How do targets deal with a discrepancy between their choice of identity and the way they are categorized by others? In this article, the authors demonstrate that participants’ reactions to this discrepancy depend on whether the way they are actually treated by others respects their chosen identity. Participants whose choice of identity was neglected expressed low identification and little loyalty to the group to which they had been assigned. By contrast, identification and group loyalty were stronger among participants whose choice of identity was respected and who did not differ from controls on these measures. Of importance, only participants whose self-identity was respected also were willing to self-categorize in and express willingness to cooperate with the ascribed group. The implications of these results for the understanding of identity processes in pluralist societies are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Baron, R, M. , & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
2.
Barreto, M. , & Ellemers, N. (2000). You can’t always do what you want: Social identity and self-presentational determinants of the choice to work for a low status group. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 891-906.
3.
Barreto, M. , Spears, R., Ellemers, N., & Shahinper, K. (2001). The influence of linguistic context on the expression of social identity among minority group members: Evidence for strategic self-presentation. Manuscript submitted for publication.
4.
Berry, J. W. (1990). Psychology of acculturation: Understanding individuals moving between cultures. In R. W. Brislin (Ed.), Applied cross-cultural psychology (Vol. 14). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
5.
Bourhis, R. Y. , Moise, L. C., Perreault, S., & Senecal, S. (1997). Towards an interactive acculturation model: A social psychological approach. International Journal of Psychology, 32, 369-386.
6.
Branscombe, N. , Ellemers, N., Spears, R., & Doosje, B. (1999). The context and content of social identity threat. In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje (Eds.), Social identity: Context, commitment, content. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
7.
Brauer, M. , & Judd, C. M. (2000). Defining variables in relationships to other variables: When interactions suddenly turn out to be main effects. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 410-423.
8.
Breakwell, M. (1986). Coping with threatened identities. New York: Methuen.
9.
Deaux, K. (1996). Social identification. In E. T. Higgins & A. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 777-798). New York: Guilford.
10.
Deaux, K. , & Major, B. (1987). Putting gender into context: An interactive model of gender-related behavior. Psychological Review, 94, 369-389.
11.
Doosje, B. , Ellemers, N., & Spears, R. (1995). Perceived intragroup variability as a function of group status and identification. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 410-436.
12.
Doosje, B. , Spears, R., & Koomen, W. (1995). When bad isn’t all bad: The strategic use of sample information in generalization and stereotyping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 642-655.
13.
Eagly, A. M. , Makhijani, M. G., & Klonsky, B. G. (1992). Gender and the evaluation of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 3-22.
14.
Ellemers, N. (1993). The influence of socio-structural variables on identity management strategies. European Review of Social Psychology, 4, 27-57.
15.
Ellemers, N. , Wilke, H., & Van Knippenberg, A. (1993). Effects of the legitimacy of low group or individual status on individual and collective identity enhancement strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 766-778.
16.
Ellemers, N. , Barreto, M., & Spears, R. (1999). Commitment and strategic responses to social context. In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje (Eds.), Social identity: Context, commitment, content (pp. 146-157). Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
17.
Ellemers, N. , Kortekaas, P., & Ouwerkerk, J. W. (1999). Self-categorization, commitment to the group and self-esteem as related but distinct aspects of social identity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 371-389.
18.
Ellemers, N. , Van Knippenberg, A., de Vries, N. K., & Wilke, H. (1988). Social identification and permeability of group boundaries. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 497-513.
19.
Finchilescu, G. (1986). Effect of incompatibility between internal and external group membership criteria on intergroup behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 16, 83-87.
20.
Fiske, S. T. (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
21.
Fiske, S. T. , & Glick, P. (1995). Ambivalence and stereotypes cause sexual harassment: A theory with implications for organizational change. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 97-115.
22.
Gaertner, S. L. , Mann, J. A., Murrell, A., & Dovidio, J. F. (1989). Reducing intergroup bias: The benefits of re-categorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 239-249.
23.
Gaertner, S. L. , Rust, M. C., Dovidio, J. F., Bachman, B. A., & Anastasio, P. A. (1994). The contact hypothesis: The role of a common ingroup identity on reducing intergroup bias. Small Group Research, 22, 267-277.
24.
Gonzales, R. , & Brown, R. (2000). Maintaining dual identity as strategy for reducing intergroup bias. Unpublished manuscript, University of Kent.
25.
Haunschild, P. R. , Moreland, R. L., & Murrell, A. J. (1994). Sources of resistance to mergers between groups. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 1150-1178.
26.
Hewstone, M. , & Brown, R. J. (1986). Contact is not enough: An intergroup perspective on the “contact hypothesis.” In M. Hewstone & R. J. Brown (Eds.), Contact and conflict in intergroup encounters (pp. 1-44). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
27.
Horenczyk, G. (1996). Migrant identities in conflict: Acculturation attitudes and perceived acculturation ideologies. In G. M. Breakwell & E. Lyons (Eds.), Changing European identities: Social psychological analyses of social change (pp. 241-250). Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann.
28.
Hornsey, M. J. , & Hogg, M. A. (2000). Assimilation and diversity: An integrative model of subgroup relations. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 143-156.
29.
Huo, Y. J. , Smith, H. J., Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1996). Superordinate identification, subgroup identification, and justice concerns: Is separatism the problem, is assimilation the answer?Psychological Science, 7, 40-45.
30.
Jetten, J. , Spears, R., & Manstead, A. S. R. (1997). Strength of identification and intergroup differentiation: The influence of group norms. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27, 816-817.
31.
Kanter, R. M. (1993). Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic books.
32.
Nkomo, S. M. , & Cox, T. (1996). Diverse identities in organizations. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), Handbook of organizational studies (pp. 338-356). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
33.
Ouwerkerk, J. W. , Ellemers, N., & de Gilder, D. (1999). Group commitment and individual effort in experimental and organizational contexts. In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje (Eds.), Social identity: Context, commitment, content (pp. 184-204). Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
34.
Ouwerkerk, J. W. , de Gilder, D., & de Vries, N. K. (2000). When the going gets tough, the tough get going: Social identification and individual effort in intergroup competition. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1550-1559.
35.
Skrypnek, B. J. , & Snyder, M. (1981). On the self-perpetuating nature of stereotypes about women and men. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18, 277-291.
36.
Spears, R. , Doosje, B., & Ellemers, N. (1997). Self-stereotyping in the face of threats to group status and distinctiveness: The role of group identification. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 538-553.
37.
Swann, W. B., Jr. , & Ely, R. J. (1984). A battle of wills: self-verification versus behavioral confirmation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 1287-1302.
38.
Tajfel, H. (Ed.). (1981). The social psychology of minorities. In Human groups and social categories: Studies in social psychology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
39.
Terry, D. J. , Carey, C. J., & Callan, V. J. (2001). Employee adjustment to an organizational merger: An intergroup perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 267-280.
40.
Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Milton Keynes, UK: Oxford University Press.
41.
Tuner, J. C. , Hogg, M. A., Turner, P. J., & Smith, P. M. (1984). Failure and defeat as determinants of group cohesiveness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 97-111.
42.
Tyler, T. R. , & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 115-191). New York: Academic Press.
43.
Van Leeuwen, E. , & Van Knippenberg, D. (in press). Organizational identification following a merger: The importance of agreeing to differ. In S. A. Haslam, D. van Knippenberg, M. Platow, & N. Ellemers (Eds.), Social identity at work: Developing theory for organizational practice. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
44.
Van Oudenhoven, J.-P. , Prins, K., & Buunk, B. (1998). Attitudes of minority and majority members towards adaptation of immigrants. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 995-1013.
45.
Wright, S. C. , Taylor, D. M., & Moghaddam, F. M. (1990). Responding to membership in a disadvantaged group: From acceptance to collective protest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 994-1003.
46.
Yzerbyt, V. , Castano, E., Leyens, J.-P., & Paladino, M.-P. (2000). The primacy of the ingroup: The interplay of entitativity and identification. European Review of Social Psychology, 11, 257-295.
47.
Yzerbyt, V. , Leyens, J.-P., & Bellour, F. (1995). The ingroup overexclusion effect: Identity concerns in decision about group membership. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 1-16.
