From cooperation to conflict: The role of collective narratives in shaping group behaviour

Abstract

In this paper, we review the concept of collective narratives and their role in shaping group behaviour. We see collective narratives as ‘meta‐stories’ embraced by groups that incorporate values and beliefs about social reality, therefore providing a blueprint for group norms which, in turn, inform group members' behaviour. Our aim is to both describe the psychological processes underpinning the relation between collective narratives and group behaviours and develop an integrative typology of the functions of collective narratives (as they connect to various collective behaviours). We start by discussing definitions in the recent literature and propose an integrative conceptualisation which positions collective narratives in the context of collective action research. Next, we focus on the process by which collective narratives provide the bases for identity formation, development, and change, thus shaping group behaviour. We see collective narratives as central in understanding group behaviour, as they function as ‘meta‐stories’ that incorporate moral codes and values, and beliefs about the ingroups and outgroups—providing a blueprint for group norms which, in turn, inform group members' behaviour. In the second part of the article, we describe a typology of collective narratives according to their functions, structured around two core dimensions: the context/s in which collective narratives develop and are shared (i.e., intragroup vs. intergroup) and their effects within these contexts (i.e., driving consensus vs. driving dissent). We identify four distinctive types of collective narrative functions and review research showing how each of them shapes specific social identity content, including behaviour prescribing norms. We then show how these specific norms shape behaviours ranging from cooperation and pro‐social action to hostile intergroup conflict. The implications of this contribution are twofold. First, by providing a systematic account and categorisation of how collective narratives function in society and of their connections to social identities (and their content), we can more accurately deduct group norms and predict behaviours in specific circumstances, including in relation to political violence. Second, by better understanding the narratives that provide the bases of identity formation, development, and change, we can improve attempts to create alternative narratives that unify rather than divide people, so that pathways to co‐operation might be chosen over conflict.

Diversity, dissent, and fragmentation in the #MeToo movement: the role of collective and individual dimensions

“…Increased opportunities for intragroup interactions can also provide group members with opportunities to deliberate and reflect on the collective values, beliefs, norms and aims of the group as a whole. In turn, these can create a platform for disagreement between group members to occur, followed by factionalisation when there dissent about issues which are core to the group identity (Sani and Todman, 2002;Sani, 2008; see also Bliuc and Chidley, 2022). Future research could more explicitly assess this proposition, possibly by using representative samples from populations in different countries and directly test for differences between them.…”

“…How we position ourselves in relation to such issues creates ideologically opposed camps -that is, psychological groups based on contrastive collective narratives about important aspects of social reality (Bliuc et al, 2020(Bliuc et al, , 2021. Ideologically opposed camps are underpinned by a group consciousness (Duncan, 2012) conducive to collective action toward group goals in line with the camp's collective narrative (Bliuc et al, 2021;Bliuc and Chidley, 2022).…”

Computational Narrative Understanding: A Big Picture Analysis

“…The quintessential example of this behavior is the "family dinner table," where family lore is the product of multiple actors engaging in the process of narrative recounting, potentially over long spans of time. At the macro-level narratologists refer to these larger narrative schemas -the aggregate of small stories -as "collective narratives" (Bliuc and Chidley, 2022), "ontological narratives" (Somers, 1994), or "deep stories" (Hochschild, 2018).…”

“…It is common to think of narrative as located within an individual document or artifact (this book or blog post tells a story), but narratologists have also highlighted the way story structures emerge from the complex social interactions of numerous agents (known as the "small stories" paradigm (Georgakopoulou, 2007)). Such "small stories" can then coalesce into larger socially circulatable schemas, variously referred to as "ontological narratives" (Somers, 1994), "deep stories" (Hochschild, 2018), or "collective narratives" (Bliuc and Chidley, 2022). Such schemas can then guide the processing and circulation of new information to "fit the narrative," potentially creating informational feedback loops that are durable over shorter or longer stretches of time.…”