Social Influence and Group Identity

Abstract

This chapter reviews research on the group identity explanation of social influence, grounded in self-categorization theory, and contrasts it with other group-based explanations, including normative influence, interdependence, and social network approaches, as well as approaches to persuasion and influence that background group (identity) processes. Although the review primarily discusses recent research, its focus also invites reappraisal of some classic research in order to address basic questions about the scope and power of the group identity explanation. The self-categorization explanation of influence grounded in group norms, moderated by group identification, is compared and contrasted to other normative explanations of influence, notably the concept of injunctive norms and the relation to moral conviction. A range of moderating factors relating to individual variation, features of the intragroup and intergroup context, and important contextual variables (i.e., anonymity versus visibility, isolation versus copresence) that are particularly relevant to online influence in the new media are also reviewed. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Psychology, Volume 72 is January 4, 2021. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Social norms, social identities and the COVID‐19 pandemic: Theory and recommendations

“…A dominant framework for understanding how social norms form, change and operate is the social identity approach (Reicher et al., 2010; Spears, 2021), developed in social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) and self‐categorisation theory (Turner et al., 1987; see Hornsey, 2008, for a review). The social identity approach proposes that belonging to social groups provides individuals with a definition of the group (i.e., a social identity), and a description and prescription of what is involved in being a group member (i.e., the group's norms).…”

Re-opening live events and large venues after Covid-19 ‘lockdown’: Behavioural risks and their mitigations

“…The classic outline of this work is contained in Turner (1991). Recent reviews of the accumulated research evidence are provided by Hogg and Gaffney (2017), Spears (2021), and Haslam, Reicher and Platow (2020). A version of the same principles is contained in guidance developed with and for colleagues in the live events industry and is currently being employed by crowd safety managers in Denmark and other locations in Europe (Drury et al, 2020).…”

Social norms, social identities and the COVID-19 pandemic: Theory and recommendations

“…A dominant framework for understanding how social norms form, change, and operate is the social identity approach (Reicher, Spears & Haslam, 2010;Spears, 2021), developed in social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) and self-categorization theory (Turner et al, 1987;see Hornsey, 2008, for a review). The social identity approach proposes that belonging to social groups provides individuals with a definition of the group (i.e., a social identity), and a description and prescription of what is involved in being a group member (i.e., the group's norms).…”