Minimal Social Categorization,Political Categorization,and Power Change

Abstract

A theory has been proposed by Mulder that the tendency to take over superordinate power varies inversely with the power distance between ego and the target. As compared to the person who occupies the middle rank, an individual who is on the bottom rank has been shown to be less inclined to take over the top position. What will happen, however, if the latter individual had to act in terms of group instead of self? Will the induction of social categorization activate him to take over superordinate power? Three experimental conditions were set up by means of Mulder's cognitive representational method, using secondary school boys as subjects (N = 54). It was found that minimal social categorization did not enhance the tendency of the bottom member to take overpower. Enhancement effect was observed only in the condition of political categorization where the bottom member belonged to a majority group which had ingroup affinity to the source of power (p < .05). No such effect was found in the political categorization condition where the bottom member belonged to a minority group which did not have ingroup affinity to the source of power.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

BENOIT-SMULLYAN, E. Status, status types, and status interrelations . American Sociological Review, 1944, 9, 151-161 .

BILLIG, M. , & TAJFEL, H. Social categorization and similarity in intergroup behaviour . European Journal of Social Psychology, 1973, 3, 27-52 .

Chinese Chronicle. Shanghai: People's Press , 1976.

DAHRENDORF, R. On the origin of inequality among men. In R. Dahrendorf (Ed.), Essays in the theory of society. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul , 1968, pp. 151-178.

FARARO, T. J. Dynamics of status equilibration. In J. Berger , M. Zelditch, Jr. , & B. Anderson (Eds.), Sociological theories in progress (Vol. 2). Boston: Houghton Mifflin , 1972, pp. 183-217.

GALTUNG, J. Rank and social integration: A multi-dimensional approach. In J. Berger , M. Zelditch, Jr. , & B. Anderson (Eds.), Sociological theories in progress (Vol. 1). Boston: Houghton Mifflin , 1966, pp. 145-198.

GOFFMAN, I. W. Status consistency and preference for change in power distribution . American Sociological Review, 1957, 22, pp. 275-281 .

GURR, T. R. Why men rebel. Princeton: Princeton University Press , 1970.

KIMBERLY, J. C. A theory of status equilibration. In J. Berger , M. Zelditch, Jr. , & B. Anderson (Eds.), Sociological theories in progress (Vol. 1). Boston: Houghton Mifflin , 1966, pp. 213-226.

10.

KIMBERLY, J. C. Relations among status, power, and economic rewards in simple and complex social structures. In J. Berger , M. Zelditch, Jr. , & B. Anderson (Eds.), Sociological theories in progress (Vol. 2). Boston: Houghton Mifflin , 1972, pp. 291-307.

11.

LENSKI, G. E. Status crystallization: A non-vertical dimension of social status . American Sociological Review, 1954, 19, 405-413 .

12.

LENSKI, G. E. Power and privilege: A theory of social stratification. New York: McGrawHill , 1966.

13.

LENSKI, G. E. Status inconsistency and the vote: A four nation test . American Sociological Review, 1967, 32, 298-301 .

14.

MULDER, M.

Power equalization through participation?

Administrative Science Quarterly, 1971, 16, 31-38 .

15.

MULDER, M. The learning of participation . Paper presented at the First International Sociological Conference on Participation and Self-government, Dubrovnik, Yugoslavia, December, 1972.

16.

MULDER, M. Power distance reduction tendencies: Problems of power and power relations . Paper presented at the conference "Research Paradigms and Priorities in Social Psychology," Ottawa, July 1-6, 1974.

17.

MULDER, M. Reduction of power differences in practice: The power distance reduction theory and its implications . Paper read at the seminar "European Contributions to Organization Theory," Fontainebleau, May 13-15, 1975.

18.

MULDER, M. , VEEN, P. , HARTSUIKER, D. , & WESTERDUIN, T. Cognitive processes in power equalization . European Journal of Social Psychology, 1971, 1, 107-130 .

19.

MULDER, M. , VEEN, P. , RODENBURG, C. , FRENKEN, J. , & TIELENS, H. The power distance reduction hypothesis on a level of reality . Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1973, 9, 87-96 .

20.

NG, S. H. Structural and non-structural aspects of power distance reduction tendencies . European Journal of Social Psychology (in press).

21.

ROGOW, A. A. , & LASSWELL, H. D. Poer, corruption, and rectitude. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall , 1963.

22.

SIMMEL, G. The sociology of Georg Simmel ( K. H. Wolff , Ed. and trans.). New York: Free Press , 1950.

23.

TAJFEL, H. Experiments in intergroup discrimination . Scientific American, 1970, 223, 96-102 .

24.

TAJFEL, H. Social identity and intergroup behaviour . Social Science Information, 1974, 13, 65-93 .

25.

TAJFEL, H. From the economics of expendable objects to the social psychology of intergroup relations. Unpublished manuscript, University of Bristol, 1976.

26.

TAJFEL, H. , & BILLIG, M. Familiarity and social categorization in intergroup behaviour . Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1974, 10, 159-170 .

27.

TAJFEL, H. , BILLIG, M. , BUNDY, R. , & FLAMENT, C. Social categorization and intergroup behaviour . European Journal of Social Psychology, 1971, 1, 149-175 .

28.

TURNER, J. Social comparison and social identity: Some prospects for intergroup behaviour . European Journal of Social Psychology, 1975, 5, 5-34 . (a)

29.

TURNER, J. Social categorization and social comparison in intergroup relations. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Bristol, 1975. (b)

30.

VEEN, P. Effects-of participative decision-making in field hockey training: A field experiment . Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1972, 7, 288-307 .

31.

WEBER, M. From Max Weber: Essays in sociology ( H. H. Gerth & C. W. Mills (Eds.)). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul , 1948.