Four studies assessed the potentially detrimental effects that restrictions to collective autonomy (i.e., a group's freedom to determine and practice its own identity) may have for the personal autonomy and psychological well-being of group members. In Study 1, using 3 distinct samples (NSample1a = 123, NSample1b = 129, NSample1c = 370), correlational and cross-cultural evidence indicates that perceived restrictions to the collective autonomy of one's group is directly associated with reduced personal autonomy, and indirectly associated with diminished well-being through personal autonomy. In Study 2 (N = 411), a longitudinal assessment of group members over 3 time-points during a 4-month period found that group members who perceived greater collective autonomy restriction also experienced reduced personal autonomy, and in turn, reduced psychological well-being over time. In Study 3 (N = 255), group members described a time during which their ingroup had (or did not have) its collective autonomy unduly restricted by other groups. Participants who were primed to think that their group lacked collective autonomy reported reduced feelings of personal autonomy, and reduced psychological well-being (compared with those primed to think their group had collective autonomy). In Study 4 (N = 389), collective autonomy was manipulated within the context of an intensive laboratory simulation. Collective autonomy-restricted group members experienced less personal autonomy than those who did not have their collective autonomy restricted. Together these findings suggest that restrictions to a group's collective autonomy may have detrimental consequences for the personal autonomy and psychological well-being of group members. (PsycINFO Database Record
This paper describes the development of a situation‐based tool to assess emerging adults’ social competence with same‐gender friends, providing information about (1) challenges occurring in these relationships, (2) the behaviors used to manage these situations, and (3) the perceived effectiveness of these strategies. Undergraduates (N = 747; 409 women; Mage = 20.16, SD = 1.43) participated in five studies. Transgressions, conflicts of interest, and support situations emerged as key challenges, and emerging adults reported using aggressive, assertive, avoidant, and apologizing behaviors to manage these situations. In general, apologizing and assertive behaviors were judged more effective than aggressive or avoidant behaviors. Results yielded the Inventory of Friendship Challenges for Emerging Adults (IFCEA), which showed expected associations with measures of interpersonal behavior.
Groups experience collective autonomy restriction whenever they perceive that other groups attempt to limit the freedom of their group to determine and express its own identity. We argue that collective autonomy restriction motivates groups (both structurally advantaged and disadvantaged) to improve their power position within the social hierarchy. Four studies spanning real-world (Studies 1 and 2) and lab-based (Studies 3 and 4) intergroup contexts supported these ideas. In Study 1 (N=311), Black Americans' (a relatively disadvantaged group) experience of collective autonomy restriction was associated with greater support for collective action, and less system justification. In Study 2, we replicated these findings with another sample of Black Americans (N=292). We also found that collective autonomy restriction was positively associated with White Americans' (a relatively advantaged group, N=294) support for collective action and ideologies that bolster White's dominant position. In Study 3 (N=387, 97 groups), groups that were susceptible to being controlled by a high-power group (i.e., were of low structural power) desired group power more when their collective autonomy was restricted (versus supported). In Study 4 (N=803, 257 groups) experiencing collective autonomy restriction (versus support) increased low-power group members' support of collective action, decreased system justification, and evoked hostile emotions, both when groups were and were not materially exploited (by being tasked with more than their fair share of work). Across studies, we differentiate collective autonomy restriction from structural group power, other forms of injustice, group agency, and group identification. These findings indicate that collective autonomy restriction uniquely motivates collective behavior.
Maintaining high-quality friendships is a key predictor of well-being during emerging adulthood, yet factors leading to friendship dissolution—defined here as actions that may decrease friendship quality or end the relationship completely—are poorly understood. Using an open-ended interview paradigm, we elicited 179 emerging adults’ (55.9% female; Mage = 20.42, SD = 1.54; 95.0% full-time university students) description of their behavioral responses to 53 hypothetical vignettes involving challenging situations with same-gender friends. We systematically coded participants’ 9,487 verbatim responses, identifying three types of friendship dissolution behaviors: completely ending the friendship, distancing from the friend, or compartmentalizing aspects of the friendship. Examining the occurrence of each response across different types of challenging situations, we found that transgressions by friends were more likely to elicit reported use of distancing and ending strategies. We also began to investigate associations between interpersonal goals and dissolution strategies, finding that stronger endorsement of the goal of asserting oneself was linked to greater odds of reporting ending the friendship, whereas the more participants reported that they would be trying to stay friends, the lower the odds of reporting either ending the relationship or distancing from the friend. Implications for future research on interpersonal processes in friendships are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.