Can Intergroup Behaviors Be Emitted Out of Self-Determined Reasons? Testing the Role of Group Norms and Behavioral Congruence in the Internalization of Discrimination and Parity Behaviors

Abstract

Bringing self-determination theory to understand why intergroup behaviors are emitted, two studies were conducted to investigate how group norms and individuals' congruence with these norms predicted self-determination to pursue two types of intergroup behaviors (parity and discrimination). Experiment 1 (N = 97) manipulated ingroup norms in favor of parity versus of discrimination and assessed the behavior participants displayed (congruent or incongruent with the norm) and their motivations for emitting this behavior. The manipulated norms significantly influenced group members' behaviors. When the ingroup norm was parity, participants whose behavior was congruent with this norm reported more self-determination to emit this behavior. When the ingroup norm was prodiscrimination, participants whose behavior was congruent with this norm were less self-determined. Experiment 2 (N = 139) replicated and extended these findings in a more conflictual intergroup setting. Results are discussed in light of motivational and intergroup theories.

The impact of group norms and behavioral congruence on the internalization of an illegal downloading behavior.

“…In line with prior studies (Amiot et al, 2012), H2a predicts that participants who act congruently with the no downloading norm (and hence who do not in tend to behave illegally themselves) will be more self-determined than those who behave incongruently with this norm. Among partici pants in the prodownloading condition, those who intend to behave incongruently with the norm should report higher self-determination than those who intend to behave in line with this norm (H2b).…”

“…These studies tested competing hypotheses based on SIT versus SDT about the possibility of group norms to be internalized and endorsed out of self-determination. The findings tended to sup port SDT's perspective: When an important in group was encouraging a pro-social behavior, such as distributing resources equally between groups (prosocial parity norm), and individuals were behaving congruently with this norm, this behavior was more strongly internalized and self-determined (Amiot et al, 2012). The re verse pattern was observed for harmful norms in favor of discrimination: When one's ingroup encouraged discrimination, it is individuals who behaved incongruently with this norm (by en gaging instead in parity) who were more selfdetermined.…”

“…Following past studies (Amiot et al, 2012), the first objective of this research is to test whether a "prodownloading norm" (i.e., a norm in favor of illegal downloading) versus a "no downloading norm" (i.e., a norm that is not against illegal downloading) influences partici pants' behavioral intentions to engage in illegal downloading behaviors. The second objective is to investigate how individuals' congruence/ incongruence with these norms influences their self-determination (as a proxy for internaliza tion) for engaging in this behavior.…”

“…In line with past studies on norm internalization (Amiot et al, 2012), we decided to manipulate the descriptive norm here (individual's perception of what other group members do), instead of injunctive norms (per ception of what group members encouraged in dividual to do; Reno, Cialdini, & Kallgren, 1993.…”

Priming self-determined and non-self-determined group identification: Effects on well-being and ingroup bias.

“…Although favoring one's ingroup can be beneficial for ingroup members by facilitating positive social identity and distinctiveness (e.g., Amiot & Bourhis, 2005;Perreault & Bourhis, 1998), ingroup bias has also been associated with undesirable consequences, such as causing harm to outgroup members, which is damaging, not only to victims, but also for perpetrators (see Wilder & Simon, 2004). In this sense, ingroup bias can be seen as being a potentially harmful consequence of social identification (Amiot, Sansfaçon, Louis, & Yelle, 2012).…”