Effects of intergroup similarity on intergroup relations

Roccas, Sonia; Schwartz, Shalom H.

doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420230604

Cited by 138 publications

(114 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

104

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…If one does not regard a particular identity as central to their self-defi nition, they are unlikely to use it as a source of self-esteem (Branscombe, Wann, Noel, & Coleman, 1993). Work carried out by Manstead (1996, 2001; see also Roccas & Schwartz, 1993) has examined the reactions of individuals that attach little, or much, importance to social categories under conditions of threatened group distinctiveness. Using similarity of group norms as the distinctiveness manipulation, it was found that intergroup similarity (i.e.…”

Section: Identifi Cation and Subgroup Distinctivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Spears et al, 1997). Thus, perceived threat to the continuation of the initial ingroup identity via recategorization would lead to, at best, no effect on bias, or, at worst, an increase in intergroup bias (Crisp & Beck, 2005;Crisp et al, 2006;Hornsey & Hogg, 2000a;Roccas & Schwartz, 1993;van Leeuwen et al, 2003). One could argue that recategorization contexts represent little more than alternative means of manipulating intergroup similarity, something that has been examined in the social identity literature with respect to subgroup identifi cation for some time.…”

Section: Theoretical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Superordinate and Subgroup Identification as Predictors of Intergroup Evaluation in Common Ingroup Contexts

Stone

Crisp

2007

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nutzungsbedingungen Richard J. Crisp University of KentWe examined the combined effects of subgroup and superordinate group identifi cation on intergroup evaluations within common ingroup identity contexts. In Studies 1 and 2 we observed a positive correlation between subgroup identifi cation and intergroup bias, and a negative correlation between superordinate identifi cation and bias. In Study 3 we replicated these effects using alternative measures and observed a common path underlying these relationships: the perceived psychological distance between the self and outgroup. In Studies 4 and 5 we replicated this path model and found that the relationship between superordinate identifi cation and intergroup bias was contingent upon making the superordinate identity salient, but this was not the case for subgroup identifi cation. We discuss the fi ndings in the context of theoretical and applied development of the Common Ingroup Identity Model.keywords common ingroup identity, distinctiveness threat, identifi cation

show abstract

Section: Identifi Cation and Subgroup Distinctivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theoretical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Superordinate and Subgroup Identification as Predictors of Intergroup Evaluation in Common Ingroup Contexts

Stone

Crisp

2007

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such a sense of self is reflected in agents' behaviour. As Mitzen argues, 'ontological security is security not of the body but of the self, the subjective sense of who one is, which enables and motivates action 4 There is also a trend within the social identity perspective (Tajfel 1978;Tajfel and Turner 1986) arguing that differentiation increases when group distinctiveness is low and threatened by similarity with other groups (Moghaddam and Stringer 1988;Roccas and Schwartz 1993;e.g. Dovidio, Gaertner, and Validzic 1998;Jetten, Spears, and Manstead 2001 and choice ' (2006:344).…”

Section: Ontological (In)security: a Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Ontological (In)security of Similarity: Wahhabism versus Islamism in Saudi Foreign Policy

Darwich

2014

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Further information on publisher's website:https://giga.hamburg/en/publication/the-ontological-insecurity-of-similarity-wahhabism-versus-islamism-insaudi-foreign Publisher's copyright statement:Additional information: GIGA Working Paper, No. 263 Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. It has long been argued that identity matters in international relations. Yet, how identity impacts enmity and conflict among states remains the subject of debate. The existing literature asserts that differences in identity can be a source of conflict, whereas convergence and similarity lead to cooperation. Nevertheless, empirical evidence from the Middle East has long defied this hypothesis. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which prides itself on being an Islamic model and claims Islamic leadership, has opposed the rise to power of Islamist movements in the Middle East. To address this paradox, this article builds on the growing literature on ontological security to propose a theoretical framework explaining how similarity can generate anxiety and identity risks. This framework, I argue, moves beyond traditional regime-security approaches to reveal that security is not only physical but also ontological. I then illustrate the argument through a comparison of Saudi identity risks in the wake of the Iranian revolution (1979) and the ascendance of the Muslim Brotherhood to power in Egypt (2012). Ultimately, these cases provide intriguing insights into foreign policy behaviour during critical situations.

show abstract

“…Previous literature has emphasized similarity--the uniqueness literature argues divergence is driven by similar others and some social identity research has argued groups feel increased pressure to differentiate themselves from similar outgroups (Brown & Abrams, 1986;Diehl, 1988;Jetten, Spears, & Manstead, 1997;Roccas & Schwartz, 1993). Previous research has not explained, however, why groups might want to differentiate themselves from dissimilar others.…”

Section: Summary: Who Drives Divergence and Why?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Divergence in cultural practices: Tastes as signals of identity

Berger¹

2007

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Divergence is a fact of social life; people select different tastes to distinguish themselves from others and they abandon tastes when others adopt them. But while we know a great deal about conformity, it predicts convergence, and thus is less equipped to explain why people diverge. We suggest people diverge to maintain clear signals of identity. Our approach emphasizes that the meaning of signals is set at a social rather than individual level. Tastes gain signal value through association with groups or types or individuals, but become diluted when members of more than one type hold them. Thus different types of people will diverge in the tastes they select, and they will abandon tastes they previously liked when they are adopted by members of other social types. AbstractDivergence is a fact of social life; people select different tastes to distinguish themselves from others and they abandon tastes when others adopt them. But while we know a great deal about conformity, it predicts convergence, and thus is less equipped to explain why people diverge. We suggest people diverge to maintain clear signals of identity. Our approach emphasizes that the meaning of signals is set at a social rather than individual level. Tastes gain signal value through association with groups or types of individuals, but become diluted when members of more than one type hold them. Thus different types of people will diverge in the tastes they select, and they will abandon tastes they previously liked when they are adopted by members of other social types. (127 words)

show abstract

Effects of intergroup similarity on intergroup relations

Abstract: We examined the impact of intergroup similarity on two aspects of intergroup relations.

Cited by 138 publications

References 27 publications

Superordinate and Subgroup Identification as Predictors of Intergroup Evaluation in Common Ingroup Contexts

Superordinate and Subgroup Identification as Predictors of Intergroup Evaluation in Common Ingroup Contexts

The Ontological (In)security of Similarity: Wahhabism versus Islamism in Saudi Foreign Policy

Divergence in cultural practices: Tastes as signals of identity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About