1972, p. 72).
Academic Press. As indicated above, the core idea in RGCT is
Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An that intergroup stereotyping, prejudice, and hostil-
intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. ity emerge when groups have conflicting interests,
New York: Cambridge University Press. and specifically when one group’s success blocks
the other’s goal attainment. RGCT includes a large
number of specific predictions about the way in
Realistic Group which clashing interests between groups influence
both ingroup functioning and intergroup relations.
Conflict Theory For example, RGCT predicts that conflict with
outgroups enhances ingroup solidarity. It also pre-
Realistic group conflict theory (RGCT) states that dicts that the more another group stands in the
competition between groups for finite resources way of one’s own group’s attainment of desired
leads to intergroup stereotypes, antagonism, and goals, the greater the hostility created toward that
conflict. Such competition creates incompatible other group. Some of these propositions have
goals for members of different groups because one stimulated much more research than others.
group’s success in obtaining those resources pre-
vents the other group from obtaining them. Such
Robbers Cave
conflicts of interest lead to the development of
ingroup norms that foster negative reactions to The research most commonly cited in discus-
the outgroup, backed by punishment and rejec- sions of RGCT is a series of three studies by
tion of those ingroup members who deviate from Muzafer Sherif and colleagues conducted between
those norms. 1949 and 1954, in which boys of 11 to 12 years of
Just as RGCT argues that competition for age attended summer camps that were set up to
desired but limited resources creates intergroup study intergroup behavior, although the boys were
conflict, it also argues that cooperation in pursuit not aware of this fact. The third and most famous
682 Realistic Group Conflict Theory

of these studies was the Robbers Cave experiment. such as waiting for a movie to start and shooting off
The goal of the first phase of this study was to fire crackers, which involved neither competitive
have two sets of previously unacquainted boys nor superordinate goals. Heckling and avoidance of
each coalesce into a group, with differentiated sta- outgroup members were evident. However, with
tus positions, group norms, and the like. To the subsequent introduction of superordinate goals
achieve this end, campers were divided into two fostering cooperation, relations between the two
groups, each of which engaged with ingroup mem- groups gradually improved to the point that by the
bers in a series of enjoyable activities (preparing end of the study, the campers cheered the idea of
food at a “hideout,” deciding how to spend money returning home on one bus, and members of one
the group had won, etc.). group used prize money to buy all campers a treat.
During the next week, in the experiment’s sec-
ond phase, when the campers in the different Later Studies
groups interacted for the first time, the situation
was structured so that the two groups had incom- Subsequent research conducted by anthropolo-
patible interests. Specifically, the groups were gists, sociologists, and psychologists has provided
brought into initial contact in a series of competi- considerable support for the basic tenets of RGCT.
tive activities (baseball games, a treasure hunt, For example, one study found that group threat
etc.), during which each accumulated points toward (measured by group size and economic conditions)
valued prizes to be given to the group with the explains most of the variation in average prejudice
highest cumulative score. scores in 12 European countries, and another repli-
In the final stage of the study, during its cated the finding that individuals overestimate the
3rd week, the functional relationship between the performance of ingroup members compared with
groups was drastically changed by the introduc- outgroup members. A study conducted in Lebanon
tion of superordinate goals. Specifically, a series of with Christian and Muslim 11-year-olds who were
situations was engineered that required the coop- randomly assigned to one of two groups at a sum-
eration of members of both groups to meet highly mer camp lent further support to the idea that real-
valued goals that neither group alone could achieve istic group conflict promotes aggression, although
(the camp’s water tank needed to be repaired to this study did not support all Sherif’s conclusions.
restore water service, etc.). In addition, some work has focused on extend-
The development of norms and relationships ing RGCT’s basic ideas. For example, Lawrence
within and between the groups at the camp under Bobo has argued that perceived threat to group
competitive and cooperative conditions was stud- interests can cause negative relations, regardless of
ied extensively by means of a wide variety of meth- whether the perception is accurate. This line of
ods. Consistent with the main tenet of RGCT, argument is supported by more recent findings
when members of the two groups began to interact suggesting that the perception of a realistic threat
competitively in the study’s second phase, negative animates negative attitudes toward immigrants in
relations developed between them. Specifically, as the United States and toward ultraorthodox Jews
the boys began to interact under competitive condi- on the part of Israeli adults who are not ultra-
tions, outgroup members were derogatively stereo- orthodox themselves. It is interesting that the
typed and became the targets of aggressive behavior, study conducted in Israel also suggested that
including name calling, stealing and burning the ingroup identification moderates the link between
other group’s flag, raiding the other group’s cabin, perceived threat and aggression. However, gener-
and preparing weapons such as socks filled with ally speaking, RGCT has inspired relatively little
rocks. In addition, members of both groups over- research in the past two or three decades, possibly
rated the performance of members of their ingroup because its basic tenets are so widely accepted.
relative to that of members of the outgroup.
During the first day or two of the study’s third
Critiques and Challenges
phase, when the tournament sparking the competi-
tion between the groups was over, members of the No theory is without its critics, and RGCT is no
two groups were brought into contact in situations exception. For example, one study concluded, on
Realistic Group Conflict Theory 683

the basis of a failure to replicate many of Sherif’s including work on the authoritarian personality
findings in research on established patrols in a Boy and the frustration–aggression–displacement
Scout troop during a camp experience, that when hypothesis, RGCT does not posit individual psy-
individuals are initially well acquainted with each chological processes as the underlying origin of
other, intergroup competition does not yield either intergroup tensions and conflict. Indeed, in order
the strong outgroup hostility and denigration or to provide a test of the basic idea that the func-
the increase in ingroup solidarity that RGCT pre- tional relationship between groups causes inter-
dicts. However, this study ignored the fact that the group conflict and stereotyping rather than
patrols were also part of a larger scout troop, cre- preexisting tensions between members of different
ating a shared superordinate identity that may well social categories or deviant personal proclivities,
have influenced the way in which relations between the boys selected to participate in classic summer
patrols developed. camp experiments were all middle class, from the
A stronger challenge to RGCT comes from same racial group (White), and “normal” with
social identity theory, where substantial research regard to school performance, social relationships,
has demonstrated clearly that groups need not be and personal adjustment.
in actual competition for ingroup bias to arise. Instead of focusing on individual psychological
However, RGCT makes no claim that it fully processes, RGCT emphasizes the role that group
explains intergroup relations. Furthermore, there processes play in creating and ameliorating inter-
is no doubt that the kinds of negative attitudes and group tensions. It does this by highlighting the role
behaviors evidenced in Sherif’s research were much of conflicting interests in creating intergroup ten-
more extreme than those typically studied by social sions and emphasizing the ways in which ingroup
identity theorists. So it is possible that mere shared processes can promote and support intergroup
group membership may foster ingroup favoritism conflict. It also de-emphasizes individual psycho-
but that conflicting interests are necessary to call logical explanations for negative intergroup rela-
forth the very strong negative attitudes and behav- tions by stressing how a change from competitive
iors evident in Sherif’s studies. Further, it may well to cooperative functional relations between groups
be that the degree to which individuals identify can profoundly change the nature of relations
with their groups influences the extent to which a between members of those groups.
conflict of interest between their group and another RGCT is similar to contact theory, another
evokes negative attitudes and behaviors toward very influential theory regarding intergroup rela-
the outgroup. tions, which had its origins at about the same
Another challenge to RGCT comes from the time. Both stress the importance of the structural
observation that intergroup conflict often involves aspects of the contact situation in influencing the
those with different amounts of initial power and development of relationships between members of
status, which was not the case in the classic RGCT different groups. However, RGCT was a more
studies. In situations involving groups that differ radical departure from prevailing thought at the
in initial power and status, it may be difficult to time because it focused attention on the way in
establish superordinate goals, and even if that is which group processes rather than individual psy-
possible, the result of working to achieve those chological processes lead to intergroup tensions.
goals might well be different from when the groups Although there is currently relatively little active
start out roughly equal to each other. It is also theoretical or empirical work stemming directly
important to recognize that third parties often from RGCT, it is widely acknowledged as having
play an important role in creating or resolving fundamentally enriched our understanding of
intergroup conflicts and that their role is ignored intergroup relations.
by RGCT.
Janet Ward Schofield
Assessing Its Importance
See also Cooperation and Competition; Intergroup
In contrast to many theories that were prevalent Contact Theory; Intergroup Violence; Sherif, Muzafer;
when RGCT emerged in the 1950s and 1960s, Social Identity Theory
684 Reference Groups

Further Readings Psychological groups may be defined as refer-


Campbell, D. T. (1965). Ethnocentric and other altruistic ence groups when (a) the individual is aware of
motives. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on those composing the group; (b) the individual
Motivation (Vol. 13, pp. 283–311). Lincoln: identifies himself or herself as a member, former
University of Nebraska Press. member, or potential member; and (c) the group is
Diab, L. N. (1970). A study of intragroup and intergroup seen as emotionally or cognitively significant for
relations among experimentally produced small the individual. Most people have multiple refer-
groups. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 82, 49–82. ence groups, and the groups may be conflicting or
Jackson, J. W. (1993). Realistic group conflict theory: A mutually sustaining. Those groups may be positive
review and evaluation of the theoretical and empirical (used to provide standards of comparison or as
literature. Psychological Record, 43(3), 395–404. sources for values, norms, and attitudes) or nega-
Kahn, A., & Ryen, A. H. (1972). Factors influencing the tive (used to provide standards of comparison in
bias towards one’s own group. International Journal direct opposition with those of the group or as
of Group Tensions, 2, 33–50. sources of values, norms, and attitudes formed in
LeVine, R. A., & Campbell, D. T. (1972). Ethnocentrism: direct opposition to the group).
Theories of conflict, ethnic attitudes, and group
behavior. New York: Wiley.
Quillian, L. (1995). Prejudice as a response to perceived Early History
group threat: Population composition and anti- Herbert Hyman is credited with first using the
immigrant and racial prejudice in Europe. American term reference group in 1942 (although others at
Sociological Review, 60(4), 586–611.
that time also conceived of the use of groups for
Sherif, M., & Sherif, C. W. (1966). Groups in harmony
relative evaluation) in an examination of the dis-
and tension: An integration of studies on intergroup
tinction between objective and subjective status.
relations. New York: Octagon Books.
He was concerned with the factors that influence
Struch, N., & Schwartz, S. H. (1989). Intergroup
people’s evaluations of their social standing or
aggression: Its predictors and distinctiveness from
in-group bias. Journal of Personality and Social
status. For Hyman, an individual’s subjective sta-
Psychology, 56(3), 364–373. tus is relative; it is a person’s conception of his or
Tyerman, A., & Spencer, C. (1983). A critical test of the her own position in comparisons with others. He
Sherifs’ Robber’s Cave experiments: Intergroup asked the participants in his investigations whether
competition and cooperation between groups of well- they ever thought about their social standing in
acquainted individuals. Small Group Behavior, 14(4), relationship to others and found that not only did
515–531. most of them think about their relative superiority
in relation to others, but they sometimes did not
use actual groups for comparison. Instead, they
used general social categories such as occupation,
race, or class.
Reference Groups Subjects rarely used the total population as a
reference group but rather used smaller, more inti-
A reference group is a group or collectivity that is mate groups. One person, for example, used
used as a standard or frame of reference by an authors who wrote the books he read rather than
individual in evaluating his or her own abilities, all authors as a reference group. Subjects were also
attitudes, or beliefs or in choosing a behavior. more likely to use different reference groups for
Reference groups help orient people and may different domains, such as social standing, looks
comprise noninteracting individuals, status cate- (physical attractiveness), and economic status.
gories, or members of social groups. Reference About the same time as Hyman’s research was
groups may be groups to which an individual cur- being conducted, Theodore Newcomb was investi-
rently belongs, groups to which an individual once gating the process of political attitude shifts among
belonged, or groups to which an individual aspires Bennington College students during their college
to belong. They may be real, tangible groups, pres- careers. Although he did not use the term reference
ent or not present, or even imaginary. groups to characterize the source of influence, his
Reference Groups 685

study did provide a systematic investigation of motivated to assimilate these values in order to be
reference groups and their influence on attitudes. accepted by the group. In comparing the liberal
He focused on how students changed their beliefs students who shifted in their values with the con-
from the standards of their families in the students’ servative students who did not, Newcomb also
first college years to the standards of the more lib- distinguished between positive reference groups, in
eral college community in the students’ junior and which attitudes are formed in accordance with the
senior years. He found that the students beginning norms of the group, and negative reference groups,
their college careers tended to use the seniors as in which attitudes are formed in opposition to the
their frame of reference instead of their own class- norms of the group.
mates, although the younger students tended to Reference groups may also provide standards of
assume that their attitudes matched those of the comparison for evaluations of oneself, others, and
majority of their classmates. the world. Kelley called this the comparative func-
In a 1950 reexamination of The American tion. Illustrated in Hyman’s research, groups were
Soldier studies conducted by Samuel Stouffer and used as standards or comparison points against
associates, Robert K. Merton and Alice Kitt used which people evaluate their own prosperity.
the concept of comparative reference groups to It should be noted that although the features of
explain relative deprivation. Men in the military the different types of reference groups led to their
used different reference groups as a source of com- conceptualization as separate and distinct, differ-
parison and, depending on which group they used, ent features may occur together within the same
reported feelings of satisfaction and deprivation, group. A group of classmates, for example, may
feelings that were often inconsistent with their have both a normative function (encouraging con-
actual levels of suffering. Only when they thought formity to academic norms) and a comparison
that their suffering was relatively greater than oth- function (as a source of academic standards for
ers’ did they express dissatisfaction. The men used evaluation) in its group influence.
reference groups to which they did not belong to Morton Deutsch and Harold Gerard conducted
define the relative quality of their circumstances. a study in 1955 to confirm and extend Kelley’s
Merton and Kitt called these nonmembership distinction by examining how reference groups
reference groups. Also in 1950, Merton and Alice could provide both normative social influence and
Rossi synthesized previous research in their work informative social influence simultaneously. They
titled “Contributions to the Theory of Reference used Solomon Asch’s experimental paradigm to
Group Behavior,” creating visibility and promi- test hypotheses predicting greater normative social
nence for the concept. influence when members are more involved in a
Another major refinement of the concept was group and when a member perceives that his or
presented in 1952 in Harold H. Kelley’s paper on her actions can be identified. In the first condition,
the two functions of reference groups. Kelley dis- the participants in the experiment made judgments
tinguished between the normative function and the about the lengths of lines while in face-to-face
comparative function of reference groups. First, interaction with three confederates. In the second
individuals may be motivated to gain or maintain condition, the participants were separated by par-
acceptance in groups, perhaps to find friendship, a titions and pressed a button to indicate their judg-
mate, or simply a companion. This type of group ments anonymously. In the third condition, Deutsch
has a normative function in that it encourages and and Gerard forced involvement of the participants
enforces acceptable behavior, attitudes, and values in the group by instructing the participants that the
through awarding or withholding recognition to most successful group would receive tickets to a
the individual. Broadway play.
The college community in Newcomb’s study at Confederates of the researchers in all three
Bennington illustrates the normative function of a groups gave mostly inaccurate judgments about
reference group. Not only did these college stu- the lines on the cards, and normative social influ-
dents develop a set of political attitudes that were ence was measured by the degree of a participant’s
largely accepted by the students as they progressed conformity with the confederates’ judgments.
through their college careers, but students were Greater conformity was found when participants
686 Reference Groups

were working for a prize and when participants’ groups exert influence. When the influence is nor-
actions could be identified. The researchers rea- mative, the source of change comes from others;
soned that the groups of confederates served as when the influence is informational, the source of
normative reference groups because it was unlikely change comes from the self.
that subjects were using the groups to gain infor- Probably the most frequent criticisms have
mation. The correct judgments were somewhat more to do with the largely circular explanation
obvious, and it is more likely that participants found in reference group theory rather than with
wanted to be accepted by the group, especially if the term itself. The theory specifies that reference
they were working together to win tickets to a groups determine behavior while groups that are
play. Participants likely did not want to be respon- found to influence behavior are reference groups.
sible for the group’s losing the prize because then Theorists fight against this deterministic reasoning,
they would be rejected by the group, particularly if however, and emphasize the process whereby indi-
they could be identified. viduals define the situation and how actors may
In another condition with face-to-face interac- accept or reject influence.
tion, in which participants were asked to judge the
lines from memory, informational influence also
was high. A group influenced its members by pro- Importance
viding information about which line was correct, For more than 65 years, the concept of reference
and participants thought that they were wrong in groups has stimulated sociological and social-
their own judgments and believed that the group psychological research. The concept underscores
was correct. the idea that reference groups are not simply one’s
membership groups. Groups that are not one’s
Expansions and Criticisms own or that one is not a member of also may be
used as frames of reference.
Although this distinction between normative and The concept has been widely used in research,
informational influence from reference groups has particularly through the 1950s and 1960s, when it
been the basis for much subsequent research, many reached its height in popularity. Since then, its
researchers suggest that it is too simple a distinc- theoretical prominence has diminished. As others
tion. Jonathan Turner, in a discussion of role-taking have pointed out, because membership and non-
and reference group behavior, suggested four kinds membership groups are such an important part of
of reference groups: the identification group (a life in complex societies, the value of the concept
source of values when individuals take the role of of reference groups is in assisting in the under-
another), the interaction group (members are con- standing of the relationship between the individual
ditions for an individual’s action), the evaluation and the larger society. By far the largest number of
group (its influence is determined by how much an empirical studies focuses on normative reference
individual values the group), and the audience groups, beginning with Newcomb’s early work on
group (a normative group that attends to and the normative influence of the college community
evaluates an individual’s behavior). on college students at Bennington. Subsequent
Eleanor Singer, who with Hyman edited a vol- normative studies measure reference group influ-
ume on reference group theory and research in ence on such features as prosocial behavior, stu-
1968, made the point that the two types of reference dent alcohol consumption, and sorority binge
groups differentiated by Kelley may not always be eating. Lesser empirical attention has been given to
empirically distinct. In a later article, John Turner the comparative effects of reference groups; com-
compared informational influence with normative parative effects are found in studies of variables
influence, pointing out that informational influence such as job satisfaction, class inequality percep-
can be socially mediated and is, therefore, norma- tions, self-evaluations for the blind and for those
tive. Norms also may be informative about the who are mentally ill, and self-appraisals of aca-
appropriateness or correctness of preferences and demic performance.
values. He suggested that the distinction more cor-
rectly refers to the source of change when reference Kathy J. Kuipers
Referent Informational Influence Theory 687

See also Asch, Solomon; Common Ingroup Identity component dealing with social influence. According
Model; Group Socialization; Informational Influence; to Turner and colleagues, social influence results
Normative Influence; Norms; Support Groups from the process of self-categorization, whereby
individuals come to see themselves as group mem-
bers and thus in possession of the same group-
Further Readings
defining attributes as other members of their group.
Felson, R. B., & Reed, M. D. (1986). Reference groups Through the processes of self-categorization and
and self-appraisals of academic ability and referent informational influence, individuals come
performance. Social Psychology Quarterly, 49, to learn about the appropriate ways of thinking
103–109. and behaving as a group member and assign these
Hyman, H. H., & Singer, E. (1968). Readings in reference characteristics to themselves.
group theory and research. New York: Free Press. In referent informational influence theory, the
traditional distinction between informational and
normative influence is replaced by a single process.
Referent Informational For group members, what is normative is highly
informative about appropriate and correct beliefs
Influence Theory and behaviors in particular contexts. Moreover,
the subjective validity of information is established
Referent informational influence theory is the by ingroup norms; information from members of
social identity theory of social influence in groups. our groups is seen as more valid than information
It considers normative influence and informa- from members of other groups.
tional influence—separate concepts in the think- In referent informational influence theory, confor-
ing of other social scientists—as part of a single mity to the group norm is the result of a three-stage
influence process linked to group membership and process. First, people must categorize themselves and
social identity. This entry describes the back- identify as group members. Then, as a consequence
ground and content of the theory and then sum- of self-categorization, a context-specific group norm
marizes relevant research and implications. is constructed from available, and usually shared,
Traditionally, social influence has been account­ social comparative information. Because the identity-
­ed for in terms of individual needs such as the need consistent behavior of prototypical group members
for approval and liking or the need for rational is a direct source of such information, these people
assessment of the social world. These two types of often occupy an effective leadership role in the
needs have been translated into two qualitatively group—an idea that underpins Michael Hogg’s
different forms of influence: normative influence, social identity theory of leadership. The newly
which reflects public compliance as a result of formed norm is represented as a group prototype
social pressure, and informational influence, which that serves to describe and prescribe the beliefs, atti-
reflects private acceptance of the nature of reality. tudes, feelings, and behaviors that maximize the dif-
However, according to social identity theory, this ferences between groups and minimize the differences
distinction is problematic because it artifactually within groups (the metacontrast principle).
separates aspects of social influence that need to be Finally, group members internalize these norms
considered together as part of a single process. through assimilation of the self to the prototype (a
Within social identity theory, informational and process called depersonalization) and use them as
normative influence emanate from a single process guides to their own behavior. Moreover, because
called referent informational influence. the norm is internalized as part of the individual’s
self-concept and is linked to his or her membership
in that group, the norm exerts influence over
History and Background
behavior even in the absence of surveillance by
Referent informational influence theory arises other group members. Identification-based confor-
from social identity theory and, more specifically, mity is a process not of surface behavioral compli-
self-categorization theory. It was developed by ance but of genuine cognitive internalization of
John Turner and his colleagues as the conceptual group attitudes as one’s own.
688 Referent Informational Influence Theory

Referent informational influence theory has lit- Studies of conformity using Solomon Asch’s
tle to say about the role of outgroups—groups to paradigm, in which people are confronted with a
which the individual does not belong—and out- majority that makes incorrect judgments about
group norms in group-mediated behavior. Al­­ unambiguous stimuli, have found that people go
though it is acknowledged that non-ingroup along with an incorrect majority in public but do
members can be informative about group norms—by not accept their judgments in private. This study is
informing the individual what not to do—the most seen to be a classic example of normative influ-
immediate and direct source of information about ence. However, social identity researchers have
group norms is seen to be other group members, found that levels of conformity in the Asch para-
particularly prototypical group members (i.e., indi- digm are a function of group membership. People
viduals who seem to embody what it means to be a do not necessarily conform blindly in public condi-
group member). Moreover, if outgroups do influ- tions; rather, individuals conform to the behavior
ence the behavior of ingroup members, this influ- of ingroup members and resist influence from out-
ence is seen to be the result of compliance, whereby group members. In other words, normative pres-
individuals go along with social norms because of sure to comply is dependent on the self-definition
the power of the other group rather than because of the target of influence. It is only when the indi-
of its true persuasive influence. vidual and the majority share group membership
that influence is likely to occur.
Group polarization is the tendency for group
Evidence
discussion to produce a group decision or position
Referent informational influence theory unifies our that is more extreme than the average of the indi-
understanding of social influence in several respects. viduals’ prediscussion attitudes and opinions and
Processes such as normalization, conformity, and is in the direction already favored by the group.
innovation are all seen as processes of influence This phenomenon has been explained in terms of
related to the establishment, maintenance, or either normative or informational influence:
change of group norms. Research by Dominic Opinions become polarized because of the per-
Abrams and his colleagues demonstrated the role ceived value of other opinions or because people
of referent informational influence in social influ- are exposed to new information that produces an
ence phenomena previously considered or explained information shift. However, research within
in terms of normative or informational influence, the social identity approach has demonstrated
including norm formation, conformity, and group that group polarization is a function of the self-
polarization. This research has supported the argu- categorization of the individuals involved in the
ment advanced in referent informational influence group discussion. Group polarization occurs only
theory that informational and normative influence when people expect to agree with their fellow
are inextricably linked to group membership. discussants—that is, when people are engaged in
Studies of norm formation, such as those con- discussion with ingroup members and not out-
ducted by Muzafer Sherif using the autokinetic group members. Thus, group polarization reflects
paradigm, have found that under ambiguous condi- conformity to what people perceive to be the
tions, people converge quickly on an agreed frame ingroup norm.
of reference—or norm. Such results are taken as
clear evidence of informational influence: Under
Debate
uncertainty, individuals accept the information pro-
vided by others as evidence about reality. However, One of the key concepts in referent informational
social identity researchers have found that the influence is the idea of depersonalization. Through
group membership of the other people in the situa- depersonalization, people come to see themselves
tion has a profound effect on norm formation. and other category members less as individuals
Individuals converge only with people categorized and more as interchangeable exemplars of the
as similar to the self (i.e., other ingroup members) group prototype. Moreover, as a function of dep-
and actually diverge from people categorized as dis- ersonalization and assimilation to the group proto-
similar to the self (i.e., outgroup members). type or norm, group members are seen to follow
Relational Cohesion Theory 689

automatically the behavior prescribed by the group


norm. In other words, an automatic link is posited Relational Cohesion Theory
between thinking of oneself as a group member
and group normative attitudes and behavior. Relational cohesion theory explains how and
However, it has been argued that this notion fails when people who are exchanging things of value
to account for individual variation in the way that develop stable, cohesive relations. It starts from
people can express their group membership. the idea that people tend to interact or do things
Although the processes that make a social identity with others because they get something they value
salient are often relatively automatic, responses to or want from those others. They give something
a salient identity, such as group behavior, are likely to the other and receive something in return. This
to be under some degree of conscious control and is termed a social exchange. The valued “goods”
can be influenced by contextual factors, such as that are exchanged may be tangible or intangible.
the presence or absence of an audience or power Employees exchange their labor for pay, clients
relations between the groups. exchange money for services, neighbors exchange
A description of the ways in which the behavior assistance with each other’s yards, coworkers
of group members can be strategic can be found in exchange advice and information, roommates
the social identity model of deindividuation effects exchange respect for each other’s belongings,
(SIDE). The SIDE model, developed by Stephen and friends exchange emotional support for
Reicher and his colleagues, combines social iden- each other.
tity with notions of self-presentation and strategic
behavior to provide a fuller account of group
Overview
behavior in social contexts and to account for indi-
vidual variability in the relationship between the Social exchanges are instrumental in the sense
individual and the group. that people engage in exchange to get something
for themselves, and they may not care what the
Joanne R. Smith other gets. Unless people have some sort of com-
mitment to each other, you would expect them to
See also Conformity; Depersonalization; Group
Polarization; Informational Influence; Normative
always be searching or “on the lookout” for bet-
Influence; Self-Categorization Theory; Social Identity ter exchange partners and to readily leave one
Model of Deindividuation Effects; Social Identity relationship for another. Social ties or relations
Theory; Social Identity Theory of Leadership would be like economic markets in this sense,
governed and shaped purely by self-interest.
Relational cohesion theory asks, Under what con-
Further Readings ditions will people in social exchange develop a
commitment to their relationship?
Abrams, D., Wetherell, M., Cochrane, S., Hogg, M. A., Commitment is defined as the tendency for
& Turner, J. C. (1990). Knowing what to think by
people to keep exchanging with the same person or
knowing who you are: Self-categorization and the
to stay in a relationship despite good or better
nature of norm formation, conformity, and group
alternatives. If people have a commitment, they
polarization. British Journal of Social Psychology, 29,
will not be as inclined to search for better alterna-
97–119.
Hogg, M. A., & Turner, J. C. (1987). Social identity and
tives or to choose an alternative over their current
conformity: A theory of referent informational influence.
relationship if one becomes available. Relational
In W. Doise & S. Moscovici (Eds.), Current issues in cohesion theory, as the name implies, argues that
European social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 139–182). social cohesion produces a strong form of commit-
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. ment that involves not just staying in the relation-
Reicher, S. D., Spears, R., & Postmes, T. (1995). A social ship but also giving gifts without strings attached
identity model of deindividuation phenomena. (unilaterally) and partaking in new joint activities
European Review of Social Psychology, 6, 161–198. or ventures that require or imply trust in the other’s
Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Milton Keynes, UK: goodwill. The theory contends that such commit-
Open University Press. ments form because social exchanges produce
690 Relational Cohesion Theory

emotions (or feelings), and under certain condi- First, social structures bring people together by
tions, people associate their individual feelings with making them dependent on each other and giving
their relationship or shared group affiliation. When them incentives to interact and exchange. Who
this occurs, people come to value not only the exchanges with whom and how often are deter-
things they personally get from the exchange but mined by these interdependencies and associated
also the relationship or group affiliation in itself. incentives. People choose to exchange with those
According to the theory, social cohesion has a from whom they receive the greatest reward or
structural and a perceptual dimension. Structural payoff, and at this point, they are oriented only to
cohesion is based on the degree of interdependence, their own rewards. However, relationships form
that is, how dependent the people are on each other. and evolve when the exchange occurs frequently
Structural cohesion is strong if both people in an and repeatedly among the same people. The
exchange are highly dependent on each other for reasons for this are the next points.
valued rewards (high mutual dependence, or inter- Second, successfully arriving at exchanges with
dependence) and if they are equally rather than another is an accomplishment that gives people an
unequally dependent on each other. Structural cohe- “emotional buzz.” They feel good about accom-
sion, however, is an unrealized potential. It makes plishing the exchange task, whereas unsuccessful
salient to people that they are involved in a joint efforts to exchange make them feel bad. Repeated
task or activity with another and that they cannot exchanges or failures at exchange create patterns
accomplish the task alone or without the other. of feeling good or bad with another person.
The fact that they “need” each other for this Moreover, because social exchange is inherently a
purpose is important, but it does not necessarily joint task, people are likely to believe that their
lead to actualized or realized cohesion. Actual or relationship is one reason they are able to repeat-
realized cohesion has to be produced and perceived edly solve the task (or fail at it). People infer that
by the people themselves in their interactions with their emotions, felt individually, are jointly pro-
each other. Once cohesion is realized, people tend duced by what they share, such as their relation-
to become committed and thus are inclined to stay ship or group affiliation.
in their relationship, give each other gifts, and trust Third, the theory argues further that positive
each other enough to partake in new cooperative feelings make more salient the relationship people
ventures that expand or grow their relationship. have to each other and lead them to perceive their
relationship as a unifying force in the situation.
Thus, repeated exchange produces positive feel-
Central Assumptions
ings, and these feelings, in turn, foster perceptions
Relational cohesion theory indicates that struc- of a cohesive relationship, that is, one coming
tural cohesion is realized through the emotions together rather than coming apart. People orient
and feelings that emerge from repeated social their behavior more to the other and to this rela-
exchanges among the same persons. An emotion is tionship than before because the relationship is
an evaluation state of the human organism that now a distinct object or force in the situation. They
has cognitive, physiological, and neurological ele- are prepared to do more things on behalf of their
ments. When you feel an emotion, you “feel it all relationship with the other, even if it involves costs
over,” so emotions refer to generalized states of the or sacrifice on their part. Thus, the instrumental,
human organism. In relational cohesion theory, the self-interest foundation of their original exchanges
emotions of concern are mild states that people evolves into an expressive, symbolic relation with
often experience in their daily lives, such as feeling intrinsic value. People continue exchanging with
good, up, satisfied, bad, down, or dissatisfied. The the same others in part to affirm and maintain a
theory identifies conditions under which such valued social relationship.
everyday feelings are attributed to relations or Fourth, combining the above three points,
groups within which social exchanges occur. This there is a three-part sequence or process through
is what causes relational or group commitments to which a social structure (dependencies) produces
become emotionally based. There are four main commitment: exchange to emotion to cohesion.
points in the theory. The effects of social structures are indirect and
Relational Model of Authority in Groups 691

occur only when this process is produced, that is, how and when group processes are likely to pro-
when exchange produces positive emotions and duce group cohesion and affective group commit-
these emotions generate perceived cohesion. ments. Group cohesion and commitment should
Commitments to relations will not occur if struc- be especially strong when the structure of the task
tures do not generate repeated patterns of ex­­ and the behaviors of people in accomplishing it
change among the same people, if those exchanges generate a strong sense of shared responsibility for
do not give people an “emotional buzz,” or if the the results.
resulting emotions do not lead the people to per-
ceive a cohesive relationship with each other. Edward J. Lawler

See also Group Cohesiveness; Group Emotions; Group


Related Research Structure; Social Exchange in Networks and Groups

Many laboratory experiments have been con-


ducted to test the predictions of relational cohe- Further Readings
sion theory. These experiments bring two or more
Lawler, E. J., & Thye, S. R. (2006). Social exchange
people together to negotiate agreements across a
theory of emotions. In J. E. Stets & J. H. Turner
series of episodes of negotiations and vary people’s
(Eds.), Handbook of the sociology of emotions
mutual dependence on each other (high vs. low)
(pp. 295–320). New York: Springer.
and also their relative dependence (equal vs.
Lawler, E. J., Thye, S. R., & Yoon, J. (2000). Emotion
unequal). The evidence strongly supports the idea and group cohesion in productive exchange. American
that equal dependence and more mutual depen- Journal of Sociology, 106, 616–657.
dence promote commitment behaviors, but only Lawler, E. J., Thye, S. R., & Yoon, J. (2006).
indirectly, through the exchange-to-emotion-to- Commitment in structurally-enabled and induced
cohesion process. exchange relations. Social Psychology Quarterly, 69,
Second, the exchange-to-emotion-to-cohesion 183–200.
process has been supported under a variety of dif- Lawler, E. J., & Yoon, J. (1996). Commitment in
ferent conditions, such as in groups of three work- exchange relations: Test of a theory of relational
ing on a joint venture, in networks with four cohesion. American Sociological Review, 63, 89–108.
people, and with different types or forms of social
exchange. Thus, the idea that frequent exchange
produces more positive feelings and more positive
feelings produce more perceived cohesion is well
founded at this point.
Relational Model of
Finally, the theory suggests, more generally, that Authority in Groups
the effects of group processes on group commit-
ments are strongest when the tasks generate a One of the primary challenges faced by leaders of
strong sense of shared responsibility among the all types of groups—work groups, organizations,
people involved in social exchange. Highly joint student groups, athletic teams, and religious sects,
tasks create a sense of shared responsibility among for example—is how to get group members to
people doing the task together, and social exchange follow the rules they establish and the directives
is one example of a joint task. If people give credit they issue. More generally, authority figures face
to themselves and not the others for success at a the challenge of getting group members to act in
joint task (low sense of shared responsibility), then ways that advance group goals, such as getting
repeated success at the task should have no effects them to work hard, organize their efforts with
on cohesion and commitment. other group members, and do things that may be
On the other hand, if people give all those in the group’s interest even if they do not benefit
involved credit for success (high sense of shared the individual. Groups that cannot successfully
responsibility), the effects of emotions felt on cohe- master this challenge are not likely to be viable
sion and commitment should be strong. In this for very long. For this reason, it is essential that
way, the theory of relational cohesion helps explain leaders focus on overcoming this challenge.
692 Relational Model of Authority in Groups

Indeed, it is this challenge that, in many ways, The underlying premise of this approach is that
makes leadership necessary in the first place. group members are fundamentally self-interested
Many theories attempt to specify how group actors who engage in behaviors that benefit them
authorities can best master the challenge of shap- and avoid behaviors that do not. Such a notion
ing group members’ behavior. The traditional per- implies that group members will not follow the
spective adopted by many of these theories is that rules put forth by group authorities unless those
leaders can best accomplish this by issuing direc- rules have tangible benefits for them. Rewarding
tives and making strict rules that establish how compliance and punishing noncompliance address
group members should behave. Of course, leaders this condition by aligning each group member’s
must also take steps to ensure that those directives behavior with his or her self-interest. The ability of
and rules are followed, which requires close moni- group authorities to lead, therefore, rests on their
toring of group members’ behavior, as well as the ability and power to monitor group members, as
provision of rewards to group members who com- well as on the power they wield to provide rewards
ply and punishment to those who do not. The and dispense punishments.
principle that underlies these approaches is that To appreciate relational models, it is important
group members cannot be relied on to follow the to note some of the implications of these more
rules established by authorities, and thus, systems traditional approaches. One such implication is
that entice them to do so must be put in place. that group members will follow group authorities
The relational model of authority (the relational only when they believe their behavior will be
model), however, takes a somewhat different observed by those authorities. When their behav-
approach. This model argues that when group ior is not observed, group authorities cannot deter-
members consider group authorities as legitimate— mine whether to provide incentives for compliance
that is, as deserving of the power they wield and as or punishments for noncompliance. Given this, the
using that power appropriately—members will group member’s primary reason for engaging in
take it on themselves to follow group rules and to the behavior has essentially been removed.
act in ways that benefit the group. Furthermore, Another implication is that group members will
the model argues, group members will do this follow group authorities only when the members
without close supervision and without the provi- believe those authorities can actually dispense the
sion of rewards and punishments. This enables incentives and punishments associated with par-
groups to devote their energy and resources to ticular behaviors. Scarce resources, weak leader-
other functions and thus enables them to function ship, and inadequate support systems can all
more effectively. In this entry, both traditional and hinder the ability of group authorities to do this.
relational approaches are explored in more detail. As such, group authorities’ ability to shape group
members’ behavior is highly contingent on whether
group authorities have sufficient resources to
Traditional Approaches
closely monitor group members and follow through
Many traditional theories about leadership and with the incentives and punishments they specify.
authority relations are based on the assumption This approach is problematic because it requires
that group members must be compelled and coerced that a considerable portion of group resources—
into following the directives of group leaders and which could be put to other uses—be devoted to
into submitting to rules set by the group. According ensuring group members’ compliance with group
to such theories, leaders must implement systems authorities’ directives. What’s more, when groups
that directly control group members’ behavior. experience periods of resource scarcity, they are
This can be done by instituting reward and incen- unable to devote the resources needed to shape
tive systems for good behavior and/or punishment group members’ behavior at precisely the time when
systems for poor behavior, both of which require it is most important to do so. It is also important to
leaders to closely monitor group members’ behav- note that even when group authorities do have the
ior. This establishes a system that encourages group resources to successfully monitor and reward or
members to engage in desired behaviors and to punish behavior, actually doing so comes at a sig-
refrain from undesired behaviors. nificant cost. They risk communicating to group
Relational Model of Authority in Groups 693

members that the group does not trust them, which First, the relational model does not require the
can in turn hurt members’ commitment to the group. expenditure of resources to gain group members’
Similarly, this can damage the dynamic between compliance, because members follow authorities
group authorities and individuals because the rela- of their own volition. This frees these resources for
tionship between the two comes to be dominated by other, more productive uses. Moreover, members
these command-and-control processes. Finally, this can be relied on to follow group authorities even
approach sends a message to group members that when group resources are scarce. In addition,
following group rules may not be in their self-interest dynamics among members and between members
because they need to be coerced into compliance via and their authorities are not damaged, as this
extrinsic rewards and punishments. framework does not communicate the authorities’
distrust of the group’s members. Finally, this
approach does not imply that following group
The Relational Model
authorities is not in the individual’s self-interest.
The relational model of authority, which suggests There is a critical question that follows from the
a very different approach to getting group mem- relational model: What are the factors that cause
bers to follow directives and rules, stands in con- group members to regard authorities as legitimate?
trast to these traditional leadership approaches. In Legitimacy is a powerful tool that enables leaders
particular, the relational model argues that group to gain effective compliance from followers. The
members will be intrinsically motivated to follow relational model argues that the roots of legitimacy
group authorities when the members see those lie in group members’ judgments of the underlying
authorities as legitimate. Legitimacy refers to fairness of group authorities’ decision making and
group members’ perceptions that authorities their treatment of the group’s members.
deserve the power they hold (i.e., that they have Such fairness judgments, known as procedural
achieved their power through appropriate means justice judgments, have been shown to have a sig-
and continue to exercise that power appropri- nificant impact on judgments of the legitimacy of
ately). When authorities are seen as legitimate, the group authorities. Group authorities who make
decisions they make and the rules they establish fair decisions (i.e., those who are consistent, unbi-
are imbued with a sense of legitimacy and correct- ased, and accurate in their decision making) are
ness, and group members feel that they should more likely to be considered legitimate. In addi-
follow those decisions and rules. In contrast, when tion, group authorities that treat members fairly by
authorities are regarded as illegitimate, their deci- showing appropriate respect for them, listening to
sions and rules may seem to have little merit, and them, and showing concern for them are also more
group members are unlikely to feel any obligation likely to be viewed as legitimate. It is important to
to follow them. Perceptions of legitimacy, there- note that these procedural fairness judgments are
fore, determine the extent to which group mem- different from the fairness judgments group mem-
bers feel that they should or should not comply bers make about the outcomes received from
with authorities. This, in turn, shapes group mem- group authorities—known as distributive fairness
bers’ actual behavior. judgments.
In suggesting that members will follow their The distinction between procedural and dis-
group’s authorities even in the absence of monitor- tributive fairness is comparable to the distinction
ing, rewards, and/or punishments, the relational between means (procedural justice) and ends (dis-
model’s framework is a more viable model of how tributive justice). Although people care about both
authorities can lead groups. According to the procedural and distributive fairness (i.e., they care
model, group members can be counted on to fol- about the fairness of both the processes they expe-
low group authorities out of their own intrinsic rience and the outcomes they receive), their judg-
desires, and thus, their compliance with rules and ments of procedural justice have the most significant
directives set forth by authorities is not contingent impact on whether they view group authorities as
on outside rewards or other factors. The benefits legitimate. In short, legitimacy comes more from a
of this perspective are readily apparent when con- sense that authorities engage in fair processes and
trasted with the downsides of other approaches. less from the outcomes people receive from them.
694 Relative Deprivation

Why is procedural justice so important to mem- Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of
bers’ perceptions of their authorities as legitimate? authority in groups. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in
The relational model argues that procedural justice experimental social psychology, 25, 115–191. New
is important because it is a cue that group members York: Academic Press.
can use to evaluate their relationship with the
group’s authority figures. Judgments that a group
authority is procedurally fair lead group members to
view their relationship with that authority positively. Relative Deprivation
This, in turn, makes group members feel that the
authority recognizes their status within the group Relative deprivation is the sense of being deprived
and that they can trust the authority. When their of something to which one believes one is entitled
relationship with the authority is validated in this and the subsequent emotions, such as anger, frus-
way, members are more likely to regard the author- tration, and resentment. Feeling deprived is deter-
ity’s power as legitimate. As noted, this in turn mined not by objective conditions of deprivation
makes them more likely to take it on themselves to but rather by subjective comparison with others
follow policies established by those authorities. who are apparently better off.
The relational model’s key tenet is that group The construct of relative deprivation has been
authorities can best overcome the challenge of around for a long time, more than six decades, and
shaping group members’ behavior by making deci- is employed in many social sciences, including social
sions and treating members with fairness. In doing psychology, sociology, economics, and political sci-
so, authorities communicate a positive message to ence. It has been used to predict a wide variety of
group members about their membership in the behaviors, ranging from the individual experience
group and their relationship to the authorities, of stress and depression to civil insurrection and
which, in turn, leads group members to conclude participation in political upheaval and other forms
that the authorities deserve the power they wield. of collective action. Although researchers have theo-
This approach to shaping group members’ behav- rized and operationalized relative deprivation dif-
ior has many upsides—especially when compared ferently, and sometimes inconsistently, its core is
with approaches that attempt to shape behavior defined by the grievance of injustice.
via extrinsic means—because these strategies are Relative deprivation captures this sense of injus-
far less taxing on group resources, less damaging tice, specifies the conditions under which it is
to group dynamics, and more likely to yield desired expected to arise, and predicts its consequences.
behaviors across a wider range of circumstances There are significant theoretical linkages with
and for longer times. Therefore, the relational social identity theory, and there are significant and
model of authority represents an important frame- persistent conceptual and methodological prob-
work for effective leadership. lems in relative deprivation research. However, the
relative deprivation construct continues to be of
Steven L. Blader value in describing and understanding social behav-
See also Leadership; Power; Procedural Justice
ior. This entry traces the theory over time, places it
in a context of other ideas, and summarizes its
primary challenges.
Further Readings
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology Historical Background
of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.
Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2005). Can businesses The term relative deprivation was coined by the
effectively regulate employee conduct? The U.S. sociologist Samuel Stouffer in the classic
antecedents of rule following in work settings. American Soldier volumes (1949). Stouffer and his
Academy of Management Journal, 48, 1143–1158. colleagues conducted extensive studies of morale
Tyler, T. R., Boeckmann, R. J., Smith, H. J., & Huo, Y. J. among U.S. troops fighting in Europe in World
(1997). Social justice in a diverse society. Boulder, CO: War II. Their research program was vast, but of
Westview. primary interest here is a seeming paradox they
Relative Deprivation 695

observed in how satisfied different service units comparison and used it to explain various social
were with their promotion opportunities. Military phenomena. In the 1960s, relative deprivation was
police faced few prospects of promotion yet were commonly employed to help explain participation
more satisfied with those prospects than were air in widespread civil unrest in the United States.
corpsmen, who had objectively much better pros- These explanations focused on Blacks’ dissatisfac-
pects of more rapid promotion. tion with access to jobs, education, fair pay, and so
Stouffer and his colleagues suggested that these on, relative to Whites, as the primary grievance
different levels of satisfaction could be understood fueling participation in civil unrest.
as the disappointment of failed high expectations Similarly, but in a converse manner, in his 1966
that had been formed though comparisons with classic Relative Deprivation and Social Justice, the
others. Servicemen working in units with low rates English sociologist Walter Runciman used the
of promotion were led to have low expectations of intergroup comparative nature of relative depriva-
success when they themselves applied for promo- tion to help explain why members of the English
tion, and hence they were not terribly dissatisfied working class did not participate in collective
if they missed out on promotion. On the other action to change the social order in which objec-
hand, servicemen working in units with high rates tively they do not fare as well as other classes.
of promotion were led to expect promotion when Tackling the classic Marxist conundrum of why
they applied, and hence they were dissatisfied if the working classes do not revolt in the face of
they missed out. Ostensibly the same objective objective evidence of their exploitation, Runciman
outcome—failing to get promoted—led to signifi- proposed that members of the English working
cantly different experiences depending on one’s class do not evaluate the fairness of their condi-
prior expectations, which had been formed by the tions relative to members of other, more privileged
surrounding social context. Dissatisfaction stemmed classes. Instead, they make such evaluations rela-
from feeling deprived relative to others. tive to other members of the working class, often
The idea of relative deprivation was similar to to people in their immediate social networks of
several other constructs and minitheories being friends and family. In other words, it is the failure
developed in the social sciences in the postwar to engage in intergroup comparisons that explains
years, most notably Robert Merton’s concept of the absence of grievance in the face of intergroup
reference groups, Harold Kelley’s theorizing about inequality and exploitation.
comparison level of alternatives, and Leon Runciman introduced the distinction between
Festinger’s social comparison theory. Theories (or egoistic and fraternalistic relative deprivation.
minitheories) about relative deprivation were also These two kinds of relative deprivation have since
being developed, more or less independently, by come to be known as personal and group relative
researchers in social psychology, sociology, and deprivation, respectively, at least in part because
political science. the term fraternalistic was awkward in later
All these different developments were brought research examining relative deprivation in work-
together in 1967 in a significant theoretical synthe- ing women. The newer labels also provide a clearer
sis by Thomas Pettigrew into what he termed link to social identity theory, discussed in more
social evaluation theory. Although that term has detail below. Egoistic or personal relative depriva-
never gained currency, Pettigrew’s specification of tion refers to feelings of grievance arising from
relative deprivation as a mesolevel process tying comparisons between self and other individuals. In
micro psychological processes to macro sociologi- Runciman’s research, those other individuals were
cal processes has had wide and long-lasting influ- usually friends and family members. The social
ence. So too has his concern with the policy and comparisons involved are individualistic; group
political implications of social-psychological theo- memberships are not involved, except to quietly
ries such as relative deprivation. Unfortunately, circumscribe the range of other individuals with
this policy dimension has been more in token whom one might compare.
observance than in material engagement. In contrast, fraternalistic, or group, relative
Early formulations of a theory of relative depri- deprivation arises from invidious comparisons
vation treated it as the result of an intergroup between one’s ingroup and some outgroup. It is
696 Relative Deprivation

these social comparisons between groups that pro- actions can influence or affect society), and the
vide the fuel for intergroup conflict and social actual opportunities for effecting change. Depend­
change. Research has consistently shown that the ing on the pattern of these mediating variables,
experience of individual relative deprivation pre- the experience of relative deprivation will lead to
dicts individual-level outcomes such as stress and stress symptoms, attempts at self-improvement,
depression, which are not predicted by the experi- attempts at constructive social change, or violence
ence of group relative deprivation. Conversely, the against society.
experience of group relative deprivation predicts Crosby’s model significantly influenced relative
social or group-level responses such as engaging in deprivation research for many years. It provided a
social protest and attempting to change the status powerful attempt at a theoretical integration of the
quo, which are not predicted by individual relative extant literature and a rare attempt at a formal
deprivation. specification of the construct of relative deprivation,
The theory of relative deprivation was, in its its preconditions, behavioral outcomes, and variables
early years, clearly a theory focused on intergroup mediating those outcomes. She was also the first to
relations and social change. Despite this focus, the posit that relative deprivation is not a construct that
theory still remained concerned with relative depri- can be measured directly but rather is a theoretical
vation as an experience of individuals situated in a variable to be inferred from a set of preconditions.
social context. This theoretical complexion started Subsequent research came to be directed at
to change in the 1970s. The U.S. political scientist assessing each of the model’s preconditions to
T. R. Gurr formulated relative deprivation as a determine whether each is either necessary or suf-
perceived discrepancy between an individual’s ficient as a precondition of relative deprivation
value expectations and value capabilities and and also at assessing the role of the proposed
argued that fraternalistic forms of relative depriva- mediators. The model was limiting in several ways,
tion are best conceptualized as special cases of however. Arguably, proposing that relative depri-
egoistic relative deprivation. This individualistic vation should be assumed from the satisfaction of
formulation reduced the construct of relative a set of preconditions rather than measured directly
deprivation by removing it from the intergroup, became a diversion in the further development of
social comparative context of earlier work. In con- the theory. Certainly, most recent research has
trast to this individualistic, reductionistic approach returned to the direct assessment of relative depri-
to the construct of relative deprivation, Gurr’s vation, at least partly because attempts to empiri-
empirical research inferred relative deprivation cally resolve issues about the preconditions never
from aggregate measures of objective conditions of reached resolution. The model was naïve in its
deprivation at a national level. formulation of the behavioral outcomes of relative
Other research on relative deprivation at this deprivation. And the model was too mechanistic
time was also becoming more individualistic, or at and not sensitive enough to context-specific influ-
least more focused on personal forms of relative ences on the experience of injustice to accommo-
deprivation. Notable among this research was a date the closer integration with social identity
significant and influential model of personal rela- theory that was to come in the 1980s and later.
tive deprivation proposed by Faye Crosby in 1976.
Crosby proposed a set of five necessary and suffi-
Theoretical Linkages
cient conditions to define those in a state of rela-
tive deprivation: People must see others possessing One of the most notable, important, and influential
something they lack, must want it, must feel enti- theoretical developments in social psychology gen-
tled to it, must think it feasible to attain it, and erally in the past two decades has been the develop-
must not blame themselves for not having it. ment of social identity theory. Flowing from early
Crosby further specified three variables that work by the European social psychologist Henri
mediate the effects of relative deprivation: whether Tajfel and first fully specified by Tajfel and John
one blames oneself or society for not having the Turner, social identity theory articulates the link-
desired object, one’s perceived level of personal ages between social categorization processes, social
control (the extent to which one believes one’s comparison processes, and social identity.
Relative Deprivation 697

Social identity is closely tied to social category dimensions comparisons will be made. Festinger’s
memberships, the value of which to an individual original formulation of social comparison theory
can be assessed only through social comparison in 1954 set out careful predictions that, all other
processes involving self, the ingroup, and relevant things being equal, people will seek similar, rather
outgroups. Negative social comparisons threaten than dissimilar, others for comparison, that com-
social identity, motivating various intergroup strat- parisons will be about particular opinions or abili-
egies to enhance the sense of positive intergroup ties, and that in the case of abilities, the comparison
differentiation. These strategies can include direct other will be slightly better than the comparer.
challenges to the intergroup status quo. Social Festinger’s theory, however, was concerned
identity theory has clear similarities to relative only with individual comparisons that people
deprivation theory, a point recognized by Tajfel in make to evaluate their opinions and abilities. The
his early, nascent formulations of social identity comparisons at the core of both relative depriva-
theory. The past two decades have seen significant tion and social identity theories often involve inter-
work elaborating the relationships between rela- or even intragroup processes and are made by
tive deprivation and social identity theories. people concerned with evaluating procedural or
The two theories primarily complement each distributive justice. Under such situations, people
other, synthesizing different historical and method- tend not to make comparisons with similar others
ological traditions. Relative deprivation research but instead often compare with dissimilar others.
has strong lineage from sociology and political sci- And the dimensions of comparison are more var-
ence and has often relied on survey methods, ied than just opinions and abilities. However, all
whereas social identity research comes predomi- social evaluation theories suffer from an inability
nantly from experimental social psychology. to predict which others (individuals or groups) will
Relative deprivation research has typically focused be selected as the comparison other, as well as an
more on the consequences of relative deprivation, inability to predict what the dimensions of com-
whereas social identity research has focused more parison will be. These problems continue to be the
on the cognitive processes linking categorization to major theoretical hurdle facing relative deprivation
social comparison outcomes. Relative deprivation and social identity theories.
research has focused exclusively on judgments of Another major issue for relative deprivation
justice and injustice, whereas social identity research, and to a lesser degree for social identity
research has had a broader approach to the dimen- research, concerns a distinction between cognitive
sions of social comparison, out of which judg- and affective components of the construct. At its
ments of justice often naturally emerge as important core, the construct of relative deprivation is a hot,
points of comparison. Relative deprivation research affective, motivational response to a grievance.
has tended to assume which social category mem- However, many operationalizations of relative
berships (social identities) are important to people, deprivation are cold and cognitive. This disjunc-
whereas social identity research has focused tion helps explain why many studies find only
intensely on this issue. These points of difference modest relationships between relative deprivation
are not fundamental incompatibilities between the and outcome measures; generally, stronger rela-
two approaches but rather points of differential tionships are found when measures of relative
emphasis. deprivation include the affective component. This
makes sense intuitively. Recognizing a discrepancy
(the cognitive component of relative deprivation)
Conceptual and Empirical Challenges
translates into action only if one cares strongly
The two approaches share some common theoreti- about the discrepancy and the discrepancy violates
cal problems too. These problems afflict all the one’s sense of fairness and justice.
family of Pettigrew’s social evaluation theories and Recognizing the role of the affective compo-
persist despite consistent research attention. Prime nent of relative deprivation has led researchers
among these are problems in the social comparison recently to expand the analysis of group-based
process—namely, specifying which groups will be emotions. Emotions are usually thought of as
chosen as a comparison referent and along which individual, psychological, private experiences.
698 Research Methods and Issues

However, emotions arise through social interac- emotional processes provide the pathway to
tion, often involving groups, and are shared and different kinds of behaviors.
regulated socially. Whether talking of personal or
group relative deprivation, recognizing a discrep- Iain Walker
ancy between what is and what one believes ought See also Justice; Social Comparison Theory; Social
to be results in attempts to change the status quo Identity Theory
only when that recognition makes one angry.
Anger is the fuel of discontent. But it is not the
only emotion that may be produced by the recog- Further Readings
nition of deprivation. Sadness, fear, shame, envy,
Crosby, F. J. (1982). Relative deprivation and working
and anxiety are all possible emotional responses,
women. New York: Oxford University Press.
and each leads to a different sort of behavioral
Pettigrew, T. F. (1967). Social evaluation theory:
response.
Convergences and applications. In D. Levine (Ed.),
Just as there are many possible emotional
Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (Vol. 15,
responses to the recognition of deprivation, so too pp. 241–311). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
are there different emotional responses to the rec- Smith, H. J., & Kessler, T. (2004). Group-based emotions
ognition of advantage and privilege. The flip side and intergroup behavior: The case of relative
of relative deprivation (sometimes referred to as deprivation. In L. Z. Tiedens & C. W Leach (Eds.),
relative gratification) has come to researchers’ The social life of emotions (pp. 292–313). Cambridge,
attention in recent years as an important compo- UK: Cambridge University Press.
nent of political change. Some earlier analyses of Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory
personal and group relative deprivation suggested of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel
that those who are doubly deprived (i.e., suffering (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations
both personal and group relative deprivation) are (pp. 33–48). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
the most likely to engage in collective action. Tyler, T. R., Boeckmann, R. J., Smith, H. J., & Huo, Y.
Others suggested that the vanguard of collective (1997). Social justice in a diverse society. Boulder CO:
action is composed of people who are group Westview.
deprived and personally advantaged, because it is Walker, I., & Smith, H. J. (Eds.). (2002). Relative
they who have the greatest resources available to deprivation: Specification, development, and
tackle the group deprivation. integration. New York: Cambridge University Press.
More recently, though, it has come to be recog-
nized that the privileged have an important politi-
cal role to play in addressing social inequalities.
Many members of privileged groups do not recog- Research Methods and Issues
nize their group’s superior position, or they explain
it away as a legitimate reflection of deservingness. Group processes can be conceptualized as the
However, some accept that their group is unfairly mechanisms or intervening factors that connect
privileged and that others suffer deprivation as a properties of groups (e.g., group size, average skill
result. Common emotional responses to this view level, diversity, or identity) to outcomes. Examples
can be indignation and shame. These typically do include the actions or communication that groups
not lead to political action, though. That comes engage in while making decisions, negotiating, or
from feeling outrage and anger. coordinating their activities. These behaviors are
Thus, it can be seen that emotions play a criti- driven by the group’s task and associated perfor-
cal role in determining responses to perceptions of mance goals, creating interdependencies among
deprivation, whether one is deprived or privileged. group members that lead to coordinated and
The waxing of research attention to the emotional actively integrated behavior. It is this set of behav-
side of judgments of unfairness and inequality iors that researchers investigating group processes
returns relative deprivation to its origins. Cognitive attempt to capture and analyze.
processes are essential in appraising the fairness of Scholars have suggested that to fully under-
personal and group outcomes, to be sure, but stand how people organize, we must consider an
Research Methods and Issues 699

individual’s behavior and how others react to that researcher is interested in a global measure of group
behavior before we can predict how that person processes (e.g., cooperation), then Likert-type scales
will behave at a later time. Mapping this process (e.g., scoring 1 for never through 5 for always) can
of interaction can provide insight as to what trig- be used by observers to assess the interaction.
gers certain behavior, what patterns of behavior However, if the researcher is interested in dynamic
are likely to occur, and what patterns are likely to processes, or if more detailed differentiation of
facilitate high-quality outcomes. Studying group behavior is required, then the raw data from these
processes thus enables the researcher to address recordings need to be coded and analyzed.
“how” questions, such as how new ideas are intro- The first step involves transforming the record-
duced within groups or how the process of plan- ing into meaningful units of analysis. This trans-
ning influences which ideas are finally adopted. formation typically occurs through a process of
The measurement of group processes poses chal- unitizing (i.e., identifying units of behavior) and
lenges to the researcher that are distinct from those then classifying behaviors according to a coding
posed by the measurement of group properties. scheme. The coding scheme is a set of rules or
This entry is thus an overview of the primary issues guidelines for coders to identify the unit to be
faced by researchers in measuring group processes. coded (e.g., thought, sentence, speaking turn,
First, it presents an overview of group process paragraph), category labels, definitions, and rules
research methods and their implications for theory of thumb for distinguishing between categories
and analysis. Second, it addresses specific method- and using context (i.e., statements surrounding the
ological issues faced by group process researchers unit of interest) to interpret meaning. Regardless
that pertain to capturing and analyzing data. of whether a coding scheme is adapted from previ-
ous research or designed from scratch, its develop-
ment is a pivotal step in the research process
Overview of Group
because the classification scheme has a profound
Process Research Methods
influence on the researcher’s ability to test and
This section provides an overview of the methods support hypotheses.
for capturing and analyzing group processes,
focusing on the differences between capturing
Analyzing Group Process:
group processes via self-reports versus third-party
Static Versus Dynamic Approaches
observations and static versus dynamic approaches
to data analysis. Because the survey methods that There are two alternative approaches to analyz-
underlie self-report measures of group process are ing group process data obtained from direct obser-
well known, this section pays more attention to vation methods: static and dynamic. A static
methods of direct observation and associated data- approach considers the total (or relative) amount
analytic approaches. of a given behavior collapsed over time. For exam-
ple, cooperation might be measured by counting
the instances of cooperative behaviors that occur
Capturing Group Process:
during a team meeting. Using a static approach by
Self-Reports Versus Direct Observation
aggregating group process data over time is appro-
To capture group process data, the researcher priate when a researcher is interested in capturing
typically has a choice of obtaining the data either the general approach used by a group or the rela-
from members’ self-reports or from third parties tive usage of different task strategies (e.g., indepen-
directly observing the group. Self-reports measure dent vs. interdependent work or cooperation vs.
group members’ subjective perception of the competition). Frequencies (or relative frequencies)
group’s actual processes, usually via survey are typically used to explain how inputs affect out-
responses after the group has completed the task. comes (e.g., group composition  information
Direct observation methods, in contrast, rely on exchange  innovativeness).
the (relatively) objective assessment of group pro- The decision whether to analyze absolute or rela-
cesses by trained observers, either in real time or tive frequencies will be guided by one’s theory of
from recordings (typically audio or video). If the group behavior. If the given behavior is theorized to
700 Research Methods and Issues

influence a group outcome regardless of the uncommon for prescriptive models to be devel-
amount of other behaviors present, then absolute oped on the basis of observations of phase pat-
frequencies are more appropriate. But if one is terns in successful groups.
interested in the relative impact of a behavior Sequential analysis techniques identify patterns
within the overall interaction, then relative fre- of recurring behavior over time. Such techniques
quencies are more appropriate. Relative frequen- typically look at transitions from one type of behav-
cies are typically calculated by dividing the absolute ior to another. Recurring patterns are then identi-
frequency of a given behavior by the total behavior fied and tested for significance. Popular analytic
exhibited by the group. Frequencies of behavior techniques include lag sequential, Markov chain,
are subsequently related to the phenomenon of log linear, and phase analyses. Lag sequential
interest by means of regression techniques. The use analysis captures the effect of a given behavior on
of frequencies, however, assumes no temporal other behaviors that occur in lags (e.g., units) later.
relationships among behaviors, no unique person- Thus, lag sequential analysis can capture immediate
to-person interactions, and it does not allow for or later (lagged) responses. Markov chain and log
the possibility that low-frequency events can have linear analyses examine the likelihood that specific
a profound influence on the group. chains of behavior will occur. Phase analysis cap-
Alternatively, group process can be measured tures emergent phases in groups. The researcher
using a dynamic approach, looking at group first defines what constitutes a phase (e.g., clusters
behavior over time. Using this approach, research- of similar behaviors or important events that serve
ers can measure sequences of behavior at a very as a transition in the process), and then the analysis
fine-grained level, or they can measure broader is used to identify when phases actually begin and
phases of behavior over longer periods of time. end within a given group.
Sequences capture the direct communication Researchers interested in adopting direct obser-
exchange between group members and can be used vation methods to measure group process face a
to predict group outcomes. For example, a group distinct set of practical and theoretical issues.
discussion in which members reciprocate informa- These issues can be categorized according to
tion sharing so that there is a back-and-forth whether they pertain to capturing or analyzing
exchange throughout the meeting will have out- group process data.
comes that differ from those of a group discussion
in which information is shared sequentially by each
member, followed by a vote. Outcomes in the for- Methodological Issues:
mer group can be expected to be more positive Capturing Group Process
than outcomes in the latter group because mem- Group processes are typically observed either in
bers are building on one another’s ideas. These laboratory experiments or in in-depth, small-sample
differences in outcomes would best be explained by case studies in the field. Although experiments can
comparing the sequences of information exchange be conducted in the field, they are rare because of
within the group. In contrast, reporting total fre- the difficulties in both manipulating variables and
quencies of information exchange might result in recording group process for large numbers of
the false conclusion that information exchange groups.
does not influence the quality of group decisions.
Phases of group process are also dynamic in
Research Design
that they capture the broader group processes
that unfold over time. Phases can be predeter- Group process research that uses traditional
mined via theory (e.g., phases of group develop- experimental design aggregates data across groups
ment), time divisions (e.g., meetings divided into to look for similar patterns within conditions and
quarters), or observation (emergent phases based differences in patterns across conditions. The
on patterns within the data). Researchers who research goals are typically to link group process
study phases are often interested in understand- to inputs or outcomes or to test for mediation.
ing the process itself rather than using it to pre- A prototypical study might manipulate the com-
dict specific group outcomes. However, it is not plexity of a group’s task, examine how groups
Research Methods and Issues 701

plan and perform in each condition, and then use differences, status within the group, and knowl-
mediation analysis to examine how the task’s edge of performance. If the researcher’s goal is to
complexity influenced planning and subsequent understand reactions to group interactions, then
performance. capturing these perceptions via self-reports is nec-
In contrast, when the process itself is of interest essary. But if the goal is to capture the fundamen-
to the researcher, then it may be more appropriate tal nature of interaction in the group, then these
to examine group functioning in real-world con- biases will create measurement problems and
texts through in-depth examination of specific interfere with the research objective.
situations. These studies typically focus on a sin-
gle group or small set of groups and systemati- Data Collection
cally examine behavior over time. This approach
is sometimes used out of necessity, because of the Collecting data on group processes can pose a
difficulty in obtaining access to large numbers of unique challenge to researchers. Several decisions
naturalistic groups in organizational settings. need to be made regarding the medium of data col-
Although the generalizability across contexts may lection: Should the data be recorded or collected in
be limited, the depth of understanding is often real time? If recorded, are audio or video record-
greater, and one can avoid potential biases associ- ings necessary? Should the verbal portion of the
ated with averaging data across groups to reach recordings be transcribed, or can coding be done
conclusions about the processes of any one directly from the tapes?
group.
Recording Versus Real-Time
The decision about which research design to
adopt eventually depends on the research goals and Obtaining a recording of the group’s process is
the feasibility of implementing a particular design. always preferable to collecting all the data in real
time. Recording allows one to code the data at the
coder’s rather than the group’s pace. Ideally a
Direct Observation Versus Self-Reports
researcher would also observe the group interac-
Capturing group process from self-reports is tion while recording because observation provides
appropriate insofar as members’ perceptions guide an opportunity to detect nuances that may be lost
their reactions and behaviors. However, relying on in recording. However, it is not always possible to
perceptual data to identify and measure group record group interactions, especially when study-
process introduces two sources of bias that can ing groups in field settings, due to concerns of
lead to measurement problems. The first source of confidentiality. In many of these situations, coding
bias, inaccurate recall, is introduced as a result of in real time is the only option. Using a simple cod-
the situation, intervening events, or members’ ing scheme and having multiple, highly trained
inattention to the group process. Furthermore, coders will increase the likelihood of reliable data
the relevant group process might not be identi- collection. More detailed coding schemes make
fiable by group members during the interac- real-time coding difficult because they require cod-
tion. Important group processes could occur at ers to make complex coding decisions quickly.
an aggregate level that is not immediately discern- This difficulty, combined with the inability to
ible. Even the most helpful participants cannot review a past code assignment, increases the risk of
describe broad patterns of the group interaction. unreliable coding. Use of multiple coders can
Alternatively, group processes could also occur reduce this concern by providing multiple assess-
subconsciously when people react to one another’s ments of the interaction.
behavior. In both cases, self-reports of group pro- Regardless of whether interactions are captured
cess would not be able to capture the phenomena in real time or via recordings, researchers must
of interest. consider whether group members’ awareness of
The second source of bias involves subjectivity being observed is affecting the group processes.
of assessment. A group member’s perception of Although basic research ethics demand that par-
the group process might be influenced by a num- ticipants consent to being observed or recorded,
ber of factors, such as past experiences, individual the effect of this knowledge on group processes
702 Research Methods and Issues

can be minimized in a number of ways. Recording Transcriptions


devices should be as inconspicuous as possible, Before coding recorded data on verbal interac-
such as behind one-way mirrors in the lab or stra- tions, the researcher must decide whether to tran-
tegically placed. When this is not possible, group scribe the verbal interaction. With transcripts, one
members can be given more time to interact so that can code from the transcripts alone or in combi-
they can adapt to the presence of the observer or nation with the recording. Without transcripts,
recording device. one must code from the recordings alone.
Audio Versus Video Recording Transcription, especially of videotapes, is time-
consuming and potentially expensive if one must
Interest in nonverbal behavior and/or in identi- use professional transcription services. Although
fying speakers will drive the choice of video or direct coding of recordings is tempting for this
audio recordings. Whereas audio recordings are reason, it is more difficult to reliably identify the
less expensive and easier to obtain, they preclude units to be coded (i.e., obtain unitizing reliability)
the collection of nonverbal behavior and make it without transcripts.
difficult to identify speakers. However, the latter If one chooses not to transcribe verbal interac-
problem can be overcome by using a multitrack tion but rather to work directly from the record-
audio-recording device and recording each speaker ings, the recordings need to be indexed by means
on a separate track. Video recordings allow speak- of time codes. The use of digital technology facili-
ers to be identified, but camera placement is tates this process because each frame is indexed
important to ensure a clear view of all group mem- when it is saved. These time codes can be used by
bers. This might require the use of several cameras, the coders to identify the beginning and ending of
depending on the configuration and size of the each unit to be coded. Behavioral coding assess-
group and room. If multiple cameras are used, it is ments can then be linked to the location on the
useful to link them to a common time code or use video through the use of the time codes.
a video mixer to facilitate integration among the
separate recordings.
Advances in software packages have improved Methodological Issues
the interface between video recordings and coding in Analyzing Group Process
equipment, making the use of video recordings
Unit of Analysis
more attractive. The use of audio versus video
recording is also influenced by the research setting. An issue raised by adopting direct observation
It is often difficult to obtain permission to videotape approaches to studying group process concerns the
group processes in organizational settings where appropriate unit of analysis. When sequences are
concerns about anonymity and confidentiality are to be analyzed, the unit of analysis can vary from
strong. However, several organizations use video- a single utterance that contains meaning to a
tapes of group decision making as sources of feed- speaking turn or to a back-and-forth exchange.
back for managers. Tapping into ongoing efforts When phases are to be analyzed, the units of
might increase the odds of gaining video access. analysis are the phases themselves.
Alternative recording media are also available. At the lowest level of aggregation, an act refers
For example, computer-mediated communication to a single expressed idea or activity that is dis-
involving e-mail and Internet chat systems is easily played by a group member. At the next level of
recorded with software programs that have been aggregation, speaking turns are defined as begin-
developed for such purposes. More recently, online ning when an individual takes the floor and end-
communities have been used as an archival source ing when that person stops talking or another
of group interactions. Group Decision Support group member begins. Hence, speaking turns can
Systems software also provides the opportunity to involve single or multiple acts. When the unit of
record written interaction while employing the analysis is at the level of acts or speaking turns,
system. Handwriting recognition systems are also sequential behavior can easily be examined. When
available for saving handwritten coding and field acts are the unit of analysis, the focus is on the
notes. flow of messages, regardless of who is speaking.
Research Methods and Issues 703

When speaking turns are the unit of analysis, the to sample and an appropriate sampling interval.
focus is often the interactive nature of the group These issues will depend on the theory about what
process. phases of work are meaningful and on how long it
At the opposite end of the aggregation spec- takes to get a representative view of the processes
trum is a conceptualization of group process as a of interest. Time sampling can also be an expedient
series of fixed phases or stages, the study of which approach to data collection, transcription, and
can provide insight into such phenomena as group coding because it does not require attention to the
socialization and group development. In the liter- entire interaction.
ature on these topics, phases of group member-
ship and stages of group development are assumed
to affect the interactions among members. Phases Coding Scheme Design
can also be conceptualized as flexible. Flexible General Versus Task Specific
models account for the fact that group processes
do not progress in an orderly fashion but rather In designing a coding scheme, one of the first
advance in fits and starts, with regression to prior issues the researcher has to consider is whether a
stages being a common event. Flexible models general or a task-specific scheme is more appropri-
thus allow for more complex modeling of the ate. General schemes are exhaustive, logically
group’s process. complete classification systems that can be applied
Decisions regarding choice of unit type must be across task types, whereas task-specific schemes
linked to the research question being asked, with index behaviors associated with performing the
special sensitivity to the appropriate level of specific task at hand.
analysis and to where, in action and speech, rele- Task-specific schemes complement the use of
vant meaning resides. If too small a unit is domain-specific theories of group behavior but
selected, then meaning can be lost because the lack the generalizability of general schemes.
individual statements convey a different meaning However, several researchers have noted that
from that conveyed by a speaking turn. Redun­ because of the large number of factors that can
dancy may also be added as a result of separating influence the interdependencies among group mem-
immediate restatements that simply repeat previ- bers, it may not be possible to generalize group
ous messages rather than add new information. In process across tasks. The task-specific approach
contrast, information can be lost if too large a supports the call by these researchers for midrange
unit is selected. If multiple categories of state- theories relevant to performance effectiveness under
ments are made during a speaking turn, then the specified circumstances.
researcher must decide which code best represents
the behavior within a given unit. To aid such deci-
Theory Derived Versus Data Derived
sions, dominance schemes, which identify the
kinds of behavior that are expected to have the What is the basis for determining how a behav-
greatest impact on the interaction, can be devel- ior should be classified? Should the classification
oped. Alternatively, the first or the last code system be derived theoretically or from the data?
within the unit might be retained. Regardless of In practice, the distinction between the two is
the approach that is used, the risk of losing valu- blurred because human behavior is too complex to
able information remains. anticipate all relevant behaviors without some
An issue related to choosing an appropriate unit direct experience with the group and its task(s).
of analysis is whether to capture group processes Thus, a hybrid approach is typically adopted, in
at predetermined intervals rather than throughout which the coding scheme is continually refined by
a group interaction. This method, known as time iterating between theory and data. An appropriate
sampling, provides a glimpse of group activities at first step in this strategy is to develop categories
a particular point in time. For example, one might based on theoretical predictions about the types of
be interested in the exertion of effort at the begin- behavior that are expected to be important. This
ning, middle, and ending of a work session. The brings us to issues about how exhaustive and
researcher needs to determine the window of time detailed a coding scheme should be.
704 Research Methods and Issues

Exhaustiveness not align, codes will be applied differently and can-


Both theoretical and analytical concerns are rele- not be compared. This is especially important when
vant to this issue. If one is interested in detailed inter­ one is coding from recordings, in which it is more
­action patterns, then coding all verbal behaviors difficult to identify the specific unit to which a code
may be important. However, if some behaviors are was assigned.
not theoretically interesting, but all behavior must Low reliability suggests that the interpretation
be classified (such as when conducting a sequential and application of labels between coders is inconsis-
analysis), a “miscellaneous” or “other” category tent. This could be due to an overexhaustive coding
can be used. If the miscellaneous category turns scheme that makes it more difficult for coders to
out to contain substantial information, then the distinguish among behaviors. Inconsistencies bet­
researcher can always create new codes to reclas- ween raters could also be attributed to the imprecise
sify these behaviors. definitions of labels. In the former case, reliability
can be increased by collapsing categories. In the lat-
Depth of Coding Scheme ter case, more precise definitions and additional
practice will enable coders to better discriminate.
The more detailed the scheme, the more fine-
Interpretive validity refers to the degree to
grained the discrimination will be among behav-
which a coding scheme produces the information
iors. As the number of categories increases, the risk
it was designed to obtain. How accurately do the
of combining two behaviors that potentially serve
applied labels represent what group members actu-
different purposes is thus reduced. However, the
ally mean? Coding schemes can be validated
downside of the proliferation of categories is two-
through the use of theoretically derived coding
fold. First, coding becomes more difficult as cate-
schemes, participants’ reflections and interpreta-
gories become less distinct. Coding errors are more
tions, or some combination of the two.
likely, lowering reliability and potentially necessi-
tating the combination of categories. Second, as
the number of categories increases, the frequency Conclusion
of behavior in each category necessarily decreases. Group processes are inherently complex, and that
Low-frequency categories are problematic for complexity is reflected in the methods that have
most statistical methods, especially sequential data been developed to study them. This has often dis-
analysis techniques. The issue of how detailed the couraged researchers who are interested in group
scheme should be ultimately depends on the goal processes but are unfamiliar with the necessary
of the analysis, that is, whether global or detailed measurement methods or daunted by their diffi-
interaction patterns are of interest. culty. Although time-consuming, these methods
are tractable and worthwhile in that the direct
Code Application examination of group process can provide insights
The reliability and validity of a measure are that no other method can. Findings from research
issues that should concern all researchers. For on group processes can illuminate critical interac-
group process research, the two kinds of reliability tions within groups, deepening our understanding
of concern are unitizing reliability and interpretive of the relationship between group attributes and
reliability. Unitizing reliability refers to the degree outcomes.
of agreement regarding identification of the units
Laurie R. Weingart and Kenneth Goh
to be categorized, whereas interpretive reliability
refers to consistency in applying labels to the units. See also Group Development; Interaction Process
High reliability of both types suggests that raters Analysis; SYMLOG
are coding from the same set of units and applying
labels consistently to these units.
To ensure high interpretive reliability, it is best Further Readings
to unitize and code the data in separate passes Bales, R. F., & Cohen, S. P. (1979). SYMLOG: A system
because errors in unitizing will have a strong for the multiple level observation of groups. New
impact on interpretive reliability. When units do York: Free Press.
Right Wing Authoritarianism 705

Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative Weingart, L. R., Olekalns, M., & Smith, P. L. (2004).
information: Thematic analysis and code development. Quantitative coding of negotiation behavior.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage International Negotiation, 9, 441–455.
Edmondson, A. C., & McManus, S. E. (2007).
Methodological fit in management field research.
Academy of Management Review, 32, 1155–1179.
Fleiss, J. L. (1971). Measuring nominal scale Right Wing Authoritarianism
agreement among many raters. Psychological
Bulletin, 76, 378–382.
Right wing authoritarianism (RWA) describes a
Futoran, G. C., Kelly, J. R., & McGrath, J. E. (1989).
relatively stable dimension of individual differ-
TEMPO: A time-based system for analysis of group
ences in social attitudes and beliefs. At the low
interaction process. Basic and Applied Social
Psychology, 10, 211–232.
extreme of this dimension are beliefs and attitudes
Gottman, J. M., & Roy, A. K. (1990). Sequential favoring individual freedom, personal autonomy,
analysis: A guide for behavioral researchers. New social diversity, social novelty, change, and inno-
York: Cambridge University Press. vation, while the high authoritarian extreme is
Guetzkow, H. (1950). Unitizing and categorizing characterized by beliefs and attitudes that favor
problems in coding qualitative data. Journal of maintaining traditional socially conservative val-
Clinical Psychology, 6, 47–58. ues, lifestyles, morality, and religious beliefs;
Hewes, D. E. (1979). The sequential analysis of social respect and obedience for established laws, norms,
interaction. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 65, 56–73. and social authorities; and strict, tough, punitive
Holmes, M. E., & Poole, M. S. (1991). Longitudinal social control.
analysis. In B. Montgomery & S. Duck (Eds.), This dimension also has broader attitudinal
Studying interpersonal interaction (pp. 286–302). implications. Persons low in RWA tend to be ideo-
New York: Guilford. logically liberal and left wing, favoring the politi-
Kelly, J. R. (2000). Interaction process analysis in task cal Left and “progressive” social change; are more
performing groups. In A. P. Beck & C. M. Lewis open and sympathetic to minorities, immigrants,
(Eds.), The process of group psychotherapy: Systems and foreigners; and oppose nationalism, ethnocen-
for analyzing change (pp. 49–65). Washington, DC: trism, and militarism. Persons high in RWA tend
American Psychological Association. to be more politically conservative and ideologi-
Morley, D. D. (1987). Revised lag sequential analysis. In cally right wing, oppose social change, and tend to
M. L. McLaughlin (Ed.), Communication yearbook be more nationalistic and ethnocentric, being in
10 (pp. 172–182). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
particular less favorable to minorities, immigrants,
Poole, M. S., Folger, J. P., & Hewes, D. E. (1987).
and foreigners in general. This entry looks at the
Analyzing interpersonal interaction. In M. E. Roloff
theory of the authoritarian personality and how it
& G. R. Miller (Eds.), Interpersonal processes:
is linked to political and ideological conservatism,
New directions in communication research
then examines current trends in this research.
(pp. 220–256). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Poole, M. S., & McPhee, R. D. (1994). Methodology in
interpersonal communication. In M. Knapp & G. R. Theory of the Authoritarian Personality
Miller (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication
(pp. 42–100). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. This individual-difference dimension of RWA atti-
Trujillo, N. (1986). Toward a taxonomy of small group tudes was originally identified in the 1930s by
interaction coding systems. Small Group Behavior, 17, social scientists such as Erich Fromm and Wilhelm
371–394. Reich. They suggested that these attitudes have
Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small their psychological basis in a particular kind of
groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 384–399. personality characterized by underlying needs for
Weingart, L. R. (1997). How did they do that? The strong national authority and hostility to out-
ways and means of studying group processes. In groups or minorities. This, they suggested, helped
L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in explain the rise of right wing fascist movements
organizational behavior (Vol. 19, pp. 189–239). and virulent anti-Semitism in Europe at the time.
Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. The theory was developed and furnished with
706 Right Wing Authoritarianism

some empirical support in 1950 in a classic vol- scoring high on the F scale were characterized by
ume, The Authoritarian Personality, by Theodor higher levels of generalized prejudice toward out-
Adorno, Else Frenkel-Brunswick, Daniel Levinson, groups and minorities and were more ethnocentric,
and Nevitt Sanford. socially conservative, and politically right wing.
Their research showed that prejudiced attitudes, This theory attracted enormous attention ini-
such as anti-Semitism, were not held in isolation tially, and the F scale became widely used. Critics,
but were part of a broader ethnocentric pattern however, noted methodological flaws in the
involving a generalized dislike of outgroups and research and pointed out that the theory ignored
minorities. Together, these attitudes formed part of authoritarianism of the left. The F scale was found
the broader right wing authoritarian social attitude to have serious psychometric flaws, most notably
dimension. The authors classified these authoritar- the all-positive formulation of its items, so that
ian social attitudes into nine categories or hypoth- scores were heavily contaminated by the response
esized traits that they assumed together constituted style of acquiescence (the general tendency of
the authoritarian personality dimension. These nine people to agree rather than disagree). When this
traits were conventionalism (rigid adherence to con- was corrected, the items of “balanced” versions of
ventional middle-class values), authoritarian sub- the F scale lacked internal consistency and so could
mission (submissive, uncritical attitudes toward not be measuring a single unitary syndrome or
authorities), authoritarian aggression (tendency to dimension. As a result of this and other nonsup-
condemn, reject, and punish people who violate portive findings, interest in the F scale and the
conventional values), anti-introspection (opposition theory of the authoritarian personality largely dis-
to the subjective, imaginative, and tender-minded), sipated during the 1960s.
superstition and stereotypy (belief in mystical deter-
minants of the individual’s fate, disposition to think
Contemporary Developments:
in rigid categories), power and toughness (preoc-
RWA and Social Dominance Orientation
cupation with the dominance–submission, strong–
weak, leader–follower dimension; identification In 1981, an important book by Robert Altemeyer
with power, strength, tough­­­ness), destructiveness reported the development of a new and psycho-
and cynicism (generalized hostility, vilification of metrically robust measure of right wing authoritari-
the human), projectivity (disposition to believe that anism, the RWA scale. Altemeyer succeeded in this
wild and dangerous things go on in the world; the by narrowing and refining the concept to just three
projection outward of unconscious emotional of the original categories or traits identified by Adorno
impulses), and finally an exaggerated concern with and colleagues—that is, conventionalism, authori-
sexual goings-on. tarian submission, and authoritarian aggression—
Adorno and colleagues’ theory of the authori- which correlated together strongly enough to define
tarian personality suggested that these traits arose a single unitary attitudinal dimension.
from underlying psychodynamic conflicts originat- During the past three decades, the RWA scale
ing from harsh, punitive parental socialization in has been widely used to measure right wing
early childhood. This was presumed to create authoritarianism and has been largely responsible
underlying feelings of resentment and anger toward for reviving social scientific interest in the concept
parental authority, later generalized to all author- and establishing its importance as an individual-
ity, and feelings that were repressed and replaced difference construct relevant to social behavior.
by deference and idealization of authority, while Research by Altemeyer and others has confirmed
the underlying repressed anger and aggression that the social attitudinal dimension measured by the
were displaced as hostility toward deviant persons, RWA scale was highly stable in individuals during
outgroups, and minorities. periods of as long as 20 years and was powerfully
Adorno and his colleagues also developed a associated with right wing political orientation,
psychometric scale to measure this authoritarian religious fundamentalism, social traditionalism,
personality, which they named the F scale (believ- resistance to change, preferences for structure and
ing the items expressed implicitly profascist senti- order, and general prejudice against outgroups and
ments). Research did indeed show that persons minorities. Some research suggests that persons
Right Wing Authoritarianism 707

high in RWA are behaviorally less flexible and pro- authoritarian personality and SDO a dominant
cess social information in a more biased fashion, authoritarian personality.
although other research suggests that this may be During the past decade, however, this “person-
so only under stressful or threatening conditions. ality assumption” has been questioned. Critics
Research on RWA has also not supported have pointed out that the RWA and SDO scales
Adorno and colleagues’ earlier hypothesis that consist of items solely assessing social attitudes and
these attitudes were formed in early childhood. that there is no evidence that they measure person-
Instead, Altemeyer’s and others’ findings suggested ality in the sense of behavioral dispositions. Instead
that RWA attitudes were largely formed through it has been argued that RWA and SDO seem to be
social learning and personal experiences and crys- attitudinal expressions of basic social values, with
tallized during late adolescence. Despite this, and RWA expressing collective security or conserva-
the finding that these attitudes are generally stable tion values (valuing social stability, tradition, secu-
over time, research has also shown that they can be rity, cohesion, and order) and SDO expressing
substantially changed by experiences throughout enhancement values (valuing power, dominance,
the life cycle. Thus, RWA scale scores decrease sub- achievement, and superiority). This approach helps
stantially with liberal higher education and increase explain the kinds of social attitudes that constitute
as a result of becoming a parent and being exposed each of these dimensions, the relative stability of
to threats to societal security and stability. the beliefs constituting these dimensions in indi-
A new development in research on authoritari- viduals, and their capacity to be changed by expo-
anism came in the 1990s when Jim Sidanius and sure to particular social experiences and events
Felicia Pratto proposed the concept of social dom- (such as social threat in the case of RWA).
inance orientation (SDO), which described a sec-
ond relatively stable dimension of social attitudes John Duckitt
in individuals, distinct from RWA. The items of See also Anti-Semitism; Authoritarian Personality;
their SDO scale, which measured this dimension, Prejudice; Social Dominance Theory
express a general attitudinal preference for inter-
group relations to be hierarchical rather than
equal, with more powerful groups having the right Further Readings
to dominate weaker ones.
Research has shown that the SDO scale power- Adorno, T., Frenkel-Brunswick, E., Levinson, D., &
fully predicts sociopolitical and intergroup phe- Sanford, N. (1950). The authoritarian personality.
nomena similar to those predicted by the RWA New York: Harper.
scale, such as generalized prejudice, intolerance, Altemeyer, B. (1981). Right-wing authoritarianism.
right wing political party preference, nationalism, Winnipeg, MB, Canada: University of Manitoba Press.
punitiveness, and militarism, but it is uncorre- Altemeyer, B. (1996). The authoritarian specter.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
lated or only weakly correlated with RWA, indi-
Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other “authoritarian
cating that they comprise relatively independent
personality.” In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in
dimensions.
experimental social psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 47–92).
San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Conclusion Duckitt, J. (2001). A dual process cognitive–motivational
theory of ideology and prejudice. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.),
In contrast to the early research of Adorno and Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 33,
colleagues, new findings have shown not just one pp. 41–113). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
but two distinct dimensions of authoritarian social Duckitt, J. (2009). Authoritarianism and dogmatism. In
attitudes. The original idea that these attitudes are M. Leary & R. Hoyle (Eds.), Handbook of individual
expressions of basic personality has, however, sur- differences in social behavior (pp. 298–317). New
vived. Many contemporary researchers, including York: Guilford.
Altemeyer himself, have argued that RWA and Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An
SDO directly represent two different authoritarian intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression.
personality dimensions, with RWA a submissive Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
708 Ringelmann Effect

replication of Ringelmann’s research was pub-


Ringelmann Effect lished until 1974, when Alan Ingham, George
Levinger, James Graves, and Vaughn Peckham
The Ringelmann effect is a systematic reduction of reported a partial confirmation of Ringelmann’s
individual effort on a task as the number of people effect in two tightly controlled laboratory experi-
performing the task increases. The effect, named ments. Their initial aim was to ascertain the gener-
after Maximilien Ringelmann, who first reported it ality of the effect. Having found some confirmation
in 1913, was described in 1927 by Walther Moede in their Study 1, their Study 2 investigated the rela-
in a German journal on industrial psychology. tive importance of coordination versus motivation
According to Moede, Ringelmann found that when losses. Ingham and colleagues’ work was inspired
groups of coworkers pulled on a rope, their collec- by Ivan Steiner’s theorizing about a group’s actual
tive group performance was inferior to the sum of productivity, which he postulated is determined by
their abilities to pull it individually. Furthermore, potential productivity minus losses due to faulty
as a group increased in size from one to eight mem- process. Steiner identified two types of process
bers, the discrepancy between the group’s potential losses: coordination loss and motivation loss.
and its actual performance increased progressively. Ingham built a 27-foot-long apparatus that
Assuming that men pulling a rope individually per- could contain groups of up to six people pulling on
form at 100% of their ability, Moede wrote that a taut rope 1 meter above the ground, from which
two-man groups perform at 93% of the average the force of their pulls was electronically recorded.
member’s pull, three-man groups at 85%, and so (Six was the maximum number of pullers whose
on, with eight-man groups pulling with only 49% joint efforts could practically be studied in his
of the average individual member’s ability. In other laboratory.) Study 1 replicated Ringelmann’s dec-
words, although a group’s absolute pull increased rements for the pulls of two and three coworkers—
with its size, its per-person performance declined. finding decrements of 9% in two- and 18% in
Ringelmann’s original 1913 article, on which three-person groups—but it found almost no fur-
Moede’s report was based, was not rediscovered ther losses after the addition of a fourth, fifth, or
until 1986, by David Kravitz and Barbara Martin. sixth coworker.
They also learned that Ringelmann was a French Study 2 was therefore designed to eliminate the
agricultural engineer (not a German, as was possibility of coordination losses and thus to esti-
assumed earlier), whose experiments were con- mate the contribution of motivation losses to dec-
ducted in the 1880s. Thus, Ringelmann’s studies rements in individuals’ rope pulls. To ascertain
are arguably the earliest truly social-psychological this, individual participants (situated in the Number
experiments ever performed, although their results 1 spot in the apparatus) pulled in the presence of
were not published until much later (and after five experimenter confederates. The participants
Norman Triplett’s better known early experiments pulled in ostensible groups of 1 (alone), 2, 3, 4, 5,
on social facilitation had been published). or 6 (in random order across subjects) but actually
Moreover, Ringelmann did not specifically refer to pulled all alone in every instance. Without excep-
rope pulling when he reported progressive perfor- tion, all participants assumed (as they reported in
mance declines with increases in group size. He postsession interviews) they had indeed pulled in
had, however, interpreted his findings as attribut- groups of six different sizes. Once again, perfor-
able to poor social coordination, whereby the mance declined significantly with the addition of
more people (or animals!) one adds to a group, the the first and second perceived coworker, but then it
more likely it is that they will fail to coordinate leveled off for perceived group sizes of four to six.
their efforts effectively, that is, by not pulling at the This second study, then, found strong evidence
same time or at the same angle. for a motivation loss, thus undercutting the suffi-
ciency of the earlier coordination loss explanation.
Note, however, that Ingham and colleagues’ appa-
The Ingham Project
ratus required all subjects to pull at the same angle,
Although Moede’s report was widely cited in the and their verbal prompts encouraged all subjects
subsequent literature on group performance, no to pull at the same time; this may have minimized
Roles 709

possible coordination losses. In their conclusions, Kerr, N. L., Seok, D., Sambolec, E. J., Lount, R. B., Jr.,
therefore, Ingham and his coauthors were careful & Park, E. S. (2007). Psychological mechanisms
to delimit the context in which their results were underlying the Köhler motivation gain. Personality
obtained and suggested ways in which groups and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 828–841.
might experience gains rather than losses in their Kravitz, D. A., & Martin, B. (1986). Ringelmann
performance. rediscovered: The original article. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 936–941.
Latané, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many
Later Research hands make light the work: The causes and
Two contrasting lines of research have followed consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality
from the 1974 attempt to replicate Ringelmann. and Social Psychology, 37, 822–832.
One line of work relabeled the term motivation Moede, W. (1927). Die Richtlinien der Leistungs-
loss as social loafing and extended it to other kinds Psychologie [Guidelines of performance psychology].
of tasks. For instance, in an early and influential Industrielle Psychotechnik, 4, 193–209.
study, Bibb Latané, Kipling Williams, and Stephen Ringelmann, M. (1913). Recherches sur les moteurs animes:
Harkins found evidence of social loafing in their Travail de l’homme [Research on animate sources of
power: The work of man]. Annales de l’Institut National
carefully designed studies of noise levels when sub-
Agronomique, 2e serie-tome XII, 1–40.
jects shouted or clapped either singly, in pairs, or
in four- or six-member groups. Their per-member
performance in Experiment 1 dropped from 100%
singly to 71% in pairs, 51% in fours, and 40% in Roles
sixes. In their more tightly controlled Experiment
2, it dropped to 66% in pairs and to 33% in six- In society, people spend much of their lives in
person groups. Parallel social loafing effects have groups. In groups, people hold various positions.
been found in other laboratory research as well as Tied to these positions are roles, which refer to the
in real-life social group contexts—such as in Soviet expectations that guide people’s attitudes and behav-
collective farms. ior. For example, on a college campus, there is the
The second line of research has pursued the position of student. Tied to the student position are
opposite tack, confirming the possibility of signifi- roles or sets of expectations, including learning new
cant increases in group performance under speci- knowledge and skills, establishing an area of study,
fied conditions. One such motivation gain is the passing courses, acquiring a degree, and so forth,
Köhler effect—based on O. Köhler’s early research that define what it means to be a student. We learn
on motivation gains in coworking groups. Essen­ expectations tied to different positions in society
tially, individuals working in a group context may from others, such as our parents, peers, educators,
under certain conditions boost their efforts and and the media. In general, if we have information
consequent output either when they feel they are about the roles people occupy in a situation, we are
competing with others in a comparative context or in a good position to predict their behavior.
when they believe their own effort is indispensable This entry reviews several aspects related to
to the group’s success. roles. First, some general concepts found in the
George Levinger literature on roles are presented. Then four role
theories are identified, along with what is central
See also Group Motivation; Group Performance; Köhler in each theory. Finally, four role processes that
Effect; Social Loafing have received attention in the literature are dis-
cussed: role-playing, role-taking, role identity, and
role differentiation.
Further Readings
Ingham, A. G., Levinger, G., Graves, J., & Peckham, V.
General Role Concepts
(1974). The Ringelmann effect: Studies of group size
and group performance. Journal of Experimental A social position is a category in society that an
Social Psychology, 10, 371–384. individual occupies. These categories are varied.
710 Roles

They can include one’s occupation, such as nurse, interactionist role theory, and cognitive role the-
pastor, or mother. They can refer to the kinds of ory. Functional role theory developed in the work
people it is possible to be in society, such as rebel of the sociologist Talcott Parsons. For functional-
or intellectual. They also can refer to one’s bio- ists, roles are consensual expectations that guide
logical attributes, such as being female or young. behavior. In turn, behavior is functional for the
When a person assumes a position in a situation, maintenance of society. Roles are the shared nor-
certain expectations are attached to the position, mative expectations that prescribe and explain
and others behave toward the person based on people’s behavior as they occupy social positions.
these expectations. It is these expectations that the Individuals learn these normative expectations
term role designates. For example, the position of from others in society and are expected to con-
friend may include the expectation of being sup- form. Conformity to roles helps explain how soci-
portive, trustworthy, and loyal. The position of ety remains stable and orderly.
worker may include the expectation of being hard- Structural role theory, like functional role the-
working, efficient, and responsible. ory, considers society as a functional unit. As in
More than one expectation may be tied to a functional role theory, roles are defined as pat-
social position. Furthermore, expectations can be terned behaviors attached to social positions in
specific or general in the behavior to which they society. Structural role theory emphasizes the idea
refer. They can require specific performances, or that because society is composed of multiple and
they can simply suggest a script within which reciprocal social positions, such as parent–child,
much flexibility is possible. For instance, a general employer–employee, teacher–student, and so forth,
expectation of a mother is that she be nurturing. there are corresponding multiple and reciprocal
Some women may fulfill this expectation by being roles. The structural perspective was influenced by
physically affectionate while others may fulfill it the work of anthropologist Ralph Linton, who
through encouraging and supportive talk with made a distinction between status (position) and
their child. Expectations also can refer to a mini- role. Status is a set of rights and duties, and a role
mal part or a large part of one’s range of interac- represents the implementation of those rights and
tions. For example, the role of male carries with it duties in interaction. For Linton, status and role are
many expectations, such as being dominant and inseparable. One cannot exist without the other.
assertive and taking the lead. These expectations Symbolic interactionist role theory examines
will be applicable to a wide range of interactions at roles not from the point of view of society, as func-
home, at school, at work, and with friends. In con- tional or structural role theory do, but from the
trast, the role of fraternity member carries with it point of view of the individual. Roles are expecta-
expectations that typically are relevant with friends tions, but they may be heavily laden with norms,
or at school; thus they are applicable to a smaller demands as to how to behave in a specific situa-
range of interactions. tion, and the evolving definition of the situation as
Members of a society share the expectations understood by the actor. This perspective was
associated with positions. It is through the social- influenced by the work of Erving Goffman and his
ization process that the members learn these expec- concept of dramaturgy.
tations. The members of a society cannot be taught Goffman viewed social interaction as analogous
the expectations unless there is societal agreement to a theater in which actors have a script that they
or consensus as to what those expectations are. play out in front of an audience. Individuals take
With consensus, individuals are expected to con- on roles in an interaction in the same way that
form to or abide by those expectations. One way to actors take on their parts in a play. For Goffman,
ensure conformity is for people to verbalize the roles are the activities individuals would enact if
expectations and pressure others to follow them. they abided by the normative demands of a posi-
tion. This is different from role performance,
which is the actual conduct of an individual based
Role Theories
on the person’s interpretation of the role.
Four major theories on roles have developed: func- Cognitive role theory, like symbolic interaction-
tional role theory, structural role theory, symbolic ist theory, addresses roles from the point of view
Roles 711

of the individual. The emphasis is on the expecta- Role-playing has been used as a technique in
tions associated with roles. Theorists examine the laboratory studies to simulate difficult group situ-
social factors that give rise to the expectations, ations to which researchers would not otherwise
how these expectations are perceived by individu- have access. For example, in the well-known
als, how these expectations can be measured, and Stanford Prison Experiment, Philip Zimbardo and
the relationship between expectations and behav- his colleagues had Stanford University undergrad-
ior. Bruce Biddle, one cognitive role theorist, has uates play the roles of prisoners and guards to
maintained that role expectations can appear in simulate the prison environment and study the
societal norms, preferences, and beliefs. In this interaction among guards and inmates. Within a
way, role expectations are much more pervasive in short time, participants in the simulation found
society than simply being associated with societal themselves deeply involved in their roles. Guards
positions. became hostile, and the prisoners became psycho-
The macro orientation to roles in functional logically fragile. The researchers had to end the
and structural role theory and the micro orienta- experiment before the scheduled deadline because
tion to roles in symbolic interactionist and cogni- of the emerging psychological harm to the partici-
tive role theory can be integrated into a general pants. This study demonstrated that when indi-
theory of roles. At one level, we can see how the viduals identify with their roles and play them out,
patterns of behavior across individuals create gen- they can closely approximate what happens in
eral patterns that constitute the social structure groups.
and social order. At another level, we can see how
roles guide behavior in interaction for any one
Role-Taking
individual. Both levels of analysis are important in
understanding roles. The social philosopher George Herbert Mead
made an important contribution to the study of
roles by highlighting the process of role-taking, or
Role Processes taking the perspective of others into account in
Four important role processes have captured the interaction. Individuals put themselves in the place
attention of many researchers: role-playing, role- of others and see the world as the others see it.
taking, role identity, and role differentiation. Role- Mead maintained that role-taking was crucial in
playing emerged out of cognitive role theory, the development of the self. Specifically, as we take
role-taking and role identity developed out of sym- the view of others into account and see things from
bolic interactionist role theory, and role differenti- others’ vantage point, we come to see how others
ation developed out of functional role theory. view us and to view ourselves in a similar manner.
When individuals evaluate themselves in the same
way as others evaluate them, a self has emerged.
Role-Playing
Role-taking facilitates not only self-development
Role-playing, a term coined by psychologist but also coordinated interaction. In seeing things
Jacob Moreno, involves imitating behaviors that through others’ eyes, individuals are able to antici-
are associated with a social position. Role-playing pate responses of others and adjust their own
is a basic strategy for learning roles. It appears behavior accordingly.
spontaneously in the behaviors of children and Role-taking has cognitive and affective aspects.
grows in complexity as the child matures. When In cognitive role-taking, the individual infers
children role-play, they gain important informa- another’s thoughts, motives, or intentions. In
tion about how to perform a role. For instance, affective role-taking, a person infers the emotional
children may learn to play the role of mother by state of another. Some have defined affective role-
first observing their mother feeding, cleaning, and taking to involve empathy, which is feeling what
clothing her children. By imitating these observed another is feeling. In general, it is better to infer
behaviors while playing “house” with their friends, what others are thinking and feeling than to infer
the children obtain a better understanding as to what they are thinking or feeling. In taking into
what is involved in the role of mother. account the cognitive and emotional dimensions of
712 Roles

others, observers have more information by which When one claims a role identity in a situation,
to gauge their own response in the situation. there is an alternative role identity claimed by
Role-taking also varies along the dimensions of another to which it is related. For example, in the
accuracy, range, and depth. In the first instance, role of student, the student identity is enacted as it
one may take the role of others but not correctly relates to the corresponding counterrole of teacher.
discern others’ thoughts or feelings. One may sim- Similarly, the husband identity is played out in a
ply “project” onto others what one is thinking situation as it relates to the wife identity, and so
rather than accurately identifying the thoughts and forth. Sometimes, one’s expectations associated
motives of others. Role-taking range has to do with a role identity may differ from the expecta-
with people’s ability to infer the thoughts and feel- tions others associate with that role identity in the
ings of a wide variety of people. Such individuals situation. When this happens, individuals may dis-
may be able to identify the views and emotions of cuss these differences and compromise on a set of
both men and women, for instance. Finally, role- expectations so that interaction can proceed.
taking depth is the ability of individuals to infer Because individuals hold multiple roles in society,
what others are thinking and feeling across a range they have multiple role identities. The many role
of areas in their lives. More generally, it is grasping identities individuals claim are organized in a hierar-
another’s total worldview. It is understanding oth- chy. The role identities highest in the hierarchy of
ers in depth and in detail. role identities are those that individuals are most
Within groups, role-taking facilitates communi- likely to play out across situations. Individuals are
cation, a shared understanding within the group, more committed to these identities in the sense that
and coordinated activity. If problems emerge in the the number of people they are connected to through
group, acknowledging others’ perspectives can having the particular identity is large, and the con-
ease conflict and tension. Role-taking is also an nection to these others is strong. For example, those
important mechanism for social control in a group. who are more committed to the student identity
If a group member decides to engage in counter- should be tied to many others based on this identity,
normative behavior, taking the role of other group and the ties with those others should be deep.
members and inferring that their reaction will be The successful enactment of role identities in
negative may lead the group member to avoid groups activates a sense of self-efficacy. Individuals
enacting the counternormative behavior. Thus, see that they are effective in living out the expecta-
persons inhibit behaviors they think the group will tions set by their role identity standards. They gain
disapprove of and choose behaviors that support a sense of control over their environment and con-
and maintain the group’s goals. fidence in their own abilities. For this reason, claim-
ing and playing out role identities in groups is an
important source of feeling good about the self.
Role Identity
Most interaction in groups is not between whole
Role Differentiation
people but between the different aspects of people
having to do with their roles. For each role a person Leadership role differentiation, an idea devel-
holds, there is a corresponding identity associated oped by Robert F. Bales and Philip E. Slater, refers
with it. Thus, people have role identities. A role to the emergence in groups of two specialized lead-
identity consists of the meanings and expectations ership roles: a task leader and a socioemotional
individuals claim for themselves while in a role. In leader. The task leader is often the person who
other words, what does it mean to a person to be a provides the best guidance and ideas toward the
student, a friend, or a worker? These meanings and attainment of the group’s goals. In an effort to get
expectations individuals attribute to themselves things done, however, the task leader may be
while in a role become their role identity standards. pushy and openly antagonistic. Although this per-
These role identity standards guide their behavior son makes an impact on the group’s opinion, his
while playing out their roles in situations. or her assertive behavior may create tension in the
As there are roles and counterroles in situations, group. Thus, a socioemotional leader emerges to
there are also identities and counteridentities. ease the tension and soothe hurt feelings in the
Role Transitions 713

group. This person might tell a joke at the right with the greater investment of women in the
moment or provide emotional support to someone domestic role and the greater investment of men in
whose feelings were hurt. The person helps release the worker role.
tension and maintain good spirits within the
group. This is often the best-liked member of the Jan E. Stets and Yvonne Thai
group. Thus, we have the development of leader- See also Gender Roles; Group Structure; Leadership;
ship into two distinct roles played by different Norms; Role Transitions; Symbolic Interactionism
individuals.
Later research on task and socioemotional role
differentiation revealed that role differentiation Further Readings
does not always occur in groups. It tends not to
Biddle, B. J. (1986). Recent developments in role theory.
occur when the leader is given the authority to lead
Annual Review of Sociology, 12, 67–92.
in the group and when the task activity is seen as
Biddle, B. J., & Thomas, E. J. (1966). Role theory:
legitimate. When an experimenter appoints a per-
Concepts and research. New York: Wiley.
son to be the leader in a group, thus giving the
Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior:
person the authority to lead, role differentiation is A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ:
less likely to occur than when the leader is not Erlbaum.
authorized by the experimenter. Role differentia- Stryker, S., & Statham, A. (1985). Symbolic interaction
tion also is less likely to occur when the task activ- and role theory. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.),
ity of the group is accepted, such that group Handbook of social psychology (pp. 311–378). New
members interact as if there is a “task ethic” (per- York: Random House.
forming the task that is asked of them, arriving at
conclusions, obtaining a consensus, etc.). Under
leadership legitimacy and task legitimacy, fewer
group members challenge the leader’s role or the Role Transitions
task activity. This leads to fewer problems in the
group, and thus there is less need for a socioemo- A role refers to the normative expectations associ-
tional leader. ated with a position in a social system. Role tran-
Early research on the family applied the concept sitions refer to the psychological and, if relevant,
of role differentiation to men’s and women’s spe- physical movements between positions within or
cialized roles in the home. Men took on the task or between social systems, including disengagement
instrumental role by financially providing for the from one role (role exit) and engagement in
family through work in the labor force, and another role (role entry). This process includes
women assumed the socioemotional, or expres- macro role transitions between sequential roles,
sive, role by being the primary caretaker. This divi- such as a high school student’s becoming a univer-
sion of labor was functional for the maintenance sity student, and micro role transitions between
and continuation of the family. simultaneous roles, such as a woman’s shifting
Alice Eagly has argued that given the specific subtly between her roles of wife and mother at the
roles that women and men occupy in the family dinner table.
and in society more generally, we come to have Although most research focuses on either role
different expectations for them. This is her social exit or role entry, the nature of each can strongly
role theory for understanding gender roles in soci- influence the other. For example, an involuntary
ety. She argued that the content of gender roles layoff can impair one’s acceptance of the role of
involves attributing communal characteristics to retiree, and a transfer to a better school can ease
women and agentic characteristics to men. the pain of leaving school friends behind. Also,
Communal characteristics reflect a concern with role transitions involve what Victor Turner refers
the welfare of others. They involve affection, inter- to as liminality, wherein a person is temporarily
personal sensitivity, and nurturance. Agentic char- between roles, and the psychological grip of each
acteristics involve assertion, control, and is reduced. Liminality allows time and psychologi-
confidence. These characteristics are consistent cal space to make sense of the old before having to
714 Role Transitions

fully embrace the new, and it allows new ways of information about the group’s nature, and political
thinking, feeling, and acting to percolate. information about the distribution and use of
This entry discusses role entry and role exit in power and status. Because newcomers are naïve
the context of macro transitions, in which an indi- and lack credibility, they are predisposed to adapt
vidual goes from outsider to insider and vice versa, to the situation in order to fit in. Thus, individuals
and then considers micro transitions. tend to be most amenable to personal change when
they first enter a new situation. To that end, groups
may actively socialize newcomers through some
Macro Role Transitions
mix of mentors, initiation rites, training, “on the
According to the work of Blake Ashforth, role job” trial and error, and observation of senior
transitions are particularly difficult if they are of members.
high magnitude (the new role differs greatly from As for the flipside of the mutual adjustment—
the old, such as a shift from a nonsupervisory to a the individual’s impact on the group—individuals
supervisory role), socially undesirable (e.g., impris- often take the initiative to learn about the situation
onment), involuntary (e.g., job demotion), unpre- and to shape it more to their own wants and needs.
dictable (the nature of the transition is hard to The more experience, knowledge, and skill they
anticipate, such as a minor league athlete awaiting bring to the new role, the more leeway they are
a call-up to the majors), individual rather than col- usually allowed to modify the role. Through seek-
lective (the person goes through the process with- ing information about the status quo, seeking feed-
out the benefit of peers), or irreversible (e.g., back about their behavior and performance,
becoming a parent) and if the transition period is building relationships, negotiating with group
short (leaving little time to prepare for exit and members about their mutual expectations, and
entry, such as suddenly being widowed). The more modifying the role directly, newcomers can influ-
difficult the transition, the less likely the newcomer ence the role and the group.
will be effective and satisfied in the new role and The result of this mutual adjustment between
its associated group. newcomer and group is that role entry is typically
a combination of personal change in the new-
comer, role modification, and group change.
Role Entry
Although some theoretical models view personal
Regardless of how difficult the transition may change and role change as opposite poles on a
be, role entry typically involves a period of mutual continuum (either the newcomer changes or the
adjustment between the individual and the group. role does), research suggests that they are relatively
As Richard Moreland and John Levine have independent: Adjustment may reflect little per-
put it, newcomers tend to enter as quasi-members sonal and role change, much change in both, or
and become full members—with “all of the privi- change in one but not the other. Nigel Nicholson
leges and responsibilities associated with group has argued that the more discretion a newcomer
membership”—only when they are socialized and has and the more novel the role is to him or her,
accepted by the group. Accordingly, the group the more likely that adjustment will entail both
tends to exert a large impact on the individual. personal change and role modification (and pre-
Because it is hard for the individual to anticipate sumably group change).
the demands and nuances of the new role and the Research on the ABCs of role entry, summa-
group(s) within which it is embedded, entry often rized by Ashforth, indicates that newcomers can
fosters surprise and uncertainty, which motivate feel (A for affect), act (B for behavior), or think
the new member to learn about the situation. (C for cognition) their way into becoming com-
Elizabeth Morrison has stated that learning fortable with their new role. For example, new-
focuses on technical information about how to comers can identify with a role or group long
perform tasks, referent information about role before becoming able to act as competent mem-
expectations, social information about other people bers, and this identification may motivate role-
and one’s relationships with them, appraisal infor- consistent behavior; conversely, as newcomers
mation about how one is evaluated, normative begin enacting their new role, they may come to
Role Transitions 715

feel more at home in it and see themselves as bona Ebaugh’s landmark work. Voluntary role exits often
fide members (what Robert Granfield termed begin when certain events—disappointments, exter-
“making it by faking it”). The ABCs are mutually nal changes (e.g., relocating for a spouse’s job, seiz-
reinforcing such that positive adjustment is a meld ing a sudden opportunity), milestones, and internal
of thinking of oneself as a member, feeling com- events (e.g., growing job burnout)—prompt doubts
fortable in the role, and performing it effectively. about the role or group. If the doubts persist, the
An important element in this process is social vali- individual may search for information to confirm or
dation, in which one’s peers and other relevant disconfirm them. However, the stronger the doubts,
individuals (e.g., group leader, external audiences) the more likely that he or she will seek—and there-
respond positively to how one enacts the role, to fore find—confirmation. Incidents that may have
the role markers (e.g., attire, grooming) one dis- aroused little notice earlier may become imbued
plays, and to one’s performance outcomes. with meaning, and the doubts may spread from
Validation, in short, involves recognizing and specific concerns to general ones. The individual
treating newcomers as legitimate members. may turn to trusted others both inside and outside
Finally, role transitions within a group should the group for impartial advice, and depending on
be mentioned briefly. Movement between posi- their responses, the doubts may be weakened or
tions within a group is less common than move- strengthened. However, if the doubts are strong, the
ment between groups. Examples of the former individual is likely to seek others who will simply
include a group member’s assuming the role of reinforce them. The individual may even act pro-
group leader, treasurer, or social events organizer. vocatively (e.g., complaining, breaking rules) to
Because the group member in question is already precipitate a reaction from the group, thereby bring-
known to the other members, the period of mutual ing the issue to a head.
adjustment is usually short. However, because the As doubts crystallize, the individual may seek
initial intragroup relationships were predicated on and weigh alternatives. Often, the alternatives
the member’s original role, the transition to the must outweigh the strong pull of inertia, personal
new role typically requires some recalibration of ties, sunk costs (e.g., time invested), and so on.
the relationships. For example, it may prove some- Where the transition is counternormative (e.g.,
what awkward if one’s peer suddenly becomes dropping out of school), knowledge of others who
one’s supervisor. have traveled the same road may normalize the
transition. The more attractive the feasible alterna-
tives, the more likely the role exit. If the individual
Role Exit
is leaning toward exit, his or her psychological
A role exit can be voluntary or involuntary. focus may shift from the current role to the antici-
Involuntary exit occurs when a group decides to pated one. Indeed, psychological exit almost always
remove a member from a role, typically because of precedes physical exit in the case of voluntary role
task or social problems. In Harold Garfinkel’s transitions (although psychological exit may well
words, a degradation ceremony, such as being continue into the new role as one strives to make
fired from a job, may be used to formally strip the sense of the experience). Even with a concrete
role from the person, thereby communicating the alternative in hand, a turning point—typically a
separation to the individual and the group and further event such as a new disappointment—is
reaffirming the values and standards of the role for often required to precipitate a break with the role
remaining members. However, members often do and to justify that break to others. Indeed, a seem-
not have the power to terminate peers in groups ingly insignificant event can serve as a last straw.
that lack a formal structure. Instead, more subtle For example, Ebaugh reported that a convent’s
actions on behalf of the group can coerce a mem- decision to forbid smoking triggered the exit of a
ber to leave, such as ostracizing the individual or nun, even though she was not a smoker: The rule
revoking benefits that make the role desirable. symbolized the disconnect between her values and
Voluntary role exits are more complex because of those of the convent.
the role of choice in the process. This discussion of A farewell party or other rite of separation
voluntary exits is adapted from Helen Rose Fuchs may be used to mark the transition and help the
716 Role Transitions

individual and group reach closure. By a celebra- role and enter the mother role, crossing the bound-
tion of individual discontinuity, social continuity is aries. Boundary crossing is facilitated by personal
preserved. Finally, the individual needs to come to and collective rites of passage that signal a change
terms with the role experience and fold it into his or in roles (e.g., turning off the office equipment and
her ongoing life narrative. Ebaugh referred to this driving home). As with macro transitions, bound-
process as constructing an ex role (e.g., alumnus). ary crossing entails liminality while the woman
Although voluntary role exit has been described suspends her role as a stockbroker, unwinds from
here in fairly linear and rational terms, it should be her workday, and prepares to reengage with her
noted that the process is fraught with emotion, family in the role of mother. Micro role transitions
bias, and contradiction and may involve iterations tend to become easier over time as individuals
of the various steps. Role exits are typically associ- develop routines for transitioning between roles.
ated with ambivalence because the individual may Conversely, highly integrated roles, such as a
experience relief at resolving his or her doubts, son’s working in the family business, tend to have
excitement and apprehension at the prospect of similar identities, be embedded in similar contexts,
beginning anew, guilt at abandoning role obliga- and overlap in the physical location and the mem-
tions, and grief at leaving peers. Thomas Schmid bership of the respective groups. Accordingly,
and Richard Jones found that even prison inmates highly integrated roles have relatively flexible and
felt somewhat ambivalent about their impending permeable boundaries, and each role may interrupt
release from prison. the other unpredictably. The son may interact with
his mother in terms of both their family relationship
(son–mother) and their work relationship (employee–
Micro Role Transitions
manager), with the focus oscillating between the
Unlike macro role transitions, micro transitions two. As this example suggests, high integration
tend to be temporary and recurrent, involving the decreases the magnitude of the role transition;
juggling of simultaneous roles, such as mother, indeed, the transitions tend to be frequent, perhaps
stockbroker, gym member, and so on. According to irregular and unpredictable, and involve little con-
Christena Nippert-Eng and Ashforth, a given pair scious awareness. However, integration increases
of roles can be arrayed on a continuum ranging role blurring and thus confusion as to which role is
from highly segmented to highly integrated. Highly operating. The challenge that individuals face in
segmented roles tend to have little similarity in integrated roles, then, is to create and maintain
their goals, values, beliefs, norms, interaction artificial boundaries to reduce the role blurring to
styles, and time horizons, and there tends to be tolerable levels. Thus, the son may insist that the
little overlap in the physical location or the mem- family not talk business when at home.
bership of the respective groups.
Accordingly, highly segmented roles, such as Blake E. Ashforth and Kristie M. Rogers
mother and stockbroker, have boundaries that are
relatively inflexible (i.e., tied to specific settings and See also Group Socialization; Inclusion/Exclusion;
Initiation Rites; Multiple Identities; Organizations;
times) and impermeable (i.e., permit few cross-role
Personnel Turnover; Roles
interruptions). Segmentation decreases the blurring
between role identities and reinforces the role
boundaries. The mother does not cease being a
mother while at work; however, the role of mother Further Readings
is not usually salient. Generally, the greater the Ashforth, B. E. (2001). Role transitions in organizational
segmentation between two roles, the greater the life: An identity-based perspective. Mahwah, NJ:
contrast in their identities. Indeed, the stockbroker Erlbaum.
role may occasionally induce the woman to act in Ebaugh, H. R. F. (1988). Becoming an ex: The process of
quite unmotherlike ways. Because of the relatively role exit. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
inflexible and impermeable role boundaries, high Garfinkel, H. (1956). Conditions of successful
segmentation increases the magnitude of the role degradation ceremonies. American Journal of
transition. The person must exit the stockbroker Sociology, 61, 420–424.
Romance of Leadership 717

Granfield, R. (1991). Making it by faking it: Working- leadership as the causal force behind the activities
class students in an elite academic environment. and outcomes of organizations. In part, a critical
Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 20, 331–351. response to a prevailing emphasis on the impor-
Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (1984). Role transitions tance of leaders in the leadership process (as
in small groups. In V. L. Allen & E. van de Vliert opposed to an emphasis on followers or the situa-
(Eds.), Role transitions: Explorations and explanations tion), the ROL theory was developed to call atten-
(pp. 181–195). New York: Plenum. tion to the fact that whatever the “true” impact
Morrison, E. W. (1995). Information usefulness and of leaders and leadership in organizations and
acquisition during organizational encounter.
societies, leadership as a concept has attained
Management Communication Quarterly, 9, 131–155.
an immense—and perhaps often unwarranted—
Nicholson, N. (1984). A theory of work role transitions.
popularity in our understanding of the world.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 172–191.
Simply stated, despite centuries of study and decades
Nippert-Eng, C. E. (1996). Home and work: Negotiating
boundaries through everyday life. Chicago: University
of formal research, the concept of leadership
of Chicago Press.
remains largely elusive and resistant to attempts to
Schmid, T. J., & Jones, R. S. (1993). Ambivalent unravel its mystique. Yet we continue to believe in
actions: Prison adaptation strategies of first-time, its import and efficacy, even in situations in which
short-term inmates. Journal of Contemporary we have no direct evidence to support this belief.
Ethnography, 21, 439–463. The ROL was introduced as one of the first
Turner, V. W. (1969). The ritual process: Structure and explicitly follower-centric approaches in an effort
anti-structure. Chicago: Aldine. to balance the many leader-centric approaches that
dominated leadership research and practice. Meindl
pointed out that leadership had attained a seem-
ingly heroic, larger-than-life status and urged us to
Romance of Leadership consider the implications of relaxing the often
taken-for-granted assumption that leadership is
Leadership is one of the most discussed, studied, and important in its own right. Particularly in light of
written about topics in our society. Should it be? the growing appreciation of external factors and
The romance of leadership (ROL) is an attributional the surrounding environment in which organiza-
approach to leadership that attempts to understand tions operate, he suggested that we need to ques-
when and why we recognize and give credit to lead- tion and systematically explore the value and
ers for influencing and changing our institutions and significance of leadership in modern organizations.
societies. First introduced by leadership scholar The ROL approach helps highlight and ques-
James R. Meindl and colleagues, this approach high- tion the esteem, prestige, charisma, and heroism
lights the fact that leaders and leadership issues attached to various forms of leadership. In addi-
often become the favored explanations for both tion, the vast majority of research and popular
positive and negative outcomes in organizations. In business attention has focused on leadership as a
addition, subsequent research has demonstrated positive force on followers and society. As a result,
that people value performance results more highly the ROL perspective questions our collective fasci-
when those results are attributed to leadership and nation with leadership and our emphasis on hero-
that a halo effect exists for leadership: If an indi- ism, charisma, and the glorification of leadership
vidual is perceived to be an effective leader, his or in the face of any real evidence that a given leader
her personal shortcomings and poor organizational is really worthy of such praise.
performance may be overlooked. This entry defines
the ROL perspective and then turns to implications Implications of the ROL Approach
and critiques of this approach.
Leadership Portrayals in the Media
The ROL is often reflected in the images of
The Theory leaders that are produced in the mass media. More
Based on a series of studies, the ROL suggests often than not, leaders are presented in the form of
that we overwhelmingly tend to favor leaders and portraits of successful individuals or images of
718 Romance of Leadership

great leadership figures, and popular leadership leader may be just as important as the actual
books are touted as never-before-revealed secrets behaviors of the leader in understanding the lead-
of leadership effectiveness. These images reflect ership process. As a result, researchers have exam-
our appetite as a society for leadership products ined issues such as how leadership influence
and behaviors that promise to enrich and improve spreads among followers, even in cases in which
our lives. In addition, such compelling images of followers have had no direct contact with or expo-
leadership appeal to our cultural fascination with sure to a leader. Specifically, understanding fol-
the power of leadership and serve to fixate us on lowers’ emotional reactions to a leader plays an
the personas and characteristics of leaders them- important role in followers’ conclusions about
selves (especially high-profile leaders). However, whether their leader is an effective or “good”
this one-sided emphasis on the positive forms of leader, worthy of extravagant stock options or a
leadership can be dangerous, for it suggests that vote to remain in political power.
leaders are inherently positive forces for individu- Another important implication of the ROL
als, organizations, and humanity as a whole. approach is that sense-making processes are inte-
Exploring previous writing and scholarship on gral to understanding leadership and may help us
leadership provides an important window into our understand why leadership is so enigmatic. Stated
beliefs, both as individuals and as a society, about more simply, individuals learn what leadership is
the topic: what constitutes leadership, why it is and what to make of leadership behaviors through
important, what makes it successful, and what their interactions with one another. Followers’
decisions or assumptions we make about the effects decisions to attribute leadership to an individual
of leadership. Our basic assumptions about leader- are to a large extent the result of their interactions
ship are influenced by how it is defined and dis- and communications with each other, in which
cussed in popular books and media and by the they share information about the leader and com-
types of leadership that are both publicly idealized pare one another’s views about what his or her
and sometimes demonized as well. An analysis of behavior means. Followers are thus viewed as
popular leadership books, for example, reveals active, powerful players in the leadership process
that leaders are seen as effecting change, possessing and not passive, compliant, obedient “sheep” at
great experience and knowledge, and providing the mercy of their leaders. In addition, followers’
their followers with opportunities to reach their psychological needs, ideas about what leadership
unique potential. These conceptualizations all fit should look like, and decisions about what leaders
our cultural stereotypes of “great” leadership. The are responsible for all play crucial yet underexam-
ROL perspective encourages us to question and ined roles in the leadership process.
debate the functions that leadership serves within The ROL perspective also provides another
society, as well as the broader trends that inform view on charismatic leadership, suggesting that
our discussion about what leadership is, what good charisma is itself a socially constructed phenome-
leadership looks like, and how we decide whether non that says as much about followers and the
a leader has truly made an impact. situation as it does about leaders. For example,
Meindl found that individuals in leadership roles
are perceived to be more charismatic to the extent
Followers and Followership
that the organization they lead undergoes a crisis
The ROL also draws attention to followers’ turnaround (e.g., moving from loss to profit)
perceptions of leadership as worthy of study in rather than a crisis decline (e.g., moving from
their own right, in parallel to or independent of profit to loss). In addition, attributions of charisma
how the leader actually behaves. As a result, the to a leader are not solely grounded in the direct
theory has fostered research into the needs of fol- interactions between leaders and followers but
lowers and situational factors that may create rather are strongly impacted by followers’ interac-
greater or lesser susceptibilities to leadership. In tions with their peers as well.
addition, the theory emphasizes that followers Through this approach, we can more readily
socially construct images of leadership, meaning understand why there are so many discrepancies
that the interactions among followers about a in perceptions of charisma and a given leader’s
Rumor 719

charismatic appeal. We can also examine how fol- Meindl, J. R. (1990). On leadership: An alternative
lowers vary in their susceptibility both to the to the conventional wisdom. In B. M. Staw &
belief in the efficacy of leadership and to the cha- L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational
risma of a leader. For example, research suggests behavior (Vol. 12, pp. 159–203). Greenwich, CT: JAI
that the first followers to succumb to the charis- Press.
matic “virus” are likely to be high in agreeable- Meindl, J. R. (1995). The romance of leadership as a
ness and emotional intensity. In addition, this follower-centric theory: A social constructionist
approach highlights the importance of one’s social approach. Leadership Quarterly, 6(3), 329–341.
Meindl, J. R. (1998). Thanks—And let me try again. In
network in understanding perceptions of leader-
F. Dansereau & F. J. Yammarino (Eds.), Leadership:
ship and suggests that those who are more central
The multiple-level approaches, Part B. Contemporary
and connected to others are more likely to spread
and alternative (pp. 321–326). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.
charismatic appeal to others.
Meindl, J. R., Ehrlich, S. B., & Dukerich, J. M. (1985).
The romance of leadership. Administrative Science
Critiques of the ROL Theory Quarterly, 30, 78–102.

Despite efforts to characterize it as such, Meindl


continually pointed out that the ROL perspective
was not antileadership but simply an alternative to Rumor
most existing theories and perspectives that place
great weight on the leaders themselves and assume A rumor is an unverified account or explanation
that leaders’ actions all have equal importance and of an event that is transmitted from person to per-
significance. Thus, the ROL perspective does not son. Rumors may be transmitted for specific rea-
reject or minimize the importance of leaders in sons, such as to blame a person or group member
leadership but simply argues that it is easier to for a particular action or to harm a reputation.
believe in leadership than it is to prove it. In addi- However, rumors can also provide useful infor-
tion, Meindl pointed out that we need to continu- mation in ambiguous situations.
ally question the prevailing emphasis on leaders to At a group level, sharing information in the
the detriment of followers. Overall, the ROL sug- form of rumors can enhance group cohesion and
gests that we need to complement existing leader- strengthen emotional ties within the group. At an
centered approaches with more follower-centered individual level, sharing rumors can help reduce
approaches and take into account the social- stress due to uncertainty. Although rumors can be
psychological processes among followers in under- transmitted without distortion of the original
standing the leadership phenomenon. account, they often become distorted as they are
passed on from person to person. In the case of
Michelle C. Bligh and Jeffrey C. Kohles rumors about groups, the information that sur-
vives in distorted rumor transmission is most likely
See also Charismatic Leadership; Great Person Theory of
Leadership; Leadership; Personality Theories of
to be information that is consistent with preexist-
Leadership; Transactional Leadership Theories ing group stereotypes.

Further Readings
History and Background

Bligh, M. C., & Meindl, J. R. (2004). The cultural One of the first psychological examinations of
ecology of leadership: An analysis of popular rumor was a study conducted by Gordon Allport
leadership books. In D. M. Messick & R. M. Kramer and Joseph Leo Postman in 1945. In this study,
(Eds.), The psychology of leadership: New perspectives participants were asked to describe an illustra-
and research (pp. 11–52). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. tion to another person who had not seen the
Shamir, B., Pillai, R., Bligh, M. C., & Uhl-Bien, M. illustration. Then the recipient of the description
(Eds.). (2007). Follower-centered perspectives on was asked to reproduce it for another person and
leadership: A tribute to the memory of James R. so on for several retellings of the description.
Meindl. Greenwich, CT: Information Age. Each participant’s account was recorded. Allport
720 Rumor

and Postman found that many of the features of The Social Functions of Rumor
the original message disappeared as the message
Rumor and Motives
was passed along the chain of recipients. In par-
ticular, approximately 70% of the details of the Rumors are often initiated and elaborated for a
message were lost in the first five or six transmis- reason. That is, the source of the rumor typically
sions. Similar findings occurred across many dif- has an ulterior motive in passing it on to others.
ferent types of pictures with different settings One reason is to harm the reputation of an indi-
and contents. vidual or group. For example, a group member
Allport and Postman described three processes can propagate a rumor about another group so
that occur in rumor transmission. The first— that the other group appears in a negative light to
leveling—refers to the process whereby the rumor others; this increases the likelihood that the group
becomes shorter and less complex, a process that will be disliked. In this respect, spreading a nega-
happens quickly. The second—sharpening—refers tive rumor about one group can enhance the posi-
to the process whereby certain features of the tion of the group responsible for the rumor. A
rumor are selected for transmission and are often group can also spread a rumor that blames another
exaggerated. Finally, assimilation refers to the dis- group for a significant event or wrongdoing. In
tortion of the information as a result of subcon- this case, blame may be deflected from the ingroup,
scious motivations, attitudes, and prejudices. and the reputation of the target outgroup can be
There is some empirical support for this three-part significantly tarnished.
process. For example, in 1951 T. M. Higham In more extreme cases, spreading rumors about
found evidence for distortion of messages trans- groups and group members can notably affect
mitted from person to person in a laboratory set- intergroup relations, provoke conflict, or reinforce
ting. However, it was found that this was the case group status hierarchies. A good example of this
only for messages that did not affect participants’ was the prevalence in the late 1800s and early
interests. For ego-involved messages that did 1900s of race-related rumors in which Blacks were
affect participants’ interests, the transmissions frequently accused of crimes and put to death by
were less distorted. illegal lynch mobs. These atrocities were based
More recent research also suggests that a rumor largely on hearsay and rumor for which no evi-
will not always be a distorted account of the dence was offered. Of course, the spreading of
original information and depends on other fac- rumors also occurs at a more innocuous level and
tors. In particular, the results of studies not based is commonly known as gossip, idle talk, or rumor
in laboratories show much less distortion of about the private affairs of others. However,
rumors than in Allport and Postman’s study. although the information transmitted in this man-
Further, the amount of rumor distortion appears ner is typically trivial, it can also be the result of a
to be dependent on the recipients’ anxiety and malicious attempt to undermine another person
whether recipients take a critical or uncritical (or group member), harm the person’s reputation,
approach to the content of the message. Information or worse.
contained in rumors can reduce anxiety in the face
of uncertainty. People therefore transmit rumors
Rumor and Information Sharing
in part to reduce stress in ambiguous situations.
However, people can also take a critical or uncrit- People devote a great deal of attention to gather-
ical approach to the information contained in the ing and sharing information about themselves and
message. If recipients take a critical approach, the others. This information is very important. By
rumor will not be distorted and may even be understanding the self and others, people are more
refined. On the other hand, when recipients take able to function in the social world. Rumor is a
an uncritical approach, it is more likely that the vital part of this information-gathering and infor-
rumor will become distorted. This is particularly mation-sharing process. It can also help forge
likely in crisis situations, in which people are social cohesion and emotional bonds within a
unable to attend to the information as closely as group. The evolutionary psychologist Robin
they normally might. Dunbar suggests that people spend about 60% of
Rumor 721

their conversations gossiping about their own lives Rumor and Stereotype Communication
and those of others. Dunbar also argues that rumor
When passing information about group mem-
and gossip are the human equivalent of social
bers on to others, people can choose to transmit
grooming among primates, which actually reduces
stereotype-consistent or stereotype-inconsistent
stress and stimulates the immune system. Another,
information. What types of information people
related function of gossip and rumor is that people
choose to transmit about groups has implications
use them to cope with and explain situations
for how rumors about groups are spread. Yoshihisa
beyond their control. Some research carried out in
Kashima and colleagues have carried out a pro-
organizational settings demonstrates that rumors
gram of research using the serial reproduction
thrive in contexts in which there is an absence of
paradigm, in which participants are asked to tell a
trust. For example, in unstable organizational set-
story about a person to another participant, who
tings containing distinct groups (e.g., manager,
then tells the story to another participant, and so
worker) with different agendas, rumor transmis-
on for a small number of retellings of the story.
sion can help people come to terms with their own
Results demonstrate that communicators generally
position within the group.
pass on more stereotype-consistent information
Receiving rumors also gives people information
than stereotype-inconsistent information. For
about what is happening within the group. This
example, in one study, in which participants were
information helps them keep in touch with their
asked to retell a story containing gender-stereotypical
groups, which facilitates their survival within the
and counterstereotypical information, more gender-
group. Being out of touch means that people do
stereotypical details than counterstereotypical
not have the fundamental social knowledge they
details were transmitted. Researchers argue that
may need in order to understand and function
this is one way in which stereotypes and prejudice
within their group. Also, propagating rumors per-
are perpetuated. In terms of rumors, this finding
forms important social functions for the sender. In
can therefore potentially have negative conse-
particular, being the source of a rumor within a
quences. One example is how rumors of violence,
group places the sender in a position of being a
rape, and looting spread after the 2005 tragedy of
source of useful information that the group can use
Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans, Louisiana.
to answer questions and solve problems. This
Details of these stereotypical behaviors of people in
therefore identifies the person as a valuable mem-
disaster situations were transmitted widely across
ber of the group.
the media although later evidence suggested that
Because social knowledge is so fundamental to
most of these reports were based on unfounded
social relationships, rumor can be characterized as
rumors. The spread of these wild rumors did very
a collective explanation process. In 2004, Prashant
little good for race relations in the city.
Bordia and Nicholas DiFonzo carried out a study
Further research shows that transmission of
that supports this idea. They analyzed a set of
information about groups is also dependent on the
archived Internet message board discussions con-
extent to which people feel as though they share
taining rumors. It was found that the plurality of
beliefs in common with the people they are com-
the statements (nearly 30%) could be coded as
municating to. If people perceive that they share
sense-making statements, which in particular
common beliefs with others, then they are more
involved attempts to understand a social process
likely to pass information on. Rumors about groups
or solve a problem. Bordia and DiFonzo also
therefore may be transmitted to the extent to which
found that each rumor went through a specific pat-
people think that others will endorse the rumor.
tern of development in which a rumor was intro-
duced for discussion, then information about the
rumor was volunteered and discussed, and finally Widespread Rumors:
a resolution was arrived at or interest in the rumor Conspiracy Theories
was lost. Rumors therefore performed the impor- A good example of widespread rumor transmis-
tant social functions of information sharing and sion is the phenomenon of conspiracy theories.
sense-making, and once those functions were Scholars characterize conspiracy theories as attempts
achieved, the rumors were no longer interesting. to explain the ultimate cause of an event (usually a
722 Rumor

political or social event) as a secret plot by a covert Finally, conspiracy theories are an attractive
alliance of powerful individuals or organizations form of rumor because they help people deal with
rather than as an overt activity or natural occur- the uncertainty and anxiety caused by significant
rence. Attempts to explain why people believe world events. Like rumors in general, conspiracy
conspiracy theories have focused on people’s need theories address ambigious events with a definitive
to explain events that are beyond their control. In and persuasive explanation, which can minimize
particular, some researchers view conspiracy theo- stress and anxiety.
ries as a response to powerlessness; in the face of
increasingly vast and anonymous bureaucratic Karen M. Douglas
forces, conspiracy theories allow people to come to See also Conspiracy Theories; Evolutionary Psychology;
terms with the possibility that these underlying Informational Influence; Normative Influence;
forces shape their future. Similarly, others view Prejudice; Social Representations; Status; Stereotyping;
conspiracy theories as a means for less powerful Trust
individuals to imagine themselves in posession of
powerful, or secret, information.
Conspiracy theories are therefore a powerful and Further Readings
attractive form of rumor. They are powerful because
Allport, G. W., & Postman, L. J. (1947). The psychology
they can reach many people, especially in the age of of rumor. New York: Holt.
the Internet, where information can be spread rap- DiFonzo, N., & Bordia, P. (2007). Rumor psychology:
idly. Further, conspiracy theories are often the result Social & organizational approaches. Washington, DC:
of a hidden agenda by a smaller group of people American Psychological Association.
and can facilitate their objectives. For example, one Dunbar, R. (1996). Grooming, gossip and the evolution
well-known conspiracy theory is that homosexuals of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
are intentionally spreading HIV, which can have an Press.
adverse impact on how this group is perceived and Knopf, T. A. (2006). Rumors, race and riots. London:
treated in society. Spreading such a conspiracy the- Transaction Books.
ory is one way to propagate antigay attitudes and McCauley, C., & Jacques, S. (1979). The popularity of
realize an antigay agenda. Conspiracy theories are conspiracy theories of presidential assassination: A
also powerful because they are difficult to discon- Bayesian analysis. Journal of Personality and Social
firm. As a result, they can be very persuasive. Psychology, 37, 637–644.
S
Classic Scapegoating Theory
Scapegoating
Freud hypothesized that unconscious motives, espe-
Scapegoating is an extreme form of prejudice in cially basic drives for sex and aggression (which
which people blame an outgroup as intentionally constitute the id), often lead people to behave in
having caused their own group’s misfortunes, irrational ways. The id inevitably comes into con-
motivating harsh actions against the scapegoated flict with social norms that seek to shape, control,
group. Scapegoating explanations have been and limit how its drives are expressed. Individuals
offered for events ranging from the execution of internalize these norms, creating the superego (or
“witches” in early modern Europe to 20th-century conscience), which represses socially unacceptable
genocides such as the Holocaust. Initial theories of drives (e.g., to aggress). Repression, however, is
scapegoating relied on Freudian psychodynamics insufficient because the id’s drives continually cre-
and, later, the frustration–aggression hypothesis. ate mental energy that seeks behavioral release.
Both view scapegoating as a spontaneous venting Thus, unless individuals can channel their impulses
of frustrations displaced onto an innocent group, constructively (e.g., express aggression through
chosen merely because it is weak and vulnerable, sports participation), they may displace aggression
making it a convenient target. These theories, onto others while avoiding the superego’s censure
however, have difficulty explaining which minori- by constructing socially acceptable justifications or
ties will be scapegoated and how scapegoating rationalizations to legitimize their hostility.
becomes a coordinated social movement that Displaced aggression is rationalized through
organizes violent actions (rather than a series of psychologically projecting one’s own faults and
unconnected, individual hate crimes). conflicts onto others. For example, “I want to
A newer model of scapegoating suggests instead harm others” is mentally transformed to “They
that, during difficult times, socioeconomically suc- want to harm me and therefore deserve my hostil-
cessful (not “weak”) minority groups face particu- ity.” Minority groups that society already dero-
lar risk for scapegoating. Only successful minorities gates present convenient, socially acceptable
are popularly viewed as having the ability (e.g., targets for projection and displaced aggression,
social position, influence, and power) as well as making it easier for people to scapegoat them.
the intent to cause widespread harm. This entry Freud believed that after people vent their frustra-
describes classical scapegoating theory and dis- tions through aggression, they experience cathar-
cusses how it has been modified to explain con- sis (a sense of relief and temporary diminishment
temporary instances. of the aggressive drive). This model is notoriously

723
724 Scapegoating

difficult to test, and although there is some empir- Newer Approaches to Scapegoating
ical support for projection, the notion that
expressing aggression diminishes subsequent vio- Subsequent approaches have focused on shared or
lence has been disproved: Acting violently (even collective (not individual) frustrations as the distal
by punching a pillow) makes subsequent violence source of scapegoating. Ervin Staub noted that dif-
more (not less) likely. ficult life conditions frustrate basic human needs
Frustration–aggression theorists preserved (e.g., for security, optimism, group esteem). Shared
Freud’s displaced aggression assumption but frustrations (e.g., an economic depression) motivate
argued that aggressive impulses are typically people to construct explanations that diagnose the
caused by obstacles to goal-directed behavior source of acute societal problems and suggest pos-
(not intrapsychic conflict). For instance, failing to sible solutions. This process has been labeled social
land a coveted job might elicit frustration and, in or collective attribution. In this view, people are not
turn, the impulse to aggress. When individuals necessarily irrational or driven by unconscious
cannot retaliate against the true source of frustra- impulses. Rather, they attempt to use an adaptive
tion, perhaps because the other is powerful and problem-solving strategy to deal with pressing
might retaliate, they may displace aggression problems that have frustrated their basic needs.
onto weak and vulnerable victims (e.g., a child Massive social problems, however, may defy
who is mad at a parent might lash out instead easy explanation or solution. Peter Glick’s ideo-
against a younger sibling). In this view, minority logical model of scapegoating posits that only
groups become targets of displaced aggression explanations that fit long-standing cultural biases
because they happen to be in a weak position, and belief systems, such as group stereotypes, will
unable to retaliate. appeal to large segments of a society. For example,
While the frustration–aggression approach imagine living in 17th-century Europe. You would
emphasizes external obstacles and the Freudian probably accept the commonly held belief that
view focuses on internal psychological conflict some people (namely witches) are malevolent and
as initial sources of frustration, they have much possess supernatural powers.
in common. Both suggest that individual frustra- Now imagine a plague that kills off one third of
tions lead people to vent (much like a boiling your village. In the absence of knowledge about
kettle must release steam or explode), both char- how diseases are transmitted, how would you
acterize scapegoating as irrationally displaced explain this horrible event? You might assume that
aggression, and both suggest that the rational- somebody or some group must have caused the
izations people use to justify their hostility have plague, and, in an early modern European cultural
nothing to do with the true reasons for their context, witches made likely candidates. After all,
aggression. witches were “known” to have special powers that
Critics have long expressed objections to both might produce diseases, as well as to have evil
the Freudian and the frustration–aggression appro­ intentions. (By contrast, imagine how you might
aches to scapegoating. Given that many minorities ridicule and reject a well-informed time traveler
may occupy weak social positions, which one will who tried to convince you that an invisible “virus”
be chosen? In instances of genocidal attack, why was the true cause.) Thus, a normally adaptive and
do so many people happen to choose the same rational motive to explain negative events can nev-
group to scapegoat? Is it mere coincidence that a ertheless yield wholly incorrect beliefs that lead
host of people simultaneously resolve their indi- people to scapegoat innocents (such as the tens of
vidual frustrations by venting on the same target thousands burned as “witches”).
group in a coordinated manner (as happens in What leads people collectively to decide that a
genocides)? Because classic scapegoating theories specific group caused their misfortunes? Logically,
remain rooted in psychological approaches focused for a group to have produced collective ills such
on individualized frustrations rather than the social as a plague, an economic depression, or political
psychology of group identification, they are ill chaos, they must be powerful (i.e., capable
equipped to explain mass scapegoating as a collec- of shaping widespread social outcomes) and also
tive event. ill-intentioned (i.e., have the desire to harm
Schisms 725

others). Glick argued that socioeconomically suc- See also Anti-Semitism; Authoritarian Personality;
cessful or powerful minority groups are at par- Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis; Genocide; Hate
ticular risk of being the objects of scapegoating in Crimes; Holocaust; Right Wing Authoritarianism
times of shared, difficult social conditions. Such
groups may be tolerated when social conditions Further Readings
are favorable but immediately suspected of mal-
Allport, G. W. (1979). The nature of prejudice.
feasance when things go bad.
Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books. (Original work
Conspiracy theories, the hallmark of scapegoat-
published 1954)
ing, exaggerate the power wielded by the scape-
Glick, P. (2005). Choice of scapegoats. In J. F. Dovidio,
goated group, which “explains” how it could have P. Glick, & L. A. Rudman (Eds.), On the nature of
caused such widespread harm. However, many prejudice: 50 years after Allport (pp. 244–261).
people may view a conspiracy theory as plausible Malden, MA: Blackwell.
when it is built on a kernel of truth—the relative Staub, E. (1989). The roots of evil: The psychological and
success and influence of the minority group within cultural origins of genocide. Cambridge, UK:
the society. In addition, scapegoat ideologies fan Cambridge University Press.
the resentment that people often feel toward suc-
cessful minorities (especially when most of society
is suffering).
The Nazis, for example, complained bitterly of Schisms
the prominence of Jews in business, science, govern-
ment, and art. Indeed, as a group, the Jews were A schism refers to the secession of at least one fac-
relatively successful in Germany before the Nazi era. tion (i.e., an ideologically distinct subgroup) from
Unfortunately, their very success fed into the Nazis’ a social group. The breakaway faction(s) may
belief that only an international Jewish conspiracy either join a different group or create a new group.
(which allegedly allowed Jewish industrialists to Schisms are common. They can occur in every
profit from German misery) could have caused type of group, including small aggregates (scien-
Germany to lose World War I and suffer a subse- tific expeditions, sports teams), middle-range
quent depression. Similarly, in Rwanda, the Tutsi— groups (political parties, religious institutions,
who were subjected to a genocidal attack during the industrial organizations), and large communities
1990s by elements of the Hutu majority—were tra- (nations, ethnic groups). Whenever they occur,
ditionally a high status, powerful minority. Thus, schisms have significant repercussions. They can
they could plausibly be blamed for Rwanda’s eco- quite dramatically affect beliefs, values, and behav-
nomic depression and other social problems. iors within groups and transform relationships
In addition to fixing blame, scapegoat ideol- and equilibrium between groups. In sum, schisms
ogies offer a “solution” to society’s problems— constitute one of the most basic and consequential
typically the elimination of the group that allegedly phenomena in the life of groups and in their inter-
caused the misfortunes (e.g., the Nazis’ “final solu- relationships. This entry provides an overview of
tion” to the “Jewish problem”). From the perspec- related research, presents a social-psychological
tive of people who adhere to such an ideology, model of schisms, discusses the model’s limita-
aggression against the scapegoated group is psy- tions, and briefly describes related constructs.
chologically justified as a necessary form of self-
defense against a diabolically clever enemy.
Genocides are organized affairs, initiated by a core
Empirical Research on Schisms
of true believers convinced of the need to murder Social scientists have long been interested in con-
the group that allegedly caused their miseries. flict and discord within groups. However, the
Thus, it remains vitally important to understand dynamics of schisms remain relatively underre-
the psychology of scapegoating to prevent future searched. Existing research can be classified into
genocidal attacks. three distinct strands.
First, several researchers have conducted in-
Peter Glick depth studies of specific schisms. In particular,
726 Schisms

sociologists have investigated religious and organi- of the split that took place in the Italian Communist
zational schisms, political scientists have studied Party in 1991 as a consequence of a change of
schisms within political parties and institutions, name, symbol, and program. Another piece of
and anthropologists have focused on schisms in research assessed the antecedents and consequences
small non-Western villages (note that anthropolo- of the schism that occurred within the Church of
gists often use the term fission instead of schism). England in the mid-1990s over the ordination of
Although these researchers have proposed expla- women to the priesthood. The model and its limi-
nations for each schismatic event that they have tations are discussed below.
studied, they have rarely attempted to create a
general theoretical model.
The Social Psychology of Schism
One notable exception is the Scottish anthro-
pologist Victor Turner. In the 1950s, he studied Group Norms and Identity
schisms in Ndembu villages located in the North- Some years ago, British social psychologists
Western province of Zambia. He was interested in Henri Tajfel and John Turner argued that members
the process leading a subgroup within a village to of a group share a powerful sense of “we” and
detach itself and build a separate settlement. “us,” in that they feel part of something that tran-
Turner contended that a schism takes the form of scends their individuality. To survive as a meaning-
a social drama. This is a sequence of ritual actions ful entity, a group needs some degree of unity.
that can be grouped into four distinct phases: Therefore, the group’s members assume that they
(1) breach of regular social relations; (2) widening should broadly agree on the norms (beliefs, values,
of the breach until it becomes coextensive with attitudes, and behaviors) that characterize the
important subgroups; (3) implementation of adjus- group’s identity and thus its members’ social iden-
tive mechanisms, such as legal procedures or public tity. But far from being set in stone, the group’s
rituals; and (4) reintegration of the disturbed sub- norms are subjected to an incessant process of
group or recognition of irreparable breach between debate and negotiation. In the course of such a
the conflicting aggregates. Turner’s work has been process, norms may be adjusted, modified, or even
very influential among social anthropologists. rejected and replaced with new norms.
However, while it points to general patterns of
behavioral manifestations that may punctuate all
From Perceived Identity Subversion to Schism
schisms, it does not describe underlying mecha-
nisms that supposedly produce a schism, and there- Although normative change is an inherent
fore it does not offer a truly explanatory model. aspect of all groups, group members tend to distin-
Second, some sociologists have reviewed several guish between changes that improve and strengthen
schisms and offered a list of group structural char- group identity, which are welcome, and changes
acteristics that make a schism more or less likely to that deny and subvert group identity, which consti-
happen. For instance, John Wilson noted that tute a threat and therefore are feared. Because the
schisms are more frequent (a) in either very dog- nature of the relationship between a new norm and
matic groups or groups in which there is a totally the group identity is arguable, there may be situa-
open truth, (b) in groups in which clique formation tions in which factions form around different
is easy, (c) in groups lacking institutionalized meth- understandings of such a relationship. Basically,
ods for resolving conflicts, and (d) in groups in while the members of a faction may see a new
which decision-making processes are either highly norm as fully consistent with the group’s identity,
centralized or highly decentralized. or even as reinforcing it, the members of another
Third, a group of social psychologists led by faction may consider the new norm to be pro-
Fabio Sani has worked toward the construction of foundly inconsistent with and even negating the
a general model aimed at explaining the social- group’s identity and denying its “true” essence.
psychological mechanisms that produce a schism. This disagreement will often trigger a schism.
Their model is based on extensive empirical This is what happened in the schisms mentioned
research on various schisms. For instance, one above. For instance, in the Italian Communist
piece of research was a retrospective investigation Party schism, the trigger was the fact that while the
Schisms 727

majority saw the newly adopted symbolism and These three reactions lead people to consider a
program of the party as a necessary development schism to be a viable option. A schism would
in line with the party identity, a substantial sub- allow them to escape from a group that is divided,
group of party members saw the change as a pro- with which they do not identify any longer, and
found rupture with the history and identity of the that causes them painful emotions.
party. As a consequence, the subgroup that opposed The model described here also specifies that
the change left the party to create a new one, those group members who are dissatisfied with the
which in their opinion retained the identity of the change, and therefore experience the reactions
Italian Communist Party. described above, will be more or less likely to join
The same mechanisms applied to the schism in a schism depending on how much voice they per-
the Church of England. That is, the majority group, ceive they have within the group. If they believe
which had voted in favor of the ordination of that, because of their position, they will be margin-
women to the priesthood, saw this change as fully alized and isolated within the group, then their
consistent with scriptures and tradition and as a likelihood of joining a schism will be relatively
necessary development that strengthened the group’s high. On the contrary, if they sense that they will
identity. On the other hand, a minority of members be respected and valued, then their likelihood of
perceived the ordination of women as inconsistent leaving the group will be lower.
with scriptures, tradition, and the will of God and
therefore as transforming the Church of England
Limitations of the Model
into a completely different group and irreconcilably
subverting its identity. Many of these members This model has two main limitations. First, it is
eventually left the Church of England to create a derived from analyses of schisms in groups in
new, small, breakaway church or to join either the which identity was of primary importance and,
Roman Catholic Church or the Orthodox Church. therefore, threats to identity caused turmoil and
Why should the perception that the group’s preoccupation that eventually led to schism.
identity has been negated lead to a schism? The However, some smaller, face-to-face groups, such
model points to three reasons. as a research team or a music band, might not
First, witnessing a profound denial of the place such importance on identity. This implies
group’s identity makes members acutely aware of that the model might be more applicable to some
the existence of two ideologically incompatible types of groups than to others.
factions within the group and raises the all too real The second, related, limitation stems from the
probability that the group will be deeply fractured fact that the model is derived from situations in
and divided and will not really be able to function which a conservative faction secedes from a group
as a single entity any longer. because of an unacceptable change endorsed by a
Second, recognizing their group as having a dif- more progressive, reformist majority. However,
ferent and undesired identity lowers members’ there are situations in which a reformist faction
sense of group identification and collective self-es- secedes from the group because it advocates
teem. Members feel estranged from the group and change that is staunchly opposed by a conservative
no longer feel a sense of pride in belonging to or majority. Whether the model can be adapted to
being part of it. this circumstance is yet to be established.
Third, the fact that the changed group identity
is radically different from one’s ideal group iden-
Related Phenomena and Constructs
tity, and from what one thinks the group’s identity
ought to be, generates negative emotions. In par- Some other phenomena studied by social scientists
ticular, this generates dejection-related emotions are strongly related to or partially overlap the
(disappointment, sadness), agitation-related emo- notion of schism. One of these is factionalism,
tions (apprehension, uneasiness), and, in some which refers to the existence of competing and
cases, even strong anger and resentment toward conflicting factions within a group. This phenom-
those members who are seen as responsible for enon is generally seen as a logical precondition of
the change. schism but not as a schism itself. For instance, in
728 Self-Categorization Theory

his 1931 entry for the Encyclopedia of Social minorities manage their social environments. Cambridge,
Sciences, Harold Lasswell stated that when fac- UK: Cambridge University Press.
tions turn into groups of higher order, the term Sani, F., & Reicher, S. (1998). When consensus fails: An
factionalism is no longer appropriate. Consistent analysis of the schism within the Italian Communist
with this, the majority of research on factionalism Party (1991). European Journal of Social Psychology,
focuses on descriptions and explanations of fac- 28, 623–645.
tion formation and development, rather than on Turner, V. W. (1957). Schism and continuity in an African
schism as a consequence of these processes. society: A study of Ndembu village life. Manchester,
UK: Manchester University Press.
It should be noted, however, that some scholars,
Wilson, J. (1971). The sociology of schism. In M. Hill
such as the psychoanalyst Wilfred Bion and his fol-
(Ed.), A sociological yearbook of religion in Britain
lowers, use the term schism to refer to divisions
(Vol. 4, pp. 1–20). London: SCM.
and conflict between small subgroups within psy-
chotherapy groups, for which the concept of fac-
tionalism would be probably more appropriate. In
contrast, other scholars use the term factionalism Self-Categorization Theory
very broadly to apply to disputes between different
political parties. Self-categorization theory describes how the cog-
Another phenomenon related to schism is defec- nitive process of categorization, when applied to
tion. Like the term schism, defection is used to indi- oneself, creates a sense of identification with the
cate the departure of members from a group. social category or group and produces the array of
Defectors are said to experience a sense of ideologi- behaviors that we associate with group member-
cal detachment from a group and a loss of faith in ship: conformity, stereotyping, ethnocentrism, and
the group’s beliefs and values. However, in this case, so forth. Self-categorization theory was developed
the emphasis is on the action of one or more indi- by John Turner and his colleagues at the University
viduals rather than on collective action undertaken of Bristol and described in a classic 1987 book. It
by members of a more or less organized faction. is an integral part of social identity theory, often
This notion is very similar to the notion of exit, referred to as the social identity theory of the
which is used by Albert Hirschman to signify one of group, to differentiate its cognitive and general
the possible options that members of firms, organi- group emphasis from Henri Tajfel and John
zations, and states may choose in times of organiza- Turner’s 1979 social identity theory of intergroup
tional decline. Finally, some sociologists, such as relations, which places more emphasis on motiva-
Lewis Coser and Stuart Wright, point out that some tional and intergroup dimensions.
defectors make special efforts to attack their former In describing self-categorization theory, this entry
group and to negate its worldview, and they use the gives some historical background and then discusses
term apostasy to indicate this specific phenomenon. key features and elaborations of the theory. These
Fabio Sani include the structuring of social categories around
prototypes, the processes of categorization and dep-
See also Collective Movements and Protest; Collective ersonalization, attraction among group members
Self; Conformity; Group Development; Group and the bases of group solidarity and cohesion,
Dissolution; Norms; Social Identity Theory intergroup behavior, motivations associated with
social and self-categorization, the process of psy-
chological salience of self-categories or social identi-
Further Readings
ties, how groups influence their members, and
Sani, F. (2005). When subgroups secede: Extending and processes that make some individuals influential
refining the social psychological model of schisms in while others are marginalized.
groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
31, 1074–1086.
Historical Background
Sani, F. (in press). When subgroups secede: A social
psychological model of factionalism and schism in groups. During the late 1960s and early 1970s, Henri Tajfel
In F. Butera & J. Levine (Eds.), Hoping and coping: How championed a cognitive perspective on intergroup
Self-Categorization Theory 729

relations. He believed that basic cognitive processes (fuzzy) sets of interrelated attributes that capture
associated with how we categorize people as mem- similarities within groups and differences between
bers of groups lie at the psychological core of an groups. Prototypes maximize entitativity (the
array of intergroup behaviors, in particular preju- extent to which a group is a distinct and clearly
dice, discrimination, and stereotyping. This per- defined entity) and optimize metacontrast (the
spective gathered momentum through collaboration extent to which maximal similarity among mem-
with John Turner and a focus on the comparisons bers of the group is balanced with maximal differ-
people make between groups, particularly between ence between the group as a whole and a relevant
a group they belong to (ingroup) and groups they outgroup). If I say to you “French,” what comes
do not belong to (outgroups), and on the role of immediately to mind is your prototype of that
self-definition and self-evaluation as a group mem- national group—possibly something to do with
ber (social identity) in intergroup behavior. berets, baguettes, and bicycles. However, if in
This led to Tajfel and Turner’s classic 1979 thinking about the French, you are contrasting
statement of the social identity theory of intergroup them to the Dutch, then bicycles may not be part
relations, which focused on how the interplay of the prototype because it is not an attribute that
between social identification, the pursuit of posi- differentiates the categories very sharply—the
tive intergroup distinctiveness, and beliefs about Dutch also do a lot of cycling.
the nature of intergroup relations impacted coop- Overwhelmingly, we make binary categoriza-
eration and competition between groups. During tions in which one of the categories is the group
the early 1980s, Turner and his colleagues turned that we are in, the ingroup. Thus, prototypes not
their attention (back) to the mechanics of group only capture similarities within the ingroup but
identification, asking what exactly, psychologically also accentuate differences between our group and
speaking, a group is and what basic social-cognitive a specific outgroup. Ingroup prototypes can there-
processes generate group identification and associ- fore change as a function of the specific outgroup
ated group processes and behaviors. In so doing, to which we are comparing our group. In this way,
Turner and his colleagues revisited and greatly prototypes are context dependent.
elaborated the role of social categorization in order
to produce the social identity theory of the group—
Categorization and Depersonalization
self-categorization theory.
The original 1987 statement of self-categoriza- The process of categorizing people has predictable
tion theory was very specific in its focus on levels of consequences. Rather than seeing them as idiosyn-
inclusiveness (how categorical distinctions are made cratic individuals, we see them through the lens of
within high order similarities; e.g., people are cate- the prototype: They become depersonalized.
gorized as Scottish or English within the context of Prototype-based perception of outgroup members
all being British, and as British or French within the is more commonly called stereotyping: We view
context of all being European) and on depersonal- “them” as being similar to one another and all
ized self-perception (how categorizing oneself dep- having outgroup attributes. We can also deperson-
ersonalizes self-perception and behavior to conform alize ingroup members and ourselves in the same
to the defining attributes of the category to which way. When we categorize ourselves, we view our-
one belongs). Very quickly, however, many, if not selves in terms of the defining attributes of the
most, social identity and self-categorization resear­ ingroup (self-stereotyping), and because proto-
chers relaxed the focus on levels of inclusiveness types also describe and prescribe group-appropriate
and broadened the depersonalization concept to ways to think, feel, and behave, we think, feel,
apply to the perception of other people as well. It is and behave group prototypically. In this way, self-
this broader perspective that is described here. categorization, which generates a sense of belong-
ing, attachment, and identification with the group,
not only transforms the way we view ourselves but
Categories and Prototypes
also transforms our behavior to comply with
Human groups are social categories that people ingroup norms, producing normative behavior
mentally represent as prototypes, that is, complex among members of a group.
730 Self-Categorization Theory

Feelings for Group Members: manifested as an intergroup struggle for positive


Social Attraction distinctiveness. Self-categorization theory origi-
nally had little to say about motivation. Instead, it
Social categorization affects how we feel toward
focused on process. However, it contained the
other people. Feelings are governed by how proto-
implicit assumption that categorization might sat-
typical of the group we think other people are,
isfy a basic human need to structure one’s percep-
rather than by personal preferences, friendships,
tions, attitudes, and behaviors and locate oneself
and enmities. In this way, liking becomes deper-
in the social world.
sonalized social attraction. Furthermore, because
Building on this idea, Michael Hogg developed
within one’s group there is usually agreement over
uncertainty-identity theory, first published in 2000
prototypicality, prototypical members are liked by
and then more fully in 2007, presenting it as a
all—they are “popular.” Likewise, less-prototypical
motivational explanation of social identity pro-
members are unpopular and can be marginalized
cesses and self-categorization effects to comple-
as undesirable deviants.
ment the motivational role of self and group
Another aspect of social attraction is that out-
enhancement. According to uncertainty-identity
group members are liked less than ingroup mem-
theory, people strive to reduce feelings of uncer-
bers. Outgroupers are very unprototypical of the
tainty about their social world and their place
ingroup. Social attraction also occurs because our
within it. In other words, they like to know who
ingroup prototypes are generally more favorable
they are and how to behave and who others are
than our outgroup prototypes (we do all we can to
and how they might behave. Social identity, through
secure an evaluative advantage of our own group
the processes of self-categorization and deperson-
over relevant comparison outgroups). Thus, liking
alization, ties self-definition and behavior to pre-
reflects not only prototypicality but the valence of
scriptive and descriptive prototypes. Social identity
the prototype.
reduces uncertainty about who we are and about
how we and others will behave and is particularly
Intergroup Behavior effective if the social identity is clearly defined by
This tendency for ingroup prototypes to be more membership in a distinctive, high-entitativity
favorable than outgroup prototypes represents group. Research confirms that uncertainty, espe-
ethnocentrism—the belief that all things ingroup cially about or related to self, motivates identifica-
are superior to all things outgroup. Ethnocentrism tion, particularly with high-entitativity groups.
exists because of the correspondence, through Another motivational perspective on social iden-
social identification and self-categorization, between tity processes based on self-categorization is offered
how the group is evaluated and how we are evalu- by Marilynn Brewer’s 1991 optimal distinctiveness
ated. Thus, intergroup behavior is a struggle over theory. According to this theory, people are simul-
the relative status or prestige of one’s ingroup—a taneously motivated to stand out and be separate
struggle for positive ingroup distinctiveness and from other people, on one hand, and to fit in and
social identity. Groups with higher status fight to be included by others, on the other hand. As a reso-
protect their evaluative superiority; groups of lution of these competing motives, they seek a state
lower status struggle to shrug off their social of optimal distinctiveness. Large groups satisfy the
stigma and promote their positivity. It is this aspect inclusiveness motive but not the distinctiveness
of social identity theory that is fully theorized by motive, and small groups do the opposite. Thus,
Tajfel and Turner’s 1979 social identity theory of people prefer to identify with midsized groups, or
intergroup relations. they seek a degree of intragroup differentiation
(based on roles or subgroups) against the back-
ground of identification with a larger collective.
Motivational Processes
For the social identity theory of intergroup rela-
Psychological Salience
tions, the key motivational process is self-enhancement
in group terms and the management of collective self- A social identity or self-category comes into play
esteem. At the group level, this motivation is psychologically to govern perceptions, attitudes,
Self-Esteem 731

feelings, and behavior when it is psychologically Relative Prototypicality and


salient. People draw on readily accessible social the Psychology of Marginalization
identi­ties or categorizations (e.g., gender, profession)—
Flowing from this discussion of how group mem-
ones that are valued, important, and frequently
bers determine the appropriate group prototype is
employed aspects of the self-concept (chronically
the observation that in groups, not every member
accessible in memory) or self-evident and perceptu-
is equally prototypical. Instead, some members are
ally obvious in the immediate situation (situation-
considered more prototypical than others, and
ally accessible). People use accessible identities to
there can be more or less intragroup consensus on
make sense of what is going on around them, check-
this. A member who is consensually perceived to
ing how well the categorization accounts for simi-
be highly prototypical will be extremely influential
larities and differences among people (structural or
within the group, functioning as an effective leader
comparative fit) and how well the stereotypical prop-
who can influence the group’s identity and destiny.
erties of the categorization account for people’s
A member who is consensually perceived to be
behavior (normative fit). People try out different
nonprototypical will find it very difficult to exert
categorizations, and the categorization with optimal
influence and will often be vilified and marginal-
fit becomes psychologically salient. Although largely
ized by the rest of the group and possibly ejected
an automatic process, salience is influenced by moti-
from the group. Where consensus on prototypical-
vations to employ categorizations that favor the
ity is low, members are effectively disagreeing
ingroup and do not raise self-uncertainty.
about what the group is or should stand for—
conditions that produce conflict that may lead to
Influence in Groups schisms and possible group disintegration.
People in groups adhere to similar standards, have Michael A. Hogg
similar attitudes, and behave in similar ways. They
See also Depersonalization; Optimal Distinctiveness;
conform to group norms and behave group proto-
Referent Informational Influence Theory; Schisms;
typically. Self-categorization is the cognitive pro-
Social Identity Theory; Uncertainty-Identity Theory
cess responsible for depersonalization and thus for
causing individual group members to behave pro- Further Readings
totypically or normatively—transforming their
self-concept and behavior to be identity consistent. Hogg, M. A. (2006). Social identity theory. In P. J. Burke
The social identity theory of influence, referent (Ed.), Contemporary social psychological theories
informational influence theory, builds on self- (pp. 111–136). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
categorization theory but also discusses processes Hogg, M. A. (2007). Uncertainty-identity theory. In
responsible for identifying and configuring the M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
psychology (Vol. 39, pp. 69–126). San Diego, CA:
ingroup prototype or norm.
Academic Press.
Clearly, members will be highly vigilant for and
Oakes, P. J., Haslam, S. A., & Turner, J. C. (1994).
attentive to information that accurately conveys
Stereotyping and social reality. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
what the prototype or norm is. In gauging what
Turner, J. C. (1982). Towards a cognitive redefinition of
the appropriate group norm is, people pay atten- the social group. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social identity and
tion to the behavior of people who are most infor- intergroup relations (pp. 15–40). Cambridge, UK:
mative about the norm. Typically, these are people Cambridge University Press.
who are generally considered to be prototypical Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., &
and who are behaving in ways that are not incon- Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group:
sistent with the wider parameters of the group’s A self‑categorization theory. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
identity. In many contexts, these people are the
group’s leaders. Indeed, this idea is the foundation
of the social identity theory of leadership. However, Self-Esteem
outgroup members and marginal ingroup mem-
bers can also be informative in a more indirect The term self-esteem is attributed to William
way: What they are is what the ingroup is not. James, who defined it as feelings about the self
732 Self-Esteem

resulting from comparisons of the actual self to domain-specific self-esteem can be conceptualized
the ideal self. More recently, self-esteem has come as a predictor or a dependent measure.
to reflect an individual’s evaluation of his or her For intergroup purposes, self-esteem may be
self-worth. With regard to intergroup relations further distinguished as measuring personal or col-
and group processes, the following issues are of lective (social) aspects of the self. Personal self-
primary importance: (a) types of self-esteem, esteem reflects how much individuals value
(b) self-esteem as an outcome or a predictor of themselves. For example, a personal self-esteem
intergroup discrimination, (c) the impact of expe- scale might include items such as “I wish I could
riencing discrimination on self-esteem, (d) implicit have more respect for myself.” Collective self-
self-esteem, (e) the role of self-esteem in terror esteem addresses how much individuals value the
management, (f) the differentiation of self-esteem groups or collectives of which they are members.
from group identification and group status, and Typical collective self-esteem measurement items
(g) contingencies of self-worth. The relationship might include, “In general, I’m glad to be a mem-
of self-esteem to intergroup phenomena is the pri- ber of the social groups I belong to.”
mary focus of this entry. However, a discussion of Still another way to categorize self-esteem is as
dimensions and types of self-esteem is necessary an explicit or an implicit measure. Explicit mea-
before discussing how self-esteem relates to group sures of self-esteem involve traditional paper-and-
processes and intergroup relations. pencil tasks wherein individuals answer direct
questions. Most self-esteem scales involve explicit
measurement. In contrast, implicit measures
Types of Self-Esteem
involve computer-based reaction time tests. For
Initially, researchers defined self-esteem as a stable example, a common implicit measure requires the
personality trait relative to how individuals felt individual to pair words relevant to the self, such
about themselves. More recently, however, the as I or me, with positive or negative words, such
term self-esteem has broadened to encompass dif- as worthy or useless. Those who associate “self”
ferent dimensions. One way to classify dimensions words with positive traits more quickly than with
of self-esteem is as global, trait based, or domain negative traits attain higher implicit self-esteem
specific. scores. This approach is often termed indirect or
Global self-esteem refers to stable aspects of the nonconscious measurement. Implicit self-esteem
self-concept (e.g., “I feel I have a number of good deserves special mention because implicit or non-
qualities”). Common global measures of self- conscious measures are commonly defined as out-
esteem include the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale and side conscious control. This definition seems to
the Collective Self-Esteem Scale. Global measures conflict with the characterizations of self-esteem as
of self-esteem are best conceptualized as predictor self-evaluative. However, some researchers argue
variables because their stability makes them diffi- that, regardless of the nonconscious aspect of the
cult to change after experimental manipulation. measure, the feelings measured are in fact elicited
Trait-based measures of self-esteem address by the self and do guide reactions to stimulus.
feelings that may fluctuate (e.g., “I feel inferior to
others at this moment”). A common measure of
Self-Esteem in Intergroup Discrimination
trait self-esteem is the State Self-Esteem Scale. Trait
self-esteem, because it can fluctuate, is appropriate The role of self-esteem in group processes and
for use as both a predictor (i.e., it can be manipu- intergroup relations is rooted in self-enhancement
lated) and a dependent measure (i.e., it may change motivations. Individuals strive to focus on positive
after experimental manipulations). information about the self and to make evalua-
Domain-specific self-esteem comprises specific tions and attributions that support positive self-
aspects of the self-concept and may fluctuate (e.g., evaluations. At an intergroup level, there also
“I have good reading comprehension”). Domain- exists a group enhancement motivation. Social
specific self-esteem measurement generally focuses identity theory states that individuals define them-
on specific areas of mastery, such as academic selves in terms of their group memberships and seek
or physical self-concept. Like trait self-esteem, to maintain a positive identity through association
Self-Esteem 733

with positively valued groups and through com- individuals with high self-esteem or individuals
parisons with other groups. with low self-esteem? Empirical evidence suggests
Social identity theory posits a central role for that individuals with high personal self-esteem
self-esteem relevant to intergroup relations. How­ demonstrate more bias. However, under condi-
ever, interpretations of the theory suggest compet- tions in which self-consistency needs are met (e.g.,
ing perspectives on the role of self-esteem. One people with low self-esteem can discriminate with-
perspective states that intergroup discrimination, or out making claims of superiority), individuals with
ingroup-favoring evaluations, enhance self-esteem. high and individuals with low self-esteem show
Intergroup discrimination involves either evalua- similar levels of bias on both personal and collec-
tions that derogate members of other groups or tive measures. Broadly, data suggest that individu-
evaluations wherein both groups are evaluated als higher in global personal self-esteem show
positively but the ingroup receives a more positive more ingroup bias, indicating that social identity
evaluation. In either case, discrimination involves theory predictions regarding the motivational role
enhancing the relative value of the ingroup. Because of self-esteem are not supported.
positive identities are a product of membership in Research examining self-esteem as a predictor
positively valued groups, people show bias as a and as an outcome of discrimination behaviors
means of enhancing their self-esteem. A competing highlights important issues about different domains
perspective proposes that depressed self-esteem pro- of self-esteem. In the case of the link between self-
motes ingroup bias. That is, individuals with low esteem and intergroup discrimination, competing
self-esteem are motivated to enhance their group as predictions were resolved through consideration of
a means of increasing deficient self-esteem. the different forms of self-esteem.
Both perspectives suggest a central role for self-
esteem in intergroup processes, but the two per- Self-Esteem of Those Who
spectives do not seem logically consistent. In Experience Discrimination
particular, if ingroup bias improves self-esteem and
people with low self-esteem are more likely to Another issue of interest is how being the target
show bias, how is it that some individuals are of group-based discrimination impacts self-esteem.
chronically low in self-esteem? The different dimen- Black people in the United States, a long-standing
sions of self-esteem detailed below help resolve this target of discrimination, generally report higher
inconsistency. self-esteem than do groups with fewer discrimina-
tion experiences. However, some other groups that
Self-Esteem as an Outcome have suffered discrimination, such as women and
of Intergroup Discrimination the overweight, show deflated self-esteem. Research
examining effects of discrimination on self-esteem
There is some support for the proposition that suggests that appraisals of the discrimination and
discrimination against outgroups enhances self- how the individual perceives the outcomes of the
esteem for those who discriminate. However, it discrimination mediate its impact on self-esteem.
appears that only trait, domain-specific, and social
aspects of self-esteem increase after the opportu-
nity to discriminate. This suggests that discrimina- The Emerging Role of Implicit Self-Esteem
tion improves aspects of self-esteem that are not Implicit self-esteem measures are relatively new.
static (i.e., trait and domain-specific) and those Although the source of some controversy, many
that are relevant to feelings derived from group perspectives suggest that consideration of both
memberships (i.e., collective or social aspects). implicit and explicit measures is important because
they predict different behavioral outcomes. In
Self-Esteem as a Predictor
addition, implicit and explicit measures are often
of Intergroup Discrimination
unrelated, suggesting that they are independent
The question most commonly asked by research- constructs.
ers interested in self-esteem as a predictor of inter- Work on the impact of implicit self-esteem on
group discrimination is, Who shows more bias, intergroup attitudes suggests that increases in
734 Self-Esteem

implicit self-esteem motivate ingroup-favoring It is also useful to distinguish group identifica-


responses. However, other research indicates that tion from self-esteem. Although measures used to
individuals who possess low implicit self-esteem assess group identification often include items that
and high explicit self-esteem are more likely to tap aspects similar to those defined as collective
demonstrate ingroup bias. Still other work finds self-esteem, group identification focuses on how
that high implicit self-esteem is associated with strongly people are committed to their groups. In
ingroup favoritism only when the ingroup is high contrast, collective self-esteem addresses the feel-
status. The relationship between implicit self- ings derived from group memberships. Collective
esteem and intergroup bias appears ripe for con- self-esteem and group identification are sometimes
tinuing investigation. viewed interchangeably. However, empirical evi-
dence suggests that stronger group identification,
but not greater collective self-esteem, predicts
Terror Management and Self-Esteem
increased ingroup bias.
Terror management theory posits that self-esteem
serves a fundamental role in buffering anxiety
Contingencies of Self-Worth
derived from reminders of mortality. In this view,
mortality reminders motivate a striving for self- Recent work on contingencies of self-worth focuses
esteem to offset anxiety. The primary mechanism on characteristics that constitute global self-esteem.
for bolstering self-esteem is adhering more strongly That is, these contingencies are the domains that
to one’s cultural worldview. Many outcomes cor- contribute to an individual’s global self-esteem.
responding to bolstering the cultural worldview Some individuals may base their self-esteem on
are relevant to intergroup relations. physical appearance, others on academic perfor-
For example, one strategy for bolstering the mance, and still others on religious faith or some
worldview (and thus bolstering self-esteem) is other domain. Contingencies of self-worth explain
evaluating the ingroup favorably and outgroups a number of paradoxical influences of self-esteem.
unfavorably, provided that the ingroup is viewed For example, empirical data demonstrate that
positively and outgroups are viewed negatively. Black people in the United States are less likely to
However, when outgroups are viewed favorably, place value on approval from others and so are less
mortality reminders promote more positive out- likely to have their self-esteem impacted by
group evaluations. In short, mortality reminders discrimination (i.e., disapproval from others).
make responses extreme. Individuals evaluate pos- Although there is presently little work examining
itively valued groups more positively and nega- the relationship between contingencies of self-
tively valued groups more negatively. worth and prejudice, this area represents an inter-
esting avenue for future investigation.
Self-Esteem Versus Christopher L. Aberson
Status and Group Identification
See also Collective Self; Identification and Commitment;
Other useful distinctions are between self-esteem Ingroup Allocation Bias; Racism; Social Identity
and group status and between self-esteem and Theory; Status; Stigma; Terror Management Theory
group identification. There is a long tradition of
investigation of the effects of status on ingroup
bias. Often group status, defined as the relative Further Readings
standing of the group in relation to other groups, Aberson, C. L., Healy, M. R., & Romero, V. L. (2000).
is equated with self-esteem. However, individuals Ingroup bias and self-esteem: A meta-analysis.
who are members of low-status or stigmatized Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 157–173.
groups are no more or less likely to have low self- Bosson, J. K., Swann, W. B., Jr., & Pennebaker, J.
esteem than are members of high-status or nonstig- (2000). Stalking the perfect measure of implicit self-
matized groups. Thus, it seems that negative esteem: The blind men and the elephant revisited?
aspects of social identity, such as low status, can Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79,
become disassociated from self-esteem. 631–643.
Self-Fulfilling Prophecy 735

Crocker, J., & Wolfe, C. T. (2001). Contingencies of self- than members of groups stereotyped as less intel-
worth. Psychological Review, 108, 593–623. ligent, competent, or likable. Thus, self-fulfilling
Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1990). Social motivation, self- prophecies may contribute to the maintenance, not
esteem, and social identity. In D. Abrams & M. A. Hogg only of stereotypes themselves, but of the group
(Eds.), Social identity theory: Constructive and critical differences and inequalities that give rise to those
advances (pp. 28–47). New York: Springer-Verlag. stereotypes.
Kernis, M. H. (Ed.). (2006). Self-esteem issues and Such processes, however, are limited, and the
answers: A sourcebook of current perspectives. New extent to which they contribute to group differ-
York: Psychology Press.
ences and inequalities is the subject of considerable
Luhtanen, R., & Crocker, J. (1992). A collective self-esteem
controversy in the research literature. This entry
scale: Self-evaluation of one’s social identity. Personality
discusses what that literature does and does not
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 302–318.
tell us (including some common misconceptions)
Major, B., & O’Brien, L. T. (2005). The social
psychology of stigma. Annual Review of Psychology,
about self-fulfilling prophecies.
56, 393–421.
Rubin, M., & Hewstone, M. (1998). Social identity Early Research
theory’s self-esteem hypothesis: A review and some
suggestions for clarification. Personality and Social The earliest empirical research on self-fulfilling
Psychology Review, 2, 40–62. prophecies examined whether teachers’ false expec-
Solomon, S., Greenberg, J., & Pyszczynski, T. (2000). tations for their students caused students to achieve
Pride and prejudice: Fear of death and social at levels consistent with those teachers’ expecta-
behavior. Current Directions in Psychological tions. Repeatedly, although not always, research
Science, 9, 200–204. demonstrated that teacher expectations are indeed
self-fulfilling—students (sometimes) come to per-
form at levels consistent with their teachers’ origi-
nally false expectations.
Self-Fulfilling Prophecy This research has been interpreted by many
scholars as providing a powerful insight into
A self-fulfilling prophecy occurs when an originally social, educational, and economic inequality.
false expectation leads to its own confirmation. Teacher expectations seem to systematically advan-
One classic example of a self-fulfilling prophecy tage students from already advantaged back-
was bank failures during the Great Depression. grounds (e.g., Whites, middle-class students) and
Even banks with strong financials sometimes were disadvantage students from already disadvantaged
driven to insolvency by bank runs. Banks make backgrounds (e.g., ethnic minorities, lower-class
money by taking in deposits and then lending that students). To the extent that education is a major
money to others. If (as happened during the Great stepping-stone toward occupational and economic
Depression) a false rumor starts that the bank is advancement, self-fulfilling prophecies, it would
insolvent (incapable of covering its deposits), a seem, constitute a major social force operating to
panic ensues, and depositors want to withdraw keep the disadvantaged in “their place.”
their money all at once before the bank’s cash runs Further support for self-fulfilling prophecies was
out. When the bank cannot cover all the withdraw- provided by additional early research showing that
als, it actually becomes insolvent. Thus, an origi- social stereotypes can indeed be self-fulfilling.
nally false belief has led to its own fulfillment. Classic studies showed that both physical attractive-
Self-fulfilling prophecies are important to the ness and racial stereotypes could be self-fulfilling.
understanding of intergroup relations. Under just When men interviewed a woman who they falsely
the right (or wrong) conditions, inaccurate social believed was physically attractive (accomplished
stereotypes may lead to their own fulfillment. For through the use of false photographs in non–face-
example, members of groups stereotyped as more to-face interviews), not only were the men warmer
intelligent, competent, or likable can, through the and friendlier to her, but she became warmer and
operation of self-fulfilling prophecies, actually friendlier in response. Moreover, when White inter-
become more intelligent, competent, or likable viewers treated White interviewees in the same cold
736 Self-Fulfilling Prophecy

and distant manner they used with Black intervie- then compared those beliefs to criteria regarding
wees, the performance of the White interviewees what those groups are actually like (Census reports,
suffered. results from hundreds of empirical studies, self-re-
Self-fulfilling prophecies have been demon- ports) find that people’s beliefs correspond with
strated in a wide variety of educational, occupa- groups’ characteristics quite well. Indeed, the accu-
tional, professional, and informal contexts. They racy of people’s stereotypes (the extent to which
have been demonstrated in experimental labora- people’s beliefs about groups correspond with what
tory studies, experimental field studies, to natural- those groups are actually like) is one of the largest
istic studies. Indeed, it is fairly easy to string relationships in all of social psychology.
together a few of the classic studies to tell a com- In addition, the shared component of stereo-
pelling story about how teachers’ expectations, types is typically even more accurate than is the
employers’ expectations, and expectations in every- individual or idiosyncratic component. People do
day interactions victimize people from stigmatized not rigidly and powerfully apply their stereotypes
social groups. And, indeed, that is exactly what when judging individuals. They readily jettison
some observers have done. The logic here is quite their stereotypes when clear and relevant personal
simple. Stereotypes are widely shared and inaccu- information is available about the person being
rate. Stereotypes lead to inaccurate expectations. judged, and overall, the effect of stereotypes on
These expectations, in turn, are self-fulfilling. judging individuals is generally quite small. Thus,
According to this perspective, self-fulfilling proph- some of the key assumptions underlying the “self-
ecies constitute a major source of social inequali- fulfilling stereotypes are a powerful and pervasive
ties and social problems. source of social problems” story—that stereotypes
are widely shared and inaccurate and that they
powerfully distort expectations for individuals—
The Limits of Self-Fulfilling Prophecies
seem to be largely invalid.
For several reasons, however, evidence for the A second important assumption underlying the
power of self-fulfilling prophecies is far from con- argument for the power of self-fulfilling prophe-
clusive. First, some of the classic studies had major cies is that even if these prophecies are small in any
methodological problems. Second, many have given study, those small effects, because they likely
proven difficult to replicate. Third, the overall accumulate over time, can become quite large and
power of self-fulfilling prophecies, especially as hence at least partially account for major social
obtained in naturalistic studies that do not involve inequalities. For example, let’s say that teacher
experimenters intentionally creating false expecta- expectations increase the IQ of high-expectancy
tions in participants, is not large at all. Fourth, students only 3 points per year and decrease the IQ
there currently is about as much evidence that of low-expectancy students only 3 points per year.
positive self-fulfilling prophecies improve the per- If these effects accumulate, then at the end of
formance of low-achieving students as there is that 6  years, there would be a 36-IQ-point difference
negative self-fulfilling prophecies harm their per- between two students who started out with identi-
formance. Fifth, considerable evidence indicates cal IQ test scores but different expectancies.
that people are not rudderless ships, relentlessly However, empirical research on self-fulfilling
tossed around on the seas of other people’s expec- prophecies in education has not provided any evi-
tations. Instead, people have their own motiva- dence of accumulation. Every study that has tested
tions and goals that enable them to successfully the accumulation hypothesis has not only failed to
combat others’ false expectations. confirm it but has found the opposite. Rather than
Overall, therefore, the evidence does not justify accumulating to become larger and larger over
a simple picture of self-fulfilling prophecies as pow- time, the effects of self-fulfilling prophecies in the
erful and pervasive sources of social problems. But classroom dissipate over time—they become
the picture gets even fuzzier when other research is smaller and smaller. Why this happens is not cur-
added to the mix. Although not all stereotypes are rently well understood. Given the evidence for
100% accurate, most of the empirical studies that generally high accuracy in teacher expectations,
have assessed people’s beliefs about groups and strongly erroneous teacher expectations may be
Self-Managing Teams 737

the exception rather than the rule. Thus, students characteristics such as race, ethnicity, social
may be highly unlikely to be the target of the same class, gender, and attractiveness. Nonetheless,
type of erroneous expectation year after year, there may be some contexts in which this role is
thereby limiting the likelihood that they will be quite large.
subjected to the same erroneous expectation (and
its self-fulfilling effects) year after year. Lee Jussim
Nonetheless, the story about the role of self- See also Children: Stereotypes and Prejudice;
fulfilling prophecies in social problems should not Discrimination; Minority Groups in Society;
be completely discarded. Self-fulfilling prophecies Stereotyping
probably do play some modest role in social
inequalities. First, some of the largest self-fulfilling
prophecy effects ever obtained have been found Further Readings
among students from stigmatized social and demo-
Jussim, L., Eccles, J., & Madon, S. J. (1996). Social
graphic groups (Blacks, lower social class students,
perception, social stereotypes, and teacher
and students with histories of low achievement). expectations: Accuracy and the quest for the powerful
Second, even though educational self-fulfilling self-fulfilling prophecy. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.),
prophecies do not accumulate, they can be very Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 29,
long lasting. Some evidence shows that sixth-grade pp. 281–388). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
teacher expectations have self-fulfilling effects as Jussim, L., & Harber, K. (2005). Teacher expectations
far out as 12th grade. Third, the types of diagnostic and self-fulfilling prophecies: Knowns and unknowns,
labels often used in educational contexts—learning resolved and unresolved controversies. Personality and
disabled, emotionally disturbed, neuro­lo­gically Social Psychology Review, 9, 131–155.
impaired—are inaccurately applied sufficiently Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the
often that they may frequently create inaccurately classroom: Teacher expectations and student
low expectations that are indeed self-fulfilling. intellectual development. New York: Holt, Rinehart
Because these labels have a veneer of scientific & Winston.
credibility, it may be much harder for students so Snyder, M. (1984). When belief creates reality. In
labeled to shake the inaccurate expectations pro- L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
duced by them. psychology (Vol. 18, pp. 247–305). New York:
Academic Press.

Conclusion
Given the highly mixed nature of the evidence,
what conclusions about self-fulfilling prophecies Self-Managing Teams
are currently justified?
Teams are a fundamental part of most manufac-
•• Self-fulfilling prophecies are a real phenomenon turing, service, and high technology companies
and occur in many settings, including and most nonprofit organizations. Some teams
laboratories, classrooms, courtrooms, and jobs. operate in a face-to-face setting, whereas others
•• In general, self-fulfilling prophecies do not are geographically distributed. Some occur within
greatly influence people. Occasionally, however, a single organization, whereas others contain
they can be quite powerful. members from multiple organizations. Self-
•• Self-fulfilling prophecies in the classroom managing teams (SMTs) share some features com-
dissipate over time. There is insufficient research mon to traditional work groups, including group
to reach any conclusion about whether they goals, a set of interdependent tasks, and the chal-
accumulate or dissipate in other contexts, such lenge of coordinating tasks and member skills to
as the workplace or family. create a group product or service. What distin-
•• In general, self-fulfilling prophecies probably guishes SMTs is their control over the decision-
play a real yet relatively modest role in creating making process. In traditional work groups,
or maintaining social inequalities based on managers decide who is in the group and how and
738 Self-Managing Teams

when members interact with one another. In an organization to solve a problem, the group takes
SMT, many of these decisions are made by the responsibility. A fourth mediating mechanism,
group. This entry examines the ways in which related to the three listed above, is a focus on
SMTs differ from traditional work groups, the learning. In SMTs, the group strives to continu-
outcomes of SMTs, challenges for future research ously develop new repertoires to enhance perfor-
on SMTs, and limitations of SMTs. mance.
To understand the difference between tradi- The potential consequences of these higher lev-
tional work teams and SMTs, consider the example els of motivation, coordination, problem solving,
of a manufacturing facility that produced blades and learning are that SMTs should achieve high
for jet engines. The plant was organized into performance goals. Also, group members should
SMTs. Each SMT decided who could join the express high levels of satisfaction and commitment
group, what jobs people would work on, and how over time. Furthermore, SMTs should be charac-
the jobs were to be done. In addition, each SMT terized by lower absenteeism, turnover, and acci-
disciplined members of the group and evaluated dent rates than are traditional work groups.
members’ competencies in order to determine What are the empirical findings regarding SMTs?
compensation. In an SMT operation, activities Evidence suggests that SMTs can improve perfor-
such as maintenance and quality control are part mance, but only when they are effectively imple-
of the group’s responsibilities rather than indepen- mented and institutionalized in organizations.
dent support operations. The fundamental idea is Performance is measured both objectively (in terms
that the responsibility and authority for all the of productivity and quality) and subjectively. High
major work decisions are held by the team rather customer satisfaction is another outcome some-
than by some organizational hierarchy. However, times associated with SMTs. Finally, there is some
all SMTs are not the same. The major differences evidence that withdrawal behavior (e.g., turnover,
among SMTs concern the scope and number of absenteeism) is lower in SMTs. In regard to media-
decisions the group controls. The critical criterion tors of SMT effectivness, research suggests that
of an SMT is that the majority of work decisions SMTs produce greater effort and problem solving,
are made by the group. which in turn lead to higher performance. To date,
little effort has been made to investigate how SMTs
influence other important group processes, such as
Impact on Outcomes
leadership, conflict management, role ambiguity,
How do these structural features of SMTs affect and emergent control systems.
group and organizational effectiveness, and what
is the rationale for designing groups this way?
Challenges for Future Research
Some key mediating mechanisms have been pro-
posed to account for the presumed effectiveness of One challenge for future research is clarifying how
SMTs. First, compared with traditional work SMTs differ from tradititional work groups.
groups, SMTs provide workers with greater levels Asserting that a group is an SMT is common in the
of autonomy, responsibility, freedom, and vari- literature. But the definition of an SMT is based on
ety—factors documented in the literature to create the group’s control over a variety of decisions. In
high levels of motivation. Second, SMTs demand many studies, the specific decisions the group does
greater levels of coordination than do traditional or does not make are not well specified, and hence
work groups. The group members, rather than a ambiguity exists about whether the group is indeed
supervisor, are responsible for making coordina- an SMT. A second challenge is understanding the
tion effective, and they have control over their evolution of SMTs over time. When a group is ini-
environment. In well-designed SMTs there are high tially given control over a new set of decisions, it is
levels of cohesiveness and strong norms supporting not surprising that there are positive performance
cooperation. Third, given the group’s responsibil- changes. Longitudinal designs are needed to assess
ity for managing the major production decisions, how SMTs evolve over time and whether the
most SMTs exhibit high levels of problem solving. changes associated with new groups persist. A third
Instead of relying on a supervisor or others in the challenge involves increasing the use of control
Self-Stereotyping 739

groups, which are absent in most of the studies on empowerment. Academy of Management Journal,
SMTs. A fourth challenge is being clear about the 42(1), 58–74.
level of analysis for measuring the consequences of Morgeson, M. D., Johnson, M. A., Campion, G. J., &
SMTs. Because SMTs are group-level phenomena, Medsker, T. (2006). Understanding reactions to job
measurement needs to be at that level. A final chal- redesign: A quasi-experimental investigation.
lenge involves carefully specifying how the organi- Personnel Psychology, 59(2), 333–363.
zational contexts in which SMTs are embedded Wageman, R. (2001). How leaders foster self-managing
affect their performance. team effectiveness: Design choices versus hands-on
coaching. Organization Science, 12(5), 559–577.

Limitations of SMTs
Several constraints on the diffusion and long-term
effectiveness of SMTs deserve mention. First, Self-Stereotyping
because SMTs represent a fundamental change in
the way organizations are structured, they are Self-stereotyping occurs when individuals’ percep-
often resisted. Second, if SMTs are introduced into tions of their own characteristics correspond to the
organizations in which traditional work teams also characteristics attributed to a social group to which
remain in place, conflicts between the two kinds of they belong (i.e., stereotypes of their group).
groups may reduce the long-run viability of the Researchers commonly measure self-stereotyping
SMTs. A third limiting factor involves the group’s in one of two ways. The first way involves measur-
task structure. Because SMTs are designed for ing the extent to which individuals attribute to
groups in which members have high task interde- themselves those characteristics commonly thought
pendence, they are unlikely to be effective in situa- to describe their group. For example, it is a com-
tions in which members primarily work alone mon belief that women in general are poor at math.
(e.g., service technicians). Assessing whether individual women feel as if they
SMTs are likely to remain part of the organiza- are poor at math would be consistent with this way
tional landscape. At the same time, the nature of of measuring self-stereotyping. The second way
work is changing—it is becoming more distributed researchers assess self-stereotyping is by measuring
and global and placing a higher premium on how similar individual group members think they
knowledge work. It will be interesting to see how are to their group or to a typical group member.
SMTs adapt to this changing environment. For example, a researcher may ask individual mem-
bers of an ethnic group how similar they are to a
Paul S. Goodman and Uriel J. Haran typical member of their ethnic group.
Some researchers use the term self-stereotyping
See also Group Cohesiveness; Group Learning; Group
Problem Solving and Decision Making; Job Design; more broadly to describe circumstances in which
Team Performance Assessment; Teams; Work Teams individual members of a group embrace stereo-
typic beliefs about their group, when group mem-
bers behave in line with prevailing stereotypes of
Further Readings their group, and when members of a group have
low self-esteem because their group as a whole is
Bishop, J. W., & Scott, K. D. (2000). An examination of
devalued within society. However, these uses of
organizational and team commitment in a self-directed
the term are less common and do not conform to
team environment. Journal of Applied Psychology,
the definition provided above.
85(3), 439–450.
Goodman, P. S., Devadas, R., & Hughson, T. L. G.
(1988). Groups and productivity: Analyzing the History and Importance
effectiveness of self-managing teams. In J. P. Campbell
& R. J. Campbell (Eds.), Productivity in organizations Historically, self-stereotyping was assumed to be
(pp. 295–327). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. an unavoidable negative consequence of member-
Kirkman, B. L., & Rosen, B. (1999). Beyond self- ship in a socially devalued group. Conceptualizing
management: Antecedents and consequences of team self-stereotyping more broadly than is done today,
740 Self-Stereotyping

classic theories of the self and intergroup relations themselves using shared ingroup characteristics that
argued that the way society views a group undoubt- differentiate their group from other groups.
edly shapes how individual group members see Two forms of evidence support this perspective.
themselves. It was believed that members of First, factors thought to increase the degree
socially devalued groups must see themselves nega- to which people think of themselves in terms of
tively because they internalize society’s negative group identities have been shown to increase self-
image of their group. Thus, the importance of self- stereotyping. For example, situational cues that
stereotyping was derived from the assumption that increase the degree to which a group membership
it represented a pervasive harmful consequence of comes to mind, such as completing a demograph-
being socially devalued. ics sheet containing items inquiring about one’s
In more recent thinking, the importance of self- group membership, increase self-stereotyping. Self-
stereotyping is thought to rest on the functions that stereotyping also increases as the distinctiveness of
it serves. According to some researchers, most nota- a given group membership within a particular situ-
bly system-justification theorists, self-stereotyping ation increases. For example, being the only Black
serves to justify inequitable social systems. That is, person at a board meeting should increase the like-
self-stereotyping among members of disadvantaged lihood that one thinks of the self in terms of this
groups is thought to translate into beliefs and group membership, and therefore this situation
behaviors that excuse and perpetuate their disad- should increase self-stereotyping. Second, self-
vantaged status, lending credence to existing group stereotyping has been shown to depend on those to
inequalities. Other notable perspectives contend whom people compare themselves. Men and
that self-stereotyping is a means by which individu- women in social or cultural contexts that foster
als can feel close to or distinct from others. cross-gender comparisons have been shown to
At the intergroup level, self-stereotyping can exhibit greater self-stereotyping than those in con-
increase a sense of connection to members of one’s texts that foster within-gender comparisons.
own group, thereby creating a sense of group cohe- The motivation to feel close to one’s own group
sion and solidarity, or decrease the degree to which or differentiate one’s group from other groups also
one’s group seems similar to other groups. At the determines self-stereotyping. Investigating the role
interpersonal level, self-stereotyping can facilitate of the former motivation, researchers found that
positive interactions with people who believe individuals whose desire to feel included in impor-
group stereotypes to be true. Research delineating tant ingroups is threatened engage in greater self-
other functions needs to be done. stereotyping to fulfill this need. For example, if a
sorority member momentarily feels that she is very
different from the other members of her sorority,
Theory and Evidence
an important group identity, she may attempt to
Several perspectives describe the circumstances in quell this feeling by engaging in self-stereotyping.
which self-stereotyping is more or less likely to Exemplifying the role of the latter motivation,
occur. One important perspective, self-categorization individuals who feel their group is threatened
theory, contends that the likelihood of self- because of low status or insufficient distinctiveness
stereotyping depends on whether people are from other groups will engage in self-stereotyping
cate­gorizing themselves in terms of either a personal as a means to enhance the sense that their group is
or a group identity at a given moment in time. As unique. An honors student who learns that honors
individuals shift from a personal identity to a group students and other students on campus are fairly
identity, the likelihood of self-stereotyping increases. similar, for example, may engage in self-stereotyping
This is because individuals who are thinking about by seeing himself or herself as highly academically
themselves in terms of their personal identity define motivated in order to restore a feeling of being dis-
themselves using characteristics that differentiate tinct from other students. People who are highly
them from other members of their group. In con- identified with their group are particularly likely to
trast, individuals who are thinking about them- respond to such temporary and chronic threats to
selves in terms of a group identity compare the group with increased self-stereotyping, even
them­selves with members of other groups, defining when the relevant group traits are negative.
Sensitivity Training Groups 741

Finally, stereotypes have been shown to influ- maintenance and change. In C. Sedikides & M. Brewer
ence how people see themselves via shared under- (Eds.), Individual self, relational self and collective self
standings about the self developed in long-term (pp. 147–170). New York: Psychology Press.
relationships and in the course of daily social inter- Pickett, C. L., Bonner, B. L., & Coleman, J. M. (2002).
action with others. Self-stereotyping is more likely Motivated self-stereotyping: Heightened assimilation
if one thinks that a close other holds stereotypic and differentiation needs result in increased levels of
beliefs about one’s group than if the other person is positive and negative self-stereotyping. Journal of
thought to hold counterstereotypic beliefs. For Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 543–562.
Sinclair, S., Huntsinger, J., Skorinko, J., & Hardin, C. D.
example, self-stereotyping is more likely if a woman
(2005). Social tuning of the self: Consequences for the
thinks that her mother believes that women are
self-evaluations of stereotype targets. Journal of
poor at math than if she thinks her mother believes
Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 160–175.
women are good at math. Also, people who think
a new person with whom they want to get along
holds stereotypic beliefs, as opposed to counterste-
reotypic beliefs, about their group are more likely
to see themselves in a stereotypic manner.
Sensitivity Training Groups
Sensitivity training groups provide training in a
Future Directions small-group setting for people who want to gain
The understanding of self-stereotyping has advanced greater awareness and understanding of them-
over time. The nature of self-stereotyping as well as selves and of their relationships with others. In
those conditions that give rise to it are better under- contrast to psychotherapy groups, in which people
stood. However, many fertile avenues for research seek relief through therapeutic intervention from
remain. One important task is further distinguish- an emotional disturbance (such as depression),
ing the circumstances under which self-stereotyping sensitivity training groups generally involve people
occurs with respect to positive group characteris- who are healthy yet have a desire for personal
tics only, negative group characteristics only, or growth. Examples of problem areas in which
both. In some research, self-stereotyping is selective growth is often sought include shyness, talkative-
and occurs only for positive traits. In other research, ness, inability to express anger, and discomfort
self-stereotyping occurs for both positive and nega- with emotional closeness.
tive traits. Another important question is whether Understanding sensitivity training groups is
and when self-stereotyping translates into corre- important because their focus on healthy individu-
sponding behavior. For example, for members of als has widespread societal applicability. These
groups commonly associated with poor academic groups are offered by organizations and agencies to
abilities, does self-stereotyping translate into poor help members of a community learn how to better
academic performance? understand and appreciate differences in other
people. They often address societal concerns such as
Jeffrey R. Huntsinger and Stacey Sinclair gender sensitivity; multicultural sensitivity, includ-
ing gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered cul-
See also Categorization; Self-Categorization Theory; Self- tures; and sensitivity toward those who are disabled
Esteem; Social Identity Theory; Stereotyping
in some way. This entry examines how such groups
developed and how they work; it also reviews
Further Readings points of debate and current use of such programs.
Guimond, S., Branscombe, N. R., Brunot, S., Buunk, A. P.,
Chatard, A., Désert, M., et al. (2007). Culture, gender
History
and the self: Variations and impact of social
comparison processes. Journal of Personality and In the early 1900s, scholars began to take an inter-
Social Psychology, 92, 1118–1134. est in crowd psychology, which translated by the
Onorato, R. S., & Turner, J. C. (2001). The “I,” the “me,” 1920s into an interest in studying normal social
and the “us”: The psychological group and self-concept groupings and interactions to find solutions to
742 Sensitivity Training Groups

social problems. In the 1930s, Kurt Lewin devel- techniques for participatory democracy. In the
oped his field theory to understand the nature of 1950s, the groups shifted to a focus on individual
individuals in the context of their experience of growth, self-knowledge, and maturation. In the
their social environment. Lewin also began research mid-1960s, the original aims of the laboratory
aimed at promoting social change. method were renewed with the launch of the
The development of what was called the train- Journal of Applied Behavioral Science as a forum
ing laboratory was a collaborative effort of Leland to critically reevaluate this field.
Bradford, Ronald Lippitt, and Kenneth Benne, all Thirty years after the birth of T-groups, there
of whom joined with Lewin in the summer of 1946 were three main types of these unstructured learn-
to run a workshop at Connecticut’s State Teachers ing groups. The traditional T-group, also called
College. According to Lippitt, one evening, as they laboratory training, emphasized interpersonal rela-
met to discuss the day’s training, three of the train- tionships and the development of interpersonal
ing participants came in and indicated they wanted skills by allowing group members to interact in an
to listen to the discussion. Lewin agreed, and he unstructured environment and then analyze the
and his colleagues tried to proceed as if the par- dynamics of what had occurred. Organizational
ticipants were not present. development groups, also called human relations
When the discussion’s focus turned to the training, used T-groups to address interpersonal
behavior of one of these participants, that partici- problems at work and to change the culture of
pant became agitated and declared that the scien- their organizations. Because group members were
tists’ view of her group’s interactions was not also coworkers, dynamics of the interactions would
correct, and she commenced to offer her own per- often have long-term positive and/or negative
ceptions. Later in the discussion, the same hap- effects in the work environment. Finally, personal
pened with one of the other participants—she, expression groups focused on personal growth and
too, had a different perception of what had development, including the examination of per-
occurred within the group that day. At the end of sonal beliefs, biases, and prejudices. With the shift
the discussion, the three trainees asked if they away from a focus on dynamic group learning,
could come back the next night for the discussion personal expression groups came to be known as
of that day’s training events. The next night all 50 sensitivity training groups. Encounter groups, a
of the trainees came, and they all continued to type of sensitivity training group that gained popu-
come back every night of the training. According larity in the late 1960s, are sensitivity training
to Lippitt, this feedback and process review ses- groups that allow group members opportunities to
sion became the most significant training event of have interpersonally intimate experiences with
the workshop. other group members. These latter two terms are
This account of the emergence of the sensitivity often used synonymously in the literature.
training group is compatible with Lewin’s three-
stage model of group decision making:
Goals and Format
(1) Unfreezing occurs when the participant has a
basic attitude, belief, or behavior disconfirmed or The goals of sensitivity training groups are to
called into question; (2) moving occurs when the help participants develop sensitivity to and aware-
participant feels safe and secure and uses informa- ness of their own feelings and reactions, to
tion obtained from the group’s feedback to arrive increase their understanding of group interac-
at new attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors; and tions, and to help them learn to modify their
(3) freezing reflects the extent to which the new behavior. These goals include specifics such as
changes are internalized. According to Kurt Back, increasing one’s awareness of one’s own feelings
the training group (T-group) provided a new in the here and now, increasing one’s ability to
method for unfreezing a group, and the strong give and receive feedback, increasing one’s ability
interactions and emotions that came with feedback to learn from experiences, increasing one’s under-
were a sign of accomplishing this change. standing of the impact of one’s behavior on other
At the time of their inception in the 1940s, people, and increasing one’s ability to manage
T-groups focused on teaching U.S. communities and use conflict.
Sensitivity Training Groups 743

To accomplish these goals, sensitivity training to patch up sources of conflict and tension from
groups do not focus on discussion of a particular earlier training sessions.
topic, the presentation of information, or problem Some researchers believe that the disconfirma-
solving but rather on the process of the group’s tion of a participant’s beliefs creates a motivation
interactions, such as the feelings of group partici- or “felt need” to learn, that the acceptance or sup-
pants and the communication of those feelings. port offered by the group creates the climate in
Participants’ concerns about issues such as inti- which the participant can change, and that these
macy, authority, and inclusion or exclusion in the paradoxical stances are essential for effective
group come to the surface and become the content learning in sensitivity training groups. The groups
and work of the group. thus provide a testing ground for group members
The format most commonly used for sensitivity to “try on” new behaviors, attitudes, and beliefs.
training is a group consisting of 7 to 12 people
who meet together with a group leader on an out-
Points of Debate
patient basis once a week for a specified time.
However, marathon groups meet continuously for Sensitivity training has been controversial because
lengthy periods, such as 12 to 24 hours, providing of suggestions that participants could suffer emo-
a highly intense experience without interruptions. tional harm that would render the training method
The leader of the group is referred to as the trainer unethical. For example, the group may promote
but is more of a facilitator than an expert or exposure, frankness, or even attacks within the
teacher, helping the group make its own decisions group that participants would not normally engage
and maximize its resources. in or be exposed to in their lives outside the group.
In general, these groups are highly experiential, Such experiences might have undesirable enduring
including activities such as discussions, games, and consequences for participants.
exercises that produce high levels of involvement Furthermore, despite some researchers’ firm
by participants, thereby producing increased learn- beliefs that confrontation or disconfirmation of a
ing. Although experiential, groups are relatively participant’s basic feelings, attitudes, or behavior is
unstructured; indeed, the group itself is account- necessary for change to occur, research does not
able for developing the structure, and in this pro- support this belief. Favorable outcomes have also
cess, interpersonal styles and habits of the been reported by participants who received only
participants become evident. Participants who are support from the group, allowing them to feel safe
self-centered, manipulative, rebellious, or pacify- or accepted. These findings provide an invitation to
ing, or who continue to remain disengaged, reveal current sensitivity training group leaders to elimi-
themselves, and the group gives them feedback on nate controversial confrontational methods and
their behavior. replace them with those that would provide more
This process takes on predictable developmen- support of group members. Doing so would allow
tal stages. These stages are given various names leaders to facilitate personal growth in group mem-
throughout the literature, but their descriptions bers without the risk of harming them emotionally.
are the same: (a) initial encounter describes the There are two other main points of debate in
beginning of the group, when participants are cau- the literature. First, there is concern about the
tious about exchanging personal material; moral implications that this type of encounter may
(b) interpersonal confrontation describes the work have for an individual and for the community at
stage, in which the focus of the group is directed to large. Within sensitivity training groups, standards
individual members and there is substantial nega- and norms are relative: They are determined in situ
tive feedback and/or invalidation of participants’ by the group and hinge on a basic assumption that
personal beliefs, which provides participants with the group should be trusted. Organizations that
an opportunity to reconstruct their beliefs and/or believe in universal moral standards or absolutes,
expectations of others; and (c) mutual acceptance such as some churches, do not support the use of
refers to the concluding phase, when the work has sensitivity training groups.
lessened, participant relationships become more Second, findings from research examining the
relaxed and positive, and participants make efforts effectiveness of sensitivity training are mixed. In
744 Sexism

some studies, participation in sensitivity training longer exists, the personal growth movement con-
groups has been shown to change behavior. tinues with widespread fervor in other formats,
However, there is a question about the persistence and many companies, such as Momentus and the
of these changes over time. Also, some research Great Life Foundation, offer intrapersonal training
suggests possible negative outcomes for some par- based on LifeSpring. There are also groups that
ticipants. Furthermore, in hospital settings, research have a greater focus on interpersonal training,
found that social skills groups that focused on such as Conscious Loving and Living, developed
learning appropriate behaviors and eliminating by Gay and Kathlyn Hendricks. The ongoing
inappropriate behaviors through the use of behav- popularity of these programs provides contempo-
ioral techniques such as rehearsal, feedback, and rary evidence of the personal value participants
modeling fared significantly better than sensitivity place on this type of training.
training groups did in producing changes in their
participants. Gary M. Burlingame and
Research on sensitivity training groups has Debra Theobald McClendon
largely faded. One reason is that although such
See also Cooperation and Competition; Group Learning;
groups were originally associated with basic labo-
Lewin, Kurt
ratory-based psychology, these groups now have a
very successful life of their own outside scientific
psychology. Sensitivity training is now largely a Further Readings
clinical and applied discipline. With no identifiable Back, K. W. (1972). Beyond words: The story of
basic social science discipline to call their own, sensitivity training and the encounter movement. New
sensitivity training groups have few norms for per- York: Russell Sage.
formance or evaluation. Back, K. W. (1978). The search for community:
Encounter groups and social change. Boulder, CO:
Current Status Westview.
Golembiewski, R. T., & Blumberg, A. (Eds.). (1977).
Concerns and research issues led to a virtual extinc- Sensitivity training and the laboratory approach:
tion of sensitivity training groups as they had Readings about concepts and applications (3rd ed).
existed in the 1960s and early 1970s. For example, Istasca, IL: F. E. Peacock.
in the early years, sensitivity training groups and Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving social conflicts. New York:
human relations training were the focus of many Harper & Row.
books and were included in psychotherapy litera- Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. New
ture reviews, yet in current publications it is diffi- York: Harper & Brothers.
cult to find mention of either of these topics in Miner, J. B. (2005). Organizational behavior: Essential
other than a historical sense. However, as reported theories of motivation and leadership. Armonk, NY:
by John Beck, many sensitivity training group par- M. E. Sharp.
ticipants reported highly fulfilling experiences, in
addition to expressing positive sentiments of excite-
ment, involvement, enjoyment, and fun.
In the 1970s, efforts were made to develop Sexism
training programs to address the continued inter-
est of participants through widely marketed for- Sexism refers to attitudes and behaviors based on
profit companies. For example, the company sex stereotypes, or cultural assumptions attached
LifeSpring, founded in 1974 by John Hanley, used to being male or being female that disadvantage
Large Group Awareness Training to present train- and discriminate against individuals on the basis
ing in a seminar format but split participants up of sex. Central to sexism are beliefs that men and
into dyads to accomplish the small-group training women have inherently and essentially different
experiences and goals of the earlier groups. By traits. Manifested in socialization, interactions,
1989, more than 300,000 participants had enrolled and institutions, these beliefs maintain differences
in these seminars. Although the company no between men and women, affecting individuals in
Sexism 745

many different ways. This entry begins by review- because it implies that it is more acceptable for
ing common stereotypes based on gender, then women to partake in male-typed activities but less
examines the consequences for women, and briefly acceptable for men to exhibit feminine behaviors.
summarizes discrimination against men. The early socialization of gender beliefs can
significantly constrain perceptions of self-compe-
tence. For instance, research finds that given the
Sex Stereotypes
cultural belief that boys are better at mathematics
Studies find that widely held gender beliefs exist in than girls are, parents often attribute boys’ suc-
the United States. In general, these beliefs hold that cesses in mathematics to talent but girls’ successes
women are more communal and men are more in mathematics to effort. Such attribution bias can
agentic. Accordingly, women are often believed to lead to feelings of competence among boys and
be more competent at tasks that are characterized feelings of incompetence among girls, even if the
as more expressive and socioemotional in nature two groups do not objectively differ in their actual
(e.g., nurturing and caring for others), while men performance in mathematics. Thus, sex stereotypes
are believed to be more competent at tasks that are can prevent and discourage girls from pursuing a
more instrumental in nature (e.g., starting a busi- male-dominated field even if they are as competent
ness). In addition to these specific assumptions, as the male sex in that field. Indeed, a number of
men are considered to be generally more status studies find that, when exposed to the belief that
worthy and more competent at tasks that “count.” men are more competent than women at a task,
Because communal tasks are often devalued, men develop not only higher ratings of self-compe-
women are usually seen as less competent than tence in that task but also higher aspirations to
men, although they are generally considered the work in a field related to that task, even if there is
“nicer” sex. no actual gender difference in competence. One
Sex stereotypes are pervasive in that they are implication, then, is that sex stereotypes can help
learned during childhood and maintained through- explain the persistent segregation of men and
out the life course. From an early age, children women in different fields of study, occupations,
learn that sex is a significant attribute of self and and jobs.
that being female is supposedly different from being Aside from early socialization, sex stereotypes
male. To make sense of this difference, children are maintained in interactions throughout the life
often imitate behaviors of their same-sex parent, course. In this light, two theories in social psychol-
and parents may in turn encourage gender-appro- ogy, status characteristics theory and expectation
priate behaviors through endorsing gender-specific states theory, provide useful frameworks for under-
hobbies (e.g., cooking for girls and sports for boys), standing the mechanisms by which gender beliefs
rewarding gender-typical acts (e.g., girls behaving are created and upheld.
well and boys being assertive), and punishing or According to status characteristics theory, an
discouraging gender-atypical acts (e.g., girls acting attribute is a status characteristic when cultural
aggressively and boys playing with dolls). beliefs attach a greater value and competence to
In addition, in childhood and adolescence, one category of the attribute than another. Gender
teachers and peers may help reinforce not only the is therefore a status characteristic in that cultural
notion that women and men are different but also beliefs denote not only sex differences in general
the belief that men are more status worthy than levels of competence (thus making gender a diffuse
women. Within the classroom, teachers may sub- status characteristic) but also sex differences in
consciously pay more attention to boys, thereby specific types of competence (thus making gender
creating a heightened sense of superiority and a specific status characteristic). The beliefs attached
importance among the male students. Outside the to the different categories of gender, in turn, have
classroom, peers may ostracize both girls who are implications for how individuals see and act
tomboys and boys who “act like girls,” but such toward one another in social relations.
stigmatization is often harsher on boys than on According to expectation states theory, cultural
girls. The differential sanctioning of gender-deviant beliefs attached to a status characteristic translate
behavior is hence suggestive of men’s higher status into performance expectations and ultimately
746 Sexism

behaviors when the status characteristic is salient in Consequences of Sexism


the particular social relational context. Specifically,
Sex stereotypes thus affect not only individual
in collective, task-oriented situations, to the extent
behaviors and social relations but also larger social
that a status characteristic is related to the task
structures. In particular, research suggests that
outcome, the stereotypes associated with that status
gender inequality in the labor market can be at
characteristic shape expectations that actors form
least partly explained by discrimination based on
for themselves and others. What this theory pre-
sex stereotypes. It is important to note, however,
dicts, then, is that in situations in which gender is
that sex stereotypes often emerge in subtle and
salient, sex stereotypes will influence what individ-
nonconscious ways. Gender beliefs emerge in
uals expect from one another. Congruent with this
social relations through the process of sex catego-
prediction, experimental research in mixed-sex set-
rization, that is, the labeling of self and others as
tings finds that men have an advantage over women
either male or female. Studies in cognitive psychol-
in task behaviors (e.g., visual dominance, assertive
ogy suggest that sex categorization often occurs
gestures) when given a masculine task or a gender-
automatically and unconsciously; that is, sex is one
neutral task, whereas women have an advantage
of the first categories with which individuals sort
over men when given a feminine task.
and make sense of self and others. As categoriza-
The resulting implication is that in interactions
tion inherently exaggerates differences between
in which gender is salient, individuals expect
groups and minimizes differences within groups,
others to treat them in ways that are consistent
sex categorization activates ingroup preferences as
with widely held gender belief. That is, men and
well as sex stereotypes, thereby distorting and
women are better at different tasks, but men are
biasing perceptions and evaluations of others.
generally more competent than women. Behaviors
then follow expectations in self-fulfilling ways:
Workplace Discrimination
Men are given more opportunities to act and
more positive feedback when they are presumed Men tend to be predominant in the workplace,
to be more competent at the task, whereas women and this can be disadvantageous to women. As
take the dominant role when the task is consid- individuals in powerful positions are often male,
ered a feminine one. ingroup preferences can result in the favoring of
The maintenance of sex stereotypes in interac- men over women in hiring and promotion prac-
tions thus reinforces and legitimates the belief that tices. Furthermore, widespread beliefs about gen-
men and women are different. This belief can serve der and competence can lead not only to the
as a basis of discrimination, especially in situations placement of men and women into different jobs
in which individuals enter a group or position that but also to the placement of men in higher posi-
is dominated by the other sex. In particular, tions and women in lower positions. Given the
research finds that women in traditionally male- assumption that men are generally more compe-
dominated work settings (e.g., engineering) or tent than women, employers may also credit men
positions (e.g., CEOs) often face a double bind: more often for their successes, leaving women with
Whereas their work requires them to be agentic less recognition for their achievements.
and aggressive, they are also expected to be com- Although they are subtle, acts of nonconscious
munal and warm. As the requisite behavior contra- discrimination can over time accumulate into real
dicts gendered expectations, women in these advantages and disadvantages. Discrimination
situations often experience a backlash, as they are based on sex, however, can also occur in other
seen as too aggressive, unfriendly, and therefore ways. Related to gendered assumptions about
deviant from the way others believe they should competence are gendered assumptions about men’s
be. As a result, women looking to work in custom- and women’s roles in the family. Though women’s
arily male occupations or jobs may be less favor- participation in the labor force has increased,
ably considered or evaluated, and their legitimacy women are still seen as wives and mothers before
may be questioned. This, in turn, can disadvantage they are workers and providers, whereas men are
women in their career choices, advancement, and seen as workers and providers before they are hus-
mobility. bands and fathers. The persistent assignment of
Sexism 747

the nurturing role to women and the provider role behavior can come from authority figures (e.g.,
to men can lead not only to increased work–family teachers or employers) as well as peers (e.g., class-
conflicts for women but also to discrimination mates or coworkers) and often involves disparage-
against mothers in the workplace. Like gender, ment or disapproval of a certain sex based on
motherhood can be seen as a status characteristic beliefs about that sex. For instance, research finds
with its own set of stereotypes. In particular, it is that women studying or working in customarily
often assumed that mothers are less competent and male fields often encounter sexist remarks that
less committed to work, given their primary child- question women’s abilities (e.g., women’s manage-
bearing and childrearing responsibilities. Given ment skills), imply their inappropriateness for
this belief, employers may see mothers as less studying or working in those fields (e.g., calling
hirable and less promotable, in turn disadvantag- law “a man’s game”), and maintain their differ-
ing mothers in their workplace pursuits. This belief ence from their male counterparts (e.g., the doctor
can also affect women who are not mothers, vs. the “lady doctor”). Such experiences with sex-
because employers often assume that most women ual harassment can lower women’s satisfaction
will become mothers. with their work, elevate their levels of stress, and
Discrimination based on motherhood therefore increase their likelihood of changing their aca-
constitutes another barrier for women in the labor demic or career plans.
market. Indeed, recent research indicates a wage In addition to discriminatory behaviors, sexist
penalty for motherhood, suggesting that employer beliefs may be embedded within institutions in
discrimination against mothers can be one reason more direct ways. One example is the devaluation
for the depression of women’s earnings. Furthermore, of women’s work. It is widely documented that
studies suggest that employers could also “statisti- there is a wage penalty for working in occupations
cally” discriminate. According to this perspective, that are female dominated. That is, controlling for
employers are seen as profit-maximizing actors occupational characteristics and occupational
who use sex stereotypes as a means to screen appli- demands, female-dominated occupations tend to
cants with respect to work productivity and com- pay less than male-dominated occupations. Re­­
mitment to work. As mentioned earlier, given the search further finds that there is a wage penalty
cultural assignment of domestic responsibilities to associated with nurturance. That is, jobs that
women, employers often assume that women are require nurturing skills pay less. Given that nurtur-
less productive, less committed to work, and more ance is a trait usually linked to women, these find-
likely to quit than men are. As such, hiring or pro- ings imply that occupations are valued in ways
moting female workers poses significant risks and that are consistent with the stereotype that men’s
high costs, and employers may accordingly not hire abilities, and hence tasks associated with men are
women or not promote women, or they may allo- worth more than women’s abilities and feminine-
cate women to lower positions with lower turnover typed tasks. Thus, as much as the gender gap in
costs. In this sense, although employers may believe pay may be due to discrimination against women,
that they are making rational decisions, their it may also be due to systematic gender bias in the
actions may nonetheless constitute discrimination compensation structures in the labor market.
based on inaccurate beliefs. Knowledge-producing institutions are also not
impervious to gender beliefs. Up until the mid-
20th century, most academic research focused
Other Outcomes
largely on men in both methodology (e.g., study-
In general, employer discrimination based on ing only men) and scope (e.g., studying only
sex stereotypes occurs in fairly subtle and covert men’s issues). Interpretations of research findings
ways. However, sex stereotypes can emerge in a also favored men and reinforced sex stereotypes.
more overt manner through sexual harassment. As an example, the finding that men and women
Broadly, sexual harassment refers to unwelcome have different brain sizes was interpreted as evi-
verbal or physical behavior of a sexual nature dence for actual gender differences in competence.
directed at a person or group in institutional set- Since then, women have increased their participa-
tings such as education or the workplace. Such tion in research, and studies including women
748 Sexism

have likewise expanded. However, it remains true regarding sexism against men, or reverse sexism.
that women’s issues are often marginalized or In this perspective, widely held gender beliefs are
neglected. Men continue to be seen as the stan- seen as disadvantageous not only to women but
dard for the typical human subject in research, also to men. A recent example is a court suit filed
and findings continue to compare women against by a male high school student against his school,
an implicit male norm rather than assess gender claiming that schools are designed to disadvantage
differences on equal grounds. Further, though boys in that they reward behaviors more often
most studies now incorporate both men and expected from girls (e.g., compliance) while pun-
women in their research methods, findings regard- ishing behaviors more often expected from boys
ing gender differences are not always discussed or (e.g., rebelliousness).
applied in the real world. Gender bias hence exists Discrimination against men, however, has been
even in institutions where objectivity is the ideal, documented in more than the educational setting.
and given that these institutions are linked to the In the criminal justice system, the gender gap in
production of knowledge, such bias may result in conviction and imprisonment rates may partly
the further reproduction of sex stereotypes. reflect the stereotype that men are more aggressive
It has also been argued that there is a general and therefore more capable of violent crimes.
lack of gender sensitivity in social institutions. Specifically, some research finds that although
Research on professional education (e.g., medical men and women are equally likely to initiate vio-
school and law school), for one, finds little inclu- lence, women are less often charged with domestic
sion and little discussion of gender issues in the abuse than men are because of the belief that
classroom and in educational texts. The marginal- women are less aggressive and therefore less capa-
ization of gender not only can result in a lack of ble of abusive acts. Bias against men has also been
gender awareness but also can leave individuals documented in the legal system. In family court,
unprepared for gendered experiences in later career fathers are much less likely than mothers to obtain
practices. Likewise, at the workplace, gender child custody in divorce cases. Possibly this reflects
insensitivity can go beyond sexual harassment in the stereotype that women are more nurturing and
that characteristics that are considered inherent in therefore better parents than men are.
jobs may be laden with gendered connotations. In Discrimination in the labor market can also be
some cases, gender-specific job titles (e.g., steward- directed at men. Just as women in male-dominated
ess) may be used to imply the gender-appropriate- occupations face significant gender bias at the work-
ness of different types of work, and specific job place, men who wish to pursue female-dominated
requirements (e.g., heavy lifting) may be used to occupations (e.g., nursing, elementary school teach-
favor a particular gender in hiring and promo- ing) find themselves discriminated against by others,
tions. Moreover, despite legal sanctions against who label these men as effeminate, weak, and pas-
blatant discrimination based on sex, the underre- sive. The overarching sentiment is that these men
porting of sexual harassment and the lack of inter- are not only acting inappropriately against norms of
vention and resolution for cases that are reported masculinity but are also stepping down in status by
indicate a need for effective policies and stronger pursuing female-typed work. As sanctions for gen-
enforcement of policies. Similarly, despite the der-deviant behaviors are usually harsher on men
prevalence of work–family conflicts, there remains than on women, such discrimination can strongly
a dearth of family-friendly policies at the work- discourage men from pursuing female occupations,
place. The lack of discussion and action regarding thereby contributing to men’s dramatic underrepre-
the work–family balance can be particularly disad- sentation in female-dominant fields.
vantageous to women because most women shoul- Even men who choose to pursue and work in
der the bulk of domestic responsibilities. female-dominant occupations face discrimination
from those within. The nature and consequences
of such discrimination, however, could be seen in
Sexism Against Men
a positive light. In particular, because of the
Although the term sexism is generally applied to assumption that men are generally more compe-
the treatment of women, there is recent discourse tent than women are, specifically at instrumental
Sexual Harassment 749

tasks, men in female occupations are often encour- The term sexual harassment entered public
aged to “move up” into higher-paying administra- consciousness during the second wave of the
tive positions (e.g., head nurse, school principal). feminist movement, in the 1960s and 1970s, and
This is a sharp contrast to women’s experiences in attention to the problem of sexual harassment was
male-dominated occupations, in which they face raised further after the 1979 publication of
backlash and hence difficulty in moving up the lad- Catherine MacKinnon’s groundbreaking book,
der. Thus, whereas women in male occupations Sexual Harassment of Working Women. Since that
face a glass ceiling, men in female occupations face time, social psychologists, sociologists, and other
a glass escalator that ultimately leads to better scholars have developed a large literature on the
career outcomes. However, while these are consid- topic, and legal protections against sexual harass-
ered positive outcomes, men may not necessarily ment have been enacted and increasingly expanded.
intend or desire them, even though they may none- Sexual harassment shapes intergroup relations at
theless take positions in higher ranks. school and work and highlights how various dimen-
sions of power such as gender and age shape experi-
Manwai C. Ku ences within these important social institutions.
This entry reports sexual harassment prevalence
See also Ambivalent Sexism; Discrimination; Feminism;
Gender and Behavior; Gender Roles; Modern Sexism; rates, outlines the two major types of sexual
Prejudice; Sexual Harassment; Stereotyping harassment covered under U.S. law, and then
describes social scientific explanations for sexual
harassment.
Further Readings
Prevalence and Reporting
Correll, S. J. (2004). Constraints into preferences: Gender,
status, and emerging career aspirations. American The experience of sexual harassment is not limited
Sociological Review, 69, 93–113. to one age or gender. Studies show that women
Reskin, B. F. (2002). Rethinking employment and men of all ages may be subjected to sexual
discrimination. In M. F. Guillen, R. Collins, harassment. As many as 70% of women and 45%
P. England, & M. Meyers (Eds.), The new economic of men have experienced sexual harassment in the
sociology: Developments in an emerging field workplace, while up to 80% of students in Grades
(pp. 218–244). New York: Russell Sage. 8 through 11 and 65% percent of college students
Ridgeway, C. L., & Correll, S. J. (2004). Unpacking the say they have been sexually harassed. Even so,
gender system: A theoretical perspective on cultural many experts believe that sexual harassment
beliefs and social relations. Gender & Society, 18, remains underreported. Those who experience
510–531. harassment may be reluctant to report it because
Williams, C. L. (1992). The glass escalator: Hidden
of concerns about possible retaliation such as
advantages for men in the female professions. Social
demotion, job loss, or stigmatization.
Problems, 39, 253–267.
Indeed, research has shown that targets of sexual
harassment may face such consequences as a result
of reporting harassment. Oftentimes harassers hold
Sexual Harassment some power over their targets, making reporting
potentially even more difficult. Although sexual
harassment is sometimes popularly represented as
Most legal and scholarly definitions of sexual the result of some misunderstanding or overreac-
harassment refer to any form of unwanted sexual tion, research shows that it is in fact a powerful
attention that occurs at work or in school. tactic used by some individuals to exert power over
Sexual harassment may include, among other others through sexual intimidation tactics.
behaviors, unwanted touching, exposure to offen-
sive materials, offensive joking, or demands for
Types of Sexual Harassment
sexual favors. In the view of many scholars and
activists, sexual harassment is best conceived of as In the United States, two forms of sexual harass-
a form of sexual violence. ment are recognized under the law. The first, quid
750 Sexual Harassment

pro quo or “something for something,” refers to a gendered expression of power used to regulate
instances when sexual demands are made, or and modify gendered behavior within the social
threatened to become, a condition of or basis for institutions of school and work. In particular,
employment or school-related decisions such as because it exists within the present cultural context
grades or access to school activities. This type of in which masculinity is valued over femininity,
harassment is usually directed at a subordinate by sexual harassment may be used to assert men’s
a person of power within an organization. dominance over women, as in the case of male-on-
The second type of sexual harassment, hostile female harassment. Social scientists have found that
environment, can occur among individuals who organizational settings where women work in occu-
have the same amount of power within an organi- pations traditionally thought to be men’s domain
zation or among those of different statuses. Hostile may be especially likely locations where sexual
environment harassment refers to the existence of harassment occurs. Public awareness of such orga-
sexual conduct or materials in the workplace that nizational cultures has increased in part because of
unreasonably interfere with a person’s ability to recently popular films such as North Country.
perform her or his job or school tasks or when Sexual harassment may also be used to force
such conduct creates a hostile, intimidating, or individuals to adhere to mainstream gender norms.
offensive working or learning environment. In For example, men who do not adhere to masculin-
most cases, a pattern of unwelcome sexual conduct ity norms associated with power, dominance, and
must typically be shown in order to qualify as hos- heterosexuality may be subject to sexual harass-
tile work environment harassment. On very rare ment. Men with egalitarian gender views and those
occasions, a single incident may qualify as hostile who do not adhere to masculine norms for self-
work environment harassment if the event is par- presentation, perhaps by wearing earrings or
ticularly severe. dressing in other ways considered feminine, have
Since the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Meritor also been found to be more likely than other men
Savings Bank v. Vinson in 1986, employees have to experience harassment.
been protected from sexual harassment under Title In addition to gender, dimensions of power such
VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Students in edu- as age, social class, and sexuality have been linked
cational programs and activities that receive fed- to instances of and explanations for sexual harass-
eral funding are protected under Title IX of the ment. Young people tend to be in positions at
Education Amendments of 1972. Most sexual school and work in which older individuals wield
harassment complaints fall under the category of power over them. Research has shown that young
hostile environment harassment. workers specifically may be more vulnerable to
A recent legal trend in the United States is that sexual harassment than their older counterparts
courts have begun to recognize and apply sexual because their lack of experience in the workplace
harassment protections in same-sex cases in addi- tends to coincide with a general lack of knowledge
tion to more typical male-on-female harassment about workplace rights and appropriate workplace
cases. For example, in the 1997 case of Doe v. interactions. Workers and students from disadvan-
Belleville, a federal appellate court considered the taged social class positions may also be more vul-
case of a young man who was physically harassed nerable to sexual harassment. In the workplace
and threatened with sexual assault by his male particularly, those from lower social classes may be
coworkers, and in 1998 the U.S. Supreme Court less willing or able to leave harassing job situations.
considered a case (Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Finally, research shows that lesbian, gay, bisexual,
Services) in which a man was subjected to numer- and transgendered individuals are more likely to
ous sexual humiliations, attacks, and threats of experience sexual harassment than are others.
rape by male coworkers. Thus, sexual identity is yet another dimension of
power that shapes sexual harassment experiences.
It is important to note that gender, age, sexuality,
Explanations for Sexual Harassment
and social class are not simply individual character-
At its core, sexual harassment is about power. More istics. Instead, these dimensions of power are imbued
specifically, research shows that sexual harassment is throughout organizations and social institutions
Shared Mental Models 751

and therefore shape experiences of and responses During the late 1980s, interest in team perfor-
to sexual harassment in schools and workplaces. mance increased dramatically, due in part to sev-
In sum, multiple dimensions of power operate eral well-publicized incidents that were attributed
together to form the context of group processes to faulty teamwork (e.g., the downing of a com-
and intergroup relations. Sexual harassment is an mercial airliner by the Navy’s USS Vincennes, the
expression of power to which a range of individu- close call at the Three Mile Island nuclear energy
als may be subject and that occurs within a variety plant, and an Air Florida crash in Washington,
of social contexts and institutions. D.C.). Given the urgent need to understand and
improve the performance of such critical teams,
Amy Blackstone researchers extended the construct of mental mod-
els to teams. Most notably, Jan Cannon-Bowers
See also Affirmative Action; Discrimination; Feminism;
Gender and Behavior; Gender Roles; Power; Prejudice; and her colleagues began to analyze shared mental
Sexism; Stereotyping model—knowledge that is common or shared
among team members. Shared mental models
allow team members not only to understand their
Further Readings own work requirements but also to predict the
needs and actions of their teammates. When accu-
Gruber, J. E., & Morgan, P. (Eds.). (2005). In the
rate, these predictions should lead to better coordi-
company of men: Male dominance and sexual
nation and thus better teamwork.
harassment. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
Good examples of shared metal models are
Hill, C., & Silva, E. (2005). Drawing the line: Sexual
harassment on campus. Washington, DC: American
often seen in sports teams. Take basketball, for
Association of University Women Educational example. One player passing the ball to a second
Foundation. player without looking is called a blind or no-look
MacKinnon, C. (1979). Sexual harassment of working pass. In analyzing this skill, we have to assume that
women: A case of sex discrimination. New Haven, the player who passes the ball is predicting that his
CT: Yale University Press. or her teammate will be in a position to catch it (or
Welsh, S. (1999). Gender and sexual harassment. Annual else the pass would not be made). By the same
Review of Sociology, 25, 169–190. token, the player receiving the pass is likely to have
Zippel, K. S. (2006). The politics of sexual harassment: A put himself or herself in a position to catch the
comparative study of the United States, the European ball. At a minimum, he or she is probably not
Union, and Germany. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge caught completely off guard by the pass. This case
University Press. illustrates how two team members are coordinat-
ing implicitly (without communicating) and dem-
onstrates the use of shared mental models.
Researchers have described four types of mental
Shared Mental Models models that might be shared among group mem-
bers and thereby improve the group’s performance.
When it comes to the interaction between humans Each model contains different types of information
and machines, it is clear that people develop an about the task and the team.
understanding of how machinery works. This
understanding, or mental model, guides how the 1. A task model includes the overall goals and
individual interacts with machines. Cognitive psy- requirements of the task, task strategies, and
chologist Philip Johnson-Laird used this term to parameters that circumscribe and limit the task.
describe a reasoning process that could be applied
2. A team interaction model includes the roles and
to practical problems. He argued that mental mod-
responsibilities of individual members and the
els help people draw conclusions about how things
group’s understanding of interaction
work, deduce the relationship between units, and
requirements.
predict outcomes. The notion of mental models
has since been widely used to describe internal 3. A team model includes team members’
cognitive representations of complex systems. understanding of one another’s knowledge,
752 Shared Mental Models

skills, abilities, preferences, strengths, members. Hence, researchers are forced to infer
weaknesses, personal styles, and so on. the existence of shared mental models from team
members’ questionnaire responses or from obser-
4. An equipment model includes a shared
vations of a team’s performance. Both techniques
understanding of the use of available equipment
are imprecise and have been the subject of some
in accomplishing the task and of how the
criticism. For this reason, efforts to improve them
performance of various team members needs to
continue.
be coordinated to be successful.
In one popular method to assess shared mental
models, task experts are first asked to generate a list
So, for example, if team members have different
of important concepts related to performance of
task models, then they may approach the task dif-
the task at hand, including the steps that must be
ferently and have trouble coordinating their
taken to complete the task. This list of concepts is
actions. By the same token, if team members have
then given to another set of experts, who are asked
different ideas about how they are supposed to
to rate how similar each concept is to each of the
interact (team interaction models), they will prob-
others. Sometimes this is done by printing each
ably run into difficulties. When team models are
concept on an index card and asking experts to sort
not shared, team members will not have a good
them into related piles (card sorting). The goal is to
sense of one another and can make bad assump-
figure out the relatedness among concepts. These
tions about what teammates need or are likely to
data are fed into statistical packages (e.g., Pathfinder)
do. Taking the basketball example, even highly
that produce an overall “map” of the experts’ men-
skilled players can fail when they are not familiar
tal models. To assess the sharedness of mental
with each other. Several Olympic “dream teams”
models among team members, each team member
have suffered this fate. Finally, in situations in
is asked to do the same concept-sorting task, and
which the team interacts with complex equipment,
the software calculates how similar the representa-
different equipment models can hinder coordina-
tions (maps) are among team members.
tion (a cockpit crew is a good example).
Although methods such as this are widely used,
Although there is much agreement among ana-
focusing only on the similarity of knowledge
lysts about the existence of shared mental models,
among team members may be misguided. Some
there is still much debate about exactly how to
suggest that it is important to assess the accuracy
define them. For example, some have interpreted
of these models as well. For example, if team mem-
the term shared to mean knowledge, implying that
bers have a highly shared mental model of a situa-
team members need to hold identical models.
tion, but that mental model is incorrect, then they
However, this interpretation is not completely
will all be wrong (and likely fail). Obviously, both
accurate. For example, it is clear that surgical teams
sharedness and accuracy are likely to be factors in
must coordinate their actions, but individual team
performance.
members certainly do not have identical knowl-
edge. Instead, each team member brings his or her
own unique set of knowledge and skills to bear. So Empirical Research
it is more reasonable to conclude that some portion on Shared Mental Models
of the individual members’ mental models must be
As noted, research on shared mental models has
shared to ensure coordinated performance.
progressed rather slowly. Most research has
focused on establishing the relationship between
Measuring Shared Mental Models
shared mental models and team performance. For
Empirical research on shared mental models has the most part, a small to moderate positive rela-
lagged far behind theoretical analyses of them. tionship has been found. Moreover, the accuracy
This gap may be attributed, in part, to the diffi- of team mental models explains a significant
culty in measuring this rather elusive construct. amount of variance in performance when added to
Obviously, there are no direct measures of mental the similarity of models as a predictor.
models or shared mental models, because both are Other researchers have investigated training
cognitive processes that occur in the minds of team approaches that might help create shared mental
Sherif, Muzafer 753

models within teams. At least three approaches See also Group Mind; Group Performance; Socially
have been proposed. The first of these is cross Shared Cognition; Team Performance Assessment;
training, in which team members are allowed to Teams; Transactive Memory Systems
experience the roles of their teammates. The
rationale here is that if team members play one
Further Readings
another’s roles, then they will have a much better
appreciation of how to support one another later Cannon-Bowers, J., Salas, E., & Converse, S. (1993).
on. Researchers have demonstrated that this is Shared mental models in expert team decision making.
indeed a promising approach. However, there In N. J. J. Castellan (Ed.), Individual and group
have also been some negative results, so more decision making: Current issues (pp. 221–246).
work is needed. A second approach is interposi- Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
tional knowledge training. This entails training Johnson-Laird, P. (1983). Mental models: Towards a
team members directly in the roles and responsi- cognitive science of language, inference, and
bilities of their teammates. This approach has consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
undergone little research (although what exists is Press.
encouraging) and thus requires further attention. Mohammed, S., Klimoski, R., & Rentsch, J. (2000). The
The third approach is team self-correction train- measurement of team mental models: We have no
shared schema. Organizational Research Methods,
ing. This approach emphasizes intrateam feed-
3(2), 123–165.
back skills that help team members refine their
Thorsden, M. L., & Klein, G. A. (1989). Cognitive
mental models following performance. For exam-
processes of the team mind. Proceedings of the IEEE
ple, this kind of intrateam debriefing often occurs
Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 46–49.
in softball teams (frequently in a bar after the Yoo, Y., & Kanawattanachai, P. (2001). Development of
game): Team members recall individual plays transactive memory systems and collective mind in
from the game and discuss ways they could have virtual teams. International Journal of Organizational
handled things better. These exchanges are natu- Analysis, 9(2), 187–208.
ral mechanisms that teams use to try to improve
their performance. To date, however, few studies
have been done to assess the utility of such
exchanges. Sherif, Muzafer
(1906–1988)
Future Directions in
Shared Mental Models Research Few can match the impact that Muzafer Sherif
Several challenges exist in fully understanding the had on social psychology in the mid-20th century.
nature and development of shared mental models. His interests were wide ranging, including the
Recent critiques have suggested that the concept of self, social judgment, communication, reference
shared mental models is too limited to clarify the groups, and attitude formation and change. But
role of cognition in team performance and that his most influential work was his early research
issues such as the accuracy of shared mental mod- on social norms and perception in the mid-1930s
els need further exploration. From the empirical and his intergroup relations experiments carried
perspective, there is a need for more research on out some 20  years later. The latter experiments
shared mental models. Relatively little is known provided the basis for his realistic conflict theory.
about how these models evolve, what they should It is his work on these two topics, based on an
contain, or how to improve them. For example, a innovative use of the experimental method, that
recent statistical review of team training found had major impact on both theory and research in
only seven empirical studies that evaluated the social psychology. The common threads in his
effectiveness of training approaches thought to work were the ways that attitudes, internalized
improve shared mental models. norms, and aspects of the self provide people with
a frame of reference and anchor the way that they
Jan Cannon-Bowers and Clint Bowers perceive, judge, and think.
754 Sherif, Muzafer

Sherif’s Personal and Intellectual History received a number of prestigious awards and hon-
ors throughout his distinguished career.
According to the historian Gardner Murphy, who
also supervised Sherif’s PhD dissertation, social
psychology in the 1930s saw the disparate contri- Sherif’s Major Contributions
butions of F. C. Bartlett’s studies of (socially trans-
Social Norms
mitted) remembering, the German school of Gestalt
psychology, and Kurt Lewin’s field theory to North In the mid-1930s, Sherif commenced his semi-
American social psychology. What Sherif supplied nal work on social norms. He argued that, to
was the alignment of an experimental commitment establish a range of possible behavior, individuals
with real-life observations that together defined use the behavior of others to provide a frame of
how people respond socially. This holistic approach reference. By default, people accept the average or
was new in its time and was the substance of middle views of others as likely to be more correct
two major publications, Some Social Factors in than their own. Further, he believed that this pro-
Perception (1935), based on Sherif’s dissertation, cess underlies the origins of social norms. Sherif
and its expansion in his Psychology of Social put this theory to the test in a series of classic stud-
Norms (1936). ies designed to induce a group norm. The task was
Sherif was born in 1906 in Turkey, completed a based on the autokinetic effect, an illusion in
master’s degree there, and then earned a second which a fixed pinpoint of light in a completely
master’s degree at Harvard in 1932. He returned dark room appears to move. In fact, the apparent
to a post as instructor at the Gazi Institute, in movement is caused by eye movement in the
Ankara, Turkey, where he commenced an investi- absence of a physical frame of reference. In the
gation of norm formation. He then reentered the experiment, people in small groups were asked in
United States to continue his work at Harvard and turn to estimate how far they thought the light had
completed his PhD dissertation on this topic at moved. Making a response in this task is difficult,
Columbia University in 1935 under Murphy’s so people are highly uncertain. To counter this
supervision. He returned to Turkey again in 1937, uncertainty, individuals used what others in their
taking the first of several academic posts there and group had to say as a frame of reference, and over
doing both basic and applied research in social time group members converged in their estimates.
psychology. He was ultimately appointed to a pro- This convergence was evidence that a norm had
fessorship at Ankara University. He left his home- emerged. For example, one group might judge that
land for the last time in 1945, extremely concerned the light had moved 2 inches, and another group
by Turkish support for Nazism. In particular, he might judge that it had moved 6  inches. In con-
rejected the acceptance of genetic racial theory by trast, people tested alone were much more variable
the Turkish government and by officials and col- in their estimates over the same number of trials.
leagues at his university. His protests led to his The group norm persisted when members were
temporary arrest. His eventual release and return later tested individually, indicating that the norm
to the United States was sponsored by the U.S. had been internalized.
State Department and aided by several American Sherif’s autokinetic experiment signaled his
academics, including influential figures such as strong commitment at the outset of his career to
Hadley Cantril, Leonard Doob, and Murphy. the experimental method and was hailed as a pio-
In 1945, Sherif married Carolyn Wood, who neering study. Together with Solomon Asch’s
became an eminent social psychologist in her own experiments on conformity to group pressure and
right. Together, they coauthored several publica- Stanley Milgram’s studies of obedience to author-
tions, including key works reporting experimental ity, Sherif’s experiment is one of the most often
studies of intergroup relations. He held posts at cited studies in social psychology dealing with
several institutions, spending the longest time at social influence. It was his demonstration of the
the University of Oklahoma, and finally moved to experimental formation of a social norm that
his last position, at Pennsylvania State University, prompted Asch, as he himself acknowledged, to
where he worked until his retirement in 1972. He study conformity to group pressure.
Sherif, Muzafer 755

Realistic Conflict Theory In other words, the groups needed to share their
efforts and to work for a common cause. Sherif
Sherif believed that an explanation of group
found evidence for a gradual improvement in
behavior could not result from the analysis of indi-
intergroup relations following a series of
vidual behavior and that the origins of ethnocen-
cooperative intergroup interactions that allowed
trism lay in the nature of intergroup relations. He
superordinate goals to be achieved.
argued that ethnocentrism is based on intergroup
conflict and that this conflict arises when groups
compete for scarce resources. These classic experiments demonstrated a number
Sherif based his theoretical ideas on three field of things:
experiments conducted in boys’ summer camps
between 1949 and 1954, the most famous of •• Stereotyping occurred before actual competition
which was the Robbers Cave experiment. These between the groups.
experiments were organized as follows: •• Prejudice and discrimination arose as a
consequence of real intergroup conflict.
•• Personality factors, such as authoritarianism and
1. The boys arrived at the camp, where they
dogmatism, did not play an important role in the
engaged initially in various campwide activities
intergroup hostility.
through which they formed friendships.
•• Ingroups formed despite the fact that some initial
2. The boys were then divided into two separate friends were outgroup members.
groups, such that some of their friends were in •• Simple contact between members of groups in
the ingroup and others were in the outgroup. conflict was not enough to improve intergroup
The groups were isolated from each other by relations.
living in separate bunkhouses and playing and
working separately. In a short time, the two Realistic conflict theory was the most widely
groups developed different norms. Even without accepted theory of intergroup conflict prior to the
intergroup contact, some outgroup stereotyping development of Henri Tajfel and John Turner’s
occurred. social identity theory. According to realistic con-
3. Next, the two groups were brought together to flict theory, incompatible goals lead to tension and
engage in organized intergroup competitions in hostility between groups, and intergroup harmony
sports and other activities. This led to fierce depends on the shared perception and realization
competition and intergroup hostility, which was of goals that require intergroup cooperation for
manifested in various ways. Ethnocentrism and their achievement.
intergroup aggression increased, often leading to Realistic conflict theory has been further
an even higher level of ingroup solidarity. Even supported by other naturalistic experiments.
harmless encounters became hostile: If the Competition for scarce resources appears to be a
groups shared the camp dining room, a meal sufficient condition for conflict to occur. Social
was a chance for the groups to throw food at identity theory argues that the mere awareness that
each other. Intergroup relations deteriorated so two separate groups exist may also be sufficient to
dramatically that two of the experiments were prompt intergroup discrimination. The two theo-
terminated at this point. ries do not contradict each other. Rather, they
highlight complementary factors that account for
4. In one experiment, it was possible to proceed to prejudice, discrimination, and intergroup conflict.
a fourth stage. The two groups were provided
with superordinate goals—ones that they both Graham M. Vaughan
desired but were unable to achieve alone. In one
instance, during a day’s outing, the boys See also Asch, Solomon; Conformity; Cooperation and
discovered that their truck was stalled, a real Competition; Ethnocentrism; Ingroup Allocation Bias;
setback because it was their only means of Minimal Group Effect; Norms; Obedience to
driving for food. It took the combined effort of Authority; Realistic Group Conflict Theory; Reference
both groups pulling on a rope to get it started. Groups; Social Identity Theory
756 Slavery

Further Readings during the later 15th century. These early adven-
Sherif, M. (1935). A study of some social factors in turers purchased slaves from Africans located
perception. Archives of Psychology, 27, 1–60. along the coast and transported the slaves back to
Sherif, M. (1936). The psychology of social norms. New Portugal or began to use them to produce sugar on
York: Harper. their Atlantic islands or a little later in Brazil. By
Sherif, M., Harvey, O. J., White, B. J., Hood, W., & 1600 a new form of racial, plantation-based slav-
Sherif, C. (1961). Intergroup conflict and cooperation: ery had taken root in the Americas.
The Robbers Cave experiment. Norman: University Slavery quickly spread throughout the Americas.
of Oklahoma, Institute of Intergroup Relations. During the early and mid-17th century, the British
Sherif, M., & Sherif, C. W. (1953). Groups in harmony and other European powers moved into the West
and tension: An integration of studies in intergroup Indies and began producing sugar. In North
relations. New York: Harper & Row. America, Dutch and British colonists began to
Sherif, M., & Sherif, C. W. (1964). Reference groups. import slaves, and by the early 18th century,
New York: Harper & Row. plantation-based racial slavery had become well
Sherif, M., & Sherif, C. W. (1969). Social psychology. established in Maryland, Virginia, and Carolina.
New York: Harper & Row. The British and their colonists established a sys-
tem of slavery that differed considerably from the
ancient system and less decidedly from the
Portuguese and Spanish models. Unlike those in
Slavery most of the ancient institutions, slaves in the
Americas faced perpetual servitude not only for
Slavery is an ancient and complex social system themselves but also for their descendants. Slavery
that permits the control of and often the actual also became associated with color or African back-
ownership of an individual and his or her labor by ground. Slavery, as a legal institution, had died out
another. This institution often blends into other in northern and western Europe during the Middle
forms of forced labor, which include a vast array Ages, and although individuals from this region
of relationships that extend from formal systems, could be forced to labor as indentured servants,
such as serfdom, indentured servitude, and con- criminals, or prisoners of war, they could not be
scription, to informal systems of family labor and perpetually enslaved. Africans, on the other hand,
to even illegal control of labor and other services. even if baptized as Christians, could be kept in
This complex and constantly changing system of perpetual bondage. The British system treated
servitude has played a central role in many societ- individual slaves as real or personal property.
ies since before the agricultural revolution and Owners could buy or sell them as individuals,
still exists in informal and illegal manifestations could use them as collateral for loans, could rent
today. This entry focuses on the history of slavery or hire them out to others, and could will them to
within North America and the United States and their descendants. Unlike other systems in which
its relationship to the development of intergroup slaves performed a variety of roles as soldiers and
relationships among races, classes, and sections bureaucrats owned by the state or became incor-
within the United States. porated into families, British North American
slavery became based on large-scale commercial
agriculture. Slaves also worked as artisans, domes-
Early Development of Slavery tics, urban and rural laborers, and sailors and at a
Racial slavery helped fuel a virulent racism that wide variety of occupations, of course, but the
became and has remained a central theme in the plantation remained the economic foundation of
history of the United States until this day. The the American institution.
institution also led to class tensions within the Race, unlike the situation in earlier and other
South between slave owners and poorer Whites forms of slavery, played a central role. Slavery
and created sectional tensions that led to the U.S. became limited to Africans, and race became a
Civil War (1861–1865). This system began with symbol of freedom and slavery. The British also
the Portuguese voyages down the African coast imported large numbers of indentured servants
Slavery 757

and convicts, but these individuals became free From the 1820s to the Civil War, slave-produced
after their term of servitude. Unlike the situation in cotton alone accounted for around half of the
the Iberian colonies, the difficulties of manumis- value of all exports from the United States, and
sion in the British system led to a much smaller tobacco and other slave-produced commodities
proportion of free Africans and thus intensified the added another tenth. U.S. commercial and finan-
linkage of race to slavery. cial institutions became heavily involved in sup-
By 1776 the conditions of servitude had become porting the shipment of these products to Europe,
well established in all the British North American and a rapidly developing textile industry in the
colonies. Every one of the colonies had legislated a northeast became dependent on Southern cotton.
slave code that gave owners control over their The U.S. merchant marine, the second largest in
property and awarded only extremely limited the world, transported most of the cotton to
rights to slaves. The codes differed from colony to Liverpool and other ports in Britain and Europe.
colony, but all accepted the ideal of perpetual ser- By the eve of the Civil War, slaves accounted for
vitude and the protection of the property rights of around $4  billion worth of property, which
owners. The colonists through their legislatures accounted for at least 20% of the total wealth of
passed these slave codes, which were unknown in the United States and which compares to a gross
northern and western Europe. domestic product of $4  billion for the nation in
The American Revolution brought indepen- 1860. Slavery had become big business.
dence to the United States but only limited changes Slavery created a powerful, wealthy elite that
for slaves. Between 1776 and 1804, several of the played an important role in Southern and national
newly created states began the process of ending history. This small group dominated the economic
slavery. Vermont led off by ending slavery in its activity in the Southern states and played a vital
1777 constitution, and New York and New Jersey role in their social composition. Slavery intensified
ended this process in 1799 and 1804, respectively. class divisions within the South as the minority of
New Jersey would be the last state until the Civil households that owned slaves looked down on
War to move toward eventual abolition. Because the majority of poorer Whites. A virulent racism
none of the southern states followed this lead, the also became associated with the system. Many
United States, after 1804, became sectionally Southerners saw it as a system of racial control
divided by slavery between the northern, so-called while Northerners associated Africans with slav-
free, states (the North) and the states to the south ery. Thus the endemic racism prevalent in the
(the South), which continued the institution. nation during these decades continued after the
Civil War and continued to play a powerful role in
U.S. history well after the destruction of slavery.
U.S. Slavery, 1790–1860
Life for slaves within this powerful institution
During the 1790s, the industrial revolution, spear- remained controlled yet complex. In theory, slaves
headed by the rapid development of the British tex- possessed very limited rights, but in practice, the
tile industry, fueled the demand for cotton, which amount of control slaves actually possessed
quickly became the leading cash crop of the Carolinas depended on the constant interactions among them-
and Georgia. When the United States purchased selves, their masters, and other Whites. Even under
Louisiana in 1803, sugar and cotton production slavery, many found space to create and protect
based on slavery spread into these new territories. families, to develop cultural and religious practices,
Meanwhile, the action of Congress to outlaw the and to sell products in local, often illegal markets.
importation of slaves in 1807 led to the rapid devel- Different situations also produced diversity. Life on
opment of an interstate slave trade as owners in the a large sugar plantation in Louisiana differed from
Chesapeake and other areas of the upper South the life of a single slave on a small western Virginia
began to sell or transport slaves to the cotton and farm. The status of a field hand in Mississippi dif-
sugar lands in the central states of the South. fered from that of a skilled iron worker in the
Between 1810 and the Civil War, slavery played Shenandoah Valley. The situation of slaves hired
a central role in the economic, social, cultural, and out to a railroad company differed from that of
eventually the political history of the United States. slaves working as domestics in Baltimore, Richmond,
758 Slavery

or New Orleans. There was a variety of environ- over “bleeding Kansas” and the formation of a
ments for slavery, but the power to buy and sell, to new Free Soil Republican party. The efforts of
hire out, or to punish meant that the owner retained President James Buchanan and his administration
an enormous amount of control. to admit Kansas as a slave state inflamed politics so
much that when abolitionist John Brown attacked
Harper’s Ferry in 1859, leading Southern politi-
Abolition and Civil War
cians demanded that Congress pass legislation that
This institution, which had become central to the would protect slavery in the national territories.
nation, created both attackers and defenders. Some This demand led to the division of the Democratic
people in the United States, influenced by Party in early 1860, the election of Lincoln in late
Enlightenment and/or evangelical ideals, began to 1860, and the secession of slave states. By the
criticize the institution, and by the 1830s a small spring of 1861, the Civil War had begun.
but active group of abolitionists had sprung up in At first the Lincoln administration merely
several Northern, or free, states. Africans, both wished to reverse secession, but in early 1862,
freed and enslaved, also attacked the institution. Congress passed legislation ending slavery in the
Many freed Africans joined the abolitionists or territories and providing for compensated emanci-
aided fugitive slaves to escape into enclaves for free pation in the District of Columbia. The war con-
Blacks in the North or in Canada. Slaves ran away, tinued, and Lincoln moved forward with his
sometimes rebelled, and committed other actions famous Proclamation, which freed slaves only in
against the institution. Slavery always had its areas under Confederate control as of January 1,
defenders, and these attacks brought forth a full- 1863. Congress, realizing that such a proclamation
fledged defense based on the deep cultural and might be eventually ruled unconstitutional, passed
historical roots of the institution, its acceptance in after serious division the Thirteenth Amendment
the Bible and among early Christians, and the viru- to the U.S. Constitution, ending slavery as a legal
lent racism common to all regions of the nation. institution, in early 1865.
The North never became dominated by the aboli- The courts later decided that the Thirteenth
tionists, but many people in the United States Amendment, which abolished slavery, also pro-
began to question the morality of the institution. hibited peonage and other forms of forced labor.
On the other side, Southerners, now influenced by This ended the ancient institution of slavery
a powerful proslavery rhetoric, began to demand within the United States. Abolishing the institu-
Northern acceptance of the institution. tion of slavery did not end its impact on inter-
Slavery had long been a sporadic political issue. group relations, however. Racism remained a
Debates at the Constitutional Convention, in the central feature in U.S. politics and society. While
early 1790s, and over Missouri between 1819 and class conflict based on slavery died away in the
1821 had riled politicians, but the Mexican War, in South, the results of slavery, the Civil War, and
the 1840s, placed the slavery issue in the midst of abolition helped create a strong Southern sectional
national politics. When the United States seized identification that persists to this day. The ancient
Mexican territory, the debate flared over whether institution ended in the United States in 1865, but
slavery should be permitted in these newly acquired its impact remains with us today.
possessions. The Free-Soilers, not abolitionists,
wanted to contain the extension of slavery, but Van Beck Hall
many Southerners, now convinced by a proslavery See also Apartheid; Dehumanization/Infrahumanization;
argument, believed it to be in the best interest of the Discrimination; Minority Groups in Society; Prejudice;
nation for slavery to expand. After serious sectional Racism
confrontations, Congress cobbled together the
compromise of 1850, which failed because Free-
Soilers, in the North, attacked the Fugitive Slave
Law and many extreme Southerners believed their Further Readings
section had gained little. The passage of the Fogel, R. (1989). Without consent or contract: The rise
Kansas–Nebraska Act in 1854 led to the battles and fall of American slavery. New York: Norton.
Social Class 759

Kolchin, P. (1993). American slavery, 1619–1877. New background remains an important factor in deter-
York: Hill and Wang. mining one’s social class in adulthood. For exam-
Morgan, P. D. (1998). Slave counterpoint: Black culture ple, an upper-class heritage is often signaled by an
in the eighteenth century Chesapeake and individual’s manners, accent, and taste. These help
Lowcountry. Chapel Hill: University of North the individual win the esteem required to maintain
Carolina Press. that class position through life. These and other
Ransom, R. L. (1989). Conflict and compromise: The forms of cultural capital are also used in fine-
political economy of slavery, emancipation, and the grained class distinctions such as that between old
American Civil War. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
money, or people who have been upper class for
University Press.
some generations, and the nouveaux riches, who
have risen in class ranks via the recent attainment
of wealth.
It also helps upper-class individuals that they
Social Class tend to have access to social connections, educa-
tion, and other factors that open up opportunities
The social class of individuals or groups refers to for them to acquire resources and prestige. Further,
their hierarchical position in society. The bases of class systems tend to be upheld by differences in
class are complex and sometimes ambiguous and the expectations of higher- and lower-class indi-
vary among societies and historical periods. In con- viduals. Those born into highly disadvantaged
temporary industrialized societies, social class is backgrounds may not expect to occupy esteemed
generally determined by a small set of socioeco- positions in society as adults. This diminished
nomic factors including educational attainment, expectation, relative to those from higher-class
occupation, income, and ownership of assets. In backgrounds, may lead to diminished motivation.
such societies, we may refer to an individual’s The number and type of social classes in a society
membership in a social class, being a group of peo- appear to depend largely on the dominant mode of
ple who typically have a designated name or label economic production. Anthropologists have observed
(such as working class or upper middle class). that some tribal hunter–gatherer societies are non-
However, this categorical judgment is not as simple stratified. In these societies there are no nominal
as it seems. For example, people with low-prestige social classes, leadership is not inherited, and indeed
occupations may nonetheless be very wealthy. in some cases it is not even assigned permanently to
Relatively uneducated people may rise to very pres- individuals. On the other hand, as agriculture begins
tigious occupations in corporate life or the arts. to dominate an economy, a class distinction often
The appropriate weighting of each of the socioeco- arises between those who own productive land and
nomic factors we have mentioned in determining those who work it for them. This specific class dis-
class is implicit, ambiguous, and often controver- tinction is a manifestation of the most fundamental
sial. People may see themselves as working class class distinction possible—that between the powerful
whereas others may see them as middle class. The and the powerless. Even so, small and isolated agri-
bases of class are contested by sociologists as well cultural communities such as the crofters of the
as by lay people. The primary focus of this entry is Scottish Highlands are sometimes characterized by a
the social psychology of class. relatively classless smallholder mode of organiza-
tion, in which each family owns and works a small
plot of land.
Defining Social Class With the rise of industrialization and the associ-
For the most part, social class is not inherited in ated expansion of trade, the class system typically
the sense that a person is guaranteed to retain the begins to get more complex, in particular with the
class status that he or she was born with. However, appearance of new middle classes, comprising mer-
some societies retain aspects of ancient hereditary chants, professionals, highly skilled workers, and
class systems, such as the caste system of India and bureaucrats. Although the middle classes typically
the aristocracy of Britain. Further, even when there do not have power over others (unlike the upper
is no formal inheritance of class, one’s family classes), they have a greater degree of autonomy
760 Social Class

than working classes do by virtue of their posses- middle and working classes. Another is that it
sion of assets such as land, housing, stocks, and tends to overemphasize the conflictual aspects of
economically valuable skills. Although most con- class relationships and to underemphasize the
temporary social scientific models make finer class cooperative dimension. In the corporate environ-
distinctions (such as upper middle class vs. lower ment, wage earners, executives, and shareholders
middle class), most reflect the essentially tripartite have common as well as divergent interests and
structure of upper, middle, and working classes. may express a high degree of identification with
the corporation regardless of their role within it.
Even a class system as stark as feudalism was char-
Theories
acterized by reciprocity, whereby the lower classes
Different theories within the social sciences take pledged their homage, loyalty, labor, and/or mili-
different views, sometimes radically different, of tary service in exchange for the right to use land.
the origins and nature of social class. For the socio- Another criticism is that Marxism gives priority to
biologist E. O. Wilson, class inequality may be a class compared with the other social categoriza-
consequence of the evolution of people who are tions—such as gender, race, and religion—which
genetically suited to occupy high- or low-status also organize human experience and society and
positions. However, this position is difficult to provide fertile ground for conflict. The notion of a
reconcile with the variety and fluidity of class society divided and in conflict along unidimen-
structures in human societies. Furthermore, genetic sional class lines seems to be almost an ideal in
evidence for the hypothesis is lacking. Marxist theory—at least as a necessary stage in the
In contrast, for Karl Marx, class ultimately realization of a classless utopia.
stems not from human nature but from excess pro- Despite the controversy that has surrounded it,
duction. When agriculture and industry are effi- some of the key insights of Marxist theory have
cient enough to produce more than is required, a been enormously influential in social psychology.
ruling class that owns the means of production Three of its most prominent theories, social iden-
emerges, as does a working class that supplies the tity theory, social dominance theory, and system
labor required to produce things. In capitalist sys- justification theory, are heavily indebted to Marx.
tems, these classes are the bourgeoisie, or capital- For example, each theory is concerned with the
ist, class and the wage-earning proletariat, distinction between what Marx called false con-
respectively. Relationships between these two sciousness and class consciousness, which refer
groups of people are characterized by a particular to ignorance and awareness, respectively, of one’s
kind of antagonism termed class conflict. Class position in the class system, the inequalities
conflict stems from the fact that the bourgeoisie is and injustices of the class system, the common
motivated to perpetuate its exploitation of the pro- interests of individuals within class groupings,
letariat, whose members for their part are moti- and the competing interests of those in different
vated to overthrow it. social classes.
The Marxist analysis of class has, of course,
been hugely influential both in social science and
in many of the important political events of the Key Research Findings
previous two centuries. The political impact of
Marxism is perhaps the most striking demonstra- Each of these theories is also concerned, in part,
tion yet of the reactivity of social science: The with one of the key findings to emerge from empir-
study of social processes has the potential to ical investigations of class. Namely, individuals
change those processes, in ways both intended and from lower social classes are more likely than
unintended. However, Marxist social theory has upper-class individuals to engage in self-defeating
attracted a fair amount of criticism. One criticism behaviors. These findings are consistent with
is that its essentially bipartite model of class, which Marx’s claim that individuals from lower classes
distinguishes the bourgeois from the proletariat, are prone to participate in their own oppression.
glosses over class distinctions of much economic Jim Sidanius and his colleagues have labeled this
and cultural significance, such as that between the phenomenon behavioral asymmetry. For example,
Social Class 761

lower social class is one of the strongest psychoso- nomic status shortly before the test, compared
cial predictors of poor health indicators such as with members of a control group, who were not
obesity and Type II diabetes, as well as adverse given those questions. Answering the questions
health behaviors such as smoking and consump- appeared to make their social class salient to the
tion of refined sugars. It also predicts low motiva- members of the experimental group, together with
tion and disengagement in educational settings, the associated stigmatizing stereotypes about low
contributing to educational underachievement. academic ability.
Class is a major risk factor for many forms of One of the most intensive lines of social-psycho-
criminality. Furthermore, individuals from lower- logical investigation into social class has been lit-
class backgrounds are more likely than those from erature on the consequences of accent. Spoken
upper-class backgrounds to vote for political par- accents in many countries convey information
ties whose policies are contrary to their economic about social class. In the United Kingdom, speak-
self-interest. Social psychologists have helped make ers with strong regional accents (e.g., a Birmingham
explicit, refined, and complemented Marx’s analy- accent) are perceived to hail from a lower-class
sis of the psychological mechanisms that work to background. Much the same thing is true in the
perpetuate systems of social class. United States, where certain accents, such as those
For example, according to the relative depriva- hailing from parts of the South, are sometimes
tion hypothesis, aggressive behavior is potentiated accorded lower class status. In Australia and New
by a sense of frustration at being denied opportuni- Zealand, accents vary much less according to
ties that are afforded to others. According to both region than they do according to class. Observers
system justification theory and social dominance ascribe less prestige and aesthetic value to lower-
theory, individuals from lower classes are moti- class accents and rate the quality of an argument
vated, as are people from higher classes, to perceive lower when it is expressed in a lower-class than in
the economic system in which they are embedded a middle- or upper-class accent. These findings are
as just. As a result, individuals from lower classes consistent with the notion that accents are a form
are prone to see their relatively lowly position as of cultural capital used to denote and thus to regu-
deserved and to internalize negative stereotypes of late and perpetuate class distinctions.
their social class, with adverse impacts on self-
esteem and motivation. According to social iden-
Additional Considerations
tity theory, individuals from lower social classes
may be diverted from collective action by the per- Despite the valuable insights that have been pro-
ception that class boundaries are permeable. Under vided by social psychologists, it is clear that overall
these conditions, pursuing social mobility as an they have paid much less attention to social class
individual may seem more attractive and fruitful than to other systems of inequality, such as race
than doing so on behalf of one’s class group. and gender. Although there is a popular
Further, working-class people may seek to preserve conception—shared by some scholars—that the
some of the very characteristics that tend to per- relevance of social class is declining, it is clear that
petuate economic disadvantage, such as a lack of people are still aware of class and discriminate on
participation in university education and a high the basis of class and that the disadvantages con-
degree of manual skill, as cherished tokens of a fronting those from the working or lower classes
distinctive and subjectively positive social identity. are many. According to national health statistics in
Researchers have recently shown that a phe- the United Kingdom, the life expectancy of those
nomenon known as stereotype threat can also in the lower socioeconomic brackets is some
adversely affect persons of low socioeconomic sta- 8 years less than that of the middle classes. Similar
tus. Stereotype threat is the tendency for people to other stigmatized minorities, ethnophaulisms,
from stigmatized groups to perform poorly because or derogatory labels, such as chav, oaf, oik, bogan,
they fear confirming a negative stereotype. The and working stiff, are reserved for members of the
performance of people from lower social classes on working classes. There are also Internet hate sites
a test of scholastic aptitude declined when they devoted to them, and these sites use language that
were merely asked questions about their socioeco- would be unthinkable and indeed illegal if applied
762 Social Comparison Theory

to racial or gender groups. It appears therefore Social Comparison


that there is scope for further social-psychological of Abilities and Opinions
contributions to the study of class.
Many social scientists had recognized aspects of
Robbie M. Sutton these phenomena, but Leon Festinger was the first
to systematize them in his 1954 theory of social
See also Discrimination; Power; Prejudice; Social
Dominance Theory; Social Identity Theory; Status;
comparison processes. Festinger initially cast the
Stigma; System Justification Theory theory as a theory about how an individual could
self-assess. In the first example above, what I’d
learn about is my own abilities; in the second
Further Readings example, it is the validity of my opinions. And
learning from the actions of others about one’s
Giddens, A. (1981). The class structure of the advanced
abilities and opinions was the process that
societies. London: Hutchinson.
Festinger sought to analyze.
Giles, H., & Powesland, P. F. (1975). Speech style and
Festinger’s theory assumed that the goal of indi-
social evaluation. London: Academic Press.
viduals was to form accurate perceptions of their
Jost, J., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. (2004). A decade of
system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of
abilities, and that is certainly a reasonable goal to
conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status hold. Knowing my abilities will enable me to make
quo. Political Psychology, 25, 881–919. sensible decisions about what I should attempt and
Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance not attempt. If I can jump about 12 feet, then I’d
orientation: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy better not try to clear a 15-foot creek! If I am a
and oppression. New York: Cambridge University really good mathematician, I have some ideas
Press. about careers at which I could succeed.
Spencer, B., & Castano, E. (2008). Social class is dead, However, other motives are also involved when
long live social class! Stereotype threat among low one compares one’s ability to that of others.
socioeconomic status individuals. Social Justice Having a high and having a low level of ability are
Research, 20, 418–432. equally informative about what we should attempt
Wilson, E. O. (1975). Sociobiology: The new synthesis. but are quite different in their impact on us.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Having a high level of ability generally heightens
one’s self-esteem, while discovering one has a low
level of ability is harmful to self-esteem. Abilities
are qualities that it is good to be good at, and self-
Social Comparison Theory esteem is bolstered and enhanced by possessing
those qualities. Similarly, doing poorly at some-
A good many things that people need to know thing that matters is a blow to one’s self-esteem.
about themselves, they learn by observing the Having accurate assessments of one’s own
actions of other people and reasoning from what abilities and having high self-esteem can be thought
they observe to implications for themselves. They of as motives of the individual, the sorts of motives
interpret the meanings of those observed actions that Festinger suggested social comparison facili-
and decode the implications of those actions for tated. However, more interpersonal motives are in
their own opinions and abilities. Sometimes this is play in social comparison situations as well. How
a simple process. At a faculty–student picnic, I well I perform when I am performing in public
foolishly join in the 100-yard dash and learn that influences people’s perceptions and opinions about
all the students finish considerably ahead of me. I me. Because I am often surrounded by groups
thus infer that my previous belief that I am a really whose opinions matter to me, I am often con-
fast runner needs to be corrected. Or I hold the cerned with managing the impressions that people
opinion that a new television show is clever and form of me. The impression management problem
cool and make the mistake of saying so, only to arises most acutely when I give a poor performance—
discover that my ingroup of friends unanimously that is, a performance that normally would be
thinks it is stupid and boring. interpreted as signaling a low ability. Social com-
Social Comparison Theory 763

parison therefore is as much about dynamics case. Imagine that I secretly prefer paintings of an
within and between groups as it is about motives idealized version of the late Elvis Presley on black
within an individual. velvet backgrounds to paintings by Mondrian. I
But a performance is not always a perfect guide discover that a group of bikers at the local bar also
to the underlying ability of the performing indi- prefers the Elvis paintings, while my superiors in
vidual. More specifically, a flawed performance the law firm where I work prefer Mondrian. I then
does not always indicate an inadequate person. I have some idea of what it would cost me to express
can run slowly because I am out of practice or my preference for Elvis while at work. I might also
have leg cramps or am distracted by problems at try to discover the reasons behind the Mondrian
work or have any number of other momentary or preference of my superiors. As a result, I might
long-term “handicaps.” Call this the performance– decide that my reasons for preferring Elvis are
ability gap. If we broaden our discussion here, we good ones, and so I would silently maintain that
can access what psychologists call the psychology preference, or I might decide that their reasons are
of excuses. Although I can act in ways that seem to more compelling than mine, and so I would move
signal a poor moral character or a crude set of toward their preference.
standards about how to behave, I often try to con-
vince others that I am not personally flawed.
Reference Groups
Skilled excuse makers are able to convince others
that the performance they have just given, which The central message of social comparison theory is
ordinarily would signal something discrediting that people are greatly affected by the information
about them, should instead be attributed to some they get from the persons around them. Yet we
external cause—the hidden difficulty of the task, know that there are people who are able to main-
the fact that they have been misinformed, and so tain an opinion about how to dress or whom to
on. The task here is to manage the attributions that vote for that is at odds with the opinions of others.
others would otherwise make about us. More spe- How do they sustain their views? One answer is
cifically, we seek to make sure that performances given by reference group theory, which is a version
that typically would be interpreted as revealing of a social comparison theory. Reference group
something unfavorable about us are instead attrib- theory presumes that the persons whose opinions
uted to other causes. The ability to carry this off sustain and validate our opinions are not necessar-
requires great tacit knowledge and subtle signaling ily those who are physically near us but rather
skills, things that many of us possess. those to whom we “refer our behavior.” An exam-
The process of comparing our opinions with ple would be a high school football player who
those of others requires a separate analysis. First it learns what “cool” behavior is by comparing his
is important to distinguish between opinions that behavior with that of the clique of “jocks” in his
have a factual content and those that are based on high school. He pays no attention to the behavior
taste, preference, or social convention. If I am of those ordinary students who physically sur-
comparing my opinion about a factual matter with round him in the classroom—their views on how
that of a person who is an expert on the topic and to behave mean nothing to him because he does
discover we disagree, I do not need to take his or not care about their opinions of him.
her opinion as certainly true, but I had better check This analysis suggests an interesting interpreta-
further to see if he or she may be right. If my opin- tion of how it is that people who are deviant
ion is about a matter of taste, preference, or social according to the standards of the group in which
convention, then I need to understand what it is they are physically embedded sustain their devi-
that I would be signaling if I were to express that ance. They do so by referring their behavior to the
opinion. One way of understanding this is by standards of some other group that is psychologi-
learning the opinions of others on the topic and cally present in their remembered experience and
doing some social calibration regarding the social agrees with their own standards, in contrast to the
standing of those others and the consequences of “uncivilized” group in which they currently find
agreeing or disagreeing with them. This is difficult themselves. One way of describing what is going
to describe in the abstract but easy in a specific on here is that people who are apparently deviants
764 Social Comparison Theory

in the group that physically surrounds them do not who fall below adequate sustenance—they fall
feel anxious and fear rejection, as most deviants below the poverty line, that is, below the level neces-
do, but instead are serene in their conviction of the sary to purchase the necessities of life.
superiority of the standards of some other group. On the other hand, relative deprivation occurs
In some cases we genuinely admire people who when an individual believes that he or she lacks
show such convictions. An example might be mis- conditions or resources that others possess, cou-
sionaries who go into other cultures and attempt pled with the feeling that he or she is either entitled
to model a life based on the Golden Rule. In other to possess them or can at least aspire to possess
cases, such as crusaders who violently tried to con- them. Relative deprivation can be sufficiently pow-
vert others to their religion, we see evil or perhaps erful to trigger revolutions of rising expectations.
mental illness. Being sustained in our beliefs and The notion here is that when a country that has
behaviors by reference to the opinions and stan- had a constant low supply of services and com-
dards of a group of absent others is an intrinsically modities available to citizens suddenly experiences
complicated endeavor but a very human one. a rise in the supply of these services and com-
modities, but they are available only to the more
powerful segments of society, then those who do
Social Comparison,
not have access to these services and commodities
Happiness, and Well-Being
feel relatively deprived. This in turn motivates
Another aspect of social comparison deals with the these “deprived” people to overthrow the power
consequences of comparing aspects of our lives structure to gain access to services and commodi-
with the lives of those around us or those in the ties that they did not previously aspire to possess.
public media. The general suggestion arising from Services and commodities that one aspires to
the social comparison perspective is that our level possess may also have powerful effects on indi-
of happiness with our lives, or more generally our viduals. Kurt Lewin made the point that affluent
sense of well-being, depends on these comparisons. people in the United States need only a few of the
In materialist societies, such as contemporary things they want. We need nourishing food, but
Western, capitalist countries, these comparisons we go out for sushi; we need water, but we pay
are often assumed to generate largely negative con- extra to drink designer water. Moreover, things
sequences for large groups of citizens who are like sushi and designer water motivate us to work.
below other groups on one or more of the stan- Lewin called them quasi-needs. John Kenneth
dard dimensions of comparison. Because the com- Galbraith commented that our current affluent
munications media—now largely television and Western societies count on our desires to acquire
magazines—tend to feature the lifestyles of the these goods to keep the demand for them high
“rich and famous” disproportionately, these nega- enough to keep the economy moving forward.
tive consequences may be quite common. The psychological mechanisms of social com-
To equip ourselves to examine this topic, we need parison that create a desire to possess goods that
to distinguish between two kinds of deprivation. On others possess are useful to think through. The
one hand, objective or physical deprivation occurs usual answer is that envy is the mechanism that
when an individual falls short of the conditions and creates a strong desire on the part of “deprived”
resources necessary to sustain life. Lack of nourish- individuals to possess those goods that more privi-
ing food, clean water, and adequate shelter are pro- leged individuals possess. However, this may be
totypical examples of physical deprivations, but too simple an analysis, as well as one that allows
today we would perhaps extend the list to include those of us who can afford luxury goods to be
medical care for illnesses and wounds, education comfortable owning them while those of us who
sufficient to succeed in modern societies, chances to are less well-to-do must go without.
engage in remunerated labor, and many similar ser- Another explanation suggests that possession of
vices and commodities. In our society, the earnings certain goods conveys status to the possessor. Call
from remunerated labor are generally what we these positional goods. In order to function as a
exchange for these commodities and services. And positional good, a good must be public in nature.
we have a term to describe the situation of those That is, people must see the possession and know
Social Comparison Theory 765

who the possessor is. Large, elegant houses fit the learning about one’s own qualities, generally
definition, as do expensive cars, fine jewelry, and abilities and opinions, by comparing manifesta-
fashionable clothes. In every behavior setting, cer- tions of these qualities with those of other people.
tain goods signal that the possessor has high status. The second theme involves justice and personal
Thus, more than envy drives the desire to possess aspirations. Given the possessions that others
whatever the trappings of high status are in any around us have, to what are we entitled? Stated
particular setting. Having high status is an advan- differently, how does observing the possessions of
tage. For example, it can signal respectability and others affect what we aspire to possess? This sec-
reliability. Advice columns for job seekers consis- ond theme is sometimes thought of as an envy-
tently stress the importance of “dressing profession- driven process, but it can also be based on the
ally,” which often means looking just a bit better desire for status.
than the other candidates. In housing markets, real Social comparison began as a relatively narrow
estate agents know that a house in a “good neigh- theory about how people assess their abilities and
borhood” is worth much more than the same house opinions but has been transformed into a more
in a less desirable neighborhood. In addition to general framework for explaining many of the
conveying status, owning the house in the good phenomena that are central to social psychology.
neighborhood may have other advantages. “Good As Serge Guimond has recently reminded us, social
neighborhoods” tend to have good schools, to some comparison processes drive a variety of assessment
extent because in the United States, for example, processes among individuals, among groups, and
property taxes support schools. What is a good across cultures.
school? Among other things, a good school is one
with a good record of getting its graduates admitted John Darley
to good colleges. Living in good neighborhoods
with good schools thus confers real advantages on See also Collective Movements and Protest; Distributive
children. More generally, cues of high status convey Justice; Festinger, Leon; Justice; Procedural Justice;
real advantages on the people who possess them. Reference Groups; Relative Deprivation
Consider next a different kind of status, namely,
one’s “standing” to participate in group functions.
Norman Rockwell nicely illustrated this kind of Further Readings
status in his painting titled Town Meeting. In the
center of the painting is a workman addressing the Crosby, F. (1976). A model of egotistical relative
yearly meeting that small New England towns deprivation. Psychological Review, 83, 85–113.
hold to decide issues that are important to their Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison
citizens. Around the workman are seated other, processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140.
Franks, R. (2007). Falling behind: How rising inequality
better-dressed people, often in coats and ties, while
harms the middle class. Berkeley: University of
the workman is wearing a flannel shirt and a worn
California Press.
leather work jacket. But the better-dressed citizens
Galbraith, J. K. (1958). The affluent society. Boston:
are listening attentively to the workman, presum-
Houghton Mifflin.
ably because his residence in the community gives Goethals, G., & Darley, J. M. (1977). Social comparison
him the standing to command other townspeople’s theory: An attributional approach. In J. M. Suls &
attention to the ideas he is expressing. Having the R. L. Miller (Eds.), Social comparison processes:
standing to participate in group functions not only Theoretical and empirical perspectives (pp. 259–278).
allows a person to influence group actions but is Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
also a major determinant of a person’s sense of Guimond, S. (2006). Social comparison and social
self-worth. psychology: Understanding cognition, intergroup
relations, and culture. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
Conclusion
Snyder, C., Higgins, R., & Stucky, R. (1983).
Two related themes are included under the head- Excuses: Masquerades in search of grace.
ing of social comparison. The first emphasizes New York: Wiley.
766 Social Compensation

second ox to a team pulling a plow, the plowing


Social Compensation did not get done twice as fast. Ringelmann explored
this issue by studying the performance of men pull-
Social compensation is superior effort exerted ing on a rope. He found there was a loss of motiva-
when an individual works on a collective task as tion when the men collectively pulled on the rope,
compared with working individually or coact- compared with when they pulled as hard as they
ively. Collective tasks involve combining all group could individually. He speculated that this reduc-
members’ contributions, which means that mem- tion of individual effort on a collective task was
bers are evaluated together. Coactive tasks involve merely an artifact of coordination problems and
individuals working in the presence of others but was not psychological in nature.
not combining their contributions, which means However, researchers in the 1970s found that
that evaluations can be made individually. Social when lack of coordination was ruled out, social
compensation involves working hard to make up loafing remained a robust psychological phenom-
for other group members whose performances are enon. Social loafing occurs when individuals
expected to be inferior. expend less effort collectively, when the outcome is
For example, a group of product executives dependent on how everyone performs, than they
might be asked to generate as many uses as they can do coactively, when individuals work by them-
for a new product. If someone believes that other selves but in the presence of others. Social loafing
group members are not capable of or willing to can be reduced or eliminated through several
perform well at this task, and the outcome of this means, such as increasing the identifiability or
collective task is important, then that person will evaluability of the individual members’ contribu-
work especially hard to generate more uses for the tions, enhancing personal involvement with the
product in order to make up for the possibility that task, elevating the uniqueness of individual contri-
other group members will not generate many uses. butions, or strengthening group cohesiveness.
If someone is working alone, then he or she will not When social loafing cannot be reduced through
be concerned with a group’s overall outcome and these tactics, however, an individual may feel he or
will not try to make up for others’ lack of effort. If she has to compensate for the loafing of other
someone believes that others can or will work hard, group members. Take a classroom project, for
then the typical response is social loafing (putting example. Teachers often divide a class into small
less effort into a collective task than if one were groups, and each group member will receive the
working alone or coactively). This entry looks at same grade for whatever project the group is
the phenomenon of social compensation, related instructed to complete. From the beginning, one
research, and practical implications. individual in the group may recognize that the
other group members are less motivated to earn a
high grade than he or she is. The highly motivated
Background
individual may then try to make up for the other
Tasks are often completed in groups, such as commit- students’ lack of motivation by working especially
tees, sports teams, juries, marching bands, and quality hard on the project.
control teams. Numerous tasks are completed col-
lectively, in that an individual’s contributions are
pooled with the contributions of coworkers to form When Social Compensation Occurs
a single outcome, such as a decision, a score (in a
sports game), a musical performance, or an inspected Two conditions must be present for social com-
product. Some of the earliest social-psychological pensation to occur. Otherwise, social loafing is the
research investigated how groups work together to more likely outcome. The first condition is the
complete a task. Social psychologists were particu- expectation that other group members will con-
larly interested in how working in groups affects the tribute insufficiently to the group effort. The
motivation, effort, and productivity of individuals. expectation that group members will perform
In early research on this topic, Max Ringelmann insufficiently may result from a general predisposi-
wanted to understand why, when he added a tion to have little trust in others’ ability or reliabil-
Social Compensation 767

ity or from particular information that other group Conclusion


members are unable or unwilling to perform on
By understanding what causes some group mem-
the specific task.
bers to loaf and others to compensate, researchers
Ironically, high-trusting individuals are more
can understand how to optimize group perfor-
likely to take advantage of others during a collec-
mance by reducing motivation losses. Researchers
tive task by letting them do most of the work
can investigate conditions that promote social
(socially loafing). Individuals high in interper-
compensation so that it occurs more often.
sonal trust expect the other group members to
Increasing social compensation might be especially
carry their weight, whereas those low in interper-
helpful during emergency situations, where detri-
sonal trust expect others to loaf. Similarly, par-
mental bystander effects can occur. The bystander
ticular information implying greater effort or
effect occurs when an individual is less likely to
ability by coworkers is more likely to lead to
aid in an emergency situation when others are
social loafing.
present compared with being the only one avail-
The second condition that is necessary for social
able to help.
compensation to occur is that the outcome be
Social compensation has implications for work-
important or meaningful to the individual. If the
ing groups and organizations. Persistent experi-
outcome of a task is not important to an individual,
ences of social compensation may cause employees
then there is no need to compensate for poorly per-
to avoid jobs or settings that involve group work.
forming coworkers. However, if the outcome of a
Being forced into situations in which social com-
task is meaningful, then an individual will be moti-
pensation might be needed could cause distress to
vated to avoid group failure by compensating for
potential compensators. A student, learning that
poorly performing coworkers. This is consistent
her grade would depend on a collective group
with expectancy-value models of effort and with
assignment, once lamented to one of us, “I know
self-validation theories, which argue that people
that I will have to work harder than everyone else
will exert effort on a task only to the degree they
in my group.” She knew from past experiences
believe their effort will produce a valued result.
that she would likely have to compensate for other
Individuals may not necessarily demonstrate a com-
group members because they were unlikely to help
plete lack of motivation, but their motivation will
her get the high grade that she desired.
be based on how directly related they think their
More often than not, people who are concerned
efforts are to producing a favorable outcome.
to ensure that their group succeeds are people who
Even if the two qualifying conditions are satis-
are valuable to an organization. Understanding
fied, social compensation may not occur for other
how to prevent such persons from always being
reasons. For instance, when it is possible to leave a
forced to socially compensate (which could cause
group, individuals may just abandon the collective
them to burn out) might help organizations retain
task to avoid a negative evaluation caused by the
these workers. Finally, it is interesting that social
poor performance of other, loafing group mem-
compensation has primarily negative origins: dis-
bers. Only when there is no other option are people
trust or knowledge of inferior effort or motivation
“forced” to socially compensate. And after com-
on the part of one’s coworkers. A more positive
pensating repeatedly for other group members, a
wellspring of social compensation, esprit de corps
person may come to feel “used” and thus stop
(group spirit), has yet to be demonstrated.
compensating. Continuing to socially compensate
may lead to the sucker effect, whereby a person Kipling D. Williams and James H. Wirth
realizes that he or she is being exploited and thus
chooses to stop compensating and join the other See also Group Performance; Köhler Effect; Social
group members in their loafing. Finally, as group Loafing; Sucker Effect
size increases, so too does the difficultly associated
with compensating for the increasing number of
Further Readings
group members who are loafing. Social compensa-
tion is thus less common when people are working Kerr, N. L. (2001). Motivational gains in performance
together in large groups. groups: Aspects and prospects. In J. Forgas, K.
768 Social Darwinism

Williams, & L. Wheeler (Eds.), The social mind: Its Law and Causes. It was 2 years before Charles
Cognitive and motivational aspects of interpersonal Darwin published his seminal, 1859 work, On the
behavior (pp. 350–370). New York: Cambridge Origin of Species. Spencer’s later theorizing (e.g.,
University Press. see First Principles, published in 1860) was strongly
Shepperd, J. A. (1993). Productivity loss in performance influenced by Darwin’s ideas.
groups: A motivation analysis. Psychological Bulletin, Spencer applied Darwin’s ideas to interpret
113, 67–81. social phenomena. He coined the term survival of
Williams, K. D., Harkins, S. G., & Karau, S. J. (2003). the fittest, maintaining that through competition
Social performance. In M. A. Hogg & J. Cooper
and natural selection, social evolution would lead
(Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 328–346).
to prosperity and personal liberty unparalleled in
London: Sage.
human history. Spencer argued that the individual
Williams, K. D., & Karau, S. J. (1991). Social loafing and
(rather than the collective) evolves, and thus gov-
social compensation: The effects of expectations of
coworker performance. Journal of Personality and
ernment intervention should be minimal in social
Social Psychology, 61, 570–581.
and political domains. This view fit well with the
dominant ideologies of the capitalist economics in
the late 19th century, especially those of laissez-
faire economics, and it was strongly supported by
both intellectuals and businessmen, including
Social Darwinism Andrew Carnegie, who hosted Spencer’s visit to
the United States in 1883.
Social Darwinism is the belief that the fittest or Spencer’s theory was essentially a prescriptive,
strongest among individuals, groups, or nations ethical theory. He did not simply argue that natural
should survive and flourish, while the weak or selection descriptively works with humans much as
unfit should be allowed to perish. This view was Darwin theorized it worked with animals and
advocated by Herbert Spencer, a British sociolo- plants, but that the survival of the fittest in human
gist who attempted to apply Charles Darwin’s society is morally correct and should be promoted.
theory of biological evolution to the development As a result, social Darwinism was used to justify
of human societies. Social Darwinism became various political and economic exploitations that
popular in the late Victorian era in England, the are generally inconsistent with modern moral val-
United States, and elsewhere. Another social inter- ues, including colonialism, imperialism, neglect of
pretation of Darwin’s biological views was pro- poor living and working conditions, oppression of
moted by Francis Galton. His view and its labor unions and similar organizations, and so on.
theoretical offshoot, later known as eugenics, Among others, a major problem with social
have also been associated with social Darwinism. Darwinism as an ethical theory is that the theory
This entry first reviews Spencer’s and Galton’s commits what is called the naturalistic fallacy in
views on developments of human faculties and philosophy, whereby an ought statement is derived
human societies and then describes the trajectory rather directly from an is statement. That is, it is a
that social Darwinism took in societies and social logical error to assume that what is natural is
sciences in the late 20th century. It then explains equivalent to what is morally correct. Social
how advocates of social Darwinism commit a Darwinism made this fatal error in using the prin-
common but fatal logical fallacy (the naturalistic ciple of survival of the fittest not only to explain
fallacy) and confuse Darwinian science with a how human society might actually operate (a state-
particular ethical position, a position that is ment that could, in principle, be verified empiri-
incompatible with contemporary moral values. cally) but also to prescribe morally how social
institutions (and human society in general) ought
to be designed. Although social Darwinism argu-
Spencer’s Evolutionary Progressivism ably had some beneficial effects (e.g., providing the
In 1857 Spencer, under the influence of Thomas poor with resources for production and education
Malthus’s 1798 work (An Essay on the Principle rather than simply with handouts), its moral basis
of Population), published his major work, Progress: is now widely rejected.
Social Darwinism 769

Galton’s Eugenics Around the same time, anthropologists Franz


Boas, Margaret Mead, Ruth Benedict, and others
Intrigued by Darwin’s 1859 work, Galton, a
also severely criticized social Darwinism. They
British scientist and Darwin’s cousin, became
emphasized the role of culture in differentiating
interested in heritability of many aspects of human
humans from other animals and rejected social
variation, ranging from physical characteristics to
Darwinism’s biological foundations. It is impor-
mental characteristics and from facial appearance
tant to note that the criticisms from these anthro-
to fingerprint patterns. Using various biographical
pologists (Boas in particular) were originally
records, Galton developed statistical techniques to
directed only against the notion of “evolutionary
quantify the heritability of human abilities. In
progressivism” advocated by Spencer—the notion
Hereditary Genius, published in 1869, he summa-
that assumes that all societies progress through the
rized these findings and argued that biological
same stages in the same sequence and that societies
inheritance is much more critical in determining
can thus be ordered, from less well-developed,
human character and intelligence than are environ-
inferior ones to more highly developed, superior
mental influences. Besides reporting his scientific
ones. Obviously, Spencer’s is a notion with little
findings, Galton went on to argue that the notion
scientific basis. However, later generations of
of heredity should occupy a central place when one
anthropologists also broadly rejected Darwinian,
considered social morals. According to his view,
biological approaches to the development of human
certain social welfare policies (e.g., asylums for the
societies in favor of a sociocultural approach. Such
insane) allowed “less fit” members of society to
resistance to applying Darwinian concepts and
survive and reproduce faster than “more fit” ones,
analyses to the study of human society rapidly
and this trend eventually would lead to degrada-
became dominant in the social sciences.
tion of the society by “inferiors.” Galton thus
During the 1960s, biological approaches to
maintained that social morals should be changed
study human social behavior and human society
so that people would become more conscious of
resurfaced, after the “modern evolutionary synthe-
heredity in their decisions about reproduction.
sis” was completed in biology. Biologists such as
In his 1883 book, Inquiries Into Human Faculty
William Hamilton, Robert Trivers, and others
and Its Development, Galton coined the term
extended their theories to explain origins of human
eugenics from the Greek word eu (well) and the
cooperation, mate selection, and human sociality
suffix -genes (born). Although Galton did not per-
in general. In 1988, the Human Behavior and
sonally advocate eugenic social policies that pro-
Evolution Society was founded by investigators
moted governmental coercion of so-called inferiors,
who unapologetically used evolutionary theory to
such mandatory eugenics began to be practiced in
analyze human nature. Since then, the Society has
the early 20th century. The most infamous exam-
expanded substantively to overlap with many
ple was provided by Nazi Germany’s eugenics
social science disciplines, including psychology,
programs, which led to the sterilizations of thou-
anthropology, psychiatry, economics, law, politi-
sands of individuals whom the Nazis viewed as
cal science, and sociology. Sharing a common
mentally and physically “unfit” and to mass kill-
metatheoretical perspective, the biological and
ings of “undesirable” people, including Jews,
evolutionary approaches have yielded highly suc-
Roma, and homosexuals during the Holocaust.
cessful cross-disciplinary collaborations, including
modern behavioral genetics, analysis of human
sociality, and research on neural underpinnings of
Social Darwinism in the Late 20th Century
social cognition. In social psychology, these
Social Darwinism gradually lost its popularity and approaches have also spurred reexaminations of
support after World War I. Ironically, the term traditional questions, including research on adap-
social Darwinism was later popularized by a U.S. tive efficiencies of group behavior, biological roots
historian, Richard Hofstadter, in his 1944 work, of intergroup behavior, and so on.
Social Darwinism in American Thought, which However, despite its broader scientific accep-
discredited Nazi Germany’s ideologies along with tance, biological and evolutionary approaches to
its eugenic policies. studying human behavior and society have also met
770 Social Decision Schemes

with substantial opposition. For example, in 1975, Pinker, S. (2003). The blank slate: The modern denial of
when biologist Edward Wilson argued in Socio­ human nature. New York: Penguin.
biology: The New Synthesis that genetics exerts a Schaller, M., Simpson, J., & Kenrick, D. (Eds.). (2006).
greater influence on human behavior than scientists Evolution and social psychology. New York:
had previously thought, he was labeled as a racist by Psychology Press.
both liberals and conservatives who favored the idea Wilson, E. O. (2000). Sociobiology: The new synthesis.
that human behavior was determined by encultura- Cambridge, MA: Belknap. (Original work published
tion. But in fact what Wilson claimed in his book 1975)
was not particularly extreme: He maintained that
human behavior cannot be understood without tak-
ing both biology and culture into account. Social Decision Schemes
Social decision scheme (SDS) theory provides a
Confusion of Social Darwinism
mathematical framework for predicting group
With Darwinism
choices from group member preferences. A social
As exemplified above, many negative reactions to decision scheme is a representation of a decision
Darwinism arise from the confusion of Darwinism process that yields predicted group decisions given
with social Darwinism. Darwinism is a scientific the initial preferences of members. As an example,
theory whose ultimate value can be judged only consider a committee of employees who must
empirically. On the other hand, social Darwinism choose among three health insurance plans being
is an ethical theory purporting that the fittest considered by their employer. The committee is
should flourish while the unfit should be allowed composed of four employees, and each has a pre-
to die. Aside from their names and a couple of ferred plan. The four members may agree or dis-
basic Darwinian notions that social Darwinism agree, but the goal is to endorse collectively one
misused (e.g., directional evolution that underlies plan. Combining such individual preferences to
survival of the fittest), these two theories share obtain a collective decision encompasses both
very little. Nevertheless, many of the negative reac- voting rules and a social influence process. Voting
tions to a Darwinian approach to understanding or decision rules are explicit or implicit rules for
human behavior and human society continue to determining the group choice based on members’
stem from antipathy for social Darwinism, its final votes. Common rules are majority (the alter-
unconventional moral values, and its illogical native with 50%  +  1 votes wins), unanimity (the
foundation (viz the naturalistic fallacy). alternative with all votes wins), and plurality
(the alternative with more votes than any other
Tatsuya Kameda wins). In addition to using voting rules, small
groups also typically discuss the decision options,
See also Eugenics; Evolutionary Psychology; Holocaust; and preferences change as a result of information
Racism; System Justification Theory exchange, persuasion, and social pressure. In the
aforementioned example, assume that the commit-
Further Readings tee adheres to a majority decision rule: Three of the
Barkow, J. H., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (Eds.). (1992).
four members must ultimately agree to adopt a
The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the particular health plan. Unless they begin with such
generation of culture. Oxford, UK: Oxford University a majority, they will likely discuss the health care
Press. plans, and the preferences that individuals bring to
Hawkins, M. (1997). Social Darwinism in European and the group may change during this discussion. SDS
American thought, 1860–1945: Nature as model and theory captures how different alignments of initial
nature as threat. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge preferences are channeled through voting and social
University Press. influence processes to yield a collective choice.
Hofstadter, R. (1992). Social Darwinism in American The fundamental question in the SDS approach
thought. Boston: Beacon. (Original work published is, What is the committee likely to decide, given the
1944) initial preferences of its members or, more gener-
Social Decision Schemes 771

ally, given the preferences of the people who are the preferences of group members are solicited
potential members of the committee? The four ele- before or at the onset of group interaction and
ments of SDS are (1) individual preferences, thereby the distinguishable distribution of each
(2) group preference composition, (3) social deci- group identified. In estimation, the probabilities of
sion schemes, and (4) group choices. This entry obtaining each of the possible distinguishable dis-
considers each of these. tributions are estimated from information about
the distribution of opinions in the population of
potential group members. A common assumption
Individual Preferences
is that groups are composed by random selection.
Choices are defined on a finite set of mutually exclu- Under random selection, the probability of obtain-
sive and discrete alternatives. In the previous exam- ing each of the distinguishable distributions can be
ple, these alternatives are the three health insurance estimated if the probability distribution of individ-
plans: Plan A, Plan B, and Plan C. More generally, ual preferences in the population of potential group
the decision set is denoted as a = {a1, a2, a3, . . . , an}, members, p, is known. In the previous example,
where n is the number of alternatives. Individual suppose that an independent survey revealed that
preferences are often summarized as the probabili- 40% of employees favored Plan A, 30% favored
ties that a randomly chosen group member will Plan B, and 30% favored Plan C. That is,
prefer each alternative. These probabilities are p  =  {.4, .3, .3}. Using the multinomial probability
summarized in a vector, p = {p1, p2, p3, . . . , pn}, function, the probability of selecting randomly four
where pi is the probability than an individual will members who all favor Plan A (r = {4, 0, 0}) is .026,
prefer alternative ai. r = {2, 1, 1} will occur with a probability of .173,
and so on. In this manner, the probability of
obtaining each of the 15 possible distinguishable
Group Composition:
distributions can be computed. The complete set of
Distinguishable Distributions
observed or estimated relative frequencies of the
Information about each group’s preference com- possible distinguishable distribution is contained in
position is summarized in a distinguishable distri- a vector, π = {π1, π2, π3, . . . , πm}, where m is the
bution, r  =  {r1, r2, r3,  .  .  . , rn}, where ri is the number of possible distinguishable distributions.
number of group members who prefer alternative
ai. In the aforementioned example, the preferences
Social Decision Schemes:
of the four members of the group can be distrib-
The Relationships Among
uted over the three choices in 15 different ways,
Distinguishable Distributions
yielding 15 possible distinguishable distributions.
and Group Choices
One of these is {2, 1, 1}, in which two prefer Plan
A, one prefers Plan B, and one prefers Plan C. The social decision scheme matrix (D matrix) is
Other possibilities include {4, 0, 0}, {3, 1, 0}, {3, 0, 1}, the mechanism for summarizing propositions
{2, 2, 0}, and so forth. Each of these possibilities about the relationships between group preference
represents a unique alignment of support among compositions and group choices. The rows of the
the possible choices. A core idea in SDS theory is D matrix are defined by the possible distinguish-
that this initial alignment of support foretells what able distributions, and the columns are defined by
choices the group is likely ultimately to make. To the possible group choices. To conserve space,
illustrate, contrast a group with a {3, 1, 0} distin- consider a simpler example of the four-person
guishable distribution with one having a {1, 2, 1} committee deciding between two, rather than
distribution. There are numerous reasons (adop- three, health care plans. In this case, there are five
tion of majority rules, consensus pressures, etc.) to distinguishable distributions, and the D matrix
expect that the {3, 1, 0} group is more likely to would have the form given in Table 1.
adopt Plan A than is the {1, 2, 1} group. The entries in the D matrix within the rectangle
In short, it matters how groups are composed. In are the probabilities, dij, of the group’s choosing
SDS applications, group composition can be directly the jth option given that opinions are distributed
observed or can be estimated. In direct observation, as in the ith distinguishable distribution. Specifying
772 Social Decision Schemes

Table 1  The General Form of the D Matrix for Two Further imagine that the prominent features of
Alternatives and Four Members Plan A are superior to those of Plan B but that the
fine print of Plan A negates its apparent superior-
r Group Choice
ity. If an individual reads and understands this fine
(rA, rB) Plan A Plan B print, the individual favors Plan B, but otherwise,
the individual favors Plan A. Further assume that
(4, 0) d11 d12
the group will select Plan A unless one or more
(3, 1) d21 d22
members have detected this critical fine print that
(2, 2) d31 d32
damns Plan A. This process is dubbed truth wins
(1, 3) d41 d42
because only one member needs to support the
(0, 4) d51 d52
correct or best choice for the group to adopt it.
Such a truth-wins process generates a distinctly
different D matrix from the one generated by the
the values of these entries gives expression to theo- majority-wins idea.
retical ideas about group process. For example, the
idea that majorities win because they can outvote,
persuade, and pressure minorities suggests a majority- Table 3   A Truth-Wins Decision Scheme
wins scheme, given in Table 2.
r Group Choice
(rA, rB) Plan A Plan B
Table 2   A Majority-Wins Decision Scheme
(4, 0) 1.0 0.0
r Group Choice (3, 1) 0.0 1.0
(rA, rB) Plan A Plan B (2, 2) 0.0 1.0
(1, 3) 0.0 1.0
(4, 0) 1.0 0.0 (0, 4) 0.0 1.0
(3, 1) 1.0 0.0
(2, 2) 0.5 0.5
(1, 3) 0.0 1.0
(0, 4) 0.0 1.0
The Fundamental Equation of
SDS Theory: Predicting Group
Choices From Individual Preferences
Notice that in this simple example of majority
wins, an anomaly arises in the {2, 2} case, which The ultimate goal is to transform ideas about the
has no majority. Decision schemes often require decision process into predictions of group choices.
that theorists address such anomalies by providing Given the estimated or observed relative frequencies
a subscheme for distinguishable distributions that of distinguishable distributions summarized in
are not resolved by the major scheme. In this case, π = {π1, π2, π3, . . . , πm} and a defined D matrix, the
we might propose that the faction will win that has distribution of group choices can be predicted. Let
the most convincing arguments for its plan. P = {P1, P2, P3, . . . , Pn}, where n Pi is the probability
However, having no way of determining a priori that a group will choose the ith alternative. Then P
which faction this will be, one may simply predict is given by
that the {2, 2} case has a 50% chance of going
either way. P = π D.
Consider another conception of a group’s
decision-making process: truth wins. Suppose that To continue the foregoing example, suppose that
the group engages in an exhaustive exchange of a poll of employees revealed that 60% favored Plan
what members know about the two plans, and the A and 40%, Plan B. Then, randomly selecting mem-
group selects the plan that is supported by the pre- bers for the four-person committee would result in
ponderance of information aired in discussion. the estimate of π being {.13, .35, .35, .15, .03}.
Social Decision Schemes 773

Using the majority-wins D matrix from above, that is highly demonstrable for a group of advanced
Equation 1 expands to math majors may be low in demonstrability for
remedial math students. In the latter case, a mem-
P = { .13, .35, .35, .15, .03} ber with the right answer may not be able to articu-
| 1.0 0.0 | late the reasoning that produces the correct answer,
and the others may not understand the rationale if
| 1.0 0.0 |
it is presented. Laughlin showed that the number of
| 0.5 0.5 | supporters needed for a decision alternative to be
| 0.0 1.0 | adopted by the group increases as the demonstra-
bility of the decision decreases. That is, a choice
| 0.0 1.0 | = { .65, .35 }.
involving a task with low demonstrability (e.g., an
That is, operating under a majority-wins deci- aesthetic judgment) may require a majority (major-
sion scheme, about two thirds of four-person ity wins) or a supramajority (two-thirds–majority
groups would select Plan A. By way of compari- wins) to determine the group choice, whereas the
son, the same computation using the truth-wins D solution to a demonstrable logic problem may
matrix from above yields a prediction that only require only a minority of one (truth wins) or two
13% of these groups would select Plan A. (truth-supported wins) to be chosen by the group.
A model-testing approach permits one to evalu-
ate comparatively the validity of competing ideas Prospecting: Going Beyond Existing Data
about decision-making processes by (a) converting A useful feature of SDS is that it permits one to
competing ideas about process into D matrices, explore the effects of group size and changes in
(b) generating the predicted distributions of group individual preferences on group decisions. For
choices, and (c) comparing these predictions to example, suppose that majority wins adequately
observed outcomes. describes the decision process of the four-person
committee deciding among health care plans. Then,
Capturing Decision Processes SDS theory can predict the effects of changing com-
mittee size or changing the individual preferences in
SDS theory can be used to explore the effects of
the population of potential group members.
various features of the decision environment on
group process. For example, one prominent line of Garold Stasser
research by Patrick Laughlin and his colleagues See also Collective Induction; Conformity; Dynamical
considers the effect of task character and member Systems Approach; Group Problem Solving and
capabilities on decision processes. They contend Decision Making; Group Task; Minority Influence
that an important feature of the task environment
is the demonstrability of the correct or best deci- Further Readings
sion. A task is said to be highly demonstrable if the
Davis, J. H. (1973). Group decision and social
following conditions are met: (a) the correct choice
interaction: A theory of social decision schemes.
is identified by a mutually shared system of infer-
Psychological Review, 80, 97–125.
ence, (b) there is sufficient information to identify Davis, J. H., & Kerr, N. L. (1986). Thought experiments
the correct choice, (c) members preferring inferior and the problem of sparse data in small-group research.
options are able to understand the reasoning that In P. Goodman (Ed.), Designing effective work groups
leads to the correct choice, and (d) members prefer- (pp. 305–349). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
ring the correct choice are able and sufficiently Laughlin, P. R. (1999). Collective induction: Twelve
motivated to present the information and argu- postulates. Organization Behavior and Human
ments that demonstrate the superiority of the best Decision Processes, 80, 50–69.
choice. Logic and math problems are prime exam- Stasser, G. (1999). A primer of social decision scheme
ples of tasks that are potentially high in demonstra- theory: Models of group influence, competitive
bility, whereas judgments of aesthetics are not. model testing and prospective modeling.
However, demonstrability also depends on charac- Organization Behavior and Human Decision
teristics of the group members. A math problem Processes, 80, 3–20.
774 Social Deviance

circulate as conventional wisdom. Near the end of


Social Deviance the 20th century, the essentialist argument that
inherited genetic differences could account for
Social deviance, broadly defined, applies to any racial disparities in criminal behavior (and other
behavior, belief, or appearance that violates pre- social inequalities) reemerged despite its dismissal
vailing social norms. Norms are social standards by professional academics and criminologists.
concerning what members of a group expect and If essentialist arguments are fundamentally flawed,
believe is acceptable conduct in a given situation. then what explains their public popularity? It is
The power of norms to govern individual behav- likely that essentialist explanations for deviant behav-
ior derives from the perception that others endorse ior remain alluring because they seemingly conform
and will enforce the normative standards. When to everyday observation. Social-psychological
an individual’s or a minority group’s behavior, research has demonstrated that individuals are
belief, or appearance deviates from normative inclined to attribute the cause of another person’s
standards, the individual or the group members behavior to that person’s personal character traits,
risk becoming the targets of social disapproval even when relevant situational or environmental
and other forms of punishment. Examples of factors clearly account for the behavior. This bias is
social deviance range from minor breaches of particularly strong when the behavior is perceived
social etiquette to major violations of the law. as unexpected, extraordinary, or threatening or has
This entry examines the development of thinking seemingly negative consequences—all common fea-
about social deviance, describes current perspec- tures of social deviance.
tives on crime and punishment, and then examines
the group dynamics of social deviance and its
impact on social change.
Contemporary Understandings
of Social Deviance
Many normative standards are codified into laws,
Historical Background and
and violations of the law are classified as crimes.
Perception of Deviant Behavior
Criminologists investigate the causes and conse-
Before the Enlightenment, it was widely accepted quences of this particular type of social deviance.
that social deviance was compelled or facilitated by Criminal deviance differs from other types in that
demonic or otherwise nefarious supernatural forces. it exposes the deviant to state-mandated punish-
Social Darwinism in the late 19th and early 20th ments. While legal standards may define legally
centuries recast this basic idea using a new, “scien- appropriate conduct at any given time, laws
tific” vocabulary. Instead of supernatural forces, it change over time and differ from one jurisdiction
was thought that inherited biological traits com- to the next.
pelled individuals to engage in deviant behavior. The rise of the labeling perspective in the 1960s
Cesare Lombroso (1836–1909) argued that the challenged the assumption that certain behaviors
physical appearance, cultural practices, and criminal were invariably deviant. The majority of researchers
behavior of marginal or lower status social groups now recognize that the labeling of particular indi-
reflected such “degenerative” biological traits. viduals or social groups as deviant often says as
Beginning with classical criminologists such as much about the power of the labeler as it does about
Cesare Beccaria (1738–1794) and Jeremy Bentham the behavior of those who are labeled.
(1748–1832), explanations of deviant behavior The normative standards adopted by an observer
have shifted away from such essentialist beliefs. will determine whether the observer defines another
The preponderance of findings from contemporary person as deviant. Because individuals belong to
research on deviant behavior suggests that it is multiple social groups, a given behavior may be
overwhelmingly, and with rare exception, rooted subject to evaluation according to different and at
in social processes rather than an individual’s fun- times contradictory standards. For example, par-
damental traits. However, the belief that deviant ents who choose to work long hours instead of
behavior reflects innate deficiencies in the charac- seeing their children may be evaluated as deviant
ter of individuals or social groups continues to when the standard of familial norms is applied, but
Social Deviance 775

they may be evaluated as conforming when the was not considered the punishment, but rather a
standard of workplace norms is applied. Likewise, means to hold criminals awaiting trial or punish-
premeditated killing can evoke widespread disap- ment. Modern imprisonment encapsulates both
proval and a long prison sentence, but it may bring active and passive forms of punishment in that it
popular acclaim and honors when authorized dur- imposes deprivations on inmates while also cur-
ing times of war. Therefore, what constitutes social tailing their access to civil society.
deviance is in the eye of the observer rather than a
necessary feature of the observed person or the
The Group Dynamics of Social Deviance
person’s behavior. While there may be widespread
consensus over definitions of deviance, such defini- Social groups distinguish themselves from one
tions are never exempt from challenge or change. another according to the normative standards of
The stigma of deviance can impact members of behavior and appearance each attempts to
many social categories (e.g., race, gender, sexual embody. The very existence of a group is pre-
orientation). Stigmatization can create social barri- mised on its ability to distinguish itself from
ers for individuals because others categorize them as other, perhaps very similar, social groups.
belonging to a particular group. For example, recent Examples include the characteristic behaviors and
research has demonstrated that even when actual appearances associated with various high school
amounts of deviant behavior and social neglect are cliques or that distinguish college sororities from
taken into account, neighborhoods with a higher one another. Social identity theory argues that
concentration of Black residents are perceived as members of a given group possess a mental image
more deviant and disorderly than are comparable of the qualities that define an ideal group mem-
White neighborhoods. In addition, research on ber. These group prototypes are mental represen-
employment opportunities in New York City found tations of the values, traits, and behaviors that
that Black male applicants with no criminal history exemplify the group and distinguish ingroup from
had the same chance of receiving a job interview as outgroup members. Individuals who conform to
equally qualified White male felons. the group prototype receive evaluations that are
more positive and are granted higher status by
fellow group members. Those who deviate from
Punishment
the group prototype are viewed negatively and
Social deviance is closely associated with the pun- risk marginalization within the group or exclu-
ishments it often elicits from observers. Punishing a sion from the group altogether.
deviant symbolically reinforces a group’s norma- In groups that are motivated to achieve a goal,
tive standard and sense of collective identity. such as winning a competition, solving a problem,
Although the specific type of punishments available or accomplishing some other activity, group mem-
to any given group may vary from mundane (e.g., bers often consider deviance a threat to the group’s
stern looks, disregard) to dramatic (e.g., public overall performance. In such goal-motivated
humiliation, physical abuse, death), all groups groups, members typically expect some measure of
wield both active and passive forms of punishment. personal gain if the group achieves its goals.
Active punishments directly penalize a deviant Therefore, members have a stake in maximizing
(e.g., reprimands, monetary fines, physical pain), the group’s effectiveness by personally conforming
whereas passive punishments either curtail or sus- to group norms and supporting the punishment of
pend a deviant’s access to social interaction and deviant behavior. For example, if a lower ranking
valued resources. Although active punishments are member fails to display proper deference to higher
more recognizable, passive punishments can be ranking members—perhaps by refusing to follow
equally distressful, particularly if the deviant closely directions or assuming the right to oversee and
identifies with the group or is otherwise highly direct the activity of others—that member risks
dependent on the group for important resources. social disapproval and punishment. Because asser-
The standard punishment for serious criminal tive behavior is normatively inconsistent with
deviance in most modern societies is imprison- lower ranking positions, other members typically
ment. For most of human history, imprisonment view such behavior as an illegitimate use of power
776 Social Deviance

that undermines group efforts. However, group suppressing, social deviance. However, the behav-
members will treat the same behavior performed ior and ideas of a deviant often become more allur-
by those with higher rank as legitimate and wel- ing to others when the deviating individual does
come contributions to the group’s efforts. not succumb to social pressure but instead endures
Because their behavior diverges from group in the face of it.
norms, deviant individuals or minority groups are Again, social controls on deviance typically pre-
vulnerable to social exclusion. However, the nega- vail in countering immediate challenges to the
tive impact of a deviant label can sometimes be status quo. However, like the proverbial squeaky
reduced or avoided altogether by demonstrating a wheel getting the oil, because social deviance is
general commitment to the group or by explicitly unexpected or unfamiliar, it attracts the attention
framing one’s behavior or ideas as motivated by a of others. By attracting attention, deviants receive
desire to promote group success. an opportunity to influence other group members
in ways that their conforming brethren do not.
Although the deviants’ influence may not be imme-
Deviance as Dissent and
diately apparent, research demonstrates that coun-
Impetus for Social Change
ternormative ideas sometimes alter the subsequent
By posing a challenge to conventional norms, decision-making behavior of people who are
social deviance can also be a powerful means of exposed to them. Therefore, while social deviance
affecting social change. Although deviants run the may often fail to influence a group at any given
risk of marginalization by undermining either the time, it can indirectly alter a group’s future trajec-
group’s identity or its productive efficacy, every tory by drawing attention to, and raising questions
normative standard was at some time a new— about, taken-for-granted normative expectations.
perhaps deviant—behavior or idea. Rather than
merely serving as a target for group disapproval, Brian Colwell
social deviance can, by posing a challenge to the
status quo, also redefine a group prototype or pro- See also Anticonformity; Conformity; Deviance;
mote innovative strategies for group achievement. Essentialism; Legitimation; Normative Influence;
One consequence of social norms is that they Social Identity Theory; Status Characteristics/
can perpetuate public compliance even when pri- Expectation States Theory; Stigma; Subjective Group
vate support for the behavior or ideas they secure Dynamics
is weak or waning. Public compliance has a self-
fulfilling effect of maintaining the perceived con-
sensus and strength of normative standards. In Further Readings
situations such as these, acts of social deviance
Becker, H. S. (1963). Outsiders: Studies in the sociology
have the potential to unmask the façade of group
of deviance. New York: Free Press.
consensus and stimulate a change in normative
Cullen, F. T., Gendreau, P., Jarjoura, G. R., & Wright, J. P.
expectations. When taken as a potential alternative
(1997). Crime and the bell curve: Lessons from
to normative social practices or beliefs, social devi-
intelligent criminology. Crime & Delinquency, 46(6),
ance is akin to the concept of social dissent. 387–411.
Individuals or minority groups that acquire the Marques, J. M., Abrams, D., Páez, D., & Hogg, M. A.
deviant label can expect challenges by those vested (2003). Social categorization, social identification, and
in the normative status quo and those with com- rejection of deviant group members. In M. A. Hogg &
peting visions of acceptable behavior or ideas. S. Tindale (Eds.), Group processes (pp. 400–424).
Initially, fellow group members will attempt to Malden, MA: Blackwell.
“correct” the deviant’s errant behavior or beliefs Nemeth, C., & Nemeth-Brown, B. (2003). Better than
through gentle persuasion or subtle verbal and individuals? The potential benefits of dissent and
nonverbal cues. If the deviant behavior persists, diversity for group creativity. In P. B. Paulus & B. A.
the individual may become the target of more Nijstad (Eds.), Group creativity: Innovation through
forceful punishments. These punishments are often collaboration (pp. 63–84). New York: Oxford
a very effective means of correcting, or at least University Press.
Social Dilemmas 777

Ridgeway, C. (1993). Legitimacy, status, and dominance the prisoner’s dilemma, the public good dilemma,
behavior in groups. In S. Worchel & J. A. Simpson and the commons dilemma, and each of these sto-
(Eds.), Conflict between people and groups ries has been modeled as an experimental game.
(pp. 110–127). Chicago: Nelson-Hall. The prisoner’s dilemma game was developed by
Sampson, R. J., & Raudenbush, S. W. (2004). Seeing scientists in the 1950s. The cover story for the
disorder: Neighborhood stigma and the social game involved two prisoners who are separately
construction of “Broken windows.” Social Psychology given the choice between testifying against the
Quarterly, 67(4), 319–342. other (noncooperation) or keeping silent (coopera-
tion). The outcomes are such that each of them is
better off testifying against the other, but if they
both pursue this strategy, they are both worse off
Social Dilemmas than if they remain silent.

Social dilemmas are situations in which private inter-


ests are at odds with collective interests. Such situa- Table 1   Payoff Matrix for Prisoner’s Dilemma
tions arise because people frequently attach more
Player 2
weight to their short-term selfish interests than to the
long-term interests of the group, organization, or Cooperate Not cooperate
society to which they belong. Many of the most chal-
lenging issues people face, from the interpersonal to −1 0
the intergroup, are at their core social dilemmas. Cooperate
Consider these examples. As individuals, we are −1 −3
each better off when we make use of public services Player 1
such as schools, hospitals, and recreational grounds
−3 −2
without contributing to their maintenance. How­
Not cooperate
ever, if we each acted according to our narrow self-
interest, then these resources would not be provided, 0 −2
and everyone would be worse off. Similarly, in the
long run, everyone would benefit from a cleaner
Notes: Payoffs represent number of years in prison associated
environment, yet how many people are prepared to with a cooperative choice (remaining silent) or a non­
voluntarily reduce their carbon footprint by saving cooperative choice (testifying against the other); lower
more energy or driving or flying less frequently? diagonals reflect payoffs for Player 1, and upper diagonals
reflect payoffs for Player 2. As can be seen, each player is
better off testifying against the other, provided that the other
Definitions and Metaphors remains silent (the first player goes free, whereas the second
players goes to prison for 3 years). Yet if both players testify
Social dilemmas are formally defined by two prop- against each other, then both players are worse off (they each
erties: (1) each person has an individual rational serve a prison sentence of 2 years) than if both remained silent
strategy that yields the best outcome in all circum- (they each serve for only 1 year).
stances (the noncooperative choice); (2) if all indi-
viduals pursue this strategy, it results in a deficient
collective outcome—everyone would be better off The public good dilemma has the same proper-
by cooperating. Researchers frequently use experi- ties as the prisoner’s dilemma game but involves
mental games to study social dilemmas in the labo- more than two individuals. A public good is a
ratory. An experimental game is a situation in resource from which all may benefit regardless of
which participants choose between cooperative and whether they contributed to the good. For instance,
noncooperative alternatives, yielding consequences people can enjoy the city parks regardless of
for themselves and others in terms of their mone- whether they contributed to their upkeep through
tary outcomes. local taxes. Public goods are nonexcludable: Once
The literature on social dilemmas has histori- these goods are provided, nobody can be excluded
cally revolved around three metaphorical stories, from using them. As a result, there is a temptation
778 Social Dilemmas

to enjoy the good without making a contribution. is economic game theory (i.e., rational choice
Those who do so are called free riders, and theory or expected utility theory). Game theory
although it is rational to free ride, if all do so, then assumes that individuals are rational actors moti-
the public good is not provided, and all are worse vated to maximize their utilities. Utility is often
off. Researchers study primarily two public good narrowly defined in terms of people’s economic
dilemma games in the laboratory. Participants get self-interest. Game theory thus predicts a nonco-
a monetary endowment to play these games and operative outcome in a social dilemma. Although
decide how much to invest in a private fund versus this is a useful starting premise, there are many
a group fund. It is individually rational to invest in circumstances in which people may deviate from
the private fund, yet all would be better off invest- individual rationality, demonstrating the limita-
ing in the group fund because this yields a bonus. tions of economic game theory.
In the continuous game, the more that people Biological and evolutionary approaches provide
invest in the group fund, the larger their share of useful complementary insights into decision mak-
the bonus. In the step-level game, people get a ing in social dilemmas. According to selfish gene
share of the bonus if the total group investments theory, humans (like any other organism) have
exceed a critical (step) level. evolved to maximize their inclusive fitness, the
Finally, the commons dilemma was inspired number of copies of their genes passed on to the
by the metaphor of the Tragedy of the Commons, next generation. Under certain conditions, selfish
a story about a group of herders having open genes can produce cooperative individuals. For
access to a common parcel of land on which their instance, it could be profitable for family mem-
cows graze. It is in each herder’s interest to put bers, who share a portion of the same genes, to
as many cows as possible onto the land, even if help each other because doing so facilitates the
the commons is damaged as a result. The herder survival of their genes. Reciprocity theories pro-
receives all the benefits from the additional cows, vide a different account of the evolution of coop-
and the damage to the commons is shared by the eration. In repeated social dilemma games between
entire group. Yet if all herders make this indi- the same individuals, cooperation might emerge
vidually rational decision, the commons will be because people can punish a partner for failing to
destroyed, and all will suffer. Compare this with cooperate. This encourages reciprocal coopera-
the use of nonrenewable resources such as water tion. Reciprocity can explain why people cooper-
or fish: When water is used at a higher rate than ate in dyads, but what about larger groups?
the reservoirs are replenished or when fish con- Evolutionary theories of indirect reciprocity and
sumption exceeds the reproductive capacity of costly signaling, which assume that there are indi-
the fish, then we face a tragedy of the commons. rect benefits derived from a cooperative act, may
The experimental commons game involves a be useful in explaining large-scale cooperation.
common resource pool (filled with money or When people can selectively choose partners to
points) from which individuals harvest without play games with, it pays to invest in getting a coop-
depleting it. It is individually rational to harvest erative reputation. Through being cooperative,
as much as possible, but the resource collapses if individuals can signal to others that they are kind
people harvest more than the replenishment rate and generous people, which might make them
of the pool. attractive partners or group members.
Psychological models offer additional insights
into social dilemmas by questioning the game
Theories of Social Dilemmas theory assumption that individuals pursue their
narrow self-interest. Interdependence theory sug-
Social dilemmas have attracted a great deal of gests that people transform a given social situation
interest in the social and behavioral sciences. into one that is consistent with their motivational
Economists, biologists, psychologists, sociolo- and strategic preferences. Playing a prisoner’s
gists, and political scientists alike study when dilemma with close family or friends, for example,
people are selfish or cooperative in a social will change the outcomes so that it becomes ratio-
dilemma. The most influential theoretical approach nal to cooperate. Whether individuals approach a
Social Dilemmas 779

social dilemma selfishly or cooperatively might also Research on the development of social value orien-
depend on what attributions they make about other tations suggests an influence of factors such as fam-
players, such as whether they believe others are ily history (prosocials have more sibling sisters), age
greedy or cooperative. Similarly, goal–expectation (older people are more prosocial), culture (Western
theory assumes that people might cooperate under cultures have more individualists), sex (more women
two conditions: They must (1) have a cooperative are prosocial), and even university course (econom-
goal and (2) expect others to cooperate. Another ics students are less prosocial). However, until we
psychological model, the appropriateness model, know more about the psychological mechanisms
questions the game theory assumption that indi- underlying these social value orientations, we lack
viduals rationally calculate their outcomes. Instead, a good basis for interventions.
many people base their decisions on what people Many people also have group-regarding prefer-
around them do and use simple heuristics, like an ences. People’s group association is a powerful
equality rule, to decide whether to cooperate. predictor of their social dilemma behavior. When
people identify highly with a group, they contribute
more to public goods and harvest less from com-
Solutions to Social Dilemmas mon resources. Group identifications have even
Studying the conditions under which people coop- more striking effects when there is intergroup com-
erate might lead to recommendations for solving petition. When social dilemmas involve two or
social dilemmas in society. The literature distin- more groups of players, there is much less coopera-
guishes between three broad classes of solutions— tion than when individuals play. Yet intergroup
motivational, strategic, and structural—that vary in competition also facilitates intragroup coopera-
whether they assume actors are motivated purely tion, especially among men. When a resource is
by self-interest and in whether they change the rules depleting rapidly, people are more willing to com-
of the social dilemma game or leave them intact. pensate for selfish decisions by ingroup members
than outgroup members. Furthermore, the free-
rider problem is much less pronounced when there
Motivational Solutions
is intergroup competition. However, intergroup
Motivational solutions assume that people have competition can be a double-edged sword. Encou­
other-regarding preferences. Considerable litera- raging competition between groups might serve the
ture on social values shows that people have stable temporary needs of ingroup members, but the
preferences for how much they value outcomes for social costs of intergroup conflicts can be severe for
self versus others. Research has concentrated on either group. It is not entirely clear why people
three social motives: (1) individualism, or maximiz- cooperate more as part of a group. One possibility is
ing one’s own outcomes regardless of others; that people become genuinely more altruistic. Other
(2) competition, or maximizing one’s own out- possibilities are that people are more concerned
comes relative to others; and (3) cooperation, or about their ingroup reputation or are more likely to
maximizing joint outcomes. The first two orienta- expect returns from ingroup than outgroup mem-
tions are referred to as proself orientations and the bers. This question needs further investigation.
third as a prosocial orientation. There is much sup- Another factor that might affect the weight indi-
port for the idea that prosocial and proself indi- viduals assign to group outcomes is the possibility
viduals behave differently when confronted with a of communication. A robust finding in the social
social dilemma in the laboratory or the field. People dilemma literature is that cooperation increases
with prosocial orientations weigh the moral impli- when people are given a chance to talk to each
cations of their decisions more and see cooperation other. It has been quite a challenge to explain this
as the most intelligent choice in a social dilemma. effect. One motivational reason is that communica-
When there are conditions of scarcity, such as a tion reinforces a sense of group identity. Another
water shortage, prosocials harvest less from a com- reason is that communication offers an opportunity
mon resource. Similarly, prosocials are more con- for moral suasion so that people are exposed to
cerned about the environmental consequences of, arguments to do what is morally right. But there
for example, taking the car or public transport. may be strategic considerations as well. First, com-
780 Social Dilemmas

munication gives group members a chance to make on conservation behavior has shown that selective
promises and explicit commitments about what incentives in the form of monetary rewards are
they will do. Yet it is not clear whether many peo- effective in decreasing domestic water and electric-
ple stick to their promises to cooperate. Similarly, ity use. Furthermore, experimental studies show
through communication people are able to gather that cooperation is more likely if individuals have
information about what others do. However, in the ability to punish defectors. Yet implementation
social dilemmas, this information might produce of reward and punishment systems can be problem-
ambiguous results: If I know that most people atic for various reasons. First, there are significant
cooperate, might I be tempted to act selfishly? costs associated with creating and administering
sanction systems. Providing selective rewards and
punishments requires support institutions to moni-
Strategic Solutions
tor the activities of both cooperators and noncoop-
A second category of solutions is strategic. In erators, and these institutions can be quite expensive
repeated interactions, cooperation might emerge to maintain. Second, these systems are themselves
when people adopt a tit-for tat (TFT) strategy. TFT public goods because one can enjoy the benefits of
is characterized by making a first cooperative move a sanctioning system without contributing to its
and then mimicking your partner’s subsequent existence. The police, army, and judicial systems
moves. Thus, if the partner does not cooperate, you will fail to operate unless people are willing to pay
mimic this move until he or she starts to cooperate. taxes to support them. This raises the question
Computer tournaments in which different strate- whether many people want to contribute to these
gies were pitted against each other have shown institutions. Experimental research suggests that
TFT to be the most successful strategy in social particularly low trust individuals are willing to
dilemmas. TFT is a common strategy in real-world invest money in punishment systems, and a consid-
social dilemmas because it is nice but firm. Think, erable portion of people are willing to punish non-
for instance, about marriage contracts, rental cooperators even if they personally do not profit.
agreements, and international trade policies that all Some researchers even suggest that altruistic pun-
use TFT tactics. However, TFT is quite an unfor- ishment is an evolved mechanism for human coop-
giving strategy, and in noisy real-world dilemmas, eration. A third limitation is that punishment and
a more forgiving strategy might be better. reward systems might undermine people’s volun-
Even when partners might not meet again, it tary cooperative intention. Some people get a
could be strategically wise to cooperate. When “warm glow” from cooperation, and the provision
people can selectively choose whom to interact with, of selective incentives might crowd out their coop-
it might pay to be seen as a cooperator. Research erative intention. Similarly, the presence of a nega-
shows that cooperators create better opportunities tive sanctioning system might undermine voluntary
for themselves than do noncooperators: Cooperators cooperation. Research has found that punishment
are selectively preferred as collaborative partners, systems decrease the trust that people have in oth-
romantic partners, and group leaders. This occurs, ers. Thus, sanctioning is a delicate strategy.
however, only when people’s social dilemma choices Boundary structural solutions modify the social
are monitored by others. Public acts of altruism and dilemma structure, and such strategies are often
cooperation, such as charity giving, philanthropy, very effective. An often studied solution is the
and bystander intervention, are probably manifesta- establishment of a leader or authority to manage a
tions of reputation-based cooperation. social dilemma. Experimental studies on commons
dilemmas show that overharvesting groups are
more willing to appoint a leader to look after the
Structural Solutions
common resource. There is a preference for a
Structural solutions change the rules of the game democratically elected prototypical leader with
by either modifying the social dilemma or removing limited power, especially when people’s group ties
the dilemma altogether. Not surprisingly, many are strong. When ties are weak, groups prefer a
studies have shown that cooperation rates go up as stronger leader with a coercive power base. The
the benefits of cooperation increase. Field research question remains whether authorities can be trusted
Social Dominance Theory 781

in governing social dilemmas, and field research See also Commons Dilemma; Cooperation and
shows that legitimacy and fair procedures are Competition; Evolutionary Psychology; Free Riding;
extremely important in citizens’ willingness to Group Problem Solving and Decision Making;
accept authorities. Leadership; Negotiation and Bargaining; Prisoner’s
Dilemma; Social Identity Theory
Another structural solution is reducing group
size. Cooperation generally declines as group size
increases. In larger groups, people often feel less Further Readings
responsible for the common good and believe,
Axelrod, R. A. (1984). The evolution of cooperation.
rightly or wrongly, that their contribution does not
New York: Basic Books.
matter. Reducing the scale—for example through
De Cremer, D., & van Vugt, M. (1999). Social
dividing a large-scale dilemma into smaller, more
identification effects in social dilemmas: A
manageable parts—might be an effective tool in
transformation of motives. European Journal of Social
raising cooperation.
Psychology, 29, 871–893.
Another proposed boundary solution is to Kollock, P. (1998). Social dilemmas: Anatomy of
remove the social from the dilemma by means of cooperation. Annual Review of Sociology, 24,
privatization. People are often better in managing 183–214.
a private resource than a resource shared with Messick, D. M., & Brewer, M. B. (1983). Solving social
many others. However, it is not easy to privatize dilemmas: A review. In L. Wheeler & P. Shaver (Eds.),
movable resources such as fish, water, and clean Review of personality and social psychology (Vol. 4,
air. Privatization also raises concerns about social pp. 11–44). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
justice because not everyone may be able to get an Ridley, M. (1997). Origins of virtue. London: Penguin
equal share. Finally, privatization might erode Classics.
people’s intrinsic motivation to cooperate. van Lange, P. A. M., Otten, W., De Bruin, E. M. N., &
Joireman, J. A. (1997). Development of prosocial,
individualistic, and competitive orientations: Theory
Conclusion and preliminary evidence. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 73, 733–746.
As social dilemmas in society become more press-
van Vugt, M., & De Cremer, D. (1999). Leadership in
ing, there is an increasing need for policies. It is
social dilemmas: The effects of group identification on
encouraging that much social dilemma research is collective actions to provide public goods. Journal of
applied to areas such as organizational welfare, Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 587–599.
public health, and local and global environmental Weber, M., Kopelman, S., & Messick, D. M. (2004). A
change. The emphasis is shifting from purely labo- conceptual review of social dilemmas: Applying a logic
ratory research to research testing combinations of of appropriateness. Personality and Social Psychology
motivational, strategic, and structural solutions. It Review, 8, 281–307.
is also noteworthy that social dilemmas are an Yamagishi, T. (1986). The structural goal/expectation
interdisciplinary research field with participation theory of cooperation in social dilemmas. In E. Lawler
from researchers from various behavioral sciences (Ed.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 3,
who are developing unifying theoretical frame- pp. 51–87). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
works (such as evolutionary theory) to study social
dilemmas. For instance, there is a burgeoning neu-
roeconomics literature that uses neuroscience meth-
ods to study brain correlates of decision making in
social dilemmas. Finally, social dilemma research-
Social Dominance Theory
ers are increasingly using more dynamic experi-
Social dominance theory addresses the question of
mental designs to see, for instance, what happens if
why all large human societies with economic sur-
people can voluntarily or involuntarily enter or exit
plus are structured as group-based hierarchies.
a social dilemma or play different social dilemmas
Social dominance theory integrates ideas from a
at the same time within different groups.
broad variety of social science theories, including
Mark van Vugt authoritarian personality theory, social identity
782 Social Dominance Theory

theory, realistic group conflict theory, Marxism, better opportunities, resources, and services to
feminism, evolutionary psychology, elite theory, members of dominant groups than to members of
social representations, symbolic racism theory, subordinate groups. Discrimination by individuals
and others. Social dominance theory is a multi- also systematically sustains inequality because
level theory, explaining how processes within people tend to discriminate in like fashion.
individuals, such as prejudice and stereotyping,
interface with practices of groups and institutions.
Legitimizing Myths
Further, social dominance theory considers how
cultural ideologies organize patterns of behavior The coordination among different actors in both
to structure group-based power in societies. This individual discrimination and institutional dis-
entry provides an overview. crimination such that certain groups are favored
and others disfavored is largely accomplished
through shared legitimizing myths. Legitimizing
Structure of Group-Dominance Societies
myths are cultural ideologies that prescribe how
Whether their government is theocratic, demo- people with certain social identities should act and
cratic, monarchical, or communist, societies have a be treated by others, what social priorities are
three-part, group-based structure, with adults important, or who deserves what. The contents of
dominating children, men exercising more power these myths can be quite varied within and between
than women, and at least one socially defined cultures and across historical time.
group that includes men, women, and children For example, propositions (and attitudes) that
(e.g., a race, religion, class, caste, or sect) exercis- justify Christian discrimination against Muslims
ing more power than at least one other group. have ranged from the theological conception that
Social dominance theory emphasizes how these Muslims were unholy (disgust) to the view that
three kinds of group-based hierarchy—age, gen- Muslims immigrate to the West to take jobs
der, and arbitrary set—intersect. Therefore, social (resentment) and to the assumption that most
dominance theory does not view each kind of hier- Muslims are terrorists (fear). In social discourse
archy as a subset of something else. and persuasive processes, legitimizing myths make
Across societies, economic systems, and histori- practices or outcomes that sustain inequality seem
cal time, the definition of the arbitrary groups and justified, natural, and necessary, or they may
their predominance has varied substantially. For obscure the fact that practices produce inequality
example, Muslims no longer dominate around the by framing it as something else (e.g., equal oppor-
Mediterranean. There has been less societal vari- tunity, for the greater good, modern, traditional,
ability in gender and age dominance, likely because efficient).
of the universal presence of families. Thus, although The “truth value” of these myths cannot be
some societies revere older people and some do determined, but they have the property of making
not, and although some societies have gender par- themselves come true by coordinating discrimina-
ity in their national legislatures and many do not, tion. For example, a stereotype that a subordinate
gender inequality and age inequality are more con- group is criminal can contribute to more extensive
stant and less lethal than arbitrary-set inequality. policing of that group, higher conviction rates, and
For a society to sustain group-based inequality, thus to a disproportionate number of convicted
it must systematically distribute whatever people criminals among that group.
value (e.g., wealth, prestige, health care, pleasant Myths that serve to sustain inequality are hier-
living places) and whatever they devalue (e.g., dan- archy enhancing. Myths that promote greater
ger, difficult jobs) more in favor of the dominant equality are hierarchy attenuating. Legitimizing
arbitrary group than subordinate groups. A major myths can change their hierarchical function when
vehicle for such unequal distribution is discrimina- people replace the meanings with social practices
tion by institutions. As documented in their 1999 that have opposite implications for hierarchy. For
book, Jim Sidanius and Felicia Pratto found that, example, the Protestant work ethic developed as a
the world over, corporate employers, financial hierarchy-attenuating myth because it privileged
institutions, schools, and health facilities provide the mercantile class over the nobility that ruled
Social Dominance Theory 783

western Europe. At present in the United States, subordinate ethnic or sexual-orientation groups.
the type of meritocracy derived from the Protestant People lower in social dominance orientation tend
work ethic privileges people who already have to be higher in empathy, benevolence, openness,
wealth, education, and the customs that are con- agreeableness, and universal values than are people
sidered high status, namely, Whites. higher in social dominance orientation. People
higher in social dominance orientation assume that
the world is a zero-sum competition, and their
Social Dominance Orientation
motivation not to lose this competition can lead
When people have freedom of choice over their them to be callous and hostile. However, social
actions, social dominance theory assumes that dominance orientation is unrelated to being task
whether they discriminate in hierarchy-enhancing focused or efficacious. Some have argued that there
or hierarchy-attenuating ways, and whether they are developmental antecedents to social dominance
choose hierarchy-attenuating or hierarchy-enhanc- orientation. For example, John Duckitt has hypoth-
ing roles, is influenced by a general value they have esized that people who are raised with little affec-
for group inequality versus equality. This psycho- tion develop a dog-eat-dog worldview and become
logical orientation is called social dominance ori- higher in social dominance orientation.
entation. People who are relatively high in social
dominance orientation (unegalitarian) have been
Behavioral Asymmetry
found to endorse sexist beliefs, to support more
conservative than liberal political parties, and to Because social dominance theory is fundamentally
endorse prejudice against the local subordinate about group differences in power, it has explicitly
group more than do people lower in social domi- theorized about the social and psychological situa-
nance orientation. tions of dominance and subordination. One impor-
This finding has emerged in the United States, tant principle it has explicated is that of behavioral
Sweden, Israel, New Zealand, South Africa, asymmetry, which states that behaviors that are
Canada, Spain, France, Belgium, Mexico, Australia, generally self- or group beneficial will be more likely
Lebanon, China, Taiwan, Italy, and elsewhere, to be performed by members of dominant than
even though the contents of sexism, the particular members of subordinate groups. Sidanius and Pratto
political system and political parties, and the sub- have reviewed an array of such behaviors. For
ordinate arbitrary group and measures of prejudice example, Blacks are less likely to spend time study-
differ from society to society. Social dominance ing and are less likely to follow their doctor’s orders
orientation also correlates with prejudice based on than Whites are. The fact that people in subordinate
nationalism and sexual orientation. Social domi- groups do not act in ways that favor themselves as
nance orientation is a robust individual difference much as do people in dominant groups is, then,
measure of group prejudice, and it accounts for another bias that contributes to group inequality.
variability in prejudice independent of right wing A special case of behavioral asymmetry is ideo-
authoritarianism and political–economic conserva- logical asymmetry. The principle of ideological
tism. Social dominance orientation reliably predicts asymmetry holds that psychological factors that are
a variety of discriminatory behaviors in experi- expected to be associated with social dominance
ments and is relatively stable over time, although it orientation, such as ingroup identification and
can change with educational socialization. endorsement of hierarchy-enhancing ideologies, will
It is not known what causes a person to become be more strongly associated among dominant group
relatively high or low in social dominance orienta- members than among subordinate group members.
tion, but there are consistent correlations between For example, ethnic identification is more strongly
social dominance orientation and other variables associated with social dominance orientation among
across nations. Men are consistently higher in Whites than among Blacks and Latinos in the United
social dominance orientation than women are, States. In fact, even people in nonhegemonic societ-
and, in most studies, people in the dominant ethnic ies, such as Lebanon, have been shown to favor the
or sexual-orientation groups are also higher in global hegemony of the United States if they are high
social dominance orientation than people in the in social dominance orientation. Related predictions
784 Social Dominance Theory

concerning group differences in the relations among sus and because hierarchy-attenuating myths and
identity, ingroup bias, and system justification have actors will tend to curb the excesses of hierarchy-
been derived from social identity theory and system enhancing myths and actors. Elite groups that rely
justification theory, but often relying on the concept more on violence than on legitimizing myths to
of social dominance orientation. maintain dominance are likely to be unstable,
because they produce resentment. Moreover, once
these groups have been removed from power, a
Gender and Group Dominance
power vacuum occurs that invites multiple parties
Social dominance theory recognizes that men play a to engage in conflict until a new dominating order
special role in maintaining group dominance in that is established.
men monopolize the forceful institutional roles that
sustain not just order but group dominance, includ- Felicia Pratto
ing judiciary, lawyers, militaries, and police. The See also Authoritarian Personality; Discrimination;
primary targets of forceful control by such institu- Dominance Hierarchies; Ideology; Power; Prejudice;
tions are men in subordinate groups. Moreover, Racism; Social Identity Theory; System Justification
men are overrepresented (compared with women) Theory
in unofficial coalitions that use force to exert power,
including criminal gangs, substate terrorist groups,
and revolutionary and liberation movements that
use violence. In some sense, then, considerable Further Readings
intergroup violence is actually conflict between Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other “authoritarian
coalitions of men, although of course women and personality.” In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in
children can also participate in and suffer from such experimental social psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 48–92).
conflicts. This is one fact that shows that gender San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
inequality and arbitrary-set inequality interlock and Duckitt, J. (2001). A dual-process cognitive-motivational
are not just special cases of each other. theory of ideology and prejudice. In M. P. Zanna
Women are more likely than men to do hierar- (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology
chy-attenuating work, or work that disproportion- (Vol. 33, pp. 41–113). San Diego, CA: Academic
ately benefits members of low-power groups, such Press.
as social work and volunteer work that aid the Guimond, S., Dambrun, M., Michinov, N., & Duarte, S.
poor, the sick, and immigrants. Gender differences (2003). Does social dominance generate prejudice?
in obtaining roles that attenuate or enhance hierar- Integrating individual and contextual determinants of
chy are not due only to gender differences in social intergroup cognitions. Journal of Personality & Social
dominance orientation but also to sex discrimina- Psychology, 84, 697–721.
Pratto, F., Liu, J., Levin, S., Sidanius, J., Shih, M.,
tion in hiring.
Bachrach, H., et al. (2000). Social dominance
orientation and the legitimization of inequality across
Power Dynamics cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31,
369–409.
The apparatus of social dominance theory outlines Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., & Levin, S. (2006). Social
how social inequality could be made more or less dominance theory and the dynamics of group power:
severe and also more or less stable. Societies should Taking stock and looking forward. European Review
be relatively more egalitarian to the extent that of Social Psychology, 17, 271–320.
they are not wealthy, have hierarchy-attenuating Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F.
ideologies strongly linked to their cultural values (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality
and social identities, have more women with polit- variable predicting social and political attitudes.
ical power, have more gender equality in care- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67,
giving roles, and have less privileging of punitive 741–763.
and military institutions. Societies that have widely Sidanius, J. (1993). The psychology of group conflict and
shared legitimizing myths will tend to be more the dynamics of oppression: A social dominance
stable in inequality, both because of social consen- perspective. In S. Iyengar & W. McGuire (Eds.),
Social Entrainment 785

Explorations in political psychology (pp. 183–219). an off-time shift. Social entrainment refers to all
Durham, NC: Duke University Press. those cycles of behavior, at the individual, group,
Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An or organizational level, that are captured and
intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. modified by one another or by an external pacer
New York: Cambridge University Press. that may serve to regulate those behaviors. This
entry summarizes the original model and related
empirical research.

Social Entrainment
Components of the Model
The social entrainment model was introduced by McGrath and Kelly assumed that these notions of
Joseph McGrath and Janice Kelly to provide a rhythm, entrainment, and external pacing events
general framework for understanding some aspects might be useful for thinking about human behav-
of social behavior over time. The term entrain- ior over time. Their ideas were formalized in 1986
ment is borrowed from the biological sciences, in as the social entrainment model. The model con-
which an internal rhythmic process is “captured” sists of four components that refer to entrained
and modified by another cycle. For instance, we and unentrained rhythms of behavior and to pos-
know that there are a number of cyclic processes sible external pacing conditions.
within the body, such as body temperature, uri- The first component of the model, rhythm,
nary output, and various hormonal cycles, that refers to the various endogenous rhythmic pro-
have become entrained to one another so that they cesses that may be inherent in the organism
operate in synchrony with respect to their regu- under study. Many aspects of human behavior
larly spaced recurrence. seem to have cyclic or rhythmic qualities. For
These cycles can also be affected by various instance, individuals have fairly predictable activ-
outside forces that might affect their onset, offset, ity cycles, perhaps influenced by various biologi-
or synchronization. For instance, the day–night cal cycles. Individuals also seem to have various
cycle acts as a powerful entraining signal for syn- base-rate preferences for the amount of talking
chronizing many of the body’s cyclic processes. In or for appropriate turn-taking that they might
“free-running” conditions, or in conditions in prefer in a group interaction. Rebecca Warner
which the outside pacing influence of the day– and others have found that patterns of sound and
night cycle is removed, these cycles continue to silence in interacting dyads seem to operate in
approximate a 24-hour periodicity. Thus, the cir- recurring patterns or rhythms. Organizations
cadian fluctuations will persist for a time, even also often have predictable, seasonal fluctua-
after the pacing event has been removed, until dis- tions. Thus, rhythmic aspects of behavior can
entrainment from the 24-hour periodicity occurs occur on individual to organizational levels and
or until a new entraining signal is imposed. When can range in periodicities from fractions of sec-
the outside pacing event is again imposed on these onds to lifetimes.
processes, such as when the day–night cycle is rein- The second component, mesh, refers to some
troduced, the 24-hour periodicity again becomes process through which various rhythms become
strongly entrained. synchronized. In biology, it is sometimes possible
By analogy, the term social entrainment describes to specify the organ or area responsible for
the many human social rhythms that are influ- the entrainment. In human social behavior, on the
enced by other social rhythms or by external pac- other hand, such a mechanism must often be
ing events. Social entrainment can also occur inferred. For example, individuals entering an
between individuals. For instance, some research- interaction with various personal tempos for con-
ers have found that individuals in conversation versational behavior must negotiate or somehow
will modify their conversation patterns toward adopt a scheme for synchronizing individual pref-
that of their partner. At an even more macro level, erences. Others have suggested a similar mecha-
there is an entrainment of life activity patterns that nism at the level of social systems, such that
can become disrupted when a worker changes to organizations must somehow develop a negotiated
786 Social Entrainment

temporal order in order to achieve smooth organi- Conversely, long initial time limits cause individu-
zational coordination. als and groups to work at slower rates of perfor-
The third component, tempo, refers to the pat- mance, but with higher quality, and these initial
terns of behavior that result as a consequence of effects also persist over multiple trials. Their work
this synchronization. For example, after individual also shows similar entrainment effects for interper-
conversational preferences are synchronized, there sonal communication patterns. Short time limits
is a resulting pattern of sound and silence, or other cause groups to focus more specifically on task-
behaviors, within the interaction. Other examples oriented communications, as opposed to nontask
might include a pattern of individual task perfor- and personal communications, and these effects
mance, daily recurrent patterns of activity and rest, also persist over multiple trials.
or yearly productivity patterns in an organization. Deborah Ancona and her colleagues have simi-
The final component, pace, refers to potential larly documented powerful external pacing events
outside pacing events that might influence the in organizations. Organizations can have periods
onset, offset, or periodicity of the specified rhythms. of speeded-up activity and periods of slowed-
The biological example is the day–night cycle that down activity that can define a rhythm of activity.
synchronizes circadian cycles to a 24-hour period- These rhythms can be influenced by eternal events,
icity. Examples of pacing events for human behav- such as seasonal demand or quarterly accounting
ior include changes in work schedule and abrupt cycles. Behavior in teams operating within organi-
changes in time zones. Each of these examples has zations also responds to internal pacing events,
implications for onset and offset of activity cycles. such as those that are defined by phases of task
For example, time limits often act as powerful pac- completion or by deadlines. Ancona thus has
ing events that obviously affect the onset and offset stated that teams must engage in a dance of
of activities but that also affect the periodicities of entrainment as they choreograph their activities to
behavior within those time limits. mesh with internal and external pacing events
The social entrainment model therefore suggests over time.
that when looking at human behavior, we might
want to examine a number of features. In particu- Janice R. Kelly
lar, we might want to examine (a) rhythms of
behavior, (b) synchronization between rhythms of See also Group Development; Group Performance;
behavior, (c) how various external pacing events Group Task; Norms; Teams
might affect these rhythms, and (d) how these
altered rhythms might persist over time.
Further Readings
Related Research Ancona, D. G., & Chong, C. L. (1996). Entrainment:
Pace, cycle, and rhythm in organizational behavior.
Most of the empirical work on social entrainment
Research in Organizational Behavior, 18, 251–284.
has focused on the third and fourth of these issues,
Ancona, D. G., & Waller, M. J. (2007). The dance of
namely, how external pacing events might alter
entrainment: Temporally navigating across multiple
rhythms and how these altered rhythms might per- pacers. Research in the Sociology of Work, 17,
sist over time. For example, Kelly and her col- 115–146.
leagues have found that time limits can serve as Farmer, S., & Seers, A. (2004). Time enough to work:
powerful potential pacing events, and these Employee motivation and entrainment in the
researchers have gathered a body of evidence con- workplace. Time and Society, 13, 265–284.
cerning the initial altering (entraining) effects of Kelly, J. R. (1988). Entrainment in individual and group
time limits and how these entrained patterns per- behavior. In J. E. McGrath (Ed.), The social
sist over time. More specifically, they find that psychology of time: New perspectives. Newbury Park,
short initial time limits (or time pressure) cause CA: Sage.
individuals and groups to work at a faster rate of McGrath, J. E., & Kelly, J. R. (1986). Time and human
performance, but with lower quality, and that interaction: Toward a social psychology of time. New
these initial effects persist over multiple trials. York: Guilford.
Social Exchange in Networks and Groups 787

Blau focused on the links between microsocial


Social Exchange in behavior and the groups, organizations, and insti-
Networks and Groups tutions in which individual relations are embed-
ded. Blau was interested primarily in the reciprocal
Research on social exchange in networks and exchange of benefits and the types of relationships
groups is primarily concerned with the more or and social structures that emerge from this kind of
less enduring relationships that develop over time. social interaction.
The research has been concerned with interac- For Emerson, the relationship between power
tions, both within and between groups and net- and social structure was the central theoretical
works, in which individuals attempt to obtain the problem in social exchange in groups and net-
resources or benefits they desire. One of the major works. Two of Emerson’s distinct contributions
concerns has been how the connections between are his fundamental insight into the relational
individuals influence their likelihood of obtaining nature of power and his extension of power–de-
the resources they desire, and as a result, how pendence theory to analyze the social networks
interactions can then reshape the connections created by exchange relations. Subsequent work
between individuals in networks and groups. by Karen Cook, Barry Markovsky, David Willer,
John Skvoretz, Edward Lawler, Linda Molm,
Phillip Bonacich, Noah Friedkin, and others built
on these developments.
History and Background
The exchange perspective on networks and groups
has origins in several disciplines, including psy-
Types of Exchange
chology, sociology, anthropology, and economics. The principles of social exchange in groups and
There were two major influences from the field of networks can be applied to most human interac-
psychology. First is the work by John Thibaut and tions, but individuals do not interact with all other
Harold Kelley, The Social Psychology of Groups, individuals the same ways, nor is it acceptable to
which was extremely influential in the early works engage in certain types of interaction to procure
on exchange in sociology. In addition, the work of certain resources (i.e., one is unlikely to negotiate
B. F. Skinner had a strong influence on the work birthday gifts). Several possible types of interaction
of George Homans and subsequently of Linda within groups and networks have been specified.
Molm. In cultural anthropology, the works of The broadest distinction between types of exchange
Claude Lévi-Strauss, Bronislaw Malinowski, and is between direct and indirect exchanges. Direct
Marcel Mauss were especially influential. exchange is a relationship in which each actor’s
Three of the earliest theorists writing about outcome is directly dependent on another actor’s
social exchange in networks and groups were behavior. Indirect exchange is an exchange rela-
George Homans, Peter Blau, and Richard M. tionship in which each actor’s outcome is depen-
Emerson. They set the groundwork for most of the dent, not on the person he or she gave to, but
subsequent research on exchange in networks and rather on either a collective entity or another mem-
groups. Each of these theorists had significant influ- ber of the network.
ence on the development of this field of study. There are three major types of direct exchange:
Homans’s primary focus was the social behavior negotiated, reciprocal, and productive exchange.
that emerged as a result of mutual reinforcement of In negotiated exchange, actors engage in a joint
two parties involved in a dyadic exchange. He was decision process, such as explicit bargaining, in
greatly influenced by the work of Skinner and bor- which they seek agreement on the terms of the
rowed Skinner’s ideas on reinforcement as a mech- transaction. It is easy to identify the benefits received
anism for change within networks. Homans’s by individuals in any given transaction. All sides of
theoretical consideration of distributive justice, the transaction must agree to the terms of the trans-
power, status, authority, leadership, and solidarity action for it to occur. Most economic exchanges
is based on an analysis of direct exchange between take this form, as do many social exchanges (nego-
individuals in groups. tiating over chores or social activities).
788 Social Exchange in Networks and Groups

In contrast, in reciprocal exchange, actors’ con- a minimum of three actors. From the perspective
tributions to the exchange are separately per- of the recipient, the obligation to reciprocate is not
formed and not explicitly negotiated. In reciprocal necessarily directed to the benefactor but instead
exchange, an actor initiates exchanges individu- to one or more actors who are implicated in a
ally, by performing a beneficial act for another social exchange situation with the benefactor.
actor or a group, without knowing whether, when, There are two main types of generalized exchange:
or to what extent the other actor will reciprocate network-generalized exchange and group-generalized
this beneficial act. If a relationship forms, it often exchange. In network-generalized exchange, each indi-
takes the shape of sequential actions characterized vidual gives goods or services directly to one other
by mutual obligations. Reciprocal exchange often individual and receives goods or services from a dif-
occurs within intimate social relations in which ferent individual in the same network. The Kula
explicit negotiation over resources or benefits ring trade in the Trobriand Islands studied by
would violate norms. But reciprocal exchange also Malinowski is the most famous example. The Kula
occurs in situations such as the workplace, where ring involved the exchange of necklaces of red shells
individuals may help one another on projects, with in a clockwise fashion between islands, while brace-
implicit expectations for reciprocity in the future. lets of white shells were exchanged in a counter-
Studies of negotiated and reciprocal exchange clockwise direction. In group-generalized exchange,
generally focus on the interaction within a net- individuals contribute to a public or collective good
work of exchange. Early work on social exchange and receive benefits from the same public or collec-
within groups and networks typically examined tive good. Barn raising, in which a community comes
dyadic exchange relationships. Now, most research together to build a barn for one of its members, is an
focuses on exchange relations embedded within example of group-generalized exchange.
larger exchange networks or groups. Emerson The majority of the theorizing on social exchange
defined an exchange network as a set of two or in groups and networks emphasizes direct exchange.
more connected exchange relations. Two exchange The following sections describe the major trends
relationships are connected if the frequency or and findings.
value of exchange in one relationship affects the
frequency or value of exchange in another.
Power
The third major form of direct exchange is pro-
ductive exchange. In this form of interaction, all By embedding the exchange relation within a net-
the parties of the exchange contribute and benefit work of connections, Emerson fostered a new era
from a single transaction. Groups engage in of exchange studies. The inclusion of networks
productive exchange when they act collectively, allowed theorists to consider the effects of having
each member contributing to produce a socially alternatives for valued resources, that is, structural
valued outcome that benefits all group members. power. Emerson, and later his colleague Cook, deve­
Productive exchange is similar to what other social loped power–dependence theory, which describes
psychologists have called cooperation or coordina- how variation in the number of alternatives for
tion. Research on productive exchange generally valued resources and the value of the resources one
focuses on the group, in which individuals work controls determine one’s relative power in an
together to achieve some valued outcome. The exchange network. One of the major findings in
structure of the group (i.e., the way each group’s this tradition is that an actor’s relative position in
members are connected) has not typically been a network produces differences in the use of
studied. Instead, research on productive exchange, power. Unequal power then manifests itself in the
such as that by Lawler and his colleagues, has unequal distribution of rewards across positions in
focused on issues of coordination, solidarity, cohe- a social network.
sion, and affect. David Willer and Barry Markovsky have also
In indirect or generalized exchange, one actor studied power within networks and groups. They
gives resources to another, but resources are recip- assume that power is determined by the number of
rocated not by the recipient but rather by a third alternative connections available to an actor within
party. Thus, generalized-exchange systems involve a network. They distinguish between two types of
Social Exchange in Networks and Groups 789

networks, strong and weak power networks. The with known partners who had demonstrated their
difference between the two types of networks trustworthiness in previous transactions (i.e., they
stems from the likelihood of actors being excluded did not misrepresent the value of their goods).
from exchange. In strong power networks, some Toshio Yamagishi and Karen Cook have found
actors in the network (low-power actors) must be that, in conditions of low uncertainty, actors are
excluded from the exchange, and some actors much more likely to avoid forming commitments
(high-power actors) must be included in the to specific partners in order to maximize their
exchange. High-power actors in strong power net- access to valued resources. And Yamagishi and
works are likely to obtain almost all, if not all, the Cook have found that, under conditions of high
resources available in the network. On the other uncertainty, actors form exclusive commitments to
hand, in weak power networks, it is possible to a specific partner in the network in an attempt to
exclude any actor in the network in an exchange. avoid the possibility of exploitation by unknown
The likelihood of being excluded from the exchange actors who enter the exchange network.
depends on an actor’s position in the network. In
weak power networks, high-power actors benefit
Affect and Affective Commitment
proportionally more than do lower power actors.
More recently, the concept of commitment has
expanded beyond the traditional behavioral mea-
Commitment
sures of repeated exchange to include measures of
In addition to the study of power, the phenomenon affective commitment. This effort has been led by
of commitment became a central focus of those Lawler and his colleagues, as well as by Molm and
interested in exchange dynamics within groups her colleagues. This shift to understand the role of
and networks. Commitment has generally been emotions in exchange represents an important
conceived of as repeated interaction with one part- return to fundamental issues of social solidarity
ner to the exclusion of other potential partners in and cohesion in networks and groups.
the group or network. Commitment became cen- Among the more recent efforts to examine the
tral to the work on exchange in networks and nonstructural elements of social exchange in net-
groups because it presented a serious theoretical works and groups is the work of Lawler on rela-
problem. Scholars who study exchange in groups tional cohesion, as well as Molm’s research on
and networks generally assume that actors try to variations in affective responses to different types
maximize outcomes they desire. However, com- of exchange. Lawler and his colleagues developed
mitting to a partner when an individual has alter- the affect theory of social exchange to explain the
natives is not a rational decision. effects of emotional responses to exchanges on
Seminal work by Cook and Emerson and their relationships within networks and groups and
students has established that, in general, individu- exchange outcomes, including the degree of com-
als value low uncertainty and often act to mini- mitment and solidarity within the network or
mize uncertainty in interactions. Cook and group. The goal of this work has been to develop
Emerson found that greater uncertainty led to a more comprehensive theory of exchange in net-
higher levels of commitment with particular part- works and groups that includes emotions as a key
ners. Commitment between partners reduces the element in the formation and continuation of rela-
uncertainty of finding a partner for trade and tionships within networks and groups.
ensures a higher frequency of exchange. Peter Molm and her colleagues have examined the
Kollock examined behavioral commitments in envi- effects of type of exchange (reciprocal or negoti-
ronments that allow actors to cheat one another in ated) on affective commitment within networks
their exchanges. In situations in which opportunism and groups. Molm and her collaborators have
is possible, a commitment to a specific trustworthy argued that reciprocal exchange is inherently more
partner is often the easiest solution to the problem risky than negotiated exchange. Because exploita-
of uncertainty. He found that actors were willing to tion is always possible, actors in reciprocal exchange
forgo potentially more profitable exchanges with risk giving benefits unilaterally while receiving little
untested partners in favor of continuing to transact or nothing in return. Moreover, these researchers
790 Social Exchange in Networks and Groups

have argued that affective commitment is more network or group). They also found that mutual
likely to form in reciprocal exchange than in negoti- trust between members of these groups leads
ated exchange. Because of the inherent risk, actors to higher levels of participation in the exchange.
are likely to attribute a partner’s positive behaviors This effect is especially pronounced in network-
to personal traits and intentions, which results in generalized exchange.
the emergence of stronger positive feelings in recip- In addition, Molm and her colleagues have
rocal exchange than in negotiated exchange. begun including generalized exchange in their
comparisons between types of exchange. They
have found that network-generalized exchange
Trust
produces higher levels of solidarity, perceived
In addition to work on affect and affective com- trust, and positive affect within groups and net-
mitment, understanding the formation of trust works than do either reciprocal or negotiated
relationships has become an important area of exchange. They have argued that indirect reciproc-
research on exchange in networks and groups. The ity, typified by network-generalized exchange,
earliest work on trust formation stressed the produces stronger feelings of group attachment
importance of positive exchange behavior in the and solidarity. The work by Molm and her col-
network or group. Blau argued that by cooperat- leagues typifies one of the major trends in exchange
ing with a partner, one indicates that one is less studies, namely, to compare how different network
likely to take advantage of one’s partner. It is these structures and exchange types impact different
actions that can help build relationships within social-psychological outcomes.
and between networks and groups. Blau argued
that actors in reciprocal exchange start with small Future Directions
gifts. If those are returned, the actor is perceived as
trustworthy, and subsequently, larger gifts may be The work discussed here focuses on interaction
given. In addition, Kollock has shown how the risk within one type of exchange, but real-world stud-
of exploitation can have extreme effects on percep- ies of exchange relationships show that exchange
tions of trustworthiness. In his study, when sellers relations are multiplex and can evolve through
were able to mislead the buyers about the quality time. One of the challenges of the study of social
of the goods to be purchased (i.e., a potential for exchange in networks and groups is to understand
opportunism existed), truthful information was the causes and consequences of changes in the type
associated with high levels of perceived trustwor- of exchange. Another area for future work on
thiness, but dishonest information was associated social exchange in networks and groups is to use
with high levels of distrust. the theoretical tools developed in the laboratory to
Molm and her colleagues have also studied how explore real-world social networks. The work on
different types of exchange (which vary in risk) social exchange in networks and groups has pri-
affect perceptions of trust. They have argued that marily been limited to highly controlled experi-
trust should be higher in reciprocal exchange than mental studies, but the theoretical framework has
in negotiated exchange, precisely because the fear the potential to help us better understand interac-
of exploitation should be stronger in reciprocal tion in naturally forming groups and networks.
exchange. This effect is magnified by the attribu- Alexandra Gerbasi
tion of behaviors to a partner’s personal traits,
which allows trust to be attributed to that partner See also Cooperation and Competition; Negotiation and
within a network or group. Bargaining; Power; Power–Dependence Theory; Social
While the majority of social-psychological stud- Networks
ies on exchange have focused on direct exchange,
interest in generalized exchange has increased
Further Readings
recently. Yamagishi and Cook compared the two
types of generalized exchange and found that net- Blau, P. M. (1986). Exchange and power in social life.
work-generalized exchange systems promote higher New York: Wiley. (Original work published 1964)
levels of participation than do group-generalized Cook, K. S., & Emerson, R. M. (1984). Exchange
exchange systems (controlling for the size of the networks and the analysis of complex organization. In
Social Facilitation 791

S. B. Bacharach & E. J. Lawler (Eds.), Research in the response is not well learned, the presence of con-
sociology of organizations (pp. 1–30). Greenwich, CT: specifics usually detracts from performance, a
JAI Press. phenomenon known as social impairment. The
Emerson, R. M. (1972). Exchange theory, part I: A fact that the presence of others intensifies reac-
psychological basis for social exchange. In J. Berger, tions (either correct or incorrect) has implications
M. Zelditch Jr., & B. Anderson (Eds.), Sociological for a wide array of behaviors in human groups,
theories in progress (pp. 38–57). Boston: Houghton including mobs, teams, and work groups. For
Mifflin. example, recent research indicates that the pres-
Emerson, R. M. (1972). Exchange theory, part II:
ence of others can facilitate intergroup stereotyp-
Exchange relations and networks. In J. Berger, M.
ing. This entry describes research regarding social
Zelditch Jr., & B. Anderson (Eds.), Sociological
facilitation, one of the oldest research topics in
theories in progress (pp. 58–87). Boston: Houghton
social psychology.
Mifflin.
Homans, G. C. (1974). Social behavior: Its elementary
forms. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich. History
(Original work published 1961)
Kollock, P. (1994). The emergence of exchange In 1897 Norman Triplett observed that bicycle rac-
structures: An experimental study of uncertainty, ers rode faster against competitors than against a
commitment, and trust. American Journal of clock. He then conducted experiments verifying
Sociology, 100, 313–345. that children wound a fishing reel faster when they
Lawler, E. J., Yoon, J., & Thye, S. R. (2000). Emotion had competitors. Other researchers found that,
and group cohesion in productive exchange. American when conspecifics were present, ants moved more
Journal of Sociology, 106, 616–657. sand, chicks ate more feed, and dogs ran faster.
Markovsky, B., Willer, D., & Patton, T. (1988). Power Knut Larsson reported that rat pairs copulated
relations in exchange networks. American Sociological more if they were in the presence of other copulat-
Review, 53, 101–117. ing rat pairs. In one intriguing study, Robert
Molm, L., & Cook, K. S. (1995). Social exchange and Zajonc and his associates found that cockroaches
exchange networks. In K. S. Cook, G. A. Fine, & ran faster down a straight runway to escape a light
J. S. House (Eds.), Sociological perspectives on if the runway was lined with acrylic cubicles con-
social psychology (pp. 209–235). Boston: Allyn & taining other cockroaches. Similarly, humans eat
Bacon. more, purchase more, and jog faster when they are
Yamagishi, T., & Cook, K. S. (1993). Generalized in the presence of other people. In short, responses
exchange and social dilemmas. Social Psychology are intensified in terms of speed, vigor, or probabil-
Quarterly, 56, 235–248. ity of occurrence when humans, insects, and ani-
mals are observed by an audience or are performing
with coactors. Because so many of the early studies
reported improvements in performance in others’
Social Facilitation presence, the term social facilitation came to be
synonymous with the impact of such social pres-
In 1956, Roger Bannister used an inventive strat- ence and to some degree remains so today.
egy to achieve the world’s first 4-minute mile. He However, by the 1930s it had become apparent
had two friends pace him, each for one lap, just that, occasionally, having people work together
under the needed pace. Bannister’s strategy illus- on a task could also impair performance. Thus, if
trates social facilitation. This term refers to cases people collaborate on a single group task such
in which individuals improve their performance that their individual contributions are masked,
when they are in the presence of conspecifics (i.e., social loafing rather than social facilitation occurs.
members of the same species). These conspecifics In addition, even on noncollaborative tasks (in
can be observers, others performing the same which one’s individual output is easily assessed),
activity, or others who just happen to be present. working alongside coactors (or before an audi-
This facilitation, however, occurs only on simple ence) impairs performance in some cases. For
tasks in which the correct response is well learned. example, such social conditions impair perfor-
In contrast, on complex tasks in which the correct mance when people work on Greek epigrams or
792 Social Facilitation

complex computer problems. Such results initially audiences do not provoke social facilitation or
provoked some confusion. However, in a classic impairment. For example, several studies indicate
1965 paper, Zajonc offered an integrative expla- that joggers do not jog faster when potential observ-
nation for these outcomes that reinvigorated ers are inattentive. However, in support of the
research on this topic. “mere-presence” view, other research indicates that
even when people should not feel anxious about
evaluation (e.g., during a pretask warm-up period),
Theoretical Views they show evidence of social facilitation while typing
their names in front of a blindfolded observer. In
Zajonc’s Drive View
another study, A. W. Rajecki reported that the sim-
Zajonc suggested that both social facilitation ple presence of a blindfolded display manikin trig-
and social impairment occur because the presence gered social facilitation. In short, the question
of others elevates drive, also called arousal or regarding the impact of mere presence remains
excitement. Drive level is important because it is unsettled.
known to intensify performance on easy tasks, in
which correct performance is pretty much auto-
Distraction–Conflict Theory
matic. This occurs because drive (e.g., hunger) is
known to intensify dominant responses—responses According to distraction–conflict theory, social
that are highly likely as a result of training or facilitation or impairment occurs because we have a
inborn tendencies. On easy tasks, the correct strong tendency to pay attention to conspecifics. In
response is dominant, and therefore drive should experiments, this tendency conflicts with our need
serve to facilitate correct performance. On difficult to pay close attention to the experimental task. The
tasks, however, incorrect responses tend to be tendency to pay attention to conspecifics should be
dominant, and therefore drive should intensify particularly strong if these others are competing
these responses, thereby impairing correct perfor- against us or evaluating us or are unusual in some
mance. Thus, according to Zajonc, increased drive fashion. This tendency produces attentional conflict,
can lead to either performance facilitation or that is, indecision regarding where and when to
impairment. Zajonc’s cockroach study illustrates direct our attention. Such approach–approach con-
his theory. The same cockroach “rooting section” flict, in turn, is known to produce the type of drive
that facilitated performance in a straight runway or arousal to which Zajonc alluded.
(where the dominant response of running forward This view explains the effects of evaluation
is “correct”) inhibited performance on a task that anxiety by assuming that worrying creates internal
required the insects to emit a nondominant response distraction (Will I perform well enough? Do I look
(slowing down and turning right). silly?). Similarly, the inconsistent effects of mere
After 20  years, it became clear that there was presence discussed above can be explained by
strong support for Dr. Zajonc’s basic predictions. assuming that when the presence of others is
A 1984 meta-analysis “averaged” the findings of unusual, it provokes attentional conflict. However,
241 studies. As predicted, social conditions did when it is not unusual, it does not. Thus, the pres-
indeed facilitate performance on simple tasks and ence of a blindfolded manikin (which few people
impair performance on complex tasks. What have encountered before) might well lure partici-
remained unclear, however, was why. pants’ attention from an experimental task, thereby
provoking attentional conflict.
Supporting this model, mechanical distractions
Evaluation Theory
have been found to provoke the same social facili-
Zajonc argued in 1965 that such facilitation or tation effects and physiological reactions as an
impairment should occur whenever others are merely audience, and social facilitation occurs only when
present. Other researchers, however, have main- coactors work on comparable tasks (where the
tained that facilitation or impairment—at least urge to socially compare is strong). In one inge-
among humans—is due to participants’ worrying nious study, Brad Groff required participants to
about looking bad to others. Consistent with this examine the face of an evaluating observer. Given
viewpoint, there is evidence that nonevaluative that this particular task required participants to
Social Identity Model of Deindividuation Effects 793

monitor the observer, there was no attentional Several recent studies support this perspective.
conflict between performing the task (watching the Dominique Muller and Fabrizio Butera reported in
observer) and attending to the audience (i.e., the 2007 that coaction increased participants’ ability
single observer). As predicted, in this condition no to focus on two key stimuli—a slash and a tilted
social facilitation occurred. S—while it decreased their tendency to falsely
report seeing these items as a dollar sign (a domi-
nant–familiar response). Similarly, Pascal Huguet
Critique reported that coaction increased individuals’ abil-
One serious problem with these versions of ity to focus on the color of letters making up a
drive theory is that evidence for elevated arousal word and decreased their tendency to read the
(e.g., blood pressure) in social conditions is mixed. word (a dominant response). In short, 99 years
Thus, the meta-analysis described above revealed after Triplett’s original report, researchers still
that arousal was elevated on complex tasks but not continue to explore the causes and dimensions of
on simple ones. In addition, John Cacioppo in social facilitation, one of the fundamental findings
1990 carefully assessed arousal measures and in group psychology.
found no evidence of heightened arousal when
people were observed. Robert S. Baron
Research by James Blascovich and his associates
suggests that physiological reactions in social condi- See also Group Motivation; Group Performance; Social
tions may be more specific than Zajonc assumed. Compensation; Social Loafing; Sports Teams; Teams
This work indicates that when individuals in social
conditions feel that they can meet the demands posed
by a task, they show increased cardiac output, dila- Further Readings
tion of their arteries, and improved blood flow to the
Aiello, J. R., & Douthitt, E. A. (2001). Social facilitation
muscles (i.e., a challenge reaction). This reaction is
from Triplett to electronic performance monitoring.
associated with improved task performance. However,
Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, & Practice,
when people feel that they probably cannot meet 5,163–180.
the task demands, they exhibit a threat reaction, Baron, R. S. (1986). Distraction-conflict theory: Progress
which is known to impair performance. This reaction and problems. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in
is marked by increased vascular constriction and experimental social psychology (pp. 1–40). New York:
increased blood pressure. These findings suggest that Academic Press.
social facilitation or impairment is not due to a simple Lambert, A. J., Payne, B. K., Jacoby, L. L., Shaffer, L.
increase in arousal, as Zajonc suggested, but rather to M., Chasteen, A., & Khan, S. (2003). Stereotypes as
a more complex set of bodily reactions. dominant responses. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 84, 277–295.
Muller, D., & Butera, F. (2007). The focusing effect of
Attention Theory
self-evaluation threat in coaction and social
In contrast to drive theory, some have sug- comparison. Journal of Personality and Social
gested that attentional processes may explain Psychology, 93, 194–211.
social facilitation effects. A revision of distrac- Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social facilitation. Science, 149,
tion–conflict theory points out that when people 269–274.
are overloaded with more stimuli than they have
time to process, they narrow the range of cues to
which they attend. If they are working on a well-
learned task, this narrow focus allows them to
better “home in” on the few key cues demanding
Social Identity Model of
attention. If, however, a complex task requires Deindividuation Effects
people to process a wide array of cues, such a nar-
row focus will hurt performance. This explains The social identity model of deindividuation
how the model accounts for both facilitation and effects (SIDE model) explains how group behavior
impairment effects. is affected by anonymity and identifiability. There
794 Social Identity Model of Deindividuation Effects

are many social situations in which people interact this makes you less able and less motivated to
in relatively anonymous ways. In social interac- regulate your actions. If you do not or cannot
tions on the Internet, for example, people often regulate your actions, you can no longer adhere to
use pseudonyms or avatars (pictures) to identify existing social norms, and your behavior may be
themselves, and even e-mail addresses do not typi- disinhibited. The psychological state of deindividu-
cally provide much information about senders. ation therefore involves a severely reduced ability
Another example is the anonymity people expe- to exercise self-control.
rience when they are in a crowd. An important Research has shown that deindividuation does
question, therefore, is how anonymity affects not tell the whole story, however. For example,
people’s behavior. questions have been raised about the existence of
SIDE was developed as an alternative to deindi- the psychological state of deindividuation. Even
viduation theory. Deindividuation theory suggests more problematic is that the outcomes predicted
that anonymity leads to a loss of self-awareness, by deindividuation theory are actually quite rare.
and this loss leads to a rise in antinormative Historical evidence shows that most crowds are
behavior. But deindividuation research shows peaceful and orderly. And even when they are vio-
contradictory results: Anonymity in groups often lent, crowds are typically disciplined and capable
leads to more normative behavior. SIDE suggests of sophisticated patterns of behavior. These char-
this is because anonymity makes people self-define acteristics are inconsistent with the deindividua-
themselves less as persons but more as members of tion theory prediction of disinhibition.
the social group to which they belong. This SIDE has taken these inconsistencies as the basis
increased salience of social group membership (or for a new model. Its prediction is different from
social identity) leads to increased adherence to the that of deindividuation theory. SIDE predicts that
norms of the group. in the crowd (as well as in other “deindividuating”
Today, SIDE is used to explain the effects of situations), group members are highly sensitive to
anonymity and social isolation in various settings, situational norms that are specific to their psycho-
and an extensive body of research has examined its logical ingroup. What happens in the crowd is not
propositions. Taken as a whole, this research dem- that individuals become less self-aware. Rather,
onstrates that anonymity and identifiability have according to SIDE, the crowd leads individuals to
profound consequences for intergroup relations, pay attention to a different aspect of the self.
group processes, and individual self-definition. SIDE builds on social identity and self-categori-
Research on SIDE has particularly focused on zation theory, which propose that one’s sense of
crowds and collective action, online teams, elec- self is made up of personal identity and multiple
tronic relationships and virtual communities, and, social identities, all of which combine to shape
recently, on social effects of surveillance (e.g., by one’s personality. Social identities are likely to
means of cameras or electronic tagging). This entry become the basis for self-definition when that social
first reviews the historical and scientific back- identity is salient, such as when making compari-
ground of the SIDE model and then explains the sons between “them” and “us.” One consequence
model in some detail. of salience is depersonalization. Depersonalization
is not the same as deindividuation or a loss of self.
Rather, depersonalization refers to a switch to a
Background
group level of self-categorization in which self and
Deindividuation theory was developed to explain others are seen in terms of their group identities.
the phenomenon that in crowds, people become As a consequence of depersonalization, percep-
capable of acts that rational individuals would not tions of the outgroup become more stereotypical.
normally endorse. In a crowd, people may become Self-perceptions also shift: Self and other ingroup
disinhibited and behave antinormatively. Soccer members become interchangeable, and the indi-
hooliganism is one example. Deindividuation the- vidual self-stereotypes in terms of group attributes.
ory argues that this behavior occurs because of the Depersonalization thus transforms individuals
anonymity of the crowd. If you are anonymous, into group members who regulate their behavior
you are not paid attention to as an individual, and according to ingroup norms. It is important to
Social Identity Model of Deindividuation Effects 795

note that, in contrast to deindividuation, the psy- “me” and “you,” actually helping these group
chological state of depersonalization does not members to maintain their sense of unity. Diff­­
imply a loss of rationality or behavioral disinhibi- erences within the group may otherwise distract
tion. Rather, the individual behaves rationally attention from the collective (“us” as a group).
and regulates behavior according to ingroup It is important to note that there are situations
standards. These ideas from social identity theory in which social identities become salient also
and self-categorization theory are the foundations when, or precisely because, individuals are identi-
of SIDE. fiable. This is particularly the case when individual
features provide information about a person’s
Development of the SIDE Model group memberships. People’s faces may sometimes
reveal things about them as individuals, but faces
The SIDE model was named in 1991 by Martin may also reveal that people are members of par-
Lea and Russell Spears. The most comprehensive ticular social groups, which may then become sali-
statement of the model was provided in 1995 by ent (this is likely to be the case for important social
Stephen Reicher, Russell Spears, and Tom Postmes. identities such as gender and race, to which most
According to SIDE, a social identity approach can people are very sensitive).
account for many of the effects observed in dein- SIDE thus describes the cognitive process by
dividuation research and in the crowd. But in which the salience of social identity is affected by
order to understand the effects of anonymity and the absence or presence of individuating informa-
identifiability on group behavior, one also has to tion. It is important to note that this process can
take the social and intergroup context into operate only to the extent that some sense of
account. SIDE proposes that these two elements, groupness exists from the outset. Research shows
anonymity and social context, when combined that if individuals interact anonymously with oth-
have both cognitive and strategic effects. ers with whom they believe they have very little or
nothing in common, anonymity can then become
Cognitive Effects of the SIDE Model a cover for them to do whatever they wish. Thus,
anonymity also provides the freedom for individ-
As described above, to be immersed in a group ual group members to do whatever they would
to the point that one feels anonymous may make like to do, independently of the group, because it
social identity quite salient. Research demon- prevents the group from carefully monitoring
strates that if people feel anonymous in a group, them. Juxtaposing the two possibilities, either
their group identities become more salient and anonymity in the group has the effect of amplify-
lead to depersonalized social perceptions of others ing a shared social identity that, however rudi-
and the self. According to SIDE, this occurs prin- mentary, is already in place, or anonymity can
cipally because (visual) anonymity obscures indi- amplify the individual independence that exists in
vidual features and interpersonal differences. As a contexts in which no shared identity is available.
result of the decreased visibility of the individual The latter process, whereby anonymity provides
within anonymous groups, the process of deper- the opportunities for people to express and
sonalization is accentuated, and group members develop identities independent of the social influ-
are more likely to perceive the group as an entity. ence of the group, is further elaborated in the
The net result is that people perceive self and oth- strategic SIDE.
ers in terms of stereotypical group features and
are influenced accordingly.
Strategic Effects of the SIDE Model
Many online groups, for example, are bounded
by strong feelings of community and shared social Anonymity also has strategic consequences: It
identity. This occurs even when the members of affects the ability to express personal and social
these online communities do not know each other identities. Strategic concerns come into play when
individually or have never met in person. SIDE an outgroup has more power than the ingroup and
research shows that the anonymity of individuals when the norms of both groups are at odds with
within such groups obscures the differences between each other. This is often the case in organizations,
796 Social Identity Model of Deindividuation Effects

for example, in which managers have more power unsympathetic outgroup. Thus, making workers
than workers and, sometimes, different ideas anonymous to each other may discourage them
about what the workers should be doing. In such from resisting management’s wishes. On the other
cases, the identifiability of ingroup members to the hand, the knowledge that other ingroup members
outgroup will shift the power balance between are unable to identify the self may allow group
groups. Identifiability to a more powerful out- members (in particular low identifiers) to feel less
group limits the degree to which the ingroup’s committed to ingroup norms.
identity can be expressed freely and without sanc-
tion on those dimensions on which ingroup norms
Contributions of SIDE
conflict with outgroup standards and values and
that are punishable or otherwise sanctionable. SIDE’s main contributions have been with respect
Conversely, anonymity to a more powerful out- to real crowds and virtual groups. SIDE’s explana-
group may be a convenient instrument for the tion of crowd behavior provides a new perspective
ingroup to express itself on those same dimen- on why crowds become a threat to public order.
sions. For example, workers may use the cloak of This perspective has informed practical interven-
anonymity to thwart the wishes of management. tions to change and improve police tactics for
The strategic SIDE thus proposes that anonym- crowd control, such as during major European
ity may be “used” by less powerful groups to soccer tournaments. With respect to online behav-
express aspects of their identity. This may appear ior, SIDE has contributed the understanding that
to be similar to the effects that anonymity has for anonymity is not a barrier to the formation of pro-
accountability in classic deindividuation theory. ductive and pleasing online relations. This has
However, unlike deindividuation theory, SIDE informed the design of systems for computer-
takes account of the intergroup context within supported collaborative learning and knowledge-
which identifiability and anonymity occur. Thus, sharing technologies. As a result, SIDE has been
a loss of accountability does not result in the one of the key perspectives to predict and explain
disinhibited or random antinormative behavior of the enormous success of the Internet for communi-
individuals that deindividuation theory is con- cation and the maintenance of social relations.
cerned with. Rather, according to SIDE, anonym-
Tom Postmes
ity affects the ability of a group to express its
identity and thus to engage in targeted and ingroup See also Deindividuation; Depersonalization; Norms;
normative behavior, thereby changing power rela- Self-Categorization Theory; Social Identity Theory
tions between groups.
This idea of strategic SIDE effects is illustrated Further Readings
by the patterned and targeted behavior that can be
Lea, M., & Spears, R. (1991). Computer-mediated
observed in the crowd. During the Los Angeles
communication, de-individuation and group decision-
riots of 1994, for example, Black rioters and loot-
making. International Journal of Man-Machine
ers were very particular about the shops they tar-
Studies, 34, 283–301.
geted, nearly all of which were Asian businesses.
Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (1998). Deindividuation and
This is not an isolated example—historical research anti-normative behavior: A meta-analysis.
shows that crowd violence often has a highly sym- Psychological Bulletin, 123, 238–259.
bolic function. Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1998). Breaching
In addition to anonymity between groups, SIDE or building social boundaries? SIDE-effects of
considers strategic effects of anonymity within computer-mediated communication. Communication
groups. Here, SIDE has particularly explored the Research, 25, 689–715.
consequences of anonymity (as well as isolation) Reicher, S., Spears, R., & Postmes, T. (1995). A social
from other ingroup members. On one hand, this identity model of deindividuation phenomena.
anonymity deprives individual group members of European Review of Social Psychology, 6, 161–198.
social support from their fellows, and this lack of Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1994). Panacea or panopticon? The
social support may hinder their ability to express hidden power in computer-mediated communication.
their ingroup identity in the face of a powerful and Communication Research, 21, 427–459.
Social Identity Theory 797

Spears, R., Postmes, T., Lea, M., & Wolbert, A. (2002). individuals to discriminate in favor of the ingroup,
The power of influence and the influence of power in to which they belonged, and against an outgroup.
virtual groups: A SIDE look at CMC and the Internet. For this purpose, participants were assigned to
Journal of Social Issues, 58, 91–108. groups that were intended to be as empty and
meaningless as possible. Nevertheless, when people
were asked to assign points to other research par-
ticipants, they systematically awarded more points
Social Identity Theory to ingroup members than to outgroup members. In
doing this, they maximized the relative gain for
When people interact in groups or think of the ingroup compared with outgroup members, even
way their group relates to other groups, they do when this implied awarding a lower number of
not always think of themselves as separate indi- points to the ingroup. The results of these minimal
viduals (I am John). Instead, they may think of group studies were interpreted by arguing that the
themselves and act as group members (I am an mere act of categorizing individuals into groups
environmentalist). In psychology, a distinction is can be sufficient to make them think of themselves
therefore made between people’s personal identi- and others in terms of group memberships instead
ties (referring to their individual self) and their of as separate individuals. This deviated from com-
social identities (indicating the group self). Social mon views at the time, namely, that an objective
identity theory, which was originally developed by conflict of interest is a central factor in the emer-
Henri Tajfel and John Turner in the 1970s, gence of intergroup conflict.
focuses on the interplay between personal and Thus, social identity theory originated from the
social identities. Its aim is to specify and predict conviction that group memberships can help peo-
the circumstances under which individuals tend to ple instill meaning in social situations. Group
think of themselves either as individuals or as memberships help people define who they are and
group members. The theory also considers the how they relate to others. Social identity theory
consequences of personal and social identities for was developed as an integrative theory, as it aimed
individual perceptions and group behavior. to connect cognitive (thought) processes and
Over the years, many researchers and theorists (behavioral) motivation. Initially, its main focus
have found this a useful analytical framework. A was on intergroup conflict and intergroup rela-
large body of research has accumulated to specify tions more broadly. For this reason, the original
the basic processes involved, which has led to sev- form has been referred to as the social identity
eral refinements and extensions of social identity theory of intergroup relations.
theory over the years. The theory has also been Later elaborations by John Turner and his col-
applied to analyze and understand a range of soci- leagues on the cognitive aspects relevant to social
etal problems (most notably in the area of stereo- identification further specified how people inter-
typing and intergroup conflict) and a variety of pret their own position in different social contexts
topics in organizational behavior (such as leader- and how this affects their perceptions of others
ship, team motivation, and organizational com- (e.g., stereotyping), as well as their own behavior
mitment). This entry looks at the background of in groups (e.g., social influence). These elabora-
this concept and then discusses several key ele- tions represent self-categorization theory, or the
ments of the theory and some common misunder- social identity theory of the group. Together, self-
standings about what it says. categorization theory and social identity theory
can be referred to as the social identity approach.
Background and History
Cognitive Processes
Social identity theory developed out of a series of
studies conducted by Tajfel and his colleagues in Social identity theory was developed to explain
the early 1970s, which are commonly referred to how individuals create and define their place in
as the minimal group studies. These were designed society. According to the theory, three psychologi-
to identify the minimal conditions that would lead cal processes are central in this regard: social
798 Social Identity Theory

categorization, social comparison, and social iden- other pole, behavior derives solely from the per-
tification. Social categorization refers to the ten- son’s group membership (i.e., intergroup behavior).
dency for people to perceive themselves and others This happens when you do not want to talk to
in terms of particular social categories. That is, as someone because he or she was raised in a different
relatively interchangeable group members instead religion from you. The significance of this distinc-
of as separate and unique individuals. For exam- tion is the implication that intergroup and interper-
ple, we can think of someone as Jane, a feminist, sonal behavior are qualitatively distinct from each
instead of as Jane, an ambitious woman. other: Groups are not just collections of individu-
Social comparison indicates the process by als, and group behavior cannot be explained in
which people determine the relative value or social terms of interpersonal principles.
standing of a particular group and its members. As a result, much of what we know about psy-
For instance, school teachers may be seen as hav- chological processes underlying individual
ing higher social standing than garbage collectors. thoughts and behaviors may not apply in group
Compared with university professors, however, situations. For instance, a robust phenomenon in
school teachers can be seen as having lower social social psychology is that people are motivated to
standing. think positively of themselves. If necessary, they do
Social identification reflects the notion that this by blaming others for their individual failures.
people generally do not perceive social situations as In some cases, however, people may care so much
detached observers. Instead, their own sense of about the groups to which they belong that they
who they are and how they relate to others is typi- sacrifice their individual interests or positive self-
cally implicated in the way they view other indi- views to help or benefit the group. This is the case
viduals and groups around them. For university when an individual soccer player takes the blame
professors, the conclusion that school teachers have for a team loss: Upholding the image of the team
lower social standing than they do affects how they is more important than maintaining a positive
think of themselves and how they relate to other view of his or her own abilities as a soccer player.
university professors and to school teachers. Social identity theory helps us understand these
Someone’s social identity is then seen as the types of responses, which cannot be explained
outcome of these three processes (social categori- from standard theories about the cognitions and
zation, social comparison, and social identifica- motivated behaviors of separate individuals.
tion). Social identity can be defined as the Social identity theory assumes that a basic moti-
individual’s knowledge of belonging to certain vation guiding people’s responses as group mem-
social groups, together with some emotional and bers is the desire to establish a positively distinct
value significance of this group membership. Thus, social identity. That is, people seek to establish a
while one’s personal identity refers to self-knowl- meaningful social identity by specifying how the
edge associated with unique individual attributes, group they belong to differs from relevant other
people’s social identity indicates who they are in groups, for instance in terms of characteristic traits
terms of the groups to which they belong. (Dutch people are stingy), attitudes (university stu-
dents care for the environment), or behaviors
(workers at this company provide a high service
Motivation
level to customers).
Social identity theory considers motivated behavior People generally prefer to maintain a positive
as a direct consequence of the cognitive processes image of the groups to which they belong. As a
that define people’s social identities. According to result of social identity processes, people are
the theory, social behavior can be represented in inclined to seek out and emphasize positively val-
terms of a bipolar continuum. At one pole of this ued traits, attitudes, and behaviors that can be seen
continuum, behavior is determined solely by the as characteristic for the ingroups they belong to.
character and motivations of the person as an indi- This may also cause them to focus on less favor-
vidual (interpersonal behavior). This is the case, for able characteristics of outgroups or to downplay
instance, when you do not want to talk to someone the importance of positive outgroup characteris-
because he or she does not smile at you. At the tics. The tendency to favor one’s ingroups over
Social Identity Theory 799

relevant outgroups can emerge in a variety of legitimacy of existing status differences between
responses, including the distribution of material groups. According to the theory, status stability
resources or outcomes between ingroup and out- and legitimacy tend to mutually influence each
group members, the evaluation of ingroup versus other: When positions are subject to change, exist-
outgroup products, attributions for ingroup versus ing intergroup differences in status appear less
outgroup performance and achievement, and com- legitimate. Conversely, when the legitimacy of
munications about the behavior of ingroup versus existing status differences between groups is ques-
outgroup members. tioned, this is likely to undermine the perceived
stability of such relations. These different belief
systems, in turn, determine what people are most
Strategies for Status Improvement
likely to do when they pursue a (more) positive
When it was first developed, the central goal of social identity. The theory distinguishes between
social identity theory was to explain the origins of three types of strategies: individual mobility, social
conflictual relations between different social competition, and social creativity.
groups, even in the absence of a conflict over Individual mobility can help individual group
scarce resources. The motivation to establish a members improve their own situation by dissociat-
positive social identity is considered to lie at the ing the self from a devalued group and seeking
root of such intergroup conflict, as members of association with (or inclusion in) another group
disadvantaged groups strive for the improvement that has higher social standing. This is the case
of their group’s position and social standing, when a member of an ethnic minority group pur-
whereas members of advantaged groups are moti- sues a university education to be able to secure a
vated to protect and maintain their privileged posi- job and advance in a professional career. When
tion. This is why the theory specifies in considerable group boundaries are seen as permeable, people
detail the different ways in which group members are more likely to engage in individual mobility
may try to cope with group-based disadvantage or attempts. Pursuit of individual position improve-
with the threat of position loss. ment can lead people to denounce or deny their
Parallel to the behavioral continuum distin- membership of the devalued group, as individual
guishing between interpersonal and intergroup success often requires that they adopt a lifestyle or
behavior, the theory specifies a continuum of dif- display behaviors that are characteristic for groups
ferent social belief systems. One pole of this con- with higher standing.
tinuum locates situations in which individuals hold Female managers who display masculine behav-
the conviction that they can move as free agents ior, immigrants who avoid talking about their
from one group to another (individual mobility family background, or gays or lesbians who bring
belief system). The defining feature of this individ- an opposite-gender friend to an office party all can
ual mobility belief system is the notion that group be seen as displaying this type of response. An
boundaries are permeable. Permeable group bound- important consequence of individual mobility
aries indicate that individuals are not bound or attempts is that it remains an individual-level solu-
restricted by their group memberships in pursuing tion for social devaluation. Because these individu-
position improvement. Permeable group boundar- als are unlikely to be seen as representative
ies imply that people’s opportunities and outcomes members of the devalued group, their individual
depend on their individual talents, life choices, and success does not necessarily help improve the
achievements rather than on their ethnic origin or image of their group as a whole.
the social groups to which they belong. Social competition indicates the tendency to
The other pole is defined by the belief that confront existing status differences at the group
changes in social relations depend on groups’ level by collectively outperforming other groups or
modifying their positions relative to each other acquiring more resources or better outcomes. This
(social change belief system). Beliefs about the is what firms do when they compete for a position
likelihood that the position of one’s group relative on the Fortune 500 list. People are most likely to
to other groups can change indicate status secu- engage in social competition when intergroup sta-
rity. This depends on the perceived stability and tus differences seem insecure (i.e., illegitimate and/or
800 Social Identity Theory

unstable). Social competition is a group-level strat- forms of identity threat. In addition to group sta-
egy in that it requires group members to draw tus threat, implying that the perceived competence
together and combine forces to help each other of the group is devalued, group members can expe-
improve their joint performance or outcomes. rience social identity threat when the moral behav-
Social creativity is a strategy that can be used ior of their group is called into question. This form
when actual improvement of individual or group of threat is sometimes experienced even by group
positions is not feasible or is undesirable (e.g., members who can in no way be held personally
because group boundaries are impermeable and accountable for their group’s behavior, such as
group status differences are stable and legitimate). people who experience collective guilt and shame
Social creativity implies that people adapt their per- about the role their country played in slavery,
ceptions of the ingroup’s standing. This can be which happened long before they were born.
achieved in different ways. One possibility is to intro- Group members can also experience social iden-
duce alternative dimensions of comparison in order tity threat when they think their group is not suf-
to emphasize ways in which the ingroup is positively ficiently acknowledged as a separate entity with
distinct from relevant outgroups. An example of this unique characteristics. This form of threat is
strategy would be female workers’ focusing on their referred to as group distinctiveness threat. It is
greater sensitivity to interpersonal relations rather experienced when different groups of people are
than addressing the notion that they are less com- included in larger, more inclusive groups, nations,
petitive or ambitious than male workers. A second or organizations, such as members of linguistic
possibility is to reevaluate existing group characteris- minorities who strive for political autonomy, or
tics to enhance ingroup perceptions. For instance, to workers of a small company that is taken over in
make people more appreciative of the potential con- an organizational merger. Categorization threat
tribution of their group, ethnic minority group mem- occurs when individuals are treated as group mem-
bers can point at the importance of cultural diversity bers at times they would prefer not to be, as when
in organizations. A final possibility is to compare a woman who is a lawyer is addressed in court on
one’s group with another reference group in order to the basis of her gender instead of her profession.
make the current standing of the ingroup appear Acceptance threat occurs when individuals fail to
more positive. Migrant workers, for instance, can gain acceptance and inclusion in the groups of
cope with their less favorable position in the labor which they consider themselves a member, such as
market by thinking of the ways they are still better when a manager of Asian descent is not invited to
off than workers in their country of origin. join the local business club.
Social creativity strategies are generally charac- To cope with these forms of social identity
terized as cognitive strategies because they alter threat, group members will show different res­
people’s perceptions of their group’s current ponses depending on the degree to which they
standing instead of altering objective outcomes. identify with the group. Whereas low identifiers
Nevertheless, it has been demonstrated that these will focus on addressing and improving their per-
strategies can constitute a first step toward the sonal situation, high identifiers tend to respond in
achievement of social change. Because social cre- ways that relieve the threat for the group as a
ativity strategies help preserve identification with whole. The degree to which individuals identify
and positive regard for the ingroup, even when it with a particular group thus not only is an out-
has low status, over time these strategies can come of social identity threat (when individuals
empower group members to seek actual position are reluctant to identify with a group that is deval-
improvement for their group. ued) but also determines the ways in which they
are likely to respond to such threat. In addition to
the perceived characteristics of the social structure
Forms of Identity Threat
(and the opportunities and restrictions implied),
Even though original statements of social identity the psychological significance of a group member-
theory focused on low group status as a source of ship and the loyalty and commitment to the group
identity threat and a cause for motivated behavior, and its members also determine how people cope
later additions to the theory have suggested different with identity threat.
Social Identity Theory of Leadership 801

Common Misunderstandings Ellemers, N., Spears, R., & Doosje, B. (1999). Social
identity: Context, commitment, content. Oxford, UK:
Because of the elaborations and specifications that Basil Blackwell.
were added over the years, it is not always clear Haslam, S. A. (2004). Psychology in organizations: The
what social identity theory predicts and what it social identity approach. London: Sage.
does not. Some misunderstandings have emerged Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1988). Social
as a result. First, it is important to note that low identifications: A social psychology of intergroup
group status does not always induce ingroup relations and group processes. London: Routledge.
favoritism. Other forms of threat can be more Postmes, T., & Branscombe N. R. (in press).
important, such as when the necessity to establish Rediscovering social identity: Core sources. London:
a distinct group identity overrules the desire to Sage.
achieve a positive social identity. Furthermore, dif- Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory
ferent group-level or individual-level strategies of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel
may be used to cope with low group status. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations
Second, the desire to achieve a positive identity (pp. 94–109). Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole.
does not imply that people identify with groups Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D.,
only to the extent that doing so serves their per- & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social
sonal self-interests or because they are interdepen- group: A self‑categorization theory. Oxford, UK:
dent on other group members. In fact, to the extent Blackwell.
that people derive a personal sense of value and
meaning from the group, they may sacrifice their
personal self-interest to serve the group, sometimes
even to an extreme degree (e.g., suicide terrorists). Social Identity Theory
Third, the awareness that people belong to a of Leadership
group does not imply that they identify with, sup-
port, or defend the group. The different aspects
Leadership is a core feature of groups and ranges
and processes involved in social identification do
from leaders of small teams through corporate
not necessarily go together. The fact that people
chief executive officers (CEOs) to national and
categorize themselves as members of a particular
global leaders who stride the world stage. It is dif-
group does not imply that they value or care for
ficult to imagine groups that do not have some
the group. Conversely, people can subjectively
form of leadership. Leaders coordinate and moti-
identify with a group while acknowledging that
vate the actions of group members to achieve
they do not fulfill the criteria for membership or
group goals, but they also set the goals and pro-
while conceding that this subjective identification
vide an overall vision for the group.
does not yield them a positive social identity.
Most leadership research is conducted outside
Naomi Ellemers social psychology, in the organizational sciences,
and focuses principally on organizational leader-
See also Collective Self; Ingroup Allocation Bias; Minimal ship and the psychology of the CEO. One feature
Group Effect; Multiple Identities; Realistic Group of leadership that has been underemphasized by
Conflict Theory; Referent Informational Influence this literature is its identity function: Leaders define
Theory; Relative Deprivation; Self-Categorization what a group stands for and thus the identity of the
Theory; Self-Stereotyping; Social Identity Model of group’s members. We look to our leaders to define
Deindividuation Effects; Social Identity Theory of
who we are and thus what we should think, how
Leadership; Tajfel, Henri; Uncertainty-Identity Theory
we should behave, how we should view the world,
and how others are likely to view us. The social
identity theory of leadership, originally published
Further Readings by Michael Hogg in 2001 and further developed
Ellemers, N. (1993). The influence of socio-structural by Michael Hogg and Daan van Knippenberg in
variables on identity management strategies. European 2003, draws on social identity theory to provide an
Review of Social Psychology, 4, 27–57. identity-focused analysis of leadership.
802 Social Identity Theory of Leadership

This entry describes the components of the prototype defines the group’s membership attri-
social identity theory of leadership in the context butes and thus members’ own self-concept and
of its grounding in aspects of social identity theory identity. In these contexts where group member-
and self-categorization theory. When people iden- ship is psychologically salient, being perceived to
tify relatively strongly with a group, social identity be a highly prototypical leader makes one more
processes come into play to make leaders more influential. There are a number of basic social
effective if they are perceived by the group to be a identity and social-psychological reasons for this.
good fit with the group’s norms and identity. Such
leaders are influential and “popular”; are per-
Appearing to Have Influence
ceived to have relatively high status; are imbued
with legitimacy, trust, and charisma; are allowed First, when people identify strongly with a
to be innovative and transformative; are effective group, the cognitive process of categorizing them-
entrepreneurs of identity; and are effective at inte- selves as group members transforms their attitudes
grating different subgroups and identities. and behaviors to conform to the prototype of the
group, a process described by self-categorization
theory as depersonalization. Because people in a
Group Membership,
group generally tend to share the same prototype
Social Identity, and Leadership
of their group (i.e., it is a group norm), this self-
Groups vary in their psychological salience, that is, categorization–based process of depersonalization
how important and central members feel the group generates conformity.
is to their sense of who they are and thus how Group members behave in similar ways that
strongly they identify with the group. Psychological conform to the group norm. Thus members appear
salience can be a relatively enduring property of a to be influenced by the prototype and therefore by
particular social identity and group membership, those members who are actually more group pro-
but it can also vary from context to context. For totypical. Prototypical members are perceived to
example, your national identity might be an impor- have disproportionate influence over the rest of the
tant orienting principle for your behaviors, percep- members of the group. Prototypical leaders appear
tions, and interactions in almost all contexts, or it to be more effective sources of influence than are
might come to the fore only when you are visiting less prototypical members.
a foreign country where you stand out.
For the social identity theory of leadership, the
Being “Popular” and Having Status
key premise is that where the psychological salience
of group membership is elevated, effective leadership Second, when members identify strongly with a
rests firmly on the extent to which followers con- group, they significantly base their liking for other
sider the leader to possess prototypical properties of members on how prototypical they feel those
the group—those attributes that followers believe others are, rather than on personal preferences
define the group and distinguish it from other or idiosyncratic attributes. Thus, they like
groups. In this analysis, group members as followers more-prototypical members more than they like less-
play a significant role in configuring the characteris- prototypical members. Because there is usually
tics of the group’s leadership or even creating the significant agreement on the prototype, the group
leadership to begin with. Members are more likely as a whole likes prototypical members; they are
to follow a leader whom they consider most able to consensually popular in group terms.
construct a group identity that is acceptable to Research shows that identification and group
them. salience produce relatively consensual liking for
As people identify more strongly with a group, more-prototypical group members over less-proto-
they pay more attention to the group prototype typical members. Being liked makes it easier to be
and to what and who is more prototypical (research influential—research shows we are significantly
shows that under these circumstances, members more likely to comply with requests from and to
have good knowledge about the relative proto- agree with people we like. Thus, prototypical lead-
typicality of group members). This is because the ers are popular in the eyes of their followers and
Social Identity Theory of Leadership 803

are readily able to gain compliance with their stands out in people’s minds against the back-
ideas. In other words, they can exercise effective ground of other information about the group.
leadership. Furthermore, this popularity creates a Because prototypical leaders are the most direct
status difference between consensually popular source of information about the group prototype,
leaders and their followers. When, as is often the they stand out as figural against the background of
case, there is a leadership clique rather than a solo the group. Members pay close attention to their
leader, this status difference may become a genuine leaders and, as in other areas of social perception
intergroup status difference within the group, in and inference, attribute their leaders’ behavior to
which case the seeds of destructive leader–follower invariant underlying personality attributes or
conflict may be sown. essences. In the context of leadership, this process
causes followers to construct a charismatic leader-
ship personality for their leader. After all, the gen-
Legitimacy, Trust, and Innovation
eral class of behaviors that is being attributed to
Third, prototypical members typically find the personality includes being the source of influence,
group more central and important to self-defini- being able to gain compliance from others, being
tion and therefore identify more strongly with it. popular, having higher status, being innovative,
They have a greater investment in the group and and being trusted.
thus are more likely to behave in group-serving In this way, charisma, which plays an important
ways. They embody group norms more exactly, role in transformational leadership, is an emergent
and they are more likely to favor their group (the property of social identity–based group processes
ingroup) over other groups (outgroups), to treat rather than a static personality attribute that is
ingroup members fairly, and to act in ways that brought by individuals to the group. The percep-
promote their group. Research confirms that tion of charisma further facilitates effective and
enhanced identification is associated with greater innovative leadership on the part of a prototypical
conformity to norms and stronger ingroup favorit- leader. For example, a new departmental head pro-
ism and with fairer treatment of fellow ingroup moted from the ranks might initially seem just like
members and more pronounced promotion of the the rest of us, but if members identified strongly
group’s goals and welfare. with the department and the new head was highly
These behaviors confirm a person’s group pro- prototypical, then we might gradually attribute his
totypicality and membership credentials and or her influence over us to charismatic personality
encourage other members of the group to trust rather than prototypicality.
that the person is acting in the best interest of the
group even when it may not appear to be so. In
Leaders as Entrepreneurs of Identity
other words, prototypical leaders are furnished
with legitimacy and group membership–based These social identity leadership processes extend
trustworthiness. Followers invest their trust in pro- leaders’ considerable power to maintain their lead-
totypical leaders, which paradoxically allows such ership position. Because they are trusted, given
leaders to diverge from group norms and be less latitude to be innovative, and invested with status
conformist and more innovative and transforma- and charisma, prototypical leaders are very effec-
tional than nonprototypical or less prototypical tive prototype managers, or entrepreneurs of iden-
leaders. Innovation and transformation are key tity. By consolidating an existing prototype,
components of effective leadership. Leaders are modifying it, or entirely reconstructing it, they can
expected to provide an identity focus and a trans- define what the group stands for and what the
formative vision for the group, not merely to man- social identity of its members is.
age the day-to-day life of the group. One of the key attributes of effective leadership
is precisely this visionary and transformational
activity in which leaders are able to change what
Charisma and Leadership
the group sees itself as being. For example, during
Finally, because the prototype is so central to the 1980s, the British prime minister, Margaret
group life, information related to the prototype Thatcher, constructed an imperially assertive and
804 Social Identity Theory of Leadership

proud British identity around an iconic image of transforming intergroup conflict into intergroup
herself as Boadicea, a first-century British queen harmony. Research in this area suggests that one
who led a British uprising against the occupying set of strategies involves recognizing and respect-
forces of the Roman Empire. ing the distinctiveness and value of subgroup iden-
There are many strategies that prototypical tities but configuring subgroup relations within the
leaders can employ to manage their prototypicality overarching identity as different groups with
and shape their group’s identity. There is evidence important shared goals working together on the
that they can talk up their own prototypicality same team. It is important to prevent one group
and/or talk down aspects of their own behavior from feeling that its attributes are relatively under-
that are nonprototypical, identify deviants or mar- represented in the superordinate identity.
ginal members to highlight their own prototypical-
ity or to construct a particular prototype for the
A Concluding Caveat
group that enhances their own prototypicality,
secure their own leadership position by vilifying With respect to this description of the social iden-
contenders for leadership and casting the latter as tity theory of leadership, there is one important
nonprototypical, and identify as relevant compari- caveat to bear in mind. Social identity leadership
son outgroups those that are most favorable to processes occur, or occur more strongly, only in
their own ingroup prototypicality. groups with which members identify strongly. As
Leaders can also engage in a discourse that ele- the group’s salience or members’ strength of iden-
vates or lowers the salience of the group to its tification with it weakens, social identity leadership
members. If you are a highly prototypical leader, processes also weaken. Leadership becomes less
elevating the group’s salience and strengthening strongly based on how prototypical the leader is of
members’ identification with the group will pro- the group and more strongly based on other fac-
vide you with the leadership benefits of high pro- tors, such as how charismatic the leader is or how
totypicality, and if you are not very prototypical, well the leader matches people’s general or more
then lowering the group’s salience and weakening specific schemas of the properties a leader should
members’ identification will protect you from the possess to fulfill a particular group function.
leadership pitfalls of not being very prototypical.
Generally, leaders who feel they are not, or are no Michael A. Hogg
longer, prototypical strategically engage in a range See also Charismatic Leadership; Contingency Theories
of group-oriented behaviors to strengthen their of Leadership; Great Person Theory of Leadership;
membership credentials. Group Composition; Interactionist Theories of
Leadership; Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory;
Leadership; Path–Goal Theory of Leadership;
Intergroup Leadership
Personality Theories of Leadership; Self-Categorization
A feature of leadership situations that is underem- Theory; Social Identity Theory; Social Identity Theory
phasized is that leaders more often than not have of Leadership; Transactional Leadership Theories;
to provide integrative leadership to quite distinct Transformational Leadership Theories; Vertical Dyad
subgroups that can sometimes have hostile rela- Linkage Model
tions with one another—for example, providing
unifying national leadership for Sunnis, Shi’ites,
and Kurds in Iraq. In these cases, the identity func- Further Readings
tion of leadership is particularly prominent. The Ellemers, N., de Gilder, D., & Haslam, S. A. (2004).
challenge for leaders is to provide an overarching Motivating individuals and groups at work: A social
identity that does not subtract from or threaten identity perspective on leadership and group
people’s cherished subgroup identities and then to performance. Academy of Management Review, 29,
configure themselves, as leaders, as prototypical of 459–478.
this acceptable overarching identity. Hogg, M. A. (2001). A social identity theory of
Identity entrepreneurship plays a particularly leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review,
important role here, as does the psychology of 5, 184–200.
Social Impact Theory 805

Hogg, M. A. (2007). Social psychology of leadership. In follows: î = f(SIN), where î stands for the magni-
A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Social tude of social impact, f is a function, S is strength
psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., of the sources, I is immediacy (e.g., closeness in
pp. 716–733). New York: Guilford. space or time), and N is number of sources.
Hogg, M. A. (2008). Social identity theory of leadership. Strength includes such things as the salience or
In C. L. Hoyt, G. R. Goethals, & D. R. Forsyth (Eds.), importance of a source and may be operationally
Leadership at the crossroads: Leadership and defined by manipulating such source variables as
psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 62–77). Westport, CT: Praeger. authority, socioeconomic status, or expertise.
Hogg, M. A., & van Knippenberg, D. (2003). Social identity
Immediacy can be thought of as the ease with
and leadership processes in groups. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.),
which a message may be communicated, and it is
Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 35, pp.
often operationally defined as physical proximity.
1–52). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Number is simply how many sources of social
van Knippenberg, D., van Knippenberg, B., De Cremer,
D., & Hogg, M. A. (2004). Leadership, self, and
influence there are. As strength, immediacy, and
identity: A review and research agenda. Leadership
number of sources of social influence increase, the
Quarterly, 15, 825–856. magnitude of social impact on a target is expected
to increase. The proposed multiplicative relation-
ship implies that if any one of the three parameters
(strength, immediacy, or number) is zero, no social
Social Impact Theory impact will occur.
The second principle of the theory, the psycho-
Social impact theory was proposed by Bibb Latané social law, is expressed as follows: î = sNt, t < 1,
in 1981 to predict how and when sources of social where î  =  the magnitude of social impact, s is a
influence will affect a target of influence. It is a scaling constant, N is the number of sources, and t
very broad theory, seeking to encompass a variety is an exponent with a value less than 1. Conceptually,
of thoughts, feelings, behaviors, and physiological the psychosocial law was modeled after S. S.
states. When other people are sources of social Stevens’s psychophysical law, which proposed that
influence on a target person, impact is predicted the subjective psychological intensity of a stimulus
to be a multiplicative function of the strength, increases as the objective intensity increases, but it
immediacy, and number of sources. When other follows a law of diminishing returns. That is, each
people are cotargets of social influence, social new source adds additional pressure to change a
impact is predicted to be divided as an inverse target’s thoughts, feelings, or behavior, but the
power function of the strength, immediacy, and social impact of each new source adds less and less
number of the targets. The theory was proposed pressure to change. For example, the first source
as a descriptive model, or metatheory, as opposed (increasing from 0 to 1) has more impact than the
to an explanatory one. It was influenced by ideas sixth (increasing from 5 to 6).
in sociology, astronomy, geography, and psy- Research on conformity provides mixed sup-
chophysics. Social impact theory accounts for a port for the psychosocial law. In Solomon Asch’s
wide range of research results in social influence classic studies, the first source of influence resulted
domains such as conformity, compliance, and in very little conformity. Instead, the largest
obedience. More recently, a dynamic version of increase in conformity occurred when the number
the theory has been used to generate predictions of sources was increased from two to three. Later
about the emergence of cultural phenomena. This conformity research, including Stanley Milgram’s
entry describes the principles of the theory, assesses research in which confederates stood on a street
its strengths and limitations, and examines the corner in Manhattan and looked up at the sixth
evolution of dynamic social impact theory. floor of a building, provides support for the psy-
chosocial law, which predicts diminishing returns
as the number of sources increases. Other research,
Principles of Social Impact Theory including work on stage fright and the perceived
The first principle of the theory, the principle importance of news events, also supports the pre-
of social forces, is expressed mathematically as dictions of the psychosocial law. In studies of stage
806 Social Impact Theory

fright, for example, as perceived audience size told by an “experimenter” to administer electric
increased from 1 through 16, participants rated shocks to “students” who gave wrong answers to
their subjective tension to increase as a predicted questions. In fact, actors played the experimenter
power function of the size of the audience. and the students, and no shocks were actually
Increasing the strength of the audience (age given administered. In variations of the experiment, the
as either early teens or late 30s) similarly increased participants’ obedience to the experimenter’s
the subjective tension experienced by participants. instruction to administer shocks increased or
The third principle of the theory relates to mul- decreased as a function of the situation. For exam-
tiplication versus division of social impact. When ple, in one variation, obedience dropped off
there are multiple targets of social impact, the fol- sharply as the victim was moved closer to the
lowing formula applies: î = s/Nt, t < 1, where î is teacher—from being in the next room without
the magnitude of social impact, s is a scaling con- voice feedback to giving voice feedback, then to
stant, N is the number of targets, and t is an expo- being in the same room, and then to the teacher’s
nent with a value less than 1. That is, social impact having to physically force the victim to place a
gets divided among multiple targets as a function hand on the shock plate. These results illustrate the
of their strength, immediacy, and number. The effects of immediacy of the victim. Immediacy of
larger a given audience, the smaller the amount of the experimenter in the Milgram obedience studies
expected social impact a source will have on each had the opposite effect: As the experimenter moved
audience member. physically farther away from the teacher, obedi-
Support for the third principle is provided by ence dropped dramatically. Levels of obedience in
the large body of research on the bystander effect, other variations of the experiment can be inter-
which shows that as the size of a group of observ- preted in terms of strength and number.
ers of an emergency increases, the likelihood that Another strength of the theory is that it ties
any of them will provide help decreases. Another together seemingly disparate phenomena. For
phenomenon supporting the principle of division example, models of persuasion have posited differ-
of impact is social loafing, or the tendency for ent processes to explain the effects of influence by
people to put forth less effort on a task as group majority versus minority influence. Social impact
size increases. theory has been used to explain how both majority
and minority sources are influential as a function
of their strength, immediacy, and influence. For
Strengths of the Theory
example, a small yet high-strength minority source
Social impact theory has been quite influential, may overcome the numerical advantage of a
appearing in most social psychology textbooks’ majority faction.
accounts of social influence. One reason for its The theory is also quite useful. Because strength,
popularity is that Bibb Latané (like Kurt Lewin in immediacy, and number can be easily conceptual-
his field theory) drew a powerful analogy between ized and operationally defined, social impact the-
physical forces and social forces. Latané termed it ory can make practical suggestions to those wishing
a “lightbulb” theory: Just as the amount of light to increase their influence over others or to resist
that shines on a target may be affected by the influence attempts. For example, when people are
strength (wattage), immediacy (closeness), and soliciting donations for charity, increasing strength
number of lightbulbs, sources of social impact may (by dressing more formally), immediacy (by stand-
vary along similar dimensions. The lightbulb anal- ing closer), and number of the people asking for
ogy provides a vivid image that makes the theory donations has been shown to increase the amount
easy to understand. of money raised.
Social impact theory is also very general. It ties
together research results from different domains of
Limitations of the Theory
social influence, including conformity, compliance,
obedience, and persuasion. For example, Milgram The original version of social impact theory was a
conducted experiments in which study participants static one, in that it assumed that targets of social
were asked to play the part of “teachers” and were influence were passive recipients of social impact.
Social Impact Theory 807

The theory did not take into account the dynamic science, computer simulation was used to deter-
nature of social influence—that is, the idea that mine what the theory would predict for a popula-
people are by turns both sources and targets of tion of agents obeying the laws of social impact
social influence in their everyday interactions. A theory. Results of thousands of computer simula-
later version of the theory, described below, incor- tions of social impact, in which a variety of param-
porated this dynamic aspect of social impact. eters, such as group size and communication
One criticism of social impact theory is that networks, were varied, showed that four group-
there has been much more empirical support for level phenomena consistently emerged over time:
the effects of number of sources and targets than
for the effects of strength and immediacy. 1. Consolidation, or a reduction in diversity at the
Operational definitions of strength are also diffi- group level, occurs as the majority faction
cult to specify in a quantifiable manner. For typically gains new members at the expense of
example, a physician may be a higher-strength the minority.
source of influence in medical matters than a phy-
sician’s assistant might be, but how much higher is 2. Clustering, or the tendency for agents to
difficult to determine a priori. Indeed, definitions become more similar to nearby neighbors over
of strength often seem to be circular: Higher- time, occurs because of the principle of
strength sources are those that exert more influ- immediacy.
ence on an audience. Strength may also be an 3. Correlation across initially unrelated issues
idiosyncratic function of pairwise relationships emerges as clusters of different issues overlap.
between sources and targets—a source of influence
may be very high in strength to one person and 4. Continuing diversity also occurs as the group
very low to another. Support for predictions maintains different factions instead of
regarding the effects of immediacy has also been converging on the majority opinion or an
mixed. A meta-analysis showed that immediacy average group-level opinion.
had stronger effects on self-reported measures of
social impact than on behavioral measures. These four phenomena have been observed to
Social impact theory is more of a descriptive emerge in spatially distributed groups of people
than an explanatory theory. It specifies the level of discussing issues with each other through both
social impact likely to occur as a function of computer-mediated and face-to-face communica-
strength, immediacy, and number of sources and tion. They have also been shown to occur in exist-
targets of social influence, but it does not specify ing groups of spatially distributed people. For
why the impact will occur. However, ideas derived example, attitudes toward alcohol use clustered by
from theories in evolutionary psychology may help dormitory floor within a building and within build-
transform social impact theory into a more explan- ings on a college campus.
atory model. For example, Robert Boyd and Peter The dynamic version of social impact theory
Richerson have postulated that it may be adaptive has been quite useful in explaining cross-cultural
for humans to adopt the thoughts, feelings, and differences in thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. It
behaviors of prestigious (i.e., high-strength) group provides a psychological mechanism for the for-
members as well as the majority of group members mation, emergence, and change of norms within
(explaining the effects of number). Tatsuya Kameda and between groups over time and explains how
and Reid Hastie have made a similar evolutionary these cross-cultural differences may derive from
argument for the validity of majority opinion. day-to-day social influence. For example, the
often-demonstrated individualism–collectivism
distinction between European and Asian cultures
Dynamic Social Impact Theory provides an example of clustering.
In 1990, Latané published a dynamic version of Social impact theory has thrived as an explana-
social impact theory in collaboration with Andrzej tion for social and cultural phenomena because it
Nowak and Jacek Szamrej. In this line of research, fulfills the criteria of a good theory: It is parsimo-
inspired by the dynamical systems approach to nious, logically coherent, general, and testable.
808 Social Loafing

Since its inception, it has guided research using a loafing, its key principles, several theories that
variety of methods, including descriptive field attempt to explain it, and some related issues.
studies, experimental laboratory studies, and com-
puter simulation. As it becomes a more explana-
History and Background
tory theory, it will continue to guide future
research aimed at understanding and explaining The motivational effects of groups on individuals
the social world. have long been of interest to social and organiza-
tional psychologists. In perhaps the earliest social-
Martin J. Bourgeois psychological studies, conducted in the 1880s,
Max Ringelmann designed a rope-pulling appara-
See also Bystander Effect; Communication Networks;
Conformity; Culture; Dynamical Systems Approach; tus that allowed him to measure the strain exerted
Obedience to Authority; Social Loafing; Social both by individuals and by groups of varying sizes.
Networks When he asked male volunteers to pull on a rope,
either alone or in groups ranging in size from two
to six people, he found that as group size got
Further Readings larger, the total force exerted was progressively
lower than would be predicted from the simple
Harton, H. C., & Bourgeois, M. J. (2005). Cultural
addition of individual efforts. This raised the pos-
elements emerge from dynamic social impact. In M.
Schaller & C. S. Crandall (Eds.), The psychological
sibility that collective tasks could reduce the moti-
foundations of culture (pp. 42–76). Mahwah, NJ: vation of individuals, though the performance
Erlbaum. reduction in these studies could also have been due
Latané, B. (1981). The psychology of social impact. to process loss, or poor coordination of the efforts
American Psychologist, 36, 343–365. of individual group members.
Latané, B., & Bourgeois, M. J. (2001). Dynamic social Nearly a century later, in 1974, Alan Ingham
impact and the consolidation, clustering, correlation, and colleagues designed a paradigm that sought to
and continuing diversity of culture. In M. A. Hogg & separate motivation loss from process loss.
R. S. Tindale (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social Individuals were asked to pull on a rope either
psychology: Group processes (pp. 235–258). Oxford, alone or in groups of varying sizes across a number
UK: Blackwell. of trials. However, on some of these trials, when
Mullen, B. (1985). Strength and immediacy of sources: A individuals believed they were pulling with others,
meta-analytic evaluation of the forgotten elements of they were actually pulling alone. The deception was
social impact theory. Journal of Personality and Social masked with the use of confederates and by having
Psychology, 48, 1458–1466. participants wear blindfolds. Ingham and colleagues
Nowak, A., Szamrej, J., & Latané, B. (1990). From replicated the performance reductions with increas-
private attitude to public opinion: A dynamic theory ing group size found by Ringelmann and also
of social impact. Psychological Review, 9, 362–376. showed that reductions occurred both on actual tri-
als (in which participants really pulled with others)
and on pseudogroup trials (in which they pulled
alone but believed they were pulling with others).
Social Loafing The latter finding suggested that working in groups
can reduce individual motivation.
Social loafing is the tendency for people to reduce To control for mere presence, distraction, and
their efforts and work less hard on a task when evaluation concerns that can vary with changes in
working in a group than when working individu- group size, social loafing researchers usually com-
ally. It represents a potential productivity barrier pare individual performance on a collective task
to any group or team in which individual efforts (in which members’ inputs are combined into a
are combined into a group product. Thus, it is group total) with individual performance on a
important to design groups carefully to avoid the coactive task (in which individuals work in the
potential for reduced individual motivation. This presence of others but their inputs are counted
entry describes the background of work on social individually), while keeping group size the same
Social Loafing 809

across these two conditions. As in the research by cultures (which are more collectivistic in orienta-
Ingham and colleagues, pseudogroups are often tion) than in Western cultures (which are more
employed to allow researchers to study individual individualistic), significant social loafing effects
performance on tasks in which the individuals sim- have been documented in a number of different
ply believe their outputs are being combined into a countries, including the United States, Canada,
group product. Germany, France, Norway, Japan, China, Taiwan,
A seminal study by Bibb Latané and colleagues and Jordan. Similarly, although the magnitude of
in 1979 nicely illustrates these features. Participants social loafing is often lower among women than
were asked to shout as loudly as possible, both among men, significant effort reductions are typi-
alone and with others. Participants were asked to cally found for both sexes. Finally, although labo-
wear blindfolds and headphones that played mask- ratory studies have predominated, social loafing
ing noise that prevented individuals from hearing effects have also been documented in groups in a
whether others were shouting. Participants shouted variety of field settings, including sports teams,
in both actual groups and pseudogroups, in which organizational work groups, sales teams, songwrit-
they were told they were shouting with others but ing teams, and classroom project teams.
actually shouted alone. Individual efforts were still Although social loafing appears to be a fairly
reduced on these pseudogroup trials, showing that robust phenomenon, it does not occur in all
a significant percentage of the reduced perfor- groups, and a number of moderating variables
mance on group tasks was due to reduced motiva- have been identified that can reduce or eliminate it.
tion, as distinct from coordination loss. Latané Specifically, a number of studies have shown that
and colleagues were also the first to use the term social loafing can be reduced or eliminated by
social loafing to describe the tendency of individu- making individuals more identifiable or account-
als to reduce their efforts on group tasks. able for their contributions, making tasks more
meaningful or personally relevant to individuals,
strengthening group cohesiveness, providing com-
Key Findings
parison standards for performance, providing per-
Thus far, more than 100 studies have been con- formance incentives, punishing poor performance,
ducted on social loafing. These studies have exam- making individual contributions more unique and
ined individual motivation within groups in both less redundant with those of other members,
laboratory and field settings, in a variety of coun- closely matching the personality of individual
tries, and across a wide array of tasks. The results members to the demands of the group task, and
converge to show that social loafing is a fairly increasing feelings of task efficacy.
robust phenomenon that generalizes across settings, Finally, in addition to research that has estab-
tasks, and subject populations. A 1993 meta-analysis lished moderators of social loafing, there is also a
by Steven Karau and Kipling Williams showed that, relatively small but growing body of research that
across 78 studies run before that date, social loafing has documented specific conditions under which
was moderate in magnitude, consistently found working in groups can actually enhance individual
across studies, and comparable in magnitude to a motivation. Examples are research on the Köhler
variety of other social-psychological effects. effect and social compensation.
Social loafing has been observed across a wide
range of tasks that require different types of effort.
Theories of Social Loafing
These tasks have included physical tasks such as
swimming or pulling on a rope, work-related tasks A number of theories of social loafing have been
such as typing or managing an in-box of informa- advanced. Among these, three perspectives have
tion, creative tasks such as listing thoughts or writ- been especially prominent in the literature. First,
ing songs, cognitive tasks such as identifying signals the evaluation potential perspective posits that
on a computer screen or navigating mazes, and social loafing occurs because individual inputs can
evaluative tasks such as rating the quality of poems typically be clearly identified on individual or
and editorials. Although the average magnitude coactive tasks but are often much harder or even
of social loafing appears to be lower in Eastern impossible to evaluate on group or collective tasks.
810 Social Loafing

A programmatic series of studies by Stephen is relevant to many other phenomena that have
Harkins, Kate Szymanski, and their colleagues been studied using somewhat different paradigms.
provides support for this viewpoint. Those research- One related phenomenon, social facilitation, occurs
ers have shown that social loafing can often be when the presence of other people affects an indi-
eliminated by making individual inputs on a col- vidual’s task-related motivation, leading to better
lective task identifiable to individuals, their team- performance on simple or well-learned tasks and
mates, or an outside party, while also providing an worse performance on complex or novel tasks.
objective or social comparison standard with At first glance, this would appear inconsistent
which those inputs can be evaluated. with social loafing research, in which working
Second, Bibb Latané’s social impact theory pos- with others reduces individual motivation. How­
its that individuals can be either sources or targets ever, the two phenomena are fully compatible
of social influence and that the influence experi- when the nature of the presence of others is con-
enced in a social situation depends on the strength sidered. In social loafing research, the others
(status or legitimacy), immediacy (proximity in a present are coworkers with whom one combines
physical or psychological sense), and number of efforts into a group product, whereas in social
sources and targets present. When working indi- facilitation research, the others present are either
vidually, people experience the full influence of the coactors or observers who might potentially
demand from an outside source of influence (such evaluate one’s efforts but who are not contribut-
as a boss or an experimenter) to work hard. But ing to one’s work as teammates. Thus, social
when working in a group, that influence is diffused facilitation research shows that the presence of
across all the members of the group. This view- others as observers or coactors tends to increase
point is consistent with a number of studies show- motivation (perhaps because of arousal, distrac-
ing that social loafing effects often become larger tion, or evaluative concerns), whereas social loaf-
as group size increases. ing research shows that the presence of others
Third, several researchers have used expectancy- as teammates or coworkers tends to reduce
value models to explain social loafing. Those mod- motivation (at least under many conditions of
els posit that social loafing occurs because people’s group work).
perceptions that their efforts will be instrumental Related issues arise in social dilemmas, situa-
in producing valued outcomes are weaker in group tions in which actions that are beneficial to the
than in individual performance contexts. Because individual in the short term tend to be detrimental
efforts are combined into a group total on collec- to the group in the long term. Social dilemma
tive tasks, and because rewards are often distrib- research, which often focuses on resources that are
uted across members, there may be less of a link, shared by groups, communities, or societies, has
or contingency, between one’s efforts and desired found that individuals often contribute less than
outcomes when one is working with others in a their fair share to public goods such as recycling
group. This perspective appears to be broadly con- centers and public television stations and take
sistent with many of the established moderators of more than their fair share from pooled resources
social loafing. such as energy grids or agricultural commons.
All three theories contribute to a greater under- Social loafing can be seen as a type of “defection”
standing of social loafing, with the expectancy- within social dilemmas, such that individuals
value approach appearing to offer integrative engage in uncooperative behavior by contributing
potential and with the evaluation potential and less than their fair share to a group product or
social impact perspectives providing strong insights outcome. Although social loafing and social dilem-
into more specific social loafing contexts. mas often have been seen as separate bodies of
research, there is the potential for insightful dia-
logue between them, a potential that has been
Relationships With Other Phenomena
partially realized by a number of scholars within
Because the impact of groups on individuals is a the past 30 years.
fundamental problem in social and organizational
psychology, it is not surprising that social loafing Steven J. Karau
Socially Shared Cognition 811

See also Free Riding; Group Motivation; Köhler Effect; idea was slow to be integrated into mainstream
Ringelmann Effect; Social Compensation; Social cognitive and social psychology. Early cognitive
Dilemmas; Social Facilitation; Social Impact Theory; theories of language and person perception focused
Sucker Effect on how information (e.g., words, perceptions of
others) was represented in an individual’s mental
structure. However, research began to show that
Further Readings
the same word or stimulus was represented very
Ingham, A. G., Levinger, G., Graves, J., & Peckham, V. differently when presented in different contexts. In
(1974). The Ringelmann effect: Studies of group size addition, research found that the meaning attrib-
and group performance. Journal of Personality and uted to particular messages differed when they
Social Psychology, 10, 371–384. came from different social groups. Finally, research
Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A on how speakers interpreted messages they gave
meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. (or were about to give) showed that interpretations
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, changed as a function of the group to which the
681–706. message was given and even just as a function of
Kravitz, D. A., & Martin, B. (1986). Ringelmann
presenting the message. Thus, both what we think
rediscovered: The original article. Journal of
and how we think change as a function of the
Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 936–941.
social and cultural context within which such
Latané, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many
thinking occurs. In general, the social context leads
hands make light the work: The causes and
people within that context to believe similar things
consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 37, 822–832.
and think about the world in similar ways, which
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Jaworski, R. A., & Bennett, is the basic definition of socially shared cognition.
N. (2004). Social loafing: A field investigation. Journal
of Management, 30, 285–304. How Shared Cognitions Develop
There are a number of different ways in which
cognitions become shared among a particular
Socially Shared Cognition social or cultural group. First, evolution has played
a major role in shaping how cognitions are shared
The cognitive revolution in psychology moved the and in what ways. For example, evolved tenden-
field from simply observing the relationship cies toward affiliation (e.g., need to belong) ensure
between environmental stimuli and behavior to healthy amounts of social contact, which is neces-
attempting to understand how people mentally sary for shared cognitions to develop. The brain
represent both the environment and their behavior structures designed for language interpretation
within it. At first, these representations were seen and production are also central to the processes
as located within individual brains. Consequently, involved in shared cognitions. Common experi-
cognition was seen as an individual phenomenon. ence is also important for shared cognitions.
The cognitive revolution was seen as one reason People who share a particular location experience
for the decline of research on group-level phenom- the same environment and learn to adapt to that
ena during the 1960s and 1970s. However, more environment in similar ways. Recent dynamic
recent conceptualizations of the role of cognitive models of social influence have shown that simply
processes in social behavior have led to a resur- living in the same geographic location leads to
gence in group research. One of the most influen- belief convergence among people.
tial concepts underlying this resurgence is the However, most shared cognitions are probably
notion of socially shared cognitions. developed through social perception and interac-
The idea that cognition is a social phenomenon tion. Virtually all cultures and societies have in
is not new. Early theorists such as George Herbert place mechanisms for teaching their young the
Mead and Lev Vygotsky argued that the way shared “truths” as defined by the culture or soci-
people view and interpret the world is influenced ety. Schools, churches, libraries, museums, and so
by their social environment. Unfortunately, this forth all serve as vehicles for socialization, helping
812 Socially Shared Cognition

ensure that knowledge and values considered valid others for social interaction. Thus, groups often
or appropriate are shared among the members of a form because of the cognitions that members
society or culture. In addition to these formal share, and groups may dissolve when such sharing
mechanisms, simply observing the behavior of oth- declines. And when groups admit new members,
ers and interacting with them will lead to shared they tend to recruit people who will think and act
cognitions. Social comparison is another major in appropriate (i.e., similar) ways and to exclude
influence on people’s behavior, particularly in new or expel people with dissimilar beliefs or behav-
or uncertain situations. People use social compari- iors. Thus, groups often start out with shared cog-
son both to detect appropriate behavior and opin- nitions and then regulate entry and exit to ensure
ions and to validate the correctness of their own that sharedness is maintained.
behavior and opinions. Norms for appropriate Another main contributor to socially shared
behavior in a particular situation are learned cognitions is social identity. People tend, in part, to
quickly, even if those norms conflict with more define themselves by the groups in which they are
accepted or prescribed rules for behavior. For members. When those group memberships are
example, even though littering is considered inap- made salient, people look to the group to organize
propriate behavior (a prescriptive norm), research their beliefs and to guide their behavior. Thus,
has shown that people are much more likely to lit- people who define themselves as members of a
ter after being reminded of the prescriptive norm group tend to share many beliefs and ideas with
(do not litter) in settings where others have obvi- other members of that group. Research has dem-
ously littered (a descriptive norm). onstrated that when social identities are strong,
Beliefs about the world are also shared through group members’ thoughts and behaviors tend to
social interaction. Many stereotypes that people move toward their idea of a prototypic group
hold come not from direct experience with the ste- member, a person who embodies the qualities that
reotyped group but rather from social interactions make the group distinctive (usually in positive
in which the stereotypes are mentioned or used ways). The conceptualization of this prototypic
without refutation. Such general societal or cul- member is shared among the members of the
tural beliefs have been referred to as social repre- group, and their thoughts and behaviors converge
sentations—common ways in which a group of accordingly. Recent research has shown that social
people represents its world. Social representations identity can be both a cause and an effect of shared
are both learned and strengthened through social cognitions. Members who think similarly tend to
interaction. When people make statements consis- see themselves as a group, and this increases their
tent with social representations, both the speaker’s identity with that group. Moreover, members who
and the recipients’ belief in the representation are identify strongly with a group change their beliefs
strengthened. Research has shown that speakers and ideas to match more closely with those of
who expect a group of people to believe certain other group members.
things tend to “tune” their message or statements
to fit those beliefs. In addition, after the speaker has
Implications of
tuned the message, his or her own beliefs become
Shared Cognitions in Groups
more consistent with those of the audience—the
“saying-is-believing” effect. Research has shown One of the main findings in the literature on small
that social comparison and interaction influence groups is that ideas that are shared among group
cognitions of all types, even those that are formed members tend to influence the group consensus
through objective experience. process. The most important of these may be
Selection and socialization processes in groups shared decision preferences, as exemplified by
also lead to socially shared cognitions. People majority decision processes. Many societies, insti-
often join (or leave) groups because they believe tutions, and smaller collectives, either explicitly or
the other members of the group have beliefs and implicitly, follow some form of majority or plural-
values that are similar (or dissimilar) to their own. ity rule. A vast number of studies on small-group
Research has shown that people like others decision making have found that a simple majority-
who are similar to themselves and seek out similar wins or plurality-wins model does a very good job
Socially Shared Cognition 813

of describing the group decision outcome. Such information, making it more important for defin-
processes tend to exacerbate individual preference ing the group’s eventual choice. The person who
trends at the group level, leading groups to be mentions the information is also perceived as more
more polarized, or extreme, in their positions rela- competent and is liked better by other group mem-
tive to individuals. Moreover, majority and plural- bers. In addition, members of the group who share
ity processes also tend to be perceived as fairer a greater amount of information with other mem-
than most other decision processes, and, in most bers (i.e., are more cognitively central) are often
cases, majority and plurality processes are quite seen as group leaders and have a disproportionate
accurate. Recent computer simulations have shown influence on the group decision. Thus, there appears
that majority decision processes maximize relative to be an individual member benefit for mentioning
accuracy for very little cognitive or computational information that others know. However, even in
effort. If a group simply chooses to do what most situations in which a member may not know what
of its members want to do in the first place, then information he or she shares with others, shared
on average that group will do quite well, and the information has a greater probability of being men-
members will be satisfied with its choices. tioned simply because a greater number of people
Another topic that has received major research know and therefore can mention it.
attention concerns the degree to which informa- There is also a growing body of evidence that
tion is initially shared among group members. shared strategies or ways of representing a task can
Early research on groups tended to assume that also affect both group process and performance.
unshared information (information known by only For example, research on juries has found that the
one group member) would be brought up and shared instructions associated with the reasonable
shared during group discussion, allowing groups doubt criterion increase the likelihood of acquit-
to outperform individuals in most information- tals, relative to other jury instructions. Looking at
processing tasks because each member would the influence processes, the reasonable doubt crite-
bring unique information to the discussion. rion gives factions that favor acquittal a greater
However, research has shown that groups tend chance of winning, even if they do not represent a
mainly to focus on information that is initially majority. Although groups usually outperform
shared by most or all group members. The hidden individuals, they tend to perform worse than the
profile paradigm was instrumental in demonstrat- average member would have performed alone in
ing this effect. In this paradigm, information is situations in which the group members share an
distributed among group members in such a way inappropriate task strategy. Again, a shared strat-
that the information they share favors one decision egy can allow minorities with incorrect responses
alternative, but if all information were pooled dur- that are aligned with that strategy to win out over
ing discussion (shared as well as unshared infor- majorities with correct responses. This trend is
mation), then a different decision alternative is reversed when group members share an appropri-
obviously superior. Under these circumstances, ate task strategy. For example, using the hidden
groups often reach consensus on the alternative profile paradigm, groups are much better at dis-
that is supported by the shared information rather covering the optimal alternative when they share a
than discovering the best alternative available. The task strategy of information sharing. If the mem-
dominance of shared information tends to be bers know that they share this strategy, they do
strongest when individual members commit to even better. Recent research on negotiation shows
their preferred alternatives before group discus- a similar pattern of results. Parties in a negotiation
sion, the information load on the group is high, who frame the negotiation in similar terms and
and reaching consensus is more important than understand how their opponents are thinking tend
making an accurate or optimal decision. to have better overall outcomes. Thus, it seems
The degree to which information is shared that both sharing cognitions and knowing that the
among group members also has other consequences cognitions are shared can influence group perfor-
for group process and performance. A group mem- mance and process.
ber’s mention of a piece of information that others Knowing what information is shared or not
also know tends to confirm the validity of the shared (i.e., shared metacognition) is a crucial
814 Socially Shared Cognition

component of transactive memory. Transactive exchange unhampered by status differences. Recent


memory systems involve distributing responsibility expansions of the program to other teams (e.g.,
for remembering different types of information hospital surgical teams) have produced similar
across members of the group. By purposely assign- positive results.
ing different information to different members, the Shared social identities have also been found to
group’s overall memory capacity is increased. affect group processes and outcomes. Groups
However, this is effective for group performance whose members strongly identify with the group
only if all members share the metaknowledge of show greater levels of cohesiveness and tend to
who knows what. The group can use the informa- polarize more in group-normative directions rela-
tion effectively only if each member knows who to tive to groups with less strongly identified mem-
go to for the information that is needed. In this bers. Stronger shared identities also lead to greater
case, the cognitions themselves are not shared, but adherence to group norms and greater cooperation
the knowledge of where the cognitions are located within the group. Groups with strong shared iden-
is shared. tities show greater commitment to group goals and
Transactive memory systems are seen as one key are less tolerant of ingroup members who show
component of shared mental models in teams. Two antinormative behavior. Unfortunately, a strong
types of shared mental models are important for shared social identity can also have negative conse-
team performance: (1) mental models of the team quences. Strongly identifying group members are
and how the members are related to one another more likely to engage in ethically questionable
and (2) mental models of the task on which the behavior that favors the group, unless part of the
team is working. Research has shown that both group identity involves adherence to high ethical
types of shared mental models are important and standards. Groups with strong social identities are
that the metaknowledge associated with knowing also more competitive and aggressive relative to
that information is shared among team members is groups with less strongly identifying members,
also important. Transactive memory systems are particularly in intergroup settings. Much research
part of the team mental model. They allow group has recently focused on how to harness the positive
members to realize who knows what in the group aspects of shared social identity while inhibiting
and who needs certain types of information when the more negative aspects.
it becomes available. Other aspects of the team Socially shared cognition is still a relatively new
mental model involve the roles and leadership area of research. Research on the best way to mea-
responsibilities of group members and the most sure socially shared cognitions of different types is
important goals for performance. ongoing, and no general consensus has yet been
The task mental model depends on the specific reached. In addition, the interplay among socially
demands required by the task on which the team is shared cognitions, metacognitions, identities, and
working. Although individual members must know so forth has only recently begun to be explored.
their roles and the behaviors for successful perfor- Although young, the area has already produced a
mance of those roles, it is also important for them number of classic insights and will probably
to have a clear representation of the overall task, remain vibrant for years to come.
as well as an understanding of the interdependen-
cies among various members. Research has shown R. Scott Tindale and Sarah Stawiski
that teams whose members share both team and
task mental models perform better than teams See also Common Knowledge Effect; Group Memory;
Group Mind; Group Polarization; Hidden Profile
whose members do not share such mental models.
Task; Minority Influence; Social Identity Theory;
A recent program of team training for airline Social Representations
crews, called cockpit resource management, has
been very effective in reducing errors and improv-
ing safety. The system is based on clearly defined
task mental models, with an emphasis on a par- Further Readings
ticular shared team mental model involving clear Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Salas, E., & Converse, S. (1993).
channels of communication and information Shared mental models in expert team decision making.
Social Mobility 815

In N. J. Castellan Jr. (Ed.), Individual and group class. Similarly, individuals from a poor or troubled
decision making: Current issues (pp. 221–246). nation might emigrate to a country that promises
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. economic advancement. This entry summarizes
Resnick, L. B., Levine, J. M., & Teasley, S. D. (1991). research on how social mobility works, examines
Perspectives on socially shared cognition. Washington, what happens when social mobility is perceived as
DC: American Psychological Association. possible or impossible, and reviews some of the
Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared challenges for those making such changes.
information in group decision making: Biased
information sampling during discussion. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1467–1478. Social Mobility and Social Identity
Swaab, R., Postmes, T., van Beest, I., & Spears, R.
For members of a group to engage in social mobil-
(2007). Shared cognition as a product of, and
ity, the hierarchically arranged system of groups
precursor to, shared identity in negotiations.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33,
must be open. That is, the intergroup configura-
187–199.
tion must have a clearly defined set of characteris-
Thompson, L., & Fine, G. A. (1999). Socially shared tics that permits members of one group to gain
cognition, affect, and behavior: A review and entrance into another group. In an open system,
integration. Personality and Social Psychology Review, then, an equity principle of justice prevails—an
3, 278–302. individual’s inputs, as deemed important by soci-
Thompson, L., Levine, J. M., & Messick, D. M. (Eds.). ety, govern how far up the intergroup hierarchy
(1999). Shared cognitions in organizations. Mahwah, that person may climb.
NJ: Erlbaum. By contrast, in a closed system of hierarchically
Tindale, R. S., & Kameda, T. (2000). Social sharedness arranged groups, social mobility is impossible.
as a unifying theme for information processing in Formal caste structures and slavery are examples
groups. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 3, of closed systems in which there are no opportuni-
123–140. ties for upward social mobility. When confronted
Tindale, R. S., Meisenhelder, H. M., Dykema-Engblade, with a closed system, the only option available for
A. A., & Hogg, M. A. (2001). Shared cognitions in an individual to improve her or his status is social
small groups. In M. A. Hogg & R. S. Tindale (Eds.), change. That is, only an improvement in the status
Blackwell handbook in social psychology: Group of the entire group will cause the individual’s per-
processes (pp. 1–30). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. sonal status to change for the better. Social change
Wiener, E. L., Kanki, B. G., & Helmreich, R. L. (Eds.). involves collective action designed to improve the
(1993). Cockpit resource management. San Diego, group’s status, and this improvement will be at the
CA: Academic Press. expense of the high-status group. Clearly, social
change strategies in the face of a closed system
involve some level of intergroup conflict. Because
the conflict involves groups of unequal power and
Social Mobility status, the usual diplomatic and military strategies
associated with conflict between equal-status
Understanding the psychological processes associ- groups will not likely yield the desired results for
ated with unequal collective power and status is the low-status group. Thus, collective actions such
critical to understanding intergroup relations. as terrorism and rioting often emerge as groups
Social mobility is a central construct in the context lacking power and status search for strategies to
of group inequality. Defined as the extent to which successfully confront high-status groups.
an individual can, and does, move from one group Social identity theorists have been influential in
to another, social mobility focuses attention on drawing the conceptual distinction between social
members of low-status groups and their potential mobility and social change. They articulated these
to move to a group of higher status. For example, two social strategies for upward mobility by point-
within nations, individual members of a low-status ing to the importance of group identity for under-
group might engage in upward social mobility by standing the self. Their proposition is that people
directing their efforts toward joining the middle strive to attain a group identity that is distinct and
816 Social Mobility

positive. Well-being is reinforced when individuals underperformed and their participation in less
identify with a group that has high status and is demanding programs.
regarded positively. Given these ambiguities, an understanding of the
Presumably, members of a low-status group will extent to which social mobility is possible falls
be motivated to improve their group-based iden- squarely into the lap of social psychologists. It is
tity by engaging in upward social mobility. But in people’s perceptions, not objective reality, that gov-
real-world intergroup situations, it has proven dif- ern their behavior, and social psychologists focus
ficult to predict when, and indeed whether, mem- much of their attention on these perceptions.
bers of a disadvantaged group will take individual
or collective action to improve their group-based
When Social Mobility Is Impossible
identity. Social identity theorists have proposed
that if members of a disadvantaged group perceive The real-world observation that few low-status
that mobility is possible and that their disadvan- groups actually engage in collective action despite
taged status is unfair, then they will engage in their disadvantaged position is theoretically inter-
behavior designed to improve their status and, by esting. Although attention naturally turns to dra-
extension, their group identity. matic instances of rebellion, coups, and terrorism,
social psychologists have focused most of their
efforts on understanding the less dramatic but
Perceiving Social Mobility as Possible
more pervasive tendency of members of low-status
It is no easy matter for members of a low-status groups to accept their disadvantaged position.
group to confidently perceive that mobility is pos- This acceptance of a disadvantaged position
sible. They may well be motivated to improve their seems to be rooted in a psychological need to
social identity by perceiving that they are partici- believe that one’s personal relations and intergroup
pating in a group hierarchy that is open to mobil- relations are just and fair. This belief is a profound
ity. But members of high-status groups have a one because it offers people a framework within
vested interest in a more closed hierarchical group which to think, feel, and behave with others. It also
structure. They are motivated to protect their own provides a measure of predictability and certainty
positive group identity, and if the system were and thereby allows for meaning in life. Hence
completely open, they might risk demotion to a people are reluctant to believe that the hierarchical
low-status group. arrangement of groups in society is unfair. It is
Even using objective statistical analyses, it is precisely this desire to perceive the world as fair
often difficult for members of a low-status group that leads members of low-status groups to believe
to decide whether mobility is possible. Consider that they must deserve their disadvantaged status.
analyses regarding upward mobility in contempo- Research in social psychology has shown that,
rary society. On one hand, there are statistics that indeed, members of low-status groups do endorse
indicate that certain visible minority groups and the status quo hierarchy of groups as much as
women are overrepresented in low-status groups. members of high-status groups do. Research has
On the other hand, there are indications of also shown that members of low-status groups
increased participation of visible minority groups cling to the belief that they deserve their disadvan-
and women in high-status positions. But there are taged position even when they are exposed to
also statistics pointing to a widening gap between relatively blatant examples of group-based dis-
elite members of minority groups and the vast crimination.
majority of other group members. Statistics about To reinforce the belief that the intergroup hier-
educational achievement are also confusing. There archy is fair, high-status groups may foster group
are statistics that describe a narrowing of the edu- stereotypes. For example, stereotyping a low-
cational achievement gap between groups that status group as lacking in intelligence or lazy
have historically underperformed and more privi- allows members of a low-status group to under-
leged groups. However, equally compelling analy- stand why they are not upwardly mobile and why
ses indicate that the narrowing is related to lowered high-status group members deserve their advan-
educational standards for those who have historically taged position.
Social Networks 817

Conclusion while leadership is often thought of as a set of


personal abilities and skills, a social network
Social mobility, or movement between groups of
analysis would focus on the leader’s relations
differing status, can have profound effects on
with others—for example, the relations between
people’s well-being. Moreover, it is very much a
the leader and his or her followers or the bridg-
social-psychological issue in that it raises funda-
ing role the leader provides to outside groups—
mental questions about when and how members of
both of which might enhance or inhibit the
a low-status group engage in upward mobility and,
leader’s effectiveness.
alternatively, when and how they come to accept
To understand how social network analysis is
their disadvantage. These questions are likely to
different from other perspectives on social phe-
elicit theoretical and empirical attention for many
nomena, it is useful to understand the distinction
years to come.
between units of analysis and levels of analysis.
Donald M. Taylor The unit of analysis refers to the aggregation of
people into units of interest as primary actors in a
See also Collective Movements and Protest; Social system. For example, the field of social networks
Dominance Theory; Social Identity Theory; System is sufficiently interdisciplinary that one can find
Justification Theory studies of networks of all kinds of units, including
people, organizations, industries, and even nations.
For present purposes, however, this entry focuses
Further Readings
on social networks in which people are the unit of
Hogg, M. A. (2007). Uncertainty-identity theory. In M. analysis.
P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social The level of analysis, in contrast, is more com-
psychology (Vol. 39, pp. 69–126). San Diego, CA: plex because it refers to different aggregations of
Academic Press. the structural or relational features of interest, and
Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of it may be best described by example. Consider a
stereotyping in system-justification and the production network made up of N friends. We can identify the
of false consciousness. British Journal of Social levels of analysis of this network on a log scale
Psychology, 33, 1–27. from 0 to 3 as follows: Level 0 refers to the net-
Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An work structure as a whole, Level 1 refers to prop-
intergroup theory of social dominance and oppression. erties of the N actors in the network, Level 2 refers
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. to properties of the individual dyadic relations
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory
between all pairs of actors in the network, and
of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel
Level 3 refers to the perceptions that each of the N
(Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations
actors has of the dyadic relationships in the net-
(pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
work. Each level of analysis sheds light on a differ-
Taylor, D. M., & Moghaddam, F. M. (1994). Theories of
intergroup relations: International social psychological
ent aspect of the social relations that characterize
perspectives. Westport, CT: Praeger.
the network. The different insights that can be
gained from the levels of analysis are illustrated in
Figures 1 and 2 (both adapted from real examples
of work teams).

Social Networks
Level 0: Structure as a Whole
Social networks is a field of study that focuses on The first level of analysis, Level 0, yields one obser-
the pattern, or structure, of relations among a set vation of interest in a given network of N actors. It
of actors. For example, while traditional expla- addresses several questions: What is the overall
nations of career success often focus on a per- shape of the network, how is this shape character-
son’s training or education, a social network ized, and what effect does this shape have on the
perspective would emphasize his or her connec- performance and behavior of the group as a whole?
tions to others within an organization. Similarly, Different shapes have different implications for
818 Social Networks

l The structure in Figure 2 has a very different


g shape, a classic bow tie, showing two relatively
p densely connected subgroups connected by one (or
sometimes a few) bridging individuals. The integ-
i
m rity of the overall structure is quite fragile because
keeping it connected is heavily dependent on one
e
c person (O), without whom the subgroups would
d be totally separated. Not only is this structure frag-
n f
ile, but the coherence within the subgroups and the
a
b relative lack of connection between the subgroups
j tends to devolve into two local subgroup identities
q (we–they attitudes). If the group’s purpose is to
perform an overall integrated task, then this struc-
k
h ture can interfere with necessary subgroup coop-
o
eration and coordination.
Figure 1   Core–Periphery Structure These two examples only scratch the surface of
the range of structural wholes that can be described
in a Level-0 analysis. Most groups are not as clas-
E B sic, or prototypical, in their structure as those in
I Figures 1 and 2. Usually, structures are complex
J L
H K and messy, and the question is not what type of
structure they are but rather how close, or similar,
P Q they are to particular ideal types. Measures of such
O closeness abound and carry with them different
G A N
C implications for group processes and outcomes.
M For example, the E–I index measures the extent to
D
F which a structure is characterized by a preponder-
ance of external ties (that bridge across group
Figure 2   Bow Tie Structure boundaries) versus internal ties (that connect peo-
ple within the group). Having a high E–I index
what people see, how they think, and how the score, indicating predominantly bridging ties, has
group or system behaves. In Figures 1 and 2, both been found to facilitate a group’s ability to deal
networks are about the same size, and they have with or survive crises.
approximately the same number of overall ties, but A secondary question is, What leads to different
their shapes are quite different. Figure 1 is a classic structural shapes? Since most network structures
core–periphery structure, made up of a small group are emergent (i.e., not preplanned but rather evolv-
of people (the core) who are well connected to each ing through a set of recurring, sometimes random,
other and who have ties to those on the periphery. interactions), the question becomes, What governs
(If there is just one person in the core, the structure which shape will predominate? Although there is
is called a star.) Those on the periphery have ties to much work to be done to answer this question, it
the core but relatively few ties to each other. This has been argued that the structures illustrated in
structure represents highly centralized work groups, Figures 1 and 2 occur frequently. For example,
which often have efficient group processes when Michels’s iron law of oligarchy argues for the
the task they face is relatively simple and routine. inevitable evolution of social systems toward a
But this structure can also evolve toward a hierar- core–periphery structure (Figure 1), with a small
chical power distribution, in which the core coor- group of leaders coordinating to dominate the
dinates to reinforce its power advantages and the whole structure. On the other hand, Watts’s work
periphery becomes disenchanted with this inequity. on “small worlds” suggests that, in large-scale
This leads to negative group dynamics that can networks, clustering such as that in Figure 2 is
undercut the efficiency of this structure. rather common.
Social Networks 819

Level 1: The Individual Actor social network. Betweenness centrality captures


the extent to which an individual is on critical
Individuals bring with them to the social situation paths between others in the network. Returning to
a set of attributes (e.g., age, education, experience, Figure 2 (the bow tie), we see that Person A has the
attitudes, beliefs). The network analyst adds to this most ties (highest degree centrality). But we also
list an assessment of the advantages a person has see that most of the people A is tied to are also tied
because of his or her position within the network. to each other. Thus, none of the people A is tied to
A Level-1 analysis addresses the following ques- are dependent on A to get a message to any of the
tion: What is the consequence to the individual others; they can easily go around A to reach their
who occupies a certain position in the network? targets. Despite A’s popularity, he or she has low
The most prominent concept used in asking betweenness centrality in this network.
Level-1 questions is centrality. There are three In contrast, whereas Person O has only 4 ties,
basic types of centrality: degree, closeness, and these ties are critically situated so that individuals in
betweenness (although extensions and varieties of the left side of the graph are highly dependent on O
each exist). Degree centrality is simply the count of to reach those on the right side (and vice versa). O is
the number of ties a person has in the network. In critically located between many other pairs of indi-
Figure 2, Person A has the highest degree centrality viduals in the network and thus has high between-
(8 ties), whereas person B has the lowest (3 ties). ness centrality. Because of the dependency that others
People with high degree centrality are often identi- have on those with high betweenness centrality, this
fied as the informal leaders of the group. index is often predictive of the power and influence
Efficient communication and information trans- an individual has in the group or organization.
fer within a group are critical to its proper func- A close relative of betweenness centrality is
tioning. The social network provides a road map Ronald Burt’s concept of structural holes. Recall
of how this communication flows within and that A had low betweenness because most of the
between groups. The more steps it takes (equiva- people A is tied to are already tied to each other
lent to the number of intermediaries who must be and thus they can easily go around A. The people
traversed) to reach someone in another part of the O is tied to, in contrast, have far fewer options. It
network, the more remote that target is. A critical is this lack of ties, called holes, that gives rise to
issue, then, is how quickly one can reach others O’s betweenness and power advantages. Measures
through the network. This ability is often assessed of structural holes and betweenness are conceptu-
by closeness centrality, which measures the aver- ally linked and empirically correlated, but the
age number of steps it takes for an individual to research on structural holes has focused more on
reach everyone else in the network. A person with the performance consequences of the group’s
high closeness centrality can reach others in rela- members. Those individuals surrounded by struc-
tively few steps; a person with low closeness cen- tural holes have been shown to be more produc-
trality has to go through many intermediaries in tive, to develop more creative ideas, and to get
order to reach everyone in the network. Those promoted more quickly in organizations. There
high in closeness centrality, therefore, are more are costs, though, in that being the bridge between
likely to be able to disseminate information quickly different groups (as O is in Figure 2) can lead to
through the network. Another advantage is that role conflict and stress.
they are more likely to pick up rumors or other
bits of information that percolate through the net-
Level 2: The Dyad
work. When such information transfer is critical to
the group, closeness centrality becomes a valuable Since position within the network has such a pow-
asset to the individual who holds it. erful effect on participants’ opportunities and con-
While both degree and closeness centrality are straints, researchers have explored a deeper
useful guides to understanding an individual’s question, namely, how do these (almost N  ×  N)
advantages and contributions to the group pro- dyadic network ties form? Why do we choose par-
cesses, it is betweenness centrality and related ticular others to be our friends? Several factors can
measures that are most important to success in a help us answer these questions.
820 Social Networks

First, there is the general principle of homoph- that the network is one large, undifferentiated
ily. People prefer to interact with others who are group with network ties densely distributed across
similar to themselves. People of similar demo- the board, then he or she may not take these group
graphic characteristics (e.g., race, sex, age, educa- dynamics into account in trying to implement the
tion) tend to associate with each other. People will new role assignments.
also tend to associate with others who share simi- Each of the N participants in the network has
lar beliefs and attitudes. his or her own perception of what the network is
Another prominent factor that influences the like. Taken together, these N perceptions are called
formation and retention of network ties is propin- the cognitive social structure of the network. Since
quity. Whether two people communicate or form each participant has a view of who is tied to
a relationship is heavily influenced by the physical whom, this amounts to approximately N3 assess-
distance between them. For example, two people ments of the structure (N perceptions of almost
with offices beside each other will tend to commu- N × N dyads).
nicate more often than will two people with offices Research in this area has produced several inter-
on separate floors. esting findings. First, participants’ perceptions of
A third factor is affect. People have a tendency the network have direct consequences for their
to interact with others whom they like. This may behavior, as illustrated by the above example
seem obvious, but the extent to which affect dom- about the group in Figure 2. Moreover, accuracy
inates people’s choices is sometimes surprising. For of network perception facilitates a participant’s
example, suppose you need technical help on a ability to accomplish his or her goals in the group.
task. Suppose further that you have a choice to In particular, an individual’s accuracy leads to
seek help from either a competent jerk (someone power, over and above the power emanating from
you view as technically able to address your ques- his or her formal position or the power attribut-
tion but whom you do not care for personally) or able to his or her centrality in the network.
a lovable fool (someone you like but who is rela- Research has explored predictors of network
tively incompetent). It turns out that most people perceptions and their associated biases. These per-
will choose the lovable fool over the competent ceptions are influenced by many factors, some of
jerk in work settings. which lead to substantial misperceptions and inac-
curacy. For example, there is a tendency to see
more solid groupings and clusters of ties than actu-
Level 3: Cognitive Social Structures
ally exist. This bias is strongest for those people
Beyond actual dyadic interactions, there are also who are closest to the perceiver (we prefer that our
people’s perceptions of networks. That is, while friends be friends with each other). We also have
the network can have structural effects on indi- relatively little insight about those parts of the net-
viduals, if a participant in the network believes the work that are distant from us as perceivers. This
network is different from what it really is, that results in an accelerated rate of inaccurate percep-
perception may influence his or her perceived tions as a function of distance, simply because of
options and subsequent behavior. For example, lack of information. In combination, these two
the person who is the manager of the workgroup sources of bias result in the most accurate assess-
in Figure 2 might want to introduce changes in the ments of dyadic ties for those who are at an inter-
role assignments of his or her work crew. A cur- mediate distance from perceivers.
sory examination of this network is likely to lead
the manager to see that he or she should take into
Conclusion
consideration the fact that these two distinct sub-
groups might view any changes with suspicion if The field of social networks provides a perspective
the changes favor members of one subgroup over on social phenomena that focuses on relationships
the other. Moreover, in seeking to implement the among individual actors as the core building block
new assignments, the manager could take advan- of group and individual behavior. Different levels of
tage of O’s unique role as a bridge between the analysis emerge from this perspective, ranging from
two subgroups. In contrast, if the manager believes the micro (Level 3) to the macro (Level 0). Each of
Social Relations Model 821

these provides insights into how individuals operate particular person) and whether that similarity
in groups and how groups interact. Moreover, lev- holds at the individual, dyadic, and group levels of
els of analysis can inform each other: Perceptions analysis. The SRM decomposes ratings members
can lead to ties, strategic ties can lead to central make about or behaviors directed to other mem-
network positions, and stratification of these posi- bers into three basic components, each of which is
tions can lead to systemic behavior. By examining used to answer a set of specific questions regard-
these network relationships, we gain a unique ing group and interpersonal processes.
understanding of complex social situations. A typical SRM study of small groups employs
a round-robin design, in which each member
David Krackhardt rates every other member on some measure
(although some studies use a block design, in
See also Cliques; Communication Networks; Dyads;
Group Composition; Homophily; Levels of Analysis; which a subset of members rates another subset),
Social Relations Model; Status so round-robin designs are assumed in the remain-
der of this entry. Self-ratings are possible, although
not necessary. Excluding them, however, pre-
Further Readings cludes several interesting analyses. Depending on
the research questions and purposes of the study,
Burt, R. S. (2005). Brokerage and closure: An
ratings can be obtained before, during, or after
introduction to social capital. Oxford, UK: Oxford
interaction, and, in some cases, ratings are
University Press.
obtained at zero-acquaintance, before members
Casciaro, T., & Sousa Lobo, M. (2008). When
competence is irrelevant: The role of interpersonal
get to know one another. The result is that in a
affect in task-related ties. Administrative Science group of size N, each member rates and is rated
Quarterly, 53(4), 655–684. by the N  −  1 other members on the variable or
Cross, R., Parker, A., & Sasson, L. (2003). Networks in measure of interest.
the knowledge economy. New York: Oxford According to the SRM, three main components
University Press. of perception (as derived from the ratings) are the
Kilduff, M., & Krackhardt, D. (2008). Interpersonal perceiver, target, and relationship effects. The per-
networks in organizations: Cognition, personality, ceiver effect describes the tendency to view or rate
dynamics, and culture. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge a set of targets similarly. For example, a given
University Press. member might be predisposed to rate all his or her
Kilduff, M., & Tsai, W. (2003). Social networks and colleagues high on credibility. The perceiver effect
organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. indexes assimilation, which is the extent to which
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network a person provides similar ratings of the other
analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge, UK: group members. The target effect describes the set
Cambridge University Press. of judgments a set of perceivers makes about a
target. For example, some members may be per-
ceived uniformly as having high credibility, per-
haps because of their behavior or institutional
Social Relations Model position. The term consensus is attached to the
target effect. Finally, the relationship effect is the
The social relations model (SRM), developed by unique perceptions a perceiver has of a target rela-
David Kenny and Lawrence LaVoie, offers both a tive to other targets. Uniqueness is the extent to
conceptualization scheme and a set of analytical which one’s perception of the target cannot be
tools for studying interdependent perceptions and explained by consensus and assimilation. From
behaviors related to group processes and out- these three components, one is able to ask several
comes at multiple levels of analysis. The model questions, including those related to assumed simi-
assesses the degree of similarity of perceptions or larity, which is the correspondence between self-
behaviors within groups (e.g., whether everyone perceptions and one’s perceptions of others, and
in the group thinks that a given member is credible self–other agreement (i.e., the correlation of self-
or whether members direct their comments to a perceptions and others’ perceptions).
822 Social Relations Model

The variation of judgments at different levels of because it is the correlation of one’s actor and tar-
analysis is at the heart of the SRM. The perceiver get effects, and it addresses whether the ratings one
and target variances are at the individual level. If receives correspond with those one provides. For
members of four-person groups rate each other on example, if other group members rate a particular
credibility, there are four mean perceiver scores member as credible, does that member rate his or
(each person rates the other three members) and her colleagues as credible? Dyadic reciprocity
four mean target scores (each person is rated by the refers to the similarity of ratings of pairs of mem-
three other members). Those means will likely differ bers—if Person A thinks B is credible, does B think
or vary from one another. The term target variance A is credible? Most conceptualizations of reciproc-
refers to the variability of the four means for each ity are implicitly at the dyadic level, but in practice
of the four targets in the group, whereas perceiver the two levels are confounded. The SRM offers a
variance indexes variation in the mean perceiver way to partial one effect from the other.
scores. (The actual computation of the variances is Kenny, among others, has reviewed the SRM
complex and is averaged across groups.) If there is literature and noted some trends in SRM compo-
little or no variance in the target effect, for example, nents. Most notably, consensus is small compared
then the rating one receives is not different from with assimilation and uniqueness, but is often evi-
that received by others. If there is sufficient per- dent, at least for some types of measures, at zero-
ceiver or target variance, then one can examine the acquaintance (at which some obvious features of
extent to which the ratings vary with other variables the target are linked to the measure in question).
of interest. For example, a researcher might hypoth- Surprisingly, consensus does not increase with
esize that the number of contributions to discussion acquaintance. Instead, it takes a relatively short
correlates with credibility ratings received. time, or just a small number of actions performed
The relationship component is a dyad-level by the target, for consensus to stabilize. Assimilation
effect. It is likely that the ratings made by a given tends to decrease with increased acquaintance
perceiver vary. For example, Person A’s ratings of because individuation-based processes supplant
Persons B, C, and D are 3, 4, 5, respectively, on a generalized processing. Uniqueness, as noted, is a
7-point credibility scale, with higher numbers indi- fairly stable feature of interpersonal interaction.
cating greater credibility. The ratings for a given The SRM is an important lens for viewing group
target provided by the other three members of the processes. It is clear that process depends on indi-
group also likely vary. If ratings vary within perceiv- vidual, dyadic, and group-level characteristics, and
ers and targets, then there is some degree of covari- the SRM is designed to capture them with just one
ance. For example, Person A’s rating of B’s set of ratings. It is also evident that a large part of
credibility might mirror B’s rating of A on that mea- the process is interdependent such that what one
sure, but those ratings likely differ from the ones A says, thinks, and decides is related to what other
and C give each other, and so on. This indexes the members do, say, and decide. The SRM captures
degree to which members perceive or act toward interdependence at three distinct levels of analysis.
one another above and beyond effects attributed to It is important to note that, assuming sufficient
particular characteristics of perceivers and targets. variation in the judgments or behaviors of interest,
Finally, there is the group-level effect; group means group scholars can examine the correlates or causes
might differ. For example, some groups might have of the effects or use them to predict other features
higher mean credibility scores than do others. of group processes and outcomes. For example, the
Another important aspect of the SRM is reci- quality of arguments made during discussion likely
procity: Perceptions and behaviors are often cor- is associated with perceptions of credibility, or the
related within groups. Reciprocity often has distribution of perceptions depends on the type of
ramifications for group processes because one’s task (e.g., whether it has a correct answer). The
perceptions and behaviors are related to those of SRM allows researchers to ask a new set of ques-
one’s colleagues. As with the three main compo- tions regarding a variety of phenomena related to
nents of the SRM, reciprocity occurs at both the group processes and outcomes.
individual and the dyad levels of analysis.
Generalized reciprocity is at the individual level Joseph A. Bonito
Social Representations 823

See also Interdependence Theory; Levels of Analysis; representations, in contrast to collective represen-
Research Methods and Issues tations, as internal states that cannot be shared
with others. In order to be communicated, such
internal states are transformed into words, images,
Further Readings and symbols that can be collectively shared. Lucien
Bonito, J. A. (2003). A social relations analysis of Lévy-Bruhl, an anthropologist, further distin-
participation in small groups. Communication guished between two modes of collective thinking:
Monographs, 70, 83–97. a rational mode, which he considered typical of
Kenny, D. A. (1994). Interpersonal perception: A social “civilized” cultures, and a mystic mode, typical of
relations analysis. New York: Guilford. “primitive” cultures. Jean Piaget used this same
Kenny, D. A. (2004). PERSON: A general model of distinction, arguing that rational thinking gradu-
interpersonal perception. Personality & Social ally replaces mystic thinking as a person develops
Psychology Review, 8, 265–280. through childhood into adulthood. However, from
Marcus, D. K. (1998). Studying group dynamics with the a social-psychological perspective, Serge Moscovici
social relations model. Group Dynamics, 2, 230–240. demonstrated that the two modes of thinking actu-
Swann, W. B. J., Kwan, V. S. Y., Polzer, J. T., & Milton, ally coexist in adult thought. People reason differ-
L. P. (2003). Fostering group identification and ently in different situations. Notably, mystic
creativity in diverse groups: The role of individuation thinking is well suited to many situations in social
and self-verification. Personality & Social Psychology
life, such as when people are engaged in convinc-
Bulletin, 29, 1396–1406.
ing or charming others, interpreting new events, or
predicting the future.

Social Representations From Mental Representations


to Social Representations
Social representations are lay conceptions of com- A nice example of how mental representations
plex phenomena that are important, relevant, and are socially structured comes from the way people
attention grabbing for society as a whole or for conceive of groups. The psychological literature
specific groups or communities within society. contains various conceptions of groups. Groups are
Examples of these phenomena include addiction, sometimes conceived of as resulting from a parti-
AIDS, climate change, intelligence, gender differ- tioning of the social world into mutually exclusive
ences, and role of genes in people’s character. categories of people. In each category, all the group
Because these are important phenomena, they have members share the same basic characteristics,
sophisticated, technical, scientific explanations. which become the “essence” of the group. Other
However, we are not all trained biochemists, psy- conceptions stress a limited number of attributes
chologists, sociologists, climatologists, and so forth, that carry weight in the definition of a prototype of
and yet we still have a desperate need to under- the group. Group membership is based on whether
stand and communicate about these phenomena. an individual possesses enough of these attributes.
Social representations fill this need. The study of Because each group member’s characteristics match
social representations is the study of how everyday to a differing degree the group’s prototype, hetero-
explanations arise and are sustained in society. geneity arises from comparisons among group
members. Still other conceptions posit that a group
consists of the accumulation of concrete memories
Background about individuals who have been previously encoun-
According to the social psychologist Willem Doise, tered during personal contacts, learned from the
the theory of social representations is a general media, and so on. Such groups promote even more
approach to understanding how collective pro- heterogeneity among the group members.
cesses affect the way that people think. The theory From the standpoint of social representations
has its roots in a distinction made by the sociolo- theory, these conceptions are not mutually exclu-
gist Émile Durkheim, who defined individual sive. Fabio Lorenzi-Cioldi has provided evidence
824 Social Representations

that the way we conceive of groups is influenced In his study of the social representation of the
by where we are positioned in a social hierarchy. theory of psychoanalysis, Moscovici showed that
Those with power and status emphasize beliefs in the partitioning of the psyche into “organs”—for
a society of loosely related individuals who are instance, the conscious and the unconscious as two
striving for mobility based on individual merit. aspects located in the outer and the inner parts of
They thus come to define themselves mainly as the brain—made the theory more familiar.
individual persons whose group membership does
Illustration: The Social Representation
not make a relevant or important contribution to
of the Androgynous Person in Psychology
their self-definition. People positioned lower in the
social hierarchy tend to describe themselves in The transformation of the concept of androgyny
terms of attributes that are associated with their in psychology illustrates how scientists promote
group membership, making the self coextensive and legitimize a socially desirable construct out of
with all the other members of the group. the prevalent social representations of sexual
This example suggests that conceptions of groups ambiguity (androgyny) as deviance. The social cli-
cannot be understood without taking into consid- mate that gave rise to the concept of androgyny
eration the broader social context in which concep- was characterized by theories and lay conceptions
tions operate. Seemingly universal and antagonistic of sex differences that associated the simultaneous
conceptions of groups are in fact concurrent and display of masculine and feminine properties with
compatible, and their form reflects the social posi- concrete images of psychological maladjustment,
tion of the conceiver. The social representations such as sexual ambivalence and homosexuality.
perspective shifts the theoretical focus from the The concept of psychological androgyny as co-
formal properties of conceptions of a group to the presence of masculine and feminine attributes has
properties of the perceivers’ social context. The been developed to repudiate this concrete imagery
study of social representations thus answers the of the sexually unhealthy character (the familiar).
question, Which social regulations engage which However, although the co-presence concept was a
reasoning in which contexts? The answer to this novel idea, it did not break clearly with more tra-
question points to two sociocognitive dynamics, ditional prescriptions of appropriate sex-typed
called objectification and anchoring. behavior. The notion of a person embodying char-
acteristics of both sexes was poorly equipped to
bypass the stigma of sexual maladaptation—such
Objectification and Anchoring a person was socially represented as determined
In his seminal work on the presentation and com- by, yet contrary to, nature.
munication of psychoanalysis in the French press, To circumvent this interpretation, theorists pro-
Moscovici introduced objectification and anchoring posed a new perspective that supplanted the prob-
as the two thought processes that provide the impe- lematic masculine-versus-feminine contrast. From
tus for the emergence of social representations. the idea of simple co-presence of masculine and
feminine attributes, the definition of androgyny
mutated toward the idea of a fusion of these attri-
Objectification
butes. Researchers advocated a hybrid being, an
To objectify means to turn abstract, unfamiliar individual who blended the sex-typed characteris-
ideas into concrete, familiar ideas. Thus, objectifi- tics into new ways of being.
cation “domesticates” reality by fitting reality into The final conception of transcendence aimed at
preexisting interpretative categories and standards rectifying further deficiencies with the blending
that are provided by our shared culture. People notion. Androgyny now referred to a person in
understand abstract information with the help of whom the masculine and the feminine had disap-
knowledge (analogies, metaphors, images) that peared, making obsolete a cognitive schema based
they already possess. Hence, to objectify means to on masculine versus feminine. The popular objec-
superimpose a concrete image on something tification of the androgyne was circumvented for
abstract, making the latter recognizable and ready good with a scientific conception that conceptual-
for communication. ized the androgyne in terms of what “s/he” was
Social Representations 825

not or did not do. The androgynous person became beliefs. Consequently, their representation was
colorless, incorporeal, and indemonstrable by related to descriptive accounts of the experiment.
commonsense standards, and thus no longer reduc- They restricted the discovery to the genetics of
ible to lay conceptions of homosexuality and her- animals and did not evoke their implications for
maphroditism. humans. Thus, the same initial message produced
very different stories at the end of the communica-
Anchoring tion chain.
Objectification of the scientific message was
Anchoring refers to the act of naming and cat- initially driven by communication concerns. In
egorizing. To anchor means to reduce new, unfa- order to understand the discovery and communi-
miliar, and strange ideas to ordinary words and cate an understandable version of it, individuals
images, that is, to set them in a familiar universe focused on intriguing aspects of the message and
that makes them readily intelligible and interpre- associated those aspects to lay vocabulary.
table. In his analysis of the images of psychoanaly- Attitudinal concerns, in the anchoring phase,
sis in the Catholic, communist, and popular press, modulate the story in order to assimilate the mes-
Moscovici showed that psychoanalysis was trans- sage into preexisting knowledge and beliefs.
formed into an interpersonal relationship between
psychoanalyst and patient. Thus it was assimilated
either to the practice of confession or to a relation- Communication Processes
ship tainted with sexuality.
The transformation of information follows differ-
Illustration: The Faithfulness Gene ent routes depending on the group within which
information is disseminated. Because social repre-
Serge Moscovici and Miles Hewstone distin- sentations are elaborated through daily exchanges,
guish scientific thought from representational com- conversations, and discussion, a focus on commu-
mon sense in terms of their differing form and nication processes is central to the study of social
content. However, common sense is increasingly representations.
based on scientific discoveries relayed through the
mainstream media. Information is incorporated
Diffusion, Propagation, Propaganda
into preexisting knowledge and beliefs, thus facili-
tating its assimilation and transformation. Moscovici distinguished between three modali-
Consider, for instance, how people interpreted ties of communication, depending on the nature of
the report in Nature of a laboratory experiment interindividual and intergroup relations. When a
concerning the affiliative tendencies of a species of new idea is emerging, the first communication
rodent. When this complex information was dif- phase is diffusion of information. The new infor-
fused by newspapers, the discovery of the impact mation is spread evenly across a group so that a
of vasopressin on the sociability of voles was trans- common reference point and body of knowledge
lated into the discovery of a faithfulness gene that are created that facilitate circulation and commu-
explained fidelity in human romantic relations. nication of information within the group. The
The transformed information was understood by second phase begins when specific groups inter-
laypeople in line with their particular belief about vene to organize the communication network
the role of genes in human social behaviors. For according to knowledge and beliefs. The message
those rejecting genetic explanations, the discovery is targeted to members of various groups, who in
contradicted their belief. Hence, it was associated turn develop perspectives on what to think about
with a potential genetic manipulation of human the developing debate. Some experts within the
beings. These people organized their representa- group may propagate a principle for weighting the
tion of the discovery around the dangerous conse- different elements of the network in order to con-
quences of the faithfulness gene for the future of solidate the group’s particular perspective. Other
romantic relations. For people believing in the individuals, most often minorities, develop a strong
genetic explanation of social behavior, the scien- perspective through the use of propaganda hinging
tific information did not threaten preexisting on recognition of conflicting social relations within
826 Socioemotional and Task Behavior

the group. This form of communication is aimed at See also Conspiracy Theories; Ideology; Levels of
selecting true and false knowledge and opinions Analysis; Moscovici, Serge; Rumor; Socially Shared
from common knowledge. Positions resulting in Cognition
propagation are expressed as flexible attitudes,
whereas those stemming from propaganda are Further Readings
inflexible and stereotypical. Deaux, K., & Philogène, G. (Eds.). (2001).
Representations of the social. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Illustration: Changing Doise, W., Clémence, A., & Lorenzi-Cioldi, F. (1993).
Conceptions of Drug Abuse The quantitative analysis of social representations.
London: Harvester-Wheatsheaf.
The debate over drug abuse shows an interest-
Moscovici, S. (2008). Psychoanalysis: Its image and its
ing evolution. In the 1960s, the consumption of
public. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. (Original work
illicit products was linked to antiestablishment
published 1961)
rebellion. Drug abuse was emphatically con- Moscovici, S., & Hewstone, M. (1983). Social
demned and rejected as an illegal and dangerous representations and social explanations: From the
contamination of youth. However, difficulties in “naïve” to the “amateur” scientist. In M. Hewstone
treating this “social problem” led some experts (Ed.), Attribution theory: Social and functional
and practitioners to argue that the classification of extensions (pp. 98–125). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
drugs in terms of legal language should be replaced Mugny, G., & Carugati, F. (1989). Social representations
with a public health viewpoint. The distinction of intelligence. Paris: Maison des Sciences de l’Homme.
between legal and illicit drugs was replaced by an
addiction measure, based on the deleterious health
effect of the product. Thus a legal product such as
alcohol became as harmful as an illicit one such as Socioemotional and
marijuana.
Through its entry into common parlance, this
Task Behavior
technical debate transformed the social representa-
tion of drugs to one in which legal and health In problem-solving groups, individual members
perspectives converged. The consequence has been engage in different types of behavior, including
a more flexible and global approach to drugs by task behavior, which focuses on the external
the legal system—such as promotion of increas- problem to be addressed, and socioemotional
ingly strict tobacco smoking bans in many coun- behavior, which addresses the feelings that arise as
tries around the world. However, the emphasis on a result of group interaction. This entry describes
addiction has played up the negative aspects of these two types of behavior and examines the
legal drugs such as tobacco and alcohol and leadership styles of group leaders who focus on
engaged a polarized public discourse resembling each one.
propaganda—which has led in the case of tobacco Starting in 1947, social psychologist Robert F.
to potential criminalization of smokers. Bales, at Harvard University, began studying roles
The social representations perspective, with its in problem-solving groups. For the time, his meth-
emphasis on multiple levels of analysis—individ- ods were quite innovative. Small groups were
ual, group, and society—is a truly social-psycho- observed through one-way mirrors, and all behav-
logical approach to the generation of hypotheses ior was recorded. The observed groups were com-
about how people explain the world they live in posed of five male Harvard undergraduates. They
and the ways they cope with social problems. As were given a human relations case and were told to
it stands now, a few process principles (objectifi- discuss it for about 40 minutes and then dictate a
cation and anchoring, diffusion, propagation, recommended solution into a tape recording at the
and propaganda) have shown their capacity to end of their session. After some refinement, Bales
help elucidate the form and content of social rep- devised a set of 12 behavior categories that trained
resentation. judges could code while observing ongoing inter-
action. Generally, 15 to 20 acts were coded every
Fabio Lorenzi-Cioldi and Alain Clémence minute.
Socioemotional and Task Behavior 827

The 12 categories of behavior included some a person who can deal effectively with both the
that were directly relevant to solving the problem challenges of the group’s task and the dynamics
the group was asked to address. Three of these are arising from the group’s feelings? An initial hypoth-
gives suggestion, gives information, and asks for esis was that there would be a status order in
opinion. Other categories refer to emotional which the person who contributed most to prob-
expression related to interpersonal interaction— lem solving would also be the best liked. This
for example, shows tension release, shows antago- hypothesis was not supported. Neither the person
nism, and shows solidarity. Overall, 56% of the who was most active nor the person who was
coded behaviors were considered problem-solving rated as having the best ideas was typically the best
attempts, and 44% included reactions to those liked. Instead, it was found that there seemed to be
attempts. In general, a task-related initiative would two leaders in many groups, one who was regarded
produce both a task-related response and some as the task leader and one who seemed to be the
emotional response. For example, one person socioemotional leader. This finding suggested the
might offer a suggestion, a second might give an hypothesis of two complementary leaders, one
opinion about that suggestion, and a third might focusing on the task and the other on emotions
express annoyance, causing the first person to look and relationships. This hypothesis included the
embarrassed. idea that the two leaders might get along quite
One overall conclusion from these and related well, their complementary skills combining to pro-
studies is that when groups work on problems, mote both group success and group happiness. The
two kinds of issues come into focus—those related idea that leadership involves these two roles is
to the challenge of solving the problem confront- supported by research published by Ralph Stogdill
ing the group and those that involve addressing in 1948. Stogdill found that two categories of
and managing the feelings that the interaction pro- leader behavior are initiating structure and show-
duces. Such emotions are almost always apt to be ing consideration.
a feature of group interaction directed toward The phenomenon of two complementary lead-
solving a problem, especially if the problem is ers, or a bifurcated leadership structure, might
ambiguous or difficult. Thus some behavior has to emerge for two reasons. First, an individual leader
be directed toward the task, and some toward rela- may only rarely be skilled enough to effectively
tionships and emotions. lead toward both task accomplishment and toward
A second conclusion from such studies is that group cohesiveness. Second, it may be that there
while each person engages in behavior related to are inherent incompatibilities between task roles
both challenges, some people focus more on the and socioemotional roles. On one hand, the task-
task, others focus more on feelings, and some are oriented leader needs to move people and direct
quite balanced. Whether any individual at any and organize them. Behaviors directed toward that
instant, or over time, focuses more on the external end disturb and perhaps antagonize people. On the
task or more on emotions within the group will other hand, the relationship-oriented leader can-
depend on two things. First, what are the individ- not both soothe ruffled feathers and issue orders,
ual’s own inclinations? What role or roles is he or so that leader will stay away from directing tasks.
she most comfortable performing? Second, how Thus, the inherent conflict between moving people
do others in the group behave? That is, any indi- and soothing them is a challenge for leadership
vidual’s behavior is shaped by his or her own per- and opens the door to bifurcated leadership.
sonality and by the behavior of others. As
pioneering psychologist Kurt Lewin observed
Task-Oriented Versus
many years ago, behavior is a function of the per-
Relationship-Oriented Leadership Styles
son and the environment.
Regardless of the cause, some individuals in In many organized groups, just one person has the
groups become task specialists and others become formal authority to lead. Unless that individual is
what Bales called socioemotional specialists. This the rare person who can successfully choreograph
development has implications for leadership. Is the both task leadership and socioemotional leader-
leader likely to be one of these specialists or instead ship, he or she is likely to prefer one style to the
828 Socioemotional and Task Behavior

other. This possibility was the starting point for clarity and difficulty of the task facing the group,
Fred Fiedler’s highly influential contingency theory and the degree of power or authority the leader
of leadership. According to the social psychologist has by virtue of his or her formal position or role
Martin Chemers, Fiedler’s emphasis on task-fo- in the group. A highly favorable situation, in
cused versus socioemotionally focused leadership which the leader has lots of control, is one in
grew out of his research on psychotherapists who which there are good relationships between the
were more distant versus more accepting. This leader and the followers, the task is easy and clear,
work led Fiedler to ask questions about the relative and the leader’s position provides a good deal of
effectiveness of leaders who were more or less formal authority. An unfavorable situation is one
interpersonally oriented. Fiedler’s important work in which the opposites hold: The leader and the
on leadership led to a number of conclusions. First, followers relate to each other poorly, the group
leaders could be reliably distinguished as primarily faces a difficult and ambiguous task, and the leader
valuing either interpersonal relations or goal does not have much formal power. Of course,
accomplishment. Second, these two different kinds most situations are neither that good nor that bad.
of leaders are effective in different kinds of situa- Quite often the situation is moderately favorable,
tions. Third, the differential effectiveness of such giving the leader a moderate degree of control.
leaders depends largely on whether their values Fiedler’s major contribution was to show that
and competencies match the demands of the situa- low-LPC leaders, who value task accomplishment
tion. When there is a good match between the over good interpersonal relations, are more effec-
leader’s personal qualities and the demands of the tive than high-LPC leaders when the situation is
situation, the leader is more likely to feel confident either very good or very bad. In very good situa-
and become active and directive and therefore tions, the leader can provide structure and direc-
effective. In these in-match situations, the leader is tion without worrying about ruffling any feathers.
likely to experience flow, which Mihaly Csikszent­ In very bad situations, the leader does not have
mihalyi has described as a dynamic state of con- time to address hurt feelings or interpersonal con-
sciousness marked by feelings of engagement, flict and instead must take charge and tell people
confidence, and control. exactly what to do. Both these situations call for
After years of research, Fiedler devised a sim- the strengths of the low-LPC leader. In contrast, in
ple measure that has proven remarkably effective moderately favorable situations, followers need
in identifying relationship versus task-oriented some direction, but they also need to be treated
leaders—the Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) with dignity, and their feelings warrant attention.
Scale. Individual leaders are asked to consider the These are the conditions that play to the values
one coworker “with whom you have had the most and competencies of the relationship-oriented,
difficulty in getting the job done.” The leaders rate high-LPC leader.
the coworkers on dimensions such as pleasant– A great deal of research has focused on Fiedler’s
unpleasant, accepting–rejecting, and trustworthy– contingency theory of leadership. On the whole,
untrustworthy. Essentially, they indicate whether the research has supported it. Task-oriented and
they think those difficult coworkers are good socioemotionally oriented leaders indeed thrive in
people or not. The high-LPC leader is one who different contexts. In those situations that play to
values interpersonal relations and grants that the their strengths, they are active and confident, and
difficult coworker is a decent human being, even the groups they are leading do well. If there is a
though he or she is a detriment to accomplishing mismatch between the particulars of the situation
goals. The low-LPC leader has no patience for the and a leader’s values and behavior, the leader’s
troublesome colleague and roundly condemns him effectiveness is significantly diminished.
or her.
Fiedler also identified three variables that deter- George R. Goethals
mine how much control the leader has or, in some- See also Charismatic Leadership; Contingency Theories
what different terms, how favorable the situation of Leadership; Great Person Theory of Leadership;
is for leadership. These variables are the quality of Interactionist Theories of Leadership; Leader-Member
the leader–follower relationships in the group, the Exchange (LMX) Theory; Leadership; Path–Goal
Sociometer Model 829

Theory of Leadership; Personality Theories of plays an important role in helping people navigate
Leadership; Social Identity Theory of Leadership; their social worlds.
Transactional Leadership Theories; Trasformational How exactly does self-esteem perform this
Leadership Theories; Vertical Dyad Linkage Model important interpersonal function? Leary suggests
that to answer this question, one must first under-
stand the general nature of regulatory systems.
Further Readings
According to evolutionary psychologists, the
Bales, R. F. (1958). Task roles and social roles in human mind is composed of a number of distinct
problem-solving groups. In E. Maccoby, T. M. regulatory modules that evolved to solve unique
Newcomb, & E. L. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in social psychological, physical, or social problems that
psychology (pp. 437–447). New York: Holt, Rinehart influenced survival or reproduction in the pre-
& Winston. historic past. For example, the pain regulatory
Bales, R. F. (1970). Personality and interpersonal system evolved to help people avoid hurt and
behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. injury. Like all regulatory modules, the pain sys-
Chemers, M. M. (1997). An integrative theory of tem comprises monitoring, signaling, and behav-
leadership. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. ioral components: The pain system monitors the
Chemers, M. M., & Ayman, R. (1993). Leadership
body for signs of injury, then signals a potential
theory and research. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
injury with feelings of pain; these feelings of pain
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1982). Toward a psychology of
motivate behaviors aimed at avoiding further
optimal experience. In L. Wheeler (Ed.), Review of
physical damage.
personality and social psychology (pp. 13–36). Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage.
Just as avoiding injury was essential for survival
Fiedler, F. E. (1993). The leadership situation and the
and reproduction in humans’ evolutionary past, so
Black Box in contingency theories. In M. Chemers, too was maintaining acceptance by one’s group.
M., & R. Ayman (Eds.), Leadership theory and People depended on their group for protection
research (pp. 1–28). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. from predators, for help gathering food and caring
Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with for young, and for care and protection during
leadership: A survey of the literature. Journal of bouts of illness or physical incapacitation. Without
Psychology, 25, 35–71. such support, an individual would have been at a
severe disadvantage in the biological race to pro-
duce healthy offspring and raise them to adult-
hood. Because of the importance of social bonds
Sociometer Model for survival and reproduction, sociometer theory
proposes that people possess a regulatory module
Despite widespread public interest in the topic, that evolved to ensure that people are at least min-
many people do not realize that there are numer- imally accepted by their group while also avoiding
ous definitions of self-esteem. Some psychologists outright rejection. Specifically, the self-esteem sys-
conceptualize self-esteem as a fundamental human tem is proposed to be an interpersonal monitor—a
need to feel good about oneself, some conceptual- sociometer­—that performs exactly this function.
ize self-esteem as a reasoned tally of one’s positive First, one’s sociometer regularly, effortlessly,
attributes, and still others conceptualize self- and often automatically monitors the environment
esteem as an emotional state. The sociometer for cues regarding one’s relational value, which is
model of self-esteem proposes that self-esteem is the degree to which one is valued by others. Such
an interpersonal monitor—a sociometer—that cues may come from the external environment in
provides real-time feedback about the quality of the form of social feedback or from interpersonal
one’s social bonds and provokes behaviors aimed experiences, but people may also glean informa-
at maintaining positive social relationships with tion about their relational value from their memo-
one’s ingroup members. Hence, this theory, pro- ries of past social experiences or from their
posed by Mark Leary and his colleagues, is a dis- anticipation of future social events. In response to
tinctly social-psychological theory of self-esteem such social cues concerning one’s relational value,
because it proposes that the self-esteem system the sociometer produces a signal that indicates
830 Sociometer Model

whether acceptance or rejection is imminent. If relationships. Transitory increases or decreases in


social feedback suggests that a person’s relational state self-esteem provide real-time feedback about
value is high, the person experiences increases in the quality of people’s social bonds, whereas peo-
state self-esteem (i.e., transitory increases in feel- ple rely on their global self-esteem to predict future
ings of self-worth). In contrast, if feedback suggests social outcomes and choose interpersonal behav-
that a person’s relational value is low, then the iors that will minimize the risk of rejection and
person experiences decreases in state self-esteem optimize the probability of acceptance.
(i.e., transitory decreases in feelings of self-worth).
In turn, such changes in state self-esteem are
Implications for Group Processes
thought to motivate social behaviors. If relational
and Intergroup Relations
value is high, the positive affective signal motivates
people to approach a desired social situation or An important implication of the sociometer model
target, whereas if relational value is low, the aver- of self-esteem is that one’s feelings of self-worth
sive affective signal motivates people either to work are ultimately determined by the group to which
to repair the damaged relationship or, if repair is one belongs. If the group is generally accepting,
not possible or is too risky, to avoid the relationship then an individual will have higher self-esteem; if
and thus avoid the hurt feelings that it prompts. In the group is ambivalent about one’s value or is
this latter instance, people would then be motivated outright rejecting, then an individual will have
to find substitute sources of acceptance through lower self-esteem. But what factors determine an
building new relationships in the group, thereby individual’s value as a relational partner?
replenishing their depleted sociometer. An individual’s social value will be determined
The preceding discussion has focused on the in large part by the individual’s social role. Social
role played by state self-esteem in regulating social roles are positions that one can hold either within
relationships. However, global self-esteem (a per- a larger social structure or within a particular rela-
son’s overall sense of self-worth) plays an equally tionship. Other people will expect and desire occu-
important regulatory role. Research suggests that pants of a given social role to possess the traits that
people rely on their global self-esteem to predict allow occupants of that role to successfully fulfill
future interpersonal outcomes: Individuals with role requirements. Typically, such role require-
higher self-esteem (HSEs) anticipate acceptance ments constitute behaviors that will benefit the
from future relational partners, whereas individu- other members of one’s ingroup. For example,
als with lower self-esteem (LSEs) anticipate a more the female gender role fundamentally involves the
chilly interpersonal reception. These differing adoption of a relational self-construal, wherein
social expectations seem to have a marked influ- one’s primary motivation is to maintain harmoni-
ence on people’s behavioral response to social cues ous relationships. In reflection of this, girls are
concerning their relational value. encouraged to develop other-oriented, communal
For example, HSEs eagerly seek new social traits, and grown women who possess traits such
opportunities whereas LSEs remain hesitant to as warmth, kindness, and responsiveness are highly
enter novel social situations unless acceptance is valued as relationship partners.
virtually guaranteed. In addition, LSEs tend to Because an individual’s social value is ultimately
respond to hurt feelings by avoiding the person determined by the social roles he or she occupies,
who caused them pain, whereas HSEs respond research suggests that the monitoring component
with efforts to repair the relationship. For exam- of the self-esteem system is also affected by one’s
ple, in romantic relationships, on the day after a social role. For example, consider the role of an
conflict, HSEs attempt to repair their relationship opera singer. The best opera singers possess musi-
by seeking closeness with their romantic partner, cality, emotional expressiveness, and perfect pitch.
whereas LSEs attempt to limit their risk of rejec- More important, opera singers who possess those
tion by emotionally distancing from their partner. qualities are generally admired by their peer group.
In summary, sociometer theory proposes that This association with actual acceptance leads
both state and global self-esteem play important opera singers’ self-esteem system to become par-
roles in helping people regulate their interpersonal ticularly sensitive to feedback about such traits,
Sociometric Choice 831

such that positive feedback leads to increases in sociometer to interpersonal value. Journal of
state self-esteem, and negative feedback leads to Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 1024–1039.
decreases in state self-esteem. In contrast, math- Crocker, J., & Major, B. (1989). Social stigma and self-
ematical abilities are not predictive of acceptance esteem: The self-protective properties of stigma.
for opera singers, presumably because mathemat- Psychological Review, 96, 608–630.
ical abilities will not benefit an opera singer’s Leary, M. R. (2004). The sociometer, self-esteem, and the
ingroup, so opera singers’ state self-esteem is not regulation of interpersonal behavior. In R. F.
sensitive to feedback about mathematical abilities. Baumeister & K. D. Vohs (Eds.), Handbook of self-
regulation: Research, theory, and applications (pp.
Conversely, in the social role of a physicist, math-
373–391). New York: Guilford.
ematical skills do predict one’s relational value and
Murray, S. L., Holmes, J. G., & Collins, N. L. (2006).
offer potential benefits to ingroup members,
Optimizing assurance: The risk regulation system in
whereas singing abilities fade in importance. Hence,
relationships. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 641–666.
a physicist’s state self-esteem is sensitive to feed-
back about his or her math skills but not about his
or her singing abilities. It is important to remember
that the opera singer and the physicist did not Sociometric Choice
choose to have sociometers that monitor social
feedback about singing abilities or mathematical Sociometric choice is a method of measuring group
skills. Their ingroup members made this choice for members’ relationships by asking them to identify
them by accepting or rejecting occupants of those others with whom they are or wish to be connected
social roles who possessed, or lacked, singing abil- in a specific situation. These choices identify rela-
ity and mathematical abilities, respectively. tions of attraction and repulsion, or liking and
This suggests that the sociometer is able to disliking, in the group. Jacob L. Moreno proposed
attend selectively to certain types of social feed- the sociometric choice test in 1934 as a key element
back. This may explain why members of stigma- of sociometry—the study of the pattern of interre-
tized social groups do not necessarily have lower lations between members of a group. The socio-
self-esteem. Research suggests that members of metric method dominated the field of sociology
stigmatized groups have a number of protective from the 1930s through the 1950s and has been
strategies that allow them to maintain relatively used in group therapy and developmental work on
high self-esteem in the face of negative social feed- children’s peer groups. Patterns of sociometric
back. They may attribute negative social feedback choice can predict important outcomes, such as
to prejudice; they may compare their social out- group performance and member influence. For this
comes to those of other ingroup members rather reason, sociometry promised early on to aid the
than to those of outgroup members; and they may optimal configuration of groups, such as families,
devalue traits or attributes on which their group schools, and factories. This entry examines the ele-
fares poorly. By using these techniques, members ments of the theory, its early applications, and
of stigmatized groups may be directing their soci- future directions for this line of research.
ometers to focus on feedback from the people
whose opinions matter most for survival and
Measurement
reproduction: one’s ingroup members.
Sociometry introduced rigorous measurement
Danu Anthony Stinson and John G. Holmes techniques for studying the microrelations within
groups and communities. At the heart of sociom-
See also Attachment Theory; Evolutionary Psychology;
Looking-Glass Self; Roles; Self-Esteem
etry was the sociometric choice test, which asked
group members to report the most, and sometimes
the least, preferred members for a specific purpose
or circumstance. For example, school children
Further Readings would name three classmates with whom they
Anthony, D. B., Holmes, J. G., & Wood, J. V. (2007). would most like to play, workers would identify
Social acceptance and self-esteem: Tuning the the people with whom they would most want to
832 Sociometric Choice

work on a committee, and military personnel companions or dormitory roommates. People also
would list the two people in their company whom choose as friends others whom they perceive as
they would most like to take home on a leave. similar to themselves in values, beliefs, and inter-
Different forms of the choice test vary in how ests, although contact with dissimilar people may
many others the respondent may list as preferred mitigate this tendency. Members who hold a dif-
or not preferred in a given circumstance. What is ferent opinion from the rest of a group are less
common, however, is that these self-reports are preferred as future group mates than are those
neither explicit evaluations of other group mem- who conform to the group norm. And status influ-
bers nor overall liking or disliking reports about ences sociometric choices in military units—service
others irrespective of a specific context. Some personnel report liking and choosing high-status
scholars have suggested that other measurement members to take home on a leave.
techniques, such as the method of rank order Ultimately, the value of sociometric choice
(ranking in order of preference all group members) comes from its ability to predict important indi-
and paired comparisons (indicating the preferred vidual and group outcomes. Research has shown
person in each possible pairing of group members), that individuals who are highly chosen in socio-
are suitable substitutes for the traditional socio- metric tests perform better and make fewer errors
metric choice test. on certain tasks in organizations. Military groups
Sociometrists aggregate their choice data in a that have greater sociometric density are charac-
variety of ways to indicate member roles in the terized by more member satisfaction and better
group and features of the group. Members who performance. Group members who are highly cho-
are highly chosen by others are popular, those who sen for leadership positions are more likely to
are infrequently chosen are isolates, those who engage in leadership behaviors during group dis-
select many others as friends are positives, and cussion (e.g., high participation and influence).
those who select few others are negatives. Pairs are Children who are identified as popular in camp
two members with mutually reciprocal bonds, and situations are more influential and imitated by oth-
cliques are subgroups of three or more members ers. In school settings, children who are chosen as
with reciprocal bonds. friends by others engage in more cooperative and
Sociometric choices also can be used to identify obedient classroom behavior. Given the importance
group cohesiveness (overall level of attraction in the of predicting individual and group performance
group) and density (degree of mutual preference in for organizational researchers and managers, the
the group). Member choices may be organized in a ability of the sociometric choice test to predict per-
sociogram, which is a figure in two-dimensional formance is a notable benefit.
space that maps member interrelations. Each group
member is represented as a lettered or numbered
Sociometric Choice in Use
circle. Lines between the circles indicate connec-
tions between members, and arrows indicate the Although much sociometric research has focused
direction of attraction. Today, computer software on the causes and consequences of sociometric
aids the creation of sociograms. choice, this was not the purpose of sociometry as
laid out by its founder. Moreno argued that under-
standing the reasons behind sociometric choices
Causes and Consequences
was unnecessary. He believed, instead, that know-
Some have criticized sociometric research for mea- ing the choices and putting them into action were
suring member choices but not the reasons behind critical. His point was that sociometric choices
them. However, research has identified several should be used. Two examples of such usage are
situational and personal factors that can influence group therapy and social engineering.
sociometric choices. For example, physical prox- One way to put sociometric choice into action
imity influences friendship choices such that people is through group therapy, a term first used by
prefer those who are close by. When classroom Moreno. In one form of such therapy, group mem-
seats or dormitory rooms are assigned randomly, bers discuss their sociometric choices and the rea-
students choose as friends those who were seating sons behind them (rather than reporting their
Sports Teams 833

choices privately). Members reveal to fellow group contributed to the understanding of social net-
members whom they most and least prefer as works and the development of network analysis. It
friends or coworkers and the reasons for their is in this direction that the study of group member
choices. These discussions, as one can imagine, can interrelations is likely to continue in the future.
be threatening and uncomfortable. Therefore,
using appropriate discussion procedures and pro- Gwen M. Wittenbaum
moting effective communication are of utmost See also Group Cohesiveness; Inclusion/Exclusion;
importance. One way to make members more Opinion Deviance; Social Networks; Therapy Groups
comfortable is to allow them to express their res-
ervations about the interaction or halt it at any
time. Moreno believed that such honest discussion Further Readings
of members’ liking preferences would promote
Cadwallader, T. W. (2001). Sociometry reconsidered: The
personal growth and interpersonal insight.
social context of peer rejection in childhood.
In the late 1920s and early 1930s, when Moreno
International Journal of Action Methods: Psychodrama,
was formulating sociometry, social engineering
Skill Training, and Role Playing, 53, 99–118.
was a popular idea (e.g., some psychologists were
Katz, N., Lazer, D. Arrow, H., & Contractor, N. (2005).
interested in eugenics, controlled breeding to pro- The network perspective on small groups: Theory and
mote the ideal population). Moreno’s hope was research. In M. S. Poole & A. B. Hollingshead (Eds.),
that sociometry would be used to create utopian Theories of small group research: Interdisciplinary
groups, communities, and societies. He envisioned perspectives (pp. 277–312). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
that sociometric choice would be used to achieve Lucius, R. H., & Kuhnert, K. W. (1997). Using
ideal group compositions, better performance, and sociometry to predict team performance in the work
improved member relations. For example, urban place. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and
planners might foster social integration by provid- Applied, 13, 21–32.
ing a framework for mapping an entire commu- Moreno, J. L. (1956). The sociometric school and the
nity. Moreno hoped that, by understanding social science of man. Sociometry, 18, 271–291.
interrelations in small groups, sociologists would Remer, R. (1995). Strong sociometry: A definition.
be able to extrapolate such knowledge to the larger Journal of Group Psychotherapy, Psychodrama, &
society. Sociometry, 48, 69–74.

History and Future Direction


Moreno had grandiose dreams for sociometry, Sports Teams
some of which (e.g., social engineering) were not
realized. In 1937, Moreno started the journal Sports teams share the properties of many other
Sociometry, which highlighted sociometric theory groups, in that they are composed of two or more
and research. This journal had great influence in individuals who possess a common identity, have
shaping the field of microsociology. After two common goals and objectives, share a common
decades of managing the journal on his own, Moreno fate, exhibit structured patterns of interaction and
handed it over to the American Sociological Society modes of communication, hold common percep-
(now the American Sociological Association). By tions about group structural elements such as
1979, sociometric methods had become less focal norms and roles, are personally and instrumentally
in the field of sociology, and, for this reason, the interdependent, reciprocate interpersonal attrac-
journal was renamed Social Psychology Quarterly— tion, and consider themselves to be a group.
its name to this day. An intercollegiate tennis doubles team provides a
Very little sociometric testing is used today useful example of this definition. The team con-
relative to its heyday, but its impact in shaping tains, of course, two athletes, both of whom would
sociology and other fields (e.g., developmental describe themselves as partners on a team (common
psychology and psychotherapy) is notable. Many identity). Also, the two athletes would share numer-
ideas originally laid out in sociometry have ous goals for both practices and competitions and
834 Sports Teams

experience success and failure as a collective (com- Group Norms


mon fate). The brief, often single-word communica-
Team norms represent an unwritten code of
tions they exchange during a rally, their dynamic
conduct for group member behavior. They pro-
adjustments in rushing toward and retreating from
vide members with guidelines as to what behaviors
the net, and their pre-serve signals to convey
are expected. In addition to being informational,
intended postserve court positions all reflect struc-
norms serve an integrative function. Athletes who
tured patterns of interaction and communication.
understand and adhere to team norms are inte-
To play doubles tennis clearly requires task interde-
grated into the group, whereas athletes who con-
pendence. Also, the considerable time spent travel-
sistently violate team norms are sanctioned and
ing to and from competitions and waiting for a
may eventually (if the behavior persists) be rejected
match to begin inevitably lead to social interdepen-
from the team. Perhaps the most important func-
dence and interpersonal attraction. Finally, and not
tion of group norms is to ensure that a team per-
surprisingly given all the above, the two athletes
forms as a unit as opposed to a collection of
would consider themselves to be a team.
individuals.
In considering themselves to be a team, the ath-
Research in sports has found that teams develop
letes exhibit one of the fundamental tenets of
norms for a variety of contexts, including competi-
social identity theory, namely, social categoriza-
tion, practice, the off-season, and social events.
tion. Considerable indirect evidence also highlights
Regardless of the context, the most dominant
the presence of two fundamental con­se­­quences of
norm in sports teams involves work output. A
this categorization—identification with the
team puts pressure on its members to give maximal
ingroup and comparison with/bias against out-
effort in competition, work hard in practice, and
groups. The purpose of this entry is to outline
train hard in the off-season. Research also has
what we know about the role that sports plays in
found that these performance norms influence
the dynamics of ingroups (teams) and their rela-
both the individual and the team. At the individual
tionships with outgroups (including opponents,
level, stronger performance norms exert greater
fans, and the media).
social influence. At the group level, teams with
higher performance norms are more successful.
The Sports Team as an Ingroup It is also important to note the negative side of
group norms. Not all norms enhance team perfor-
In 1995, Roy Baumeister and Mark Leary pre-
mance. An example of a negative norm that inhib-
sented an elegant case for the proposition that we
its performance is the expectation that one should
have an innate need to belong to groups. In our
be abusive to other team members (e.g., rookies,
evolutionary past, creating bonds with others
training personnel). Perhaps the most troubling
increased our chances of survival. Thus, the desire
aspect of negative norms is that they can persist
for interpersonal attachments is thought to be a
over several seasons—long after the athletes who
fundamental human motivation. Membership in
were instrumental in their development have
sports teams, just like membership in other social
departed.
groups, satisfies this need to belong. In fact, con-
sistent with social identity theory, being a mem-
Group Roles
ber of a team forms an important part of an
individual’s self-concept. When we belong to a While norms represent general expectations for
group, our identity is derived, at least in part, the behavior of all team members, roles reflect
from that group. specific expectations concerning how members
In examining the sports team as an ingroup, who occupy a certain position on the team should
two important aspects to consider are the team’s behave. Every member of a sports team has a role.
structure (e.g., norms and roles) and its processes For example, hockey teams have enforcers—mem-
(e.g., decision making). The discussion in this sec- bers who are expected to serve (as a National
tion focuses on how these factors influence team Hockey League coach suggested) as a “nuclear
members’ thoughts, emotions, and behaviors, as deterrent.” Each role is unique and contributes to
well as the team as a whole. a team’s success. In fact, a team’s effectiveness
Sports Teams 835

relies on each person’s carrying out his or her des- newspaper quotations from professional athletes.
ignated role effectively. It has been found that team members explain team
Role clarity is a cornerstone of effective team losses in a similar manner, in that teams tend to be
performance. Research has shown that role ambi- either collectively optimistic (e.g., “we lost only
guity (the flip side of role clarity) can arise among because our opponent outworked us tonight”) or
athletes regarding the scope of their responsibilities collectively pessimistic (e.g., “we lost because we
(is being an enforcer sufficient, or am I also have no talent”). Furthermore, the team’s attribu-
expected to be a productive member of the tion style has been found to correlate with its
offense?), the behaviors necessary to carry out role future performance, such that optimistic teams
responsibilities (in my role as an enforcer, am I tend to perform better than pessimistic teams dur-
expected to fight or simply serve as a deterrent by ing the next season.
my presence?), the consequences of failing to carry
out role responsibilities (if I don’t fight, will I be
The Sports Team and Its
benched, reprimanded, cut from the team?), and
Relationship With the Outgroup
how role performance will be evaluated (is it suf-
ficient to simply fight, or do I have to win the Trash Talking
majority of the encounters?). Role ambiguity has Traditionally, sports psychology research has
been shown to be moderately (and negatively) focused on the ingroup—the thoughts, feelings,
related to athlete performance. Other aspects of and behaviors characteristic of the members of a
the roles associated with athlete performance team. Little research attention has been directed
include role satisfaction, role acceptance, role effi- toward relationships between teams. Nonetheless,
cacy, and role conflict. there is substantial anecdotal evidence that the
bias, prejudice, and stereotyping displayed by
Shared Beliefs ingroups toward outgroup members in other con-
Shared beliefs are a pervasive cognitive attribute texts also are present within sports. Take trash
of groups. Despite individual differences in person- talking, for example, one of the most reviled phe-
alities and histories, members of sports teams nomena in sports. Trash talking involves verbal
develop similar beliefs. Team members are exposed barbs or abuse directed at opponents, both on and
to the same experiences, and each member’s inter- away from a court or field. Trash talking is wide-
pretation of an event is influenced by how his or spread—almost universal—despite rules in many
her teammates interpret that event. The interde- sports that seek to eliminate it.
pendence and interaction among teammates result Race is the only topic considered off limits for
in shared beliefs. Research with sports teams has trash talking. Thus, an opponent’s family (includ-
provided empirical support for the presence of ing “yo mamma”), physical imperfections or
strong shared beliefs about collective efficacy (i.e., unusual characteristics, and mental limitations are
confidence in the team as a collective), cohesion, all potential targets. Taunts that might produce
group norms, and performance attributions (expla- physical retaliation in any other context are con-
nations advanced for factors in team success and sidered “part of the game” in sports. In fact, the
failure). target of trash talking often takes pains to show
that he or she is not negatively affected by it.
Attributional Style
Violence
Performance attributions made by team mem-
bers can evolve into a team attributional style. In sports, especially in football, rugby, water
Individuals are often characterized as having either polo, wrestling, and hockey, describing behavior
an adaptive (optimistic) or maladaptive (pessimis- directed at opponents (the outgroup) as violent
tic) style. Attributional style has been linked to an poses some difficulties. Body contact is an integral
individual’s emotions, expectancies, and future part of competition, and athletes enter competition
behavior. In studies investigating attributional expecting aggressive tactics from opponents.
style at the group level, researchers have examined However, all sports have sanctions against what
836 Sports Teams

are considered excessively dangerous acts. It is not For example, countries win more medals
physical contact per se that is problematic—it is when they host the Olympic Games than they do
contact exerted to violate, damage, or abuse an in immediately preceding or subsequent games.
opponent. Although sports such as hockey, basket- Another interesting example is provided by
ball, and baseball have a long tradition of inter- results from Fédération Internationale de Foot­
team violence, there has been a noticeable increase ball Association World Cup competitions. They
over the past 15  years in both the frequency and have been held 18 times. In that period, host
severity of violence in sports—an epidemic of vio- nations have placed first, second, or third a total
lence, according to some scholars. No one is sure of 10 times—an overall 55% success rate. Given
why this increase has occurred. that in two of the competitions—1994 in the
In sports, a number of constituencies consider United States and 2002 in Korea and Japan—the
themselves part of the ingroup. They include ath- host nations were improbable possibilities for a
letes, coaches, parents, fans, and support person- top-three finish, the host nations’ record is
nel, such as trainers. Constituents forming the impressive.
outgroup are numerous as well. They include the At the team level, the home advantage has been
other team, its supporters, and often officials and well documented in professional sports. A home
the media. Violence has been perpetrated by virtu- advantage has been found in every sport, although
ally every constituent of the ingroup against virtu- the magnitude varies. For example, in baseball,
ally every constituent of the outgroup. Many football, ice hockey, basketball, and soccer the
examples can be cited. A Massachusetts father of a home advantage is 53%, 57%, 58%, 61%, and
10-year-old hockey player beat a coach to death 62%, respectively.
over what was perceived to be intolerably rough The above notwithstanding, not every team in
play against his child on the ice. Manchester every league enjoys a home advantage. For exam-
United’s Eric Cantona assaulted a fan who alleg- ple, when Steven Bray analyzed National Hockey
edly had subjected him to racial slurs. The Miami League results from 1974 to 1993, he found that
Hurricanes and Florida International University’s slightly more than one third of the teams won
Golden Panthers engaged in a bench-clearing brawl fewer than 50% of their home games. Generally,
sparked by a point-after-touchdown incident. Ten however, if inept teams are going to win, there is a
players from the New York Knicks and Denver greater probability that they will do so at home
Nuggets were ejected from a game after a brawl than on the road.
instigated by Carmelo Anthony. After an attack The reasons underlying the home advantage
from behind by Todd Bertuzzi of the Vancouver have been examined extensively. No single factor
Canucks, Colorado Avalanche’s Steve Moore was has been identified, and the factors that appear
hospitalized with three broken vertebrae. Ron important in some contexts are not always so in
Artest and Jermaine O’Neal of the Indiana Pacers others. With this caveat, it seems that the major
exchanged punches with Detroit Pistons fans. And causes are the crowd, the officiating (because of
the list goes on. Violence is prevalent in sports, the crowd influence), the visiting team’s travel, and
despite many efforts to eliminate it. familiarity with the home facility.

The Home Advantage Conclusion


A significant factor in an ingroup’s relationship The term competition comes from the Latin word
with an outgroup is territoriality. This should not competere, which means to seek together, to coin-
come as a surprise, given the number of popular cide, and to agree. This utopian notion that mem-
expressions that highlight the special nature of the bers of opposing sports teams are working toward
home, such as “home sweet home,” “home is a common goal, when in fact they are participating
where the heart is,” and “there’s no place like in a zero-sum contest in which a plus (win) for one
home.” Countries in international competitions team necessarily means a minus (loss) for the other
and teams in professional sports profit from com- team, is not supported by research or by popular
peting in a place they call home. (media) reports. Outgroup members in sports are
Stanford Prison Experiment 837

subjected to the same bias, prejudice, and stereo- severe institutional setting such as prisons. They
typing present in other group situations. did this by (a) selecting a group of participants
who were psychologically healthy and had scored
Albert Carron and Kim Shapcott in the normal range of numerous personality vari-
ables and (b) assigning participants to the role of
See also Cooperation and Competition; Group
Cohesiveness; Group Structure; Intergroup Violence; either prisoner or guard on a completely random
Norms; Prejudice; Roles; Social Identity Theory; basis. The behavior that resulted when these other-
Socially Shared Cognition; Stereotyping wise healthy, normal participants were placed in
the extreme environment of a simulated prison
would therefore have to be explained largely if not
Further Readings entirely on the basis of the characteristics of the
social setting in which they had been placed.
Beauchamp, M., & Eys, M. A. (2007). Group dynamics
The setting itself was designed to be as similar as
advances in sport and exercise psychology:
Contemporary themes. London: Routledge.
possible to an actual prison, given a number of obvi­
Buford, B. (1992). Among the thugs: The experience and ous practical and ethical constraints. Constructed
seduction of crowd violence. New York: Norton. in the basement of the Psychology Department at
Carron, A. V., Hausenblas, H. A., & Eys, M. A. (2005). Stanford University, the “Stanford County Prison”
Group dynamics in sport (3rd ed.). Morgantown, had barred doors on the small rooms that served as
WA: Fitness Information Technology. cells, cots on which the prisoners slept, a hallway
area that was converted to a prison “yard” where
group activities were conducted, and a small closet
that served as a short-term “solitary confinement”
Stanford Prison Experiment cell for disciplining unruly prisoners. The prisoners
wore uniforms that were designed to de-emphasize
The Stanford prison experiment (SPE) was an their individuality and underscore their powerless-
experiment designed to examine the power of an ness. In contrast, guards donned military-like garb,
institutional environment—prison, in particular—to complete with reflecting sun glasses and nightsticks.
shape and control the behavior of persons placed Guards generated a set of rules and regulations that
inside it. Using college student participants who in many ways resembled those in operation in
were selected for their normality and randomly actual prisons, and prisoners were expected to com-
assigned to be prisoners or guards, the study ply with the guards’ orders. However, guards were
ended unexpectedly early because of the dramatic instructed not to resort to physical force to gain
and extreme results. It has assumed a prominent prisoner compliance.
place in debates over the causes of extreme behav- Despite the lack of any legal mandate for the
ior in powerful situations or settings, especially in “incarceration” of the prisoners, and despite the
the criminal justice system. fact that both groups were told that they had been
randomly assigned to their roles (so that, for
example, guards knew that prisoners had done
Study Design and Findings
nothing to “deserve” their degraded prisoner sta-
The SPE was conducted in 1971 by a group of tus, and similarly, prisoners knew that the guards
Stanford research psychologists, led by Philip had no special training or actual legal authority
Zimbardo, and his two graduate students, Craig over them), the behavior that ensued was remark-
Haney and Curtis Banks. The experiment was ably similar to behavior that takes place inside
designed to control for the individual personality actual prisons. It also was surprisingly extreme in
variables (e.g., narcissism, authoritarianism) that intensity and effect. Thus, initial prisoner resis-
are sometimes used to attempt to explain behavior tance and rebellion were met forcibly by guards,
in prison and other institutional settings. That is, who quickly struggled to regain their power and
the researchers in the SPE neutralized the explana- then proceeded to escalate their mistreatment of
tory argument that pathological traits alone prisoners throughout the study, at the slightest
accounted for extreme and abusive behavior in sign of affront or disobedience.
838 Stanford Prison Experiment

As the guards’ control over the prisoners differences between the guards and prisoners could
increased, the tensions between the two groups explain their very different behavior in the study,
intensified, and the harassment of the prisoners and no personality differences within either group
worsened. For example, the guards conducted a reliably predicted variations in their in-prison
series of “counts”—times when prisoners were behavior.
removed from their cells in order to be counted but
which quickly deteriorated into occasions for verbal
The SPE’s Larger Implications
and other forms of abuse and humiliation that the
guards directed at them. In some instances, the Controversial from the outset and widely discussed
guards conspired to physically mistreat prisoners since it was conducted, the study has come to stand
outside the presence of the experimenters and to in psychology and related disciplines as a demon-
leave prisoners in the solitary confinement cell beyond stration of the power of situations—especially
the 1-hour limit that the researchers had set. extreme institutional settings such as prisons—to
Conversely, prisoners resisted the guards’ orders shape and control the behavior of the persons in
at first but then succumbed to their superior power them. The results of the study undermine the
and control. Some prisoners had serious emotional notion that extreme social behavior can only—or
breakdowns in the course of the study and had to even mostly—be explained in terms of the extreme
be released from participation. Other prisoners characteristics of the persons who engage in it.
became compliant and conforming, rarely if ever Instead, the SPE warns us to look more carefully at
challenging the “authority” of the guards. Despite the characteristics of the settings in which extreme
the fact that the researchers could not keep the behavior occurs.
prisoners in the study against their will (and they The SPE also stands as a challenge to what
had been informed at the outset of the study of might be termed the presumption of institutional
their legal right to leave), as the study proceeded rationality—that is, the tendency to assume that
prisoners “petitioned” the prison “administrators” institutions operate on the basis of an inherent
for permission to be “paroled” and returned pas- rationality that should be accepted rather than
sively to their cells when their requests were denied. questioned. Instead, the SPE (itself the most “irra-
By the end of the study, they had disintegrated as a tional” of prisons, in the sense that the guards had
group. The guards, in contrast, solidified and no legal authority over the prisoners, who had
intensified their control as time passed. Although committed no crimes that warranted their punish-
some of the guards were more extreme and inven- ment) suggests that a kind of “psycho-logic” may
tive in the degradation they inflicted on the prison- operate in these settings that controls role-bound
ers and some were more passive and less involved, behavior, whether or not that behavior furthers
none of the guards intervened to restrain the legitimate goals. That is, despite the fact that the
behavior of their more abusive colleagues. Although guards had no genuine authority over the prisoners
the study was designed to last for 2 full weeks, the and the prisoners had done nothing illegal to
extreme nature of the behavior that occurred led legitimize their mistreatment, the guards reacted to
the researchers to terminate it after only 6 days. violations of rules that they arbitrarily constructed
A post hoc analysis of the SPE data showed that as if they were mandated to do so (and often did
the careful screening of the participants and their so forcefully, in ways that caused apparent pain
random assignment to the roles of prisoners and and distress for the prisoners).
guards had effectively controlled for any signifi- The SPE was conducted in the early 1970s, and
cant personality-based, or dispositional, explana- its results and implications were widely dissemi-
tion of the results. That is, there were no significant nated in the years that immediately followed. The
personality differences between the SPE partici- study was often cited as a prominent example of
pants and the normal population (i.e., the group research that contributed directly to the “situa-
means for guards and prisoners did not fall outside tional revolution” in psychology—the insight that
the 40 to 60 percentile range of the normative male context plays a powerful role in shaping people’s
population on any of the dimensions of the person- thoughts and actions, especially in extreme settings
ality inventory that was used), no personality (such as ones where social pressures are brought
Status 839

acutely to bear, where marked imbalances of that was inflicted on the prisoners at Abu Ghraib.
power exist, and where all aspects of patient, Here, too, the explanation that situational forces
inmate, or prisoner behavior are subject to con- had overcome the dispositions of the otherwise
trol). It helped lead to the now more widely normal, healthy soldiers who perpetrated the abuse
accepted proposition that no account of behavior seemed cogent. The analysis of the behavior of the
can avoid a careful assessment of the situational guards in the SPE and at Abu Ghraib pointed away
influences on what people do, the things they from a “few bad apples” assessment of blame and
believe, and even how they think. focused instead on the abuse-engendering circum-
The study also promised to have an impact on stances in which the guards functioned—a “faulty
prison policy, at least in the years that immediately barrel” assessment, if you will—as well as the
followed. This was a time in the history of the responsibility of the persons who created and
criminal justice system in the United States when the maintained such a flawed environment for moni-
nation appeared open to fundamental reform of its toring prisoners and guards alike.
crime control policies and penal practices. The mes-
sage of the SPE—that context very much mattered Craig Haney and Philip G. Zimbardo
in general and that, specifically, prison and prison- See also Intergroup Violence; Obedience to Authority;
like environments had the inherent capacity to set Power
powerful social-psychological forces in motion that
could negatively affect the behavior of staff mem- Further Readings
bers and have adverse consequences for inmates—
resonated perfectly with the spirit of these times. Haney, C. (2006). Reforming punishment: Psychological
However, for reasons that appeared more politi- limits to the pains of imprisonment. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
cal than scientific, the nation’s prison and crime
Haney, C., Banks, C., & Zimbardo, P. (1973).
control policies soon began to move in a fundamen-
Interpersonal dynamics in a simulated prison.
tally different direction. In the waning years of the
International Journal of Criminology and Penology, 1,
1970s and in the several decades that followed, the
69–97.
situational message of the SPE had little impact in Haney, C., & Zimbardo, P. (1977). The socialization into
correctional circles. Although evidence continued criminality: On becoming a prisoner and a guard. In J.
to mount in psychology and related disciplines that Tapp & F. Levine (Eds.), Law, justice, and the
past and present circumstances and situations individual in society: Psychological and legal issues
played a powerful role in influencing behavior, not (pp. 198–223). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
only in penal institutions but in the origins of the Haney, C., & Zimbardo, P. (1998). The past and future
criminal behavior those institutions were intended of U.S. prison policy: Twenty-five years after the
to address, sentencing laws and prison policies were Stanford prison experiment. American Psychologist,
implemented that seemed to ignore the most impor- 53, 709–727.
tant lessons of the situational revolution. That is, Zimbardo, P. (2007). The Lucifer effect: Understanding
crime control practices during these years focused how good people turn evil. New York: Random
even more narrowly on individual-level wrongdo- House.
ing to the exclusion of situational models of crime Zimbardo, P., Maslach, C., & Haney, C. (1999).
prevention, and the potential role of context and Reflections on the Stanford prison experiment:
circumstance in crime causation was increasingly Genesis, transformations, consequences. In T. Blass
discounted, even in sentencing guidelines (where (Ed.), Obedience to authority: Current perspectives on
“social factors” were explicitly deemed irrelevant). the Milgram paradigm (pp. 193–237). Hillsdale, NJ:
In more recent years, however, the implications Erlbaum.
of the SPE became part of the national dialogue
that occurred in response to the widely publicized
abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib, Iraq, by mem- Status
bers of the U.S. military. There appeared to be
direct parallels between some of the mistreatment The status of individuals and groups refers to their
perpetrated by the guards in the SPE and the abuse social rank defined in terms of prestige or esteem.
840 Status

Because status brings respect and deference, it is awarded to an individual. Indeed these traits are
also closely associated with power. It is surely one often more apparent than task-relevant characteris-
of the most fundamental parameters governing tics in the early stages of group formation. They
the lives of humans and other social animals. It is may therefore have an unduly powerful influence
also something that can be negotiated, con- on the initial assignment of status.
structed, challenged, and perpetuated in the proc- This process, sometimes referred to as status
ess of social interaction. It is therefore of interest generalization, illustrates how individuals’ status
to social psychologists as both an independent outside the group affects their status within the
variable (i.e., a cause) and a dependent variable group. It means that similar people tend to occupy
(i.e., an effect). Indeed many research studies have high- and low-status positions within groups, even
examined status from both these perspectives, when the formation of each group is entirely inde-
revealing much about the sources, the conse- pendent. For example, when groups are composed
quences, and the unfolding dynamics of status of both men and women, men tend to occupy the
within and between groups. high-status positions, be those groups political,
cultural, religious, or economic. Thus, status hier-
archies within local groups tend to enact and rep-
The Intragroup Dynamics of Status
licate global status hierarchies.
One of the early findings to emerge from the Once status hierarchies are formed, they tend to
empirical scrutiny of group processes is that groups be reinforced and legitimized by group processes.
tend to form unequal status hierarchies. Seldom A person’s status characteristics influence the size
are groups arranged along entirely egalitarian of the contribution to the group’s goals that the
lines. The Harvard sociologist Robert F. Bales con- person will make. When a large contribution is
vened small decision-making groups of under- expected of an individual, he or she tends to be
graduate students and found that typically within given every opportunity to make one. Such indi-
the first hour-long meeting, a hierarchy of status viduals are given opportunities to contribute ear-
had developed. Bales documented four specific, lier than other members. Identical contributions
interdependent dimensions of status. High-status are evaluated more favorably if made by a high-
members (1) initiated and (2) were granted more rather than a low-status individual. They are also
opportunities to participate in decision making. rewarded more richly: Rewards within groups are
Further, their ideas were (3) rated more favorably assigned as a legitimizing marker of status inde-
by and (4) had more influence over their peers. pendent of the value of a person’s contribution to
Usually, these status hierarchies formed quickly a group. Nowhere does this point seem to be illus-
and smoothly. Where power struggles did occur, trated more clearly than cases in which large sala-
they postponed but did not cancel the development ries, bonuses, and pensions are paid to high-status
of a stable, unequal status hierarchy. executives even after the spectacular failure of the
Status within these hierarchies can be earned or companies for which they are responsible.
achieved on the basis of one’s actions, or it can be The importance of family, race, and gender to
assigned or ascribed on the basis of inherited char- status can be attributed to longstanding discrimi-
acteristics, such as the status of one’s family, race, natory systems of class, racism, and sexism, by
or gender. This distinction is reflected in expecta- which members of some social categories are
tion states theory, by Joseph Berger. According to advantaged relative to others. This is not the case,
this theory, the status that group members grant to however, for the effect of height on status. The
an individual depends on how much they expect he power of height to confer status seems to be relia-
or she will help to contribute to realizing the group’s ble in both experiments and field studies, which
goals. Individuals with characteristics that are task show, for example, that CEOs are taller than aver-
relevant, such as expertise and talent, will tend to be age and that tall job applicants are more likely
granted high status. But also, diffuse status charac- than others to be successful. The link between sta-
teristics, such as family, race, and gender, influence tus and height is implicit in the etiquette of many
group members’ perception that an individual may cultures, in which low-status individuals bow,
assist the group. Therefore, they influence the status curtsey, or even sit or kneel to confirm the higher
Status 841

status of high-status individuals. It is also implicit In addition to affecting the body language of
in the pervasive cultural metaphors identified by communicators and how they take turns in com-
the psycholinguist George Lakoff and the philoso- munication, status has effects on how communica-
pher Mark Johnson in their book Metaphors We tors express themselves verbally. For example, in
Live By. According to their analysis, metaphors some settings, low-status speakers tend to use
such as “social climber,” “upper class,” and “ideas more polite and tentative language. Consistent
above one’s station” reflect an underlying cultural with expectation states theory, this phenomenon is
equation of social status with physical height. most likely to manifest itself when people of lower
The role that status plays in regulating social status talk to those higher in status and when the
interaction affects much more than the tendency to basis of status (e.g., gender, race, occupation, or
engage in “bowing and scraping.” The social psy- class) is perceived to be relevant to the goals of the
chologist Roger Brown has suggested that across conversation.
all known human cultures, status plays a key role
in a universal norm that governs communication
Consequences of Intragroup Status
and intimacy. In societies that are stratified accord-
ing to status, people reserve a respectful mode of Once achieved, it is clear that social status has
communication for those who are either higher in many social-psychological effects. High-status
status than themselves or socially distant. For people are also likely to receive more flattery and
example, in Medieval English, thou was used to more measured and mitigated forms of critical
address inferiors and familiar people, while you feedback, and they are likely to benefit from oth-
was reserved for superiors and strangers. This is an ers’ attempts to ingratiate themselves. However,
example of the so-called T–V distinction present in discrepancies in status can raise suspicion about
many languages (named after the French language, the motives of those who engage in ingratiation, as
in which tu is familiar and vous, respectful). has been shown in research by the social psycholo-
Similarly, the use of titles and surnames in address gist Roos Vonk. Vonk found that attempts by low-
is associated with communication directed to status individuals to win the hearts and minds of
someone who is either unfamiliar or who is higher high-status individuals with flattery and similar
in status, whereas use of first names signifies com- tactics of ingratiation may be seen for what they
munication that is directed to an equal, an inferior, are and may subsequently backfire, producing less,
or someone with whom the speaker is close. rather than more, liking. Pithily, Vonk labeled this
Furthermore, any relaxation in formality is usually finding the slime effect. It is perhaps not surprising
suggested by the communicator with higher status. that independent observers, more than those who
Thus it is more typical for professors to suggest are personally being flattered and ingratiated, are
that a student address them by their first names more prone to the slime effect. Independent observ-
than vice versa. Being high in status confers the ers are less likely to suspect that the flattery may be
privilege of control over intimacy. strategic rather than heartfelt.
Status has other powerful effects on the way Status can also be seen as a form of social capi-
that social interactions unfold from moment to tal, allowing individuals to achieve their goals by
moment. Studies of nonverbal language have exerting power or influence over others. A number
shown that compared with persons of lower sta- of studies show that compliance is more likely to
tus, those high in status gaze more into the eyes of requests made by individuals with higher status
their conversation partners while talking, touch and by representatives of organizations with higher
others more, stand in a more erect posture, and status. One of the most famous demonstrations of
criticize more frequently. Conversation analyses the effect of status on compliance was provided by
have shown that people of higher status interrupt Stanley Milgram’s studies of obedience. In these
others more and are more likely to direct who studies, participants complied with requests from
takes turns in the conversation. Conversely, judi- an experimenter to deliver ostensibly strong doses
cious use of these high-status types of body lan- of electricity to an innocent stranger. The effect
guage and conversational style can sometimes be generalizes to much more mundane and arguably
an effective way to win status. less distressing requests, such as the calls for small
842 Status

donations made by charity workers. A parallel lit- publication of this research, winning the Nobel
erature on so-called source credibility shows that a Prize per se seemed to confer “a kind of health-
similar effect applies to persuasion. Attitudes are giving magic.”
more likely to shift toward persuasive messages Further research is required to establish pre-
from high-status sources than from low-status cisely how social status translates to physical health
sources. For example, identical editorials are more and longevity. The prestige, power, and other
persuasive when attributed to prestigious newspa- forms of social capital conferred by status may
pers than to less-prestigious tabloids. play a role. But also, the health benefits of status
Furthermore, a person’s status may make him or may operate rather more directly. Researchers
her attractive to both individuals and groups. For have observed immediate physiological responses
example, high social status tends to confer sexual to social status in human and nonhuman animals
attractiveness on men, in particular. Evolutionary alike. For example, animals who are experimen-
psychologists explain this effect in terms of the tally locked into a low-status or subdominant posi-
biological and social imperative for women to tion display endocrinological changes involving
invest in their children and therefore to select mates elevated levels of harmful, stress-related chemicals
who are likely to be willing and able to support in the blood. These changes are associated with
them materially and socially. Alternatively, it is heightened vigilance, agitation, and motivational
possible to explain this effect in terms of economic disorientation. Low status therefore appears to be
necessity and culturally determined sex roles. an aversive and unhealthy state for many social
In addition, groups are often keen to recruit animals. In some animals, however, these effects
individuals with high social status because the disappear once status hierarchies have been estab-
groups perceive these individuals to be able to lished and each animal settles into its place in the
assist in the realization of group aims. For exam- regime. In these cases, animal behavior is reminis-
ple, the recruitment of high-status individuals cent of some of the patterns predicted by Theodor
allows groups to bathe in the associative glow of Adorno’s authoritarian theory of personality and
their prestige. High-status individuals may be able its descendants, such as Robert Altemeyer’s theory
to employ their enhanced capacity for social influ- of right wing authoritarianism.
ence to enhance ingroup cohesion and to success-
fully negotiate with external parties in the interests
Social-Psychological Theories
of the group.
of Responses to Intra- and Intergroup Status
Given all the social benefits that status confers,
it is not surprising that it is also beneficial to Social-psychological theories offer differing per-
physical well-being. A number of studies link sta- spectives on how people respond to their position
tus to health and longevity, even when related within their group and to their group’s status
factors such as wealth are controlled for. One of within an intergroup hierarchy. According to both
the most striking and well-publicized examples social dominance theory and authoritarian theo-
was uncovered by University of Warwick econo- ries, many people prefer contexts in which there is
mists Andrew Oswald and Matthew Rablen in a clear status hierarchy of groups to situations in
2005. They analyzed the life span data available which groups have equal status. Social dominance
for a sample of 524 nominees for the Nobel Prizes theory also suggests that people actively seek a
in physics and chemistry in the first half of the dominant position for their group and support
20th century. The average life span of these nom- measures that might further this aim. In contrast,
inees was 76  years, but the 135 winners among right wing authoritarianism is thought to lead to
this group were found to have lived approximately acquiescent or “yielding” responses to high status.
2 years longer when other factors, such as country Each theory derives support from a range of
of origin, were controlled for. The number of sources, including studies in which individual dif-
nominations received by scientists was not predic- ferences in social dominance orientation and right
tive of their life span, and neither was the size of wing authoritarianism are measured. Individuals
the monetary award given to each laureate. As who are high in right wing authoritarianism and,
Oswald noted in an interview subsequent to the depending on the social context, social dominance
Status 843

orientation prefer marked status hierarchies at son with the outgroup, and choosing to compare
both the interpersonal and the intergroup levels of themselves against other outgroups.
society. Of course, the status of one’s own group in
In contrast, just world and system justification relation to others is not merely of symbolic impor-
theories are premised on the idea that people tance, relevant only to collective self-esteem.
generally prefer to see the intra- and intergroup Often, as recognized by social identity theory, it
hierarchies that they occupy as fair. This means determines the resources that groups can gain for
that if individuals occupy low-status positions themselves. It also determines what groups can do
within their group, they are apt to perceive them- to each other. According to Susan Fiske’s stereo-
selves as deserving of that status. Reductions in type content model, group members are motivated
self-esteem and especially perceptions that one is to know what other groups can do and want to do
lacking in status-relevant attributes such as com- to their group. This means that they are particu-
petence tend to follow. Similarly, members of larly interested in two types of traits, namely,
low-status groups may be prone to outgroup competence (is the group capable or not?) and
favoritism in an unconscious attempt to justify warmth (does it mean well or ill?). High-status
their collective position, endorsing negative ster- groups tend to be seen as competent but cold,
eotypes of their own group and seeing higher- whereas low-status groups are often seen as warm
status groups as superior to their own on key but incompetent. These stereotypes are likely to
traits such as competence. help observers justify inequality and to cope with
According to these theories, how people feel conflicting information (e.g., prevailing negative
about their personal status is more or less the same representations of an outgroup on one hand, but
as how they feel about their group status. In con- a normative ban on prejudice on the other). Also,
trast, social identity theory postulates a subtle the stereotypes tend to offer an explanation for
interplay between people’s perception of the status how the high- and low-status groups got where
of themselves and their group. For example, mem- they are.
bers of low-status groups are less likely to take In general, it is probably fair to say that research
action to improve their collective lot if they per- and theorizing thus far permits more definite con-
ceive that group boundaries are permeable and clusions about the status of individuals than about
that their personal status may therefore improve. the status of groups. For example, there is much
They are also less likely to take action if they per- research on how individuals come to achieve a
ceive the low status of their group to be legitimate certain level of social status but rather less on how
and if they are unaware of alternative social con- groups do this. Typically, research and theory
texts in which their group may have higher status. focus on how groups respond to a given level of
If status relations between groups are seen as ille- status, a question that is hotly contested by a
gitimate and alterable, then social identity is said number of theories. Consensus has yet to be
to be insecure. When social identity is insecure, reached on key problems such as whether, and in
individuals are likely to take action to address the what circumstances, high-status groups exhibit
low status of their group. more prejudice and ingroup favoritism than low-
The specific strategy that group members may status groups do. Nonetheless, it is clear that status
use to enhance their status depends on contextual is a crucial variable at the intra- and intergroup
factors such as what is practical in the circum- levels of human behavior.
stances and how other groups react. For example,
group members may, when possible, engage in Robbie M. Sutton
social competition, in which they strive to better See also Authoritarian Personality; Discrimination;
rival groups on the dimensions on which they are Dominance Hierarchies; Group Structure; Power;
currently perceived as inferior. Or they may engage Right Wing Authoritarianism; Social Class; Social
in strategies classed as social creativity. These Dominance Theory; Social Identity Theory; Status
strategies include attaching positive value to Characteristics/Expectation States Theory; Status
attributes that were hitherto seen as negative, Construction Theory; Stereotypes; System Justification
choosing other attributes as the basis of compari- Theory
844 Status Characteristics/Expectation States Theory

Further Readings entry describes how this line of research devel-


Hogg, M. A. (2001). A social identity theory of oped, what SCT says about group relations, and
leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review, how the ideas have been applied in interventions.
5, 184–200.
Kroger, R. O., & Wood, L. A. (1992). Are the rules of What Is Expectation States Theory?
address universal? IV: Comparison of Chinese,
Korean, Greek, and German usage. Journal of Cross- During the 1960s, three researchers at Stanford
Cultural Psychology, 57, 416–425. University developed expectation states theory:
Levine, J. M., Moreland, R. L., & Choi, H. (2001). Joseph Berger, Bernard Cohen, and Morris Zelditch
Group socialization and newcomer innovation. In Jr. The type of formal theory they used, along with
M. A. Hogg & S. Tindale (Eds.), Blackwell handbook the subject matter they studied, became known as
of social psychology: Group processes (pp. 86–106). the Stanford tradition of sociological social psy-
Oxford, UK: Blackwell. chology.
Marmot, M. (2004). Status syndrome: How your social Expectation states theory is not a unitary theory
standing directly affects your health and life but rather a theoretical research program compris-
expectancy. London: Bloomsbury. ing a set of interrelated, middle-range theories.
Ridgeway, C. L. (2001). Social status and group SCT is one of this set of middle-range theories, as
structure. In M. A. Hogg & S. Tindale (Eds.), is reward expectation states theory, status legiti-
Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Group mation theory, source theory, status construction
processes (pp. 353–375). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. theory, and many others. Several similarities exist
Ridgeway, C. L., & Smith-Lovin, L. (1999). The gender
among these theories, but the two most central and
system and interaction. Annual Review of Sociology,
important concepts that unite them are expecta-
25, 191–216.
tion state and status situation.
Turner, J. C., & Brown, R. (1978). Social status,
cognitive alternatives and intergroup relations. In
H. Tajfel (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups Expectation State
(pp. 201–234). London: Academic Press.
An expectation state is an out-of-awareness
anticipation or hunch about one’s capacity to
engender the behaviors, attitudes, and competence
Status Characteristics/ necessary to elicit more (or less) deference from
other group members. Expectation states have
Expectation States Theory four important properties.

When members of juries, project teams, or study 1. They are activated nonconsciously. People are
groups differ by gender, race or ethnicity, or even not aware of the instantaneous mental process
physical attractiveness, how do these differences that occurs when expectation states begin to
affect members’ conduct? More generally, how affect their actions. Psychological social
does social status, the prestige one possesses based psychologists refer to this kind of mental activity
on one’s differentially valued social distinctions, as implicit processing, as opposed to explicit
affect people’s behavior during group encounters? processing, which entails conscious thinking.
Status characteristics theory (SCT), which is a part
2. An expectation state is a relative notion: People
of the theoretical research program called expec-
cannot have a higher level of expectation for
tation states theory, explains this group-level phe-
their actions if they do not compare their
nomenon. SCT describes the social-psychological
capacities with those of others within a group.
process that produces a status hierarchy—a rank
order of people that is based on social prestige— 3. An expectation state is distinctive to the
within certain kinds of groups. Knowing the par- specific social situation. Just because an
ticulars of SCT has allowed researchers to craft expectation state is triggered in one situation
powerful intervention strategies designed to inhibit does not mean that it will be triggered in other
the deleterious effects of status inequalities. This situations.
Status Characteristics/Expectation States Theory 845

4. An expectation state is unobservable, in that we within businesses, and study groups of students
cannot directly measure when an expectation who are assigned a project for which they will all
state is activated. However, we can presume receive the same grade.
that an expectation state has been activated by With the notions of expectation states and sta-
observing the behavioral inequalities displayed tus situations, researchers have proposed several
by group members. These differences in theories to describe how status hierarchies affect
behavior are indicators of the presence of an groups. This entry focuses on SCT. To introduce
activated expectation state. this theory, some important concepts must first
be defined.
The type of expectation state central to SCT is the
performance expectation: an out-of-awareness
What Is a Status Characteristic?
anticipation of one’s capacity and abilities relative
to those of other group members to complete a A status characteristic is any recognized social dis-
group task successfully. tinction that has attached to it widely shared
beliefs about at least two categories, or states, of
the distinction. Those possessing one category, the
Status Situation
positive state, are more valued socially than those
The other important concept central to expecta- possessing the complementary category, the nega-
tion states theory is the status situation. This is a tive state. Different states of a status characteristic
micro-encounter in which two or more people confer social advantages and disadvantages on
work on a task given to a group to complete suc- actors who have the traits and attributes associ-
cessfully. Roles for each group member are not ated with the respective state.
formally assigned before the beginning of the Status characteristics convey assessments of
group’s work. Rather, group members organize individuals’ capacities to other actors. SCT posits
their roles and behaviors informally, on their own, that the different states of the status characteristic
as they carry out the task. will be attached to differential evaluations of abil-
In formal theoretical terms, a group’s circum- ity. For example, gender is a status characteristic
stance is considered to be a status situation if the with the positive state typically being male and the
group meets two criteria, or scope conditions: The negative state being female. In general, there are
group must be both task oriented and collectively widely held cultural beliefs suggesting that men
oriented. Scope conditions are situations in which possess higher ability than do women on a large
researchers are able to guarantee that the proposi- range of tasks.
tions of expectation states theory will apply. If a Two types of status characteristics exist. A spe-
group is both task oriented and collectively ori- cific status characteristic is one that is applicable to
ented, then the group falls within the boundaries one type of task and is associated with a distinct
specified by theories involving expectation states. If performance expectation. For instance, ability to
a group does not meet these scope conditions, theo- do calculus is a specific status characteristic: Those
rists are not assured that the propositions for the who possess the positive state are expected to be
theory being applied will be confirmed, nor are they able to solve calculus problems; those who possess
certain that an expectation state will be activated. the negative state are considered much less likely
Task-oriented groups are those whose members to have the ability to solve this type of math prob-
are committed to completing a task that they per- lem. A diffuse status characteristic is one that is
ceive as having either a successful or unsuccessful both applicable to more than one type of task and
outcome. Collectively oriented groups are those is associated with a general performance expecta-
whose members believe that it is necessary, and in tion. Gender is a diffuse status characteristic:
fact right and proper, for them to take each other’s Males are believed to have more ability on many
behaviors and opinions into account when complet- tasks, such as solving math problems and mechan-
ing the task. Examples of task-oriented and collec- ical difficulties in cars, than do females. And males
tively oriented groups include juries during are often viewed as more competent in general
delibe­­rations, special project teams assembled than are females.
846 Status Characteristics/Expectation States Theory

It is essential to note that ability evaluations sur- members should behave. These researchers do not
rounding the different states of diffuse status char- support the notion that women should be evalu-
acteristics are based on perceptions and cultural ated lower than men, for example. In fact, the
belief systems, and not necessarily on reality. For primary motivation for most expectation states
example, the gender gap in the math SAT scores theorists is first to recognize that social inequali-
has narrowed to the point that it is no longer sta- ties exist and affect behavior and then to study
tistically significant. However, the perception that how these adverse circumstances can be changed.
males are better in math than females are still per- Without understanding the processes that create
sists in our society. inequalities, even the best-intentioned programs
It is also crucial to note that, not always but designed to eradicate them may not make a differ-
often, diffuse status characteristics mirror the mac- ence. Understanding the deleterious consequences
rolevel social inequalities of a society. For example, of status generalization is the first step in elimi-
in the United States, experimental tests have dem- nating those consequences.
onstrated that race, ethnicity, physical attractive- Status generalization occurs within groups
ness, military rank, sexual orientation, and that fit within the scope conditions of expecta-
occupational ranks and positions are diffuse status tion states theory. In lay terms, that means the
characteristics. One could demonstrate that these group members are working together to achieve
status characteristics are also the general axes of a shared goal. Five assumptions depict status
inequality in the United States, representing sys- generalization.
tems of unequal income distributions, educational The first is called the salience assumption. It
attainment, and the like. describes the conditions under which status char-
Finally, the nature of the task may determine acteristics activate status generalization. We pos-
which state of a diffuse status characteristic is sess states of myriad status characteristics, so
positive and which is negative. For instance, in which ones matter for the process? The salience
1988 John Dovidio and his colleagues demon- assumption states that those status characteristics
strated that male was the negative state and female that discriminate between actors, the ones in which
was the positive state on a sewing task, even at least one group member possesses one state and
though many tailors are male. Because sewing is another member the complementary state, will
widely believed to be a female-centric task, the activate status generalization. Also, if a status
states of the status characteristic gender were characteristic is perceived as culturally linked to
reversed, compared with general attitudes about the task at the start of a group encounter, even if it
the relationship between competence and gender. does not differentiate members, then it will still be
salient. An example of this situation would be a
group of three men working on a sewing task.
The Status-Organizing Process
Gender does not distinguish group members but is
How do status characteristics organize behavior in salient because it is related to the task.
groups? Which ones matter? What if I possess a The second assumption is called the burden of
positive state on one status characteristic but a proof assumption. It refers to whether a status
negative state on another—do they somehow can- characteristic that becomes salient remains salient.
cel each other out? These questions are answered For a status characteristic to stay germane to the
by SCT. Its assumptions explicate a status-organiz- situation, group members need do nothing. Unless
ing process, often referred to as status generaliza- group members know that the status characteristic
tion. The status-organizing process described by has nothing to do with the task, they perceive it as
SCT is one in which status characteristics and their if it is pertinent to the situation. However, to
concomitant ability evaluations, based on widely “deactivate” the salient characteristic, group mem-
shared beliefs and perceptions, result in observable bers must actively dissociate the status advantages
behavioral inequalities during microencounters. and disadvantages conferred on group members by
At this point, it is important to note that expec- that salient status characteristic. In other words,
tation states theorists do not believe that the sta- the burden of proof for whether a status character-
tus generalization process describes how group istic is relevant to a task at hand lies with someone
Status Characteristics/Expectation States Theory 847

who might persuasively demonstrate its irrele- not necessarily an actual cognitive model. A com-
vance. For example, suppose a group of individu- plete graph-theoretic rendering of this model is
als is gathered to fix a broken-down car. Unless presented in the book titled Status Characteristics
these people know for sure that gender is not rel- and Social Interaction: An Expectation States
evant to fixing a car, then gender will remain Approach, published in 1977 by Joseph Berger and
salient during the period that the group works his colleagues.
together. If, however, a mechanic joins the group The fifth and final assumption, the basic expec-
and firmly states that neither men nor women are tation assumption, posits that the theoretical
better at fixing cars, then the status characteristic power and prestige order will translate into the
may no longer be salient. behavior of the group members who will display
The third assumption is called sequencing. If behavioral inequalities. The unequal distribution
new information about status characteristics is of behaviors is referred to as the observable power
made known to a group, or if new people join the and prestige order. If person A has a higher perfor-
group, then the new information is added to the mance expectation profile than person B (i.e., per-
original group members’ status ordering. However, son A has more status than person B), then A will
a trace of the initial ordering would remain and receive more action opportunities to participate in
affect group behavior as long as the original mem- the task, make more performance outputs to solve
bers stay within the group. The restructuring done problems related to the task, obtain higher perfor-
with the new information would follow the rules mance evaluations, and exert more influence than
proposed by the salience and burden of proof B will. Other behaviors that would likely indicate
assumptions. A’s performance expectation advantage over B are
The fourth assumption states that group mem- differential rates of gesturing, disparate rates of
bers combine all the information conveyed by maintaining eye gaze, and unequal ratios of fluent
salient status characteristics. All status information to nonfluent speech.
from positive states is combined into one grouping Two final comments are warranted. First, the
and assigned a positive score; all negative informa- processes associated with the five assumptions
tion is combined into another grouping and occur among group members simultaneously.
assigned a negative score. This combining process Because of widely shared cultural understandings
includes a weighting scheme such that for each about the information provided by status charac-
grouping, any additional, similarly signed infor- teristics, the processes will be the same and will
mation has less incremental effect on the overall happen concurrently for all group members. Second,
positive or negative grouping score (this is known cultural understandings about status characteris-
as the attenuation effect). Combining also includes tics, and not necessarily individual meanings, are
a second weighting scheme such that those status what trigger status generalization. So, for example,
elements more relevant to the task have a higher a woman may personally believe that she is as com-
impact on the positive or negative grouping scores. petent as, or even more competent than, any man
Finally, after taking the weighting schemes into working on a task with her. However, she may also
consideration, the positive and negative grouping believe that men get paid more than women and are
scores are added together. This computation, generally perceived as being more competent than
known as the principle of organized subsets, cre- women. She will expect that the other group mem-
ates a performance expectation profile that is com- bers will respond to male workmates in a fashion
pared with others’ profiles. A group member’s consistent with these shared beliefs. These beliefs
expectation advantage or disadvantage can be cal- will activate status generalization (if gender is a
culated by subtracting another member’s perfor- salient status characteristic) despite her personal
mance expectation profile from his or her own. A beliefs about her own abilities.
group’s rank order of these expectation profiles
represents the theoretical power and prestige order
Interventions
of the group—the status hierarchy. It is important
to remember that this mathematical procedure is a Researchers have created intervention strategies to
heuristic for how people process status information, prevent status-organizing processes from happening
848 Status Construction Theory

or to impede these processes once they have (Eds.), Sociological perspectives on social psychology
occurred. A good example is the work of Elizabeth (pp. 281–310). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Cohen, a former professor at Stanford University. Wagner, D. G., & Berger, J. (2002). Expectation states
Cohen recognized that student groups assigned to theory: An evolving research program. In J. Berger &
work on classroom projects often experience sta- M. Zelditch Jr. (Eds.), New directions in
tus generalization. She devised two interventions contemporary sociological theory (pp. 41–76).
to reduce this tendency—the multiple abilities and Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
the assigned competence treatments. In the former Webster, M., Jr., & Foschi, M. (1988). Overview of
status generalization. In M. Webster Jr. & M.
intervention, teachers develop group tasks that
Foschi (Eds.), Status generalization: New theory and
require many roles with associated abilities for
research (pp. 1–20). Stanford, CA: Stanford
completion. Teachers then tell students that their
University Press.
task requires the contributions of all group mem-
bers, because people are not good at every role. In
the latter intervention, teachers observe students’
behaviors in groups to determine students’ typical
status positions. During subsequent group tasks, Status Construction Theory
teachers tell students to pay attention to the abili-
ties of low-status group members, because these Status construction theory describes social pro-
students can make useful contributions to task cesses that transform nominal differences among
completion. There is some evidence that these people—such as ethnicity, sex, occupation, or
interventions can reduce status generalization in religion—into status distinctions in a society or
classrooms. population. A social difference becomes a status
distinction when people develop beliefs that those
Alison J. Bianchi in one category of the social difference (e.g.,
Whites, men) are more socially respected and are
See also Dominance Hierarchies; Group Structure;
Implicit Prejudice; Power; Self-Fulfilling Prophecy; presumed to be more competent at socially valued
Status; Status Construction Theory tasks than are those in another category of that
difference (e.g., people of color, women). These
status beliefs, when widely shared in the popula-
Further Readings tion, have consequences for inequality among
both individuals and social groups. Thus, to
Berger, J., Fişek, M. H., Norman, R. Z., & Zelditch, M., explain how a social difference becomes a status
Jr. (1977). Status characteristics and social interaction: distinction, status construction theory describes
An expectation states approach. New York: Elsevier. (a) how status beliefs can be created and spread in
Berger, J., Rosenholtz, S., & Zelditch, M., Jr. (1980). interpersonal encounters among socially different
Status organizing processes. Annual Review of
actors and (b) the social conditions under which
Sociology, 6, 479–508.
these beliefs are likely to become widespread in
Berger, J., & Webster, M., Jr. (2006). Expectations,
the population.
status, and behavior. In P. J. Burke (Ed.),
A distinctive aspect of status beliefs is that both
Contemporary social psychological theories (pp. 268–
those in the social category favored by a belief and
300). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Cohen, E. G. (1982). Expectation states and interracial
those in the category less favored by the belief hold
interaction in school settings. Annual Review of similar beliefs that “most people” view the favored
Sociology, 8, 209–235. group as better than the other group. As beliefs
Dovidio, J. F., Brown, C. E., Heltmann, K., Ellyson, S. L., about what “most people” think, status beliefs are
& Keating, C. F. (1988). Power displays between a type of social reputation. Status construction
women and men in discussions of gender-linked tasks: theory proposes one set of processes by which such
A multichannel study. Journal of Personality and status beliefs could form, although there are likely
Social Psychology, 55, 580–587. to be other ways as well. This entry examines how
Ridgeway, C. L., & Walker, H. A. (1995). Status the theory developed, summarizes its contents, and
structures. In K. S. Cook, G. A. Fine, & J. S. House briefly reviews supporting evidence.
Status Construction Theory 849

Historical Overview that the categorical difference between them is


salient. As a consequence, there is a probability that
Status construction theory developed in the con-
the participants will associate their apparent differ-
text of a well-established body of theory and
ence in esteem and competence in the situation with
research on status hierarchies among individuals in
their corresponding categorical difference.
groups. Beginning in the 1950s, a long tradition of
To the extent that this association between the
empirical research, particularly that associated
categorical difference and influence appears to be
with status characteristics and expectation states
consensually accepted in the situation, rather than
theories, showed that the influence and deference
resisted or challenged, it seems socially valid to the
individuals attain in groups is powerfully shaped
participants. The backing of legitimate authority
by differences among them in social characteristics
will also make the correspondence between differ-
that carry status value in the larger society.
ence and influence seem socially valid to partici-
Differences in occupation and sex, for instance,
pants. If the same association with influence is
affect people’s influence on juries.
repeated for these participants in subsequent
It was unknown, however, how status beliefs
encounters with people from the other category, its
developed about such social differences. Drawing
apparent validity will be further strengthened.
on this body of research, status construction theory
Eventually, the apparent validity of the associa-
argues that if existing status beliefs are powerfully
tion between the categorical distinction and influ-
at play in encounters among people who differ in
ence in encounters induces actors to believe that,
socially recognized ways, then such encounters are
whether they like it or not, “most people” outside
also likely to be arenas in which new status beliefs
the encounters also would accept that people who
are created, spread, and maintained.
differ on the categorical distinction also differ in
The theory takes as a starting point the exis-
esteem and competence. In this way, actors form
tence of a social difference that is widely recog-
generalized status beliefs about the categorical dis-
nized in a population but about which no shared
tinction even when these beliefs disadvantage their
evaluation has yet developed. It also assumes that
own categorical group.
people from different categories of this social dif-
Once people form status beliefs about the dis-
ference are interdependent in that they must regu-
tinction, they carry these beliefs to their next
larly cooperate in order to achieve what they want
encounters with those from the other group who
or need. Under these conditions, the theory argues,
may not be aware of the belief. Yet, by treating
the local contexts in which people from different
categorically different others according to the new
social categories encounter one another have the
status belief, belief holders induce at least some of
potential to induce the participants to form shared
the others to take on the belief as well. In effect,
status beliefs about their difference.
they “teach” the others the belief by acting on it.
This in turn creates a diffusion process that spreads
the new status belief in the population.
Basics of Status Construction Theory The theory’s second set of arguments focuses on
The theory’s arguments about how local encounters the structural conditions under which beliefs
create status beliefs can be summarized as follows. formed in encounters can disseminate widely. The
In cooperative, goal-oriented encounters between most important condition is whether there is an
categorically different people, interpersonal hierar- unequal distribution between the groups of some
chies of influence and status are likely to develop factor, such as material resources or technology,
among the participants just as they do in virtually that is helpful in gaining influence in intercategory
all goal-oriented encounters. Such interpersonal encounters. If so, it becomes likely that people
influence hierarchies develop implicitly, through from the categorical group with more of the factor
multiple small behaviors. One person speaks up, for (e.g., the richer group) will more often than not
instance, while another holds back or responds emerge as the most influential actors in encounters
hesitantly. Because participants rarely notice these with people from the group with less of the factor
behaviors, the actual origins of their influence hier- (the poorer group). This causes the intercategory
archy are usually obscure to them at the same time encounters taking place all across the population
850 Stepladder Technique

to continually foster more status beliefs favoring cast the participant’s own group as lower status.
the structurally advantaged group than favoring Research has also demonstrated that the formation
the other categorical group. As these beliefs spread of status beliefs in these encounters turns on social
through future encounters, beliefs favoring the validity, as the theory argues. When the apparent
structurally advantaged group will eventually over- consensual acceptance of the influence hierarchies
whelm counterbeliefs and become nearly consen- in these encounters was challenged by a partici-
sual in the population. Thus, the theory argues pant, status beliefs did not form.
that if a factor that creates an influence advantage Additional experiments have shown that when
in encounters is unequally distributed between cat- the influence hierarchies in these intercategory
egorical groups, status beliefs favoring the struc- encounters are biased by a structural factor, such
turally advantaged group will develop and spread as material resources, the beliefs that people form
to become widely shared in the population. favor the resource-advantaged category, as pre-
Although the theory frames its arguments in dicted. Moreover, once people form status beliefs
terms of the creation of new status beliefs, it also in encounters, they spontaneously treat the next
explains the maintenance of existing beliefs. If person they encounter from the other category
structural conditions described by the theory are according to their new belief (although men do this
currently present, such as an inequality in resources more quickly than women do). Finally, there is
between categorical groups, then status construc- evidence that, by treating someone in the situation
tion processes will act to maintain status beliefs according to the belief, people can spread their
about the categorical difference, whether or not beliefs to others, creating a diffusion process that
these processes played a role in the actual histori- allows beliefs to spread widely.
cal origins of these status beliefs. Thus, status
construction processes can cause status beliefs Cecilia L. Ridgeway
based on race, gender, or other social differences See also Dominance Hierarchies; Group Structure; Power;
to persist in contemporary societies even after the Status; Status Characteristics/Expectation States Theory
original historical causes of those status beliefs
have disappeared.
Further Readings
Supportive Evidence Ridgeway, C. L. (1991). The social construction of status
value: Gender and other nominal characteristics.
Two types of evidence support these theoretical
Social Forces, 70, 367–386.
arguments. Computer simulations have shown
Ridgeway, C. L. (2006). Status construction theory. In P.
that if encounters between socially different actors
Burke (Ed.), Contemporary social psychological
actually do create and spread status beliefs as the theories (pp. 301–323). Stanford, CA: Stanford
theory argues, then the development of nearly con- University Press.
sensual status beliefs about the difference would Webster, M., & Hysom, S. J. (1998). Creating status
indeed be a logical result of the structural condi- characteristics. American Sociological Review, 63,
tions the theory posits. In addition to this logical 351–379.
support, experiments have examined whether peo-
ple do form and spread status beliefs in encounters
with different others.
These experiments have shown that people Stepladder Technique
form clearly defined status beliefs about a previ-
ously unevaluated categorical difference from only The stepladder technique is a structured proce-
two repeated encounters with members of the dure designed to facilitate effective group decision
other category in which influence hierarchies making. The goal is to ensure that the thoughts
developed that corresponded to actors’ categorical and ideas of all members are made available to the
difference. Participants formed beliefs favoring the group so that they can be considered while the
categorical group that was consistently more influ- group is reaching a decision. The importance of
ential in the encounters even when these beliefs this goal is underscored by research by Gary
Stepladder Technique 851

Stasser, James Larson, and others indicating that a decision. Once one suggestion begins to get sup-
groups frequently fail to consider relevant infor- port, this tends to inhibit other members from
mation and that this can seriously impair the qual- adding new suggestions. Group members may be
ity of group decisions. This entry describes the reluctant to openly disagree with positions of high-
technique and looks at research outcomes. status members. Thus, members may remain silent
The stepladder technique was developed by rather than offer alternative perspectives. Members
Steven Rogelberg, Janet Barnes-Farrell, and Charles frequently conform to the ideas of other members
Lowe. It involves the sequential entry of members because they do not want to disagree openly or
into a discussion group. The order in which mem- because they devalue their own ideas when they
bers enter the group is randomly determined. At find that these ideas differ from the group consen-
the first step, two of the group members (the core sus. The stepladder technique is an attempt to limit
group) discuss the issue and reach a tentative these problems.
understanding. Next, a third person joins the The initial two-person discussion and the
group and shares his or her thoughts with the sequential addition of members who must share
members of the core group. This is followed by a their thoughts and potential solutions with the
discussion among the three members. Next, a other group members serve to ensure that all mem-
fourth person joins the group, shares his or her bers participate in the group discussion. Members’
thoughts, and additional group discussion ensues. expressing their ideas before hearing the opinions
This procedure continues until all group members of others should lessen conformity pressures and
have presented and discussed their ideas. At that result in a wider range of ideas and potential solu-
point, the group reaches a final decision. tions. This feature not only increases the chances
In addition to the sequential entry of members that a high-quality solution is proposed, but it also
into the discussion, the technique involves other exposes any conflicting views that may exist. The
procedures. Group members are provided with the consideration of opposing viewpoints within a
decision task and given time to think about it cooperative framework can lead to more careful
before group discussion. The discussion is struc- deliberation and a more refined solution. Thus, the
tured so that each person added to the core group stepladder technique offers an approach that can
is required to state his or her thoughts before lead to a more complete use of member expertise
learning the ideas and preferences of the other and promises to improve the quality of group deci-
members. As each member is added, the group is sion making.
given adequate time for discussion. The final deci-
sion is not made until all members have provided
Research Evidence
their thoughts and the entire group has discussed
the problem and potential solutions. Only a limited number of empirical studies have
The stepladder technique was designed to over- been conducted to evaluate the stepladder tech-
come some of the more common sources of pro- nique, but they indicate that the technique can lead
cess losses in groups. Process losses are ineffective to meaningful improvements in group decision
group processes that limit the effectiveness of performance. Groups using the stepladder tech-
groups. Process losses frequently occur in group nique reach decisions of higher quality than do
discussions and often keep groups from perform- groups using unstructured methods (in which all
ing as effectively as they potentially could. In members work collectively to reach a decision).
decision-making groups, a few members may Moreover, the decision made by a stepladder
dominate the discussion while other members par- group is likely to exceed the quality of the indi-
ticipate little or not at all. As demonstrated by vidual decision made by the best member of the
Michael Diehl, Wolfgang Stroebe, and others, group.
members may fail to participate because they can Some potential reasons the stepladder technique
easily slack off on group projects, they feel their facilitates effective group decisions have been inves-
contributions are not needed, or they are shy or tigated. Compared with group members using
inhibited by other members. Often only a very few unstructured methods, members of groups using the
suggestions are considered before a group reaches stepladder technique report positive climate effects
852 Stepladder Technique

(e.g., less pressure to conform, better teamwork) The reasons for this discrepancy are not clear, but
and greater levels of effort. Although these factors they may be related to factors such as the quantity
may lead to decisions of higher quality, their impact or distribution of communication, availability of
on performance of stepladder groups has not been paralinguistic cues, or members’ feelings about the
assessed. Evidence also suggests that the stepladder group—factors that may differ across the two types
technique leads to more effective use of group mem- of virtual groups.
bers’ expertise. In stepladder groups, but not in
conventional groups, the most expert member is
more likely than other members to report having Directions for Future Research
ample opportunity to express his or her ideas. There Additional research is needed on the boundary
is also evidence that the most expert member exerts conditions for the effectiveness of stepladder
the most influence on the group decision in steplad- groups. For example, all the studies to date have
der groups, but not in conventional groups. Finally, used a single type of task, the survival exercise. In
in stepladder groups, but not in conventional this task, participants rank order items in terms of
groups, the performance of the best member is their utility for survival in an inhospitable environ-
highly related to group decision quality. Although ment, such as a remote area during severe winter
these factors may account for some of the improve- conditions. Studies that examine the effectiveness
ments in decision effectiveness in stepladder groups, of the technique across a variety of other tasks
additional work is needed to understand when and would therefore be useful. Another area in which
why such groups are effective. additional work is needed involves group size. At
Despite the fact that, in stepladder groups, present, all studies have used four-person groups.
members of the core group participate in all discus- It is possible that the technique may prove too
sions and other members enter later, these latter cumbersome and time-consuming for use with
people do not experience the group less favorably larger groups.
or have less impact on group decisions. That is, Studies to date have used laboratory groups in
members added later do not differ from those in which members typically are unacquainted and
the initial core in terms of influence, feelings of there is no existing group structure. Because such
involvement, or cohesion. Finally, it is worth not- groups are in some ways similar to project teams
ing that, while the stepladder technique leads to and virtual teams used in organizations, findings
more effective group decisions, there is some cost from laboratory studies may well generalize to these
in terms of time. This time cost may be inconse- types of groups. It is less clear, however, how well
quential in some cases, but the technique may not the technique will work in intact teams in which
be appropriate when time demands are extreme. members work together for long periods of time.
Some efforts have been made to study the One question concerns the willingness of members
boundary conditions of the effectiveness of steplad- of intact teams to continue using the technique.
der groups. For example, when the technique was Because of the persistence of norms and resistance
first developed, the timing of entry of members into to change in such groups, their members may revert
the group was controlled by the researcher. Later to more traditional modes of group discussion once
studies have indicated that the technique is also the intervention is over. An evaluation of the long-
effective when group members themselves deter- term use of the stepladder technique in intact work
mine the timing of entry of new members. In addi- groups would therefore be worthwhile.
tion, although the stepladder technique was initially In summary, the stepladder technique is a very
used with face-to-face groups, recent studies have promising approach to group decision making. It
examined its utility with virtual groups (in which seems to minimize a number of process problems
members are not located together but instead inter- that limit the effectiveness of conventional deci-
act via electronic communication). Results indicate sion-making groups. However, additional work is
that the technique leads to more effective decisions needed to specify the conditions under which the
for groups that communicate via a telephone con- technique is effective.
ference call, but not for those in which members
interact by sending computer-based text messages. Glenn E. Littlepage
Stereotype Threat 853

See also Conformity; Delphi Technique; Group Problem Stereotype threat enters this debate as a theory
Solving and Decision Making; Hidden Profile Task; that takes a different approach. It argues that even
Social Loafing if one could perfectly match students for their bio-
logical or environmental history, the mere knowl-
edge of gender or racial stereotypes would create
Further Readings
group differences in performance that give the
Rogelberg, S. G., Barnes-Farrell, J. L., & Lowe, C. A. appearance of group differences in ability. By
(1992). The stepladder technique: An alternative pointing to situational factors that help produce
group structure facilitating effective group decision these performance differences, stereotype threat
making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 730–737. offers a more optimistic account that lends itself to
Rogelberg, S. G., & O’Connor, M. S. (1998). Extending solutions. This entry will summarize when stereo-
the stepladder technique: An examination of self- type threat occurs, who is most susceptible, the
paced stepladder groups. Group Dynamics: Theory, psychological mechanisms by which performance
Research, and Practice, 2, 82–91. is impaired, and how stereotype threat can be
Rogelberg, S. G., O’Connor, M. S., & Sederburg, M. reduced.
(2002). Using the stepladder technique to facilitate the
performance of audioconferencing groups. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 87, 994–1000. How and When Is
Thompson, L. F., & Coovert, M. D. (2002). Stepping up Stereotype Threat Elicited?
to the challenge: A critical examination of face-to-face
Stereotype threat was first documented empirically
and computer-mediated team decision making. Group
by Claude Steele and Joshua Aronson in 1995. In
Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 52–64.
West, M. A. (2004). Effective teamwork: Practical lessons
one seminal study, Black college students per-
from organizational research (2nd ed.). Malden, MA: formed worse than their White peers on a task that
BPS Blackwell. was described to them as a diagnostic measure of
verbal ability, an effect that paralleled the race gap
typically found on standardized tests. However,
when the same task was described to a second half
Stereotype Threat of the sample as a simple laboratory exercise and
unrelated to intelligence, Black students performed
Stereotype threat occurs when people confront the significantly better on the task, and their perfor-
possibility that their own behavior could confirm mance was not significantly different from that of
a negative stereotype about a group to which they their White counterparts after their prior SAT
belong. The fear associated with confirming an scores were taken into account. This effect demon-
unwanted stereotype can prevent a person from strates that subtle situational cues can impair per-
performing up to his or her true potential, and formance and exacerbate the appearance of group
when this occurs for many members of a stigma- differences in ability.
tized group, the average performance of the group Since the phenomenon was first identified, ste-
is decreased, creating the appearance that the reotype threat has been firmly established as an
group lacks ability in that domain. effect that can be created for any group in the right
Stereotype threat research helps to explain long- situation. Stereotype threat has been examined as
observed gender and racial differences in perfor- a cause of women’s underperformance in math,
mance, particularly in standardized testing. These Latinos’ underperformance on intellectual tests,
persistent gaps in performance have fueled an and older adults’ poorer memory performance.
ongoing controversy over whether race differences White men, a group that is not typically stigma-
in IQ scores or sex differences in math perfor- tized, show lower performance on a math test
mance are due to environmental factors, such as when told that their ability will be compared with
socioeconomic disadvantages or a history of biased that of Asian men, a group stereotyped to be math-
socialization, or to biological factors, such as ematically superior. Studies also show that Asian
genetic, hormonal, or neurological differences that American women perform better on a math test
correlate with race or sex. when reminded of their Asian background but
854 Stereotype Threat

perform worse when reminded of their gender. Who Is Most Susceptible


Again, this result shows that simple features of the to Stereotype Threat?
situation, such as reminders of one’s race or gen-
Several individual difference variables make some
der, can affect how one performs.
individuals more susceptible to stereotype threat
Stereotype threat has also been shown outside
effects on their performance. For example, although
the classroom, in athletic performance. For exam-
individuals need not endorse the stereotype to
ple, White athletes do worse at a golf putting task
experience stereotype threat, research has shown
when told that the task measures natural athletic
that women who buy into gender stereotypes
ability (a trait White athletes are stereotyped to
about men’s superior math skills are more suscep-
lack), whereas Black athletes do worse when told
tible than other women to stereotype threat effects
that the task measures sports intelligence (a trait
on their math performance. In addition, individu-
Black athletes are stereotyped to lack).
als who are most invested in doing well in a given
In general, stereotype threat occurs when
domain are the ones who will be most susceptible
aspects of individuals’ environment subtly remind
to the threat that their performance could confirm
them that their behavior in that context is relevant
a negative stereotype. Likewise, individuals who
to negative stereotypes targeted against their
are strongly identified with their group, and per-
group. These reminders of group stereotypes can
haps have the most invested in maintaining a posi-
be as simple as merely knowing that the task is
tive image of that social identity, also experience
diagnostic of an ability that one’s group is stereo-
stereotype threat more strongly. It is not surprising
typed to lack. But stereotype threat can also be
that individuals high in stigma consciousness,
experienced after only a very simple reminder that
those who are chronically aware of being viewed
one belongs to a stigmatized group. For example,
through the lens of stereotypes, are more suscep-
being the only woman taking a math test, being
tible than others to the effects of stereotype threat
asked to indicate one’s race, or even watching
on their performance.
stereotypical television commercials before a test
In addition to these factors that increase suscep-
have all been shown to impair performance.
tibility to stereotype threat, several other individual
Finally, it is important to note the performance
difference variables related to more general coping
decrements are exhibited only on tasks that are
abilities have been shown to moderate stereotype
complex or require the active manipulation of
threat effects on performance. For example, situa-
large amounts of information. If a task is rela-
tions of stereotype threat are thought to force
tively easy, one’s motivation to disconfirm the
individuals to consciously monitor their behavior
stereotype leads to better overall performance, or
with respect to the context. Thus, those who are
stereotype reactance.
already highly practiced at such self-monitoring
Recent theory suggests that stereotype threat is
processes are better able than others to cope with
not a unitary phenomenon but instead can take
the effects of stereotype threat. In addition, having
multiple forms. For some, threat is created by a
a sense of humor is generally associated with more
fear that they could confirm a stereotype in their
successful coping, and research suggests that it also
own eyes, whereas others might be more con-
buffers individuals from the experience of stereo-
cerned about confirming the stereotype held by
type threat. However, individuals with an internal
other people, either those who are similarly ste-
locus of control, who are used to feeling that they
reotyped or those who are part of the non-stigma-
have the ability to control their outcomes, do not
tized majority. In addition, the target of the threat
fare as well in situations of stereotype threat.
can be either oneself or one’s personal identity (I
don’t want to be seen stereotypically) or one’s
social identity (I don’t want my group to be seen
What Processes Underlie the Effects
stereotypically). This conceptual analysis results
of Stereotype Threat on Performance?
in several distinct forms of stereotype threat, each Considerable progress has been made in identifying
with some unique properties, but all of which the physiological, affective, and cognitive processes
lead to underperformance compared with one’s that combine to explain why stereotype threat
true ability. impairs performance. Situations of stereotype threat
Stereotype Threat 855

elicit a physiological stress response. This height- Reducing reminders of group membership is
ened state of stress arousal is paired with greater another way to minimize stereotype threat effects
vigilance to the situation in an effort to consciously on performance. In a recent reanalysis of a field
monitor one’s behavior for signs that one is con- experiment of students taking an advanced place-
firming the stereotype. Because of this focus on ment calculus exam, researchers found that having
detecting failure, individuals are more likely to students indicate their gender after instead of just
interpret aspects of their experience, such as errors before the test led to a 33% reduction in the gender
they make or even their own level of arousal, as gap in test scores (although the same manipulation
indicating poor performance, leading to more nega- did not have a significant effect for minority tests
tive thoughts and heightened feelings of anxiety. takers). An alternative to downplaying one’s group
However, because they are especially threatened by membership is to highlight the existence of positive
feeling anxious when performing under the burden role models or group members who disconfirm the
of negative stereotypes, individuals try to suppress stereotype. Similarly, highlighting other positive
or avoid these anxious thoughts and feelings. characteristics of the group or one’s own self-con-
Three of these elements—increased physiologi- cept can also minimize the sting of the negative
cal stress, conscious monitoring of behavior, and stereotype and lead to improved performance.
active suppression of thoughts and feelings—are Whereas the above strategies reduce stereotype
likely to cause impairments in working memory threat by counteracting negative features of the
efficiency. Working memory refers to our ability to environment with the presence of more positive
mentally manipulate information. It involves focus- features, other interventions work to combat ste-
ing attention on a central task while inhibiting reotype threat by changing how people think about
irrelevant information or distractions, a skill that is the negative features that are present in the situa-
central to performance on tasks such as reading tion. For example, if stereotype threat occurs, in
comprehension, memorization, spatial rotation, part, because people interpret their behavior in a
and math calculations. Thus, situations of stereo- more negative way, then manipulations designed to
type threat affect the same working memory change those interpretations should reduce stereo-
resources often needed for successful performance type threat. Indeed, instructing individuals to inter-
on a range of mental tasks. Research also shows pret their anxiety in a more benign manner or as a
that stereotype threat impairs performance on well- normal part of the academic experience can circum-
learned motor tasks by increasing conscious atten- vent some of the processes of emotion regulation
tion to performing a sequence of physical behaviors, that absorb cognitive resources and impair perfor-
when relying on well-learned and automated mus- mance. In fact, research suggests that when indi-
cle movements would lead to better performance. viduals are taught about stereotype threat and the
effects it can have in creating anxiety and impairing
performance, they are more likely to report that
How Can Stereotype Threat Be Reduced?
their anxiety was caused by factors that are external
Research into the basic parameters of stereotype to them and perform better as a result. Thus, edu-
threat has led to important discoveries of ways in cating people about the phenomenon could be a
which stereotype threat effects can be reduced. simple way of helping to combat its effects.
First, it is already clear that situations that mini-
mize reminders of negative stereotypes diminish Toni Schmader
group differences in performance. For example, See also Collective Self; Gender and Behavior; Looking-
the race and gender gap in test performance Glass Self; Minority Coping Strategies; Minority
decreases when a set of verbal or math problems is Groups in Society; Self-Fulfilling Prophecy;
described as a laboratory exercise that is not diag- Self-Stereotyping; Stereotyping; Stigma
nostic of any ability. However, in many testing
contexts, it is hard to deny that one’s performance Further Readings
will be interpreted as an indicator of inherent skill. Schmader, T., Johns, M., & Forbes, C. (2008). An
If this alone can elicit stereotype threat, what other integrated process model of stereotype threat effects
interventions can be employed? on performance. Psychological Review, 115, 336–356.
856 Stereotyping

Shapiro, J., & Neuberg, S. (2007). From stereotype threat across individuals in a culture or society, they can
to stereotype threats: Implications of a multi-threat also be conceptualized as a cultural- or societal-
framework for causes, moderators, mediators, level phenomenon. Stereotypes are part of the
consequences, and interventions. Personality and culture itself and are represented and expressed in
Social Psychology Review, 11, 107–130. the media, in everyday conversation, and in
Steele, C. M. (1992, April). Race and the schooling of humor. Stereotypes are in large part social norms—
Black Americans. The Atlantic Monthly, pp. 68–78. they represent our underlying theories about the
Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat world of social groups and group relations—our
and the intellectual test performance of African
cultural beliefs about the fundamental essence of
Americans. Journal of Personality and Social
social groups.
Psychology, 69, 797–811.
Stereotypes develop from the process of social
Steele, C. M., Spencer, S. J., & Aronson, J. (2002).
categorization, which is the assignment of indi-
Contending with group image: The psychology of
stereotype and social identity threat. In M. Zanna
viduals to groups based on culturally important or
(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology
otherwise salient characteristics. The most com-
(Vol. 34, pp. 379–440). New York: Academic Press. mon categorizations, and thus the most common
basis for stereotypes, arise from the categories of
sex, race, age, and sexual orientation. When we
categorize another person, we move away from
Stereotyping individual person-based judgments to group-based
judgments.
Stereotypes are the characteristics that are believed The application of a stereotype to a target per-
to be true of a particular social group and its son is known as stereotyping; it frequently occurs
members. They are generally traits (Blacks are in an unconscious, automatic way, often without
athletic; women are emotional) but can poten- the knowledge of the person doing the stereotyp-
tially include other attributes (___ are likely to be ing. Once developed, stereotypes become available
lawyers; ___ are likely to be on welfare). Stereotypes in memory and highly cognitively accessible. They
may be positive in valence (Italians are romantic; pop into mind easily and quickly when we encoun-
Asians are good in math), but most are negative. ter a member of the stereotyped group, and they
Stereotypes represent the cognitive component of are difficult to suppress. In fact, attempting to sup-
intergroup beliefs and are related to the affective press stereotypes can make them even more highly
component (prejudice) and the behavioral compo- accessible, leading to more stereotyping. The mere
nent (discrimination) of intergroup relations. presence of a member of the particular social
Stereotypes often predict, and serve as a rational- group is enough to activate the stereotype beliefs,
ization for, both prejudice and discrimination. As and applying the activated beliefs—stereotyping—
trait dimensions, stereotype beliefs fall into the can inform social judgments and influence interac-
basic dimensions used to judge people more gener- tions between individuals in a pervasive way, on a
ally. For instance, a large part of the variance in daily basis.
stereotype beliefs is captured by the important
underlying dimensions of warmth and compe-
Outcomes of Stereotypes
tence, and the beliefs about many social groups
are captured by these two factors. Holding stereotypes and applying them to social
Stereotypes have been studied extensively by judgments may in some cases be informative, func-
social psychologists, in part because they represent tional, and mentally efficient, particularly if there
a form of person perception more generally, in is some truth to stereotypes. If stereotypes are in
part because they can be used to understand how part accurate, then stereotyping increases one’s
social information is mentally encoded, repre- ability to predict the behavior of others. Stereotyp­
sented, and activated, and in part because they ing may also be self-protective because in danger-
have significant societal outcomes. ous situations, one can make quick judgments
Stereotypes are held by individuals, but about possible outgroup members who may pose a
because there is general consensus on beliefs threat. These quick judgments are also mentally
Stereotyping 857

efficient because they free up cognitive resources Stereotypes as Mental Representations


for other things. Instead of our evaluating each
new individual as a unique person, stereotyping Information that is encountered on a daily basis
allows us to quickly retrieve and apply informa- must be categorized and stored so that it is easily
tion about the new individual’s group, thereby retrievable and can be used in future situations. At
allowing a likely summary judgment of the indi- the individual level, social information about
vidual himself or herself. groups is stored in memory as cognitive represen-
Stereotyping is more likely to occur when one tations of the groups, or stereotypes. In this sense,
has little motivation or capacity to individuate oth- stereotypes allow one to make inferences about
ers or when one is tired, distracted, or cognitively social targets, to “fill in the blanks” regarding
busy. When we do not have much interest in the information that is ambiguous or unknown about
other or when we have power over the other, the social target, to interpret events that are uncer-
thinking about the other person as an individual tain, and to help encode new information about a
(individuation) is not necessary, and instead we social group. Several models have been used to
will rely on stereotypes. Alternatively, when we understand the cognitive structure of stereotypes,
know the other well or when we are dependent on how the social information contained stereotypes
the other for outcomes, individuation is likely to becomes activated, and how stereotypes are applied
occur without the use of stereotypes. during social judgment.
Stereotypes have important societal implica- Most broadly, stereotypes can be considered as
tions because they create a variety of social diffi- schemas that contain a general set of information
culties and problems for those who are stereotyped. about a group. Individuals acquire this informa-
For one, because stereotype beliefs are frequently tion through direct personal experience or through
overgeneralized, they have the potential to be indirect cultural experiences. For instance, an indi-
unfair to those who are judged. Stereotypes may vidual may learn that Blacks have dark skin, or
lead individuals to act as if characteristics believed that immigrants speak English as a second lan-
to be true of a social group are true of every mem- guage. These general characteristics will be stored
ber of the group, when this cannot be the case. Not in schemas about the groups and will subsequently
all members of the category possess the stereo- inform the stereotypes of the groups.
typed characteristics, and assuming that they Stereotypes have also been considered as proto-
do—and particularly acting as if they do—is unfair types, which are more specific group representa-
to those who are categorized and stereotyped. tions. They are developed through the integration
Furthermore, stereotypes create anxiety and pro- of all attributes that are observed and learned
duce cognitive load during interactions. As a about over time in many different contexts and
result, substantial effort on the part of those in social group members. Thus prototypes represent
interaction is required, which inhibits and reduces the average of group attributes and contain the
the quality of the social interaction. most “typical” characteristics of the group. After
Stereotypes also influence task performance. multiple experiences with lawyers, one may con-
For instance, because Asian students are aware of sider the typical lawyer to be extroverted, hard-
the stereotype that Asians are good at math, working, and argumentative. During encounters,
reminding them of this fact before they take a dif- lawyers will be judged on their “goodness-of-fit”
ficult math test can improve their performance on with the prototypical lawyer, such that lawyers
the test. On the other hand, sometimes these whose characteristics seem to be similar to those of
beliefs are negative, and they create negative self- the typical lawyer will be assimilated into the cog-
fulfilling prophecies (stereotype threat) such that nitive category lawyer, whereas lawyers whose
one may perform more poorly due to knowledge characteristics appear to be less similar to those of
about the stereotypes. Thinking about negative the typical lawyer will be thought of as an excep-
stereotypes that are relevant to a task that one is tion and will not be assimilated into the cognitive
performing creates stereotype threat—performance category lawyer.
decrements that are caused by the knowledge of Within each group representation, there may be
cultural stereotypes. several specific exemplars that come to mind as
858 Stereotyping

good examples of a social group. These exemplars very large samples, most people associate stereo-
are most likely memories of specific group mem- types with many social groups. However, implicit
bers the individual has encountered. Exemplars measures of stereotyping such as the IAT are gen-
allow the individual to store more detailed infor- erally uncorrelated or only slightly correlated with
mation about the social group that may not neces- responses on more explicit measures.
sarily be represented by the averaging of group Recent developments in the field of social cogni-
characteristics. For instance, when thinking of the tive neuroscience have generated several techniques
group politicians, an individual may think of to measure neural activity in response to various
George Bush or Bill Clinton. Both exemplars are social stimuli. Functional magnetic resonance
good category fits, but they are quite different imaging (fMRI) has become an increasingly valu-
from one another. In certain contexts, the indi- able tool because it quickly produces precise
vidual characteristics of George Bush or Bill images of specific brain structures. Other methods
Clinton may provide useful additional information include using electrodes to measure evoked poten-
that would not be provided by simply thinking of tials, which are the changes in electrical activity
the most typical characteristics of politicians. immediately after exposure to particular stimuli.
These different models of the cognitive repre- Research using neuroimaging methods has found
sentation of stereotypes allow researchers to under- that the medial prefrontal cortex responds to social
stand the various ways in which stereotypes stimuli in general. More specifically, the amygdala
develop, function, and change. Each of these con- is an area of the brain that is involved with social
ceptual approaches allows slightly different predic- categorization. In addition to becoming activated
tions to be made about the activation and during emotional experiences, it becomes activated
application of stereotypes. It is important to in response to outgroup members and social tar-
remember, however, that although stereotypes are gets that are stereotyped as threatening. The ante-
stored as cognitive representations, they are not rior cingulate, a region of the brain that detects
entirely rigid. The particular categories that are conflict, is activated when stereotypes are used,
activated, as well as the particular stereotypes that signaling the awareness of bias, and the lateral
are applied, vary across social context and often prefrontal cortex becomes activated when stereo-
depend on the individual’s processing goals. types are inhibited.

Measuring Stereotypes and Stereotyping Accuracy


Stereotypes are assessed through a variety of tech- It is generally assumed that stereotypes contain
niques. The most common approaches are self-re- some kernel of truth, and most research suggests
port methods, which include thought listings, that this is the case, although some stereotypes are
Likert-type scales (e.g., How true is this trait of the more accurate than others. There are observed
group?), and probability or percentage estimate correlations between stereotypes ascribed to out-
measures (e.g., What proportion of the group pos- groups and the traits that members of those
sesses the trait?). However, because self-report groups ascribe to themselves, as well as correla-
methods are likely to be influenced by self-promo- tions between perceptions of stereotypes and
tion demand characteristics, a variety of nonreac- actual observed group behavior. However, it is
tive, indirect, or unobtrusive measures have also difficult to determine whether group traits inform
been used. Methods that measure the specific the stereotype or whether the stereotype informs
words or characteristics that become activated group traits.
after exposure to members of different categories In some cases, stereotypes may reflect the aver-
have been used to assess group attitudes with more age roles of different groups. For instance, the
validity. A variety of reaction-time measures, stereotypes that women are nurturant and that
including the Implicit Association Test (IAT), have men are dominant may occur in part because, on
also been used to assess associations between cat- average and across many cultures, men are more
egory labels and stereotypes of the category. likely to have high-status occupations, such as doc-
Research using the IAT has shown that, based on tor or lawyer, whereas women are more likely to
Stereotyping 859

have low-status occupations, such as homemakers some minorities behaving negatively. Because of
and child care workers. In this sense, the stereo- set size effects, infrequently performed and nega-
types are at least partly “true” for many of the tive behaviors tend to be particularly salient. As
members of the social categories, in terms of their both minorities and negative behaviors are infre-
actual behaviors in these roles. Consistent with quent and therefore salient, an individual may
this idea is the fact that stereotypes can change as incorrectly perceive a relationship between them
a result of changes in social contexts. When indi- when they occur together. The result is that nega-
viduals from a social group perform behaviors that tive stereotypes easily develop about minority
are inconsistent with existing stereotypes, or are in groups.
different contexts, beliefs about the social group Individuals also learn useful social categories
may change as well. and stereotypes through social processes such as
In many cases, however, behaviors of group everyday discourse and exposure to the media,
members are also determined by the stereotypes of just as they learn any other social norm. Indeed,
their group because stereotypes can become self- individually held stereotypes are generally very
fulfilling prophecies. Expectations that outgroup similar to the stereotypes held by others in the
members possess certain traits often lead to the same social contexts. Individuals use stereotypes
perception and even the expression of the trait in when they perceive, on the basis of social norms,
the outgroup. For example, during a hiring pro- that it is appropriate to do so, and they refrain
cess, if an interviewer expects a Black interviewee from using stereotypes when it is perceived as
to be aggressive because of a stereotype about inappropriate. Stereotyping is so normal and natu-
Black people, the interviewer may unintentionally ral that children learn stereotypes as early as 3 or
phrase questions in a way that elicits aggressive 4 years of age, and their stereotypes remain quite
responses, thus confirming the interviewer’s initial rigid until around the age of 10. There is only a
belief about the social group’s aggressiveness. small relationship between the stereotypes of chil-
Stereotype-based self-fulfilling prophecies are dren and those of their parents, however, possibly
ubiquitous—even teachers’ expectations about because children’s unique experiences with vari-
their students can influence the students’ school ous social groups are more likely to inform the
performance way they categorize social stimuli than are their
parents’ attitudes.
Stereotype Development
Stereotype Maintenance and Change
At a basic level, individuals like similar others,
perhaps because, over the long course of evolu- Because stereotyping and social categorization are
tion, those who were similar were more likely to basic human processes that provide some benefits
be helpful and benign, whereas those who were for those who hold them, stereotypes are easy to
different were more likely to be threatening. develop but difficult to change. New, potentially
Stereotypes are formed through a variety of cogni- contradictory information is discarded without
tive and affective processes. As discussed earlier, influencing the existing category, whereas ambigu-
stereotypes develop through the organization of ous information regarding the stereotype is fre-
social stimuli into various categories that contain quently distorted to fit the existing beliefs.
both general and specific information about the Furthermore, confirmation biases lead people to
social groups. In some cases, these categories seek out information and ask questions about oth-
develop out of relatively accurate perceptions of ers in ways that confirm and thus reinforce their
everyday behaviors, but in other cases, they develop existing beliefs. Individuals pay less attention to,
from misperceptions of behaviors. These mispercep- and are less likely to remember, information that
tions can be driven by preexisting expectations or disconfirms their existing stereotypes.
by processing errors. For instance, distinctiveness- Although it is difficult, stereotype change is pos-
based illusory correlations occur when a percei­ sible. One approach is to attempt to change the
ver assumes a relationship between minorities beliefs themselves. This is perhaps the most com-
and negative behaviors after exposure to one or mon approach, but perhaps also the most difficult,
860 Stereotyping

because expectancies tend to support themselves in practiced and because it often occurs out of aware-
virtually every possible way. An alternative but ness and is difficult to stop. However, some social
related approach is to attempt to change the per- situations, including repeated practice in denying
ceived variability of stereotyped groups such that one’s beliefs, awareness of one’s moral hypocrisy
the perceiver believes that the stereotypes, although when one stereotypes, and the presence of positive,
perhaps true of some group members, are far from stereotype-disconfirming exemplars, reduce the
true for every group member and thus not very extent to which individuals apply stereotypes to
diagnostic for use in social judgment. outgroup members.
Changing beliefs occurs in part through educa- Stereotyping may also be reduced by changing
tion, as those with more education express fewer social categorization processes such that out-
stereotypes, and in part through increased social group members are recategorized as part of the
interactions with outgroup members. Indeed, posi- ingroup. This recategorization process allows the
tive intergroup contact has been found to change members of different groups to be able to per-
stereotypes in many settings, including schools, ceive themselves as members of a common group,
work environments, the military, and businesses. to see each other as more similar, and to make
However, this approach is not a panacea. Negative friends with each other. Through fostering per-
intergroup contact makes beliefs more resistant to ceptions of shared identities, encouraging mean-
change, whereas positive intergroup opportunities ingful contact that defies group boundaries, and
are limited, and the conditions required for posi- highlighting similarities on dimensions unrelated
tive contact situations are difficult to achieve. to group distinctions, the ingroup and an out-
Furthermore, contact with individual outgroup group can begin to reduce negative beliefs and
members, even if successful at the individual level, promote positive ones.
does not always change attitudes about the group Finally, on a macro level, legal remedies can be
as a whole. Beliefs about individual outgroup successful in decreasing the use of stereotypes.
members change much more quickly than beliefs When individuals are forced to individuate rather
about outgroups as a whole because the individual than categorize, learning about others as individu-
outgroup members are subtyped into lower levels als may completely overwhelm the influence that
of group membership if they do not match expec- their group membership would previously have
tations about the outgroup as a whole. Thus it is had. Over long periods of time, legal remedies can
possible to know many individual outgroup mem- also help change social climates so that stereotyp-
bers to whom stereotypes are not applied and yet ing becomes less socially acceptable and so that
nevertheless apply stereotypes to the outgroup as a increased opportunities for some social groups
whole. Generalization of stereotype-discrepant change social roles so that some stereotypes inevi-
information to the whole outgroup is more likely tably become obsolete.
when individual outgroup members behave in
ways that confirm some existing stereotypes and Charles Stangor and Julia D. O’Brien
yet disconfirm others such that, because the indi- See also Categorization; Children: Stereotypes and
vidual does seem representative of the group on Prejudice; Common Ingroup Identity Model; Illusory
some dimensions, the stereotype-discrepant infor- Correlation; Implicit Association Test (IAT);
mation is more difficult to ignore. Intergroup Contact Theory; Perceived Group
There are several different approaches to chang- Variability; Prejudice; Self-Fulfilling Prophecy;
ing beliefs that avoid the issue of generalization. Stereotype Threat; Subtyping
One successful approach that has created long-
term changes is to convince individuals that their
prejudiced beliefs are nonnormative and that oth- Further Readings
ers do not hold stereotypes. Another approach is Blair, I. V. (2002). The malleability of automatic
to allow the beliefs to remain intact but help peo- stereotypes and prejudice. Personality and Social
ple avoid applying them to individuals, thus pre- Psychology Review, 6(3), 242–261.
venting the stereotyping process. This approach is Eagly, A. H., & Steffen, V. J. (1984). Gender stereotypes
also difficult because stereotyping is very well stem from the distribution of women and men into
Stigma 861

social roles. Journal of Personality and Social Spoiled Identity, is widely credited with introduc-
Psychology, 46, 735–754. ing the concept of stigma to the social sciences.
Fiske, S. T. (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice and Goffman extended the notion of stigma to other,
discrimination. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. less obvious signs that might still designate the
Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (4th bearer as spoiled, flawed, and less than fully human
ed., Vol. 2, pp. 357–414). New York: McGraw-Hill. in the eyes of other society members. He distin-
Jussim, L., Lee, Y., & McCauley, R. (1995). Accuracy guished three types of stigma: “abominations of the
and inaccuracy in stereotyping. Washington, DC: body” (e.g., physical deformities), “blemishes of
American Psychological Association.
individual character” (e.g., mental disorders, addic-
Rothbart, M., & John, O. P. (1985). Social categorization
tions), and “tribal identities” (e.g., race, religion).
and behavioral episodes: A cognitive analysis of the
Much of the research on stigma in psychology
effects of intergroup contact. Journal of Social Issues,
focuses on the perspective of the stigmatizer. In
41, 81–104.
Smith, E. R., & Queller, S. (2004). Mental
contrast, research in sociology often focuses on the
representations. In M. B. Brewer & M. Hewstone
target’s experience. This entry first describes the
(Eds.), Social cognition (pp. 5–27). Malden, MA: ways in which stigma has been conceptualized and
Blackwell. classified. It then summarizes key research findings
Spears, R., Oakes, P. J., Ellemers, N., & Haslam, S. A. with regard to (a) the perspective of the stigmatizer
(1997). The social psychology of stereotyping and (why individuals stigmatize others), (b) the per-
group life. Malden, MA: Blackwell. spective of the target (the consequences of being
Stangor, C. (2000). Stereotypes and prejudice: Essential stigmatized), and (c) characteristics of social inter-
readings. New York: Psychology Press. actions between stigmatizer and target.
Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat
and the intellectual performance of African Americans.
Conceptualizations and
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69,
797–811.
Classifications of Stigma
Recent psychological definitions of stigma have
emphasized three fundamental components:
(1) recognition of a person’s difference from others
Stigma based on some distinguishing characteristic or
mark, (2) consequent devaluation of the person,
Stigma refers to a characteristic or attribute that is and (3) subsequent (de)valuation of the person
associated with negative generalized inferences across most contexts. Typically, a stigmatized iden-
about the bearer. Psychological research on stigma tity activates negative stereotypes and interpersonal
often has focused on race and ethnicity, gender, rejection and ultimately produces social discrimi-
sexual orientation, obesity, and disability. How­ nation and economic disadvantage. As such, stigma
ever, there is no definitive list of what does or does is a more encompassing construct than deviance,
not constitute a stigma, only the idea that stigma prejudice, or discrimination, involving perceptions
involves a characteristic that is devalued across of societal-level deviance (a negative status) and
most social contexts. In addition, the characteris- elements of prejudice (negative attitudes and
tics that mark individuals’ identities as undesir- impressions of worth) and discrimination.
able vary across time and place. One aspect of most definitions of stigma is an
The term stigma can be traced back to the acknowledgment of its dynamic nature, or the fact
Greeks, who cut or burned individuals’ bodies to that it is embedded and evolving within social
“brand” them as traitors, criminals, or other social interactions and contexts. Hence what is deemed a
misfits. In the classic Greek sense, stigmas referred stigma by one stigmatizer and target may not be
to actual physical marks inscribed on the bodies of viewed as such by others at a different time or in
devalued members of society as visible indicators another place. For instance, White women, par-
that they should be avoided or treated unfavorably. ticularly those holding a strong ideology of blame,
Sociologist Erving Goffman’s classic 1963 mono- stigmatize obesity, whereas Black women do not.
graph, Stigma: Notes on the Management of In addition, a stigma (e.g., homosexuality) may be
862 Stigma

activated in one setting (e.g., a Southern Baptist The origin (controllability) of a stigma has been
church) but not in another (a San Francisco book- shown to influence outcomes significantly. For
store), and some environments (e.g., buildings example, those who perceive homosexuality or
without elevators) may increase the salience of a obesity as an individual choice are more likely to
stigma (e.g., certain physical disabilities) in ways stigmatize than are those who attribute such con-
that other environments do not. Thus, researchers ditions to biological causes beyond an individual’s
often argue that societal-level stigmas involve control. Furthermore, physical disabilities caused
those characteristics that are devalued across most by an accident are stigmatized more when the tar-
contexts. get was the cause of the accident (e.g., was driving
Researchers have classified how stigmas differ drunk) than when another party was the cause
from each other. In one influential typology, E. E. (e.g., the target was hit by a drunk driver). When
Jones and his colleagues identified six such dimen- there is ambiguity as to the cause, evidence sug-
sions on which stigmas may vary: (1) concealabil- gests that stigmatized individuals can reduce nega-
ity (whether a stigmatizing condition can be tive treatment by using environmental cues that
hidden from others), (2) course (the extent to signal an external cause for their stigma (i.e., an
which the condition changes over time), (3) dis- obese woman will be treated more positively if she
ruptiveness (the extent to which the condition carries a diet soda and discusses her exercise regi-
interferes with social interactions), (4) aesthetic men than if she carries a fattening beverage and
qualities (the extent to which the condition makes discusses her lack of desire to exercise).
the individual ugly to others), (5) origin (the
extent to which the individual is responsible for
Why Stigmatize?
the stigmatizing condition), and (6) peril (the
extent to which the condition poses a danger to While the particular conditions that are stigma-
others). In subsequent empirical investigations, tized will vary dramatically between societies,
concealability, origin (controllability), and peril social stigma of some form is universal. The uni-
have emerged as most important in determining versality of stigma would seem to suggest that
attitudes toward stigmas. The reason that peril stigmatizing others serves some functional value to
has this effect is perhaps obvious, but concealabil- the individuals who stigmatize. Two broad reasons
ity and origin deserve discussion. that stigmatization occurs involve (1) justification
The visibility (concealability) of a stigma has processes and (2) protective functions.
been argued to be one of the most important Justification processes focus on legitimizing the
dimensions of stigma because if the stigma is visi- unequal societal and economic statuses of different
ble, perceivers are more likely to view the individ- groups (system justification theory) or of different
ual primarily in terms of the stigma rather than as individuals (belief in a just world). Under system
a whole person who may have some undesirable justification theory, individuals from groups of
characteristics. Visible stigmas include race, gen- higher status stigmatize groups of lower status in
der, obesity, and many physical disabilities. order to make their advantaged, privileged status
Concealable stigmas include sexual orientation, seem fair. Research in the United States has shown
religion, physical disabilities that are early in their that individuals who strongly endorse the belief
course (e.g., cancer, AIDS), and histories of psychi- that individuals who work hard will succeed in
atric disorders, drug abuse, or criminal back- society are more likely to stigmatize economically
ground. Visible stigmas are often more damaging disadvantaged groups.
because individuals with such stigmas cannot hide Negative attitudes toward different disadvantaged
their stigmatized identity to avoid the prejudice groups tend to be related. For instance, those who
and harassment that their stigma may engender. believe being overweight results from a lack of will-
However, individuals with concealable stigmas power also tend to believe that the poor are respon-
may become consumed by efforts to keep the sible for their own poverty. In a similar way, belief in
stigma hidden and may lose the ability to make a just world, or the view that people get what they
social comparisons with and receive social support deserve, may serve to legitimate stigmatization of
from similar others. individuals in poverty or low-status positions.
Stigma 863

Protective functions of rejecting stigmatized of nonstigmatized group members. Yet for many
people are postulated by both sociobiological the- stigmatized groups this is untrue. For example,
ory and the more culturally driven terror manage- Blacks do not have lower self-esteem than Whites.
ment theory. According to the former theory, However, overweight individuals and gay men and
evolutionary evidence suggests that interdependent lesbians do tend to have lower self-esteem than
group (societal) living was adaptive for human their respective counterparts.
survival and gene transmission. Therefore, humans One possible reason for this discrepancy con-
stigmatize others who are seen as unable (e.g., cerns the relationship between group identification
individuals with disabilities) or unwilling and self-esteem, which is typically positive. Because
(e.g., individuals of outgroup ethnicities or reli- ethnic and religious minorities often identity
gions) to contribute to the ingroup. Terror man- strongly with their groups, their self-esteem would
agement theory posits that humans experience be expected to be relatively high. However, indi-
existential anxiety over their own inevitable mor- viduals with physical or mental disabilities may
tality and their inability to prevent a premature not identity with their groups, because they do not
and unexpected death. To buffer against this anxi- wish to identify with others on the basis of what
ety, individuals subscribe to a cultural worldview society considers a “limiting” condition. Moreover,
that imposes order and meaning on an otherwise some gay men and lesbians may not identify with
random and senseless world. According to this their groups (at least across contexts) because they
framework, individuals with physical disabilities wish to remain “closeted.”
or deformities are stigmatized because they remind
us that we might possibly experience suffering and
Marred Interactions
will inevitably experience death. Terror manage-
ment theory also suggests that individuals who Essential to understanding stigma is clarifying
deviate from societal norms for reasons unrelated what happens in interactions between stigmatized
to physical impairment (e.g., religion, cultural and nonstigmatized people. Although there is rela-
background) are stigmatized because their differ- tively little research on this question, some inter-
ence makes salient the lack of a social consensus esting findings have emerged. For example, in
regarding one’s worldview. That is, the existence interacting with stigmatized targets, nonstigma-
of discrepant worldviews makes the dominant tized individuals often show a mismatch between
worldview seem arbitrary and calls into question their verbal and nonverbal behavior. A classic
one’s standards for judging what is true and valu- study showed that when participants interviewed a
able. Research has shown that reminding individu- physically disabled applicant, they took more time
als of their own death makes them more rejecting deciding what questions to ask, terminated the
of several groups that violate dominant cultural interview sooner, and stayed farther away from
norms, including prostitutes, those who express the applicant than when they interviewed a non-
views against their country, and outgroup mem- disabled applicant. At the same time, however,
bers generally. participants were more likely to distort their per-
sonal opinions in a direction consistent with those
thought to be held by the disabled applicant and
Consequences of Stigma
were more likely to report positive impressions of
In general, stigmatized individuals are aware that the disabled applicant, compared with the nondis-
their identity is seen negatively in society, with this abled applicant.
awareness well established by adolescence. This As another example, White individuals have
consciousness has been shown across groups as been shown to make verbal attempts to appear
disparate as ethnic minorities; women; people who nondiscriminatory and helpful to Black interac-
are mentally, developmentally, or visually impaired; tants, even though their nonverbal behaviors are
overweight individuals; and gay men and lesbians. often discriminatory and unhelpful. One explana-
One might assume that, because groups are aware tion for this mismatch is that the White individuals
of their stigmatized status, the self-esteem of stig- focused the majority of their attention on their
matized group members would be lower than that verbal behaviors, which are easier to monitor and
864 Stigma

control than are nonverbal behaviors. However, verbally acknowledge the stigma (“As you can see,
and perhaps because of this difference in control- I use a wheelchair”). Studies have shown that such
lability, stigmatized targets are more likely to acknowledgment can increase the favorability of
attend to nonverbal than to verbal behaviors of nonstigmatized people’s attitudes and behaviors
their nonstigmatized partners. toward those with stigmas such as physical disabil-
Certainly, nonstigmatized people are responsi- ity, obesity, and stuttering—provided that the
ble for many of the behaviors they emit in the pres- stigma is visible. Acknowledgment may work
ence of stigmatized targets. This has been clearly because it causes potential stigmatizers to assume
shown in studies in which targets are unaware of that someone who acknowledges his or her stigma
their stigma (e.g., when they are unknowingly will attribute any negative behavior on their part
labeled as “gay” by words printed on their base- to discrimination.
ball cap) and hence could not have elicited the A good deal of work on remediation of stigma-
behaviors they receive. However, in some cases tization has been based on the contact hypothesis,
targets’ awareness of their stigmatized status (and which assumes that reducing prejudice between
their resulting behaviors) can influence others’ groups is best achieved by bringing them together
behavior toward them. For example, there is evi- in structured situations. In a recent meta-analysis
dence that being aware that one will be stigmatized of more than 500 studies on the contact hypothe-
leads targets to alter their behavior in ways that sis, it was found that increased contact between
worsen discrimination against them. A series of stigmatized and nonstigmatized people was associ-
experimental studies has shown that targets led to ated with decreased prejudice on the part of non-
believe that perceivers viewed them as mentally ill stigmatized people.
(even though perceivers were actually unaware of Bringing nonstigmatized and stigmatized
their mental health status) received more rejection people into interaction can be difficult, because
than did targets who were not led to hold that nonstigmatized people often avoid interaction
belief. Beliefs about potentially being stigmatized with stigmatized people and vice versa. However,
may also lead targets to exhibit performance defi- the two groups tend to make different attributions
cits, a phenomenon known as stereotype threat. for this state of affairs, typically blaming the other
In some cases, stigmatized individuals behave in group. For instance, research on race relations
ways designed to elicit favorable treatment from shows that both Black and White individuals
nonstigmatized others. For instance, research con- believe that their ingroup wants to have more
ducted in the 1970s and 1980s showed that wom- contact with the outgroup than the outgroup
en’s behavior became more consistent with wants to have with them. Yet in some situations,
traditional gender roles in interactions with sexist contact is inevitable (e.g., random assignment of
men. Women who expected to interact with a male first-year college roommates), and in such cases
job interviewer with sexist attitudes (compared there is evidence that one person’s positive inter-
with expecting to interact with a nonsexist man) action with members of another group can cause
expressed more traditional gender role attitudes others to follow suit. For instance, when Black
and arrived wearing more makeup and accessories. and White students were shown a dining hall sce-
Furthermore, studies have shown that when over- nario in which members of the two groups sat
weight women were led to believe that their inter- separately, their reported fear of race-based rejec-
action partner was aware of their stigma (i.e., tion was reduced when they imagined that their
because he could see them), they behaved in a best friend enjoyed socializing with the outgroup
more friendly fashion than when they did not members. Thus, there is evidence that, in some
think he was aware. cases, intergroup relations can be improved by the
behavior of individuals.
Remediation Michelle Hebl and Laura Barron
Additional research has documented strategies See also Ageism; Anti-Semitism; Deviance;
that stigmatized targets may adopt if they wish to Discrimination; Homophobia; Prejudice; Racism;
decrease discrimination. Chief among these is to Sexism; Weightism
Subjective Group Dynamics 865

Further Readings psychology. In sociology, Emile Durkheim theo-


Crocker, J., Major, B., & Steele, C. (1998). Social stigma. rized that deviance is an important part of the way
In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), society defines its norms and rules. If people did
Handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2, not break rules, and if others did not enforce rules,
pp. 504–553). Boston: McGraw-Hill. it would be difficult to know exactly where the
Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management boundaries and guidelines for behavior were.
of spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Social psychologists such as Muzafer Sherif,
Hall. Solomon Asch, and Leon Festinger showed that
Heatherton, T. F., Kleck, R. E., Hebl, M. R., & Hull, people make judgments, even about physical
J. G. (2000). The social psychology of stigma. New stimuli, using the opinions of others as reference
York: Guilford. points. Reaching agreement about the physical and
Hebl, M. R., & Dovidio, J. F. (2005). Promoting the social world allows people to feel confident about
“social” in the examination of social stigmas. the validity of their judgments. Research on small
Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9, 156–182. groups has consistently shown that people who
Jones, E. E., Farina, A., Hastorf, A. H., Markus, H., dissent within a group are liable to be marginal-
Miller, D. T., & Scott, R. A. (1984). Social stigma: ized, criticized, and ultimately ignored.
The psychology of marked relationships. New York: Much of the emphasis in research until the
Freeman. 1980s was on how individuals influenced one
Shelton, N., Dovidio, J. F., Hebl, M., & Richeson, J. another or how people within a specific small
(2008). Misunderstandings in interracial interactions. group could influence one another. An alternative
In S. Demoulin, J. P. Leyens, & J. F. Dovidio (Eds.),
general perspective was offered by Henri Tajfel’s
Intergroup misunderstandings: Impact of divergent
social identity approach, which made the impor-
social realities (pp. 21–38). New York: Psychology
tant point that people are motivated to ensure that
Press.
their groups are distinctive from other groups and
that they are evaluated positively relative to other
groups. This desire to have a positive social iden-
tity means that people may face a problem when
Subjective Group Dynamics they discover deviant members of their groups
because those members potentially reduce the
Subjective group dynamics arise when people extent to which all members fit in the same social
respond to deviant individuals within groups in a category. Criticism or derogation of an ingroup
context involving comparisons between their member might imply criticism of the whole group,
ingroup and an outgroup. People spend a lot of and this would damage social identity.
time in small groups such as teams, committees,
work groups, and social groups of friends. Social
psychology shows that the opinions held by other The Black Sheep Effect
people within such groups can easily affect the José Marques, Vincent Yzerbyt, and Jacques-
way members make judgments and decisions, how Philippe Leyens examined this question by asking
well they perform tasks, and how they form atti- Belgian students to evaluate either Belgian or
tudes and opinions. The dynamics within these North African students who showed either lik-
groups can have powerful effects on the way able or unlikable behavior. The students were
people share resources, who they vote for or more negative to the unlikable ingroup (Belgian)
against, and what choices they make. But these students than to unlikable outgroup (North
dynamics change when the groups are being com- African) students, but more positive to the likable
pared with other groups. ingroup than to likable outgroup students. The
more extreme derogation of an ingroup deviant
(compared with ingroup normative members)
Background than of an outgroup deviant (relative to outgroup
Research on subjective group dynamics has normative members) is known as the black
its roots in several areas of sociology and social sheep effect.
866 Subjective Group Dynamics

Experiments investigating how people evaluate of norms are violated. Robert Cialdini distin-
group members in intergroup situations (i.e., guished between descriptive and prescriptive
when their own and another group are being com- norms. Descriptively, men are taller than women
pared, are competing, or are in conflict) have and speak with deeper voices, but some men are
repeatedly shown a black sheep effect. These shorter or have higher voices than most women.
experiments typically ask people to evaluate mem- Prescriptively, hotels have washrooms that are
bers of their own group or members of another designated for use by men and women. Only men
group. Most of these members conform to the should use those designated for men. The subjec-
norm of their respective group, whereas one or a tive group dynamics model argues that some
small minority deviates from the norm. The norms are prescriptively relevant for social iden-
groups in these experiments are sometimes real tity, and it is when these prescriptive norms are
groups, such as same-gender groups, psychology transgressed that members react strongly to the
students, or people from a particular country or deviant. When intergroup differences are salient,
region. In other experiments the groups are mini- deviant group members elicit a prescriptive focus
mal groups that the participants learn they belong that is psychologically equivalent to pressures to
to after taking a test. uniformity that arise in face-to-face groups. People
The black sheep effect is important because it are motivated to establish validity for ingroup
shows that people do not simply evaluate ingroup norms, and they do this psychologically by disap-
members more positively than outgroup members. proving of ingroup deviants.
Instead, people pay close attention to differences It follows that subjective group dynamics should
among individuals within their own and other be affected by the relevance or salience of that
groups. Their evaluations of these individuals are norm. One experiment reduced the black sheep
a vehicle for establishing the extent to which the effect by having participants focus only on the
norms of each group are valued more highly. individual people without emphasizing the groups
to which they belonged. Another experiment
increased the effect by making it clear to partici-
Subjective Group Dynamics
pants that the norm was important for the group.
Marques, Dario Páez, and Dominic Abrams pro- When adults and children believe their evaluations
posed a model of subjective group dynamics. A key will be seen by other ingroup members, they
aspect of the model is that if people are motivated respond more extremely to deviant group mem-
to differentiate between groups (intergroup differ- bers, presumably because they want to be seen to
entiation), this differentiation may be accompa- have upheld the norm.
nied by careful differentiation among people within A number of studies with adults and with chil-
those groups. In fact, when people detect a devi- dren show that subjective group dynamics are also
ant, people who care more about the differences affected by how strongly people identify with their
between groups are more likely to differentiate group. People who identify more with their group
among people within groups too. So the black also derogate ingroup deviants more strongly, and
sheep effect is a way in which people sustain the derogating deviants can also reinforce a positive
subjective validity of positive intergroup differen- image of their group as a whole and strengthen
tiation. This principle of subjective group dynam- their ingroup identity.
ics contrasts strongly with traditional theories Subjective group dynamics are thought to
about social categorization, which hold that the occur because people care about the validity of
more that people perceive differences between their positive evaluation of the ingroup com-
groups, the less they perceive differences within pared with outgroups. One consequence is that
those groups. people may be much more concerned about a
Marques and colleagues theorized that there deviant opinion if the ingroup’s consensus is not
should be several factors that would affect how very clear. Experiments have shown that people
much people differentiate deviants from other are more tolerant of a deviant member who
members and how strong the black sheep effect is. strongly disagrees with others when the others
First, the effect is likely only when particular types hold an identical opinion than when some hold
Subtyping 867

the opinion more strongly than others do. Further Readings


Similarly, the black sheep effect is weaker when Abrams, D., Randsley de Moura, G., & Hutchison, P.
the status of an ingroup is clearly better than an (2008). Innovation credit: When can leaders oppose
outgroup’s than when there is uncertainty about their groups? Journal of Personality and Social
the status differences. Psychology, 95, 662–678.
Derogation of deviant members does not nec- Abrams, D., & Rutland, A. (2008). The development of
essarily mean that people want to expel those subjective group dynamics. In S. R. Levy & M. Killen
members. For example, they may try to persuade (Eds.), Intergroup attitudes and relations in childhood
deviants to shift position (conform) or try to through adulthood (pp. 47–65). Oxford, UK: Oxford
resocialize them to be more committed group University Press.
members. In addition, some deviant members Abrams, D., Rutland, A., & Cameron, L. (2003). The
may be tolerated because they contribute to the development of subjective group dynamics: Children’s
groups in other ways. For example, Dominic judgments of normative and deviant in-group and out-
Abrams, Georgina Randsley de Moura, and col- group individuals. Child Development, 74, 1840–
leagues showed that deviant members who are 1856.
about to take on a leadership role are derogated Hutchison, P., Abrams, D., Gutierrez, R., & Viki, T.
less than deviants who are nonleaders, ex-leaders, (2008). Getting rid of the bad ones: The relationship
or current leaders. between group identification, deviant derogation and
The developmental bases of subjective group identity maintenance. Journal of Experimental Social
dynamics have recently been investigated. A series Psychology, 44, 874–881.
Marques, J. M., Abrams, D., Páez, D., & Hogg, M. A.
of studies by Dominic Abrams, Adam Rutland,
(2001). Social categorization, social identification, and
and colleagues asked children to evaluate ingroup
rejection of deviant group members. In M. A. Hogg &
and outgroup members (from teams, schools, or
S. Tindale (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social
national categories). The members either showed
psychology: Vol 3. Group processes (pp. 400–424).
complete loyalty to their group or showed positive
Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
but divided loyalty to both the ingroup and out- Marques, J. M., Yzerbyt, V. Y., & Leyens, J.-P. (1988).
group. Younger children (below the age of about The black sheep effect: Judgmental extremity towards
7 years) generally preferred ingroup members over ingroup members as a function of group identification.
outgroup members, whereas older children paid European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 1–16.
closer attention to whether the members showed
loyalty to the ingroup. Older children were more
likely to evaluate disloyal outgroup members posi-
tively and disloyal ingroup members negatively. Subtyping
Older children’s evaluations of the group members
were associated with how they expected peers to The term subtyping refers to creating narrower,
evaluate those members. Children who were better more specific mental categories, such as business-
at taking different social perspectives and children woman or homemaker, within a broader social
who had belonged to a larger number of different category, such as women. For example, common
social groups were more likely to anticipate that elderly subtypes include kind grandmothers, fre-
ingroup and outgroups would react differently to quent travelers, and curmudgeons. Forming sub-
deviant members of each group. These findings types within a broad category provides more
suggest that subjective group dynamics have a differentiated expectations and evaluations about
basis in both cognitive ability, such as perspective group members but can also protect an existing
taking and categorization, and in social experi- general stereotype from exceptions that discon-
ence, such as being in face-to-face groups. firm it.
The term subtyping has been used in slightly
Dominic Abrams different ways in two research streams. The first
shows that as people become familiar with a
See also Black Sheep Effect; Deviance; Norms; Opinion group, they perceive distinctions and create multi-
Deviance; Ostracism; Social Identity Theory ple subtypes of members who are similar to each
868 Subtyping

other in ways that differentiate them from other The features associated with a subtype may
members, thus capturing the variability within a overlap or differ from those of the broader cate-
group. In this entry, subtyping refers to this form gory. Warmth and competence are two primary
of subcategory formation. The second stream of dimensions that often differentiate subtypes. For
research shows that people protect an existing gen- example, like the broader category of women, the
eral stereotype by relegating counterstereotypic homemaker subtype is seen as high in warmth but
members to an exceptions-to-the-rule subtype seen low in competence, whereas the businesswoman
as unrepresentative of a group. The term exception subtype is seen as high in competence but low in
subtyping refers to this type of subcategory forma- warmth. Some subtypes are more strongly associ-
tion. For example, a White manager might preserve ated with the broader category than others (e.g.,
his stereotype that Black males are unsuccessful by businesswomen and homemakers are both strongly
relegating highly admired Black males, such as associated with the category of women). Emotions
Barack Obama, Colin Powell, or Tiger Woods, to toward a category (such as poor people) may differ
an “exceptional Black professionals” subtype that by subtype (poor-but-honest elicits pity, but poor-
he views as atypical, keeping his general stereotype and-exploiting elicits contempt). Subtypes and
intact. their features can be inaccurate, can be based on
Research on subtyping is important for under- socially prescribed roles, and can be formed by and
standing (a) the nature of social categorization; influence behavior toward individual members
(b) how people differentiate social categories into without our conscious intent or awareness.
subtypes as they become more familiar with varied
group members; (c) how people form exception
Greater Familiarity Leads to
subtypes to accommodate group members who dis-
More Differentiated Subtypes
confirm their stereotypes, making stereotypes hard
to change; and (d) how to develop strategies for One stream of subtyping research asks, What leads
reducing stereotype bias and improving intergroup people to perceive more differentiated subtypes
relations. These topics are discussed in this entry. within a category? First, forming subtypes can be
socially useful because subtypes provide richer
descriptive information about potential group
The Nature of Subtypes
members, enabling people to make distinctions
in Social Categorization
that reflect the variability within broad categories.
Building on basic categorization research, Marilynn Suppose you are meeting a female president of a
Brewer, Shelley Taylor, and colleagues showed corporation. Having a female-executives subtype
that people categorize others in terms of subtypes provides a more differentiated and potentially use-
rather than exclusively in terms of broad social ful basis for anticipating her behavior than would
categories. Gender, age, and ethnicity are major relying on a general stereotype for women.
bases for social categorization, providing visually Two other factors also influence subtype forma-
prominent and socially important cues. Research tion: familiarity and ingroup-versus-outgroup sta-
has identified common subtypes within each of tus. Patricia Linville, Gregory Fischer, and
these broad categories. For example, people per- colleagues showed that those with greater familiar-
ceive female subtypes such as businesswomen, ity and experience with a group develop more
homemakers, and feminists; younger people per- subtypes reflecting greater differentiation and vari-
ceive elderly subtypes such as grandmothers, elder ability among group members. For example, among
statesmen, and inactive seniors; and Whites per- both college students and the elderly, those with
ceive Black subtypes such as activists, athletes, and more contact with the other age group perceived
streetwise Blacks. Some subtypes cut across more subtypes, more variability, and more com-
ingroup–outgroup boundaries, which can reduce plex subtypes involving a mix of positive and nega-
intergroup bias by narrowing the perceived gap tive characteristics (e.g., older frequent travelers
between ingroups and outgroups. For example, for are active but complaining, jocks are athletic but
a White executive, a Black executives subtype is a not intellectual, nerds are smart but unsociable).
racial outgroup but an occupational ingroup. Similarly, White students with Black friends
Subtyping 869

perceived more as well as more complex Black stu- reading a general description of a group and
dent subtypes than did White students without behavioral descriptions of individual members,
Black friends, and people with more years of busi- people received instructions to encourage either
ness experience perceived more complex business subgrouping (sorting individuals into groups of
subtypes (e.g., fast-trackers, visionary leaders, num- members who are similar in some way and differ-
ber-crunchers). People are usually more familiar ent from other members), or exception subtyping
with their ingroups. As this suggests, both young (sorting individuals into those who fit with the
and older people perceived more as well as more group and those who do not). People receiving
complex subtypes for their age ingroup. Charles exception-subtyping instructions perceived less
Judd, Bernadette Park, and colleagues also found variability and made more stereotypic judgments
that students perceived more ingroup subtypes about the group as a whole.
(e.g., in their own fraternities and college majors), Because exception subtyping is an obstacle to
resulting in greater perceived ingroup variability. stereotype change, it is important to know what
conditions promote it. Research shows that excep-
tion subtyping is more likely when counterstereo-
Exception Subtyping:
typic information is concentrated in a few members
A Barrier to Stereotype Change
rather than dispersed over many; when counter­
A second stream of subtyping research demon- stereotypic individuals are perceived as highly
strates that people use subtyping to protect their atypical of the group; when the perceiver’s goal is
stereotypes against disconfirming information. By to judge members as fitting or not fitting the group;
relegating counterstereotypic individuals to excep- and when counterstereotypic members share some
tions-to-the-rule subtypes, we can discount them common characteristic that helps explain their
as unrepresentative of the group and avoid revising departure from the general stereotype. Suppose
our general stereotype. For example, subtyping John meets several accountants who go rock climb-
75-year-old Boston Marathon runners as excep- ing, violating his stereotype that accountants are
tional older athletes preserves one’s general stereo- risk averse. It is easier for John to relegate these
type that the elderly are fragile and inactive. rock-climbing accountants to an exception subtype
A classic experiment by Renee Weber and if they are few in number, atypical of his accoun-
Jennifer Crocker compared three models of how tant stereotype in other respects (e.g., disorga-
people respond to counterstereotypic information: nized), and all come from Colorado, a commonality
Do people change their stereotype dramatically that helps explain why they rock climb.
after a few powerful disconfirming instances (con-
version), change gradually with accumulating evi-
Implications for
dence (bookkeeping), or avoid change by isolating
Counteracting Stereotype Bias
discrepant instances as atypical exceptions (sub-
and Improving Intergroup Relations
typing)? People read behavioral descriptions of
group members that were either consistent or Differentiating multiple subtypes within a group
inconsistent with an overall group stereotype. leads people to perceive greater variability among
Stereotype change was greater when stereotype- group members, which counteracts stereotypic
inconsistent behaviors were dispersed over many thinking. On the other hand, exception subtyping
group members than when the same number of discounts counterstereotypic group members,
inconsistent behaviors was concentrated in a few which preserves existing stereotypes. Fortunately,
members. This favors exception subtyping because our growing understanding of exception subtyping
concentrating counterstereotypic information in a suggests strategies for preventing it and thus pro-
few highly atypical members allows one to relegate moting stereotype change. To be effective, inter-
them to an exceptions subtype and discount them group contact should (a) provide exposure to a
as unrepresentative of the larger group. variety of group members in a variety of contexts,
Bernadette Park, Charles Judd, Myron Rothbart, (b) provide exposure to stereotype-inconsistent
and colleagues showed that information-process- information that is associated with otherwise typi-
ing goals influence how subtypes are formed. After cal members and is widely distributed across many
870 Sucker Effect

members rather than concentrated in a few, and For example, suppose you are working on a
(c) create opportunities for forming subtypes that three-person lab project in your chemistry course.
cut across ingroups and outgroups, thus narrowing Suppose that you see that you are doing much more
the gap between them. Such situations may allow of the work on the project than your two lab part-
the cognitive and social benefits of subtype categori- ners. If everyone in the group receives the same
zation while overcoming the costs of stereotyping. grade based on the quality of the final lab report,
your extra work will not result in your receiving a
Patricia W. Linville and Gregory W. Fischer higher grade than your partners do. Under such
conditions, you may well feel exploited by your
See also Categorization; Cross-Categorization; Ethnicity;
Outgroup Homogeneity Effect; Perceived Group partners, or, in more colloquial terms, that you are
Variability; Prejudice; Racism; Stereotyping “playing the sucker.” You may well reason, “If my
partners are not willing to do their fair share of the
group’s work, then neither will I,” and therefore you
Further Readings will lower your own level of effort to match theirs.
Brewer, M. B., Dull, V., & Lui, L. (1981). Perceptions of
the elderly: Stereotypes as prototypes. Journal of Conceptual and Empirical
Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 656–670. Origins of the Sucker Effect
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. S. T., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002).
A model of (often mixed) stereotype content:
The sucker effect was first demonstrated experi-
Competence and warmth respectively follow from mentally in a study by Norbert Kerr in 1983.
perceived status and competition. Journal of Experimental participants were first asked to do
Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902. their best at a fatiguing physical task—pumping as
Linville, P. W., Fischer, G. W., & Yoon, C. (1996). much air as they could in 30 seconds with a small
Perceived covariation among the features of ingroup rubber bulb. They received feedback indicating
and outgroup members: The outgroup covariation that they had done well, succeeding on every one
effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, of four practice trials. Participants in an individu-
70, 421–436. al-control condition then did nine more trials.
Park, B., Wolsko, C., & Judd, C. M. (2001). They received 25  cents for every trial on which
Measurement of subtyping in stereotype change. they succeeded; the criterion for success was their
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, lowest practice trial score.
325–332. Other participants also performed the task for
Taylor, S. E. (1981). A categorization approach to nine more trials, but they were told that they
stereotyping. In D. L. Hamilton (Ed.), Cognitive would work in a two-person team. The air-pump-
processes in stereotyping and intergroup behavior ing task would have disjunctive demands—that is,
(pp. 88–114). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. the group would succeed on a trial as long as either
Weber, R., & Crocker, J. (1983). Cognitive processes in member of the dyad succeeded. When the group
the revision of stereotypic beliefs. Journal of succeeded on a trial, each member of the dyad
Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 961–977. would receive 25 cents. In the experimental condi-
tion that interests us most, participants were told
that their partner was nearly as capable as they
Sucker Effect were (the partner had succeeded on three of the
four practice trials). During the following nine tri-
The sucker effect is a type of group motivation loss als, the participants in this condition received
or social loafing effect—an instance in which a accurate feedback on their own performance, but
person works less hard as a member of group than they received bogus feedback on their partner’s
as a comparable individual performer. The sucker performance. Specifically, after an initial success
effect occurs when people perceive that they are on Trial 1, their partner failed on every subsequent
doing more than their fair share of the group’s trial. When confronted with a capable partner who
work; one way to reduce the injustice of such a appeared to be slacking off and letting them do the
situation is to reduce their own level of effort. group’s work—yet who was getting the same cash
Sucker Effect 871

reward—the participants reduced their efforts In another condition of that study, participants
(relative to the individual controls). Even when were told that their dyad partner was not very
such reductions in effort meant they would not capable (namely, that their partner had succeeded
earn as much money, participants appeared to pre- on only one of the four initial practice trials).
fer such failure to the inequity of “playing the These participants then received the same perfor-
sucker” and carrying a lazy partner. mance feedback as those in the sucker condition—
Subsequent research has shown that there are that is, their partner succeeded on Trial 1, and then
reliable individual differences in the magnitude of failed on every trial thereafter. However, partici-
this effect (e.g., males show a larger effect than pants did not reduce their effort significantly in
females; those who believe that people ought to be this condition. People appear willing to carry the
rewarded equitably for their work or that hard load for a group member who cannot do so (i.e.,
work is a virtue show a larger effect than those who who is doing the best he or she can), but not for a
do not). group member who can but will not do so (i.e.,
There is often a close parallel between the who is just lazy).
dilemma facing group members when deciding how It is also important to remember that reducing
hard to work and when confronting social dilem- one’s own effort is not the only possible way to
mas. The latter are situations in which an uncoop- deal with an unfair group work load. For example,
erative choice appears more desirable from the one might reduce the quality of one’s work (rather
individual member’s perspective, yet everyone in the than the quantity), one might subjectively exagger-
group would be better off making a different, coop- ate one’s rewards (I work harder, but I enjoy the
erative choice. Many real-world situations pose work more), or one might simply leave the group.
such social dilemmas (e.g., choosing between using
a lot or a little water during a drought).
The Sucker Effect and Other
A simple experimental game, the prisoner’s
Group Motivation Phenomena
dilemma game, is often used to study behavior in
such situations. The sucker effect derives its name The sucker effect may be contrasted with two
from the name of one of the outcomes of the pris- closely related group motivation loss effects. The
oner’s dilemma game—one receives the smallest, first is free riding. Free riding occurs when you
sucker’s payoff when one makes a cooperative believe that you can enjoy the rewards of group
choice at the same time one’s partner makes an success without working hard. For example, in
uncooperative choice (and receives a large payoff). another condition of the 1983 study, participants
Unsurprisingly, much research on social dilemmas were led to believe that their capable partner was
shows that group members will not long accept succeeding on every trial. Because they could
receiving the sucker’s payoff—if their partner will apparently get the cash payoff without working
not cooperate, neither will they. Similarly, the hard, they too reduced their efforts, free riding on
sucker effect shows that group members will not their hard-working partners. The tables were
long accept acting cooperatively (working hard on turned, though, in the sucker condition—the par-
the group’s behalf) so that their uncooperative ticipants were led to suspect that their partners
(and lazy) fellow group members can reap the were free riding on their efforts, and the unfairness
rewards of group success without doing their fair of the situation led them to match the low effort of
share of the group’s work. their partners.
Of course, it can sometimes be hard to define Sometimes, however, one will do more than
just what a fair share is. Does fairness require that one’s share, even if doing so is seen as unfair.
every group member do the same work, regardless Research on the social compensation effect has
of their capabilities? We usually would not expect shown that if the payoff for group success is suf-
someone who was not as capable to perform at the ficiently high, and there is no other way of ensur-
same level as someone who was very capable; ing the group’s success except to work exceptionally
rather, we would make allowances for differences hard, group members will (reluctantly) do so. So,
in group member ability. This was demonstrated to return to our earlier example of the three-person
in the 1983 experiment discussed earlier. lab group, suppose that you are a premedical
872 Support Groups

student and that your grade in your chemistry people who meet to exchange social support
course will be very important in your application about a problem or situation that they all have
to medical school. Further, suppose your two lab experienced. Support groups, which are also
partners are taking the course as an elective and known as self-help groups, exist for nearly every
their only concern is getting a passing grade. Under major medical, psychological, or stress-related
such conditions, the only way you may be able to problem. Each one is likely to be unique in some
ensure the high grade you desire in the course is to respects, but most such groups are practical in
compensate for the low effort of your partners— focus and interpersonal in method, for they usu-
that is, to do not only your share of the lab assign- ally strive to provide members with both emo-
ments, but your partners’ shares, too. tional support and useful information. Support
The sucker effect shows that, unless there are groups are usually organized and regulated by the
compelling reasons to do so, people are reluctant members themselves, yet members often report
to contribute more than what seems to be their fair benefits from participation that rival the gains of
share of the group’s work. This illustrates that members of more formal and traditional treat-
choosing how hard to work in a group is more ment methods.
than a simple calculation of personal costs and
benefits. It also involves considerations of social
Features of Support Groups
fairness and justice.
In times of trouble, such as illness, divorce, loss, or
Norbert L. Kerr crisis, people tend to join with others rather than
cope alone. During their first semester in college,
See also Free Riding; Group Motivation; Prisoner’s
Dilemma; Justice; Social Compensation; Social students may seek out social networks of peers and
Dilemmas; Social Loafing friends as they deal with new and stressful experi-
ences. When people first learn they are suffering
from some serious illness, they often turn to friends
Further Readings and family members for information, advice, and a
sympathetic audience. When people feel stressed and
Abele, S., & Diehl, M. (2008). Finding teammates who
burned out by work-related pressures, they often
are not prone to sucker and free-rider effects: The
cope by joining gripe sessions with coworkers.
Protestant work ethic as a moderator of motivation
Families, friends, and professional caregivers
losses in group performance. Group Processes &
Intergroup Relations, 11(1), 39–54.
such as physicians and therapists are excellent
Kerr, N. L. (1983). Motivation losses in task-performing sources of help and information in stressful, diffi-
groups: A social dilemma analysis. Journal of cult circumstances, but some individuals’ social
Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 819–828. networks may be too worn, too fragile, or too
Kerr, N. L. (1986). Motivational choices in task groups: inexperienced to provide them with the solace they
A paradigm for social dilemma research. In H. Wilke, require. Sometimes, too, individuals may not wish
D. Messick, & C. Rutte (Eds.), Experimental social to reveal their problems and their needs to their
dilemmas (pp. 1–27). Frankfurt am Main, Germany: intimates and would prefer to unburden them-
Lang GmbH. selves with others who are knowledgeable but
more objective and therefore less likely to judge
them harshly.
Support groups are based on this natural ten-
Support Groups dency to seek reassurance and help through mem-
bership in a group. The most fundamental feature
When people experience traumas, crises, or catas- of such groups is reflected in their name: They sup-
trophes, when they encounter medical or interper- port group members as they cope with their spe-
sonal difficulties that they cannot cope with by cific problem or illness, as well as other difficulties
themselves, or if they simply need to find a sym- that can be traced back to their basic problem.
pathetic audience who will listen to their prob- Given the pragmatic orientation of self-help groups,
lems, they often turn to support groups: groups of much of this support takes the form of direct
Support Groups 873

advice about the problem. More experienced disease and AIDS; individuals who care for those
members of the group may provide information, suffering chronic disease, illness, and disability;
directions, advice, and suggestions regarding treat- those who are addicted to alcohol or other sub-
ment or palliatives, demonstrate how to carry out stances; people who are grieving for someone lost
the procedures recommended by medical authori- to death; individuals struggling to cope with a
ties, or give general interpretations about symp- major life change, such as unemployment, divorce,
toms that are often misunderstood or clear up or retirement; and individuals advocating for
uncertainties about remedies. But support groups social and political change.
also provide emotional support to members. They Support groups are, therefore, usually commu-
may encourage members to persevere and praise nities of similar sufferers. Members are all alike in
them for each achievement related to their prob- terms of their experiences and needs, and so they
lem. They allow members to express their fears are peers who are all “in the same boat.” This com-
and misgivings and so provide a receptive audience mon qualification not only increases the credibility
that responds positively rather than judgmentally. of others in group but also reduces each member’s
They respond to members in an emotionally posi- sense of uniqueness and victimization. Lone indi-
tive and motivating way, rather than dispassion- viduals may blame themselves for their problem or
ately or negatively. Support groups include the feel that they have been unfairly singled out to suf-
individual within the boundaries of the group, and fer, but once surrounded by others who are simi-
this basic inclusion process minimizes new mem- larly afflicted, they realize that that their feelings
bers’ worries, tensions, and loneliness while and experiences are relatively common ones.
increasing their sense of self-worth and efficacy.
How do support groups help their members, Relationships
given that they usually have no formally designated
Support groups tend to be personally and inter-
leaders, no professionally trained staff, and no
personally involving. Even though individuals’
facility or budget? Although no two groups adopt
identities are often masked within such groups
identical procedures and structures, the hallmarks
(e.g., Alcoholics Anonymous), members nonethe-
of a support group approach include focusing on a
less establish personal relationships with one
specific problem, encouraging members to form
another. Members are expected to engage in rela-
personal relations with one another, and stressing
tively high levels of self-disclosure, so that each
mutuality in helping. Support groups are also likely
person’s unique experiences, background, and per-
to remain independent of other sources of support
sonal qualities are known by others in the group.
that the members might be receiving, and they usu-
Because this exchange of personal information is
ally adopt an overarching perspective or world-
mutual, members learn to trust and rely on one
view that provides a context for understanding the
another. Members are also expected to be respect-
problem the group is designed to redress. These
ful of one another and their needs and to treat
typical features of support groups are examined in
people fairly. Yet because support groups take a
more detail in the rest of this entry.
very personal interest in their members, members
are singled out for praise and commendation when
Support for a Specific Problem they succeed in some way, but also criticized and
urged to change if they fail.
Support group members may differ from one
another in terms of age, sex, race, and wealth, but
Communalism
they share one important similarity: They are all
coping with the same kind of problem. Unlike gen- Most support groups develop a strong sense of
eral therapeutic groups or social groups, support community and sharing within the group. Each
groups usually deal with one specific type of medi- member of the group is valued as a member of the
cal, psychological, stress-related, or social prob- community and is cared for by the group in a per-
lem. So long as the population of an area is sonal way. Like most groups, support groups
sufficiently large, support groups form for people develop a degree of structure in which some mem-
diagnosed with physical illnesses such as heart bers tend to be more influential than others. In
874 Support Groups

support groups, however, status is based on expe- are sometimes viewed as a radical alternative to
rience with the problem rather than other socially health care systems that are considered to be
valued individual qualities such as educational bureaucratic, impersonal, and ineffective.
background, wealth, or ethnicity. Most support
groups include veteran individuals who have Perspective
knowledge and experience with both the problem
and the means of dealing with the problem, and Support groups’ independence from more tradi-
these individuals serve as role models for others. It tional approaches is also manifested in their adop-
is expected, however, that the exchange of help tion of a novel perspective with regards to their
among members will be mutual. Members of the problem domain. A grief group may adopt fer-
group draw support and encouragement from the vently a particular model of the stages of grieving
group, and they are expected to provide support and base its interventions and recommendations
and encouragement to others within the group. on that perspective. A support group for alcoholics
Each person, then, is both a provider and a recipi- may maintain that recovery is never permanent,
ent of help and support. and so one must abstain from all forms of alcohol
to overcome the addiction. A group for parents of
children with severe immune-system deficiencies
Autonomy may recommend using novel methods of treatment
Most support groups are self-governing, with that are rarely recognized as therapeutic by profes-
members rather than experts or mental health pro- sionals. These perspectives may not be complex,
fessionals determining activities. A physician in nor are they always explicitly recognized by mem-
consultation with a patient suffering from a bers, but in many cases the group’s perspective on
chronic illness, a psychologist seeing a client suf- its affliction may become the centerpiece of the
fering from substance abuse and addiction, or a group’s discussions, with new members urged to
social worker helping a grieving family cope with adopt the group’s worldview as a means of coping
the loss of a child may direct individuals to join a effectively with the problem.
support group that is maintained by a hospital or
community social service agency. But in most Varieties of Support Groups
cases, support groups are autonomous groups that
set their own standards and practices. Some local Because support groups tend to operate alongside
groups may be aligned with national organizations traditional health care organizations and are coor-
that mandate specific procedures for all their chap- dinated by volunteers rather than professionals,
ters, but even this standardization does not elimi- statistics on their number and popularity are
nate the emphasis on the local group’s control of incomplete. Even conservative estimates, however,
its methods. indicate that the number of support groups is
Because support groups are autonomous, they increasing rapidly, with as many as 10 million cur-
often operate outside of, and even in opposition to, rently operating in the United States alone. A rep-
traditional health care delivery systems. People resentative sample would include groups that focus
have long turned to groups for support in times of on mental and physical health (including weight
trouble, but the number of such groups and their loss and rehabilitation), family and life-transition
diversity increased during the late 1960s and support, advocacy, and addiction and recovery.
1970s. The political and social changes of that era
prompted people to question more openly the wis-
Mental and Physical Health Groups
dom of traditional methods of treatment and to
seek alternatives. Support groups provide this Individuals dealing with mental and physical
alternative, for members are qualified as experts health issues, including psychological disorders,
not by training but by common experience, and physical illness, and recovery from injury, generally
because they receive no compensation for the suc- require the services of professionals to diagnose the
cess of their intervention, they can be trusted to source of their problems and carry out treatment.
share information openly. Support groups, then, Support groups, however, can supplement the
Support Groups 875

traditional services rendered by the health care Advocacy


community. In the supportive environment of a
A number of support groups mix commitment
group of peers, members can learn about the pro-
to a specific social issue with support provided to
cedures they must endure from people who have
individuals who are pursuing social change. Gay,
themselves experienced the procedures. Because
lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered individuals
members can remain in the group as long as they
may, for example, meet regularly to share informa-
find it to be of value, such groups are well suited
tion or discuss experiences of unfair treatment and
for problems that involve long-term recovery and
ways to secure the privileges they are due as citi-
adjustment, such as cancer, amputations, and
zens (e.g., the Gay Activists’ Alliance). Mothers
stroke. Examples of such groups include the Cancer
Against Drunk Driving is a political movement,
Aftercare and Rehabilitation Society, the National
but it also provides support for members who have
Peer Network of the Amputee Coalition of America,
lost family members in automobile accidents
and Recovery, Inc. (a self-help mental health
involving alcohol.
group).
One relatively common type of support group
Addictions
focuses on helping members achieve a change in
their health-related behaviors such as food intake. A number of support groups, including Alcoholics
Take Off Pounds Sensibly (TOPS), for example, is Anonymous (AA), Narcotics Anonymous, and
a worldwide organization that facilitates the for- Gamblers Anonymous, help members gain control
mation of local clubs whose members are seeking over intemperate behaviors and maladaptive depen-
ways to control their weight. TOPS meetings dencies. Many of these groups help members work
involve a private weigh-in, presentations designed through various aspects of their addiction by fol-
to provide information about weight control, and lowing the 12-step program developed initially by
supportive interaction that serves to motivate mem- Bill Wilson, the founder of AA. Wilson, a con-
bers to follow recommended dietary restrictions. firmed alcoholic, relapsed many times before he
had a profound, mystical experience that forced
him to recognize his own powerlessness over his
Family and Life Transition Support
alcoholism but also his oneness with the universe.
Many of the difficulties people face in their lives After his experience, he worked closely with mem-
are traumatic and stressful, yet they are not typi- bers of the Oxford Group, a group that was ori-
cally considered to be the kinds of problems that ented toward spiritual growth and that stressed the
require the intervention of a health care profes- importance of self-understanding, recognition of
sional. An individual who is divorcing, for example, one’s character flaws, acceptance of responsibility
may experience a range of negative psycho­logical for one’s wrongdoings, and restoration of harmony
reactions to the experience, and by seeking out in one’s relationships with others. Integrating his
others who are going through this life transition, own experiences with the practices of that group,
the individual may cope more effectively. Similarly, Wilson developed a group-based procedure aimed
bereavement and grief groups help people adjust to at alcoholics.
the death of a family member or friend and adjust AA is a support group in which members give
to life after the loss. Support groups can also help one another advice, encouragement, help, and
a family deal with a particular type of chronic guidance as they struggle with abstinence. AA
problem, as when a family member is diagnosed makes use of peer influence, mediated through
with AIDS; an older family member begins to dis- face-to-face interactions, structured group ses-
play symptoms of Alzheimer’s; or a parent must sions, and testimonials by group members to help
learn to help a child with a learning disability, new members learn and assimilate the group’s
physical limitation, or psychological disorder. approach to controlling their drinking. AA
Examples include In Touch, for parents of chil- recommends a series of stages, or steps, to take
dren with mental handicaps; Parents Without in dealing with addiction, and that general
Partners; and the Alzheimer’s Disease Support and approach has been adopted by a number of other
Information Group. anti-addiction groups. These steps recommend
876 Support Groups

admitting one’s powerlessness over alcohol; sur- the groups may rely on personal experiences and
rendering one’s fate to a greater power; taking an assumptions rather than on research to guide their
inventory of personal strengths, weaknesses, and recommendations, they may provide members
moral failings; and helping others fight their with misinformation.
addiction. The AA philosophy considers alcohol- Overall, however, support groups are more
ism to be an illness that can never be cured, so frequently therapeutic than harmful. Support
the only solution is complete abstinence from groups are quite cost-effective because they do
alcohol consumption. Members are known to not require salaried personnel and members usu-
one another only by their first names in order to ally pay very little for the services they provide.
emphasize that they are all equals in the quest to Groups may charge dues or small fees to cover
remain sober. Even though AA is now an inter- basic operating costs, but these charges are mini-
national organization and is more elaborately mal compared with other treatment procedures.
structured than most support groups, change is In addition, research suggests that while the con-
still achieved through local chapters of alcoholics sequences of participation are difficult to docu-
who meet regularly to review their success in ment, individuals who take part in such groups
maintaining their sobriety. generally report that they gain substantially from
the experience. AA, for example, is generally
Online Support Groups rated by members as the most effective treatment
they have experienced for dealing with a drinking
Support groups, by tradition, meet face to face problem, even in comparison with more medi-
at designated locations, usually following a regular cally sophisticated interventions. Although the
schedule and agenda. Increasingly, however, indi- benefits of participation in a support group do
viduals have begun using the Internet as a means not emerge in all studies, many find that people
of meeting their needs for social and informational who become committed members of a cohesive,
support. Some support groups use the Internet well-organized group of peers experience fewer
primarily to post information about the particular of the physical and psychological effects of stress
problem they address, as well as to refer interested and report overall gains in life-satisfaction and
individuals to local meetings. Others, however, mental health.
create virtual support groups with members com-
municating with each other via e-mail, message Donelson R. Forsyth
boards, forums, and real-time chat protocols. No
See also Common-Identity/Common-Bond Groups;
matter what problem an individual faces, an online
Computer-Mediated Communication; Families; Group
group that can provide self-care information, sup- Cohesiveness; Identification and Commitment;
port, and referral services likely exists somewhere Sensitivity Training Groups; Social Networks; Therapy
on the Internet. Groups

Advantages and Limitations


Further Readings
Many practicing professionals are uncertain of the
Flores, P. J. (1997). Group psychotherapy with addicted
value of support groups because they are unregu- populations: An integration of twelve-step and
lated and unsupervised. Because their membership psychodynamic theory. Binghamton, NY: Haworth
changes over time, their procedures and results Press.
tend to be variable—very advantageous when the Levy, L. H. (2000). Self-help groups. In J. Rappaport &
group includes individuals who are committed, E. Seidman (Eds.), Handbook of community
experienced, and helpful but less effective when psychology (pp. 591–613). Dordrecht, the
the attendance fluctuates and the preconditions for Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
social support are not met. In some cases, too, Lieberman, M. A. (1993). Self-help groups. In
groups may actually add to members’ level of H. I. Kaplan & M. J. Sadock (Eds.), Comprehensive
stress by stirring up conflicts, increasing responsi- group psychotherapy (3rd ed., pp. 292–304).
bilities, and exposing members to criticism. Because Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
Survey Methods 877

systematic trends in overall presidential approval


Survey Methods and identify associations between historical or
social events and approval ratings.
Survey research is a type of field research that Of course, repeated cross-sectional surveys can
involves the use of a questionnaire to collect infor- detect changes only at the aggregate level. In the
mation from a sample of respondents. When the case of presidential approval, for example, cross-
sample of survey respondents has been carefully sectional surveys will detect change only if, on
selected, information collected from the sample average, individuals’ approval ratings changed in
can be used to draw inferences about the larger the same direction. If subsets of the population
population from which the sample was drawn. changed in opposite directions (e.g., Democrats
The power of survey research, therefore, lies in the became more disapproving while Republicans
precision and efficiency with which the character- became more approving to equal degrees), these
istics and attributes of a large population can be changes would cancel out at the aggregate.
estimated via a set of measures collected from a To more precisely capture the dynamics within
small, scientifically selected subset of the popula- a population, survey researchers sometimes turn to
tion. The set of techniques that survey researchers panel survey designs. Panel surveys (also referred
use to gather data is known as survey methods. to as longitudinal surveys) involve the collection of
This entry examines some key elements underly- data from the same participants at several points in
ing the validity and usefulness of surveys: survey time. Panel surveys provide information about
design, sampling, response rate, questionnaire individual-level change, enabling researchers to go
design, survey modes, and evaluation issues. beyond overall levels of change to explore rates of
change among subsets of respondents, among
other things.
Survey Design
Cross-sectional, repeated cross-sectional, and
Surveys may take a variety of forms, depending on panel surveys can all provide important informa-
the aims of the research. Most surveys can be cat- tion about the attributes of a population and asso-
egorized as cross-sectional, repeated cross-sec- ciations among these attributes. And with the use
tional, or panel surveys. And across these basic of sophisticated statistical procedures, researchers
designs, some surveys incorporate experimental can use survey data to test hypotheses about the
manipulations into their design. causal relations among variables. For stronger
The most common design is a cross-sectional causal inferences, however, survey researchers
survey, in which data are collected from a sample have increasingly begun to embed experimental
of respondents at one point in time. Cross-sectional manipulations into surveys. By randomly assigning
surveys offer a “snapshot” of the population, survey respondents to different versions of a ques-
revealing the currently prevailing opinions, prefer- tionnaire, researchers can more directly test causal
ences, or other characteristics. hypotheses.
Instead of a static glimpse of a population, For example, scholars interested in the impact
researchers may be interested in capturing over- of race on social policy judgments have sometimes
time dynamics. In such cases, researchers some- presented survey respondents with a hypothetical
times turn to a repeated cross-sectional survey scenario involving a potential recipient of public
design. In repeated cross-sectional surveys, the assistance, and they have experimentally manipu-
same questionnaire is administered at two or more lated the race of the recipient (and in some cases
points in time to independent samples drawn from other characteristics as well). By comparing respon-
the same population. Such surveys provide infor- dents’ support for public assistance for the target
mation about aggregate-level shifts over time. For individual across experimental conditions, schol-
example, survey researchers periodically ask repre- ars can draw inferences about the impact of race
sentative samples of U.S. adults about their or other factors on policy judgments. And they can
approval of the way the nation’s president is han- examine the magnitude of these effects across
dling his job. By comparing responses to this ques- various subgroups within their sample, exploring
tion across time, survey researchers can track the possibility that race or other characteristics of
878 Survey Methods

a target have a larger impact on support for public results of such surveys beyond the particular indi-
assistance for some respondents than for others. viduals who took part in the survey.
This approach enables researchers to combine the
unique strengths of survey research with the well-
Response Rate
established advantages of laboratory experimenta-
tion, yielding powerful tests of causal processes. Probability sampling procedures are necessary to
ensure representative samples, but they are not suf-
ficient for doing so. Even when probability sam-
Sampling
pling procedures have been carefully implemented,
We have suggested that the strength of survey not all the individuals selected for inclusion in the
research lies in the ability to draw inferences about sample will agree to participate in a survey. The
a large population based on information collected proportion of selected members of a sample who
from a small subset of the population. The validity actually take part in the survey is referred to as the
of these inferences, however, depends critically on response rate.
the process by which the subset of survey respon- If a survey has used a probability sampling tech-
dents is selected. Sampling refers to this process. nique and has a high response rate, we can be
At the most general level, there are two types of confident that the sample of survey participants is
sampling procedures: probability sampling and representative of the larger population from which
nonprobability sampling. Probability sampling it was drawn. But as the response rate drops, there
involves selecting respondents from the population is an increasing chance that the subset of people
at random such that every member of the popula- who participated in the survey were different in
tion has an opportunity to potentially be included meaningful ways from those who refused to do so.
in the sample. In the simplest case, every member For example, those who participated in the survey
of the population would have an equal chance of may have been especially interested in the topic, or
being selected for inclusion in the sample. When a they may have had especially extreme attitudes
sample has been selected from the population that they wished to express. To the extent that
through the use of probability sampling techniques, people who refuse to participate in a survey differ
survey researchers can be confident that their systematically from those who agree to participate,
sample is representative of the larger population sample representativeness is compromised. For
from which the sample was drawn. Further, they this reason, a high response rate is desirable.
can use statistical procedures to estimate just how
precisely their sample represents the larger popula-
Questionnaire Design
tion (sometimes referred to as a margin of error).
Nonprobability sampling procedures are those The results of a survey can vary dramatically with
in which members of a survey sample are not changes in question format, question wording, and
drawn randomly from the population. For exam- question order. When one is conducting or inter-
ple, some surveys are conducted on an opt-in basis preting a survey, therefore, one must pay careful
whereby individuals choose to take part in a sur- attention to these design elements.
vey by calling a toll-free number to voice their Survey questions fall into two broad categories:
opinion on an issue or by following a link on a open-ended and closed-ended questions. An open-
Web page to complete a questionnaire on a par- ended question allows respondents to answer in
ticular topic. Other surveys are conducted with their own words, and as a result, questions of this
samples of convenience. Shoppers at a particular sort can capture the richness and complexity of
store might be approached and asked to complete people’s views. Because the responses are idiosyn-
a brief questionnaire, for example, or people may cratic, however, it can be difficult to compare open-
be stopped on the street and asked for their opin- ended responses across individuals or groups.
ion on a particular topic. When samples have been Quantifying responses for analysis requires research-
selected in these ways, they cannot be assumed to ers to develop and implement a content coding
be representative of any particular population. As scheme, a process that can be time-consuming and
a result, it is extremely unwise to generalize the labor intensive. Open-ended questions also take
Survey Methods 879

more time and effort for respondents to answer, Finally, the particular words that are used in a
potentially contributing to respondent fatigue. survey question can sometimes affect responses.
Much more common in survey research are For example, substituting the phrase assistance for
closed-ended questions, which require participants the poor for the more politically charged term wel-
to select their response from a set of predetermined fare dramatically increases public support for
answers. For example, survey respondents are rou- assistance programs. And individuals are much
tinely asked to identify the most important issue more likely to say that a controversial behavior
facing the country and are provided with a list of should not be allowed than to say that this same
response options from which to choose (e.g., the behavior should be forbidden. Thus, seemingly
economy, health care, education, crime, the envi- equivalent question wordings can sometime elicit
ronment). quite different responses. It is not always possible
Although they offer many advantages, closed- to anticipate the impact of particular wording
ended questions have their drawbacks as well. choices, but careful attention should be paid to the
Most obviously, responses will be powerfully precise language of survey questions and response
influenced by the response options that are pre- options.
sented, which can yield a distorted portrait of The order in which participants encounter the
public opinion. For example, closed-ended ques- questions in a survey can also influence their
tions about the most important problem facing the answers. Questions that come early in a survey
country can obscure the importance of issues that may bias the way respondents answer later ques-
are not explicitly offered as response options. In tions. For example, if respondents are asked to
addition, participants may be influenced by the report their gender before they are asked to report
order in which responses are provided (with the their attitudes toward feminism, they may answer
first and the last options being more likely than the feminism questions differently than they would
middle options to be selected). if asked to report gender later in the survey. When
Regardless of whether they are posed in an interpreting survey data, therefore, it is important
open- or a closed-ended format, all survey ques- to consider the answers to each question in the
tions must be worded clearly so that the precise context of the entire survey.
meaning of each question is understood in the
same way by all respondents. Vague or ambigu-
Survey Modes
ous question wording can result in poor data
quality, which makes it difficult to tell whether Survey mode refers to the means by which data are
different responses reflect substantive differences collected from respondents. Some surveys are con-
across participants or are instead due to differ- ducted via face-to-face interviews, during which a
ences in participants’ interpretation of the ques- trained interviewer records an individual’s answers
tion. To maximize clarity, questions should use on a paper questionnaire or a laptop computer.
simple language and avoid technical terms when- Other surveys are conducted over the telephone.
ever possible. This typically involves questionnaires that are
Researchers and consumers of survey research administered by trained interviewers with the help
should also be wary of double-barreled questions— of computer-assisted telephone interviewing soft-
questions that ask two or more questions at the ware, which guides the interviewer through the
same time. Consider the question, Do you think correct series of questions and allows him or her to
that parents and teachers should teach middle enter participants’ responses into the computer. Still
school students about birth control options? other surveys are conducted via self-administered
Although it is framed as a single yes-or-no ques- questionnaires, which respondents complete on
tion, it in fact comprises two questions (should their own using a paper-and-pencil format, on lap-
parents teach middle school students about birth tops, or over the Internet.
control options, and should teachers do so). A good survey will use a mode that is appropri-
Because respondents are required to answer two ate to respondents’ literacy and computer skills.
questions with a single response, double-barreled For example, self-administered surveys are best
questions are inherently ambiguous. suited to populations that are comfortable reading
880 Symbolic Interactionism

and following written instructions. The optimal Krosnick, J. A., & Fabrigar, L. R. (in press). The
mode of data collection also depends on the con- handbook of questionnaire design. New York: Oxford
tent of the survey. When a survey asks about sensi- University Press.
tive topics, self-administered questionnaires are Lavrakas, P. J. (1993). Telephone survey methods:
often preferable because they provide respondents Sampling, selection, and supervision. Newbury Park,
with a greater sense of privacy, which may make CA: Sage.
them more comfortable about providing candid Visser, P. S., Krosnick, J. A., & Lavrakas, P. J. (2000).
responses. Survey research. In C. M. Judd & H. Reis (Eds.),
Research methods in social psychology. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Evaluating Survey Data Weisberg, H., Krosnick, J. A., & Bowen, B. (1996).
Introduction to survey research, polling, and data
Surveys are very common, and their quality varies
analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
markedly. When one is evaluating survey data, it is
wise to consider the who, what, and how of the
research methodology. Answers to who questions
will be related to sampling: Who participated in Symbolic Interactionism
the study? Who are the researchers trying to draw
inferences about? The validity of these inferences Symbolic interactionism is a sociological perspec-
rests on the degree to which the sample is represen- tive that views human conduct as a meaningful
tative of the larger population from which it was product of situated social interaction among self-
drawn, so it is important to consider the potential conscious individuals. The perspective is rooted in
threats to representativeness. the philosophy of pragmatism, especially as it was
Answers to what questions will center on the developed by George Herbert Mead, who taught
content of the survey, including the types of ques- at the University of Chicago in the early 20th cen-
tions asked, the precise ways in which the ques- tury, and whose student, Herbert Blumer, named
tions were worded, and the order in which the perspective symbolic interactionism. This
questions were posed to respondents. As we have research seeks to portray social behavior from the
seen, these design features can powerfully shape perspective of participants by closely studying the
the results of a survey. concrete situations in which they form what is
Answers to how questions will concern various labeled “conduct.” Symbolic interactionists exam-
procedural details. Were the survey design and ine how people define situations and act on the
mode of data collection appropriate, given the basis of those definitions, as well as how the self is
aims of the research, the population being studied, shaped by group membership and by the real and
and the topic of the survey? What conclusions are imagined boundaries between groups. Symbolic
being draw about causal relationships, and are interactionists have investigated such topics as
they justified by the survey’s design? Careful atten- race and ethnic group relations, the formation of
tion to these basic methodological elements will subcultures, life in communities and urban neigh-
help ensure that appropriate inferences are drawn borhoods, and collective behavior. To understand
from the survey data that we encounter every day. this perspective, we must examine the nature of
meaning, the situated formation of conduct, the
Katie M. Bowen and Penny S. Visser self, and the method of participant observation.
See also Experimentation; Research Methods and Issues
The Nature of Meaning
Symbolic interactionists believe that human beings
Further Readings are symbolic creatures for whom linguistic sym-
Dillman, D. A. (2007). Mail and Internet surveys: The bols are the principal basis for constructing, expe-
tailored design. New York: Wiley. riencing, and acting meaningfully in their worlds. A
Kalton, G. (1983). Introduction to survey sampling. symbol is anything—a word, an image, a gesture—
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. that stands for something else. National flags
Symbolic Interactionism 881

symbolize patriotic attitudes and feelings; certain of behavior are statistically associated. Such vari-
hand gestures or facial expressions signify the ables—whether they are demographic characteris-
user’s contempt or disdain for another; derogatory tics such as age, education, place of residence,
words for outgroup members serve to demarcate group membership, or personal attitudes and
and attach emotional significance to boundaries beliefs as expressed in interviews or question-
between “them” and “us.” Symbols shared by the naires—provide only an imperfect glimpse of the
members of a society, a community, or a group genesis of conduct. To explain why some members
have a critical characteristic: They arouse shared of an outgroup engage in a riot and others do not,
responses in members. The person who invokes a or why some ingroup members seem to expect and
symbol responds to it with thoughts, feelings, and to provoke such behavior, we must examine the
actions that resemble those of others who see or situation as it unfolds.
hear it. Symbols thus prepare people to take action: We gain some understanding of the events by
An announcement in a public place that a fire has learning whether riot participants are more likely
broken out arouses in all who are present the moti- to be young or old or economically advantaged or
vation to escape; derogatory words lay a shared disadvantaged, but the conduct of individuals
basis for thoughts and feelings and ultimately arises in a situation and not simply and reflexively
actions toward others. out of circumstances and characteristics they share
Meaning is a social and not merely an individ- with others. What events occurred to spark a riot?
ual phenomenon. It is the individual, of course, How were those events defined? Who did the
who learns and uses the meanings provided by the defining? How did battles with the police or loot-
language of his or her community. Yet to use a ing of stores become seen as legitimate responses
word is to bring into public view a part of the indi- to previous discrimination, and who saw them
vidual’s state of mind at a particular time. To that way?
speak of fire, for example, is to indicate to others Likewise, to grasp how the attitudes and actions
that one believes there is danger and is prepared to of one group toward another become more posi-
act on it, that the others should define the situation tive over time, we must examine the concrete situ-
and act in a similar way, and that collectively they ations in which the members of one social group
are seeking escape or rescue from a dangerous situ- interact with those of another. What are the situa-
ation. To invoke a racial or ethnic stereotype in a tions that bring ingroup and outgroup members
conversation is to invite the other to view the together, and what happens in their interaction
member of a racial or ethnic outgroup in the same that transforms attitudes and behavior?
way as the speaker, and implicitly (though not
necessarily immediately) to act toward the out-
The Self
group member on the basis of that attitude.
Meanings thus shape both the individual’s conduct Symbolic interactionism emphasizes the self-con-
and that of others. Each culture embraces a variety scious nature of human conduct. The symbolic
of meanings and thus influences conduct in a vari- nature of the human species is the chief basis for
ety of directions—altruism as well as selfishness, the human experience of self. Humans live in a
cooperation as well as conflict, tolerance of outsid- world of named objects and are capable of acting
ers as well as hatred for them. toward themselves as objects, much as they act
toward any object. Individuals have names, just as
other objects—houses, chairs, cars—have names.
Situated Conduct
To name something—whether it is a new Lexus or
Human conduct is situated. People form their con- a newborn infant that is called by such relational
duct as they interact with others, use and hear names as son or daughter, as well as by an indi-
symbols, define the situation in which they find vidual name, Jacob—is to assign it a place in the
themselves, and construct lines of conduct for social world and to invoke shared ways of acting
themselves and influence the conduct of others. toward it. A new luxury car invokes shared ideas
Conduct cannot be explained merely by pointing about social standing or wealth; a new infant
to a set of “variables” with which particular forms invokes shared ideas about how girls and boys
882 Symbolic Interactionism

should be treated or about an ancestral Jacob, or a Lutheran, as a friend or an enemy, as brilliant


whose qualities it is hoped will be shared by his or intellectually slow—when the individual’s
namesake. Cars do not hear or use their names, announcements of identity correspond with the
but people do. Jacob learns his name, and along placements made by others.
with it, as socialization proceeds, he learns his Every act announces an identity of one kind or
“meaning” in the eyes of others. He learns the another. Approaching a sales clerk in a store with
attitudes they hold, the expectations they have of a confident sense that one expects his or her atten-
him, the ways they are prepared to act toward tion is an announcement of one’s identity as a
him. In thus becoming an object he can himself customer. The executive who disdainfully ignores
name, think about, develop feelings about, and act a janitor or other service worker announces an
toward, he acquires a self. identity of “superior” and assigns the other the
The self is an important object in every human place of “subordinate.” When the clerk attends to
encounter or action. This is not to say that humans the customer, he or she places the other in the cus-
are motivated by any single goal such as a quest tomer identity. When the service worker avoids
for self-esteem. Self-esteem, which we may define eye contact and attends only to the work at hand
as a person’s emotional responses to self, is an rather than to the executive, he or she places the
important facet of human existence, but it is a part other in the claimed position.
of a complex of thoughts, feelings, and actions The individual’s construction of an identity is
toward the self rather than the most important therefore inherently a social process. Over time,
motivation for conduct. Rather, to make the self people announce and are placed in a variety of
central to human conduct and social interaction is identities: familial, occupational, educational, age
to say that in forming their conduct, people take related, political, ethnic, religious, and the like.
themselves into account as a part of the situation Some of these identities acquire a more central
in which they find themselves. They imagine how place in the self than others—the individual may
they appear to others and how their impending be chiefly identified by others and identify himself
actions will affect how others see them. About to or herself as a professor, for example, or a Black,
utter an ethnic slur, an individual may reflect on or a woman. People also construct personal identi-
whether it will lead others to view him or her less ties for themselves that reflect their particular life
favorably, and perhaps as a defensive strategy, the histories or accomplishments and not only their
individual may disclaim any prejudiced intent even group memberships and social roles. Some peo-
while making a prejudiced remark. Plans of action ple—for example, Apple Computer CEO Steve
are constrained by the individual’s view of his or Jobs—develop such distinctive personal identities
her capabilities and limitations: Why work hard in that their names alone establish their place in the
school if it is likely I won’t be rewarded for the social world. Their personal identities nonetheless
effort or if I am unlikely to succeed? And when depend as much on their placement by others as on
individuals find themselves defined in ways they their own actions.
do not like as a result of their actions, they seek to Identity is important because it provides a key
repair damage to the conceptions others have of basis for motivation and action. We see the world
them by excusing or justifying their conduct. from the vantage points of our various identities.
As Catholics or Jews, Blacks, Whites, or Hispanics,
or as Steve Jobs, we define our circumstances and
Identity
opportunities for action on the basis of our identi-
The concept of identity is central to the symbolic ties. Our actions within the groups to which we
interactionist analysis of the self and is particularly belong and our relationship to the members of
important for the study of intergroup relations. other groups are shaped by how we see ourselves
Identity refers to the individual’s location in social as members and nonmembers.
life, and it is established by the thoughts, feelings, Announcements and placements do not always
and actions of others as well as those of the indi- agree. Fellow members of one’s ethnic group may
vidual. A person has an identity—as a parent or a be more interested in placing one among them and
child, as a Black or a White, as a Roman Catholic eliciting identification with the group than one is
Symbolic Racism 883

in announcing a group affiliation and identifying


with it. An individual’s identification with a group Symbolic Racism
may be met with indifference or rejection by group
members. In such circumstances we cannot really Racial conflicts have plagued the United States
say that the individual “has” the group identity. from its very beginnings, driven in particular by
Nonetheless, identity is a motivating element in his racial prejudice against Blacks. In the period since
or her conduct, whether it promotes an effort to the civil rights era of the 1960s, old forms of racial
resist the group’s pressures or to overcome its prejudice have nearly vanished, to be replaced by
resistance. newer forms. The most politically powerful is sym-
bolic racism. It is defined as a blend of anti-Black
affect with traditional values, accompanied by the
Participant Observation acceptance of formal racial equality. It applies a
To study any social activity using the symbolic more general symbolic politics theory to the racial
interactionist perspective requires the researcher to context, emphasizing the early acquisition of
grasp the meanings that are central to it, and doing major sociopolitical attitudes and the symbolic
so requires a close, hands-on relationship with the meaning of political rhetoric, rather than interest-
social world under investigation. Participant obser- based politics. This entry briefly describes the the-
vation is therefore a central interactionist method. ory of symbolic racism, the empirical evidence that
Participation for a time within while also observing sustains it, and competing points of view.
a social world, such as that of the neighborhood
gang or of the ethnically homogeneous retirement
Background
community, is a means of learning what issues are
important to members, how they define themselves At the end of World War II, Blacks were still sec-
and others, and what motivates their conduct. In ond-class citizens, denied the pursuit of the
addition to participant observation, symbolic inter- American dream in all spheres of life—socially,
actionists use interviews, direct observations, his- economically, and politically. Since then, the
torical records, and other written materials to Southern system of institutionalized Jim Crow seg-
round out their picture of a given social world. regation has been eliminated, as has most formal
racial discrimination elsewhere. Old-fashioned
John P. Hewitt racism, embodying beliefs in the biological inferi-
ority of Blacks and support for formal discrimina-
See also Collective Movements and Protest; Looking-
Glass Self; Multiple Identities; Reference Groups;
tion and segregation, has greatly diminished and
Roles; Self-Esteem; Social Identity Theory indeed has nearly disappeared from public dis-
course. However, Blacks continue to experience
substantial disadvantages in most domains of life.
Further Readings Proponents of Blacks’ interests have therefore con-
tinued to push for greater racial equality.
Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective
These efforts have often met with substantial
and methods. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
White reaction, including the Republican Southern
Hewitt, J. P. (2007). Self and society: A symbolic
strategy of the 1960s, opposition to court-ordered
interactionist social psychology (10th ed.). Boston:
Allyn & Bacon.
busing in the 1970s and more recently to affirma-
Mead, G. H. (1964). On social psychology (A. L. Strauss,
tive action, support for the use of Confederate
Ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. symbols in state flags, opposition to Black political
Reynolds, L. T., & Hermann-Kinney, N. J. (Eds.). candidates, and, more indirectly, appeals for
(2003). Handbook of symbolic interactionism. Walnut harsher crime and welfare policies.
Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. Symbolic racism (also known as racial resent-
Williams, N., & Correa, M. (2003). Race and ethnic ment) has been proposed as one explanation for
relations. In L. T. Reynolds & N. J. Hermann-Kinney Whites’ political reactions, taking over the role
(Eds.), Handbook of symbolic interactionism once played by old-fashioned, or Jim Crow, rac-
(pp. 743–760). Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. ism. Symbolic racism centers around the belief that
884 Symbolic Racism

Blacks violate traditional U.S. values, especially Much research shows that symbolic racism
individualism. Perceptions that Blacks violate other powerfully influences attitudes of White people in
values (including, for example, morality, self-re- the United States toward racially relevant policies
straint, and family traditionalism) have been less such as busing for school integration or affirmative
studied but may be important for understanding action, as well as less explicitly race-targeted poli-
the range of values invoked in symbolic racism. cies that disproportionately affect Blacks, such as
welfare and crime policies. It has also been shown
The Current Theory to promote opposition to Black candidates such as
Jesse Jackson or Barack Obama, as well as support
Symbolic racism is usually described as a coherent for ethnocentric White candidates such as Pat
belief system expressed in terms of four specific Buchanan or former Ku Klux Klan leader David
themes: that Blacks no longer face much prejudice Duke. The use of subtle racial appeals in political
or discrimination, that Blacks’ failure to progress campaigns, such as the attention to Black murderer
results from their unwillingness to work hard and rapist Willie Horton during the 1988 presiden-
enough, that Blacks make excessive demands, and tial campaign and the militant Black minister
that Blacks have gotten more than they deserve. It Jeremiah Wright in 2008, also enhances its political
is typically measured in telephone or face-to-face force. Symbolic racism also has played a pivotal
surveys or with computer-based or paper-and- role in the realignment to the Republican party of
pencil questionnaires. the once solidly Democratic vote of White
The theory of symbolic racism poses five central Southerners—it is more common, and more strongly
propositions: influences voting choices, among White Southerners
than among other people in the United States.
1. Symbolic racism has largely replaced old- There are two distinctively different ways to
fashioned racism; only a tiny minority of Whites think about the origins of any belief system. One is
still accept the latter whereas they are about its grounding in more fundamental psychological
evenly divided about the beliefs contained in constructs, such as values, personality predisposi-
symbolic racism. tions, or social identities. In this sense the origins
2. Symbolic racism now influences Whites’ of symbolic racism are described as lying in a blend
political attitudes much more strongly than does of anti-Black affect and traditional values. But its
old-fashioned racism. origins can also be described in terms of a develop-
3. The origins of symbolic racism lie in a blend of mental or life-history process. Most childhood
early-acquired negative feelings about Blacks attitudes toward social groups are primitive and
and traditional values. cognitively rudimentary. But they may develop
more fully in adolescence with increasing exposure
4. Whites’ opposition to racially targeted policies to prepackaged belief systems such as symbolic
and Black candidates is more influenced by racism. Research shows that symbolic racism usu-
symbolic racism than by realistic threats posed ally develops in adolescence, earlier than many
by Blacks to Whites. other sociopolitical beliefs.
5. Symbolic racism has political effects
independent of those of ostensibly racially
neutral predispositions such as ideological Distinctions, Challenges,
conservatism. and Future Directions
Other forms of contemporary racism are defined
The term racism therefore reflects the centrality of somewhat differently. Modern racism and aversive
antipathy toward Blacks. The term symbolic high- racism are conceptualized as reflecting an ambiva-
lights both that symbolic racism is rooted in lence between egalitarian cognition and anti-Black
abstract moral values rather than in concrete self- affect. Racial ambivalence reflects an ambivalence
interest or personal experiences and that it targets between egalitarianism and individualism.
Blacks as an abstract collectivity rather than as Much research has been devoted to distinguish-
specific individuals. ing the political influence of symbolic racism from
SYMLOG 885

that of personal interests. Symbolic racism is par- most difficult social problem facing the United
tially rooted in abstract beliefs about Blacks’ viola- States. If the symbolic racism claim is right, much
tions of traditional values, beliefs acquired early in remedial work of a variety of kinds needs to be
life from parents, peers, and the media. Interest- done on the White side of the racial divide. If it is
based preferences, in contrast, presumably arise wrong, and racial conservatives’ views about the
from adults’ calculations of their own interests, optimal relative balance of governments and mar-
such as Whites’ opposition to affirmative action kets in modern societies are largely free of underly-
because they believe it will prevent their getting ing racial prejudice, much obligation would be
desirable jobs. Considerable research shows that placed on Blacks to adapt to a society in which
symbolic racism influences racially relevant politi- they no longer are being treated much less fairly
cal attitudes regardless of a person’s own interests, than their fellow citizens.
just as self-interest usually plays a secondary role The theory of symbolic racism was developed in
in public opinion more generally. the particular U.S. context of continuing White
Group-based interests are another matter. resistance to full racial equality in the post–civil
Perhaps White people in the United States often rights era. It has since been applied to other cases
oppose race-based policies such as affirmative of group prejudice, including attitudes toward
action to protect the threatened interests of Whites women, the obese, or (in Europe) immigrants.
as a whole, regardless of their own narrow self-
interest. However, research has shown that sym- David O. Sears
bolic racism strongly predicts Whites’ racial policy See also Aversive Racism; Modern Forms of Prejudice;
preferences above and beyond the effects of vari- Modern Racism; Modern Sexism; Prejudice; Racial
ables relevant to group interest, such as White Ambivalence Theory
group identification, perceived common fate with
other Whites, perceived collective threat to Whites,
or competition from Blacks about valued resources, Further Readings
all of which themselves tend to have weak effects.
Hutchings, V. L., & Valentino, N. A. (2004). The
The political effects of symbolic racism seem to be
centrality of race in American politics. Annual Review
quite separate from Whites’ desires to protect their
of Political Science, 7, 383–408.
self- or group-based interests. Sears, D. O. (1993). Symbolic politics: A socio-
Symbolic racism can also be distinguished from psychological theory. In S. Iyengar & W. J. McGuire
conservative ideology. The two are related, but (Eds.), Explorations in political psychology
they independently contribute opposition to (pp. 113–149). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
racially targeted policies and Black candidates. Put Sears, D. O., & Henry, P. J. (2005). Over thirty years
another way, symbolic racism strongly promotes later: A contemporary look at symbolic racism. In M.
such opposition among both ideological liberals Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
and conservatives. Of course some ideological con- psychology (Vol. 37, pp. 95–150). San Diego, CA:
servatives may oppose race-based policies without Elsevier.
subscribing to symbolic racism, but that seems to Sears, D. O., Sidanius, J., & Bobo, L. (Eds.). (2000).
be the exception rather than the rule. This remains Racialized politics: The debate about racism in
an important controversy, however, and political America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
conservatives do not regard it as settled.
The symbolic racism claim is an important one.
It asserts that the politics of race are not merely
“politics as usual” but instead are significantly SYMLOG
influenced by the underlying racial prejudice held
by many racial conservatives and that ostensibly The acronym SYMLOG stands for a SYstem for
race-neutral conservative rhetoric often disguises the Multiple Level Observation of Groups. The
underlying racial animosity. These controversies SYMLOG system was developed by Robert F.
are of more than mere academic relevance. They Bales and his colleagues and was first published in
go to the substantive core of longest-running and book form in 1979. At its most basic level,
886 SYMLOG

SYMLOG is a method for quantitatively and and often = 2. The 26 items are each briefly defined
graphically describing the behavior or personality with specific behaviors or adjectives. Ratings can
of groups or group members across a three- then be made by untrained coders or by members
dimensional conceptual space defined by the fac- of an interacting group who rate each other’s
tors of dominance, friendliness, and acceptance of behavior retrospectively on each of the 26 descrip-
authority. The resulting descriptions can be used tive items.
for a variety of purposes, including to provide The scores are then tallied and arranged to pro-
feedback on group functioning, to assess the effects duce a location for each coder’s perception of each
of an intervention, or to describe organizational group member in the three-dimensional space,
values. This entry describes both the scoring and thereby producing a graphical representation of
presentation of results in the SYMLOG system. interpersonal relations and group dynamics. The
The SYMLOG system grew out of earlier work results of those ratings can then be graphically
by Bales that used his interaction process analysis displayed by means of one of a number of repre-
system, which was a systematic framework for sentations described later in this entry.
making observations important to Bales’s theoreti- A summary location for each of the three dimen-
cal ideas concerning group problem solving. In that sions can also be calculated by adding together all
earlier work, Bales proposed that a group moves the items that contain one end of the dimension
through a particular sequence of phases as it moves and subtracting from it the sum of all the items
from the beginning to the completion of a task: that contain the opposite end of the dimension. For
(a) orientation (gathering information and clarify- example, a location on the friendliness-versus-un-
ing the task), (b) evaluation (assessing that infor- friendliness dimension can be determined by sum-
mation), and (c) control (deciding what to do). ming together the nine items that contain an
In SYMLOG, those phases reemerge as dimen- F descriptor (e.g., F, PF, DNF) and subtracting
sions that capture important distinctions in inter- from that sum the sum of the nine items that con-
personal and group dynamics: dominance versus tain a B descriptor (e.g., B, UB, DNB). SYMLOG
submissiveness, friendliness versus unfriendliness, can also be used for act-by-act coding of verbal
and acceptance versus nonacceptance of authority. content (as with the interaction process analysis),
In the SYMLOG system, these three dimensions although this application is rare.
form a cube that constitutes the SYMLOG space. The specific content of the SYMLOG rating
The dimensions of the cube have directional labels forms varies, such that different behaviors or
that correspond to each pole of these bipolar adjectives may be used to describe each of the 26
dimensions. Upward and downward correspond cells. For instance, the SYMLOG General Behavior
to dominance and submissiveness, respectively. Rating Form assesses each of the 26 cells using
Positive and negative correspond to friendliness specific corresponding behaviors. For example,
and unfriendliness, respectively. Forward and U is assessed by means of the behaviors active,
backward correspond to acceptance and nonac- dominant, and talks a lot, whereas PF is assessed
ceptance of authority, respectively. Each dimen- by means of the behavior works cooperatively
sion also has a neutral middle position, resulting in with others. On the other hand, the Value Rating
a 3  ×  3  ×  3 cube, with each cell in the cube Form assesses each of the 26 cells by means of
described by singly (e.g., U, P, F), doubly (e.g., NB, general values that might underlie each descrip-
UP, DP), or triply (e.g., DNB, UPB, UNF) desig- tion. For example, on this form U is assessed by
nated coordinates. The interior cell of the cube is means of the underlying value of material success
left undesignated. and power, whereas PF is assessed using the under-
The SYMLOG rating form consists of 26 items lying value of altruism, idealism, cooperation.
that correspond to each of the 26 labeled cells of the Other possible rating forms include the Specific
cube. Each entity being assessed (e.g., a person or Behavior Rating Form, in which the 26 cells are
an organization) is rated on a 3-point scale on each described with more specific behaviors than on the
of the 26 items. The 3-point scale represents a fre- General Rating Form (e.g., active, entertaining,
quency rating of the behavior, and the scale values depressed), and the Individual and Organizational
are typically labeled as rarely = 0, sometimes = 1, Values Rating Form, in which the 26 cells are
SYMLOG 887

described by means of underlying values that are member on the grid by first locating the group
central (e.g., efficiency, protecting less able mem- member’s coordinates on the forward–backward
bers, conservative). The level at which the dimen- and positive–negative grid and then adjusting the
sions are assessed can also vary and can range size of the image used to mark those coordinates
from ratings of the self to ratings of other group according to the member’s location rating on the
members to ratings of the group as a whole and to upward–downward dimension, with a larger circle
ratings of the organization as a whole. indicating more dominance.
Note that by using difference scores to represent
values on each dimension, researchers lose infor-
Presenting the Results
mation concerning the magnitude of ratings on
The results of the SYMLOG rating form are gener- each pole of the dimension. Bar graphs retain this
ally presented by means of a graphical representa- more specific information and can be used if neces-
tion—most commonly in the form of a horizontal sary to aid in the interpretation of the field dia-
bar graph across the 26 items or in terms of a field gram. In addition, it is common to expand the
diagram. The horizontal bar graph is perhaps the pattern of the field diagram so that it fills up the
most intuitive form of representation. Each of the available diagram space. It is therefore important
26 items to be assessed is listed down one side of to be aware of the expansion multiplier used when
the graph. Frequency ratings or averaged frequency one is trying to compare the overall patterns of
ratings for each of those items are then presented two or more diagrams.
as histograms to the side. These bar graphs can be Bales also recommends that the field diagram be
used quite flexibly. For example, the ratings of used to help define the main forces of tension and
each of two group members can be compared by balance within a group and between group mem-
comparing the bar graphs displaying the group’s bers. In examining a field diagram, one can see
averaged assessments of each member’s behavior. various clusters of group members and separations
Similarly, one could compare the dominant between group members. A number of strategies
organizational values of two organizations by com- exist for determining the polarizing and unifying
paring bar graphs displaying average ratings of aspects of group dynamics that create such clusters,
these values for each organization. Researchers can including both statistical calculations and the use of
also include on the bar graph indications of a norm a more subjective transparent overlay that is placed
or an optimum location for effective behavior or over the field diagram in order to identify sub-
effective teamwork on each of the 26 cells derived groups within the larger group. The overlay con-
from survey research conducted by Bales and oth- sists of two large circles tangent to one another.
ers to aid in the interpretation of individual scores. The line of polarization is drawn through the
The more common way of graphically present- centers of those circles and identifies differences
ing SYMLOG ratings is the SYMLOG field dia- among clusters of group members. The line of bal-
gram. Essentially, the field diagram is a strategy ance is drawn at right angles to the line of polariza-
for displaying ratings of the three dimensions of tion and marks the dividing line between the two
the SYMLOG space on a two-dimensional surface. polarized clusters. By examining the position of
Two of the dimensions—forward versus backward group members relative to the lines of polarization
and positive versus negative—define a two-dimen- and balance, researchers can identify reference
sional grid. The third dimension—upward versus groups, opposition groups, and more specific group
downward—is indicated by the size of the circle member roles, such as scapegoat and mediator.
that represents the group member or other entity Thus, the field diagram provides a graphical
represented on the grid. representation of the underlying structure of the
For example, a researcher might want to repre- group or organization. Feedback in the form of
sent ratings for each member of a group on a single the bar graphs or field diagrams can be given to
field diagram. The researcher must first determine individuals to help them understand how their
each group member’s location on each of the three behavior is viewed by others in the group. The
dimensions, using the subtraction method described group as a whole can also be given group-level
above. The researcher then represents each group feedback in order to help its members understand
888 System Justification Theory

the underlying dynamics that are affecting group that lead people to consciously and unconsciously
behavior and contributing to effective or ineffec- defend, bolster, and rationalize aspects of the soci-
tive group performance. etal status quo. System justification is accom-
plished by individuals and groups through the use
Janice R. Kelly of stereotypes, social judgments and evaluations,
legitimizing beliefs, and more formal ideologies
See also Group Structure; Interaction Process Analysis;
Social Networks such as political conservatism and religious funda-
mentalism.
System justification theory may be distinguished
Further Readings from other sociological and psychological perspec-
tives that emphasize self-interest, identity politics,
Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A
and the thirst for justice as primary or ubiquitous
method for the study of small groups. Cambridge,
motives. These other perspectives assume that
MA: Addison-Wesley.
people are quick to anger in the face of injustice
Bales, R. F., & Cohen, S. P. (with Williamson, S. A.).
and exploitation, and they suggest that protest,
(1979). SYMLOG: A system for the multiple level
rebellion, and moral outrage on the part of the dis-
observation of groups. New York: Free Press.
Hare, A. P., Sjovold, E., Baker, H. G., & Powers, J.
advantaged should be commonplace. However,
(2005). Analysis of social interaction systems: rebellion in social, economic, and political domains
SYMLOG research and applications. Lanham, MD: occurs more rarely than one would expect, and the
University Press of America. sense of injustice is surprisingly difficult to awaken.
Polley, R. B., Hare, A. P., & Stone, P. J. (1988). The Moral outrage is frequently directed at those who
SYMLOG practitioner: Applications of small group dare to challenge the system rather than those who
research. New York: Praeger. are responsible for its failings. What needs to be
explained, then, is the surprising extent to which
people, including members of disadvantaged groups,
acquiesce in the face of an unjust status quo.
System Justification Theory
System justification theory was initially proposed Ego, Group, and
by John T. Jost and Mahzarin R. Banaji in 1994 System Justification Motives
to explain how and why people tolerate unjust A unique prediction of system justification theory
and exploitative social arrangements rather than is that people are motivated to defend, bolster, and
doing everything they can to change the status rationalize their own self-interest and the basis of
quo and thereby create a better, more just system. their self-esteem (ego justification), the interests
The need for such an explanation arises from his- and esteem of their own group (group justifica-
torical observations revealing numerous instances of tion), and also the social systems that affect them
people not merely passively accepting—but some­ (system justification). The result of this last motive
times even actively justifying and rationalizing— is a general inclination to see the status quo as
social systems that are seen as extremely unjust by good, fair, legitimate, and desirable. System justifi-
outsiders, often in retrospect. cation theory does not suggest that people always
For example, the caste system in India has sur- perceive the status quo as completely fair and just;
vived largely intact for 3,000 years, and the institu- as with other motives (including ego and group
tion of slavery lasted for more than 400  years in justification motives), the strength of the system
Europe and the Americas. Colonialism was also justification motive is expected to vary consider-
practiced for centuries and still is in some places ably across individuals, groups, and situations.
(as is slavery), and the apartheid system in South The theory suggests merely that people are
Africa lasted for almost 50  years. According to prone to exaggerate their system’s virtues, to
system justification theory, social systems such as downplay its vices, and to see existing social
these are supported and maintained at least in part arrangements as more favorable and just than they
because of processes of motivated social cognition actually are. Social systems to which people
System Justification Theory 889

become psychologically attached can range in size children in Bolivia revealed that they were signifi-
and scope from relationship dyads and families to cantly more likely to approve of the Hispanic-run
formal and informal status hierarchies to social, government, more likely to endorse the suppres-
economic, or political institutions and organiza- sion of speeches against the government, and less
tions, or even to entire societies. likely to be cynical or distrusting of the govern-
According to system justification theory, the ment than were children from other ethnic groups
three motives of ego, group, and system justifica- that were more advantaged. These results, which
tion are generally consonant, complementary, and are difficult to explain from the standpoint of
mutually reinforcing for those who occupy a rela- other prominent theories in sociology and psychol-
tively advantaged position in the social system. For ogy, suggest that nearly everyone holds at least
those who are disadvantaged, however, these three some system-justifying attitudes and that, para-
motives are often in conflict or contradiction with doxically, it is sometimes those who are the worst
one another, and different individuals may make off who are the strongest defenders of the system.
different “choices” about how to resolve these It is possible, of course, that members of disad-
conflicts. Accordingly, several studies show that vantaged groups feel strong social pressure to exag-
the more members of disadvantaged groups (e.g., gerate their support for the status quo in public and
Blacks) subscribe to system-justifying beliefs, such that they privately hold attitudes that are far more
as the belief that inequality in society is fair and critical of the existing social system. However, a
necessary, the more they suffer in terms of self-es- large number of studies using implicit measures
teem and neuroticism and the more ambivalent that reduce opportunities for impression manage-
they feel toward fellow ingroup members. ment, such as the Implicit Association Test, suggest
Furthermore, these negative consequences are that it is extremely common for members of disad-
more likely to arise for those members of disad- vantaged groups to internalize relatively favorable
vantaged groups who are relatively highly identi- attitudes toward members of more advantaged
fied with their own group, presumably because the outgroups and the social system as a whole.
conflict between group and system justification For example, substantial proportions of mem-
motives is more acute for such individuals. bers of disadvantaged groups—including dark-
Distancing from (or dis-identifying with) one’s skinned Morenos in Chile, poor people and the
own group is another way of resolving the conflict obese, university students randomly assigned to
between group and system justification motives. low-status rather than high-status residential col-
leges, gays and lesbians, Latinos and Asians, and
even Blacks, who reject the legitimacy of racial
System Justification
inequality at an explicit level—exhibit implicit
on the Part of the Disadvantaged
biases in favor of more advantaged outgroup
Because ego, group, and system justification motives members. Furthermore, the extent to which mem-
are in opposition for those who are disadvantaged bers of disadvantaged groups exhibit implicit out-
by the status quo, such individuals are on average group favoritism is predicted by their scores on
less likely than those who are advantaged to see the measures of system justification and political con-
existing system as fair and legitimate. However, servatism.
under some circumstances—such as when the
salience of individual or collective self-interest is
The Palliative Function
very low—members of disadvantaged groups can
of System Justification
be the most ardent supporters of the status quo.
For example, survey studies in the United States It has been theorized that system justification
reveal that extremely low-income respondents are serves a set of relatively proximal epistemic, exis-
more likely, rather than less likely, to believe that tential, and relational functions that help people
income inequality is legitimate and necessary than manage uncertainty and threat and smooth out
are medium- or high-income respondents. social relationships. System-justifying belief sys-
Similarly, a study of the social and political tems are reassuring because they enable people to
attitudes of severely disadvantaged indigenous cope with and feel better about the societal status
890 System Justification Theory

quo and their place in it. Along these lines, John T. individual differences in self-deception and ideo-
Jost and Orsolya Hunyady suggested that system logical motivation. Second, laboratory experi-
justification serves the palliative function of reduc- ments in which exposure to system threat is
ing negative affect and increasing positive affect. manipulated reveal that most people respond
This idea bears some resemblance to Karl Marx’s defensively on behalf of the system, using stereo-
notion that religion is the “opiate of the masses,” types and evaluative judgments to rationalize
or the “illusory happiness of the people.” inequalities between social groups. Third, research
Several studies reveal that giving people the demonstrates that system justification leads peo-
opportunity to justify the system does indeed lead ple to engage in selective, biased information
them to feel better and more satisfied and to report processing in favor of system-serving conclusions,
feeling more positive and fewer negative emotions. such as the conclusion that the U.S. economic
Furthermore, chronically high system justifiers, system is highly meritocratic. Fourth, system jus-
such as political conservatives, are happier (as mea- tification exhibits several other properties of goal
sured in terms of subjective well-being) than are pursuit, including equifinality (the fact that there
chronically low system-justifiers, such as liberals, are multiple, functionally interchangeable means
leftists, and others who are more troubled by the of reaching the system justification goal) and
degree of social and economic inequality in our multifinality (the fact that the system justification
society. goal satisfies multiple needs, including epistemic,
The hedonic benefits of system justification, existential, and relational needs). Fifth, studies
however, come at a cost in terms of decreased indicate that the desire to make the system look
potential for social change and the remediation of good and fair inspires behavioral efforts in terms
inequality. Research shows that system-justifying of task persistence and performance. For all these
ideologies, whether measured or manipulated reasons, it seems as if the guiding theoretical
through a mindset-priming technique, do indeed assumption of system justification theory, namely
serve to reduce emotional distress—including that people are motivated to defend, bolster, and
negative affect in general and guilt in particular— justify the status quo, is on relatively solid empir-
but they also reduce moral outrage. This last con- ical ground.
sequence is particularly important because moral A motivational approach to system justification
outrage motivates people to engage in helping may ultimately help explain when people will (and
behavior and to support social change. Thus, the will not) engage in social change. Because a goal
reduction in moral outrage makes people less systems framework allows for the operation of
inclined to help those who are disadvantaged, competing goals—such as ego justification or
measured in terms of research participants’ degree group justification, goals for novelty or accuracy,
of support for and willingness to volunteer for or or the desire for retribution and other justice-re-
donate to a soup kitchen, a crisis hotline, and lated motives—it can help clarify the circumstances
tutoring or job training programs for the under- under which people will challenge or criticize the
privileged. system. Such an approach will enable us to better
understand the processes that give rise to wide-
spread defection from the motivational clutches of
How Do We Know It Is Motivated?
system justification.
Some scholars recognize that attitudes and behav- When justifying the system no longer satisfies
iors are commonly system justifying in their con- epistemic, existential, or relational needs—either
sequences but question the notion that people because the status quo itself offers no stability or
are motivated to see the societal status quo as certainty or because it is regarded as a source of
fair, legitimate, and desirable. There are at least threat rather than reassurance, or because it has
five lines of empirical evidence suggesting that become counternormative to stick with the old
system justification is a motivated, goal-directed regime when a new one is gaining in popularity—
process. then the system justification goal will finally be
First, studies show that the endorsement of abandoned. Once a new system or regime acquires
system-justifying attitudes is correlated with an aura of inevitability, system justification motives
System Theory 891

should lead people to engage in rationalization


processes that will bolster the new system at the System Theory
expense of the old one.
System theories are concerned with the relation-
John T. Jost ships among elements (such as individuals) within
systems (e.g., a group). General systems theory
See also Collective Movements and Protest; Ideology; was popularized by Karl Ludwig von Bertalanffy
Protestant Work Ethic; Social Dominance Theory; as an interdisciplinary framework, or metatheory,
Social Identity Theory; Uncertainty-Identity Theory aimed at describing the fundamental principles of
systems of all kinds, from cells and organisms to
societies and from biological and ecological to
Further Readings social systems. Several other metatheories, such as
cybernetics and information theory, the theory of
Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of
complex adaptive systems, and dynamical systems
stereotyping in system-justification and the production
of false consciousness. British Journal of Social
theory, are also system theories. The most impor-
Psychology, 33, 1–27.
tant concepts from these theories for group psy-
Jost, J. T., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2004). A chology are briefly presented below.
decade of system justification theory: Accumulated One main assumption of system theories is that
evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the system itself (e.g., a group) has, or develops,
the status quo. Political Psychology, 25, 881–919. properties that cannot be fully described, explained,
Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. or predicted by observing the behavior of elements
(2003). Political conservatism as motivated social of the system (e.g., the group members). Recall
cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375. Aristotle’s claim that the whole is something
Jost, J. T., & Hunyady, O. (2002). The psychology of besides (or more than) its parts. Moreover, the
system justification and the palliative function of properties of the elements within a system (e.g.,
ideology. European Review of Social Psychology, 13, group members’ behavior) can be understood only
111–153. when one knows something about the system as a
Jost, J. T., Liviatan, I., van der Toorn, J., Ledgerwood, whole. Given that groups are complex, composed
A., Mandisodza, A., & Nosek, B.A. (in press). System of individuals, and embedded in contexts, a system
justification: How do we know it’s motivated? In theory perspective seems especially appropriate for
A. C. Kay et al. (Eds.), The psychology of justice and the study of groups.
legitimacy: The Ontario Symposium
(Vol. 11). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Jost, J. T., Pelham, B. W., Sheldon, O., & Sullivan, B. N.
(2003). Social inequality and the reduction of Core Assumptions of System Theories
ideological dissonance on behalf of the system:
Biological and social systems are open systems that
Evidence of enhanced system justification among the
interact (exchange information, material, or
disadvantaged. European Journal of Social
energy) with their environment and thus are influ-
Psychology, 33, 13–36.
enced by and influence their context. They are
Kay, A. C., Jost, J. T., Mandisodza, A. N., Sherman, S.
J., Petrocelli, J. V., & Johnson, A. L. (2007).
hierarchically organized: A system is composed of
Panglossian ideology in the service of system
subsystems and is embedded into suprasystems. A
justification: How complementary stereotypes help subsystem in a group might be a single group
us to rationalize inequality. In M. Zanna (Ed.), member or a clique of members, and the group’s
Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 39, suprasystem might be an organization in which the
pp. 305–358). San Diego, CA: Academic Press/ group is embedded. System theorists assume that
Elsevier. all the concepts they have identified can be
Wakslak, C., Jost, J. T., Tyler, T. R., & Chen, E. (2007). observed at different system levels.
Moral outrage mediates the dampening effect of Systems, such as groups, have a tendency
system justification on support for redistributive social toward self-organization, which means that they
policies. Psychological Science, 18, 267–274. develop structures or functions “by themselves,”
892 System Theory

without pressure or influence from an outside A system is self-regulating and thus adapts to
agent. Examples of self-organization include changes as it pursues goals. Feedback loops are a
growth and development processes. The local central element of this regulation: The output of a
dynamics in a system, that is, the interactions system’s actions serves as an input into the system,
among system components (e.g., group members), and the system readjusts its behavior when it seems
produce what are called order parameters at the to be deviating from the chosen, or prescribed,
system level. These parameters influence the behav- course. In following this course, many systems
ior of system elements and thus become what are move toward an end state, and so their movement
called the global dynamics of the system. For seems purposeful. Goal orientations are especially
instance, group members establish rules during important for human and social systems. There are
their interactions (local dynamics). These rules usually many possible ways to achieve a goal; this
then become a given for the group as a whole (glo- is described as equifinality.
bal dynamics) and thereby influence the behavior
of group members.
System Theories in Group Research
Systems change over time. System theorists
assume that open systems tend to move toward System theories have influenced group research in
higher organization and more differentiation and different ways. In a few studies, researchers have
specialization, but they also move toward higher applied mathematical concepts from system theo-
centralization, because they can import energy and ries to their data. The next section presents an
thus resist entropy (a state of disorder) for a time. example of such an application. Some researchers
Centralization means that some components have have formulated theories about groups on the
greater influence on the system than do others. An basis of system thinking. Two such theories are
example is the development of leadership struc- summarized briefly. Furthermore, system theories
tures in groups. Complexity theory investigates have influenced many different aspects of group
patterns of changes over time in systems and research, and some examples of that influence are
describes whether and under what conditions a also described.
system evolves to one or several stable states.
These stable states are called attractors. Often, the
Formal Analyses of Group Processes
trajectories of different system states over time
toward attractors are estimated on the basis of Although the propositions in most system the-
mathematical formulae and plotted in a so-called ories have been formulated as mathematical con-
phase space (a graphical representation of pre- cepts, only a few researchers have analyzed group
dicted behavior). processes using the resulting mathematical mod-
Temporal changes in systems are seldom linear els. Some have even questioned whether doing so
but occur instead in an abrupt and nonlinear is useful, because the high precision and the large
way. The system may be stable for a time, even number of data points required for such analyses
under considerable pressure to change, but even- are difficult to achieve. In addition, the results of
tually a small event, which would not normally such analyses are often difficult to interpret.
influence the system, can have a dramatic effect. However, an interesting example of group proc-
Given the complex interplay of different influ- ess analyses based on dynamic system theory is
ences in most systems, it is difficult to predict the work of Losada and his colleagues. They ana-
when such a dramatic change occurs. Rapid, lyzed trajectories in phase space for teams that
large changes in systems are described by catas- showed different temporal patterns (e.g., positive
trophe theories, which depict changes as surfaces and negative emotional exchanges among group
or curves and describe abrupt changes from one members). The researchers found that high-per-
state to another as bifurcation or phase transi- forming groups occupied a clearly larger phase
tions. Below the bifurcation point, the system is space before entering a stable state, whereas low-
stable, but above that point, there is a short phase performing groups rapidly moved toward an attrac-
of instability, and, after a massive change, the tor. This indicates that high-performing groups
system again attains stability. display a greater variety of behaviors, which may
System Theory 893

help them adapt better to changing demands. One than trying to predict group-level variables on the
can expect more analyses like these in the future as basis of individual behavior. Furthermore, such
new technology allows researchers to collect more studies should be carried out over time.
fine-grained data on group processes. Contextual variables (e.g., the organization in
which a group is embedded) also influence group
behavior because the group must adapt to chang-
Theoretical Frameworks
ing conditions. The influence of contextual factors
Based on System Theories
is often nonlinear. This means that large changes
Probably the most extensive and integrative may not always have big effects, whereas small
theoretical framework that incorporates dynami- changes at specific times may alter the group in
cal systems and complexity theory is that pub- dramatic ways. This makes the identification of
lished by Arrow, McGrath, and Berdahl in 2000. critical times for external influence as important
They see groups as open systems that are com- as the identification and evaluation of the influ-
plex, dynamic, and adaptive. Besides local dynam- ence itself. A discussion of critical times for exter-
ics and global dynamics, Arrow and her colleagues nal influences can be found in Hackman and
have emphasized the importance of contextual Wageman’s team coaching model. Their model
dynamics. Contextual dynamics require the adap- claims that motivational coaching should be pro-
tation of a group to changes in its environment. vided at the beginning, strategic coaching at the
An interesting and novel aspect of this theory is midpoint, and educational coaching at the end of
the assumption that some elements of a group a group’s task.
(e.g., group structure) go beyond its members. Another system-based group theory is DeSanctis
Rather, a group’s elements also include its tasks and Poole’s adaptive structuration theory. It is
(or intentions or projects) and the resources and based on structuration theory, which was pro-
technologies (called tools) that are available to it. posed by the sociologist Giddens. Adaptive struc-
The interplay among members, tasks, and tools turation theory attempts to explain how groups
(the local dynamics) forms the overall coordina- and their members structure each other, and it
tion network. Group behavior must respond to helps explain why one often observes very differ-
the three main functions of groups, namely ful- ent outcomes and interaction processes in groups
filling member’s needs, maintaining the structure with very similar features.
and integrity of the group as a system, and Generally stated, a group’s structures (rules,
achieving group projects. The main activities of a regulations, and resources) guide its members’
group are communication (information process- interactions, but member behavior also repro-
ing and the generation of meaning), conflict man- duces, constitutes, adapts to, and changes those
agement, and the coordination of member structures and thus alters the group. On one
behavior. hand, individuals in groups act according to
Another important aspect of this theory is its social structures, for example the rules and regu-
emphasis on different temporal changes in groups. lations that govern their behavior. Often, these
The theory does not assume predictable, consecu- social structures are adopted from general rules
tive stages of development in groups. Instead, it (e.g., the majority rule for decision). Sometimes,
uses complexity theory and the concept of attrac- new structures are created or adapted (e.g., to the
tors to explain different possible change trajecto- group’s task or technology) and influenced by
ries in group behavior. For example, groups can available resources. On the other hand, when
(rapidly) move toward a stable state, but they members respond to group structures, they also
sometimes oscillate between different attractors create and reproduce them. This is called the
and thus show multiple stable states. Arrow, duality of structures: The behavior of group
McGrath, and Berdahl assume that group-level members is governed by the rules and regulations
patterns can emerge independently from the par- in the group (the structures), but these structures
ticularities of individual members’ behavior. also emerge and are influenced by the interac-
Identifying regularities, or patterns, in a group tions. Thus, group members influence the group’s
thus requires studying the group as a whole, rather structures.
894 System Theory

Topics in Group Research Influenced by, approach is compatible with a system dynamics
or Compatible With, System Theories perspective and helps identify the critical points at
which it may be easiest to change a group.
The ideas of many group theorists, such as
Kurt Lewin, are compatible with a system theories
approach. But most group researchers have stud- Conclusion
ied either the influence of groups on individual
behavior or the influence of individual behavior The serious use of system theories implies an exten-
on group outcomes. More recently, new research sion of traditional paradigms of experimental and
questions have been inspired by the systems per- analytical research on groups because these para-
spective, which may help overcome what Lewin digms often cannot adequately assess the complex
(1947) once called a taboo on studying group- social dynamics the system theories have proposed.
level phenomena. Such a taboo is evident in Instead of studying single, cause–effect relation-
Allport’s claim that all group-level phenomena ships, system theories are interested in the complex
can and should be explained by individual factors. interplay of elements, features of the whole system
Allport denied that groups exist apart from their and its contexts, and changes over time. System
members. theories assume that precise predictions of system
Examples of recent concepts from the groups states are difficult or even impossible to make, but
literature that seem compatible with a system theo- the assumptions of system theories can still serve as
ries perspective include shared mental models, valuable heuristics to draw attention toward impor-
socially shared cognitions, group reflexivity, and tant phenomena that would be otherwise over-
transactive memory systems. These concepts refer looked. Empirical investigations based on system
to group-level phenomena and describe the proc- theories are difficult. Arrow and her colleagues
esses involved as functionally analogous to similar have suggested three research strategies compatible
processes within the individual. In other words, with a system perspective:
they suggest that groups can be viewed as (larger
and more complex) information processing sys- 1. Comparative case studies that investigate groups
tems. Other examples involve temporal changes in over time may help scholars understand the
groups: For example, the group socialization the- interplay of and the recursive influence between
ory proposed in 1982 by Moreland and Levine multiple levels of a system.
describes role transitions, which mark qualitative 2. More naturalistic studies, including simulations
shifts in the relationship between the group and based on realistic situations, allow researchers
the individual. Between role transitions, that rela- to analyze at least part of the complexity
tionship usually changes in a more continuous, associated with real groups.
incremental fashion. Group development theories,
such as that proposed by Worchel, Coutant-Sassic, 3. Computer simulation studies allow researchers
and Grossman, describe group development as a to apply mathematical functions to data on
cyclical activity that is influenced by the relation- groups or to translate verbal theories into
ships among group members, the group as a computational models and then run
whole, and its context. And Gersick’s punctuated computational simulation studies. The results of
equilibrium model of project group development those studies can then be compared with real-
suggests that group development involves long life observations.
periods of relative inertia, separated by sudden
transitions associated with special events, such as Ultimately, system theories are metatheories.
the midpoint of the group’s work. These transi- Their application to group research requires the
tions are likely to involve large, nonlinear changes translation of general concepts to more specific
in the group. During its midpoint transition, for phenomena and new or adapted research strate-
example, a group will often radically change its gies, whose development is still under way.
work strategies and direction. Afterward, another
period of relative stability begins. Gersick’s Franziska Tschan
System Theory 895

See also Dynamical Systems Approach; Group Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers of group dynamics: Concept,
Composition; Group Development; Group method, and reality in social science; social equilibra
Socialization; Lewin, Kurt; Shared Mental Models; and social change. Human Relations, 1, 5–41.
Socially Shared Cognition; Social Networks; Teams; Losada, M., & Heaphy, E. (2004). The role of positivity
Transactive Memory Systems and connectivity in the performance of business teams:
A nonlinear dynamics model. American Behavioral
Scientist, 47, 740–765.
Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (1982). Socialization in
Further Readings
small groups: Temporal changes in individual–group
Arrow, H., McGrath, J. E., & Berdahl, J. L. (2000). Small relations. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in
groups as complex systems: Formation, coordination, experimental social psychology (Vol. 15, pp. 137–192).
development, and adaptation. London: Sage. New York: Academic Press.
DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M. S. (1994). Capturing the Vallacher, R. R., & Nowak, A. (2004). Dynamical systems
complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive in social psychology. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
structuration theory. Organization Science, 5, Worchel, S., Coutant-Sassic, D., & Grossman, M. (1992).
121–147. A developmental approach to group dynamics: A
Gersick, C. J. G. (1989). Marking time: Predictable model and illustrative research. In S. Worchel, W.
transition in task groups. Academy of Management Wood, & J. A. Simpson (Eds.), Group process and
Journal, 32, 274–309. productivity (pp. 181–202). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
T
France, he spent his time for several years helping
Tajfel, Henri European refugees to rehabilitate and be repatri-
(1919–1982) ated or else resettled in other countries. These
events left profound psychological marks on
Henri Tajfel is best known for developing the con- Tajfel and provided him with important intellec-
cept of social identity, a central construct in what tual signposts for his later research and writing
later became known as social identity theory. His dealing with discrimination against minorities
earliest work in psychology was largely experi- and how identity is shaped by ethnic and national
mental and dealt with social perception and ste- group membership. In his own wartime experi-
reotyping. Later, he turned his attention to the ence, he observed that had his Polish–Jewish
study of intergroup relations, and it was in this identity been revealed, his fate would have been
context that social identity theory was formulated. determined by his social category—a certain
He is also remembered in Europe for the time and death, no matter what other personal qualities
energy that he gave to establishing a European his might have had.
style of social psychology, one that recognized the He married and with his wife, Anne, moved to
social, political, and historical context within England in 1951. As an undergraduate student at
which social behavior takes place. Birkbeck College, London, he won a scholarship
for an essay on a topic close to his heart, preju-
dice. He graduated in 1954, worked as a research
Tajfel’s Personal and Intellectual History
assistant at the University of Durham, and later
Born into a Jewish family in Poland, Henri Tajfel became a lecturer in social psychology at Oxford.
was a student at the Sorbonne in France when In 1967, he was appointed to a chair in social
Germany invaded Poland in September 1939. A psychology at Bristol University, a post that he
fluent French speaker, he served in the French held until his death.
army, was captured by the invading German forces
in 1940, and spent the rest of the conflict as a pris-
oner of war. His survival depended on his assuming
Tajfel’s Research Contributions
a French identity and concealing his Polish–Jewish Tajfel’s earliest published research was on social
heritage. Years later, he had difficulty understand- perception, based on what was termed the New
ing the Polish language on a return visit to his Look in perception and stimulated by Jerome
native country, a reminder that he had come to Bruner at Harvard University. What was new was
think and speak as a Frenchman. an emphasis on perception as an active rather
The war’s end revealed that all his family and than a reactive process. People’s mental processes
most of his friends had been killed. While still in often organize everyday stimuli according to

897
898 Tajfel, Henri

those values or need states that are current or Social Identity and Intergroup Relations
salient at that moment. For example, a meat eater
His most famous work was theoretical and fol-
who was very hungry might mistake a blurred
lowed next. His concept of social identity became
photographic image of a red flower for a juicy
the central ingredient in a new theory of inter-
steak.
group behavior. The main ideas were first pub-
lished in French in 1972, followed by an English
Perceptual Accentuation version in 1974 and later amplified as social iden-
tity theory with John Turner in 1979. The concepts
Tajfel absorbed such ideas into his work on
invoked were the following:
perceptual accentuation. In one study, the stimuli
were eight lines that differed in length by a con-
stant percentage increment. He showed that a Social categorization: Social categorization is a
simple manipulation in an experimental condition cognitive tool. It is the social classification of people
caused the eight lines to be categorized into two as members of social groups. It is a more powerful
groups of four, and their estimated lengths were determinant of intergroup discrimination than are
different from those judged in a control condition. individual-level variables, such as personality
In the experimental condition, the four shorter characteristics, which might be shared by group
lines were labeled A and the four longer lines are members. The key to understanding outgroup
labeled B, whereas in the control condition, the A prejudice is that individuals know that they are
and B labels were random. In the experimental members of discrete categories, that is, groups.
condition, therefore, length was correlated with
the labels, and the lines were perceived to be in Social comparison: Intergroup comparison is a
two categories or groups, a shorter one and a lon- group-level concept that is analogous to Leon
ger one. Further, there was an accentuation effect: Festinger’s individual-level concept, also called
The A lines were judged a little shorter and the B social comparison. Both concepts serve to define
lines a little longer than they really were. The con- the self, but in Festinger’s case, the inferences arise
cept of accentuation fit with Tajfel’s thinking about from interpersonal comparisons. For example,
social stereotypes. Members of ethnic groups are Jim concludes he is fast because he usually wins
(mis)perceived to fit more closely to stereotypes footraces against other individuals. In Tajfel’s
commonly held about them. case, social comparison is an intergroup concept,
An important development in his thinking was and the inferences are based on group membership.
revealed in a 1970 paper in which he explored the For example, Jane decides she is advantaged by
concept of social categorization as a basis for inter- her ethnicity because it confers higher status when
group discrimination. Unlike Muzafer Sherif’s she makes comparisons with other salient ethnic
realistic group conflict theory, which argued that groups.
intergroup conflict derives from mutually incom-
patible goals, Tajfel proposed that the simple act of Social identity: This is a crucial aspect of identity.
becoming a group member was sufficient to pre- It is part of the self-concept that derives from
cipitate discrimination against members of an people knowing that they members of one or more
available comparison outgroup. Intergroup con- social groups, such as political or religious groups.
flict was now seen as an outcome of people being An individual strives to achieve positive self-
socially categorized rather than the result of com- definition, an outcome based on comparisons that
petition for tangible rewards. It is an irony of advantage the ingroup over salient outgroups.
Sherif’s work that in his famous studies of inter-
group discrimination carried out in boys’ summer Social change: This concept is thought by some
camps, there was evidence that the mere separa- commentators to be the most innovative of Tajfel’s
tion of children into groups led quickly to out- contributions to social identity theory. Social
group negative stereotyping. In Tajfel’s view, social change is a significant perceived alteration in the
categorization rather than intergroup competition relationship between large social groups, such as
was the key to incipient prejudice. national, religious, and ethnic groups. Whereas
Team Building 899

social mobility is a change in self-definition when See also Ethnocentrism; Ingroup Allocation Bias; Minimal
an individual moves into a new group, social Group Effect; Norms; Realistic Group Conflict Theory;
change applies to a transformation of social Reference Groups; Social Identity Theory
identity for an entire social group. Social change is
the process by which people actively seek positive
Further Readings
social identities in response to being defined
negatively in a world of social inequality. Cohen, D. (1977). Psychologists on psychology: Modern
innovators talk about their work. Oxford, UK:
Tajfel drew widely on theory and examples Taplinger.
from history, literature, sociology, politics, and Tajfel, H. (Ed.). (1978). Differentiation between social
economics in elaborating these ideas and went to groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup
considerable lengths to link social identity theory relations. London: Academic Press.
to large-scale social structures and to ideology. Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories:
Unlike many theorists in social psychology, Tajfel Studies in social psychology. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
made a deliberate connection with collective move-
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory
ments and political action.
of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel
Although Tajfel conducted and encouraged
(Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations
others to undertake experimental research, his
(pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
goal was more ambitious and was explicitly pitted
against reductionism in theory. He was mindful of
the scope and magnitude of North American
social psychology and what it had achieved in
defining the discipline in the 20th century.
Team Building
However, he was convinced that a European per-
spective could offer something different and valu- The term team building is used to refer both to
able. He argued that North American social team formation and efforts to advance group
psychologists were mostly reductionist, even myo- development within existing teams. Team building
pic, in their pursuit of psychological laws that is important because the use of team-based struc-
reside in the individual. In contrast, Europe’s tures is ubiquitous in today’s organizations, mak-
political history of disputes and wars, and the ing practices related to the formation, design, and
stunning, horrific experience of the Holocaust, development of work teams vital to both group
pointed to the need for theoretical constructs that and organizational success.
were embedded in the social group.
Tajfel demonstrated his beliefs and values in Team Formation
his professional as well as research activities.
According to many, Tajfel did more than any Despite its importance, research on building teams
other person in helping to develop a distinctively has lagged behind other work on teamwork in
European form of social psychology, one that organizations. This is in part because most research
stressed that people should be studied as mem- on teamwork starts with the assumption that the
bers of groups. Tajfel’s efforts, and those of his team already exists. (Some exceptions to this view
colleagues, are recognized today in the European exist, such as work on group development and
Association of Experimental Social Psychologists engineering models of team building.) At the most
and the European Journal of Social Psychology. basic level, building a work team involves specifi-
In the decades following his death, his main ideas cation of the work to be done, selection of mem-
won wide acceptance in social psychology. They bers based on the skills and knowledge required to
currently permeate research and teaching in complete that work, and use of effective techniques
many countries around the world, including the for recruiting members who will contribute to
United States. team effectiveness.
One important dimension of work with impli-
Graham M. Vaughan cations for building teams is interdependence,
900 Team Building

which concerns the extent to which a task can be a team. Research suggests the need for caution in
completed by people working separately versus drawing simple conclusions about knowledge and
together. Work with low interdependence can be skill alignment as uniformly harmful or helpful.
completed either by an individual without any Therefore, managers must be aware of the poten-
assistance from others or by a number of individu- tial advantages and disadvantages of various kinds
als working independently and then coming of alignment among team members.
together for a final product. Work with high inter- Finally, the selection of members for a team
dependence requires members of a team to work involves a choice about how to recruit the people
closely together, share and integrate their knowl- with the right knowledge and skills. Team mem-
edge and skills, and generate a collective product bers can be recruited from the social network of
or output in which the input of particular members the manager forming the team or identified through
may be difficult to discern. more impersonal channels, such as organizational
Once the team’s task is understood, the next key databases. Of course, the choice of recruiting
challenge is identifying the “right” people for the channel may be constrained by the need for spe-
team. A critical goal is to align individuals’ knowl- cific knowledge or skills available through only
edge and skills with the requirements of the team’s one channel. The means used to recruit members
work. Building a team with the necessary skills and when forming the team have implications for team
knowledge seems straightforward, but this is not performance. Members with social ties to each
always the case. For example, in some organiza- other may speed the development of internal cohe-
tions, chemical engineering skills may correlate sion and superior knowledge utilization, but they
with gender or organizational department. As a can also produce flawed decisions if close ties pro-
result, assigning an individual on the basis of such duce a team whose members favor harmony over
skills may introduce conflict into a team (e.g., critical judgment. Furthermore, if a premium is
because other team members do not appreciate the placed on selecting team members from an existing
value of his or her skills) that has negative conse- social network, knowledge and skill alignment
quences for group processes and outcomes. may be compromised in favor of personal relation-
Moreover, certain skills and knowledge may exist ships among the team members. This could disad-
in only a small number of individuals, and these vantage a team’s ability to effectively complete its
people may not have the time or the motivation for task. Alternatively, the manager in charge of form-
a particular team assignment. ing the team may use organizational databases,
In addition to alignment between members’ human resources recruiting techniques, or other
knowledge and skills, on one hand, and task “impersonal” means of identifying team members.
requirements of the team, on the other hand, it is Although this approach may be useful in some
important to consider the dispersion of knowledge ways, it may miss opportunities to leverage exist-
and skills across members of the team. This form ing knowledge structures among individuals who
of alignment concerns the extent to which the team have prior experience with one another.
members have similar or different knowledge and
skills and, in the latter case, complementary or
Team-Building Programs
noncomplementary knowledge and skills. When
team members have different and noncomplemen- Once teams are formed, managers may engage
tary knowledge and skills, they are highly special- team members in team-building programs focused
ized. Such specialization may make recognition of on group development. Team building involves
expertise easier but coordination of effort more some type of planned intervention, ranging from
difficult. Alternatively, similar knowledge and short-term to long-duration activities, designed to
skills or different but complementary knowledge enhance process effectiveness and reduce problems
and skills can result in easier coordination but may through setting group goals and supporting inter-
come at the cost of insufficient expertise in particu- personal relations, problem solving, and role clari-
lar areas. In addition, certain kinds of knowledge fication. Although the concept of team building
and skill diversity may reduce internal cohesion was introduced some 30  years ago, research on
but at the same time provide more external ties for formal team building is rather limited, and the
Team Building 901

work that has been done indicates that team- for recruiting these people. Although there is fer-
building programs have a mixed impact on team vent support for team-building interventions in
performance. For example, in a meta-analysis of some quarters and anecdotal evidence that such
11 empirical studies of team building, Eduardo interventions improve team productivity, solid
Salas and his colleagues found that team-building research has yet to unequivocally support these
programs have a positive, but weak, effect on sub- views. The research record suggests that if manag-
jective measures of performance (e.g., team mem- ers wish to implement formal team-building inter-
bers’ self-reports of their effectiveness) and no ventions, these interventions ought to focus on role
effect on objective measures of performance (e.g., clarification and be of short to moderate duration.
productivity). It has been suggested that the lack of positive
Providing contradictory evidence, a meta- effects of team building on productivity is due to
analysis by Daniel Svyantek and colleagues problems in transferring learning from the team-
revealed that team-building interventions have building experience to the actual work environ-
positive effects on both subjective and objective ment. Therefore, special attention must be paid to
measures of team performance. Moreover, they how the experiences in the program relate to the
noted that this relationship is affected by several work completed by the team and what specific
characteristics of the team-building effort and the efforts will be made to reinforce the learning in the
organizational context. In particular, interven- program when the team is back on the job.
tions initiated by people outside the work group
(e.g., higher level management) have a greater Mary E. Zellmer-Bruhn
(positive) impact than those initiated internally; See also Diversity; Group Composition; Group
supervisor support increases the effectiveness of Development; Group Formation; Group Task;
the team building; and team building focused on Interdependence Theory; Social Networks; Team
corrective action has a stronger effect on perfor- Performance Assessment; Teams
mance than team building designed as a preven-
tive measure. Furthermore, team-building efforts
led by external consultants are more effective than Further Readings
efforts led by internal consultants, with team
building producing the most positive outcomes Beer, M. (1976). The technology of organization
when led by a combination of internal and exter- development. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook
nal consultants. Finally, team building focused on of industrial and organizational psychology
group change (e.g., improving group problem- (pp. 937–994). Chicago: Rand McNally.
solving processes) is more effective than team Jackson, S. (1991). Team composition in organizations.
building focused on individual changes (e.g., role In S. Worchel, W. Wood, & J. Simpson (Eds.), Group
process and productivity (pp. 138–176). London:
definition for individuals in the group).
Sage.
It is worthwhile to note that a very popular
Moreland, R. (1987). The formation of small groups. In
form of team-building intervention involves out-
C. Hendrick (Ed.), Review of personality and social
door challenges or experiential training, such as
psychology (Vol. 8, pp. 80–110). Newbury Park, CA:
ropes courses and wilderness trips. To date, no Sage.
research evidence supports a performance benefit Salas, E., Rozell, D., Mullen, B., & Driskell, J. E.
or specific return on investment in the form of (1999). The effect of teambuilding on performance:
improved productivity for teams that participate in An integration. Small Group Research, 30(3),
outdoor team-building interventions. 309–329.
Svyantek, D. J., Goodman, S. A, Benz, L. L., & Gard, J. A.
Conclusion (1999). The relationship between organizational
characteristics and team building success. Journal of
In sum, managers engaged in team formation must Business and Psychology, 14(2), 265–283.
pay careful attention to defining the team’s task, Wageman, R. (1999). The meaning of interdependence.
identifying potential members with the right In M. Turner (Ed.), Groups at work: Theory and
knowledge and skills, and using effective means research (pp. 197–218). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
902 Team Negotiation

teams must contend with is how to manage the divi-


Team Negotiation sion of labor within the team itself.
Consider this example: One member of a nego-
In many negotiations, one individual sits down at tiation team has strong analytic skills, another has
the table to represent his or her own interests. vast technical and industry knowledge, and a third
This is also true in multiparty negotiations in has strong relationship-building skills. These ingre-
which three, four, or even more individuals are dients should add up to a formidable team. But if
negotiating to resolve their own interests. Team members disagree about the key issues—such
negotiations are different, however, because more as what the bottom line is or when to make
than one individual represents each side. Team concessions—then they are unlikely to take advan-
negotiations can become exceptionally complex tage of their differing skills. Clearly, teams can be
because individuals must negotiate and resolve an effective presence at the negotiating table but
their interests and positions within each team, as only if they are able to uncover, leverage, and effi-
well as between each team. ciently coordinate their diverse abilities.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Teams Managing a Team Negotiation


Is a team negotiation, that is, two groups negotiat- Thus, the greatest challenge for a team is to man-
ing against each other, likely to produce a better age its internal negotiation before, as well as dur-
outcome than two individuals coming to the table? ing, negotiation with an opponent team. A
The discontinuity effect proposes that intergroup negotiating team’s preparation phase should
interaction will be more competitive than interindi- include three components: (1) a substantive discus-
vidual interaction, primarily because groups gener- sion of the negotiation, (2) a skills assessment of
ate both more fear and more greed than individuals team members and the assignment of team roles,
do. However, the vast majority of the evidence for and (3) a plan for the negotiation process.
this effect comes from contexts that are relatively
information poor (e.g., prisoner dilemma games)
Discuss the Negotiation’s Substance
when compared with most negotiation contexts.
By contrast, researchers studying richer bar- Before entering into the negotiation, team mem-
gaining contexts have consistently found that hav- bers must agree about the basics of the negotia-
ing even one team at the bargaining table increases tion’s substance, striving for as much agreement as
the cooperativeness, and hence the integrativeness, possible. Basic negotiation principles come into
of joint agreements—in other words, all parties are play here—it is basically a prenegotiation or even
better off when one of them is a team. This so- a negotiation that is embedded within the larger
called team effect seems to occur because teams negotiation. Before meeting their opponents, the
stimulate the discussion of more information than team members must agree on their best alternative
do individuals. This information exchange leads to to a negotiated agreement (BATNA). The BATNA
greater accuracy about both parties’ interests and is basically what the team will do if it does not
priorities, enabling trade-offs on issues that increase reach an agreement with the other team. The team
overall profitability. members must also decide on their reservation
Thus, we know that teams increase integrative point, or the worst outcome that they will agree to
(or win–win) outcomes, but are teams always at an before walking away, and their aspiration level, or
advantage compared with their solo counterparts? the best outcome that they can imagine. The team
In other words, do teams do better on the distribu- members can use these critical limits to think
tive (win–lose) dimension? Not necessarily. Although through their priorities, the issues on which they
one of the advantages to teams is the ability to split might be willing to consider trade-offs, and their
roles within the team, such as the famous good cop– underlying assumptions. Research has shown that
bad cop technique, research has shown that this negotiators who set specific limits and focus on
ability does not always lead to better performance their aspirations outperform those that set “do
for the team. This is because one of the major issues your best” limits and focus on reservation points.
Team Negotiation 903

The team must also consider what it knows research now shows that making the first offer
about the other team(s). The team should do its allows negotiators to set an anchor for the negotia-
best to estimate its opponent’s priorities, BATNA, tion, and when they do so with a focus on their
reservation point, and aspiration level. A team can aspiration levels, they do better than negotiators
be superior to a solo negotiator here because each who concede the first offer to the other party.
team member may have different expertise, knowl- One process feature is unique to the team: the
edge, and experience, which can be integrated to recess, or caucus. Teams should take advantage of
arrive at accurate estimates. The team might also opportunities to break away from the other side,
need to engage in research before the actual nego- whether to raise new issues, do a reality check, or
tiation begins, and a division of labor is often resolve internal disputes. The team leader may
easier with more people to do the work. ask one member of the team to focus on the emo-
tions of the other team or report on that team’s
reaction to a recent offer or ask the team member
Assess Skills and Roles keeping track of the numbers to analyze and
In addition to assessing the negotiation’s sub- assess new data. Any differences within the team
stance, a team must determine how to take advan- should always be handled in a recess, outside of
tage of the diverse skills among its members. In the other side’s earshot. The team leader should
some cases, the team’s composition is determined ultimately resolve any arguments about conces-
by an outside manager or superordinate authority, sions or trade-offs.
but in other cases, there is an opportunity for The team can also call a caucus for strategic
members to make sure that there is a match reasons, such as signaling a willingness to abandon
between the needs of the team and their composi- the negotiation. Caucuses can also slow down
tion. In either case, the first step should be an talks that are moving too fast, giving both sides
assessment of what skills, knowledge, and abilities time to consider options and make offers. Teams
are required. The next step is to match skills with can communicate with each other electronically
essential roles. via laptops or handheld computers, or they can
Most teams elect one person as the team’s simply pass notes on slips of paper.
chief negotiator. The chief negotiator must be
articulate, not easily rattled, and able to follow
the team’s predetermined negotiation plan. Other When to Use a Team
important roles include a team member who can As noted above, teams have assets as well as liabil-
record and analyze data, keeping track of offers ities, and therefore the key task is to maximize the
and counteroffers. This individual should also be assets and minimize the liabilities. One way to do
able to interpret the data and their implications that is to use a team when it will be most benefi-
for the team. Finally, the team might want some- cial. Research has shown that teams are particu-
one who can attend to and interpret the other larly beneficial in situations in which the task is
side’s private reactions to offers. Research has complex, requiring a diverse set of knowledge,
shown that only a small amount of information abilities, or expertise, or the problem has great
is conveyed through actual words. Much more is potential for creative, integrative solutions. Teams
communicated through tone of voice, posture, are also beneficial in situations in which one party
stance, and body language. wants to display its strength to the other, teams are
expected to be used (e.g., in certain international
Plan the Negotiation Process settings), diverse constituencies must be repre-
sented (such as in union negotiations), or either
The substance of the negotiation and the diver- party wishes to signal that the negotiation is
sity of roles come together in the third step as the extremely important (as in a merger or acquisi-
team makes decisions about the central process tion). Another factor to consider is whether there
features of the negotiation. What opening offer is time to organize and coordinate a team effort.
should it make? When should it make the first
concession? For example, a substantial amount of Elizabeth Mannix
904 Team Performance Assessment

See also Cooperation and Competition; Group Is It a Team?


Performance; Group Problem Solving and
Decision Making; Negotiation and Bargaining; Although all social collectives share certain proper-
Socially Shared Cognition; Teams; Transactive ties, a team is generally considered to be distinct
Memory Systems from other groups in that a team has a history and
a future and exists to perform a function for some
larger entity (e.g., a company, military unit, or
Further Readings school). In addition, most teams involve members
who are recruited for specific positions and have
Brodt, S., & Thompson, L. (2001). Negotiating teams: A
specific duties or roles that they must fulfill. In most
levels of analysis approach. Group Dynamics: Theory,
teams, individual responsibilities can be executed
Research and Practice, 5(3), 208–219.
only in concert with other team members. That is,
Liang, D. W., Moreland, R. L., & Argote, L. (1995).
there is task or workflow interdependence. While
Group versus individual training and group
performance: The mediating role of transactive
the issues associated with the assessment of group
memory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
performance and team performance are similar in
21, 384–393. many ways, this entry focuses on the latter.
Mannix, E. (2005). Strength in numbers: Negotiating as a
team. Negotiation: Negotiation and Decision-Making Purposes of Team
Strategies That Deliver Results, 8(5), 1–4. Performance Assessment
Sell, J., Lovaglia, M., Mannix, E., Samuelson, C., &
Wilson, R. (2004). Investigating conflict, power, and There are many purposes for conducting a team
status within and among groups. Small Group performance assessment, including establishing
Research, 35(1), 44–72. training needs; guiding the redesign of training
Wildschut, T., Pinter, B., Vevea, J., Schopler, J., & Insko, C. programs, equipment, or work processes; improv-
(2003). Beyond the group mind: A quantitative review ing performance levels; and shaping compensation
of the interindividual–intergroup discontinuity effect. awards. Moreover, the kind of setting in which
Psychological Bulletin, 129(5), 698–722. assessment is to take place will affect the appropri-
ateness of particular assessment measures and
methods.

Team Performance Assessment Parameters of Team Assessment


What to Measure
Teams are a hallmark of modern societies. They
are most evident in organizations, especially work A team usually operates in some larger organi-
organizations. The effective performance of teams zational context. Just as team members have per-
is closely linked to the accomplishment of goals sonal assignments within the team, so the team as
for both the members involved and the organiza- a whole has a function within this larger system.
tions in which they operate. Thus, the nature of Accordingly, many writers make use of the Input-
team performance and the issues involved in the Process-Output rubric to organize thinking about
assessment of team performance are central to an the features of a team that will influence perfor-
organization’s success. mance and therefore affect the ways that one goes
Approaches to team performance assessment are about defining and assessing performance.
quite varied, and they should be. Both the appro- Inputs include such things as the type of people
priate definition of team performance and the best involved (number and skills of members), team
way to measure (assess) it will depend on a variety resources available (money and equipment), the
of factors. Thus, those interested in assessing a nature of the “raw” materials to be used, team
team should become fairly knowledgeable about structure (communication channels, distribution of
the context involved. This entry examines team per- authority), team history (levels of past performance,
formance assessment from a context-dependent, or past relationships among members), and team mis-
contingent, perspective. sion (time urgency, novelty, and difficulty). Processes
Team Performance Assessment 905

involve patterns and sequences of individual-level member skills, to measure the “typical” perfor-
thinking and feelings, on one hand, and team- mance of the team, or to discover the team’s
related activities associated with such things as man- capacity for maximum performance or perfor-
aging relationships, coordinating work flow and mance under stress. The choice of setting should
communications, and using influence tactics, on the also relate to the function that the assessment
other. Outcomes usually refer to levels of individual information will play (e.g., remediation, compen-
performance within the team, degree of mission sation, or certification).
accomplishment by the team, positive or negative
changes in capacity (over time) to function well as
How to Measure
a team, and levels of stakeholder satisfaction.
Degree of satisfaction with outcomes is usually Many methods are useful to the assessment of
related to the needs, goals, and expectations of the team performance, but the feasible set will depend
stakeholder. Stakeholders interested in team perfor- on the purpose, the foci, and the setting. Typically,
mance can include the team members themselves, obtaining valid assessments of processes represents
the team leader, clients, customers, and (in the case the greatest challenge. Processes by their very
of a sports team) an audience. nature are emergent, in that they unfold over time.
Current thinking is that a complete team assess- They are also ephemeral in that they usually do
ment should also provide information regarding not leave any signs or artifacts. Individual pro-
the contribution of the various factors that are cesses of interest include the way someone attends
thought to drive team performance. Typically this to, selects, stores, and retrieves information.
requires an examination of the activities of indi- Under some circumstances, getting a good mea-
vidual team members, the team leader, key team- sure of the pattern of decisions or choices made by
member dyads (e.g., pilot and copilot), and the each of the team members or the way that members
team as a whole. For example, the team may per- handle emotions (e.g., relative to success or failure)
form poorly because of one unprepared member, may also represent important process information.
poor team leadership, or team-level problems with At the team level, processes are reflected in interac-
communication. Although the preferred approach tions and activities by and among team members.
to assessment will depend on its purpose, most In this case, measures need to be crafted and used
experts on team assessment emphasize the need to to assess the number and patterns of communica-
examine both processes (individual or team) and tions among members, interpersonal influence,
outcomes (individual or team) in order to gain an decisions made, work flow, and so on.
adequate perspective on the nature and causes of
high or low performance.
Measuring Processes
The mission or type of the team will strongly
affect the key inputs, processes, and outcomes to When team performance is defined as effective
assess. Most typologies of teams include variants individual or team processes, the assessment is
of the following: production, project, service, com- traditionally done by using techniques such as rat-
mand and control, action, advisory, or manage- ings by skilled observers, postperformance reports
ment. This list conveys some notion of the kinds of of team members, content analysis of video record-
people (with attendant skills) required as input for ings of individual and team-level activities, or the
effective team performance. pattern of choices or decisions captured by com-
puter work stations. Each of these approaches has
both advantages and liabilities.
Where to Measure
Current thinking is that team-level processes
Team performance can be exhibited in a num- (e.g., patterns of member activities) result in what
ber of venues, such as a training situation, the are called proximal outcomes. These are transitory
actual workplace, or a setting created for assess- or recurrent states of a team that are produced by
ment purposes (e.g., a simulation). The choice of team dynamics. Once these states are created, they
setting should relate to the purpose of assessment. become a characteristic of a team. It is important
That is, the purpose may be to improve team to note that, as a team property, they will have an
906 Team Performance Assessment

impact on future team processes and often on the than one measurement tool to assess stakeholder
eventual performance level of the team (called dis- satisfaction.
tal outcomes or outputs). Concepts such as team The level of team performance may take time to
cohesion, team shared cognition, team potency, become manifest. For example, the objective may be
team trust, and team climate have been used to to assess the performance of a top management team
describe such emergent states. As a generalization, of a large work organization after a change of CEO.
teams that can be described (rated) as highly cohe- The nature of work at the level of the CEO and the
sive, possessing a supportive climate, or having interplay among members of the top management
members with shared goals and high levels of trust team are complex and poorly understood. However,
are thought to be effective. To put it another way, it is believed that it takes time for a new CEO to staff
such teams are poised to demonstrate high perfor- a strong top management team. Once team members
mance, subject to resources and authority. are in place, the CEO must build a well-functioning
team and create and then implement strategy.
Even if all this is done expeditiously, it still may
Measuring Outcomes
take months to see the impact of strategy on such
When team performance is defined as desired outcomes as market share, return on investment,
individual or team outcomes, valid assessment can or stock price. Yet these are the kind of measures
be equally challenging. In operational settings, per- to which the typical CEO and top management
formance may be estimated by examining out- team will be held accountable. Clearly the scores
comes such as level, speed, or efficiency of work obtained from an assessment of the performance
goal attainment for either the members or the team of a top management team depend greatly on
as a whole. Such outcome information is often when that assessment takes place.
found in operational records. However, before one
selects such metrics, it is important to control for Interteam Relationships
or rule out factors that could contaminate the mea-
sure and thus reduce its validity. For example, high In many contexts, the quality of interteam rela-
mortality rates of a hospital team may be an arti- tionships is important to the assessment of team
fact of the way cases get assigned to teams, such performance. Examples include project teams that
that truly effective teams get the worst cases. must function within a larger program, production
Blindly accepting mortality rate as a metric with- teams that combine outputs from other teams,
out adjustments would be inappropriate. Ratings teams that are part of a supply chain, or military
by supervisors, analysts, or customers are com- units that must function effectively with units in a
monly used to obtain assessments of outcome qual- battle situation. In such cases, teams are interde-
ity. An outcome of importance in some contexts is pendent relative to inputs or outcomes. Moreover,
a measurable improvement in team member skills in business today, there are team member clusters
or a more positive attitude by members relative to and whole teams that are separated geographically
such things as their desire to stay in the team or but connected via technology (virtual global teams).
their feelings of individual or collective efficacy. These present a special challenge for team perfor-
These too are frequently assessed via ratings based mance assessment.
on member behaviors or activities during or after a In summary, the assessment of team perfor-
team performance episode. Such ratings can also mance must be guided by a deep knowledge of
be obtained from members directly. team dynamics, the team mission, and the context
Stakeholder satisfaction is increasingly being in which the team functions. The appropriate
used as an indicator of team performance because approach will also be contingent on the goal or
many teams exist to provide service to others. purpose of assessment.
Levels of satisfaction can be estimated by customer Richard Klimoski
surveys, unsolicited customer comments, or levels
of repeat business garnered by the team. Because See also Group Cohesiveness; Group Development;
each of these indicators may be imperfect or Group Performance; Group Potency; Shared Mental
incomplete, many organizations make use of more Models; Team Building; Team Reflexivity; Teams
Team Reflexivity 907

Further Readings also contributed significantly to its understanding.


Cannon-Bowers, J. A., & Salas, E. (1997). A framework It is conceptualized as a process involving three
for developing team performance measures in training. stages or components: reflection, planning, and
In M. T. Brannick, E. Salas, & C. Prince (Eds.), action or adaptation. The three stages are of equal
Team performance assessment and measurement importance.
(pp. 45–62). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. The first stage, team reflection, refers to a team’s
Gessner, T. L., Langkamer, K. L., & Klimoski, R. J. joint exploration of work-related issues and
(2007). Research designs for assessing group learning. includes behaviors such as questioning, planning,
In V. Sessa & M. London (Eds.), Work group learning exploratory learning, analysis, reviewing past
(pp. 391–420). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. events with self-awareness, and coming to terms
Klimoski, R. J. & Kiechel Koles, K. L. (2001). The chief over time with the new awareness. Reflection lev-
executive officer and the top management team els are assumed to vary in depth. Shallow reflec-
interface. In S. L. Zaccaro & R. J. Klimoski tion consists of thinking about issues closely
(Eds.), The nature of organizational leadership related to the task at hand. An illustrative question
(pp. 219–269). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. at this level is, Do people think we communicate
Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Bell, B. S. (2003). Work groups information about patients well within this team?
and teams in organizations. In W. C. Borman, D. R. Moderate reflection is characterized by a more
Ilgen, & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), Handbook of critical approach toward tasks. An illustrative
psychology: Industrial and organizational psychology question at this level is, Let’s think about some
(Vol. 12, pp. 333–376). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. alternatives in terms of how we could best improve
Marks, M. A., Zaccaro, S. J., & Mathieu, J. E. (2000).
our product design processes. Finally, deep reflec-
A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team
tion involves rethinking the norms and values of
processes. Academy of Management Review, 26,
the team or organization, as illustrated in a state-
356–376.
ment such as, “So we agree that our communica-
McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and
tion about patients is hampered by professional
performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Sundstrom, E., DeMeuse, K. P., & Futrell, D. (1990).
divisions within the team.”
Work teams: Applications and effectiveness. American The second stage, planning, refers to the activi-
Psychologist, 45, 120–143. ties that enable reflections to change into action
or adaptation. Planning involves four dimensions:
detail (the extent to which a plan is worked out in
detail before action as opposed to being worked
Team Reflexivity out only during action), inclusiveness of potential
problems (the extent to which a team develops
With the increasing relevance of teamwork in alternative plans in case of inadvertent circum-
organizations, the quest for the factors that stance), a priori hierarchical ordering of plans (the
enhance team effectiveness has grown exponen- extent to which plans are broken up into subplans
tially. Team reflexivity is one of the factors that before actions are commenced), and time scale
has been identified as a possible key variable in (the extent to which both short- and long-term
explaining the effectiveness of work teams. Team plans are drawn). Planning is important because it
reflexivity can be defined as the extent to which creates a perceptual readiness for, and guides
team members collectively reflect on the team’s team members’ attention toward, relevant oppor-
objectives, strategies, and processes, as well as tunities for action and means to accomplish the
their wider organizations and environments, and team’s goal.
adapt accordingly. The third stage, action or adaptation, concerns
the goal-directed behaviors relevant for achieving
the desired changes in team objectives, strategies,
Conceptualization
processes, organizations, or environments previ-
The concept of team reflexivity was initially devel- ously identified by the team during the stage of
oped by Michael West, but other scholars, such as reflection. The action component of reflexivity can
Michaela Schippers and Carsten de Dreu, have be assessed in four dimensions: magnitude (the
908 Team Reflexivity

scale of an action or change initiated by the team), reflection as they imply a rearrangement of work
novelty (how new the action or change is for the processes and enable an exchange of perspectives
team, organization, or other stakeholders), radical- between the newcomer and the team. Errors and
ness (the amount of change in the status quo that failures can be used as a tool for learning because
the action or change represents), and effectiveness they offer valuable feedback and have the potential
(the extent to which the action or change achieves to stimulate teams to reflect on the processes or
the intended team goals). assumptions that led to them. Successes constitute
Typically, reflexive teams show more detailed an equally important trigger for reflection.
planning, pay more attention to long-term conse- Although teams tend not to look back on their
quences, and have a larger inventory of environ- work when they are successful, analyzing what
mental cues to which they respond. In contrast, a they did well and how they did it offers important
nonreflexive team shows little awareness of the learning. Other factors that can trigger team
team’s objectives, its strategies, and the environ- reflexivity are cooperative conflict management;
ment in which it operates. Nonreflexive teams tend difficulties over time allocations; difficulties in syn-
to rely on the use of habitual routines. In other chronizing the work of the different team mem-
words, they tend to repeatedly exhibit a similar bers; and interruptions, such as crises, obstacles,
pattern of behavior in a given situation without and organizational changes.
explicitly discussing it or by selecting it over other Interventions conducted by West and his col-
possible courses of action. This lack of exploration leagues to promote team reflexivity suggest that
of alternative hypotheses ultimately leads to stag- these concepts are readily grasped by teams and
nation, lack of innovation, and inability to adapt that levels of reflexivity rapidly increase, with sus-
to a changing environment. tained reflexivity up to 12 months after interven-
tions begin. Moreover, reflexivity has also been
successfully manipulated in experimental studies,
Factors That Trigger Team Reflexivity
suggesting that in applied settings managers should
Team reflexivity is unlikely to arise naturally. be able to induce reflexivity.
Reflection often involves recognizing a discrepancy Studying reflexivity demands methodologies
between actual and desired circumstances, which that can gauge the depth and richness of the pro-
can generate anxiety and uncertainty. Moreover, cess. Most research on team reflexivity has been
reflection might demand change in action, and indi- conducted by means of questionnaires. Other
viduals and organizations are naturally resistant to methodological approaches that have potential for
change. In the face of these factors, teams tend not advancing understanding of reflexivity are critical
to engage in reflexivity in a voluntary fashion. incident techniques, observation of team meetings,
In contrast with other, more stable team charac- focus groups, and longitudinal interventions.
teristics that are difficult to modify (such as mem-
bership), managers can actively promote team
Impact on Team Effectiveness
reflexivity and consequently increase the level of
team effectiveness. Indeed, several factors have Recent research in both experimental and field set-
been suggested to trigger team reflexivity. tings has found evidence for the positive effects of
Leadership style is one such factor. In order to team reflexivity. These effects were observed in
foster reflexivity, leaders should adopt a style that samples comprising management, production, and
creates the conditions for experimentation and risk service teams from a variety of sectors, including
taking and that develops shared commitment to banking, government, health care, the chemical
reflecting on and questioning routine practices. industry, and research and development. In these
Leaders can concentrate their efforts on longer- studies, the impact of team reflexivity was particu-
term goals, emphasize a vision, inspire team mem- larly powerful when the environment was uncer-
bers to pursue the vision, coach followers to take tain and teams had complex tasks that required
responsibility for their development, and encour- nonroutine activities.
age team members to reflect on errors. Team mem- Overall, team reflexivity has been found to be
ber changes also provide an opportunity for positively related to desirable outcomes such as
Teams 909

systematic information processing, creativity, inno- contribution of goal interdependence. Group


vation, performance, and organizational citizenship & Organization Management, 29(5), 540–559.
behavior. Furthermore, reflexivity has been found West, M. A. (2000). Reflexivity, revolution, and
to moderate the impact of other team characteris- innovation in work teams. In M. M. Beyerlein,
tics on team performance. For instance, diversity in D. A. Johnson, & S. T. Beyerlein (Eds.), Product
terms of goal orientation is positively associated development teams: Advances in interdisciplinary
with team performance only when teams are highly studies of work teams (pp. 1–29). Stamford, CT:
reflexive. In addition, cooperative outcome interde- JAI Press.
pendence is related to more intensive information
sharing, increased learning, and higher team effec-
tiveness only when team reflexivity is high.
Although the mechanisms by which reflexivity Teams
affects performance have been specified theoreti-
cally, there is little empirical research examining Teams are social entities that come together to
them. One of the few relevant studies reported that perform complex, dynamic, and critical tasks that
reflexivity increased team effectiveness by enhanc- are beyond the capabilities of an individual. Teams
ing communication and implementation of strate- are now part of every aspect of organizational life.
gies, as well as similarity of mental models. They are prevalent in government, the military,
health care, aviation and space, the corporate
world, the oil industry, and manufacturing, to
Conclusion name just a few settings. Teams are deployed to
Team reflexivity is a useful concept for both under- solve organizational effectiveness problems, to deal
standing and promoting team effectiveness. This with life-or-death situations, to create new prod-
is partly because many teams are not naturally ucts, to resolve world conflicts as peace keepers, to
reflexive. The capacity to reflect on behavior is unique put out wildfires, and to rescue people during
to humans and is useful in many contexts. In the natural disasters.
complex setting of interdependent teamwork, reflex- Indeed, teams are an integral part of our soci-
ivity offers a powerful means of improving the effec- ety. Nonetheless, questions remain about teams:
tiveness of the team. What are teams? How are they different from
groups? What is teamwork? What do we know
Michael A. West and Claudia A. Sacramento about team dynamics? What do effective teams
do? These questions are answered in this entry.
See also Group Learning; Group Motivation; Group
Performance; Group Problem Solving and Decision
Making; Shared Mental Models; Teams Some Definitions
Some important definitions are needed to under-
Further Readings stand team dynamics in organizations. First, a
team can be defined as a set of two or more indi-
De Dreu, C. (2007). Cooperative outcome
interdependence, task reflexivity, and team
viduals who adaptively, episodically, and dynami-
effectiveness: A motivated information processing cally interact interdependently through specified
perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(3), roles and responsibilities as they work toward
628–638. shared and valued goals. Team member interde-
Gurtner, A., Tschan, F., Sernmer, N. K., & Nagele, C. pendency (i.e., task interdependency) is a critical
(2007). Getting groups to develop good strategies: feature of a team and distinguishes a group of indi-
Effects of reflexivity interventions on team process, viduals from a team. Although this distinction
team performance, and shared mental models. might seem academic, it highlights that teams and
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision groups are not the same. Teams and groups have
Processes, 102(2), 127–142. different organizational and leadership structure,
Tjosvold, D., Tang, M. M. L., & West, M. (2004). goals, communication requirements, life spans,
Reflexivity for team innovation in China: The and task intensity. Team members usually have a
910 Teams

past and a future together. In contrast, group mem- enact their individual behaviors and individual-
bers (e.g., people who participate on juries, coun- and team-level teamwork processes. Team perfor-
cils, task forces, brainstorming groups) usually mance can be contrasted with the definition of
have limited time together and nothing to tie them teamwork provided above, which focused on the
together other than a particular task at one par- enactment of teamwork processes alone. Therefore,
ticular time. teamwork is nested within team performance.
In addition, because they contain specific roles, Team performance is the combination of both
teams can often be characterized as having distrib- individual performance and teamwork processes.
uted expertise. That is, team members often have What is team effectiveness? Team effectiveness
different specializations in which teammates hold is an evaluation of the outcomes of team perfor-
different information about the task and possess dif- mance relative to some criteria. It is a judgment of
ferent knowledge and skills. In fact, it is this diver- how well the results of performance meet some set
sity of expertise that creates the synergy for teams to of relatively objective measures (e.g., metrics of
complete work outside the scope of any one indi- productivity) or subjective standards (e.g., supervi-
vidual’s capabilities. And the dynamics of effective sor or observer ratings).These standards, to be
teamwork are necessary to realize this synergy. meaningful, should be aligned with the goals of the
What is teamwork? Teamwork is the dynamic, team and organization.
simultaneous, and recursive enactment of behav-
ioral, attitudinal, and cognitive mechanisms (in the
Research Theories and Results
form of team processes) that affect moment-to-
moment actions and performance outcomes. What contributes to teamwork? Interest in teams
Teamwork, then, is a set of interrelated, adaptable, has led to a plethora of theoretical models of team-
and flexible cognitions, behaviors, and attitudes work and team performance. Eduardo Salas and
needed to achieve desired team goals. One can colleagues recently reviewed almost 140 studies
argue that teams “think,” “do,” and “feel” as they from various disciplines that model aspects of
perform and execute their interdependent tasks. teamwork or team performance. This proliferation
These cognitions, behaviors, and attitudes repre- of models is indicative of the widespread fascina-
sent the team-level competencies (i.e., the knowl- tion with teams and teamwork. But what do all
edge, skills, and attitudes, or KSAs) that members these models tell us about teamwork and team
need in order to execute effective team functions performance?
and achieve performance greater than that pre- Most models include inputs (e.g., task structure,
dicted by the combined efforts of the individual member characteristics), processes (e.g., coordina-
team members. tion, communication), and outputs (e.g., member
To be clear, it is useful to think of competencies satisfaction, team performance), which together
within a team as belonging to one of two types: are known as IPOs. Although the IPO perspective
teamwork and task work. Task work competen- has become the preferred way to model teams,
cies are KSAs used to accomplish individual task some theorists add system theory constructs. For
performance—the application of these skills does example, Joseph McGrath adds the notion of
not require interdependent interaction within the dynamic change in his model of time, interaction,
team. Teamwork competencies, in contrast, are and performance. And Daniel Ilgen and colleagues
the KSAs necessary for members to function extend the IPO framework to include emergent
within an interdependent team. They occur only states and feedback loops. Such perspectives pro-
at the team level. Therefore, team members must pose a less linear framework that takes into
possess not only individual-level expertise relevant account the dynamic nature of team functioning.
to their own individual tasks but also expertise in What contributes to teamwork, however, are
the social-cognitive dynamics of teamwork. five factors supported or “glued” by three others.
Teamwork is the process of enacting these team- Salas and colleagues have proposed that there is a
work competencies. “Big Five” in teamwork. They argue that, across
What is team performance? Team performance domains, team goals, tasks, and structures, there
is a multilevel process that arises as team members are five core components of teamwork (as long as
Teams 911

team members have high task interdependence). core of this model is adaptive team performance,
The core teamwork components are team leader- which is characterized as an emergent phenomenon
ship, adaptability, mutual performance monitor- based on the unfolding of a recursive cycle of per-
ing, backup or supportive behavior, and team formance. It occurs when one or more team mem-
orientation. The importance of each component bers functionally redirect (change) current cognitive
may vary across contexts or domains, but each of or behavioral actions or structures to meet expected
the Big Five in some form is essential for any type or emerging demands. Burke argues that adaptive
of teamwork. In addition, Salas and colleagues team performance is achieved as the team passes
have identified three collaborating mechanisms: through four phases. The first phase consists of
shared mental models, closed-loop communica- situation assessment, during which team members
tion, and mutual trust. These collaborating mecha- scan the environment, recognize cue patterns, and
nisms are necessary because they facilitate the build a coherent understanding of their present
enactment of the Big Five. situation. The second phase is plan formulation,
during which team members collectively generate
and decide on a course of action. The third phase
Key Components
is plan execution, which is achieved via the team
Team leadership has substantial implications coordination mechanisms (behavioral actions) that
for the effectiveness of teams and organizations at are in place. The fourth and final phase is team
large. The functional approach to leadership char- learning, during which the team evaluates the effec-
acterizes it as promoting coordinated, adaptive tiveness of its performance and makes appropriate
team performance by facilitating goal clarification corrections. The results of this team learning feed
and attainment. Leaders solve collective problems into future team performance episodes (i.e., pass
through four general types of actions. They search through the adaptive cycle).
for and structure information, they use informa- Mutual performance monitoring is how team
tion in problem solving and sense-making, they members keep track of their teammates’ work
manage human capital resources, and they manage while carrying out their own. They do this to
material resources. Kimberly Smith-Jentsch and ensure that everything is going as expected and
colleagues have identified two specific team leader- that they are following procedures correctly. It
ship behaviors that contribute to expert team per- involves team members being aware of their sur-
formance. First, team leaders provide guidance roundings, an essential component of teamwork.
and suggestions on improvements. This facilitates A team must develop a strong habit of mutual per-
team learning and development, which lead to formance monitoring, as well as attitudes that
higher levels of future performance. Second, team define it as critical to high performance. For
leaders identify team- and individual-level priori- mutual performance monitoring to be successful,
ties to ensure that the aspects of the team and team members must develop a shared understand-
individual tasks that are most critical for team ing of their task, mission, and equipment. Such an
outcomes are given the most attention. understanding is essential in order to detect devia-
Adaptability underlies many team functions and tions from normal or expected conditions. Knowing
behaviors and can be defined as the team’s ability what should be happening is a necessary condition
to change (shift) team-based processes in response for obtaining useful information from observa-
to demands from the environment in a manner that tions of what is happening at any one time.
results in effective team functioning. Adaptability is Backup behavior (or supporting behavior)
an essential component of teamwork, especially for happens when team members step in to help one
teams operating under dynamic, stressful, and another. It is defined as a discretionary behavior
time-critical conditions. Until recently, only a small enacted when there is recognition by potential
amount of research dealt with temporal aspects of backup providers that there is a workload
team adaptation and performance. This neglect is demand distribution problem in their team. As
beginning to be addressed. noted above, mutual performance monitoring is
For example, C. Shawn Burke and colleagues a necessary condition for backup behavior, and
have proposed a model of team adaptation. At the backup behavior is necessary to transform mutual
912 Teams

performance monitoring into performance gains. situation and similar inferences about possible
Backup behavior can involve either physical or states of the situation in the near future. Also,
verbal (or other communicative) assistance. holding shared mental models enables implicit
Backup behavior supports effective team func- coordination (e.g., passing information without its
tioning in three key ways. First, it allows team having been requested), that is, communicating
members to receive timely and precise feedback so without overtly doing so.
that team performance processes can be adjusted. Closed-loop communication is a specific pattern
Second, it allows team members to provide assis- of communication that enables effective team-
tance during task performance. Third, as already work. In general, communication is information
noted, it allows teams to dynamically adjust their exchange between a sender and a receiver, with
performance strategies and processes when an both knowing that the information was received.
imbalance in the workload distribution is detected. Communication is the means by which team mem-
This creates an adaptive capacity to correct errors bers translate individual-level understanding into
and shift performance strategies. the team-level dynamic representations that guide
Team orientation is more than an individual’s coordinated actions. Effective teams are able to
disposition to work in a team rather than alone. It shift between implicit and explicit coordination
is the propensity to value and use task inputs from when environmental demands change. When effec-
teammates. These preferences and patterns of tive teams engage in explicit coordination, they use
behavior are essential for effective teamwork. For closed-loop communication. Three features define
example, when teams experience increasing levels closed-loop communication: (1) a message that is
of stress (e.g., time pressure), team members can initiated by the sender; (2) the receipt, interpreta-
succumb to intentional narrowing, in which they tion, and acknowledgment of that message by the
shift their focus away from the team and toward intended receiver; and (3) a follow-up by the
their individual tasks. This causes them to become sender, ensuring that the message was received and
less likely to accept input or feedback from others appropriately interpreted. This pattern of commu-
on their team. A strong team orientation can miti- nication helps ensure that all team members are
gate this tendency. operating under the same goals and understanding
of the situation.
Smith-Jentsch and colleagues have identified
Collaborating Mechanisms
four specific teamwork behaviors contributing to
The five core components of teamwork discussed good team communication. First, team members
above are facilitated by three core collaborating should use the proper phraseology. Teams that
mechanisms: shared mental models, closed-loop speak with a specialized communication terminol-
communication, and mutual trust. They do this ogy (e.g., military or health care teams) are able to
by ensuring that information is exchanged, distrib- pass large amounts of information quickly. Second,
uted, and processed in an appropriate and timely team members should provide complete and timely
manner. reports of the information they hold. Third, team
Shared mental models are organized knowledge members should minimize unneeded communica-
structures that facilitate execution of interdepen- tions (e.g., chatter) by focusing only on the essen-
dent team processes. An individual-level mental tials of interaction necessary for team functioning.
model is a knowledge structure that helps to inte- Fourth, to minimize the chance of misinterpreta-
grate information and comprehend some phenom- tion, team members should make sure that their
enon of interest. Expanded to the team level, a communications are clear and audible.
shared mental model is a knowledge structure that Mutual trust in the context of teams is mem-
is shared across the members of the team. This bers’ shared perception that the team is motivated
“sharedness” allows team members to interpret and able to protect the interests of its members.
information in a similar manner and thereby Mutual trust concerns the team’s motivation and
facilitates effective team function. Team members ability to resolve conflicts so that members feel
who hold shared mental representations are better accountability and ownership for team results.
able to develop similar causal explanations of a Without mutual trust, resources of the team (e.g.,
Territoriality 913

attention and communication) may be squandered Modeling complex systems: Motivation, cognition and
on unnecessary surveillance of members to ensure social processes (pp. 185–243). Lincoln: University of
that they are performing adequately. Mutual trust Nebraska Press.
also underlies team processes and outcomes, such
as members’ willingness to disseminate informa-
tion, members’ contributions, members’ participa-
tion, and the quality of the team’s performance. Territoriality
What Do Effective Teams Do? Territoriality, or territorial behavior, is related to
occupation or ownership and control of a geo-
Research has identified a number of behaviors graphical area. A territory is a spatial unit that is
and cognitions that distinguish high-performing defended from encroachment. In contrast to per-
from lower performing teams. High-performance sonal space, conceived by the anthropologist
teams hold shared mental models; they self-correct Edward T. Hall as an area or “bubble” that moves
and adapt as they perform; they have clear roles with a person, a territory is a region that is fixed.
and responsibilities; they have shared vision; they Topics of interest to social psychologists are how
engage in a cycle of prebriefing, performing, and different kinds of territories affect social behavior
debriefing; their members trust one another; they and the consequences of territorial invasion. This
have a sense of teamwork; and they optimize entry examines the background of the idea of
resources. In sum, high-performing teams are not territoriality and some relevant research.
just a collection of the “best players”—having the
best person in each position does not guarantee
team success. To succeed, teams need teamwork. Background
Within the social sciences, the concept of territory
Eduardo Salas
has long been of interest to geographers and to
See also Group Composition; Group Development; sociologists who studied how street gangs mark
Group Learning; Group Performance; Group out their home turf. The significance of territorial-
Structure; Shared Mental Models; Team Building; ity for social psychologists, however, arose pre-
Team Performance Assessment; Team Reflexivity; dominantly from theory developed in ethology—the
Trust; Work Teams study of animals in their natural environments.
The ornithologist Henry Howard noted in 1920
that birds defined and used small spaces, which he
Further Readings called territories. How animals come to occupy
and then defend a territory attracted the attention
Driskell, J. E., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E., & O’Shea,
of the ethologists Konrad Lorenz and Nikolaas
P. G. (2006). What makes a good team player? Group
Tinbergen. They found that territoriality occurs
Dynamics: Theory, Research and Practice, 10,
mostly within an animal species. It is instinctive
249–271.
and is associated with mating, rearing of the
Ilgen, D. R., Hollenbeck, J. R., Johnson, M., & Jundt, D.
young, and protecting access to food sources. In
(2005). Teams in organizations: From input-process-
output models to IMOI models. Annual Review of
both social and environmental psychology, territo-
Psychology, 56, 517–543. riality is not confined to individuals but also occurs
McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and for groups.
performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. In territorial species, territorial behavior is
Salas, E., Sims, D. E., & Burke, C. S. (2005). Is there a linked to aggression in the defense of space.
“Big Five” in teamwork? Small Group Research, 36, Members of a species spread out and divide the
555–599. available living space, establish a territory, and
Salas, E., Stagl, K. D., Burke, C. S., & Goodwin, G. F. defend it against intruders of their own species.
(2007). Fostering team effectiveness in organizations: Attacks against an invading conspecific can occur,
Toward an integrative theoretical framework of team but these are often minimized by the use of bound-
performance. In W. Spaulding & J. Flowers (Eds.), ary marking—Bears mark trees with their claws,
914 Territoriality

dogs urinate, cats spray and also leave their scent others. A home is an example of a primary terri-
by rubbing against objects, and birds sing. If an tory and is used often permanently by a primary
intruder persists, an aggression display signals group, such as a family. This kind of territory is the
what could follow and may head off an actual most central to the concept of privacy, as defined
attack. Within some species, such as primates, a above. As a primary territory, someone’s house is
territory underpins the social structure of the therefore the most clearly marked. It is likely to
group and provides a context for dominance hier- have fences or hedges as its boundaries. It may
archies that control access to resources by group have a gate and almost certainly a lockable front
members. door and a bell for visitors. Of all territories, it is
The combined thrust of arguments in the etho- the one that is most actively defended when
logical and psychological literature is that territo- invaded. Generally, the use of defensive force is
riality serves two functions: It regulates social accepted in the face of home invasion.
interaction, and it defines identity. Both functions Within a primary territory, members of a pri-
have been explored in social-psychological research. mary group usually differentiate between areas in
With respect to social interaction, defining a terri- terms of how they may be used. The kitchen is
tory eases contact between people by reducing likely to be communal, whereas the bathroom is
conflict and miscommunication. It involves indi- declared off limits to most other group members
vidualizing a place with a marking device that for short periods of time. In the family home,
serves as a boundary and communicates owner- growing children stake their claim to their bed-
ship. Claiming a territory can also communicate rooms by mounting photos of friends, posters of
identity, either for oneself or for one’s group. pop stars, and trophies on the walls. In time, chil-
The environmental psychologist Irwin Altman dren may also expect their parents to knock before
viewed territorial behavior as a mechanism that entering. Likewise, in shared spaces such as an
controls social interaction. He argued that human open-plan office or a student dormitory, the use of
territoriality has several components: decorations stamps one’s personal identity on a
specific zone and enhances the perception of per-
•• It regulates interaction by defining self–other sonal control.
boundaries. (This notion overlaps with the According to Altman, primary territories are
concept of privacy, that is, how we control powerful privacy-regulation mechanisms. In
access to the self or to our group.) Western culture at least, they are usually treated in
•• It involves personalization, or marking, of a a sacrosanct way and can be entered only with the
geographical area. owner’s permission. The degree to which an indi-
•• It communicates real or implied ownership by its vidual personalizes a primary territory indicates
users or inhabitants. how attached that person is to that space. For
example, university students who decorate their
rooms in residence halls are more likely to identify
Kinds of Territories with the hall and the university and to extend their
Altman distinguished between primary, secondary, studies there beyond their freshman year. Violation
and public territories, noting that these vary in of a primary territory is a threat to a person’s iden-
terms of how central they are to the lives of indi- tity, and a failure to regulate one’s privacy can lead
viduals or to the activities of groups to which they to a loss of self-esteem. Examples of people who
belong. Different kinds of territories also vary in have little or no primary territory are prisoners,
terms of their duration of possession or ownership, psychiatric hospital patients, and the homeless.
ranging from transient to long-term occupancy.
Secondary Territories
Primary Territories
A secondary territory is less psychologically
A primary territory is owned and most often central and less exclusive than a primary terri-
used exclusively. Ownership is invested in an indi- tory. Secondary territories may have a limited
vidual or a group, and this is clearly identifiable to degree of ownership, such as clubrooms by club
Territoriality 915

members or the foyer of an apartment building by privacy. Like animals, people use territorial mark-
its inhabitants. Such territories may even function ers to deter encroachment on their territories. For
as “homes” in certain cases. For example, regular example, a home owner might use fences, hedges,
frequenters of a neighborhood bar may regard the or signs (e.g., “Beware of dog”). And a worker in
bar as their shared domain and feel that they can a shared office might use personal items, such as
control who may use the space, even to the point calendars, desk ornaments, or photos. At the
of trying to deny entry to strangers. Intruders can group level, people living in a particular residen-
be subjected to hostile looks and insulting or tial area might indicate that their neighborhood is
mocking statements. Regulars at a bar can also off limits to burglars by forming citizen patrols or
treat it as an office, taking phone calls, storing creating a gated community that only residents
funds with the bartender, and receiving mail. can enter. In such cases, the creation of a defen-
Some researchers have included temporary sible space contributes to the stability of the social
interactional areas as a special kind of secondary system.
territory. An example is the way a small cluster of The reaction to a territorial invasion varies
people occupies a circle of floor space at a party. with the type of territory. Primary territories, such
Altman, however, has argued that such a shared as homes, usually involve legal ownership, so an
area is better classified as a group personal space, emergency call to the police might serve to deal
an enlarged and shared version of Hall’s personal with a home invasion. Intrusions into secondary
bubble—a “transparent membrane” that can shift territories, where ownership is not always obvi-
with the people who are inside it. Because second- ous, are more difficult to address. Marking one’s
ary territories are usually semipublic, conflict is space in a public territory can deter encroach-
possible over their location, their boundaries, and ment, although the success of the strategy depends
even their existence. The less clear the rules gov- on the number of occupants seeking space. In a
erning the use of a secondary territory, the more study by Robert Sommer, when few people were
likely it will be encroached. using a library and density was therefore low,
almost any marker, such as a paperback book or
even an old newspaper (although not litter), was
Public Territories an effective way of protecting reading space when
a person left the room. However, when many
A public territory is one that everybody can
people were using the library and density was
enter and occupy from time to time. Occupancy,
high, a personal marker such as a coat was much
therefore, is temporary and usually not exclusive.
more effective.
For example, just because an individual has arrived
first at the beach does not mean that other people
can be prevented from swimming. Public territo-
ries can be exclusive for the time of occupancy, Conclusion
such as a seat in a restaurant or a telephone booth, Both individuals and groups are embedded in
but people have no rights over them once they social environments. Although these environ-
leave. Occupancy of a public territory does not ments provide benefits, they also generate costs.
imply complete freedom of action. Behavior is Territoriality is a means of reducing these costs
typically constrained by community norms, some- by buffering individuals and groups from
times defined in posted rules, such as the ban on unwanted interactions. Given the striking simi-
alcoholic beverages in certain parks. larities in how various species of animals create
and defend territories, it is not surprising that ter-
ritoriality has elicited a good deal of theoretical
Territorial Invasion and empirical attention from researchers from
various disciplines.
A territorial encroachment involves an unaccept-
able breach of a personal or group boundary. Graham M. Vaughan
Violation of a boundary means that the level of
achieved privacy is less than the level of desired See also Crowding; Group Boundaries; Norms
916 Terrorism

Further Readings Jewish brethren as well. In 1605, Guy Fawkes infa-


Altman, I. (1975). The environment and social behavior: mously attempted to blow up King James, the
Privacy, personal space, territory and crowding. King’s council, and the English Parliament as part
Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. of the ultimately foiled Gunpowder Plot. During
Ardrey, R. (1966). The territorial imperative. New York: the 20th century, terrorism was successfully
Atheneum. employed in Russia, China, Cuba, and Iran by
Hall, E. T. (1966). The hidden dimension. New York: revolutionaries looking to overthrow their govern-
Doubleday. ments. Although these examples offer only a small
Newman, O. (1972). Defensible space. New York: sampling of the countless numbers of terrorist acts
Macmillan. that litter the pages of human history, their diverse
Sommer, R. (1969). Personal space: The behavioral basis nature illustrates that terrorists need not share any
of design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. common goals but merely an ideological convic-
Tinbergen, N. (1968). On war and peace in animals and tion legitimizing fear and violence as a means to
man: An ethologist’s approach to the biology of their desired end.
aggression. Science, 160, 1411–1418. During the past 40 years, the number of coun-
tries reporting terrorist incidents has steadily
grown, with the countries of Israel, Iraq, Pakistan,
and Colombia reporting the greatest number of
Terrorism incidents. During this same period, terrorists have
also increasingly targeted persons, in addition to
There are more than 100 different definitions of structures and other forms of property.
terrorism. One possible reason for this lack of Terrorists show considerable creativity in the
consensus is that the pejorative connotation of the tactics they use in their attacks. Seven tactics—
terrorism label motivates individuals to set it apart bombings (including suicide bombings), assassina-
from forms of aggression they wish to condone. tions, armed assaults, kidnappings, arson, hijack-
That is, because terrorism is considered heinous ings, and hostage incidents—account for the
and illegitimate, those considered terrorists by overwhelming majority of all terrorist incidents in
others often reject such a label because they see recent history. Nonetheless, the way these and
their cause as righteous and justified. This is other tactics have been used (e.g., the conversion
embodied in the often-heard assertion that one of commercial aircraft into missiles, the use of
person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom sophisticated improvised explosive device technol-
fighter. One common element in the different ogy, the use of poisonous gas in public places)
definitions of terrorism represents its core: attests to considerable ingenuity and adaptability
Terrorism is the strategic use of fear to advance of terrorist activities to situational conditions.
one’s political objectives. This definition, however,
creates a situation wherein the use of fear by orga-
The Psychology of Terrorism
nized states in order to break the morale of a tar-
geted population will fall under the label of (state) Though terrorism has manifold aspects, funda-
terrorism. For that reason, perhaps, most defini- mental questions about terrorism are sociopsy­
tions used by terrorism researchers restrict terror- chological in nature. These questions concern
ism to nonstate actors. individuals’ motivations for joining a terrorist
organization, recruitment modes and means of
persuasion, the inculcation of belief systems that
Terrorism Throughout History
justify terrorism and portray it as efficient and
Terrorism is not a new phenomenon. Documented honorable, and organizational decision making
incidents of terrorism, loosely defined, date back regarding its use.
to the ancient world. During the 1st century CE, More generally, each of these questions belongs
Jews rebelling against Roman occupation wan- to one of three levels of psychological analysis. The
dered through crowded streets, using daggers to individual level pertains to psychological factors
indiscriminately kill not only Romans but their that operate on the terrorist as a person, the group
Terrorism 917

level pertains to interpersonal psychological phe- quest for social and emotional support stems from
nomena that arise in group settings, and the organi- their personal experience, as do pain, trauma, and
zational level pertains to factors regarding the redemption of lost honor, often listed as motives. In
structure and functioning of terrorist organizations. contrast, liberation of one’s land or carrying out
of God’s will pertains to ideological factors that
transcend individual actors’ life circumstances. A
The Individual Level
terrorism-justifying ideology identifies a culprit
Because the atrocities that terrorists perpetrate (e.g., the West, Israel, infidels) presumed responsi-
violate fundamental norms of human conduct, ter- ble for the discrepancy between the extant and
rorism was thought to represent a form of psycho- desired state (defining the grievance) and portrays
pathology. However, the systematic quest for a violence against that culprit (e.g., jihad, terrorism)
terrorist psychopathology or for a unique terrorist as an effective means for redressing the grievance
personality has yielded little empirical support. and moving toward the desired state.
The majority of research has pointed to the “nor- Beyond personal causes and ideological reasons,
mality” of individuals involved in terrorist acts. a third motivational category pertinent to suicidal
The search for situational “root causes” of attacks involves a sense of social duty and obliga-
terrorism, such as socioeconomic status, age, edu- tion, whether internalized or induced by social
cation, relative deprivation, religion, foreign occu- pressure. This is exemplified in the case of World
pation, or poverty, has also proven disappointing. War II Japanese kamikaze pilots, but it is also
The primary hindrance is the conceptual problem highly relevant to present-day terrorism.
of specificity: Although many people share the Suicide terrorism is an extreme form of terror-
same oppressive environments, only a small num- ism in which terrorists claim their own life along
ber consider joining a terrorist organization. Thus, with those of their victims, thus becoming “mar-
none of these environmental factors can be consid- tyrs” for an ideological cause. Although a wide
ered the necessary and sufficient condition for, or variety of specific factors have been suggested as
the cause of, terrorism. This does not imply that possible motives of suicide bombers, it is possible
personality traits or environmental conditions are that a quest for personal significance serves as an
irrelevant to terrorism. Rather, they are best overarching motivational category responsible for
regarded as contributing factors to terrorism in suicidal terrorism. This explanation posits that
that they may enhance an individual’s support for, suicide missions are seen by those who undertake
or involvement in, a terrorist act or organization, them as means of gaining or restoring significance
under specific circumstances. or as preventing the loss of significance.
In recent years, a number of different theories
on terrorists’ motivations have been proffered.
The Group Level
Some have emphasized a singular motivation, such
as the quest for emotional and social support, Violence, in general, and the killing of innocents,
resistance to foreign occupation, or religion. In more specifically, fall outside the norms of most
contrast to this emphasis on a single crucial moti- civilized societies. Because it is difficult to sustain
vation, other theories have listed a potpourri, or deviance on one’s own, terrorism is typically car-
cocktail, of motives (e.g., honor, dedication to the ried out in the context of groups whose ideologies
leader, humiliation, modernization, pain and per- or shared realities lend terrorism an aura of legiti-
sonal loss, group pressure, vengeance) that might macy. Several sociopsychological aspects of terror-
propel individuals toward terrorism. ism require analysis at the group level. These
A reasonable step in dealing with such heteroge- include recruitment to the group, construction and
neity is to reduce it by aggregating the diverse maintenance of the group’s shared beliefs, and the
motives for becoming a terrorist into more general, mechanism of public commitment.
motivational categories. Several authors have hinted Recruitment to terrorist groups can occur
at such a taxonomy, based on a partition between through networking (introduction to the group
ideological reasons and personal causes for engag- through a family member, friend, romantic part-
ing in terrorism. For instance, alienated individuals’ ner, or other acquaintance), institutions (e.g.,
918 Terrorism

churches and mosques, religious schools) whose The Organizational Level


climates and/or explicit objectives concern
The organizational level of analysis is of consid-
ideological indoctrination, or self-recruitment
erable importance for understanding terrorism.
(e.g., through the Internet). These bottom-up (e.g.,
Terrorist groups vary immensely in degree and
networking, the Internet) and top-down (e.g.,
type of organization that characterize them. Some
religious institution) recruitment processes are
organizations revolve around a single leader.
intertwined. The personal relations provide the
Others are less autocratic and leader centered.
motivational impetus for adopting the ideology
Based on considerable intuitive appreciation of
and its social validation, whereas the Internet
various psychological principles (of recruitment,
messages furnish the ideological arguments them-
indoctrination, training, etc.), terrorist organiza-
selves and inflame the motivation to accept those
tions have been able to create a veritable assembly
arguments.
line for the production of devoted foot soldiers
Another important group-level process inherent
prepared to go so far as to sacrifice their own lives
in terrorist activity is the creation of an ensconced
for the cause. It is the organizations that then
culture. Typically, a terrorist group exists within a
decide when and where to deploy these operatives
larger society with which it may have varying
in ways that best serve the organizations’ political
degrees of worldview overlap. In some cases, the
agendas.
perspectives, values, and objectives held by the ter-
Because beyond a certain minimal size, terrorist
rorist group have little in common with those of
organizations require infrastructure, space for
the larger society. In other cases, the overlap is
training, and funding, the organizational level of
substantial, and the terrorist group is seen as act-
analysis may reveal major vulnerabilities of terror-
ing on behalf of the larger society. Because of the
ist organizations, hence affording an opening for
nearly inevitable exposure of the embedded terror-
launching significant counterterrorism efforts
ist group to views emanating from the larger soci-
exploiting those vulnerabilities.
ety, the latter may impact the terrorists’ opinions.
Thus, terrorist groups whose ideologies are diver-
gent from the societal worldviews often feel the Conclusion
need to protect their ideological premises from
Violent and deadly acts of terrorism perpetrated
contrary external influences. This is often accom-
by both large, multinational organizations (e.g.,
plished via reduction of members’ contact with
al-Qaeda) and single individuals acting on their
outside sources and the creation of a unique cul-
own (e.g., Ted Kaczynski) are capable of under-
ture wherein the terrorism-justifying ideology is
mining the sense of security in the international
repeatedly highlighted.
system as a whole. Hence, a solid understanding of
Because defection from a terrorist group may be
terrorism at macro, micro, and middling levels of
demoralizing as well as dangerous (potentially
analysis is of critical importance. This entry has
involving the provision of important intelligence to
discussed psychological phenomena proposed to
the enemies), terrorist organizations often use tac-
underlie, and thus help explain, various facets of
tics of public commitment and social pressure to
terrorism at the individual, group, and organiza-
ensure members’ loyalty. For instance, an impor-
tion levels, with the aim of offering insight into the
tant element of the group process brought to bear
general psychology of terrorism across its mani-
on the suicidal bomber in training is the creation
fold manifestations.
of a psychological point of no return, which few
individuals can overcome. Often, the candidate is Arie W. Kruglanski and Anna C. Sheveland
made to prepare his or her will and write last let-
ters to family and friends and is then videotaped See also Ideology; Intergroup Violence
bidding everybody farewell and encouraging oth-
ers to follow his or her example. This places an
extraordinary amount of pressure on the individ- Further Readings
ual to carry out the deed as planned, thus helping Crenshaw, M. (2007). Explaining suicide terrorism: A
ensure the group’s success. review essay. Security Studies, 16, 133–162.
Terror Management Theory 919

Hoffman, B. (2006). Inside terrorism. New York: others who criticize or violate the group’s norms.
Columbia University Press. This research demonstrates that concerns about
Kruglanski, A. W., Chen, X., Dechesne, M., Fishman, S., mortality contribute to many aspects of human
& Orehek, E. (2009). Fully committed: Suicide behavior, including conformity, obedience, self-
bombers’ motivation and the quest for personal esteem striving, nationalism, dogmatism, inter-
significance. Political Psychology, 30(3), 331–357. group conflict, stereotyping, political decision
Kruglanski, A. W., Crenshaw, M., Post, G., & Victoroff, J. making, and terrorism. This entry summarizes the
(2008). What should this fight be called? Metaphors theory’s basic propositions, describes supporting
of counterterrorism and their implications.
evidence, and discusses the implications for inter-
Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 8,
group relations.
97–133.
Kruglanski, A. W., & Fishman, S. (2006). The psychology
of terrorism: “Syndrome” versus “tool” perspectives. Basic Propositions
Terrorism and Political Violence, 18, 193–215.
Rapoport, D. C. (2004). Modern terror: The four waves.
Like other animals, humans have a host of bio-
In A. K. Cronin & J. M. Ludes (Eds.), Attacking logical systems that serve to perpetuate their sur-
terrorism: Elements of a grand strategy (pp. 46–73). vival. For humans, survival is enhanced by the
Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. evolved human brain, which has the capacity to
Sageman, M. (2004). Understanding terror networks. experience symbolic thought, to think about the
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. past and the future, and to be aware of oneself.
Victoroff, J. (2005). The mind of the terrorist: A review However, these same capabilities also make
and critique of psychological approaches. Journal of humans aware that eventually these systems will
Conflict Resolution, 49, 3–42. fail, and they will die. This knowledge of mortality
Victoroff, J., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2009). Psychology of in a creature designed for survival creates an ever-
terrorism: Classic and contemporary perspectives. present potential for anxiety, or terror.
New York: Psychology Press. To manage this potential for terror, humans
must view themselves as more than animals fated
to obliteration. Cultural worldviews facilitate this
denial by portraying life as meaningful and humans
Terror Management Theory as beings of enduring significance who will live on
literally or symbolically beyond death. Literal
All humans view life through a culturally based immortality is provided by the concept of a soul
worldview. According to terror management the- that transcends death through an afterlife. Symbolic
ory, a central function of these worldviews is to immortality is provided by viewing the self as con-
imbue existence with meaning and our lives with tinuing on through offspring, legacies, group iden-
enduring significance to obscure the terrifying tifications, and valued achievements: “I will die,
possibility that existence is a brief episode punctu- but my group, achievements, influence, memory
ated with oblivion upon death. Groups serve a will live on.”
central role in perpetuating these worldviews, and Each culture provides a meaning-imbuing story
conflict is often fueled by the threat that other of where life came from, what its purposes are, and
groups’ worldviews pose to sustaining faith in the how, through one’s valued deeds and roles, one
validity of one’s own worldview. will endure beyond one’s physical death. Various
Building on Ernest Becker’s existential psycho- religious, educational, political, and entertainment
analytic writings, Sheldon Solomon, Jeff Greenberg, institutions, symbols, and rituals promote faith in
and Tom Pyszczynski formulated terror manage- this meaningful and security-providing cultural
ment theory and initiated research to assess the worldview. By sustaining faith in one’s cultural
theory. A large body of published experiments worldview and living up to the standards of value
from many countries has supported the theory. prescribed by that worldview (i.e., maintaining
One central finding is that reminding people of self-esteem), individuals can believe they are more
their own mortality generally increases identifica- than just material animals fated to obliteration and
tion with their cultural group and derogation of thereby manage their potential terror.
920 Terror Management Theory

Along with explaining the function of cultural concerning death transcendence have been an
worldviews and self-esteem, the theory explains important component of virtually all known cul-
how meaning and self-worth become the individu- tures, from the ancient Sumerians, Egyptians, and
al’s psychological security base. Newborns are Chinese to tribes throughout the globe and to
completely helpless and dependent on their parents modern Christian, Hindu, and Islamic cultures.
for survival. Thus, parental love and protection History has been greatly influenced by the spread
constitute the initial basis of security. The many of and clashes among groups with different after-
fears of the child, the dark, strangers, big dogs, life beliefs. Psychological research documents the
monsters, and so forth are quelled by the protec- human proneness to conformity and obedience to
tion of the seemingly omnipotent parents. cultural dictates, the relationship between self-
From the beginning, parents instill the culture’s esteem and good mental health, and the many
values and beliefs into their children, including ways people pursue and defend their self-esteem.
what it means to be good and what it means to be Terror management research has focused pri-
bad. As children develop, parents put demands on marily on two broad hypotheses. First, faith in
them to be good: to behave in certain ways and not one’s worldview and self-esteem should buffer
in others. When children follow these standards of anxiety and protect one from death-related con-
value, they are comforted and rewarded. When cerns. Research has supported this hypothesis in a
they do not, love is withdrawn, or they are pun- number of ways. For example, giving people a
ished. Thus, children come to associate being good boost to their self-esteem reduces their anxiety in
with feeling secure and being bad with feeling anx- response to the prospect of receiving electric
ious. Children internalize these standards so they shocks, and threats to an individual’s worldview
can regulate their own behavior to try to sustain or self-esteem arouse anxiety and bring thoughts
the parental love and protection. of death closer to consciousness.
Thus self-esteem, the sense that they are good, The second broad hypothesis is that when peo-
buffers children from anxiety. When children feel ple are reminded of their mortality (known as mor-
good, they bask in the omnipotent love and protec- tality salience), they will intensify their efforts to
tion of their parents, and everything is right in sustain faith in their worldview and strive harder to
their world. However, with cognitive development, demonstrate their self-worth. Mortality salience
they become increasingly aware of more powerful has been induced in a variety of ways, including
threats, especially the ultimate threat to existence, asking people to write briefly about their own
death, and realize the limits of the parents. death, filling out a death anxiety questionnaire,
Children’s basis of psychological security, there- interviewing them near a cemetery, or exposing
fore, must be transferred to something greater than them to the word dead on a computer screen
the parents, namely, the cultural constructs the flashed so quickly that the participants are not
parents have instilled in them throughout child- aware they are seeing the word. Most of the studies
hood, including deities (e.g., Jesus), authorities compare the effects of mortality salience with the
(e.g., the president), and groups (e.g., the United effects of making salient other aversive potential
States). From then on, being valued in the eyes of future events, such as being in intense pain, taking
the larger culture rather than the parents is the an upcoming exam, giving a speech in public, being
basis of psychological security. Through this devel- socially excluded, or feeling uncertain.
opmental process, the individual’s worldview and These studies show that mortality salience leads
sense of self-worth provide security in the face of to negative reactions to those who violate the mor-
the threats posed by reality that culminate in the als of or criticize one’s worldview and positive
knowledge of mortality. reactions to those who uphold the morals of or
praise one’s worldview. For example, mortality
salience led municipal court judges to increase rec-
Empirical Evidence
ommended bond for a fictional prostitute from
Terror management theory fits what we know $50 to $455. On the other hand, mortality salience
about cultural worldviews, social influence, also increased people’s recommendations for how
and the need for self-esteem. Beliefs and rituals much reward should be given to a hero.
Terror Management Theory 921

Mortality salience also leads people to distance specific stereotypes of minority group members,
themselves from reminders of their similarities to when the need for worldview validation is strong,
other animals and their material, and therefore people will prefer individuals who conform to
mortal, nature. In addition, mortality salience rather than violate cultural stereotypes of the
leads people to strive harder to display attributes minority group. For example, in a control condi-
on which they base their self-esteem. For example, tion, White people in the United States preferred a
people reminded of mortality drive more boldly if counterstereotypic studious, conservatively dress­­ed
they base their self-esteem partly on driving ability Black male over a stereotypic Black male in hip-
and display more physical strength if they base hop garb who expressed a strong interest in basket-
their self-worth partly on physical strength. ball and had violent tendencies. However, after
Mortality salience also generally increases people’s mortality salience, U.S. Whites preferred the stereo-
identification with their nation and other valued typic U.S. Black over the counterstereotypic one.
groups but reduces such identification when these Finally, worldviews that provide the most satis-
groups are depicted in a negative light. fying sense of significance are those that portray
one’s group as representing all that is good in a
heroic battle to triumph over evil. Therefore, when
Implications for Intergroup Relations
the need for terror management is strong, people
The theory’s fundamental implication for under- will be drawn to leaders and ideologies that pro-
standing intergroup relations is that groups who mote such a “we are great and we must defeat
espouse a worldview different from one’s own call those who are evil” worldview.
the validity of one’s own worldview into question When judging hypothetical gubernatorial candi-
and thereby threaten one’s psychological security. dates, reminders of mortality increased preference
From the terror management perspective, this psy- for a charismatic leader who emphasized the great-
chological threat is a fundamental cause of preju- ness of one’s own state and nation. Similarly,
dice and intergroup conflict. To cope with this before the 2004 U.S. presidential election, mortal-
threat, people react to other cultural groups in one ity salience increased preference for Republican
of three primary ways. First, they often derogate president George W. Bush, who emphasized a need
such groups, such as by dismissing them as “igno- for a heroic triumph over evildoers, over Demo­
rant savages.” Second, they often try to assimilate cratic candidate John Kerry. Mortality salience
such different others into their own worldview, for also directly increases support for eradication of
example through missionary activity. Third, threat- the evil other. Mortality salience increased Iranians’
ening groups are often aggressed against. What support for suicide bombings against the United
better way to assert the superiority of one’s own States and U.S. conservatives’ support for extremely
way of life than by derogating, converting, domi- lethal military actions in the Middle East.
nating, or annihilating those with an alternative Terror management theory and research suggest
worldview? two ways to reduce the inclination toward inter-
In support of these ideas, mortality salience group hostility. First, if individuals could develop
increases preference for aspects of one’s own cul- more individualized ways to ameliorate their fear
ture and those who validate it and decreases liking of death, they would be less reliant on defending
for aspects of other cultures and people who criti- their particular worldview. Second, if people
cize one’s own culture. For example, mortality invested in worldviews that were more flexible and
salience increased Christians’ liking of a fellow that highly valued tolerance of different others,
Christian and dislike of a Jew, and it increased they would be less threatened and less prone to
Germans’ preferences for German over foreign negativity toward them.
products. Mortality salience also increased indi-
viduals’ aggression against someone who criticized Jeff Greenberg
their political party.
Terror management theory posits two addi- See also Collective Self; Culture; Intergroup Anxiety;
tional mechanisms that contribute to prejudice Intergroup Violence; Nationalism and Patriotism;
and conflict. First, because worldviews prescribe Prejudice; Self-Esteem; Stereotyping; Terrorism
922 Therapy Groups

Further Readings from problems gather together seemed radical at


Goldenberg, J., Pyszczynski, T., Greenberg, J., & first, researchers have confirmed the value of
Solomon, S. (2000). Fleeing the body: A terror group methods for helping people reach their
management perspective on the problem of human therapeutic goals.
corporeality. Personality and Social Psychology
Review, 4, 200–218. History
Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., & Arndt, J. (2007). A basic
but uniquely human motivation: Terror management. People have long recognized the curative potential
In J. Shah & W. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of of groups. Down through the ages, palliative and
motivation science (pp. 114–134). New York: curative practices, including religious rites intended
Guilford. to purify and heal members of the community and
Pyszczynski, T., Greenberg, J., & Solomon, S. (1999). A treatments for those suffering from both physical
dual process model of defense against conscious and and psychological problems, have been conducted
unconscious death-related thoughts: An extension of in groups rather than in solitude. The restorative
terror management theory. Psychological Review, power of groups was rediscovered by practitioners
106, 835–845. in the early years of the 20th century when they
Pyszczynski, T., Solomon, S., & Greenberg, J. (2003). In brought together, for treatment and instruction,
the wake of September 11: The psychology of terror. patients who suffered the same malady. At first,
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. such grouping was done to save time and money.
Schimel, J., Simon, L., Greenberg, J., Pyszczynski, T., Working with a group of people was more efficient
Solomon, S., Waxmonsky, J., et al. (1999).
than treating each one individually. In time, how-
Stereotyping and terror management: Evidence that
ever, practitioners realized that their patients were
mortality salience increases stereotypic thinking and
benefiting from the groups themselves, in that they
preferences. Journal of Personality and Social
supported each other, shared nontechnical informa-
Psychology, 77, 905–926.
tion about their illnesses and treatment, and seemed
Solomon, S., Greenberg, J., & Pyszczynski, T. (1991). A
terror management theory of social behavior: On the
to appreciate the opportunity to express themselves
psychological functions of self-esteem and cultural to attentive and sympathetic listeners. Whereas
worldviews. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in group therapy was once used only as a last resort
experimental social psychology (Vol. 24, when the number of patients outstripped the avail-
pp. 93–159). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. able therapists, group approaches became the treat-
ment of choice for a variety of psychological
problems, particularly those that originate from dif-
ficulties in making and maintaining strong interper-
sonal relationships with other people or limitations
Therapy Groups in self-regulation. Their effectiveness led practition­
ers to recognize that, in many cases, it is easier to
Therapy groups are designed to promote the change individuals when they are gathered into a
health and adjustment of their members. Initially group than to change individuals one at a time.
used when the demand for services outstripped Group psychotherapy is currently used to treat
available health care providers, therapists discov- many types of psychiatric problems, including
ered that group approaches offered unique bene- addictions, thought disorders, depression, eating
fits over more individualistic therapies. Some of disorders, posttraumatic stress disorder, personal-
these benefits include a reduced sense of isolation ity disorders, and some forms of psychosis. Group
and uniqueness, mutual support, exposure to therapy is, however, a treatment for individuals
positive models, and the opportunity to develop rather than intact groups that are behaving in a
coping skills by interacting with others. Therapists dysfunctional way. Group therapists are mindful
now use groups to address a variety of psycho- of the interpersonal processes that operate within
logical and physical maladies, and their methods the group and often deal with the group as a
are as varied as those used in individual approaches. whole, but they do not treat groups per se. They
Even though the idea of having people suffering make use of the group milieu and its interpersonal
Therapy Groups 923

dynamics to promote the adjustment of the indi- In the more humanistic, interpersonally focused
viduals in it. group therapies, leaders take advantage of the
group’s dynamics to help members learn about
themselves, their personal and existential concerns,
Types of Therapy
and how they are perceived by other people. Some
Many groups have therapeutic purposes. In sup- group therapists rely on relatively structured activ-
port groups, members who are suffering from ities and role-playing methods to give members the
some illness or share in common a troubling expe- opportunity to reexperience previous life events
rience provide one another encouragement and and explore the interpersonal roots of their emo-
hope. Some groups guide members who are recov- tional reactions. The therapists may also make use
ering from an addiction. When individuals wish to of psychodrama, in which group members are
strengthen and broaden their personal or social asked to take on roles that are defined in advance
skills, they often join educational and training for the session or to develop their parts spontane-
groups. Even groups of friends, relatives, or col- ously as the activity progresses. Interpersonal
leagues from work, by sharing an experience and group therapy, more than other approaches, explic-
offering one another support, can be considered itly focuses on the processes that occur within the
therapeutic for their members. Traditionally, how- therapy group itself. Members are encouraged to
ever, therapy groups are ones that are organized develop meaningful relations with one another,
and led by a mental health professional and whose and then their reactions to one another are
members are individuals suffering from a diag- explored so that members can better understand
nosed psychological or medical problem. how they respond to others interpersonally, and
Group therapists are similar in that they treat also how others perceive them.
their patients in groups, but they differ in their
general approach to treatment and conception of
Treatment Factors
groups themselves. When the group is led by a
therapist who uses psychoanalytic methods, then Traditional, one-on-one therapies are thought to
the focus of treatment is on each individual’s anxi- be based on a set of common, curative factors.
eties and his or her reliance on defense mechanisms Research suggests that most therapies, despite
to cope with these anxieties. As in individual psy- using various techniques, help patients by provid-
choanalysis, the therapist encourages members to ing an alliance between the patient and the thera-
speak freely with each other about troubling issues, pist, by giving the patient the opportunity to
and by interpreting these associations and interac- review previous problems, and by working through
tions, patients gain insight into their difficulties. any emotions the patient may have about prior
Not all therapies, however, involve the search experiences. Similarly, despite their varying focuses
for hidden motives, conflicts, and repressed ten- and methods, all group therapies are thought to
sions. Cognitive behavioral therapy groups, for take advantage of common group-level processes
example, focus on the specific behaviors or thoughts to facilitate the attainment of treatment goals.
that are considered troubling and use principles These group-level treatment factors that yield
derived from learning theory to deal with these therapeutically positive gains for members include
problems. These therapies were initially developed social and personal comparison, interpersonal learn-
as one-on-one therapies, but they have been used ing, and mutual support among members. Groups
with great success in groups. They assume that prompt people to engage in social comparison—
individuals who wish to change must learn a new they can compare their own experiences with those
set of thoughts and behaviors and unlearn those of others in the group—and these comparisons can
that are dysfunctional and disturbing. Cognitive be both inspiring and reassuring. When group
behavior therapy groups therefore stress modeling members discuss their problems openly in the
desired behavior, learning sessions in which mem- group, these disclosures increase trust and reduce
bers practice the behaviors they wish to learn, and members’ feelings that they are “odd” or “unusual.”
feedback to group members about their progress Groups, because they include multiple individuals
toward their goals. rather than just a single therapist, also provide
924 Tokenism

members with more extensive opportunities to learn therapeutic goals. Those who drop out of treat-
from others. The members can also learn by observ- ment tend to be skeptical about group approaches
ing the other members of the group, so they need and are more likely to also report having problems
not be directly involved in the discussion to gain a with substance abuse issues. In some rare cases,
benefit. Groups, when cohesive, also provide mem- individuals are significantly harmed by the group
bers with the social support they need to overcome treatment, particularly when the group becomes
the negative effects of stress, and they even satisfy too critical of its members. Such responses are
members’ needs for interpersonal intimacy. In some rare, however, for most individuals respond posi-
cases, members find they can disclose more private, tively when presented the opportunity to work in
and sometimes troubling, information about them- a group to achieve mental health goals.
selves to other people rather than to therapists, and
in doing so they learn to experience a sense of trust Donelson R. Forsyth
and commitment. When group members vent strong See also Sensitivity Training Groups; Social Comparison
emotions, the resulting catharsis may reduce their Theory; Support Groups
stress. Group members also benefit from increased
self-confidence produced by helping others and by
gaining insight about their personal qualities from Further Readings
other group members.
Forsyth, D. R., & Corazzini, J. G. (2000). Groups as
change agents. In C. R. Snyder & R. E. Ingram (Eds.),
Effectiveness Handbook of psychological change: Psychotherapy
processes and practices for the 21st century
Joining a group and remaining active in it often (pp. 309–336). New York: Wiley.
improve a person’s adjustment and well-being, and Yalom, I. D., & Leszca, M. (2005). The theory and
therapy groups are no exception. Group therapy practice of group psychotherapy. New York: Basic
has been shown to be an effective method for help- Books.
ing individuals change their thoughts, emotions,
and actions. Individuals are sometimes more reluc-
tant to take part in group psychotherapy than in
individual therapy, and this bias may prevent them Tokenism
from profiting from a highly effective mode of
treatment. Reviews of clinical trials that have com- Tokenism occurs when only a small percentage of
pared the effectiveness of various types of psycho- a disadvantaged group is permitted membership
logical treatments conclude that group therapy is in a specific setting, with those individuals referred
as effective as individual methods, at least for cer- to as tokens (e.g., a token female firefighter in an
tain types of disorders. Specifically, individuals otherwise all-male department). Tokenism implies
experiencing mood disorders (anxiety, depression) that there are external restrictions that prevent the
respond better to group therapy than individuals entry of greater numbers of group members who
experiencing other types of disorders (e.g., thought would otherwise be qualified. Tokenism is also
and dissociative disorders). Group therapy has characterized by a specific constellation of nega-
been shown to work well with children, adoles- tive psychological and emotional consequences
cents, and adults and with both inpatient and out- for the tokens. Thus, although there may be situ-
patient populations. ations in which a high-status group has an insig-
Researchers continue to study ways to improve nificant presence (e.g., White students at a
the effectiveness of therapy groups. Some factors, historically Black college), the term tokenism is
including pretraining members so they know what usually reserved for situations in which the tokens
to expect in treatment and including two therapists are from a lower-status group.
rather than just one in each group, are associated From a systems perspective, tokenism is con-
with enhanced outcomes. Moreover, as in individ- trasted with a social system that is completely open
ual therapy, members of groups sometimes termi- to all qualified individuals (a meritocracy), and
nate their participation before reaching their tokenism is also contrasted with a system that is
Tokenism 925

completely closed to members of a particular behind). Tokenism also has consequences for
group (e.g., a caste system). Because a token sys- broader social change.
tem is neither fully open nor fully closed, there is
ambiguity about the circumstances under which Majority Group (Dominants)
members are permitted entry. This ambiguity is
Most research on tokenism focuses on the nega-
problematic for disadvantaged groups because it
tive consequences of the situation for the individual
can undermine efforts to change the system.
tokens, yet the “action” is often located in the
majority group. By definition, tokens differ from
History and Background dominants, but dominants also tend to exaggerate
these differences and engage in greater stereotyp-
Rosabeth Moss Kanter introduced the concept of
ing and negative evaluations of the tokens, due to
tokenism into the sociological and psychological
the tokens’ visibility and appearance as “represen-
lexicon in 1977 with the argument that the relative
tatives” of their group. For example, dominants
proportions of group members in a situation have
tend to confuse who said what among token mem-
a critical effect on group dynamics. Kanter was
bers of their group and to view token members’
especially interested in groups in which men
behavior as consistent with stereotypes. Such ste-
greatly outnumbered women because large num-
reotyping may be even more exaggerated if it
bers of women were finding themselves in such a
allows dominants to preserve their status through
situation as they joined traditionally male organi-
familiar forms of interaction (e.g., a male manager
zations during the feminist revolution. Kanter
treating an equal-status female colleague as he
described specific consequences of tokenism that
would a secretary). These behaviors create artifi-
she believed were due to the visibility or salience of
cial boundaries between the groups, further isolat-
the tokens, including social isolation and increased
ing the tokens and preventing them from full
stereotyping. Although much research has pro-
membership and equal status in the organization.
vided support for Kanter’s analysis, the effects of
tokenism appear to depend greatly on the wider
Tokens
social context and the social status of the tokens.
For example, female engineers are much more Tokens must contend with multiple handicaps.
likely to suffer negative consequences as tokens They are usually assigned to lower-status roles—
than male nurses are. with lower pay and benefits—and they have to
Research on tokenism has also expanded to cope with being stereotyped and negatively evalu-
provide a better understanding of the psychologi- ated on the basis of their group membership.
cal impact on tokens. A classic series of studies by Tokens can fight these stereotypic role assign-
Charles Lord and Delia Saenz showed that tokens ments, but if they do, they may then be labeled as
may suffer cognitive and behavioral deficits due to disagreeable or militant. In contrast, if tokens
preoccupation with self-presentation, even when accept the stereotypic roles assigned to them, this
they are not treated differently from others. This passivity can limit their ability to demonstrate
idea has been further developed in research on competencies. Tokens must also manage the height-
stereotype threat. Finally, as described later in this ened self-focus and accompanying anxiety that
entry, research on tokenism has expanded to come with being the focus of attention. They are
include system-level analysis, such as how token- likely to feel self-conscious about their actions,
ism undermines social change. worry about impression management, and feel
pressured to work harder in order to stand out for
their achievements rather than just their group
Consequences of Tokenism
status. A token’s performance may thus suffer
Research on tokenism has traditionally focused on because such pressure and anxiety consume cogni-
the tokens. However, there are others who are tive resources that could otherwise be devoted to
affected, both directly (e.g., the majority group relevant tasks (cf. stereotype threat). The studies
members in the token setting) and indirectly (e.g., by Lord and Saenz, for example, showed that indi-
the minority group members who have been left viduals randomly assigned to a token position in a
926 Tokenism

group displayed significantly worse memory for group members do attempt to change a fully closed
what was said during group interaction than did system, in which no one from their group is per-
individuals assigned to nontoken positions. mitted to advance, they rarely do so in a token
Finally, tokens have to manage potentially com- system. Instead, the accomplishments of the tokens
peting social identities. Tokens who are able to are taken as proof that the system is fair and that
overcome obstacles and avoid social rejection— individual-level achievement is possible. Because a
perhaps by assimilating to dominant norms—risk token system is not actually open to all who are
being isolated from their original group. At the qualified, however, many disadvantaged group
same time, they may never be fully accepted by the members will fail to advance despite their best
dominant group and thus risk being left without efforts. Such failure leads to resentment (often
real support from either group. against those who have achieved, further eroding
the group cohesion that is necessary for social
change), anger, stress, and depression. Moreover,
Social System
by accepting the system as fair, disadvantaged
One of the most effective strategies for making group members are likely to attribute their low
a token system more open and egalitarian is collec- status to personal failings rather than to system-
tive action. Stephen C. Wright argues that token- level barriers, further reducing the chances of their
ism may maintain and even enhance social hierarchy engaging in social change.
more than if the system were completely closed,
because tokenism undermines perceptions of injus-
Remediating the
tice and group identity and suggests that individual-
Negative Effects of Tokenism
level action is effective. Wright points out that
everyone in the system—the tokens, the remaining Tokenism provides advantages for at least some
disadvantaged group members, and the dominant disadvantaged group members, but there are con-
majority—can be invested in viewing the system as siderable drawbacks, including psychological stress
just fine. and worsened performance among tokens and the
For the individual tokens, the system has permit- material exclusion of many other disadvantaged
ted them some measure of success, and thus they group members. Solutions to the problems created
may be motivated to preserve it. The lone female by tokenism range from organizational change to
state senator, for example, is unlikely to charge that individual coping strategies.
the system that placed her there is unfair. Moreover, Organizational change is perhaps the most obvi-
her need to adhere to the norms and values of the ous solution. The problems of tokenism would pre-
organization may further undermine her identity sumably disappear if organizations simply increased
with women who do not share her advantage. the number of disadvantaged group members in
The dominant majority is similarly invested in their ranks. As discussed above, however, tokenism
maintaining the system. Its members have material is not easy to dismantle. Even if a significant increase
advantages to preserve, but, unlike a fully closed sys- were allowed in the number of disadvantaged group
tem, the presence of tokens serves to assuage any guilt members permitted entry, the outcome may not be
the dominants may have about the fairness of the all positive. There may simply not be enough disad-
current system and the degree to which they deserve vantaged group members available to eliminate the
their advantaged positions. If disadvantaged group effects of tokenism, and a large increase in the num-
members can advance, the lack of advancement by ber of disadvantaged group members in a particular
others can be attributed to their own failings. setting could result in perceptions of threat on the
Perhaps most surprising is the finding that dis- part of the dominant group, greater and more active
advantaged group members who are not them- hostility, and the loss of important mentors and
selves tokens also go along with tokenism. These allies for the new members.
individuals have the most to gain through social Research conducted by Janice Yoder suggests a
change, and they ought to be motivated to see the different organizational approach for avoiding
system as unfair. However, research shows that some of the negative effects of tokenism: Enhance
this is often not the case. Whereas disadvantaged the status and legitimacy of the tokens. Yoder
Transactional Leadership Theories 927

found that token women in a simulated organiza- See also Categorization; Collective Movements and
tional setting perceived less performance pressure Protest; Minority Groups in Society; Stereotype
and anxiety if they had higher status (e.g., were Threat; Stigma; System Justification Theory
older or more educated) than the male members of
the group. Similarly, token women who received
advanced training and were explicitly labeled as Further Readings
“experts” were able to successfully influence the Jost, J. T., & Major, B. (Eds.). (2001). The psychology of
male-dominated groups, whereas token women legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice,
without such legitimacy were not. and intergroup relations. New York: Cambridge
Individual tokens may also be able to avoid University Press.
some of the negative psychological effects of Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and women of the
tokenism by using certain cognitive strategies. For corporation. New York: Basic Books.
example, Saenz and Lord showed that tokens who Saenz, D. S., & Lord, C. G. (1989). Reversing roles:
thought of themselves as “judges” (i.e., focused on A cognitive strategy for undoing memory deficits
evaluating the majority group members) showed associated with token status. Journal of Personality
better cognitive performance than did tokens who and Social Psychology, 56, 698–708.
either believed they were the targets of evaluation van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008).
or were told nothing (controls). This benefit was Toward an integrative social identity model of
observed even when the majority members were collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of
unaware that they were being judged, suggesting three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological
that the strategy might be effective in the absence Bulletin, 134, 504–535.
of social validation by others. Individual-level Wright, S. C. (2001). Restricted intergroup boundaries:
strategies that have been shown to be effective in Tokenism, ambiguity, and the tolerance of injustice. In
overcoming stereotype threat, such as a brief self- J. T. Jost & B. Major (Eds.), The psychology of
legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice,
affirmation, may also be effective in combating the
and intergroup relations (pp. 223–254). New York:
negative effects of tokenism.
Cambridge University Press.
Yoder, J. D. (2002). 2001 Division 35 presidential
address: Context matters: Understanding tokenism
Conclusion
processes and their impact on women’s work.
Although research on tokenism initially focused on Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 1–8.
the issues facing women in male-dominated careers,
its principles have allowed insight into broader
facets of intergroup interaction and the extension
of research on tokenism into a variety of domains, Transactional Leadership
including race, religion, and sexual orientation.
Tokenism research has further informed the study
Theories
of social systems by providing an explanation for
how attitudes develop to favor system stability The hallmark of the transactional leadership theo-
rather than change. In this respect, knowledge of ries is the idea of equitable exchange. Every day,
tokenism highlights the importance of remaining individuals engage in an exchange process whereby
vigilant even after low-status individuals appear to one valued benefit, resource, or commodity is
have achieved membership in high-status groups. exchanged for another. A mechanic fixes a car for
As research progresses on tokenism, it is likely that monetary compensation, a student completes a
its focus will shift from identifying its negative thesis to receive a degree, or a supervisor praises
impacts to finding ways to reduce them. It may be an employee for securing a lucrative contract. The
impossible to balance group ratios completely, but transactional approach characterizes effective
there are ways to ensure that token members suffer leadership as a reciprocal and mutually beneficial
fewer consequences of being in the minority. process of give and take between leaders and fol-
lowers. Leaders manage valued resources (e.g.,
Irene V. Blair and J. Allegra Smith information, support, consideration) and provide
928 Transactional Leadership Theories

rewards or punishments to assist followers to return, their credits give them leeway to diverge
achieve goals. In return, followers reciprocate with from group norms. This leeway is referred to as
loyalty and compliance to the leader’s requests idiosyncrasy credit. Leaders are expected to spend
while bestowing status on the leader. some of their idiosyncrasy credit to bring about
change and innovation in the group that may be
contrary to the status quo. The leadership posi-
Historical Background
tion, however, still requires successful fulfillment
Early studies of leadership did not consider the of role obligations and conformity to group expec-
role of exchange in leader–follower relationships. tations. As such, leaders should ideally use their
Instead, attempts were made to unearth a success- idiosyncrasy credit wisely, that is, to bring about
ful profile of a leader in terms of personality traits. change while still demonstrating successful perfor-
In 1948, Ralph Stogdill conducted an influential mance. Otherwise, they may bankrupt their accrued
review of traits research and concluded that traits credit and jeopardize their leadership position.
alone could not fully explain the leadership phe- A number of studies support the idea that initial
nomenon. Thereafter, the traits approach lost conformity can increase the influence potential of
momentum and other approaches to leadership group members. In an experiment by Hollander in
soon emerged. By the 1950s, social scientists began 1960, five engineering students and a confederate
to explore new territories to explain the important were brought together to work on a problem-
role of leadership in groups. solving task. The confederate’s conformity to
Using what is called the behavioral approach, group norms and demonstration of competence
researchers at Ohio State University and the early in the experiment were translated into greater
University of Michigan studied effective leader group acceptance of his recommended solutions in
behaviors. Their studies helped initiate the devel- later stages of the experiment. Having amassed
opment of the contingency approach, which jointly idiosyncrasy credit at the beginning of the experi-
considers leadership behaviors and situational fac- ment, the confederate was able to exert influence
tors to explain effective leadership. Around the when he displayed nonconforming behavior (e.g.,
same period, the transactional approach was interrupting people) later on. Subsequent research
developed to explain leadership in terms of the has generally supported the concept of idiosyn-
transactions between leaders and followers as a crasy credit.
means of bidirectional influence. The transactional
approach is evident in a variety of leadership theo-
Leader-Member Exchange Theory
ries developed before the 1980s. It also later
became a theory of leadership in its own right. Another important transactional approach to lead-
ership effectiveness, the vertical dyad linkage
model, was proposed by George Graen and col-
Early Transactional Approaches:
leagues in 1973. In 1982, it was renamed and
Idiosyncrasy Credit
expanded into leader-member exchange (LMX)
One of the first transactional theories of leader- theory. LMX theory emphasizes the quality of the
ship, the concept of idiosyncrasy credit, was put relationship between leaders and followers as a
forth by the social psychologist Edwin Hollander central predictor of leadership effectiveness in
in 1958. Drawing on social exchange theory, organizations. The quality of this relationship
Hollander held that group members are bonded in depends on the nature of social (e.g., esteem) and
a relationship in which they give and receive credit material (e.g., compensation) exchanges and the
from one another. Each group member accrues level of compatibility (e.g., personal traits, back-
credits to the extent that his or her behavior con- ground, skills) between leaders and followers.
forms to group norms and positively contributes to In low-quality exchange relationships, exchanges
the group. As a result of earned credits, group between the leader and the subordinate follow the
members gain trust, status, and influence potential terms set forth in the employment contract. That
in the group. Leaders are assumed to possess a is, they are materially based. For example, the
relatively large account of accrued credits. In leader provides only the necessary resources and
Transactional Leadership Theories 929

guidance for the follower to get the job done. The This classic work stimulated renewed interest in
follower, in turn, exerts sufficient effort to do the leadership and is often credited with helping spur
job in order to maintain employment and receive the new leadership paradigm, which aims to
compensation. High-quality exchange relation- demystify transformational and other “extraordi-
ships involve close relationships and performance nary” forms of leadership.
beyond the call of duty. The leader and the fol- Burns argued that true leadership is commensu-
lower engage in reciprocal interpersonal exchanges rate with moral leadership, which is built on a
that surpass the terms of the employment contract. foundation of moral values. Moral leadership
The relationship is built on mutual positive regard, comes in two forms, transactional and transform-
trust, loyalty, and dependability. For instance, fol- ing, which are at opposite ends of a continuum.
lowers may take on additional duties or provide Both transactional and transforming leadership
extra assistance to the leader that are not called for involve exchanges between the leader and the fol-
in their job description. In return, leaders may pro- lower, but they differ regarding what is being
vide additional support, information, mentoring, exchanged and what values guide the leader. Burns
esteem, or resources to the subordinate. also held that transactional leaders are more com-
LMX theory has received substantial empirical monplace than are transformational leaders.
support in predicting leadership effectiveness. Transactional leaders engage followers in instru-
High-exchange relationships between leaders and mental exchanges that satisfy the self-interests of
followers are associated with a number of impor- both the leader and the followers. Furthermore,
tant positive organizational outcomes, including such leaders are guided by modal values such as
better performance, increased job satisfaction, honesty, responsibility, and fairness. In contrast,
lower turnover, increased innovation, follower being grounded in transcendent values such as
empowerment, and more organizational citizen- equality, liberty, and justice, transforming leaders
ship behavior. motivate followers to transcend their self-interests
Several scholars, however, have noted limita- and to pursue higher-order morality. The leader–
tions of LMX theory and research. Some limita- follower relationship in this case involves mutual
tions involve the potentially questionable content motivation to work together to achieve some collec-
validity of the LMX scale and the need for more tive good. Therefore, an instrumental exchange does
extensive theory building that includes consider- not take place between a transformational leader
ation of the self-concept and the wider social con- and followers. Instead, a mutual consciousness-
text (e.g., group processes) in which leader-member raising process emerges from this relationship.
relations are embedded. For example, the social In 1985, Bernard Bass extended Burns’s ideas
identity perspective suggests that leadership effec- into a theory of transformational leadership.
tiveness is tied to the extent that the group (team Contrary to Burns, Bass did not address the moral
or organization) is salient in the mind of followers. concerns in the earlier versions of the theory but
When the group is highly salient, research shows instead placed emphasis on the behaviors that
that leadership effectiveness is more strongly characterize transformational versus transactional
related to a depersonalized leadership style than to leaders. In the most recent version of the theory,
an interpersonal (dyadic) one. This suggests that transformational leadership behaviors include
high LMX relationships between leaders and fol- (a) motivating followers by articulating enticing
lowers may be more important when personal visions that evoke follower emotion (inspirational
identities are salient. motivation); (b) challenging followers to be inno-
vative and to view issues from new vantage points
(intellectual stimulation); (c) encouraging fol-
Transactional and
lower identification with the leader, role model-
Transformational Leadership
ing, and evoking perceptions of charisma (idealized
In 1978, political scientist James MacGregor Burns influence); and (d) paying attention to followers,
wrote a book, Leadership, in which he presented being in tune with their needs, and providing
an in-depth analysis of several political leaders, them with support and mentoring (individualized
ranging from Franklin D. Roosevelt to Gandhi. consideration).
930 Transactional Leadership Theories

Drawing from earlier research on contingent who interchangeably adopt a transformational and
reinforcement, Bass specified that transactional an active transactional style (e.g., contingent
behaviors include contingent rewards and manage- rewards) tend to receive the highest effectiveness
ment by exception. Contingent rewards include ratings. This suggests that leadership aiming to
leader behaviors that clarify the rewards that fol- realize a vision of a new and improved reality for
lowers receive when designated objectives and the collective is vital, but some active transactional
tasks are successfully completed. For example, the behaviors are necessary to accomplish this feat.
manager of a car dealership may attempt to moti- Even during radical transformation, not all parts
vate salespeople by creating an incentive such that of the status quo require transformation. Trans­
any employee who sells at least six cars per week actional leadership behaviors may help sustain
will receive double commissions for that week. some sense of stability during change while clarify-
Research shows that contingent rewards (both ing followers’ role expectancies, signaling appropri-
material and social) help reduce role ambiguity, ate behaviors, and providing rewards to reinforce
clarify the task or goal at hand, increase follower positive behavior and performance. As Bass and
satisfaction, and contribute to better performance. colleagues implied in 2003, the next step may be
Management by exception involves leadership helping leaders develop a wider repertoire of behav-
behaviors that actively or passively seek to correct iors that include both transformational and trans-
or punish poor performance or problematic fol- actional styles to optimize successful navigation in
lower behavior. In active management by excep- the often turbulent waters of change.
tion, the leader actively attends to followers’
performance to ensure that it meets the necessary Viviane Seyranian
rules and standards. If errors, oversights, or viola- See also Charismatic Leadership; Contingency
tions are evident, the leader engages in corrective Theories of Leadership; Great Person Theory of
behavior or negative reinforcement to rapidly rem- Leadership; Idiosyncrasy Credit; Interactionist
edy the situation. Research suggests that active Theories of Leadership; Leader-Member Exchange
management by exception is related to higher rat- (LMX) Theory; Leadership; Path–Goal Theory of
ings of the leader than is passive management by Leadership; Personality Theories of Leadership;
exception, which involves less direct monitoring of Social Identity Theory of Leadership;
followers. In passive management by exception, Transformational Leadership Theories;
leaders intervene to provide correction or punish- Vertical Dyad Linkage Model
ment only when there is an obvious mistake or
problem that requires attention.
The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire Further Readings
(MLQ) was developed to measure both transac-
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond
tional and transformational leadership behaviors.
expectations. New York: Free Press.
Because of criticisms regarding its validity, the
Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of
MLQ has undergone a number of revisions, but
leadership. New York: Free Press.
concerns are still voiced about its utility. One con-
Bass, B. M. (2003). Predicting unit performance by
cern is that various transformational behaviors assessing transformational and transactional leadership.
tend to be correlated with transactional behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 207–218.
This is problematic because transformational and Burns, M. J. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper &
transactional leadership styles are theorized to rep- Row.
resent two distinct types of leadership. Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-
Considerable empirical research has been con- based approach to leadership: Development of
ducted on transformational versus transactional leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of
leaders in a variety of settings and countries. Various leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level
meta-analyses suggest that transformational leader- multi-domain perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 6,
ship is more effective than transactional leadership 219–247.
in increasing followers’ performance and satisfac- Hogg, M. A., Martin, R., Epitropaki, O., Mankad, A.,
tion. However, research also suggests that leaders Alici Svensson, A., & Weeden, K. (2005). Effective
Transactive Memory Systems 931

leadership in salient groups: Revisiting leader-member of transactive memory systems has been docu-
exchange theory from the perspective of the social mented in a wide variety of relationships and
identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social groups, including married couples, dating couples,
Psychology Bulletin, 31, 991–1004. families, friends, coworkers, and project teams in
Hollander, E. P. (1958). Conformity, status, and both organizational and laboratory settings. This
idiosyncrasy credit. Psychological Review, 65, entry describes transactive memory systems, dis-
117–127. cusses how they develop and what makes them
Lowe, K. B., Kroeck, K. G., & Sivasubramaniam, N. work, and summarizes their outcomes
(1996). Effectiveness correlates of transformation
and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic review
of the MLQ literature. Leadership Quarterly, 7, Characteristics of
385–425. Transactive Memory Systems
The term transactive memory systems was coined
by Daniel Wegner in a paper published in 1985.
Since that initial paper, researchers in psychology,
Transactive Memory Systems management, communication, and other fields
have worked on identifying the antecedents, pro-
A transactive memory system is a group-level cesses, and consequences of transactive memory
memory system that often develops in close rela- systems. Research on transactive memory systems
tionships and work teams. It involves the division borrows heavily from what is known about the
of responsibility among group members with memory processes of individuals and applies it to
respect to the encoding, storage, retrieval, and groups. At a minimum, a transactive memory sys-
communication of information from different tem can be defined in terms of two components:
knowledge areas and a shared awareness among the organized store of knowledge in the memory
group members about each member’s knowledge systems of the individual members and the knowl-
responsibilities (or “who knows what”). For edge exchanges that occur between members.
example, in a family, one parent may be respon- A directory-sharing computer network has
sible for knowing when the bills are due and what been used as a metaphor for illustrating the three
is needed at the grocery store, and the other may key processes of transactive memory systems. The
be responsible for knowing the children’s sched- first process is directory updating, whereby indi-
ules and how to fix things around the house. Or viduals develop a working directory or map of
in a new product development team, one member who knows what and update it as they obtain
may be responsible for all information related to new information about the knowledge and exper-
prototype development while another member tise of group members. The second process is
may be responsible for all information related to information allocation, in which new information
marketing and advertising. that enters the group is communicated to the per-
Transactive memory systems enable people in son whose expertise will facilitate its storage. The
relationships and groups to share information third process is retrieval coordination, which
more efficiently and effectively. They can reduce involves devising an efficient and effective strat-
the memory load for each individual in the system egy for retrieving needed information, based on
while providing each individual with access to a the person expected to have it.
larger pool of information collectively. When indi- In terms of content, transactive memory systems
viduals need information in another’s area of contain both differentiated and integrated knowl-
expertise, they can simply ask the person respon- edge. Differentiated knowledge represents the
sible rather than taking the time and energy for specialized and unique knowledge held by each
locating and learning the information themselves. individual in the system, whereas integrated knowl-
As a result of their developed transactive memory edge represents the knowledge that individuals
system, members of experienced groups often per- hold in common. Integrated knowledge, such as
form their tasks more effectively and make better shared directories, routines, and procedures, is
decisions than newly formed groups do. Evidence especially useful for coordination.
932 Transactive Memory Systems

Development of some cases, such as in diverse work teams, these


Transactive Memory Systems initial assumptions can become self-fulfilling
prophecies. Individuals can be assigned knowledge
Unlike the literal way that computer networks areas that are consistent with social stereotypes
update directories and locate, store, and retrieve even though those areas do not reflect their actual
information, transactive memory systems among expertise, and they eventually become experts as a
humans are often flawed. Transactive memory sys- result of those assignments.
tems vary in terms of their accuracy (the degree to Researchers have created and validated a scale
which individuals’ perceptions about other mem- with three key indicators for measuring the degree
bers’ expertise are accurate), sharedness (the degree of development of a transactive memory system in
to which individuals have a shared representation work teams. The first indicator is memory special-
of who knows what in the group), and validation ization, the tendency for groups to delegate respon-
(the degree to which individuals accept responsi- sibility and to specialize in different aspects of the
bility for different knowledge areas and participate task. The second is credibility, beliefs about the
in the system). Transactive memory systems will be reliability of members’ expertise. The third is task
most effective when knowledge assignments are coordination: the ability of team members to coor-
based on group members’ actual abilities, when all dinate their work efficiently based on their knowl-
group members have similar representations of the edge of who knows what in the group. The greater
group’s transactive memory system, and when the presence of each indicator, the more developed
members actively participate in the system. the transactive memory system and the more valu-
One necessary requirement for the development able the transactive memory system for efficiently
of a transactive memory system is cognitive interde- coordinating the actions of group members.
pendence. That is, individuals must perceive that Transactive memory systems usually develop
their outcomes are dependent on the knowledge of informally and implicitly through interpersonal
other people in their relationships or groups and interaction rather than by formal design. Members
that others’ outcomes are dependent on their can learn informally about one another’s expertise
knowledge. Cognitive interdependence is what through interactions and shared experiences work-
motivates the development of the transactive mem- ing together, thus identifying likely experts in dif-
ory system and often develops in close interpersonal ferent areas. Informal interactions and shared
relationships, in which people share responsibili- experiences working together provide opportuni-
ties, engage in conversations about many different ties for team members to hear about members’
topics, and make joint decisions. It can also arise as background and credentials, to observe members’
a result of a reward system or the structure of a skills in action, to indicate their interests and pref-
group task, as is the case in work teams. erences, to coordinate who does what, and to
Transactive memory systems develop as indi- evaluate the willingness of team members to par-
viduals learn about the knowledge of other group ticipate in the transactive memory system. Team
members and begin to delegate and assume respon- training can also facilitate the development of a
sibility for different knowledge areas. Individuals transactive memory system. Those systems set up
can become linked to knowledge areas based on by formal design (such as a listing of staff mem-
relative expertise (the best cook is likely to become bers’ responsibilities in an office procedures hand-
the person in charge of knowing what is in the book) are either validated or modified over time as
refrigerator), by negotiated agreements (one per- group members learn more about one another, so
son agrees to keep track of car maintenance if the the informal transactive memory system may not
other will keep track of bill payment due dates), or correspond directly to the formal system.
through circumstance (the person who answered New technologies are being developed to help
the phone when a new client calls becomes the people locate and retrieve information from experts,
“new client” expert). In newly formed groups, facilitating the development of new and expanding
individuals often rely on stereotypes based on per- existing transactive memory systems. Social net-
sonal characteristics (such as gender, ethnicity, working sites such as LinkedIn.com can help people
organizational role) to infer what others know. In identify experts both inside and outside their social
Transformational Leadership Theories 933

networks. Intranets (Web sites designed for internal However, there may be situations in which too
use in organizations) can help employees learn much specialization may impede group perfor-
about the expertise and knowledge of others in mance, such as when assigned experts are unavail-
their organization. Some features that intranets able, unable, or unwilling to contribute their
might include are expert directories, postings of knowledge. Even when specialization leads to bet-
formal job descriptions and/or responsibilities, ter outcomes, some redundancy may be useful. It
search engines for information and expertise, exper- helps members to communicate more effectively, it
tise inference systems (capture and analysis of can encourage group members to be more account-
activities such as who attended meetings on a par- able to one another, and it can provide a cushion
ticular topic, who participated in which forum, for transitions in relationships when, for example,
etc.), and communityware, tools that generate the designated expert leaves the group.
visual representations of knowledge and communi-
cation networks based on information voluntarily Andrea B. Hollingshead
shared by individuals. There is some debate among See also Group Learning; Group Mind; Group
scholars about whether social networking technol- Performance; Shared Mental Models; Socially Shared
ogies and other formally based systems can facili- Cognition; Social Representations; Teams
tate the development of transactive memory
independently of group structures and incentives
that promote cognitive interdependence among Further Readings
individuals.
Brandon, D. P., & Hollingshead, A. B. (2004).
Transactive memory systems in organizations:
Outcomes of Matching tasks, expertise, and people. Organization
Transactive Memory Systems Science, 15, 633–644.
Hollingshead, A. B. (1998). Retrieval processes in
For many reasons, groups that have a developed transactive memory systems. Journal of Personality
transactive memory system perform better than and Social Psychology, 74, 659–671.
groups that do not. Groups with transactive mem- Lewis, K. (2003). Measuring transactive memory systems
ory systems are more likely to assign tasks to indi- in the field: Scale development and validation. Journal
viduals who can perform those tasks best and are of Applied Psychology, 88, 587–604.
better equipped to anticipate rather than to simply Moreland, R. L. (1999). Transactive memory: Learning
respond to group members’ actions. When individu- who knows what in work groups and organizations.
als have responsibility for only a portion of the In L. Thompson, D. Messick, & J. Levine (Eds.),
group’s knowledge, they may be able to accumulate Shared cognition in organizations: The management
a more extensive and deeper understanding in their of knowledge (pp. 3–31). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
area of specialization. Individuals who know about Wegner, D. M. (1995). A computer network model of
one another’s knowledge may be able to obtain bet- human transactive memory. Social Cognition, 13,
ter and more accurate information because they 319–339.
know the right person to ask. When group members Wegner, D. M., Giuliano, T., & Hertel, P. T. (1985).
have experience communicating with one another, Cognitive interdependence in close relationships.
they may know how to ask for information so that In W. J. Ickes (Ed.), Compatible and incompatible
the request is understood and how to cue members relationships (pp. 253–276). New York:
having difficulty retrieving information in ways that Springer-Verlag.
facilitate its accessibility. They may also be less
likely to fall prey to an overly confident and persua-
sive but inaccurate group member.
Transactive memory systems can lead to
Transformational Leadership
improved group performance in situations in Theories
which groups must process a large amount of
information quickly or on group tasks that require Transformational leadership theory suggests that
expertise from many different knowledge domains. leaders transform their followers’ values, priorities,
934 Transformational Leadership Theories

and goals and inspire followers to perform beyond Transactional leadership focuses on the proper
expectations and to transcend their narrow self- exchange of resources between a leader and his or
interests for the good of the larger group, organiza- her followers. Transformational leadership, in
tion, and mission. Transformational leaders contrast, emphasizes meaning and purpose to
articulate compelling visions that stress the mean- develop and fulfill deeper existential needs that go
ing, importance, and value of goals, as well as beyond a simple relationship of quid pro quo.
of the strategies designed to achieve them. Although Burns suggested that leaders engage in
Transformational leaders thus build followers’ either transactional or transformational leader-
confidence and broaden their needs to assist them ship, Bass posited that effective leaders engage in
in achieving higher potential, ultimately developing both types of leadership behavior.
followers into leaders. Research suggests that Transformational leadership augments, or sup-
transformational leadership is positively associated plements, the effect of transactional leadership.
with trust, job attitudes, and a broad range of indi- Stated differently, transactional leadership can be
vidual performance outcomes. effective, but transformational leadership will
Although 20 years of research suggests that improve leadership effectiveness, achieving perfor-
transformational leadership is strongly related to mance beyond expectations. Transformational
followers’ attitudes and performance, this research leaders establish goals and objectives with the
also indicates that such leadership plays an impor- developmental objective of changing followers
tant role in shaping, inspiring, and directing group into individual leaders or into a collective leader-
goals and processes. Transformational leaders ship group, such as self-directed teams.
enhance group members’ confidence, motivation, The focus on follower development distin-
and performance by asserting the importance of guishes transformational leadership from transac-
the group’s mission and its capabilities to achieve tional leadership. Transforming followers into
synergistic outcomes, while supporting followers leaders not only empowers associates but also
in aligning their individual goals with collective enhances their capability to deal effectively with
goals. Research has also shown that transforma- ambiguity, develops their competence to handle
tional leadership builds group cohesiveness, identi- more intellectually stimulating tasks, and gives
fication, efficacy, and climates that positively them the opportunity to assume some of the lead-
influence group outcomes. This entry reviews the er’s responsibilities. Although transactional leader-
history of this research, describes key dimensions ship may yield short-term extrinsic benefits,
of transformational leaders, and discusses evidence transformational leadership produces longer-term
related to their impact. intrinsic rewards. In other words, transformational
leadership significantly adds to transactional lead-
ership effectiveness, thus building higher individual,
Background and History
group, and organizational potential. Subsequent
For much of the 20th century, leadership scholars empirical research supported these hypotheses,
studied exchange-based, or transactional, leader- suggesting that more effective leaders engage in
ship behavior, which involves reinforcing follow- exchange-related, as well as inspirational, motiva-
ers’ behaviors and providing direction and support. tional, and developmental, behaviors.
In 1978, James Burns introduced the notion of
transforming leadership. In the mid-1980s, partly
Transformational Leadership Dimensions
inspired by Bernard Bass, researchers began to
shift their attention to leadership models that Transformational leaders exhibit four types of
emphasize visionary messages, inspirational appeals, behaviors: idealized influence, inspirational moti-
ideological and moral values, intellectual stimula- vation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized
tion, and individualized consideration. Burns ini- consideration. A leader who exhibits idealized
tially posited that transactional and transformational influence increases followers’ respect, pride, trust,
leadership represent opposite ends of a continuum and admiration for the leader’s high ethical stan-
and differ in terms of what leaders and followers dards and conduct. Such leaders enhance follow-
offer one another. ers’ trust through their commitment to overcome
Transformational Leadership Theories 935

challenges, their willingness to sacrifice their per- making personal sacrifices in the short term for the
sonal self-interest, and their prior successes. common good in the long term.
Inspirational motivation refers to leaders’ artic- Second, transformational leaders build group
ulation of shared goals and communication of a cohesiveness through encouraging and enabling
compelling vision of what is possible and how it followers to take greater responsibility for their
can be achieved. Transformational leaders inspire own development as well as their group’s develop-
followers by setting high standards, expressing ment. Empowering followers in this way helps
optimism about attaining them, and infusing them share information with each other and there-
meaning into the daily tasks. fore improves group information processing.
Intellectually stimulating leaders challenge fol- Finally, transformational leaders increase group
lowers to think critically; solve problems creatively; cohesiveness by stressing the followers’ involve-
and challenge their own values, beliefs, and assump- ment and membership in the group and by distin-
tions, as well as those of their leaders, when appro- guishing the ingroup from outgroups. Social identity
priate. Such leaders motivate followers to more theory suggests that when ingroups and outgroups
fully engage in their job, which causes the followers are prominent, people identify with their ingroup
to achieve higher levels of performance and experi- and perceive more positive attributes of the ingroup
ence greater job satisfaction and commitment. and more negative attributes of outgroups.
Finally, leaders who exhibit individualized con-
sideration recognize and satisfy followers’ unique
Group Identification
needs. They encourage followers, through coach-
ing and mentoring, to reach their maximum As suggested above, group identification refers to a
potential, and they enhance followers’ ability to feeling of psychological belongingness to a particu-
respond to individual, group, and organizational lar group. It conveys a sense of being a part of
challenges. something, because one’s self-definition is tied to
The accumulated research indicates that leaders membership in particular groups. There is consider-
who are rated higher on the four transformational able evidence that work group identification can
leadership components generate higher levels of impact work behavior, because identification pro-
group confidence, effort, and work performance. motes positive responses toward ingroup members.
A strong group identity also spurs group members
to obtain greater expertise in their jobs. Conse­
Group Cohesiveness
quently, group members engage in more active job-
Social identity theory suggests that group character- relevant learning to the extent that they possess
istics can become self-defining over time. One strong relationships with others in their group.
aspect of group cohesiveness is the tendency for Research shows that transformational leadership
individual members to incorporate the group’s is related to group identification in at least two ways.
vision, mission, and goals as self-referential. First, because transformational leaders are proactive,
Research suggests that transformational leadership change oriented, and inspiring, they create identifica-
is positively related to this component of group tion among group members and therefore extract
cohesiveness. Transformational leaders can influ- extra effort from the members toward the mission of
ence group cohesiveness through several behaviors. the group. Second, transformational leaders increase
First, transformational leaders influence and group members’ sense of self-worth by emphasizing
facilitate group cohesiveness by emphasizing the the importance of each individual’s contribution to
importance of sacrificing for the benefit of the the group, encouraging each member to internalize a
group and demonstrating high ethical standards. “collective” frame of mind. This also increases mem-
Appealing to these higher-order needs enables fol- bers’ efforts for the group as a whole.
lowers to transcend self-interest and pursue collec-
tive group interests. Furthermore, transformational
Group Efficacy
leaders are able to link followers’ individual identi-
ties to their group’s collective identity by appealing In 1986, Albert Bandura, in the process of devel-
emotionally to socially desirable behaviors, such as oping social cognitive theory, developed the notion
936 Trust

of group efficacy. Group efficacy is a construct that research indicates that transformational leaders
refers to an individual’s evaluation of his or her who influence the service climate motivate follow-
group’s capability to effectively perform job-related ers to deliver high-quality service.
tasks. A group with high efficacy believes that it In sum, a considerable body of evidence demon-
can perform well on a task, whereas a group with strates the positive impact of transformational
low efficacy thinks that it will fail. Numerous stud- leadership on outcomes at the individual, group,
ies indicate that group (as well as individual) effi- and organizational levels. Moreover, across cul-
cacy is positively related to a number of positive tures, when people describe their ideal leader, they
outcomes (e.g., effort, organizational commitment, typically describe a transformational leader.
and job satisfaction).
Research suggests that transformational leader- Fred O. Walumbwa, Bruce J. Avolio,
ship is an important antecedent of group efficacy. and Chad Hartnell
Transformational leaders provide followers with
See also Charismatic Leadership; Contingency Theories
opportunities to appreciate the group’s accomplish-
of Leadership; Great Person Theory of Leadership;
ments and members’ contributions when they make Interactionist Theories of Leadership; Leader-Member
the group mission salient, stress shared values, and Exchange (LMX) Theory; Leadership; Path–Goal
connect followers’ individual interests to the group’s Theory of Leadership; Personality Theories of
interests. As individuals become more aware of and Leadership; Social Identity Theory of Leadership;
confident in the group’s capabilities, group efficacy Transactional Leadership Theories; Vertical Dyad
increases. Thus, transformational leaders can directly Linkage Model
influence collective efficacy and, as a result, indi-
rectly influence important group-level outcomes.
Further Readings
Avolio, B. J. (2005). Leadership development in balance:
Service Climate Made/born. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Climate refers to the environment and atmosphere Avolio, B. J., & Yammarino, F. J. (Eds.). (2003).
in which employees work. In a recent study, Hui Transformational and charismatic leadership: The
Liao and Aichia Chuang drew a distinction between road ahead. New York: Elsevier.
individual- and work unit–level transformational Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and
leadership. The former refers to leadership behav- action: A social cognitive view. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
ior as perceived by an individual. The latter refers
Bass, B. M. (1998). Transformational leadership:
to leadership behavior as perceived by an entire
Industrial, military, and educational impact. Mahwah,
group. Hence, work unit–level transformational
NJ: Erlbaum.
leadership is perceived similarly by different group
members. Work unit–level transformational lead-
ership aspires to achieve group- and organizational-
level outcomes by transforming the climate into Trust
one that is more positive and promotion oriented.
Service climate represents employees’ shared Researchers have long recognized the central and
perception of the organizational context’s prac- beneficial role that trust plays in effective intra-
tices, policies, and procedures as they relate to group processes and in facilitating constructive
customer service. Research suggests that service intergroup relations. Trust has been shown, for
climates are malleable, and work unit–level trans- example, to facilitate the sharing of information
formational leadership has a major role in shaping within groups and to contribute to more coopera-
perceptions of the climate. Transformational lead- tive interaction between groups.
ers who provide a compelling customer service
vision arouse excitement and hope about securing
Conceptualizing Trust
and deepening customer loyalty. They also serve as
role models for employees and challenge followers Although recognizing the benefits of trust, social sci-
to create new ways to serve customers. Recent entists have also noted that trust is a psychologically
Trust 937

and socially complex construct. Reflecting this psy- about the trustworthiness of others. Over time,
chological and social complexity, a concise and this diffuse expectancy can even come to assume
universally accepted definition of trust remains elu- the form of a relatively stable personality charac-
sive even to this day. As a consequence, the term teristic or disposition.
trust is used in a variety of distinct, and not always Other research on the development of trust has
compatible, ways by different researchers. At one shown that one’s perceptions of others’ trustwor-
end of the definitional spectrum are formulations thiness and one’s willingness to engage in trusting
that highlight the ethical and moral facets of trust. behavior when interacting with them are largely
For example, one scholar characterized trust in history-dependent processes. According to such
terms of people’s expectations regarding ethically models, trust between two or more interdependent
justifiable behaviors, on the assumption their deci- actors increases or decreases as a function of their
sions were based on ethical principles. Conceptions cumulative interactions. These interaction histories
at the other end of the spectrum, in contrast, presumably give individuals information that is
emphasize the purely expectation-based and calcu- useful in assessing others’ trust-related disposi-
lative dimensions of trust. For example, some tions, intentions, and motives. This information, in
researchers have defined trust simply as “antici- turn, provides a basis for drawing inferences
pated cooperation,” arguing that the issue is not regarding others’ trustworthiness and reliability—
moral at all. information that will be useful when making pre-
Despite such divergence, most trust theorists do dictions about their future behavior.
agree that—whatever else its essential features— Appreciating both the importance of informa-
trust is fundamentally a cognitive state. When con- tion regarding others’ trustworthiness and the dif-
ceptualized as a cognitive state, trust has been ficulty in obtaining such information, scholars
defined in terms of several interrelated properties. have noted that third parties can sometimes func-
Most important, trust entails a state of perceived tion as important conduits of trust because of their
vulnerability or risk that is derived from individu- ability to diffuse trust-relevant information to
als’ uncertainty regarding the motives, intentions, other parties. In effect, they become trust brokers.
and prospective actions of others on whom they One recent study of exchange relations among
depend. For example, researchers have often char- firms in the New York apparel industry provides
acterized trust in terms of risky actions predicated evidence of this constructive third-party role in the
on confident expectations that others involved in a development and diffusion of trust. This study
relationship will act competently and with benign found that third parties acted as important go-
motives. betweens in new relationships, enabling individu-
From this definition, the question logically arises: als to essentially roll over their expectations from
What are the bases for such confident expectation? well-established relationships to others in which
adequate knowledge or history was not yet avail-
able. In explaining how this worked, the research-
Bases of Trust
ers who conducted this study argued that such
Considerable research has focused on identifying go-betweens help transfer positive expectations
the bases or antecedents of trust within and and opportunities from existing embedded rela-
between groups. Early work in this area focused tionships to newly formed ones, thereby furnishing
on identifying individual differences with respect a foundation for trust.
to the propensity to trust. To explain the origins of With respect to trust within and between groups,
such differences, researchers proposed that people trust based on social category—defined as trust
extrapolate from their early trust-related experi- predicated on information regarding a trustee’s
ences to build up generalized beliefs and expecta- membership in a particular social category—may
tions about other people and, in particular, their be an important form of both intragroup and inter-
trustworthiness in particular social situations. As group trust. For at least two reasons, membership
these trust-related expectancies are generalized in a salient social category can provide a basis for
from one social agent to another, according to this such presumptive trust. First, shared membership
view people acquire a sort of diffuse expectancy in a given category can serve as a basis for defining
938 Trust

the boundaries of a low-risk form of interpersonal assumes many forms. Group members are expected,
trust. By so doing, such information eliminates the for example, to contribute their time and attention
need for more personalized, individuating knowl- toward the achievement of collective goals, they are
edge. Second, because of the cognitive conse- expected to share useful information with other
quences of categorization, individuals tend to organizational members, and they are expected to
attribute positive characteristics such as honesty, exercise responsible restraint when using valuable
cooperativeness, reliability, and trustworthiness to but limited organizational resources.
other ingroup members. Another important stream of research has
examined the relationship between trust and vari-
ous forms of voluntary deference within and
Benefits of Trust
between groups, especially those embedded in
In addition to exploring the bases of trust, research- hierarchical relationships. From the standpoint of
ers have been keen to document more fully its those in positions of authority, trust is crucial for
benefits within and between groups. Indeed, the a variety of reasons. First, if group leaders or
ascension of trust as a major focus of recent authorities had to continually explain and justify
research during the past two decades has reflected their actions, their ability to effectively manage
in no small measure accumulating evidence of the would be greatly diminished. Second, because of
substantial and varied benefits, both individual the costs and impracticality of monitoring perfor-
and collective, that accrue when trust is in place. mance, authorities cannot detect and punish every
These myriad benefits of trust have been discussed failure to cooperate, nor can they recognize and
primarily on three levels: (1) trust as a mechanism reward every cooperative act. As a result, efficient
for reducing transaction costs within and between group performance depends on individuals’ feel-
groups; (2) trust as a means for increasing sponta- ings of obligation toward the group, their willing-
neous sociability, cooperation, and coordination ness to comply with its directives and regulations,
within and between groups; and (3) trust as a and their willingness to voluntarily defer to group
mechanism for facilitating appropriate (i.e., adap- leaders. In addition, when conflict arises, trust is
tive) forms of deference to group authorities or important because it influences acceptance of dis-
leaders. pute resolution procedures and outcomes.
In the absence of personalized knowledge about Research has shown that individuals are more
others, or adequate grounds for conferring trust on likely to accept outcomes, even if unfavorable,
them presumptively, either trust within and between when individuals trust an authority’s motives and
groups must be individually negotiated or substi- intentions.
tutes for trust must be located. Even when effec- Other researchers have investigated the influ-
tive, such remedies are often inefficient and costly. ence of procedural variables on attributions regard-
Recognition of this problem has led a number of ing group leaders’ trustworthiness. Procedures are
theorists to focus on the role of trust in reducing important because they communicate information,
the costs of both intra- and interorganizational not only about authorities’ motivations and inten-
transactions. For example, as noted above, trusted tions to behave in a trustworthy fashion, but also
third parties can serve as useful conduits for estab- about their ability to do so, a factor characterized
lishing trustworthiness of social actors about as procedural competence. In support of this gen-
which one knows relatively little. eral argument, evidence indicates that procedures
One of the most important manifestations of that are structurally and procedurally fair tend to
trust as a form of social capital is the spontaneous increase trust, whereas the absence of such proce-
sociability such trust engenders. When operational- dures tends to elicit low levels of trust.
ized in behavioral terms, spontaneous sociability In the context of group processes and intergroup
refers to the myriad forms of cooperative, altruis- relations, the future of trust research seems bright
tic, and extrarole behavior that members of a social indeed. Trust theorists have been interested in
community engage in that enhance collective well- elaborating on the institutional bases of trust and
being and further the attainment of collective goals. the role culture plays in the development and main-
Within group contexts, spontaneous sociability tenance of trust. Another recent and important
Trust 939

extension includes examination of cross-cultural (Eds.), Scientific inquiry in the social sciences
variations in the bases and consequences of trust. (pp. 345–359). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
For example, studies have compared the construal Cook, K. S. (2001). Trust in society. New York: Russell
of trust and its antecedents in the United States and Sage.
Japan. Hardin, R. (2002). Trust and trustworthiness. New York:
Russell Sage.
Roderick M. Kramer Insko, C. A., & Schopler, J. (1997). Differential distrust
of groups and individuals. In C. Sedikides, J. Schopler,
See also Cooperation and Competition; Distributive & C. Insko (Eds.), Intergroup cognition and
Justice; Justice; Leadership; Negotiation and intergroup behavior (pp. 75–108). Mahwah, NJ:
Bargaining; Organizations; Procedural Justice Erlbaum.
Kramer, R. M., & Cook, K. S. (2004). Trust and distrust
in organizations: Dilemmas and approaches. New
Further Readings
York: Russell Sage.
Brewer, M. B. (1981). Ethnocentrism and its role in Sztompka, P. (1999). Trust: A sociological theory. New
interpersonal trust. In M. B. Brewer & B. Collins York: Cambridge University Press.
U
environment (situational factors)? Or both? For
Ultimate Attribution Error example, if the barista at the coffee shop fails to
smile at us, should we conclude that she is antiso-
The ultimate attribution error refers to a psy- cial by nature, or will we notice that she also looks
chological phenomenon in which individuals tired and infer that she might have stayed out too
explain the behaviors of people in groups by late the night before?
attributing those behaviors to the influence of Attribution researchers have determined that
dispositional or situational forces. The disposi- when we attempt to explain someone else’s behav-
tional or situational nature of the attribution ior, we typically tend to underestimate the impact
depends on the positive or negative valence of of the situation and overestimate the impact of
the behavior and on whether the individuals so personal characteristics such as traits and atti-
observed are members of the observer’s ingroup tudes. This phenomenon has been dubbed the
or another group. Individuals making the ulti- fundamental attribution error (also called the cor-
mate attribution error tend to overemphasize respondence bias or the overattribution effect). In
broad dispositional explanations, or explana- one classic experiment investigating the funda-
tions based on innate group characteristics (e.g., mental attribution error, Edward Jones and Victor
ethnicity or gender) when explaining the nega- Harris had university students read opinion essays
tive (antisocial, undesirable) behaviors of mem- supporting or criticizing Cuba’s then leader, Fidel
bers of groups they do not belong to. Conversely, Castro. When students were told that the position
positive (prosocial, desirable) behaviors of out- taken had been chosen by the author, they quite
group members are often attributed to excep- reasonably assumed that the essay content reflected
tionality, luck, effort, special advantage, or the author’s true opinion. However, when they
other mutable situational forces. were told that the position taken had been assigned
by a third party, students still inferred that the
author of the essay had either pro- or anti-Castro
Background and History leanings, in accordance with the position taken in
the essay. In other words, when explaining the
The Fundamental Attribution Error
reason the author of the essay wrote what he or
One way in which we can make sense of the she did, individuals participating in this experi-
world around us is to determine why other people ment overemphasized the influence of the author’s
act the way they do. Is a behavior we observe personal attitudes about Castro and discounted
merely a function of the observed individual’s per- the situational influence of being told what to
sonality traits (dispositional factors)? Or is he or write by a third party. A large body of work fol-
she being influenced to act by something in the lowing the Jones and Harris study supports this

941
942 Ultimate Attribution Error

general finding, making it one of the most robust However, when an outgroup member behaves in
phenomena studied by behavioral researchers. a positive way that is inconsistent with an overall
negative view of the outgroup, it violates precon-
ceived, stereotypical notions about innate differ-
Extrapolating From the Individual
ences between ingroup and outgroup members
to the Group: The Ultimate Attribution Error
(e.g., “Everyone knows women aren’t as good as
In the fundamental attribution error, we tend to men at sports, so how could I have been beaten at
ascribe the behavior of other individuals to innate tennis by that girl?”). An ingroup member exposed
personal characteristics such as traits or attitudes to this dilemma must find a way to reconcile his or
and overlook the impact of situational factors. In her natural tendency to make dispositional attribu-
some cases, the attributions made by others will be tions about the behavior of others with the desire
negative for an observed individual (e.g., “he’s to maintain positive differentiation between his or
poor because he’s lazy”). In other cases, an indi- her own ingroup and members of an outgroup.
vidual may benefit from a positive dispositional One way to resolve this discrepancy is to change
attribution (e.g., “the quiz show contestant knew one’s view about an entire outgroup. Research
all the answers because she is intelligent”). But indicates that this does happen, but only under
what happens when people’s behavior can be specified situational conditions, such as repeated
potentially attributed to a dispositional character- positive contact with multiple members of an out-
istic of a group they are a member of, and the group. In many instances, a typical observer does
attribution may reflect on dispositional character- not have information about the behavior of out-
istics of a group the observer is a member of? group members over time. In this case, individuals
In the ultimate attribution error, we tend to pri- will likely assume that an isolated positive act by a
marily ascribe dispositional explanations to nega- member of an outgroup can be explained by forces
tive behaviors (e.g., antisocial or undesirable) of such as luck, special advantage, being an “excep-
outgroup members, and situational explanations tional member” of a group (including having par-
to positive behaviors (e.g., prosocial or desirable). ticularly high motivation or putting in extra effort),
In other words, outgroup members are viewed as being influenced by members of the ingroup, and
wholly responsible for negative behaviors and so forth, which do not indicate anything disposi-
simultaneously not responsible for positive ones. tional about the outgroup as a whole. Positive acts
Thomas Pettigrew has suggested that the reason may also be reframed by observers so as to indicate
for this view lies in the desire to protect currently the presence of a negative disposition (e.g., behav-
held stereotypes about members of other groups iors indicating intelligence are described as cun-
and maintain the perception that one’s ingroup is ning, ambition becomes being pushy, high ability
inherently superior to outgroups. in women is framed as unfeminine).
An outgroup member performing a negative Although research on the ultimate attribution
act supports a negative stereotype about that error is relatively scarce when compared with the
group that we may already hold and confirms our large body of work investigating its cousin, the
tendency to ascribe dispositional attributions to fundamental attribution error, several studies sup-
the behaviors of others. So for instance in the case port Pettigrew’s assertions. Birt Duncan, for exam-
of race, ethnicity, or gender, this dispositional ple, found that White participants were more
attribution may take the form of assumptions likely to interpret a shove as both more violent and
about genetic characteristics of members of that indicative of personal attributes (e.g., aggression,
group. Attributing behaviors of members of that dishonesty, immorality) when it came from a Black
group to genetic characteristics may in turn sup- person than when it came from a White person.
port a currently held stereotypical perception of Another study, by Donald Taylor and Vaishna
the group as a whole and allow an individual to Jaggi, found that Hindu participants tended to
favorably compare his or her ingroup to members make dispositional attributions for negative behav-
of an outgroup (e.g., “Unlike Whites, Blacks are ior when an observed individual was Muslim (out-
violent by nature, which is why that Black man group member) and displayed the opposite pattern
mugged me”). when an observed individual was Hindu (ingroup
Uncertainty-Identity Theory 943

member). Similarly, a meta-analysis by Janet Swim


and Lawrence Sanna found that in experiments Uncertainty-Identity Theory
involving traditionally masculine tasks, partici-
pants were more likely to attribute male than Uncertainty-identity theory, developed by Michael
female successes to ability, and male failures were Hogg in 2000 and elaborated more extensively in
more likely than female failures to be attributed to 2007, argues that people are motivated to reduce
bad luck or lack of effort. feelings of uncertainty, particularly about them-
selves and about their perceptions, attitudes, and
behaviors that reflect most directly on self. One
Conclusion way to satisfy this motivation is to identify with a
The ultimate attribution error can in some ways be group (a team, an organization, a religion, an eth-
said to be at the heart of the continuation of preju- nicity, a nation, etc.)—a process that not only
dice against racial, ethnic, or other groups in a defines and locates oneself in the social world but
particular culture. The practice of explaining away also prescribes how one should behave and how
individuals’ successes and simultaneously holding one should interact with others.
their shortcomings against them and their identity Uncertainty-identity theory is grounded in social
as a group member sets up an attributional double identity theory and invokes social cognitive and
standard from which it can be very difficult for social interactive processes associated with social
members of stigmatized or stereotyped groups to identity to explain how uncertainty motivates
break free. Thus, it is important for behavioral group identification and how identification reduces
researchers studying stereotyping and prejudice uncertainty. Uncertainty-identity theory can be con-
and individuals who attempt to mitigate the effects sidered a motivational elaboration of social identity
of stereotyping and prejudice via public policy to theory. This entry describes the main features of
take into account the influence of misattribution of uncertainty-identity theory and discusses the prop-
behavior at the intergroup level. erties of groups, and thus the types of groups, that
may best satisfy the uncertainty reduction motive.
Kira M. Alexander One implication of this analysis is an understanding
of the way in which acute and chronic uncertainty
See also Attribution Biases; Discrimination; Essentialism;
Intergroup Contact Theory; Linguistic Intergroup Bias
may lead to group extremism: zealotry, fanaticism,
(LIB); Prejudice; Racism; Sexism; Stereotyping ideological orthodoxy, xenophobia, dehumaniza-
tion, collective violence, and so forth.

Further Readings
Uncertainty and the
Duncan, B. L. (1976). Differential social perception and Need to Reduce Uncertainty
attribution of intergroup violence: Testing the lower
Feeling uncertain about our perceptions, attitudes,
limits of stereotyping of Blacks. Journal of Personality
values, or feelings motivates us to address the uncer-
and Social Psychology, 34, 590–598.
Jones, E. E., & Harris, V. A. (1967). The attribution of
tainty. Uncertainty can be an exhilarating challenge
attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,
to be confronted and resolved, making us feel edgy
3, 1–24. and alive, but it can also be anxiety provoking and
Pettigrew, T. F. (1979). The ultimate attribution error: stressful, making us feel impotent and unable to
Extending Allport’s cognitive analysis of prejudice. predict or control our world and what will happen
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 5, 461–476. to us in it. Although we strive to resolve, manage,
Swim, J. K., & Sanna, L. J. (1996). He’s skilled, she’s or avoid feeling uncertain, we do not do this all the
lucky: A meta-analysis of observers’ attributions for time; some uncertainties we simply do not care
women’s and men’s successes and failures. Personality much about, and therefore we do not bother to
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 507–519. dedicate our stretched cognitive resources to them.
Taylor, D. M., & Jaggi, V. (1974). Ethnocentrism and We expend cognitive energy resolving only those
causal attribution in a south Indian context. Journal uncertainties that are important or matter to us in a
of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 5, 162–171. particular context.
944 Uncertainty-Identity Theory

One factor that imparts motivational impetus to When we categorize others, ingroup or outgroup
feeling uncertain is self-relevance. We are particu- members, we stereotype them and have expecta-
larly motivated to reduce uncertainty if we feel tions of what they think and feel and how they
uncertain about things that reflect on or are rele- will behave. When we categorize ourselves, self-
vant to self or if we are uncertain about self per se— categorization, the same process occurs: We assign
about our identity, who we are, how we relate to prescriptive ingroup attributes to ourselves; we
others, and how we are socially located. Ultimately, autostereotype, conform to group norms, and trans-
we like to know who we are, how to behave, and form our self-conception.
what to think, as well as who others are, how they In this way, group identification very effectively
might behave, and what they might think. reduces self-related uncertainty. It provides us with a
Although we are, therefore, in the business of sense of who we are that prescribes what we should
reducing self-uncertainty, there will always be think, feel, and do. Because self-categorization is
some degree of uncertainty (we cannot ever attain inextricably linked to categorization of others, it
absolute certainty); uncertainty-identity theory is also reduces uncertainty about how others will
about reducing uncertainty rather than achieving behave and what course social interaction will
certainty. It is also important to bear in mind that take. Group identification also provides consen-
individuals and groups may sometimes embark on sual validation of our worldview and sense of self,
courses of action that in the short term increase which further reduces uncertainty. This is because
uncertainty, such as when the individual or group people in a group tend to have a shared prototype
is confident that the experience of short-term of “us” and a shared prototype of “them,” and
uncertainty is necessary in order to resolve more therefore our expectations about the prototype-
enduring contradictions and uncertainties that based behavior of others tend to be confirmed, and
have arisen. our fellow group members agree with our percep-
tions, beliefs, attitudes, and values and approve of
how we behave.
Social Identity and Uncertainty Reduction
Identification can effectively reduce and protect
Feelings of uncertainty can be resolved in many us from uncertainty, and so uncertainty can moti-
different ways. However, self-uncertainty and self- vate group identification. We identify with groups
relevant uncertainty are particularly efficiently in order to reduce or protect ourselves from uncer-
reduced by the process of psychologically identify- tainty. We may “join” existing groups as new
ing with a group: group identification. members, create and identify with entirely new
According to social identity theory, and more groups, or identify more strongly with existing
specifically self-categorization theory, people cog- groups to which we already belong. Empirical
nitively represent social groups as prototypes. A studies have provided solid support for this moti-
prototype is a fuzzy set of attributes that defines the vational analysis of the relationship between uncer-
group and distinguishes it from other groups in a tainty and group identification.
specific context. In describing members’ percep-
tions, beliefs, attitudes, values, feelings, and behav-
Group Attributes Best Suited
iors, a prototype accentuates similarities among
to Reduce Self-Uncertainty
members within the same group and accentuates
differences between groups (a phenomenon called Not all groups are equally well equipped to reduce
metacontrast). The prototype of a group we belong self-uncertainty. One property of a group that
to, the ingroup, tends to be prescriptive in designat- improves its ability to reduce uncertainty is entita-
ing how we ought to behave as a group member. tivity. A high-entitativity group is clearly struc-
When we categorize someone as a group mem- tured with clear boundaries, it is internally relatively
ber, we assign the specific group’s attributes to that homogeneous, and its members have a sense of
person. We view that person through the lens of the common goals and shared fate. Such groups may
prototype of that group, seeing him or her not as a also be subject to essentialism—a tendency for
unique individual but as a more or less prototypical people to see the group’s attributes as fixed and
group member—a process called depersonalization. unchanging because they reflect, for example,
Uncertainty-Identity Theory 945

invariant personality or genetically grounded attri- belief systems; they are intolerant and suspicious
butes of the group’s members. of outsiders and of internal dissent and criticism;
An unclearly structured, low-entitativity group, they are rigidly and hierarchically structured, often
which has indistinct boundaries, ambiguous mem- with strong autocratic leadership; and they are
bership criteria, limited shared goals, and little ethnocentric and narcissistic. These extremist attri-
agreement on group attributes, will do a poor job butes are particularly effective at providing a
of reducing or fending off self-uncertainty. In con- clearly directive and unambiguous sense of who
trast, a clearly structured, high-entitativity group you are and how you should behave.
with sharp boundaries, unambiguous membership There is a well-documented association between
criteria, highly shared goals, and consensus on societal uncertainty and various forms of extrem-
group attributes will do an excellent job. ism, such as genocide, cults, ultranationalism, blind
Identification reduces uncertainty because it pro- patriotism, religious fundamentalism, terrorism,
vides a clear sense of self that makes social interac- ideological thinking, fanaticism, and being a “true
tion predictable and because self is governed by a believer.” Uncertainty-identity theory specifies a
prototype that prescribes cognition, affect, and psychological mechanism that converts uncertainty
behavior. Prototypes that are simple, clear, unam- into extremism or totalism. Under certain circum-
biguous, prescriptive, focused, and consensual are stances, uncertainty-induced identification under-
more effective than those that are vague, ambigu- pins zealotry, fanaticism, ideological orthodoxy,
ous, unfocused, and dissensual. Clear prototypes xenophobia, dehumanization, collective violence,
are more likely to be grounded in high- than low- and so forth.
entitativity groups. A number of studies have shown There is now some evidence that even liberal-
that under uncertainty, people prefer to identify minded Westerners can be more inclined toward
with high- rather than low-entitativity groups. being a part of and identifying with these kinds of
groups when they feel self-uncertain.
Uncertainty, Social Identity, Michael A. Hogg
and the Psychology of Extremism
See also Entitativity; Ideology; Self-Categorization
When self-uncertainty is acute and enduring (e.g., Theory; Social Identity Theory
in times of economic collapse, cultural disintegra-
tion, civil war, terrorism, or large-scale natural Further Readings
disasters or in the face of unemployment, bereave-
Hogg, M. A. (2000). Subjective uncertainty reduction
ment, divorce, relocation, or adolescence), the
through self-categorization: A motivational theory of
motivation to reduce uncertainty effectively is
social identity processes. European Review of Social
strengthened. Under these circumstances, people
Psychology, 11, 223–255.
will identify strongly. They will have a strong sense
Hogg, M. A. (2006). Social identity theory. In P. J. Burke
of belonging and a strong feeling of attachment to (Ed.), Contemporary social psychological theories
the group, and their sense of self will be compre- (pp. 111–136). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University
hensively defined by the group; they could be Press.
described as zealots, fanatics, or true believers. Hogg, M. A. (2007). Uncertainty-identity theory. In
Furthermore, people will seek to identify with M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social
groups that are not merely entitative but extreme. psychology (Vol. 39, pp. 69–126). San Diego, CA:
Relatively, these are groups that have some combi- Academic Press.
nation of the following attributes: They are homo- Hogg, M. A. (in press). Uncertainty-identity theory. In
geneous in their attitudes, values, and membership; P. A. M. van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, &
they have inflexible customs and carefully policed E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of social
boundaries; they have orthodox and ideological psychological theories. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
V
over time through a number of stages based on a
Vertical Dyad Linkage Model role-making process. The positions of leader and
subordinate are associated with specific role-
The vertical dyad linkage (VDL) model is a frame- assigned behavior (e.g., leaders are expected to make
work for understanding workplace leadership that major decisions, and subordinates are expected to
focuses on the interactions between the leader implement them). Leaders generally take a signifi-
(manager) and his or her subordinates. The name cant role in the development of the relationship with
of the model reflects its focus on two people (a their subordinates because leaders typically have the
dyad) and the facts that the position of the leader legitimate authority, invested in them by their orga-
is above that of the subordinate in terms of author- nization, to negotiate exchanges. In addition, leaders
ity in the organization (vertical) and that there is who are admired and liked by their subordinates can
interrelated behavior between them (linkage). The have informal power over them, and this can deter-
basic premise of VDL is that leaders develop sepa- mine the types of exchanges that occur.
rate exchange relationships with each subordinate. It is proposed that the relationship between the
This premise challenges the dominant perspective leader and the subordinate develops through three
in many behavioral and situational leadership stages. The first stage (stranger) is an initial testing
models that leaders should adopt the same leader- phase, in which the leader and the subordinate
ship style for all group members (sometimes evaluate each other’s motives and beliefs and the
referred to as average leadership style). This entry potential value of resources each has to offer. For
looks at the basic features of the VDL model, the the leader, these resources might include the ability
different kinds of possible relationships, and the to increase remuneration or grant promotion or
most recent evolution of the idea. the allocation of interesting and rewarding work.
For the subordinate, these resources might include
being a loyal and trusted worker, supporting the
Development of VDL Relationships
leader, and being a good team member. During
VDL proposes that leaders develop differentiated this stage, the role expectation between the leader
relationships with their subordinates based on the and the subordinate is established. Some leader–
types of exchanges that develop between them. subordinate relationships do not develop beyond
The model does not focus on leadership style but this first stage.
on the way relationships develop between the If the relationship proceeds to the second stage
leader and subordinates and how this affects the (acquaintance), then mutual trust and loyalty
exchanges that occur between them. develop between the leader and the subordinate.
According to the VDL model, the relationship The leader takes into consideration the subordi-
between the leader and the subordinate develops nate’s needs and ambitions and tries to satisfy them

947
948 Vertical Dyad Linkage Model

within the workplace. Finally, the two may enter a Research has identified many reasons that a
third stage (mature partnership), in which the leader might develop exchange relationships of dif-
exchanges become based on mutual commitment ferent quality with his or her subordinates. One
to the goals and objectives of the work group. The reason might be managing a very large group of
leader and the subordinate work closely together, people (many leaders are responsible for very large
and the level of mutual influence between the two groups of subordinates). Because leaders do not
is very high. have enough time to develop good-quality
exchanges with all their subordinates, there is a
tendency to subgroup the subordinates into good-
High- and Low-Quality Relationships
or poor-quality exchange relationships. Such a
VDL theory proposes that leaders do not develop the strategy might be cost-effective for the leader time-
same type of exchange relationships with all their wise, but this advantage has to be weighed against
subordinates. In many cases, leaders develop two having poor-quality exchange relationships with
main types of relationships, high- and low-quality other members of the work group, who may
exchange relationships, sometimes referred to as underperform.
ingroup and outgroup relationships, respectively. Another reason might be personal compatibility
Leaders develop high-quality exchange relation- between the leader and the subordinate. The more
ships with those subordinates whom they trust and similar the subordinate is to the leader, on a range
who in return show them loyalty, and these subor- of work and nonwork factors, the greater is the
dinates can function as lieutenants and advisers to likelihood that a high-quality exchange relation-
the leader. These high-quality exchange relation- ship will develop. Research in the relationships
ships can be extremely beneficial to both the subor- area shows that similarity leads to attraction, and
dinate (in terms of receiving valued rewards) and this also applies to the relationship between a
the leader (in terms of support, commitment, and leader and his or her subordinate. In this situation,
help). In order to sustain these types of relation- the similarity between the leader and the subordi-
ships, the leader needs to maintain an interest in the nate may lead to their liking each other, which can
needs and goals of the subordinate to ensure that result in the development of high-quality exchanges
the subordinate receives the benefits expected. between them.
On the other hand, low-quality exchange rela-
tionships are not characterized by these positive
features. In low-quality situations, the relationship Recent Developments
between the leader and the subordinate is based on Recent versions of VDL emphasize that leaders
the formal working contract in that the subordi- should not form high-quality exchange relation-
nate is expected to fulfill set duties and work ships with just a few of their subordinates but
requirements. If subordinates meet these expecta- should try to develop positive relationships with
tions, then they will receive the benefits (such as all their subordinates. This advice recognizes that
salary), but the relationship is not designed to conflict can occur among subordinates if they
motivate the subordinate beyond this level, nor is feel that the leader treats some members of
it concerned with the subordinate’s personal needs the work group more favorably than others—
for development. especially if such favorability is based on the
Research has shown that people in high-quality leader’s personal preference rather than on work
exchange relationships with their leader report performance criteria.
much higher rates of job satisfaction and commit- Research into VDL has developed to take a
ment to the organization and lower levels of job broader view of leadership in order to examine
stress than those who report having a low-quality how leaders manage groups of subordinates, and
relationship with their leader. In addition, those this research has been the forerunner for the estab-
with a high-quality exchange relationship with lishment of the leader-member exchange theory of
their leader tend to display better work perfor- leadership.
mance than do people with a low-quality exchange
relationship. Robin Martin
Virtual/Internet Groups 949

See also Charismatic Leadership; Contingency Theories communication, or the expanded capacity for com-
of Leadership; Great Person Theory of Leadership; munication and connection. Using the richness
Interactionist Theories of Leadership; Leader-Member metaphor, the time line of virtual groups can be
Exchange (LMX) Theory; Leadership; Path–Goal roughly bracketed into an early phase, oriented
Theory of Leadership; Personality Theories of
around text-based communication (1960s to
Leadership; Social Identity Theory of Leadership;
1980s); a middle phase, oriented around group-
Transactional Leadership Theories; Transformational
Leadership Theories
ware (1980s to 1990s); and the current phase, ori-
ented around social computing (1990s to 2000s).

Further Readings Text-Based Virtual Groups


Danserau, F., Jr., Graen, G., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A The creation of the first computer networks (e.g.,
vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within
ARPAnet) in the 1960s led to the introduction of
formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of
network-based tools, of which the most significant
the role making process. Organizational Behavior and
was electronic mail (e-mail). E-mail allows text-
Human Performance, 13, 46–78.
based communication that can be stored and for-
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based
approaches to leadership: Development of leader-
warded by computers, meaning that messages are
member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over
delivered just as easily to a single recipient as to a
25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain list of recipients (e.g., an electronic mailing list).
perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 6, 219–247. Similarly, messages can be delivered to local or
distributed addresses with equal effort. Mailing
lists were quickly adopted as mechanisms for both
formal and informal communication. For example,
Virtual/Internet Groups the computer language Common Lisp was an ini-
tial successful instance of work accomplished
The development and adoption of network-based almost completely via mailing list discussions.
collaboration tools and services have allowed the During a span of 30  months in the early 1980s,
formation of virtual groups, or groups that exist the Common Lisp team exchanged thousands of
primarily via technology-mediated interaction. messages among dozens of contributors all over
The evolution of virtual groups has followed the the world and demonstrated that complex tasks
evolution of the Internet, from groups defined by could be coordinated and executed via electronic
electronic mailing lists in the 1980s to the contem- interaction.
porary use of social networking sites, such as At the same time as work groups discovered the
Facebook. Virtual groups differ in important ways advantages of mailing lists for coordinating and
from traditional groups, and these differences are accomplishing activity, non-work groups also
the focus of practical and theoretical interest. adopted mailing lists. For instance, in a 1990
From a practical perspective, virtual groups allow paper, Tom Finholt and Lee Sproull documented
organizations to build work teams that are geo- the first purely social uses of mailing lists in the
graphically dispersed, which can make it easier to context of groups devoted to particular interests
combine far-flung expertise. In theoretical terms, (e.g., cooking or movies), as well as groups that
virtual groups challenge many assumptions about existed as virtual extensions or counterparts to
group process, such as the importance of physical traditional groups (e.g., coworkers who go to bars
proximity and face-to-face communication for together or members of a sports team). In the case
group formation and maintenance. of interest groups, mailing lists allowed those with
The emergence of virtual groups is tied closely to rare interests (e.g., playing the Japanese strategy
the emergence of key enabling technologies, in game go) to identify similarly oriented others,
which succeeding stages of technology develop- unconstrained by time or place. In the case of
ment have supported more elaborate forms of vir- extensions to traditional groups, mailing lists
tual groups. This progression can be thought of in allowed members to expand socializing beyond
terms of the increasing “richness” of virtual group occasions for face-to-face gatherings.
950 Virtual/Internet Groups

Groupware these materials. The use of shared file spaces also


allowed groups to see what members were work-
Instances of group activity supported via electronic ing on, with corresponding benefits in terms of
communication created demand for tools to enable reduced coordination overhead. Systems like Notes
a broader spectrum of group interaction. For did introduce certain difficulties. For example,
instance, rather than sharing text through e-mail, Wanda Orlikowski found that use of Notes in one
users wanted to edit the text in real time. Starting in professional organization was very sensitive to
the mid-1980s, researchers in academia and corpo- incentive structures. For example, a goal of instal-
rate labs began to develop prototype applications to lation was to encourage employees to share more
support synchronous and asynchronous activity at of their individual work-related information, with
a distance, called groupware. Research on group- the expectation that doing so would accelerate the
ware formed the core of a new research area, called conversion of personal knowledge into commu-
computer-supported cooperative work. nity knowledge (so that employees could better
Some early instances of groupware focused on benefit from the wisdom and experience of their
shared writing tools and shared whiteboards. By coworkers). However, in practice, employees with-
the 1990s, commercial applications of these tech- held contributions, both because contributions
nologies, such as Microsoft NetMeeting, were were not classified as billable activity and because
available, as well as open-source versions, such as employees thought managers were using Notes
Virtual Network Computer. Typically, these appli- contributions to monitor performance. Similarly,
cations allowed remote users to share a common in a 1994 study of an asynchronous groupware
desktop, enabling joint viewing and manipulation system for biologists, called the Worm Community
of documents, images, and other application inter- System (WCS), Susan Leigh Star and Karen
faces. Communication occurred via text-based Ruhleder found that junior scientists, particu-
chat windows. Successful interaction via these larly postdocs, were reluctant to deposit data in
tools required a number of technology and inter- the WCS. Part of their concern reflected fears
face innovations, such as mechanisms to avoid that availability of their data within the WCS
simultaneous work on the same section of a text could lead a more senior researcher to analyze the
and the use of user-specific telepointers to repre- data and hence anticipate, or scoop, the postdocs’
sent focus of attention (because remote users can- discoveries.
not see gaze direction). For example, in a 1999
paper, Gloria Mark and colleagues showed how
Social Computing
design teams at Boeing were able to use NetMeeting
to increase common ground in long-distance col- The arrival of the World Wide Web in the mid-
laboration by creating a shared visual reference 1990s dramatically expanded use of computer
when talking about design changes. Contemporary networks for social activity. Initially, much of this
versions of synchronous groupware, called data expansion involved the introduction of conven-
conferencing tools (e.g., WebEx), have become tional applications and services, such as e-mail, to
ubiquitous in corporate environments and have new populations of users or the appropriation of
added capabilities, such as video and audio. synchronous groupware technologies for enter-
Another important early line of research on tainment, such as online games (e.g., Everquest
groupware focused on asynchronous applications, and more recently World of Warcraft). Recently, a
such as systems that combined shared secure file host of new uses of the Web have emerged, col-
spaces, threaded discussion lists, and e-mail repos- lectively termed social computing. These emerging
itories. By the 1990s, commercial applications of services take advantage of the Web’s capacity to
these technologies, such as Lotus Notes, were in link and store information, particularly with
wide use. A primary advantage of asynchronous respect to social relationships. The best known
groupware was the controlled group access to the instances of social computing include social net-
system, such that distributed group members working sites (e.g., Facebook), recommender sys-
could upload work in progress with the expecta- tems (e.g., Digg), and user-contributed content
tion that only other group members would see sites (e.g., Wikipedia).
Virtual/Internet Groups 951

Social networking sites, begun as tools for users this effort reflect the contributors’ altruistic
to catalog their friendships, have become infra- impulses as well as more instrumental goals (e.g.,
structures for supporting a diverse array of social contributors to open-source software projects
processes. Facebook, for example, is a means for increase their visibility to prospective employers).
maintaining a running commentary, with one’s
friends, about events, opinions, and affiliations.
The Coming Era of Virtual Organizations
This commentary is enriched by combining fea-
tures of the social networking site with other ser- The experience with virtual groups during the past
vices, such as photo sharing (e.g., via Flickr), video two decades has produced calls, for example from
sharing (e.g., via YouTube), or game playing (e.g., Jonathon Cummings and colleagues in 2008, for
Scrabbulous). LinkedIn, a networking site oriented the creation and study of virtual organizations.
toward career development and business opportu- Initially considered largely in the context of global
nities, has become a way for prospective employers scientific collaborations, such as the community of
to identify and assess job candidates, effectively researchers who use the Large Hadron Collider at
replacing such traditional features of job search as the European Organization for Nuclear Research,
the distribution of cover letters and resumes. virtual organizations are envisioned as ways to
Recommender systems, originally developed as transparently share resources across institutional
tools for users to express their opinions about and geographic boundaries. For example, a typical
favorite movies and books, have become sophisti- application involves identification and allocation
cated mechanisms for mining and extracting of computational and data resources for large-
aggregate opinions. For instance, in the news site scale computations. Traditionally, sharing these
Digg, stories are elevated to the top of the queue resources might involve explicit negotiations
based on how many times users have “digged” a among resource owners, such as contracts and
story, effectively transferring traditional editorial other agreements. By contrast, within a virtual
functions of story selection to consumers as organization, these complex social arrangements
opposed to a select group of editors. Aggregate are delegated to software called middleware, which
recommendations can also be used to tailor selec- automatically negotiates resource access and use
tions of movies or books based on preferences of according to authentication and authorization
viewers or readers with similar tastes. An active schemes. In some sense, virtual organization
area of research concerns efforts to make recom- schemes take the work of trust formation and
mender systems resistant to manipulation, such as maintenance and move it from the realm of man-
reducing the influence of software agents that agers and decision makers to the realm of software
might cast votes for a book or movie to boost its and system developers. There may be significant
popularity artificially. advantages to the virtual organization approach.
A final notable form of social computing is For instance, middleware may reduce bias in
the emergence of user-contributed content sites, resource allocation and create new opportunities
such as Wikipedia. These sites coordinate and for groups and organizations that might otherwise
collect the efforts of thousands of users to pro- have no access. However, embedding important
duce resources (an encyclopedia in the case of social processes within software also carries risk.
Wikipedia) that can be more comprehensive and Notably, decisions made under software control
up-to-date than some traditional counterparts. may be invisible or unintelligible to those affected,
For example, in the case of Wikipedia, contribu- much as recent operation of the financial sector
tors concerned with a particular topic will moni- (e.g., software-controlled hedge funds) has been
tor that topic and then immediately update or obscured, with important consequences in terms of
correct entries. Active areas of research on user- reduced accountability and monitoring.
contributed content include efforts to understand
motivation and incentive structures for contribu- Thomas A. Finholt
tors. Specifically, much of the effort to create
Wikipedia and similar sites comes from the volun- See also Collaboration Technology; Communication
tary efforts of contributors, whose reasons for Networks; Teams
952 Virtual/Internet Groups

Further Readings Orlikowski, W. (1992). Learning from Notes:


Organizational issues in groupware
Cummings, J., Finholt, T. A., Foster, I., Kesselman, C., implementation. In Proceedings of the 1992
& Lawrence, K. (2008). Beyond being there: A ACM Conference on Computer-Supported
blueprint for advancing the design, development and Cooperative Work (pp. 362–369). New York:
evaluation of virtual organizations. Retrieved April 5, ACM Press.
2009, from: http://www.ci.uchicago.edu/events/ Resnick, P., & Varian, H. (1997). Recommender systems.
VirtOrg2008/VO_report.pdf Communications of the ACM, 40, 56–58.
Finholt, T. A., & Sproull, L. S. (1990). Electronic groups Star, S. L., & Ruhleder, K. (1994). Steps toward
at work. Organization Science, 1, 41–64. an ecology of infrastructure: Complex problems
Mark, G., Poltrock, S., & Grudin, J. (1999). Meeting at in design and access for large-scale collaborative
the desktop: An empirical study of virtually collocated systems. In Proceedings of the 1994 ACM
teams. In Proceedings of the Sixth Conference on Conference on Computer-Supported
European Computer-Supported Cooperative Work Cooperative Work (pp. 253–264). New York:
(pp. 159–178). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic. ACM Press.
Nov, O. (2007). What motivates Wikipedians? Steele, G. L. (1984). Common Lisp: The language
Communications of the ACM, 50, 60–64. (1st ed.). Newton, MA: Digital Press.
W
overeating and a lack of exercise, and thus fatness
Weightism is avoidable. In addition, because weight is per-
ceived to be connected to self-control, being heavy
Weightism involves negative attitudes and dis- is perceived to be reversible. Heavyweight indi-
criminatory behavior toward people on the basis viduals are thus considered responsible for their
of their weight. Although in the developing world fate—they have brought this condition on them-
there is some bias against thin people, the most selves, and if they only worked hard enough, they
common form of weightism is bias against people could return to “normality.”
who are heavier than average. When this bias is an This perception of control over weight is not
attitude, it is sometimes called antifat prejudice. consistent with the vast array of data showing that
This entry looks at the origins of weightism, com- dieting rarely works (and when it does, the effects
pares it with other kinds of prejudice and dis- are usually temporary), that exercise programs are
crimination, and discusses its consequences and hard to stick with and do not directly contribute
potential remedies. large amounts to weight loss, and that by far the
greatest contributors to weight are genetic and
physiological factors rather than self-control.
Origins of Weight-Based Bias
Social norms regarding weight suggest that there is
an ideal body type that individuals should strive to
Comparing Weightism
attain. Although there is variability in the ideal
With Other Prejudices
body type across cultures, most cultures endorse a Antifat prejudice is like other prejudices in that it
lean, thin ideal. Because heavyweight individuals involves negative feelings toward people in a
do not fit this ideal, they are often viewed and group (based on category status rather than indi-
treated negatively. vidual characteristics) and stereotypes about the
Heavyweight people are often seen as less group, and it affects the major life areas of friend-
reproductively fit than average-weight people. ships, romance, employment, education, and
From an evolutionary perspective, heavyweight health. As with other prejudices, people who hold
people are seen as unhealthy and less likely to pro- antifat prejudice find justifications for their atti-
duce healthy offspring. There is no evidence, how- tude by endorsing negative stereotypes and hold-
ever, that any but the most morbidly obese are less ing people responsible for their condition. For
capable of successful reproduction. example, people with negative feelings toward fat
Heavyweight people are often seen as responsi- people emphasize the role of personal responsibil-
ble for their condition. In Western countries, ity, the potential success of diet and exercise pro-
people believe that becoming heavy is a result of grams, and the value of self-denial.

953
954 Weightism

Heavyweight people are underrepresented in surprisingly, they do not show ingroup bias—fat
television programs, movies, and advertising. people are every bit as antifat, on average, as thin
Rather than being presented as protagonists, heavy- and average-weight people. Perhaps as a result,
weight individuals are more likely to be portrayed heavyweight people do not tend to engage in advo-
as secondary characters. When they appear in the cacy or join groups promoting social change.
media, heavyweight people are often in the role of Although activism is relatively rare for many stig-
clowns, fools, villains, or people who are damaged matized groups, the rate of activism for heavy-
in some way. weight people, particularly given their prevalence
Heavyweight people have more difficulty than in modern society, is surprisingly low.
others in navigating important social institutions.
They are less likely to go to college, particularly
Consequences of
elite colleges, and they receive less support from
Weight-Based Discrimination
their parents when they do, despite equal interest,
grades, and test scores. The negative consequences of excess weight appear
Heavyweight people are less likely to seek medi- early in life. Although most children experience
cal care for their problems, whether weight related some teasing, heavyweight children experience
or not, perhaps because they fear humiliating or significantly more than average. Individuals who
depersonalizing treatment when they go to the doc- are discriminated against on the basis of their
tor. The evidence suggests that they are right: weight show an increased likelihood of depression
Physicians, medical residents, nurses, and other as well as suicidal thoughts and attempts. Heavy­
health care workers hold antifat attitudes and ste- weight people may also suffer decrements in self-
reotypes. Physicians express more negative emo- esteem and feelings of self-efficacy, particularly if
tions, recommend fewer procedures, show less they feel responsible for their weight.
personal desire to help, and spend less time with Women are more likely than men to be victims
heavyweight patients. Some health programs explic- of antifat bias. Women are more likely than men to
itly do not cover obesity or other weight-related develop friendships with people of similar weight
issues. (and height). Women are more likely to be judged
Heavyweight people can have trouble negotiat- by their physiques in general and by their weight
ing the physical environment. Public accommoda- in particular. A woman’s attractiveness is more
tions are often not built with them in mind—seating, affected by her weight than is a man’s, and wom-
transportation, bathrooms, automobile seat belts, en’s self-approval and self-esteem are more strongly
and doorways are often developed with leaner linked to their weight and body image. Many of
users in mind (although more recent laws, notably the biases demonstrated against heavyweight
the Americans with Disabilities Act, have increased people in the literature seem to be more serious
accessibility in many public accommodations). for women than for men (e.g., discrimination in
The range of clothing available for heavyweight hiring, education, and dating preference).
people can be quite limited, and the higher ends of The bias against heavyweight people, and particu-
the fashion industry aim primarily at a very lean larly women, is also found in marriage. Heavy­
silhouette; the latest fashions are rarely designed weight people, and particularly heavyweight women,
with heavyweight people in mind. begin dating later in life and marry later than their
Although weightism is similar to other preju- leaner counterparts. On average, they also date and
dices, there are some important differences. Unlike marry less desirable partners. Fortunately, once heavy­
other discriminated-against groups, heavyweight weight people are in stable dating relationships or
people do not identify strongly with their group. marriages, they report the same levels of commit-
Perhaps because weight is seen as an issue of per- ment and satisfaction as lean couples do.
sonal responsibility, and perhaps because over- Heavyweight people are more likely than
weight is a category that people believe they can leaner individuals to avoid public exposure and
escape, heavyweight people do not see their weight social situations. Heavyweight people seem to
as part of a group membership. They do not seek have slightly fewer friends than lean people have.
fellowship with other heavyweight people, and, They are also more likely to live alone and to
Work Teams 955

report being lonely, and they are less likely to be See also Ageism; Ambivalent Sexism; Discrimination;
well integrated into the groups and informal Modern Forms of Prejudice; Ostracism; Prejudice;
friendship networks that can offer social rewards Self-Esteem; Stigma
and life opportunities. Heavyweight people often
work hard to compensate for some of these social Further Readings
disadvantages, developing social skills and nur-
turing friendships. Brownell, K. D., Puhl, R. M., Schwartz, M. B., &
Rudd, L. (Eds.). (2005). Weight bias: Nature,
There has been a long history of investigation of
consequences and remedies. New York: Guilford.
the mental health of heavyweight people. When
Crandall, C. S. (1994). Prejudice against fat people:
body image and body esteem are set aside (the
Ideology and self-interest. Journal of Personality and
heavyweight are more negative in both), there are
Social Psychology, 66, 882–894.
few if any differences in the psychological func- Pearce, M. J., Boergers, J., & Prinstein, M. J. (2002).
tioning or health of heavyweight people compared Adolescent obesity, overt and relational peer
with the rest of the population. When differences victimization, and romantic relationships. Obesity
are occasionally found in research, they seem to be Research, 10, 386–393.
connected to the negative treatment to which Puhl, R., & Brownell, K. D. (2001). Bias, discrimination,
heavyweight people are exposed. and obesity. Obesity Research, 9, 788–805.

Reducing Weight-Based
Prejudice and Discrimination Work Teams
Antifat bias has been reduced through education Work teams are composed of two or more indi-
about the causes of obesity. These efforts are only viduals who (a) perform organizationally relevant
occasionally successful in shifting explanations for tasks, (b) share one or more common goals,
fatness from internal causes and personal responsi- (c) interact socially, (d) exhibit interdependencies
bility to causes outside the individual’s control (e.g., in task workflows, (e) manage and maintain
genetics, physiology, in utero nutritional environ- group boundaries, and (f) are embedded in a
ment). When successful, however, change in attri- broader organizational context that constrains the
bution for weight leads to a change in the overt team and influences exchanges with other units in
expression of antipathy for heavyweight people. As the organization. During the past two decades,
with other discriminated-against groups, increased strategic, technological, and economic forces have
positive interpersonal contact between heavyweight driven a shift from work organized around indi-
and nonheavyweight individuals should also lead to vidual jobs to team-based structures. Teams serve
a decrease in bias. Finally, increasing empathy for as the basic building blocks of modern organiza-
heavyweight individuals, perhaps through perspec- tions and represent a critical means by which
tive taking, may also reduce negative attitudes. work is accomplished in today’s world. Therefore,
In summary, antifat bias is pervasive and often significant research during the past few decades
seen as justified by those who endorse it. It is wide- has been focused on understanding work team
spread and affects all the major arenas of life. effectiveness. This entry looks at the history of
Unlike other forms of prejudice, antifat bias is this research and what it says about team types,
equally endorsed by members of the group, and team composition, team development, team pro-
thus group membership and identity offer little cesses, and team effectiveness.
comfort or buffer against discrimination.
Heavyweight people often do not identify with
their group and hence do not work for social History and Background
change or improvement in heavyweight people’s
The idea of people working together in teams is
lives. In practice, movement out of the group is
certainly not new. Yet for much of the 20th cen-
relatively rare and often temporary.
tury, the concept of work in large organizations
Christian S. Crandall and Nia L. Phillips was primarily centered on individual jobs. During
956 Work Teams

the past two decades, however, there has been an model they term input–mediator–output–input
evolution in the design of work, shifting from indi- (IMOI). The IMOI model reflects the fact that
vidual jobs in functionalized structures to teams there are a broad range of factors, beyond just
embedded in more complex workflow arrange- processes, that mediate the effects of team inputs
ments. This shift is the result of numerous forces, on outcomes, and it acknowledges the potential
including increased globalization, consolidation, for a cyclical feedback loop in which outputs, such
and technological innovation. To compete in this as team performance, serve as inputs to future
environment, organizations need access to diverse team processes. The following sections review sev-
skills and experiences, they need to remain flexible eral of the inputs, processes and other mediators,
and adaptive, and they must be able to operate and outputs that have been studied frequently in
effectively across geographical and cultural bound- the research on work team effectiveness.
aries. Teams enable these characteristics. For exam-
ple, an organization can use cross-functional teams
Work Team Types
to bring together individuals with diverse talents to
solve a problem or create a new product and can Work teams come in a variety of different forms,
use virtual teams to connect individuals who may and new forms are regularly invented to deal with
be distributed around the globe. Unfortunately, the emerging organizational needs (e.g., virtual teams).
transition to team-based work structures has not The diversity of team forms presents a challenge
always been a smooth one. Teams are frequently for understanding team effectiveness, as many fac-
unsuccessful, as evidenced by the fact that failures tors that influence team functioning vary across
in team functioning are commonly cited as a pri- different types of teams. General typologies distin-
mary cause of air crashes, medical errors, military guish a broad range of teams, often based on func-
catastrophes, and industrial disasters. tional differences. For example, general team types
The combined promise and peril of work teams include production teams, service teams, and man-
has captured the attention of researchers and has agement teams. Some researchers have identified
led to a growing number of theories, empirical stud- more specific types of teams, including crews, top
ies, and literature reviews on the topic of work team management teams, transnational teams, and vir-
effectiveness. For many years, team research focused tual teams. The value of such typologies stems
on the study of small interpersonal groups in social from the underlying dimensions that distinguish
psychology, but during the past two decades, it has team types, because these dimensions highlight the
become increasingly centered in the fields of organi- varying contingencies that determine the effective-
zational psychology and organizational behavior, ness of different types of teams.
representing the growing interest in work teams. In a 2003 review, Steve Kozlowski and Bradford
Most theoretical frameworks for understanding Bell suggested that the following dimensions can
team effectiveness follow the input  process  be used to characterize the constraints faced by
output (IPO) logic proposed by Joseph McGrath in different team forms: (a) the external environ-
1964. Inputs represent the resources (e.g., charac- ment or organizational context with respect to
teristics of individual members, organizational its dynamics and degree of required coupling;
resources) that can contribute to team effectiveness (b) team boundary permeability and spanning;
and constraints (e.g., task requirements, workflow (c) team member diversity and collocation, or
interdependencies) that have to be managed or spatial distribution; (d) internal coupling require-
resolved for a team to be effective. Processes repre- ments; (e) workflow interdependencies, with their
sent the psychological mechanisms that allow team implications for goal, role, process, and perfor-
members to combine their talents and resources to mance demands; and (f) temporal characteristics
resolve the constraints and achieve success. Outputs that determine the nature of performance epi-
represent internal and external aspects of team per- sodes, or cycles, and the team life cycle.
formance and the impact of the experience on team
members (e.g., team member satisfaction).
Team Composition
In a 2005 review, Daniel Ilgen, John Hollenbeck,
Michael Johnson, and Dustin Jundt proposed an As noted earlier, one of the resources that work
alternative to the traditional IPO framework, a teams use to manage these constraints and achieve
Work Teams 957

success is the characteristics of their individual groups, which had no prior history, no broader
members. Although research on team composition context, and an unstructured task. As a result, the
has examined many different characteristics of model emphasizes the interpersonal processes that
teams and their members, a general conclusion teams must manage to achieve their goals.
that cuts across this literature is that the effects of In contrast, existing teams possess a relatively
team composition depend on the nature of a team’s stable set of shared norms and role expectations
task. For example, studies examining the effect of and a distinct group climate that have emerged
team size on effectiveness have failed to reach con- during the course of the team’s life span. The
sensus on an “optimal” size for different types of inflow of a new member presents a potential chal-
teams. Rather, it appears that the appropriate team lenge to this stability, and thus teams seek to
size depends on the task and the environment in assimilate newcomers, and newcomers, for their
which a team operates. Larger teams may be able part, endeavor to adapt while seeking accommo-
to leverage their resources to facilitate performance dation by the group. Unfortunately, much of the
on more complex tasks, but smaller teams may research in this area has focused on the socializa-
find it easier to coordinate the activities necessary tion of individuals into the organization and has
to tackle less complex tasks. paid very little attention to the role of the work
There also exist very few consistent findings group or team in the socialization process. However,
regarding the effects of diversity on team perfor- there is some evidence that work group members
mance. Whereas some studies have found that are helpful socialization agents, much more so
greater levels of heterogeneity or diversity can than formal socialization practices, and play an
improve performance, other studies have reported important role in newcomers’ learning, under-
negative results for diversity or have shown diver- standing, and adjusting.
sity to have no significant effects. In a 2005 review
of this literature, Elizabeth Mannix and Margaret
Team Processes and Performance
Neale noted that the effects of diversity depend
largely on whether teams are able to capitalize on At the core of all models of team effectiveness are
the benefits of increased information and perspec- the process mechanisms through which team
tives while mitigating the disruptive effects of their inputs are translated into team performance and
differences on team processes, such as cohesion. other outcomes. The literature on team processes
Further, the information-processing and problem- is voluminous, and there exists little convergence
solving benefits of diverse teams are most likely to on a core set of processes or broader mediators.
translate into enhanced effectiveness when the In their 2003 review, Kozlowski and Bell classi-
team’s task is cognitively complex or requires mul- fied team processes into cognitive, affective-
tiple perspectives. Although these findings suggest motivational, and behavioral mechanisms in an
that the effects of team composition are complex, a attempt to organize this research. Cognitive mech-
better understanding of these contingencies can help anisms, such as team mental models, transactive
organizations select and construct effective teams. memory, and team learning, capture the collective
task-relevant perceptions, knowledge, and infor-
mation of team members.
Team Development
A common theme of much of the work in this
Team development applies not only to the forma- area is that team performance is enhanced when
tion of new teams but also to the process of social- members share a common understanding of the
izing newcomers to existing teams that naturally task environment, its goal–role–strategy require-
experience outflows and inflows of new members ments, and perceptions of the broader organiza-
during their life span. Much of the research in this tional climate. However, other research suggests
area assumes the formation of a brand-new team that success depends on a team’s ability to access
with no prior history. The classic stage model the unique informational resources held by mem-
proposed by Bruce Tuckman in 1965, for exam- bers. Transactive memory systems, for example,
ple, describes a sequential series of developmental allow different members of a team to process and
stages: forming, storming, norming, and perform- store information related to their expertise. The
ing. This model was based on clinical and therapy result is that team members can rely on their
958 Work Teams

teammates’ expertise, enabling the team to access team effectiveness. For example, the evidence has
a larger pool of task-relevant information and consistently supported the use of several training
avoid wasting cognitive effort. techniques, such as cross-training, simulation-
Affective and motivational processes are also based training, and crew resource management,
important to team effectiveness. For example, for enhancing team processes and performance.
group cohesion, or team members’ shared commit- Leadership is also a potentially critical lever for
ment or attraction to the group, the task, and one enhancing team effectiveness. A variety of leader
another, has been shown to positively predict team approaches, such as transformational and transac-
performance. Team efficacy, or the shared belief in tional leadership, have received consistent research
a group’s collective capacity to organize and exe- support, although there is a need to extend theory
cute courses of action required to produce given and research in this area to the team context.
levels of goal attainment, has also been shown to Research on other topics, such as group composition
relate positively to team performance. In contrast, and team development, holds considerable promise
both interpersonal and task conflict within a team for helping organizations select and develop effective
have been shown to undermine team effectiveness. teams, but continued work is needed to develop
It is important to note that the positive or negative scientifically grounded tools and applications.
effect of each of these affective-motivational pro-
cesses has been shown to be stronger when a team’s Bradford S. Bell and Steve W. J. Kozlowski
tasks entail higher levels of interdependence.
Behavioral team processes, such as coordina- See also Diversity; Group Composition; Group
tion, communication, and cooperation, focus on Development; Group Learning; Group Performance;
what team members do to combine individual Team Building; Team Performance Assessment; Team
Reflexivity; Transactive Memory Systems
effort and action to accomplish team objectives.
These three processes are related in that communi-
cation serves as a means to enable coordination
Further Readings
and cooperation. Coordination and cooperation
are related concepts, but coordination involves a Bell, B. S., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2002). A typology of
temporal component that is not an essential part of virtual teams: Implications for effective leadership.
cooperation. For example, complex tasks typically Group & Organization Management, 27(1), 14–49.
require high levels of interdependence, temporal Ilgen, D. R., Hollenbeck, J. R., Johnson, M., & Jundt, D.
pacing, and synchronicity. Under these conditions, (2005). Teams in organizations: From input-process-
effective performance requires coordinated action, output models to IMOI models. Annual Review of
not simply discretionary cooperation. Psychology, 56, 517–543.
Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Bell, B. S. (2003). Work groups
and teams in organizations. In W. C. Borman,
Enhancing the D. R. Ilgen, & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), Handbook of
Effectiveness of Work Teams psychology: Vol. 12. Industrial and organizational
psychology (pp. 333–375). New York: John Wiley.
Given the growing importance of work teams in Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006). Enhancing
today’s organizations, there exists considerable the effectiveness of work groups and teams.
interest in designing, selecting, training, and lead- Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7(3),
ing teams to be effective. However, this is also an 77–124.
area in which practice has significantly outpaced Mannix, E., & Neale, M. A. (2005). What differences
research, leading to interventions being developed make a difference? The promise and reality of diverse
in the absence of a solid scientific foundation. In a teams in organizations. Psychological Science in the
recent 2006 article, Kozlowski and Ilgen identified Public Interest, 6, 31–55.
those areas of the team effectiveness literature that McGrath, J. E. (1964). Social psychology: A brief
have well-developed theoretical and empirical introduction. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
foundations and used the findings from these Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in
areas to identify interventions that can improve small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 384–399.
X
Xenophobic Reactions to Immigrants
Xenophobia
In contrast to the vast research literatures on preju-
The term xenophobia derives from the Greek dice and racism, there has been little research on
xenos (foreigner or stranger) and phobos (fear or xenophobia. The term is most frequently used in
aversion) and is generally used to describe fear of, reference to negative reactions to immigrants. One
contempt for, or aversion to foreigners and, more area of recent research has been the upsurge in
broadly, people, values, customs, beliefs, and even anti-immigrant xenophobia in western Europe
artifacts differing from those of one’s own culture. during the past half century. Thomas Pettigrew
Xenophobia is related to several social science reviewed this research for the Annual Review of
concepts describing different kinds of antipathy to Sociology in 1998 and described four major reac-
others. These include prejudice (dislike of others, tions to “new minorities” in western Europe.
who may differ in almost any way, but which One reaction was pervasively hostile attitudes
mostly refers to intergroup differences), racism or prejudice expressed either blatantly and overtly
(dislike of others seen as racially different; racism or in more subtle and covert forms. A second was
is usually associated with an ideology of superior- discrimination, which could also be either direct,
ity over those others), stigmatization (devaluation creating inequality through differential treatment
or dislike of others seen as deviating from socially and access to employment and housing, or indi-
desirable standards or norms), and ethnocentrism rect, as when inability to gain citizenship restricts
(dislike of ethnically or culturally different others; opportunities, thereby perpetuating inequality. A
ethnocentrism is associated with a strong sense of third was political opposition, with the formation
ingroup preference and superiority). Of these, of far-right anti-immigrant political parties openly
xenophobia is most similar to ethnocentrism, if the propagating racist and xenophobic policies and
term ethnic is broadly interpreted, but it may not shifting the entire political spectrum on the issue
necessarily involve the implication of strong to the right. Finally, there was increased anti-
ingroup preference. If the concept of prejudice, immigrant and antiforeigner violence, sometimes
which is the broadest noted here, is interpreted associated with far-right political activity but also
widely, xenophobia can be viewed as a kind of seen in sporting contexts and individual hate crimes.
prejudice directed against persons seen as strangers It is interesting to note that recent ecological
or foreigners. This entry begins by examining the studies of xenophobic violence and hate crimes
impact of xenophobia on immigrants and relates have not supported early findings on lynching in
that topic to ethnocentrism, then looks at the bases the United States, which had suggested a link with
of xenophobia at intergroup, individual, and cultural economic hardship or unemployment. Instead,
or societal levels. these studies, notably by Donald Green and his

959
960 Xenophobia

colleagues, have indicated that xenophobic vio- hostility and dislike and sometimes not. Social
lence is particularly likely when social groups feel scientific theory and research suggest answers to
that they are confronted by growing numbers of this question at three different levels: intergroup
outsiders with different social practices in a way processes, individual differences, and societal or
that seems to challenge the groups’ more favor- cultural group.
able, established position in the social hierarchy.
Intergroup Bases of Xenophobia
Extent of Xenophobia and Ethnocentrism
The observation that dislike of certain outsiders
The idea that anti-immigrant hostility may be a and foreigners, but not others, may be widely
direct response to the arrival of new migrants, as shared or consensual in a society suggests that
appears to have happened in western Europe, some kind of real or anticipated intergroup pro-
seems overly simplistic. Host people living in the cesses may be causing the antipathy for those par-
areas most affected by new immigrants and who ticular outgroups but not for others. Three kinds
have most contact with them tend to be most of intergroup processes seem to be particularly
favorable to them, whereas those living in areas conducive to intergroup dislike.
least affected by new immigrants and having least First, there is intergroup threat, whereby mem-
contact with them are most unfavorable to them. bers of a group who perceive outsiders or foreign-
This observation also contradicts the idea pro- ers as posing a threat to their resources (real threat)
posed by some evolutionary theories that hostility or values or identity (symbolic threat) will dislike
to outsiders had survival value for early human them. Second, there is intergroup competition,
groups and therefore became an evolved adaptive whereby outsiders or outgroups seen as competing
response that was universal and genetically trans- either over real resources, such as territory, or over
mitted, underlying most forms of prejudice. These relative prestige and superiority will be disliked.
theories have cited many examples of strangers or And third, there is intergroup inequality, whereby
outsiders being killed, attacked, avoided, or rejected outsiders or foreigners seen as lower in status,
by tribes or communities they encountered. The prestige, or power will tend to be devalued and
historical record, however, provides equally numer- derogated.
ous examples of cultural outsiders or strangers
being welcomed and greeted with interest, curios-
Individual Bases of Xenophobia
ity, and sometimes even veneration.
Ethnographic and cross-cultural studies of eth- Dislike and rejection of outgroups and foreigners
nocentrism, such as a classic series of studies con- can also be an individual phenomenon, and it is
ducted among East African tribes by Donald well documented that reactions to foreigners may
Campbell and Marilynn Brewer in the mid-20th vary widely within societies or cultures, with some
century, have also shown that attitudes to out- people responding with hostility and others not.
groups and outsiders were not universally negative Research has also shown that individuals’ preju-
but varied widely, sometimes being negative, diced attitudes tend to be generalized over out-
sometimes positive, and sometimes varying mark- groups, with some people being generally prejudiced
edly by situation or context. Surveys of attitudes and others generally tolerant. This suggests that
toward foreigners among East German youth dur- some stable characteristics of individuals cause
ing the 1990s, when antiforeigner attacks in East them to be either generally prejudiced or tolerant.
Germany were causing concern, also showed that Research findings show that two social attitude
these attitudes were organized along two indepen- dimensions are strongly related to generalized preju-
dent dimensions, with one comprising “good,” or dice in individuals. One is labeled right wing author-
liked, foreigners (English, Swedes, North itarianism (RWA) and is broadly equivalent to
Americans, French) and the other “bad,” or dis- social conservatism, as opposed to liberalism. The
liked, foreigners (Turks, Poles, Jews, Gypsies). other is labeled social dominance orientation (SDO)
These considerations raise the question of why and comprises attitudes supporting social inequal-
foreigners or strangers are sometimes viewed with ity, or hierarchy, as opposed to egalitarianism.
Xenophobia 961

RWA and SDO seem to be social attitudinal expres- as RWA and SDO to become dominant ideologies
sions of basic social values, with RWA expressing and culturally normative in these societies. Such
values of collective security (valuing social order, societies would then tend to be collectively ethno-
cohesion, stability, conformity, and tradition) and centric and xenophobic in their normative atti-
SDO expressing values of power, dominance, and tudes and reactions to outsiders.
superiority over others. In any particular society,
therefore, persons high in RWA and SDO would be John Duckitt
the most ethnocentric and xenophobic, and persons
See also Assimilation and Acculturation; Discrimination;
low in RWA and SDO the least.
Ethnocentrism; Hate Crimes; Islamophobia; Prejudice;
Racism; Right Wing Authoritarianism; Social
Cultural or Societal Bases of Xenophobia Dominance Theory

Finally, cross-cultural research has shown that dis-


like and rejection of outgroups and foreigners can
Further Readings
also be a societal or cultural phenomenon, with
certain cultures or societies responding collectively Bond, M. (1988). Finding universal dimensions of
with greater xenophobia to outsiders than others individual variation in multi-cultural studies of
do. For example, Michael Bond investigated cul- values: The Rokeach and Chinese value surveys.
tural values across 22 cultures and found that they Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55,
were clearly differentiated along a cultural value 1009–1015.
dimension with one pole characterized by general- Brewer, M., & Campbell, D. (1976). Ethnocentrism and
ized tolerance for others and openness to outside intergroup attitudes: East African evidence. New
influences and the other pole characterized by cul- York: Sage.
tural inwardness, traditionalism, ethnocentric Duckitt, J. (2003). Prejudice and intergroup hostility. In
superiority, and generalized dislike of outsiders. D. Sears, L. Huddy, & R. Jervis (Eds.), Oxford
handbook of political psychology (pp. 559–600).
However, there has been little research on what
Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
causes societies or cultures to be ethnocentric or
Green, D., Abelson, R., & Garnett, M. (1999). The
xenophobic. An anthropologist, Marc Ross, found
distinctive political views of hate-crime perpetrators
that more ethnocentric and xenophobic preindus-
and White supremacists. In D. Prentice & D. Miller
trial cultures were characterized by relatively (Eds.), Cultural divides: Understanding and
harsh, punitive, and unaffectionate childhood overcoming group conflict (pp. 429–464). New York:
socialization practices, which he speculated may Russell Sage.
have created a psychological disposition for people Pettigrew, T. (1998). Reactions to the new minorities of
in those cultures to view outsiders with suspicion Western Europe. Annual Review of Sociology, 24,
and hostility. 77–103.
Another approach extends the individual differ- Ross, M. (1993). The culture of conflict. New Haven,
ence perspective noted above by suggesting that CT: Yale University Press.
certain social environmental influences on societies Watts, M. (1996). Political xenophobia in the transition
(high levels of threat and danger or of inequality from socialism: Threat, racism, and ideology among
and competition) may cause social attitudes such East German youth. Political Psychology, 17, 97–126.
Index

Entry titles and entry page numbers are in bold.

AA. See Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) intergroup relations and, 1:11–12


ABCs of role entry, 2:714–715 workplace composition and, 1:10–11
Abelson, Robert, 1:138 African National Congress (ANC), 1:27
Abilities, social comparison theory and, 2:762–763 Afrikaners, 1:25–26
Abrahamson, Eric, 1:271 Ageism, 1:13–15
Abrams, Dominic, 1:56, 1:210, 2:688, 2:866–867 discrimination against aging people, 1:215–216
Abstraction-based models, 2:638 forms of, 1:13–14
Abu Ghraib, Iraq, 1:54, 2:839 internalization of, 1:14–15
Accentuation phenomenon, 1:363 motivation for, 1:14
Acceptance criteria (AC), 1:378 pervasiveness of, 1:15
Acceptance threat, 2:800 reducing, 1:15
Accommodation, 1:378, 1:379 Agentic behaviors, 1:297
Acculturation. See Assimilation and acculturation gender roles and, 1:301
Action research, 1:1–6, 2:535 minority groups in society and, 2:563–564
common elements in, 1:4–5 roles and, 2:713
differences from traditional social science research, 1:2–4 sexism and, 2:744–749
history and forms of, 1:1–2 Aggression, 1:440
Action verbs (AV), 2:536 Agreeableness, 2:639–640
Actor control (AC), 1:463 Ahmadinejad, Mahmoud, 1:408
Adams, Henry, 1:409 Ainsworth, Mary, 1:38, 1:276
Adams, J. Stacey, 1:218 Air Florida, 2:751
Adaptability, of teams, 2:911 Akert, Robin, 1:212
Adaptive structuration theory, 2:893 Albanese, Robert, 1:288
Addictions, support groups and, 2:875–876 Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), 2:873, 2:875–876
Additive rule, 1:324 Aliens Act of 1905, 1:256
Adler, Alfred, 1:350 Allen, Natalie, 1:412, 1:424
Adorno, Theodor, 1:22 Allport, Floyd, 1:16, 1:170
The Authoritarian Personality, 1:45–46, 1:47, 1:419, Allport, Gordon, 1:15–17, 1:212, 1:445, 2:558, 2:571,
1:445, 2:656, 2:706 2:573, 2:655
dogmatism and, 1:225–226 on categorization, 1:68–69
hate crimes and, 1:396 extended contact effect and, 1:265
status and, 2:842 intergroup contact theory and, 1:468–473
Aesop, 1:317 jigsaw classroom technique and, 1:491
Affect control theory, 1:6–8 on prejudice, 2:657–658
cultural sentiments, 1:6–7 on rumor, 2:719–720
interaction, 1:7 on stereotyping, 1:291
mathematical foundation of, 1:7–8 work of, 1:16–17
Affective empathy, 1:476 Altemeyer, Robert, 1:47, 1:226, 1:419, 2:706–707, 2:842
Affect theory of social exchange, 2:789 Altman, Irwin, 2:914–915
Affirmative action, 1:8–13, 1:224 Alvaro, Eusebio, 2:529
diversity in higher education and, 1:11 Alzheimer’s Disease Support and Information Group, 2:875
history of, 1:8–9 Amazon, 1:97–98

963
964 Index

Ambassador activities, 1:58 Aristotle, 1:113, 1:217, 1:404, 2:891


Ambivalence amplification, 2:675–676 Aronoff, Joel, 1:357
Ambivalent racism theory, 2:573 Aronson, Elliot, 1:94, 1:212, 1:224, 1:491–493, 2:546
Ambivalent sexism, 1:17–19, 2:579 Aronson, Joshua, 2:853
components of, 1:17–18 ARPAnet, 1:96–97, 2:949
consequences of, 1:19 Arrow, H., 2:893
measuring, 1:19 Arrow, Holly, 1:327
sources of, 1:18 Artest, Ron, 2:836
American Arbitration Association, 2:550 Arthur, Michael, 1:153
American Bar Association, 2:550 Asch, Solomon, 1:28–30, 1:140–144, 1:209, 1:351, 2:566,
American Cancer Society, 1:132 2:685, 2:688, 2:754
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), 1:86 impression formation and, 1:28–29
American Civil War, 2:757–758 informational influence and, 1:443
American Dilemma, An (Myrdal), 2:571 legacy of, 1:30
American Heart Association, 1:132 social impact theory and, 2:805
American Jewish Committee, 1:45 social influence and, 1:29–30
American Psychological Association, 1:16, 1:40, subjective group dynamics and, 2:865
1:264, 1:286 Ashforth, Blake, 2:714, 2:716
American Revolution, 2:757 Assigned competence, 2:848
American Sociological Association, 2:833 Assimilation and acculturation, 1:30–37, 2:720
American Sociological Society, 2:833 acculturation, uni-dimensional to bi-dimensional models,
American Soldier, The (Stouffer), 2:685, 2:694 1:31–32
Americans with Disabilities Act, 1:84, 2:954 acculturation and deculturation, 1:31
Amnesty International, 1:86 conclusions and implications of, 1:36–37
Amputee Coalition of America, 2:875 ethnicity and, 1:246
Anchoring, 2:824–825 group socialization and, 1:378
Ancona, Deborah, 1:327, 1:333–334, 2:786 immigration and, 1:428–429
Anderson, Elijah, 1:229 interactive acculturation model, 1:32–33
Anderson, Judith, 1:271 studies of host community acculturation orientations,
Anderson, Norman, 1:29 1:33–34
Androgyny, social representations and, 2:824 studies of immigrant acculturation orientations, 1:35–36
Animals, crowding and, 1:166–167 Association for Psychological Science, 1:40
Annual Review of Sociology, 2:959 See also American Psychological Association
Anomie, 1:206–207 Attachment theory, 1:37–39
Anthony, Carmelo, 2:836 families and, 1:278
Anti-Christ, 1:24 individual difference features of, 1:38–39
Anticonformity, 1:141 need for belonging and, 2:595
anticonformists and, 1:21 Attempted influence, 2:618
background and historical overview, 1:20 Attending to, group memory and, 1:347
by overconformity, 1:21 Attenuation effect, 2:847
theories of, 1:20–21 Attitudes Toward Women Scale, 1:39–42
Antifat prejudice, 2:953 background and historical overview, 1:40
Anti-immigration rhetoric, eugenics and, 1:257 change over time, 1:41
Antinorm effect, 1:210 limitations and new directions of, 1:41
Anti-Semitism, 1:22–25 significance of, 1:40
implications of, 1:24–25 Attribution biases, 1:42–45
new anti-Semitism, 1:23–24 attribution theory, 1:42
psychological foundations, 1:22–23 ideology and, 1:418
Apartheid, 1:25–28 individual, 1:42–43
“grand apartheid” and “petty apartheid,” 1:26–27 intergroup, 1:43–44
historical and theoretical context, 1:25–26 intergroup, reducing, 1:44
ingroup allocation bias and, 1:447 Audience groups, 2:686
opposition to and demise of, 1:27 Audio recording, for research, 2:702
Apollo 13, 1:375 Aum Shinrikyo, 1:174
Appropriateness model, 2:779 Auschwitz, 1:24, 1:53
Arbitration, 2:551 Austin, Texas, 1:491
Arendt, Hannah, 1:53 Authoritarian personality, 1:45–48, 2:842
Argumentation, 2:607 authoritarianism and culture, 1:48
Argyle, Michael, 1:20 criticisms of authoritarian personality theory, 1:46–47
Index 965

dogmatism and, 1:225 Becker, Howard, 1:207


evidence of, 1:45–46 Begin, Menachem, 1:159
hate crimes and, 1:396–397 Begue, Laurent, 1:505–506
historical and theoretical context, 1:45 Behavioral asymmetry, 2:760
intergroup violence and, 1:479–480 Behavioral decision approach, 2:605–606
Islamophobia and, 1:486 Behavioral empathy, 1:476
realistic group conflict theory and, 2:683 Behavioral interaction model, 2:556–557
responses to criticisms of, 1:47–48 “Being there”/”being beyond there” technology, 1:97
right wing authoritarianism and, 2:705–706 Belief-Pattern Scale for Measuring Attitudes Toward
social dominance theory and, 2:781–782 Feminism, 1:40
Authoritarian Personality, The (Adorno, Bell, Bradford, 2:956–957
Frenkel-Brunswik, Levinson, Sanford), Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American
1:45, 1:47, 1:419, 1:445, 2:656, 2:706 Life, The (Herrnstein, Murray), 1:256
Authoritative parents, 1:277 Bell Labs, 1:204
Authority structures, performance and, 1:357–358 Bem, Daryl, 1:131
Autokinetic effect, 1:178, 1:209, 1:443 Benedict, Ruth, 2:769
Autonomy Benevolent ageism, 1:14
job characteristic theory (JCT) and, 1:495 Benne, Kenneth, 2:742
support groups and, 2:874 Bennington College, 2:684–686
Average leadership style, 2:947 Bennis, Warren, 1:325
Aversive racism, 1:48–51, 2:572, 2:884 Bentham, Jeremy, 2:774
combating, 1:50–51 Berdahl, J. L., 2:893
nature of the attitudes, 1:48–50 Berger, Joseph, 1:383, 2:840, 2:844, 2:847
Avolio, Bruce, 1:458 Berkowitz, Leonard, 1:291–292, 1:377n, 1:397
Axelrod, Robert, 2:662–663 Berlin Wall, 1:472
Axis Rule in Occupied Europe (Lemkin), 1:304 Bernd, Simon, 1:118
Berry, John, 1:31, 1:35, 2:583
Back, Kurt, 2:742 Bertuzzi, Todd, 2:836
Backup behavior, of teams, 2:911–912 Best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA), 2:902
Balance theory, 1:93–94 Bicultural identity patterns, 2:586
Bales, Robert Freed, 2:712, 2:826, 2:840, 2:885–887 Biddle, Bruce, 2:711
dynamical systems approach and, 1:232 Big Five (personality factors), 2:639–640
group development and, 1:325 Biko, Steve, 1:27
group structure and, 1:383 Billig, Michael, 1:157, 2:555, 2:656
interaction process analysis and, 1:460 Binet, Alfred, 1:255
language and intergroup relations, 2:514 Bion, Wilfred, 2:728
Ball-tossing paradigm, 2:629 Biosocial model, 1:303
Banaji, Mahzarin R., 2:888 Bishop, George, 1:362
Banality of evil, 1:53–55 Black Power, 1:27, 1:112
Bandura, Albert, 1:189, 1:368–369, 2:935–936 Black sheep effect, 1:55–57, 2:620
Banks, Curtis, 2:837 deviance and, 1:210
Bannister, Roger, 2:791 empirical evidence of, 1:56–57
Barabasi, Albert-Laszlo, 1:129 social identity and ingroup favoritism, 1:56
Barnes-Farrell, Janet, 2:851 subjective group dynamics and, 1:56, 2:865–866
Bar-Tal, Daniel, 1:189 Blake, Robert, 1:152, 1:154
Bartel, Caroline, 1:334 Blanchard, Ken, 1:154
Bartlett, F. C., 2:754 Blascovich, James, 2:793
Baseline homophily, 1:404 Blatant sexist behaviors, 2:578
Basic expectation assumption, 2:847 Blau, Peter, 2:652, 2:787, 2:790
Bass, Bernard, 2:929–930 Blumer, Herbert, 1:103, 1:366–367, 2:542, 2:880
Baumeister, Roy, 1:316, 1:439, 1:441, 2:834 Boadicea (British queen), 2:804
Baumrind, Diana, 1:277 Board of Education of Oklahoma City Public Schools
Bavelas, Alex, 1:128, 1:382–383 v. Dowell, 1:200
Bay of Pigs, Cuba, 1:374, 1:390 Boas, Franz, 2:769
Bazerman, Max, 2:605 Bobo, Lawrence, 1:367, 2:682
Beagle Channel, 2:550 Body image, 1:271–272
Beccaria, Cesare, 2:774 Boer Wars, 1:25
Beck, John, 2:744 Bonacich, Phillip, 2:787
Becker, Ernest, 2:919 Bond, Michael, 1:144, 2:961
966 Index

Borderwork, 1:297 Bystander effect, 1:63–65


Bordia, Prashant, 2:721 decision making and, 1:64
Boston Marathon, 2:869 diffusion of responsibility and, 1:64–65
Bottom-up approach, to group task, 1:386–387 informational social influence and, 1:64
Boundary spanning, 1:57–59, 1:314 Kitty Genovese and bystander intervention, 1:63–64
Bounded rationality, 2:605–606 modern forms of prejudice, 2:572
Bourhis, Richard, 1:32, 1:252, 2:511 pluralistic ignorance and, 2:645
Bowers, Kenneth, 1:457 social compensation and, 2:767
Bowlby, John, 1:37–39, 1:276, 2:595
Bow tie structure, 2:818, 2:818 (figure) Cacioppo, John, 2:793
Boyd, Robert, 2:807 California Supreme Court, 2:550
Boy Scouts, 2:683 Calvin, John, 2:672
Bradac, Jim, 2:513 Cambridge University, England, 1:16
Bradford, Leland, 2:742 Campbell, Donald, 1:70, 1:178–179, 2:681, 2:960
Brainstorming, 1:59–63 Canada, 2:594
enhancement of, 1:62–63 ethnolinguistic vitality and, 1:254
historical overview of, 1:59–61 language and intergroup relations, 2:513
illusion of group effectivity and, 1:423–424 modern forms of prejudice and, 2:574
models of, 1:61–62 multiculturalism and, 2:582–583
process gain and loss, 2:669 racial ambivalence theory and, 2:676
Branch Davidians, 1:174 Cancer Aftercare and Rehabilitation Society, 2:875
Brauer, Markus, 1:362 Cannon-Bowers, Jan, 2:751
Brawley, Lawrence, 1:316 CANOE (personality model), 2:639–640
Bray, Steven, 2:836 Cantona, Eric, 2:836
Brazil, 2:756 Cantril, Hadley, 2:754
Brehm, Jack, 1:20 Carli, Linda, 1:144
Brewer, Marilynn, 2:620, 2:730, 2:868, 2:960 Carlsmith, J. Merrill, 1:94
decategorization and, 1:185–187 Carlyle, Thomas, 1:312
homophily and, 1:406 Carnegie, Andrew, 2:768
intergroup contact theory and, 1:470 Carnevale, Peter, 2:551
looking-glass self and, 2:544 Carron, Albert, 1:316–318
multiple identities and, 2:586–587 Carter, Jimmy, 1:159
Brian’s Song, 1:319 Cartwright, Dorwin, 1:209, 1:383
Bristol, England, 1:248 Castro, Fidel, 2:941
Britain, 2:574 Catastrophe theories, 2:891
British North America, 2:756–757 Categorization, 1:67–72
Broederbond, 1:27 category learning, formation, use, 1:69–71
Bronfenbrenner, Urie, 1:333 discrimination and, 1:213
Browder v. Gayle, 1:87 ethnocentrism and, 1:248
Brown, John, 2:758 functions of, 1:68–69
Brown, Roger, 2:656, 2:840 group boundaries and, 1:315
Brown, Rupert, 1:187, 1:470, 2:587 ongoing debates about, 1:71–72
Brown, Vincent, 1:61–62 process of, 1:67–68
Brown Power, 1:112 self-categorization theory and, 2:729
Brown v. Board of Education, 1:76, 1:84, 1:87–89, 1:111, structures of, 1:69
1:199, 1:491 subtyping and, 2:868
Bruner, Jerome, 1:68, 2:897 Categorization threat, 2:800
Buchanan, James, 2:758 Ceiling effects, 1:41
Buchanan, Pat, 2:884 Cellular automata, 1:234
Bulgaria, 1:308 Centers for Disease Control, 1:102
Burden of proof assumption, 2:846–847 Central Intelligence Agency, 1:149
Burger, Warren E., 2:550 Centrality, 2:819
Burke, C. Shawn, 2:911–912 Chagall, Marc, 1:20
Burlingame, Gary, 1:233 Chaiken, Shelly, 1:418
Burns, James McGregor, 1:312, 2:517–518, Challenger (space shuttle), 1:390
2:929, 2:934 Chang, Artemis, 1:327
Burt, Ronald, 2:819 Charismatic leadership, 1:72–74
Bush, George W., 1:208, 2:858, 2:921 defined, 1:72–73
Butera, Fabrizio, 2:793 historical illustration of, 1:73
Index 967

limitations of and problems of, 1:73–74 Closed-ended questions, 2:878


personality theories of leadership and, 2:641 Clustering, social impact theory, 2:807
romance of leadership, 2:719 Coalitions, 1:91–93
social identity theory of leadership and, 2:803 coalition formation, 1:340
transformational leadership and, 2:522 coalition games, 1:91
Charismatic relationship model, interactionist theory dynamic theories of coalition formation, 1:92
and, 1:458 empirical support and theoretical limitations of, 1:92–93
Chatman, Jennifer, 1:411–412, 1:458 static theories of coalition formation, 1:91–92
Cheaters, punishing, 1:259 Code switching, ethnolinguistic vitality and, 1:253–254
Chechnya, 1:390 Coding scheme, 2:699, 2:703–704
Chemers, Martin, 2:828 Cognitive consistency, 1:93–96
Chen, Xin, 2:569 application to groups, 1:95
Chesapeake Bay, 1:166 balance theory and, 1:93–94
Children: stereotypes and prejudice, 1:75–78 cognitive dissonance and, 1:94–95
explicit judgments about social exclusion, 1:77–78 intergroup processes and, 1:95–96
implicit biases in children, 1:75–76 Cognitive dissonance, 1:94–95
implicit prejudice in children, 1:76 Festinger on, 1:286–287
origins of prejudice and, 1:75 Holocaust and, 1:402
self-presentation and explicit prejudice, 1:76–77 Cognitive elaboration perspective, 1:162
Children’s groups, 1:79–83 Cognitive empathy, 1:476
historical overview of, 1:79 Cognitive interdependence, 2:932
peer group acceptance and individual differences, Cognitive models of brainstorming, 1:61–62
1:80–82 Cognitive priming, 2:649
peer group in development and, 1:79–80 Cognitive role theory, 2:710–711
social groups, 1:82–83 Cognitive social structures, 2:820
Chippewa Indians, 1:367 Cohen, Bernard, 2:844
Choice homophily, 1:404 Cohen, Dov, 1:181–182
Christian Church, 2:566 Cohen, Elizabeth, 2:848
Christie, Richard, 1:46, 1:48 Coie, John, 1:80
Chuang, Aichia, 2:936 Cold War, 1:208, 1:309
Church of England, 2:726–727 Collaboration technology, 1:96–98
Cialdini, Robert, 1:130–131, 2:866 “being beyond there” technology and, 1:97–98
Cisco’s Telepresence, 1:98 “being there” technology and, 1:97
City College of New York, 1:204, 1:284 new directions in, 1:98
Civil Rights Acts, 1:84–88 Collective action
of 1964, 2:550, 2:750 collective action and, 1:110–111
of 1968, 1:395 emergent norm theory and, 1:237
Civil rights legislation, 1:83–86 feminism and, 1:283
controversies of, 1:84–85 Collective Effort Model, 1:352
effects of, 1:85–86 Collective guilt, 1:98–101
historical overview of, 1:84 causes of, 1:99–100
monitoring activities of, 1:86 genocide and, 1:308
Civil rights movement, 1:86–89 reducing, 1:100–101
aftermath and ongoing struggles of, 1:88–89 Collective induction, 1:101–103
background and context, 1:87 collective vs. individual induction, 1:101–102
historical overview, 1:87–88 processes of, 1:102
related efforts, 1:89 for research, 1:101
Clark, Kenneth, 1:111 simultaneous collective and individual induction, 1:102
Clarke, Steve, 1:151 Collective induction, group potency and, 1:373
Clash of Civilization, The (Huntington), 1:486 Collective movements and protest, 1:103–110
Class conflict, 2:760 historical overview of, 1:103–104
Class consciousness, 2:760 new evidence and ideas about, 1:104–106
Classical view, of categories, 1:69 recent directions in, 1:107–109
Climate, 2:936 standard agenda for, 1:106–107
Clinton, Bill, 1:72, 2:858 Collective responsibility, 1:240
Cliques, 1:89–90 Collective self, 1:110–112
gender differences and, 1:90 collective action and, 1:110–111
related constructs, 1:90 self-esteem and ethnicity, 1:111–112
as social hierarchies, 1:90 two kinds of self and, 1:110
968 Index

Collective Self-Esteem Scale, 2:732 Compliance, 1:130–133


Collectivism/individualism, 1:112–117 as change in public behavior, 1:130–131
historical overview of, 1:112–113 in response to a request, 1:131–132
varieties of collectivism, 1:113–115 Computer-mediated communication, 1:133–137
varieties of individualism, 1:115–116 to broaden social networks, 1:136
Colorado Avalanche, 2:836 CMC technologies, 1:133–134
Columbia (space shuttle), 1:390 deindividuation and, 1:194
Columbia University Teachers College, 1:204 effects of, on conversational processes, 1:134–135
Columbine High School, 1:440 Computer simulation, 1:137–139
Columbus, Christopher, 2:582 mate selection and, 1:137–138
Commitment modeling of group process, 1:138–139
relational cohesion theory and, 2:689 models in social psychology, 1:138
social exchange in networks and groups, 2:789 Conflict Resolution Center, 2:550
Committee on the Selection and Training of Conflict theory, 1:118, 1:204
Aircraft Pilots, 1:284 Conformity, 1:139–145
Common-bond groups. See Common-identity/ classic studies of, 1:139–140
common-bond groups definitional and measurement issues of, 1:140–141
Common-identity/common-bond groups, 1:117–119 deviation and, 1:208–209
differences between, 1:117–119 motivational bases of, 1:141–143
historical overview of, 1:117 role of individual differences, 1:143–144
Common ingroup identity model, 1:119–122, social impact theory and, 2:805–806
1:186, 2:588 social support and conformity reduction, 1:143
empirical support for, 1:121–122 Congress of Racial Equality, 1:88
functional relations, categorization, bias, 1:120–121 Conjunctive group tasks, 2:507
social categorization and bias, 1:120 Connecticut State Teachers College, 2:742
social categorization and recategorization, 1:120 Connell, R. W., 1:409
Common knowledge effect, 1:123–125 Conscientiousness, 2:639
decision making and, 1:123 Conscious Loving and Living, 2:744
fostering better decisions and, 1:124–125 Conservatism, 1:145–148
theoretical explanation for, 1:123–124 Consolidation, social impact theory, 2:807
Common Lisp, 2:949 Conspiracy theories, 1:148–151, 2:721–722
Common pool resource (CPR), 1:125 explanations for, 1:150–151
Commons dilemma, 1:125–127, 1:156 related phenomena, 1:148–149
cooperation and competition, 1:156–157 research on, 1:149–150
factors promoting conservation in, 1:125–127 scapegoating and, 2:725
social dilemmas and, 2:778 Constantine, Emperor, 2:528
Communal behaviors, 1:297 Constitutional Convention, 2:758
gender roles and, 1:301 Contact hypothesis, 1:16–17, 1:202
normative influence and, 2:607 jigsaw classroom technique and, 1:491
roles and, 2:713 realistic group conflict theory and, 2:683
sexism and, 2:744–749 Containment and manipulation, 2:578
support groups and, 2:873–874 Contemptuous prejudice, 1:307
Communication networks, 1:127–130 Contextual dynamics, 2:893
classic research on, 1:128 Contingency theories of leadership, 1:151–155, 2:521,
communication processes and social representations, 2:828, 2:928
2:825–826 contingency theory of leadership effectiveness, 1:152–153
computer-mediated communication, historical overview, 1:151–152
1:133–136 mediation and, 2:551
performance and, 1:357 normative decision model, 1:153–154
recent advances in, 1:128–129 path-goal theory, 1:153
study of, 1:128 path-goal theory of leadership as, 2:635
teams and communication, 2:912–913 situational leadership theory, 1:154
Communist Manifesto, The (Marx), 1:489 Contingent rewards, 2:930
Communist Party, 1:47 Continuing diversity, social impact theory, 2:807
Community Relations Service, Continuum of benevolence, 1:308
U.S. Department of Justice, 2:550 Continuum of destructiveness, 1:306
Communityware, 2:933 Contractual mediation, 2:550
Comparative reference groups, 2:685 Control, 1:6, 1:463
Complexity theory, 2:891 Convergent outcomes, 2:644
Index 969

Conversation cultural transmission and small group processes,


computer-mediated communication and, 1:134–135 1:177–178
dominance hierarchies and, 1:228–229 esconced culture and terrorism, 2:918
Conversion, 1:130 evolutionary psychology and, 1:261
Cook, Karen, 2:653, 2:787–790 gender and behavior, 1:298
Cooley, Charles Horton, 1:110, 2:541–543 groups and cultures, 1:176–177
Cooper, Joel, 1:214 implicit prejudice and, 1:438
Cooperation and competition, 1:155–160 in large populatons and groups, 1:178–180
defined, 1:155 parenting styles and, 1:277
evolution and genetics, 1:155–154 recent trends in psychology and, 1:180
game theory and rational choice, 1:156 See also Multiculturalism
interdependence and realistic conflict, 1:157 Culture clash, 2:552
minimal groups and social identity, 1:157–158 Culture of honor, 1:181–183
negotiation and, 1:159 development in, 1:182
social dilemmas, 1:156–157 mechanisms of persistence and change, 1:182–183
superordinate goals and social harmony, 1:158–159 overview of, 1:181–182
Cooperative interaction, 1:205 related concepts, 1:183
Cooperative learning, 1:160–163 violence and, 1:182
future of, 1:163 Culture’s Consequences (Hofstede), 1:113, 1:179
theoretical perspectives on, 1:161–163 Cummings, Jonathon, 2:951
Coordinator activities, 1:58 Curious spectators, 1:236
Copper, Carolyn, 1:317–318 Cusp models, 1:233
Core-periphery structure, 2:818, 2:818 (figure) Cyberball paradigm, 2:629–630
Correlation, social impact theory, 2:807 Cyert, Richard, 2:623
Correspondence bias, 2:941
Coser, Lewis, 2:728 Darfur, Sudan, 1:305
Costly signaling, 2:778 Darley, John, 1:64–65, 1:262–264
Cottrell, Catherine, 1:260–261 Darwin, Charles, 1:155, 1:255, 2:768–770
Coutant-Sassic, D., 2:894 Darwinism, social Darwinism vs., 2:770
Covariation of interest, 1:463 Data collection, for research, 2:701–702
Covert sexist behaviors, 2:578 D’Augelli, Anthony, 1:216
Crano, William, 2:529, 2:569 Davenport, Charles, 1:255, 1:257
Crazes, 1:269 Davies, James C., 1:489–490
Crocker, Jennifer, 2:869 Dawkins, Richard, 1:155
Crosby, Faye, 2:696 Decategorization, 1:185–188, 2:588
Cross-categorization, 1:44, 1:163–166 critiques and limitations of, 1:187
countering negative stereotypes, 1:164–165 empirical evidence of, 1:187
modeling complex intergroup relations, 1:164 generalization process in decategorized contact,
Crowding, 1:166–169 1:186–187
models of, 1:167–168 three aspects of: individuation, differentiation,
practical implications of, 1:168 personalization, 1:185–186
research approaches to, 1:166–167 de Dreu, Carsten, 2:907
Crowds, 1:169–173 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), 1:454
broadening relevance of crowd psychology, 1:172 Deflection studies, 1:332
classic crowd theory, 1:169–170 Degree of completeness of information, 1:463
crowd dynamics and social change, 1:171–172 Dehumanization/infrahumanization, 1:188–190
deindividuation, 1:191 dehumanization, defined, 1:188
normative theories of, 1:170–171 genocide and, 1:306
“Crude law” of interpersonal relations, 1:206 infrahumanization, defined, 1:189–190
Crutchfield, Richard, 1:20 intergroup violence and, 1:480
Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly, 2:828 theories of, 1:189
Cuban Missile Crisis, 1:375 Deindividuation, 1:190–195
Cults, 1:173–176 accountability and, 1:191–193
defined, 1:173–174 computer-mediated communication and, 1:194
leadership and structure, 1:174 genocide and, 1:306
socialization in, 1:174–176 group norms and, 1:193–194
Culture, 1:176–181 historical overview and analyses of crowd
cultural racism, 2:677, 2:679–680 behavior, 1:191
cultural sentiments and affect control theory, 1:6–7 social identity model of deindividuation effects and, 2:794
970 Index

Delphi technique, 1:195–197 Discourse-based learning process, in action research, 1:4–5


advantages and limitations, 1:196–197 Discrimination, 1:211–217
origin of, 1:195–196 blatant, 1:212
Democratic Party, 2:758 examples of contemporary discrimination, 1:214–217
Demographics feminism and, 1:282
ethnolinguistic vitality and, 1:252 subtle, 1:212–214
group composition and, 1:320 toward immigrants, 1:431
Denny, Reginald, 1:397 See also Prejudice
Denver Nuggets, 2:836 Disengaged parents, 1:277
Dependent variables, defined, 1:262 Disengagement, 2:563
Depersonalization, 1:197–199, 2:687 Dishion, Thomas, 1:83
defined, 1:197–198 Distinctiveness-based illusory correlation, 1:425–426
examples of, 1:198–199 Distraction-conflict theory, 2:792–793
identification and commitment, 1:413–414 Distributed groups, 1:96
self-categorization theory and, 2:729 Distributive fairness judgments, 2:693
social identity model of deindividuation effects and, 2:794 Distributive justice, 1:217–219, 1:501–502, 2:664
social identity theory of leadership, 2:802 District of Columbia, 2:758
Deprovincialization, 1:470 Divergence criteria (DC), 1:378, 1:379
DeSanctis, G., 2:893 Divergent outcomes, 2:644
Descriptive action verbs (DAV), 2:536, 2:538 Diversity, 1:219–225
Descriptive roles, 2:608–609 diversities within, 1:220
Desegregation, 1:199–204 education and training, 1:224–225
consequences for achievement, 1:200–202 group performance vs. dynamics, 1:221–222
consequences for intergroup relations, 1:202–203 policies, 1:222–224
historical overview and policy changes, 1:199–200 Dodds, Peter, 1:270
Detroit Pistons, 2:836 Dodge, Kenneth, 1:81
Deutsch, Morton, 1:142, 1:155, 1:157, 1:204–206, 1:218, Doe v. Belleville, 2:750
1:444, 1:502 Dogmatism, 1:225–227
on cooperation and competition, 1:204–205 historical overview of, 1:225–226
insights of, 1:206 implications of, 1:226–227
opinion deviance and, 2:617 origins of, 1:226
reference groups and, 2:685 related constructs, 1:226
on Trucking Game, 1:205 Doherty, Mary, 1:459
Deviance, 1:206–211 Dollard, John, 1:290–291, 1:396, 2:655
deviant groups, defined, 1:210–211 Domain-specific self-esteem, 2:732
opinion deviance, 2:617–620 Dominance hierarchies, 1:227–229
psychological perspectives on, 1:208–211 allocating ranks, 1:227–228
reaction to deviant group members, 1:209–210 conversation and, 1:228–229
social deviance and, 2:774–776 need for power and, 2:600–601
sociological perspectives on, 1:206–208 testosterone and, 1:229
subjective group dynamics and, 2:865 Doob, Leonard, 1:290, 2:754
Devine, Patricia, 2:573 Dorr’s Rebellion of 1842, 1:489
DeWall, C. Nathan, 1:441 Double-barreled questions, 2:879
Dickens, Charles, 1:293 Dovidio, John, 1:198, 1:470, 2:676, 2:846
Dickson, Markus, 1:458–459 Downing, Leslie, 1:193
Diehl, Michael, 1:60, 2:851 Drescher, Stuart, 1:316
Diener, Edward, 1:192, 1:211 Drive, social facilitation and, 2:792
Differentiated knowledge, 2:931 Drug abuse, social representations and, 2:826
Differentiation, 1:185–186 Dual concern theory, 2:604–605
Diffuse status characteristics, 2:522, 2:845 Duality of structures, 2:893
Diffusion of responsibility, 1:307 Dual-process theory of social influence,
DiFonzo, Nicholas, 2:721 1:442–443
Digg, 2:950–251 Duckitt, John, 1:47–48, 2:783
DiMaggio, Paul, 1:455 Duke, David, 2:884
Dion, Kenneth L., 1:317, 1:329 Dunbar, Robin, 1:128, 2:720–721
Direct exchange, 2:787 Durkheim, Émile, 1:104, 1:113, 1:179, 1:206, 2:865
Direct observation process, 2:701 deviance and, 1:209
Directory updating, 2:931 group structure and, 1:381, 1:382, 2:581
Discontinuity effect, 2:902 social representations and, 2:823
Index 971

Dyads, 1:229–231 Entitativity, 1:238–241, 2:638, 2:729


categorizing, 1:229–230 perceived, 1:238–239
context of, for understanding social phenomena, 1:231 perceived, and perceived similarity, 1:240
dyadic-level and individual-level variables, 1:230 perceived, consequences, 1:239–240
interdependence between individuals and, 1:230 Entry criterion (EC), 1:377
special considerations for, 1:230–231 Envious prejudice, 1:307, 1:402
Dynamical systems approach, 1:231–234 Epistemic motives, conservatism and, 1:146
chaos and complexity in therapeutic groups, 1:233 Equal division norm, 2:611
continuous/discontinuous change in accident rates, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), 1:86
1:232–233 Equal excess theory, 1:92
historical overview, 1:232 Equifinality, 2:890, 2:892
methods, 1:232 Equipment models, 2:752
self-organization in group formation, 1:233–234 Equitable exchange, 2:927
Dynamic social impact theory, 2:807–808 Equity norm, 2:611
Dynamogenic Factors in Pacemaking and Competition, Equity theory, 1:218
The (Triplett), 1:381 Error correction, group memory and, 1:346–347
Dysfunction, within family system, 1:278 Escalation of commitment, 1:241–243
background and causes, 1:241–243
Eagly, Alice, 1:144, 1:297, 1:300, 1:303, 1:418, 2:713 importance of, 1:241
Earley, Christopher, 2:665 Esperanto, 1:253
Ebaugh, Helen Rose Fuchs, 2:715–716 Essay on the Principle of Population, An (Malthus), 2:768
Economic game theory, 2:778 Essentialism, 1:243–245, 2:944
Education Amendments of 1972, 2:750 defined, 1:243–244
Egocentrism, 1:251 implications of, 1:244–245
Egoistic deprivation, 1:501 importance of, 1:245
Ego justification, 2:888 Eternal Jew, The, 1:402
Egypt, 2:602 Ethics
Eichmann, Adolf, 1:53, 1:403 experimentation and, 1:264
Eichmann in Jerusalem (Arendt), 1:53 obedience to authority and, 2:615–616
Eisenberger, Naomi, 1:441 Ethics (Aristotle), 1:217
Eisenhower, Dwight, 1:223 Ethnic cleansing, 1:305
Elaborated social identity model (ESIM), 1:171–172 Ethnicity, 1:245–247
Elderspeak, 1:216 collective self and, 1:111–112
Elites, 2:562, 2:782 definition and comparison, 1:245–246
Elliott, Jane, 2:543 extended contact effect and, 1:266–267
Emancipation Proclamation, 1:84, 2:758 significance for identity, 1:246–247
Embedding knowledge, group learning and, 1:345 stereotype threat and, 2:853–854
Emergent mediation, 2:550 Ethnocentrism, 1:247–252
Emergent norm theory (ENT), 1:170–171, 1:235–238, historical overview, 1:248
1:236–237 ingroup bias and, 1:248–250
Emerson, Ralph Waldo, 2:542 realistic conflict theory and, 2:755
Emerson, Richard M., 1:383, 2:653–654, 2:787–789 self-categorization theory and, 2:730
Emotion theories of, 1:250–252
collective action and, 1:108 Ethnolinguistic identity theory, 1:252
emotion equations and affect control theory, 1:7–8 Ethnolinguistic vitality, 1:252–255
emotion-focused minority coping strategies, 2:559–560 future directions, 1:254
inclusion/exclusion and, 1:442 language and intergroup relations, 1:252–253
intergroup emotions theory, 1:473–475 language attitudes and, 1:254
interpersonal power and, 2:650 multilingualism and, 1:253–254
relational cohesion theory and, 2:690 Ethnophaulisms, 2:512, 2:761
sociology of emotions, 2:542–543 Eugenics, 1:255–258
Emotional intelligence, 2:641 contemporary importance, 1:256–257
Empathy, 2:543 historical overview, 1:255–256
Employment settings. See Workplace social Darwinism and, 2:769
Encoding information, group memory and, 1:347 European Association of Experimental Social
Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, 2:728 Psychology, 2:580, 2:899
Endorsement, 2:525 European Journal of Social Psychology, 2:899
Engels, Friedrich, 1:418 European Laboratory of Social Psychology, 2:581
Enlightenment, 2:774 European Organization for Nuclear Research, 2:951
972 Index

European social psychology, 2:580 organizational fashions, 1:271


European Union, 1:108, 1:159, 2:564, 2:583 social influence and, 1:270–271
Evaluation apprehension, 1:60 Fair Housing Act of 1968, 1:84, 1:88
Evaluation groups, 2:686 Fairness
Evaluation potential perspective, 2:809 common-identity vs. common-bond groups, 1:117–118
Evaluation theory, 2:792 ethnocentrism and, 1:248–249
Evaluative structures, performance and, 1:358 Fairness heuristic theory, 2:665
Evans, Charles, 1:317 Fairness norms, 2:611
Evans, Martin, 1:153 Fair process effect, 2:664
Everquest (game), 2:950 “Faithfulness gene,” 2:825
Evolution, cooperation/competition and, False consciousness, 2:760
1:155–154 False consensus effect, 1:272–275
Evolutionary psychology, 1:258–262 explanations of, 1:273
basic assumptions of, 1:258–259 historical overview, 1:272–273
intergroup processes and, 1:260–261 implications of, 1:274
intragroup processes and, 1:259–260 related constructs, 1:273–274
social dominance theory and, 2:782 False uniqueness bias, 1:273
Exception subtyping, 2:869 Families, 1:275–278
Exclusion family as system, 1:278
group boundaries and, 1:315 family socialization processes, 1:276–278
opinion deviance and, 2:618–620 family support groups, 2:875
See also Inclusion/exclusion Farr, Rob, 2:530
Exemplar-based models, 2:638 Faultlines, 1:220, 1:278–281
Exemplar view, of categories, 1:69 defined, 1:279
Existential motives, conservatism and, 1:146–147 examples and implications, 1:280
Exit criteria, group socialization and, 1:379 recent research on, 1:280–281
Expectancy-based illusory correlation, 1:426–427 Fawkes, Guy, 2:916
Expectancy theory, 2:767 Feather, Norman, 1:418
path-goal theory of leadership and, 2:635 Federal Bureau of Investigation, 1:216
social loafing and, 2:810 Federalist Papers, 1:483
Expectation states theory. See Status characteristics/ Fédération Internationale de Football Association World
expectation states theory Cup, 2:836
Expected utility theory, social dilemmas and, 2:778 Federico, Christopher, 1:47
Experimentation, 1:262–265 Feldman, Stanley, 1:47
ethics and, 1:264 Female gangs, 1:294
historical overview, 1:262–263 Feminism, 1:281–284
types of experiments, 1:263–264 historical overview, 1:281
Expert groups, jigsaw classroom technique and, 1:492 relevance to intergroup relations, 1:281–284
Explanandum/explanans, 1:351 social dominance theory and, 2:782
Explicit coordination, 2:670 Festinger, Leon, 1:94, 1:130, 1:191, 1:284–287,
Explicit measures, 2:732 2:762, 2:865, 2:898
Extended contact effect, 1:265–267 background, 1:284
implications of, 1:267 on cognitive dissonance, 1:286–287
supporting evidence for, 1:265–266 deviance and, 1:209
underlying processes of, 1:266–267 ethnocentrism and, 1:251
External representation, 1:58 group cohesiveness and, 1:316
External validity, defined, 1:263 group mind and, 1:351
Extraversion, 2:640 group polarization and, 1:364
Extremism, 2:945 informational influence and, 1:443
Eysenck, Hans, 1:47, 1:208 opinion deviance and informal social
communication, 2:617
Facebook, 1:97, 1:136, 1:269, 2:949–951 on social comparison, 1:285–286
Facesaving function of mediation, 2:551 social comparison theory and, 2:762
Face-to-face interviews, 2:879 social comparison theory and relative
Factionalism, 2:727–728 deprivation, 2:695, 2:697
Factions, 2:725 on social pressures in informal groups, 1:284–285
Fads and fashions, 1:269–272 Fichte, Johann Gottlieb, 1:349
body image and, 1:271–272 Fiedler, Fred, 1:152–154, 1:358, 1:387, 2:521, 2:828
historical overview, 1:269–270 Fiedler, Klaus, 2:515, 2:538
Index 973

Field experimentation, 1:263–264 Full ingroup-outgroup designs, 2:636


Field theory, 2:533, 2:534 Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), 2:858
Filtering, 1:58 Fundamental attribution error, 1:135, 2:941–942
Finholt, Tom, 2:949 conspiracy theories and, 1:150
First Principles (Spencer), 2:768 obedience to authority and, 2:614
Fischer, Gregory, 2:868 Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientation, 1:325
Fisher, Roger, 2:602
Fiske, Susan T., 1:17–19, 1:29, 1:189, Gacaca (tribunals), 1:481
2:647–648, 2:658, 2:843 Gaertner, Samuel, 1:198, 1:470, 2:660, 2:676
Fission, 2:726 Galbraith, John Kenneth, 2:764
Fixed-pie assumption, 2:605–606 Galileo, 2:566
Flickr, 2:951 Galinsky, Maeda, 1:326
Florida International University, 2:836 Galton, Francis, 1:255, 2:768
Focus theory of normative conduct, 2:610–611 Gamblers Anonymous, 2:875
Folger, Robert, 2:664 Game theory, 1:156, 2:661
Folkman, Susan, 1:167 Gandhi, Mohandas, 1:73–74
Folkways (Sumner), 1:248 Gangs, 1:293–296
Follett, Mary Parker, 2:602 composition of, 1:294
Followers/followership, 2:718–719 crime and, 1:294–295
Forbes, Hugh, 1:472 historical overview, 1:293
Ford, Henry, 2:624 institutionalization of, 1:296
Ford Motor Company, 1:390 methods of studying, 1:293–294
Forgiveness, genocide and, 1:308 victimization and, 1:295
Fortune 500, 2:799 Gardner, William, 1:458
Fourteenth Amendment, 1:200 Garfinkel, Harold, 2:715
Frankfurt/Berkeley School, 1:45 Garrett, James, 2:672
Frankfurt School, 1:22, 2:656 Gatekeeping and monitoring, 1:277
Fraternal deprivation, 1:501, 2:695 Gay Activists’ Alliance, 2:875
Freeman, Linton, 1:384 Gays. See Homosexuality
Freeman v. Pitts, 1:200 Gender and behavior, 1:296–300
Free riding, 1:287–289 locations of gender differences in behavior, 1:298–299
historical overview, 1:287–288 perspectives on, 1:296–298
process gain and loss and, 2:670 Gender roles, 1:300–304
related processes, 1:289 concept of, 1:300–301
research findings, 1:288–289 conformity and, 1:144
social dilemmas and, 2:778 deviation from, 1:301–302
sucker effect and, 2:871 as diffuse status characteristic, 2:845
Free-Soilers, 2:758 discrimination and, 1:215
Free Soil Republican party, 2:758 essentialist beliefs and, 1:244–245
Freezing, 2:598, 2:742 female gangs, 1:294
French, John, 2:647 homophily and, 1:405–406
French Canadians. See Canada impact on individuals and society, 1:303–304
Frenkel-Brunswik, Elsa, 1:45, 1:419, 2:706 interpersonal power and, 2:649–650
Freud, Sigmund, 1:21, 1:191, 1:208, 1:409, 2:566, 2:583 need for power and, 2:600
ethnocentrism and, 1:250 origins of, 1:302–303
need for belonging and, 2:595 self-concept and, 1:302
scapegoating theory and, 2:723–724 sexism and, 2:744–749
Friedkin, Noah, 2:787 social dominance theory and, 2:784
Fromm, Erich, 1:208, 2:705 stereotype threat and, 2:853–854
Frustration-aggression hypothesis, 1:289–292, 2:683 weight-based discrimination and, 2:954
applications to intergroup relations, 1:290–291 Generalized exchange, 2:788
background and assumptions, 1:290 General systems theory, 2:891
criticism and modifications, 1:291–292 Genetics
hate crimes and, 1:396 cooperation/competition and, 1:155–154
scapegoating and, 2:724 Moscovici on genetic model of minority influence, 2:580
Frustration and Aggression (Dollard, Doob, Miller, Mowrer, Genocide, 1:304–309
Sears), 1:290 bystanders and supporters of, 1:307
Fugitive Slave Law, 2:758 collective guilt and forgiveness, 1:308
Fuhriman, Addie, 1:233 conditions leading to, 1:305–306
974 Index

defined, 1:305 strategic identity expression and, 1:314–315


group emotions and, 1:335–336 threats of inclusion/exclusion, 1:315
heroes and resisters, 1:307–308 Group cohesiveness, 1:162, 1:316–320, 2:643
perpetrators of, 1:306 development of, 1:317
scapegoating and, 2:724–725 ingroup relationships, 1:317–319
victims of, 1:306–307 negative consequences of high levels of, 1:319–320
Genovese, Kitty, 1:63–65 power-dependence theory and, 2:653–654
Genzlinger, Neil, 1:53 transformational leadership theories and, 2:935
Geography, collective action and, 1:107 of work teams, 2:958
Gerard, Harold, 1:142, 1:444, 2:617, 2:685 Group composition, 1:320–324
German Crusade, 1:22 as cause, 1:322–324
Germinal (Zola), 1:191 as consequence, 1:321–322
Gersick, Connie J. G., 1:327, 1:329, 2:894 as context, 1:322
Gestalt, 1:16, 1:28, 2:533, 2:754 performance and, 1:356–357
Get-acquainted paradigm, 2:630 Group Decision Support Systems, 2:702
GI Joe, 1:271 Group development, 1:325–328
Giles, Howard, 1:252, 2:511–513 group formation and, 1:341–342
Gill, Diane, 1:318 group-level theories, 1:325–326
Glasgow Gang Observed, A (Patrick), 1:294 group socialization and, 1:375
Glass ceiling, 2:749 multi-level theories, 1:326–328
Glass escalator, 2:749 Group dissolution, 1:328–330
Glick, Peter, 1:17–19, 2:724–725 Group distinctiveness threat, 2:800
Global self-esteem, 2:732, 2:830 Group diversity, 1:221–222
Goal-setting theory group cohesion and, 1:319
path-goal theory of leadership and, 2:635 personnel turnover and, 2:643
social dilemmas and, 2:779 Group ecology, 1:330–335
Goertzel, Ted, 1:47 performance and, 1:358–359
Goethals, George, 1:272–273 physical environments and, 1:331–332
Goffman, Erving, 1:408, 2:543, 2:558, 2:710, 2:861 social environments and, 1:332–334
Golden Panthers, 2:836 temporal environments and, 1:334
Golden Rule, 2:764 work environment and organizations,
Golec, Agnieszka, 2:599 2:625–626
Goleman, Daniel, 2:641 Group emotions, 1:335–339
Google, 1:97, 1:363 emotions based on identification with group,
Goths, 1:271, 1:363 1:336–338
Graduated reciprocation in tension reduction (GRIT), 1:159, historical overview, 1:335–336
1:309–311 in individual encounters with outgroup members, 1:336
applications of, 1:310–311 related topics and new directions, 1:338–339
principles of, 1:309–310 Group formation, 1:339–342
Graen, George, 2:517–519, 2:928 acting group formation, 1:339–340
Granfield, Robert, 2:715 formation as stage of group development, 1:341–342
Graves, James, 2:708 self-organization of new standing groups, 1:340–341
Great Depression, 1:290, 2:735 Group-generalized exchange, 2:788
Great Life Foundation, 2:744 Group identification
Great person theory of leadership, 1:311–313, 2:639 culture and, 1:177
critiques of, 1:312–313 self-esteem and, 2:734
historical overview, 1:311–312 transformational leadership theories and, 2:935
Great Wall of China, 1:472 uncertainty-identity theory and, 2:944
Green, Donald, 2:959 Group justification, 2:888
Greenberg, Jeff, 2:919 Group learning, 1:342–346
Green Line of Cyprus, 1:472 consequences, 1:345
Grey, Jim, 1:98 learning process and, 1:344–345
Groff, Brad, 2:792 research on, 1:342–344
Grossman, M., 2:894 Group memory, 1:346–349
Grotenberg, Hanneke, 1:222 group potency and, 1:372
Group boundaries, 1:313–316 shared mental models, 1:348–349
meaning seaking and, 1:314 stages of group memory performance, 1:347–348
origins and functions of, 1:313–314 superior group performance and, 1:346–347
permeability, 1:313–314 transactive memory, 1:348
Index 975

Group mind, 1:169, 1:349–351 Group status threat, 2:800


critique of, 1:350–351 Group structure, 1:381–385
historical and philosophical overview, 1:349–350 historical overview and background, 1:381–382
socially structured field in individual and, 1:351 in intergroup contexts, 1:384–385
Group Mind, The (McDougall), 1:350 in intragroup contexts, 1:382–384
Group motivation, 1:351–354 performance and, 1:357
historical overview, 1:352 Group task, 1:385–390
motivation gains, 1:353 bottom-up approach, 1:386–387
motivation losses, 1:352–353 McGrath’s Group Task Circumplex, 1:385–386, 1:388,
study of, 1:352 1:389 (figure)
Group norms top-down approach, 1:387–389
common-identity vs. common-bond groups, Group therapy, sociometric choice and, 2:832–833
1:118–119 Groupthink, 1:390–393
deindividuation and, 1:193–194 group problem solving and, 1:374–375
group cohesion and, 1:318–319 homophily and, 1:406
Group performance, 1:354–360 methods for overcoming, 1:392
actual vs. potential group productivity, 1:359–360 pluralistic ignorance and, 2:645
diversity and, 1:221–222 recent developments in, 1:391–392
factors affecting, 1:356–359 research on, 1:390–391
group task and, 1:387 Group threat theory, 1:202
individual vs. group performance, 1:354–356 Group value model, 2:523
Group polarization, 1:361–365 Growth need strength (GNS), 1:495
case of “risky shift” and, 1:361–362 Gruenenthal Chemie, 1:390
explaining, 1:364–365 Gruenfeld, Deborah, 2:647–648
group problem solving and, 1:374 Grutter v. Bollinger, 1:200
group task and, 1:386 Guard activities, 1:58
juries and, 1:498 Guastello, Stephen, 1:233
opinions and, 1:362–364 Guimond, Serge, 2:765
pluralistic ignorance and, 2:645 Guinote, Ana, 2:650
referent informational influence theory and, 2:688 Gunn, Lawanna, 2:545
Group position theory, 1:365–368 Gunpowder Plot, 2:916
limitations of, 1:367 Gurr, Ted R., 1:490, 2:696
related theories, 1:367 Guzzo, Richard, 1:369
research on, 1:367
theory of, 1:366–367 Hackman, Richard, 1:368, 1:387, 1:494
Group potency, 1:368–370 Hadrian’s Wall, 1:472
applications of, 1:370 Hafer, Carolyn, 1:505–506
background, 1:368–369 Hagan, John, 1:295
correlates of, 1:369–370 Hagedorn, John, 1:296
factors affecting, 1:369 Hahn, Eugene, 1:41
Group problem solving and decision making, Hall, Edward T., 2:913, 2:915
1:370–375 Halloween, 1:192
bystander effect and, 1:64 Hamilton, Alexander, 1:483
common knowledge effect and, 1:123–125 Hamilton, T. E., 1:138
decision issue of Holocaust and, 1:401–402 Hamilton, William, 2:769
effective group decision making, 1:346 Handbook of Research Methods in Social and Personality
escalation of commitment and, 1:241 Psychology (Hastie, Stasser), 1:138
group memory and, 1:346 Handbook of Social Psychology (Abelson), 1:138
group potency and, 1:373–375 Haney, Craig, 2:837
need for closure and, 2:598 Hanges, Paul, 1:458–459
process gain and loss and, 2:669 Hanley, John, 2:744
social decision schemes and, 2:773–777 Happiness, social comparison theory and, 2:764–765
Group relative deprivation, 2:695 Harary, Frank, 1:383
Groups: Interaction and Performance (McGrath), 1:385 Hardin, Garrett, 1:125–126
Group size, 1:320 Hardy, James, 1:319
Group socialization, 1:178, 1:375–380, 1:438, 2:894 Harkins, Stephen, 2:709, 2:810
basic processes of, 1:376 Harlow, Harry, 1:79, 1:276
model of, 1:377 (figure) Harper’s Ferry, West Virginia, 2:758
passage through group, 1:376–380 Harris, Lasana, 1:189
976 Index

Harris, Victor, 2:941 Hollander, Edwin, 1:210, 1:313, 1:420–422, 2:517–518,


Harrison, Douglas, 1:220 2:521, 2:619, 2:928
Hart, Claire, 2:545 Hollenbeck, John, 2:956
Harvard Project on Negotiation, 2:602 Holocaust, 1:22, 1:24, 1:255, 1:305, 1:400–403,
Harvard University, 1:16 2:655, 2:899
Harwood Manufacturing Company, 2:625 anticonformity and, 1:21
Haslam, Alexander, 2:659 anti-Semitism and, 1:22–25
Haslam, Nick, 1:190 bystander issues and, 1:403
Hastie, Reid, 1:138, 2:807 decision issue and, 1:401–402
Hate crimes, 1:395–398 genocide and, 1:308
historical overview and modern targets of, 1:395–396 group emotions and, 1:335–336
theoretical approaches to, 1:396–398 historical overview of, 1:400–401
xenophobia and, 2:959 multiculturalism and, 2:582
Hate speech, 2:512 obedience to authority and, 2:616
Hawthorne studies, 2:625 perpetrator issues and, 1:402–403
Hazan, Cynthia, 1:38 prejudice and, 2:655–656
Heaven’s Gate, 1:174 scapegoating, 2:723
Hebl, Michelle, 1:216 scapegoating and, 2:725
Hecht, Tracy, 1:424 social psychological perspectives of, 1:401
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, 1:349 Homans, George, 1:383, 2:517, 2:652, 2:787
Heider, Fritz, 1:42, 1:93, 1:382–383 “Home advantage,” sports teams and, 2:836
Heise, David, 1:6 Homophily, 1:404–407
Helmreich, Robert, 1:39–40 bases and patterns of, 1:405–406
Hendricks, Gay, 2:744 consequences of, 1:406
Hendricks, Kathlyn, 2:744 types of, 1:404–405
Henrich, C. C., 1:90 Homophobia, 1:407–410
Herder, Johann Gottfried, 1:349 historical overview, 1:407–408
Hereditary Genius (Dalton), 2:769 importance of, 1:409–410
Heredity in Relation to Eugenics (Davenport), 1:255 social distance and, 1:408–409
Herek, Gregory, 1:216 Homosexuality
Herrnstein, Richard J., 1:256 discrimination against, 1:216–217
Hersey, Paul, 1:154 essentialism and, 1:245
Herzberg, Frederick, 1:494 homophobia and, 1:407–410
Heteronormativity, 1:407 prejudice and, 2:655–656
Heterosexism, 1:407 Hook, Sidney, 1:309
Heuristic reasoning, juries and, 1:500 Horton, Willie, 2:884
Hewstone, Miles, 1:187, 1:470, 2:587, 2:825 Host Community Acculturation Scale (HCAS), 1:32
Hidden profile task, 1:123, 1:398–400 Hostile environment, sexual harassment and, 2:750
causes of poor performance, 1:399 House, Robert, 1:153, 2:635
limitations of, 1:400 Household labor, 1:299
remedies, 1:399–400 Hovland, Carl, 1:396, 2:566
socially shared cognition and, 2:813 Howard, Henry, 2:913
task illustration, 1:398–399 How To Think Like a Social Scientist
Higham, T. M., 2:720 (Pettigrew), 2:530
High social dominance orientation, 2:563 Hugo, Victor, 1:191
Hill, Gayle, 1:355 Huguet, Pascal, 2:793
“Hinglish,” 1:253–254 Hulin, Charles, 1:138
Hinz, Verlin, 1:221 Human Behavior and Evolution Society, 2:769
Hirschi, Travis, 1:207 Human Legacy, The (Festinger), 1:287
Hirschman, Albert, 2:728 Human relations training, 2:742
Hitler, Adolf, 1:21, 1:55, 1:74, 1:400. Hummert, Mary Lee, 2:512
See also Holocaust Huntington, Samuel, 1:486
Hobbes, Thomas, 1:113, 1:155 Hunyady, Orsolya, 2:890
Hochschild, Arlie Russell, 1:299, 2:543 Hurricane Katrina, 2:721
Hoffman, L. Richard, 1:221 Hurting stalemate, 2:551
Hofstadter, Richard, 1:150, 2:769 Hussein, Saddam, 1:149, 2:562
Hofstede, Geert, 1:113, 1:179 Hutus, 1:306, 1:480–481, 2:725
Hogg, Michael, 1:47, 1:197, 1:316, 2:523, 2:687, 2:730, Hyman, Herbert, 2:684–685
2:801, 2:943 Hypothesis, defined, 1:262
Index 977

IAT. See Implicit Association Test (IAT) reciprocal relations between immigrants and members of
ICCCR. See International Center for Cooperation and host society, 1:431
Conflict Resolution (ICCCR) See also Xenophobia
Identification and commitment, 1:411–415, 2:686 Implicit Association Test (IAT), 1:49, 1:75, 1:432–435,
common ingroup identity and intergroup violence, 1:481 1:438, 2:574, 2:577, 2:659, 2:858, 2:889
cultivating commitment among group members, construct and predictive validity of, 1:434
1:414–415 defined, 1:432–433
cultivating normative commitment through social control, discoveries about intergroup cognition, 1:433
1:412–413 evidence about bias, 1:433–434
dimension models of commitment, 1:411–412 Implicit coordination
ethnicity and, 1:246 process gain and loss and, 2:670
fashion and, 1:270–271 shared mental models and, 2:751
feminism and, 1:281–282 Implicit leadership theories (ILT), 2:515–516
gender and behavior, 1:296–297 Implicit measures, self-esteem and, 2:732
group benefit from members’ normative commitment Implicit prejudice, 1:435–439
and, 1:413 critique of, 1:437–438
group emotions and, 1:336–337 manifestations, 1:436
group identification, 1:413–414 measuring, 1:436–437
intergroup emotions theory and, 1:475 origins and prevalence, 1:435–436
leaders as entrepreneurs of, 2:803–804 Impression formation
national, 1:430–431 affect control theory and, 1:7–8
personal identity, 2:798 Asch on, 1:28–29
person identities, 1:416 common-identity vs. common-bond groups, 1:119
social/personal, and ethnocentrism, 1:251–252 social comparison theory and, 2:762–763
social psychology of schism and, 2:726 Inbreeding homophily, 1:404–405
symbolic interactionism and, 2:882 Inclusion/exclusion, 1:439–442
Identity control theory, 1:415–417 belonging to groups as fundamental need, 1:439
bases of identity and, 1:416 group boundaries and, 1:315
control of perceptions and, 1:416 inclusion of the group in the self, 1:266–267
emotions and, 1:417 inside/outside laboratory, 1:439–440
identity change and, 1:417 negative consequences of exclusion, 1:440–441
identity verification and, 1:416 opinion deviance and, 2:618–620
meaning and, 1:415–416 positive consequences of exclusion, 1:441–442
multiple identities and, 1:416–417 Independence, anticonformity and, 1:20
Identity threat, 2:800 Independent variables, defined, 1:262
Identity verification, 1:416 Index of agreeement, 1:318
Ideology, 1:147, 1:417–420 Indiana Pacers, 2:836
features of, 1:418 Indirect exchange, 2:787–788
importance of, 1:420 Indirect measurement, 2:732
politics and, 1:418–420 Indirect reciprocity, 2:778
Idiosyncrasy credit, 1:420–422, 2:518, 2:521, 2:619 Individual and His Religion, The (Allport), 1:16
related research, 1:421–422 Individual mobility, 2:799
theoretical origins and, 1:421 Individuals, 1:429
Iellatchitch, Alexandre, 1:451 collective induction vs. individual induction, 1:101–102
Ilgen, Daniel, 1:138, 2:910, 2:956, 2:958 conformity and, 1:143–144
Illusion of group effectivity, 1:422–425 deviation and, 1:208
brainstorming and, 1:423–424 group emotions and, 1:336
implications of, 1:424 impact of gender roles on, 1:303–304
romance of teams and, 1:424 individualism, 1:33
Illusory correlation, 1:425–427 individual racism, 2:677–679
distinctiveness-based illusory correlation, 1:425–426 individual representations, 2:823
expectancy-based illusory correlation, 1:426–427 intraindividual levels of analysis, 2:531 (figure), 2:532
Immigrant Acculturation Scale (IAS), 1:35 juries as, 1:497–498
Immigration, 1:427–432 loyalty to, and relationships, 2:545
acculturation and, 1:428–429 multiple identities and, 2:585–587
attitudes toward immigrants and immigration in host performance of, vs. group performance, 1:354–356
society, 1:429–431 personal spaces of, 1:332
discrimination toward immigrants, 1:431 satisfaction and group cohesion, 1:318
push and pull factors of, 1:428 social decision schemes and, 2:771–773, 2:772 (tables)
978 Index

socially structure field in, and group mind, 1:351 Integration


social networks and, 2:819 ethnicity and, 1:246
terrorism at individual level, 2:917 integrationism, 1:32
ultimate attribution error and, 2:942–943 Integrative agreements, 2:602–606
See also Collectivism/individualism; Individuation Integrity, 2:641
Individuation Intellective tasks, group potency and, 1:371
common ingroup identity and intergroup violence, 1:481 Intelligence
decategorization and, 1:185–186 leadership and, 2:640
Induced homophily, 1:404 leadership and emotional intelligence, 2:641
Inequity theory, 1:218 self-fulfilling prophecy and, 2:736–737
Informal social communication theory, 2:617 INTERACT, 1:8
Informational influence, 1:130, 1:442–445 Interaction groups, 2:686
conformity and, 1:141–142, 1:142 Interactionist theories of leadership, 1:456–459
debate and controversy, 1:444 interactionist models of leadership, 1:458–459
group polarization and, 1:364 interactionist perspective, 1:457
historical overview and background, 1:444 interactionist perspective and leadership, 1:457–458
juries and, 1:498 person-situation debate, 1:457
normative influence and, 2:606–607 Interaction process analysis, 1:383, 1:459–462
opinion deviance and, 2:617–618 analysis of group processes using, 1:461
reference informational influence theory and, 2:687 content and coding of, 1:460
Information allocation, 2:931 development of, and its extensions, 1:460–461
Informational social influence, 1:269, 1:270 evaluation of, 1:461
Information pooling, 1:346 Interdependence theory, 1:462–465
Information processing, 1:58 cooperation and competition, 1:157
entitativity and, 1:239 interdependence structure, 1:463
interactionist theory and, 1:458–459 power and, 2:648
need for closure and, 2:598 social dilemmas and, 2:778–779
Information retrieval, group memory and, 1:347–348 team building and, 2:899–900
Information sharing transformation of situations, 1:463–464
process gain and loss and, 2:669–670 Interglobal level of analysis, 2:530, 2:531 (figure)
rumor and, 2:720–721 Intergroup anxiety, 1:336, 1:465–468
Information storage, group memory and, 1:347 causes of, 1:465–466
Ingham, Alan, 2:708–709, 2:808 consequences of, 1:466–467
Ingham, Richard, 1:352 directions for future research, 1:467–468
Ingham project, 2:708–709 reducing, and improving intergroup relations, 1:467
Inglehart, Ronald, 1:113 Intergroup contact theory, 1:468–473, 2:587
Ingroup allocation bias, 1:445–448 critique of, 1:472
discrimination in minimal groups, 1:445–446 explanatory models, 1:470
historical overview, 1:445 future directions of, 1:472
resource allocations using Tajfel matrices, 1:446–448 generalization of effects, 1:470
Initiation rites, 1:448–451 group structure, 1:384–385
description, 1:448–449 historical overview and background, 1:468–469
explaining impact of, 1:449–450 interindividual-intergroup discontinuity and, 1:485
group characteristics and, 1:450–451 policy implications of, 1:473
Innovation, 1:451–454 prejudice and, 1:469–470
basic distinctions, 1:451–452 when/how contact effects occur, 1:471
determinants of team innovation, 1:452 Intergroup discrimination, self-esteem and, 2:732–733
major findings in, 1:452–454 Intergroup emotions theory, 1:337, 1:473–475
Input-mediator-output-input (IMOI), 2:956 evidence supporting, 1:474–475
Input-process-output (IPO), 2:956 focused vs. general emotions, 1:474
Inquiries Into Human Faculty and Its historical overview, 1:473
Development (Galton), 2:769 key themes of, 1:475
Insko, Chester, 1:157, 1:159 Intergroup empathy, 1:475–478
Institutionalized bias, 1:454–456 practical and policy implications, 1:477
Institutional racism, 2:677, 2:679 research findings, 1:476–477
Institutional support, ethnolinguistic types of, 1:476
vitality and, 1:252 Intergroup leadership, 2:804
Integrated knowledge, 2:931 Intergroup level of analysis, 2:531–532, 2:531 (figure)
Integrated threat theory of prejudice, 1:429 Intergroup power, 2:648, 2:651
Index 979

Intergroup relations Islamophobia, 1:486–487


cognitive consistency and, 1:95–96 historical overview, 1:486
cross-categorization and, 1:164 prevention and reduction of, 1:487
desegregation and, 1:202 psychological causes of, 1:486–487
ethnolinguistic vitality and, 1:252–253 Isozaki, Mititoshi, 1:362
evolutionary psychology, 1:260–261 Israel, realistic group conflict theory and, 2:682
feminism and, 1:281–284 Italian Communist Party, 2:726–727
frustration-aggression hypothesis and, 1:290–291
hate crimes and, 1:397–398 Jackson, Jesse, 2:884
intergroup anxiety and, 1:467 Jacobs, Robert, 1:178
self-fulfilling prophecy and, 2:735–737 Jaggi, Vaishna, 2:942
sociometer model and, 2:830–831 Jago, Arthur, 1:153–154
subtyping and, 2:869–870 Jahoda, Gustave, 1:193
xenophobia and, 2:960 Jahoda, Marie, 1:46
Intergroup status. See Status James, King, 2:916
Intergroup violence, 1:478–482 James, William, 1:350, 1:384, 2:517,
background and origins, 1:478–479 2:541, 2:731–732
factors promoting, 1:479–480 Janicik, Gregory, 1:334
strategies for promoting intergroup Janis, Irving, 1:319, 1:374, 1:390, 1:392
harmony, 1:480–482 Jay, John, 1:483
Interindividual-intergroup discontinuity, 1:482–446 J-curve hypothesis, 1:489–491
generality of effect, 1:484 historical overview and background, 1:489–490
historical overview, 1:483 relative deprivation theory, 1:490
intergroup cooperation and, 1:485 weaknesses of research on, 1:490–491
laboratory evidence, 1:483–484 Jealousy, 1:318
mechanisms producing effect, 1:484–485 Jefferson, Thomas, 1:29
nonlaboratory evidence, 1:484 Jefferson County, Kentucky, 1:200
Interindividual levels of analysis, 2:531 (figure), 2:532 Jensen, Mary Ann, 1:325–326, 1:329
Internalization, 1:130 Jermier, John, 1:153
Internal validity, defined, 1:263 JFK, 1:150
Internal working model, 1:276 Jigsaw classroom technique, 1:491–493
International Center for Cooperation and Conflict Jim Crow, 1:27, 1:455, 2:883
Resolution (ICCCR), 1:204, 1:206 Job characteristic theory (JCT), 1:494–495
International Committee of the Red Cross, 2:550 Job design, 1:493–495
International Monetary Fund, 1:108 early work on, 1:494
Internet. See Virtual/Internet groups job characteristic theory (JCT), 1:494–495
Interpersonal power, 2:649–651 Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS), 1:495
Interpositional knowledge training, 2:753 Jobs, Steve, 2:882
Interpretive action verbs (IAV), 2:536, 2:538–539 Johns Hopkins University, 1:161
Interpretive reliability, 2:704 Johnson, Lyndon B., 1:8, 1:149
Intersocietal level of analysis, 2:531, 2:531 (figure) Johnson, Mark, 2:840
Intimacy groups, 1:238–239 Johnson, Michael, 2:956
Intimate relationships, 1:298 Johnson, Robert, 1:193
In Touch, 2:875 Johnson-Laird, Philip, 2:751
Intraglobal level of analysis, 2:530, 2:531 (figure) Joint control (JC), 1:463
Intragroup (ingroup) processes, 2:532 Jones, E. E., 2:862
evolutionary psychology and, 1:259–260 Jones, Edward, 2:941
group cohesiveness and, 1:317–319 Jones, James, 1:74, 2:546, 2:641, 2:677, 2:679
group structure, 1:382–384 Jones, Ned, 2:676
multiculturalism and, 2:583–584 Jones, Richard, 2:716
See also Categorization Jost, John T., 1:111, 1:147, 1:418, 1:419–420,
Intragroup status. See Status 2:599, 2:888, 2:890
Intraindividual levels of analysis, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 2:742
2:531 (figure), 2:532 Journal of Experimental Social
Intranets, 2:933 Psychology, 1:138
Intrasocietal level of analysis, Judd, Charles, 2:869
2:531, 2:531 (figure) Judgmental issues
Invasion studies, 1:332 juries and, 1:498
Iron law of oligarchy, 2:818 normative influence and, 2:606–607
980 Index

Judgmental tasks Kitt, Alice, 2:685


group potency and, 1:371 Klee, Paul, 2:555–556, 2:658
group task and, 1:387 Kline, Wendy, 1:256
Julian, James, 1:421 Knapp, Robert, 1:148
Jundt, Dustin, 2:956 Knowledge
Jung, Carl Gustav, 1:350 group learning and, 1:345
Juries, 1:496–500 job characteristic theory (JCT) and, 1:495
as groups, 1:498–500 knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs), 1:452–453, 2:910
as individuals, 1:497–498 scientific knowledge in action research, 1:5
mock jury decisions and group potency, 1:373–374 Köhler, Otto, 1:353, 2:507–508, 2:709
problems of studying, 1:496–497 Köhler effect, 2:507–509
socially shared cognition and, 2:813 causes of, 2:508
Justice, 1:500–504 free riding and, 1:289
distributive, 1:501–502 group motivation and, 1:353
procedural, 1:502–503 historical overview, 2:507–508
retributive, 1:503–504 process gain and loss, 2:671
roots of justice research, 1:501 research on, 2:508–509
Just world hypotheses, 1:307, 1:504–506 Kollock, Peter, 2:789–790
historical overview and background, 1:505–506 Kolowski, Steve, 1:459
importance of, 1:506 Korean War, 1:390
status and, 2:843 Koresh, David, 2:641
Just World Scale, 1:505 Kozlowski, Steve, 2:956–958
Kramer, Bernard, 1:291
Kaczynski, Ted, 2:918 Kramer, Roderick, 2:544
Kalick, S. M., 1:138 Krantz, James, 1:329
Kameda, Tatsuya, 2:807 Krauss, Robert, 1:205
Kamphoff, Cindra, 1:318 Kravitz, David, 2:708
Kandinsky, Wassily, 2:555–556, 2:658 Kressel, Ken, 2:551
Kanfer, Ruth, 2:665 Kristallnacht, 1:401
Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, 2:758 Kruglanski, Arie, 1:48, 2:597–598
Kanter, Rosabeth Moss, 1:299, 1:414, 2:925 Kuhn, Thomas, 2:533
Karau, Steven, 1:334, 2:809 Ku Klux Klan, 1:87, 1:192–194, 1:397, 2:583, 2:884
Kashima, Yoshihisa, 2:721 Kula ring, 2:788
Katz, Irwin, 2:675–676
Keating, Caroline, 1:450 Labeling, 1:207–208
Keech, Mrs., 1:286 Labeling equations, 1:7–8
Kelley, Harold H., 1:42, 1:462, 2:517, 2:603, 2:648, 2:652, Laboratory experimentation, 1:263
2:685–686, 2:695, 2:787 Lack of authorization, 2:526
Kelly, Janice R., 1:334, 2:785–786 Lacoursier, Roy, 1:326
Kelman, Herbert, 1:130, 1:412 Lag sequential analysis, 2:700
Keltner, Dacher, 2:647–648 Lakoff, George, 2:840
Kennedy, John F., 1:8, 1:74, 1:88, 1:149–150, Lambert, Wallace E., 1:254, 2:513, 2:583
1:310–311, 1:375 Language. See Ethnolinguistic vitality; Language and
Kenny, David, 2:821–822 intergroup relations; Linguistic category model (LCM);
Kent State, 1:390 Linguistic intergroup bias (LIB)
Kerr, Norbert, 1:208, 1:288–289, 2:870 Language and intergroup relations, 2:511–515
Kerr, Steve, 1:153 management of social distance and, 2:511–512
Kerry, John, 2:921 power and, 2:513–515
Keynoting, 1:235–236 prejudice and, 2:512–513
Keyton, Joann, 1:329 Large Group Awareness Training, 2:744
Khmer Rouge, 1:305 Large Hadron Collider, 2:951
Killian, Lewis, 1:170, 1:235–237 Larson, James, 2:851
Kimmel, Michael S., 1:409 Larsson, Knut, 2:791
Kinder, Don, 2:676 Lasswell, Harold, 2:728
King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1:73–74, 1:85, 1:87–88, 2:543 Latané, Bibb, 1:64–65, 1:128–129, 1:139, 1:233–234,
King, Rodney, 1:397 1:262–264, 2:709, 2:805–810
Kinsey, Alfred, 2:647 Lau, Dora, 1:220
Kirkpatrick, Clifford, 1:40 Lauderdale, Patrick, 2:619
Kitayama, Shinobu, 1:113, 1:179 Laughlin, Patrick, 1:357, 1:387, 2:773
Index 981

LaVoie, Lawrence, 2:821 Leviathan (Hobbes), 1:155


Lawler, Edward, 2:654, 2:787–789 Levine, John M., 1:178, 1:314, 1:376–378, 2:544, 2:618,
Lazarus, Richard, 1:167 2:714, 2:894
Lea, Martin, 2:795 group composition and, 1:323–324
Leader categorization theory, 2:515–517, 2:522 group development and, 1:323–324, 1:324–328
Leader-member exchange (LMX) theory, 2:517–519, group dissolution and, 1:329
2:521–522 LeVine, Robert, 2:681
Graen team’s work, 2:518–519 Levinger, George, 2:708
historical overview, 2:517–518 Levinson, Daniel J., 1:45–46, 2:706
transactional leadership and, 2:928–929 Lévi-Strauss, Claude, 2:653, 2:787
Leadership, 2:520–524 Lévy-Bruhl, Lucien, 2:823
contingency theories of, 1:151–154, 2:520–521 Lewicki, Roy, 1:448–449
defined, 2:520 Lewin, Kurt, 1:1–2, 1:117, 1:204, 1:232, 2:533–535, 2:754,
effectiveness of leaders, 2:520 2:806, 2:894
group task and, 1:386 action research of, 2:535
innovation and, 1:453–454 as empiricist, 2:534–535
interactionist theories of, 1:456–459 Festinger and, 1:284–287
leader-member exchange (LMX) theory, 2:517–519 group cohesion and, 1:320
in organizations, 2:626–627 group mind and, 1:351
path-goal theory of, 2:635–637 group performance, 1:355
perceptions, schemas, stereotypes, 2:522 interactionist theories of leadership and, 1:457
personality theories of, 2:639–641 interaction process analysis, 1:460
romance of, 2:717–719 levels of analysis and, 2:532
social identity and, 2:522–523 Lewin’s field theory, 2:533, 2:534
social identity theory of leadership, 2:801–804 Lewin’s paradigm shift in social psychology, 2:533–534
task-oriented vs. relationship-oriented leadership styles, sensitivity training groups and, 2:742
2:827–828 on social class, 2:764
team reflexivity and, 2:908 socioemotional and task behavior, 2:827
of teams, 2:911 Lewin, Miriam, 2:534
transactional, 2:521–522 Leyens, Jacques-Philippe, 1:189–

You might also like