Determinants of collective behavior, as suggested by the social identity or self-categorization approach and social movement research, were examined in 2 field studies. Study 1 was conducted in the context of the older people's movement in Germany and Study 2 in the context of the gay movement in the United States. Both studies yielded similar results pointing to 2 independent pathways to willingness to participate in collective action; one is based on cost-benefit calculations (including normative considerations), and the other is based on collective identification as an activist. Study 2 included an experimental manipulation and provided evidence for the causal role of collective identification as an activist. Directions for future research on the proposed dual-pathway model are suggested.

In an approach to intergroup discrimination and tolerance, it is assumed that the outgroup's difference from the ingroup is evaluated with reference to the prototype of the higher-order category that includes both groups. Two correlational studies yielded evidence that (a) group members tend to perceive their ingroup as relatively prototypical for the inclusive category (projection), (b) members highly identified with both ingroup and inclusive category (dual identity) tend to project most, and (c) relative prototypicality is related to negative attitudes toward the outgroup. The latter relation was further specified in Study 3, manipulating the valence of the inclusive category. Projection was related to more negative attitudes toward the outgroup when the inclusive category was primed positively but to more positive attitudes when it was primed negatively. The meaning of dual identities for intergroup relations is discussed.

No abstract

Research demonstrates that the perceived legitimacy of intergroup status differences has profound effects on intergroup attitudes, emotions and behavior. However, there has only been little intergroup research that predicts the perception of legitimacy. We hypothesize that the perception of legitimate or illegitime status relations depends upon the perceived relative prototypicality of the ingroup for the inclusive category. Since the prototype of the inclusive category provides a normative comparison standard for subgroup evaluation, similarity to this standard (i.e. prototypicality) should be positively evaluated and used to justify high status. A first study in a natural intergroup context (N ¼ 67) offered correlational data in support of the predicted relationship. The second study (N ¼ 60), using Germans as ingroup with Poles as outgroup and Europe as inclusive category, demonstrated that the link between prototypicality and legitimacy is contingent upon the valence of the inclusive category. In order to elucidate the causal direction, the third study manipulated relative prototypicality in an artificial intergroup context (N ¼ 94) and introduced status as a moderator variable. Overall, we found strong support for the hypothesis that legitimacy is related to prototypicality and that this relation is moderated by ingroup status and valence of the inclusive category.

No abstract