Past works have shown that identification with smokers predicts increased resistance to antismoking campaigns. In this research, we hypothesized that group entitativity, because it affects the extent to which people feel committed to act for their group, can mitigate this link. We conducted two studies with convenient samples of smokers that both included a measure of identification and measured (Study 1) or manipulated (Study 2) entitativity. Then, participants read an antismoking message and, finally, reported their attitude toward smoking (Studies 1 and 2), as well as their urge to smoke and intention to quit (Study 2). Consistently, both studies revealed more resistance among high (vs. low) identifiers, but only when they perceived smokers as a highly entitative group. These findings emphasized the importance of group processes and social identity factors for accounting for responses to antismoking information.
BlanchardA. L.CaudillL. E.WalkerL. S. (2018). Developing an entitativity measure and distinguishing it from antecedents and outcomes within online and face-to-face groups. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 23, 91–108. doi:10.1177/1368430217743577
2.
BlondéJ.GirandolaF. (2018). Self-relevant threatening messages promote vigilance toward coping information: Evidence of positive processing at attentional level. Social Cognition, 36, 411–441. doi:10.1521/soco.2018.36.4.411
3.
BrewerM. B.HongY.-Y.LiQ. (2004). Dynamic entitativity: Perceiving groups as actors. In YzerbytV.JuddC. M.CorneilleO. (Eds.), The psychology of group perception: Perceived variability, entitativity, and essentialism (pp. 25–38). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
4.
BrownS. L.SmithE. Z. (2007). The inhibitory effect of a distressing anti-smoking message on risk perceptions in smokers. Psychology & Health, 22, 255–268. doi:10.1080/14768320600843127
5.
BurgessD. J.FuS. S.van RynM. (2009). Potential unintended consequences of tobacco-control policies on mothers who smoke. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 37, 151–158. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2009.05.006
6.
CampbellD. T. (1958). Common fate, similarity, and other indices of the status of aggregates of persons as social entities. Behavioral Science, 3, 14–25. doi:10.1002/bs.3830030103
7.
CastanoE.YzerbytV.BourguignonD. (2003). We are one and I like it: The impact of ingroup entitativity on ingroup identification. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 735–754. doi:10.1002/ejsp.175
8.
CastanoE.YzerbytV.PaladinoM.-P.SacchiS. (2002). I belong, therefore, I exist: Ingroup identification, ingroup entitativity, and ingroup bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 135–143. doi:10.1177/0146167202282001
9.
ChipeauxM.KulichC.IacovielloV.Lorenzi-CioldiF. (2017). “I want, therefore I am” – Anticipated upward mobility reduces ingroup concern. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01451
10.
ClarkJ. K.ThiemK. C. (2015). Group communicators, perceived entitativity, and persuasion: A self-validation analysis. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 61, 5–11. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2015.06.005
11.
ClarkJ. K.WegenerD. T. (2009). Source entitativity and the elaboration of persuasive messages: The roles of perceived efficacy and message discrepancy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 42–57. doi:10.1037/a0015450
12.
ComelloM. L. G. (2013). Conceptualizing the intervening roles of identity in communication effects: The prism model. In LasorsaD.RodriguezA. (Eds.), Identity and communication: New agendas in communication (pp. 168–188). New York, NY: Routledge.
13.
CookeR.SheeranP. (2004). Moderation of cognition–intention and cognition–behaviour relations: A meta-analysis of properties of variables from the theory of planned behaviour. British Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 159–186. doi:10.1348/0144666041501688
14.
CoxL. S.TiffanyS. T.ChristenA. G. (2001). Evaluation of the brief Questionnaire of Smoking Urges (QSU-brief) in laboratory and clinical settings. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 3, 7–16. doi:10.1080/14622200020032051
15.
CrawfordM. T.SalamanL. (2012). Entitativity, identity, and the fulfilment of psychological needs. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 726–730. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2011.12.015
16.
CrumpS. A.HamiltonD. L.ShermanS. J.LickelB.ThakkarV. (2010). Group entitativity and similarity: Their differing patterns in perceptions of groups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 1212–1230. doi:10.1002/ejsp.716
17.
DasguptaN.BanajiM. R.AbelsonR. P. (1999). Group entitativity and group perception: Associations between physical features and psychological judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 991–1003. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.5.991
18.
De HoogN.StroebeW.de WitJ. B. F. (2008). The processing of fear-arousing communications: How biased processing leads to persuasion. Social Influence, 3, 84–113. doi:10.1080/15534510802185836
19.
DensonT. F.LickelB.CurtisM.StenstromD. M.AmesD. R. (2006). The roles of entitativity and essentiality in judgments of collective responsibility. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 9, 43–61. doi:10.1177/1368430206059857
20.
DoosjeB.EllemersN.SpearsR. (1995). Perceived intragroup variability as a function of group status and identification. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 410–436. doi:10.1006/jesp.1995.1018
21.
DoosjeB.SpearsR.EllemersN. (2002). Social identity as both cause and effect: The development of group identification in response to anticipated and actual changes in the intergroup status hierarchy. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 57–76. doi:10.1348/014466602165054
22.
DupontP.TackV.BlechaL.ReynaudM.BenyaminaA.AmiroucheA.AubinH.-J. (2015). Smoker’s Identity Scale: Measuring identity in tobacco dependence and its relationship with confidence in quitting. The American Journal on Addictions, 24, 607–612. doi:10.1111/ajad.12272
23.
DurkinS.BrennanE.WakefieldM. (2012). Mass media campaigns to promote smoking cessation among adults: An integrative review. Tobacco Control, 21, 127–138. doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050345
24.
EchabeA. E.GuedeE. F.CastroJ. L. G. (1994). Social representations and intergroup conflicts: Who’s smoking here?European Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 339–355. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420240304
25.
EffronD. A.KakkarH.KnowlesE. D. (2018). Group cohesion benefits individuals who express prejudice, but harms their group. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 79, 239–251. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2018.08.002
26.
EffronD. A.KnowlesE. D. (2015). Entitativity and intergroup bias: How belonging to a cohesive group allows people to express their prejudices. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108, 234–253. doi:10.1037/pspa0000020
27.
EllemersN.SpearsR.DoosjeB. (1997). Sticking together or falling apart: In-group identification as a psychological determinant of group commitment versus individual mobility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 617–626. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.3.617
28.
Erceg-HurnD. M.SteedL. G. (2011). Does exposure to cigarette health warnings elicit psychological reactance in smokers?Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41, 219–237. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00710.x
29.
Evans-PolceR. J.Castaldelli-MaiaJ. M.SchomerusG.Evans-LackoS. E. (2015). The downside of tobacco control? Smoking and self-stigma: A systematic review. Social Science & Medicine, 145, 26–34. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.09.026
30.
Falomir-PichastorJ. M.ChatardA.MugnyG.QuiamzadeA. (2009). Coping with stigmatization: Smokers’ reactions to antismoking campaigns. In ButeraF.LevineJ. M. (Eds.), Coping with minority status (pp. 177–201). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
31.
Falomir-PichastorJ. M.InvernizziF. (1999). The role of social influence and smoker identity in resistance to smoking cessation. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 58, 73–84. doi:10.1024//1421-0185.58.2.73
32.
Falomir-PichastorJ. M.MugnyG. (1999). Influence sociale et résistance au changement chez les fumeurs [Social influence and resistance to change in smokers]. Addictologie, 21, 25–29.
33.
Falomir-PichastorJ. M.MugnyG. (2004). Société contre fumeur: Une analyse psychosociale de l’influence des experts [Society against smokers: A psychosocial analysis of experts’ influence]. Grenoble, France: Presses Universitaires de Grenoble.
34.
Falomir-PichastorJ. M.MugnyG.BerentJ.PereiraA.KrastevaD. (2013). Antismoking norm and smokers’ antismoking attitudes: The interplay between personal and group-based self-esteem. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 192–200. doi:10.1002/ejsp.1935
35.
Falomir-PichastorJ. M.MugnyG.InvernizziF. (2002). Influence d’experts sur l’intention d’arrêter de fumer: Contrainte persuasive et enjeux identitaires [Expert influence on intention to quit smoking: Persuasive constraint and identity concerns]. Psychologie Française, 47, 61–71.
36.
FarrellyM. C.DukeJ. C.DavisK. C.NonnemakerJ. M.KamyabK.WillettJ. G.JusterH. R. (2012). Promotion of smoking cessation with emotional and/or graphic antismoking advertising. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 43, 475–482. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2012.07.023
37.
FarrimondH. R.JoffeH. (2006). Pollution, peril and poverty: A British study of the stigmatization of smokers. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 16, 481–491. doi:10.1002/casp.896
38.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA.-G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. doi:10.3758/bf03193146
39.
FisherE. B. (1997). Two approaches to social support in smoking cessation: Commodity model and nondirective support. Addictive Behaviors, 22, 819–833. doi:10.1016/S0306-4603(97)00064-6
40.
FongG. T.HammondD.JiangY.LiQ.QuahA. C. K.DriezenP. (2010). Perceptions of tobacco health warnings in China compared with picture and text-only health warnings from other countries: An experimental study. Tobacco Control, 19, 69–77. doi:10.1136/tc.2010.036483
41.
FreemanM. A.HennessyE. V.MarzulloD. M. (2001). Defensive evaluation of antismoking messages among college-age smokers: The role of possible selves. Health Psychology, 20, 424–433. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.20.6.424
42.
GlasmanL. R.AlbarracinD. (2006). Forming attitudes that predict future behavior: A meta-analysis of the attitude–behavior relation. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 778–822. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.5.778
43.
GlockS.KneerJ. (2009). Are deterrent pictures effective? The impact of warning labels on cognitive dissonance in smokers. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 1, 356–373. doi:10.1111/j.1758-0854.2009.01019.x
44.
HamiltonD. L.ShermanS. J. (1996). Perceiving persons and groups. Psychological Review, 103, 336–355. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.103.2.336
45.
HamiltonD. L.ShermanS. J.LickelB. (1998). Perceiving social groups: The importance of the entitativity continuum. In SedikidesC.SchoplerJ.InskoC. A. (Eds.), Intergroup cognition and intergroup behavior (pp. 47–74). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
46.
HamiltonW. L.BienerL.BrennanR. T. (2007). Do local tobacco regulations influence perceived smoking norms? Evidence from adult and youth surveys in Massachusetts. Health Education Research, 23, 709–722. doi:10.1093/her/cym054
47.
HarrisP. R.MayleK.MabbottL.NapperL. (2007). Self-affirmation reduces smokers’ defensiveness to graphic on-pack cigarette warning labels. Health Psychology, 26, 437–446. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.26.4.437
48.
HaslamC.JettenJ.CruwysT.DingleG.HaslamA. (2018). The new psychology of health: Unlocking the social cure. New York, NY: Routledge.
49.
HertelA. W.MermelsteinR. J. (2012). Smoker identity and smoking escalation among adolescents. Health Psychology, 31, 467–475. doi:10.1037/a0028923
50.
HertelA. W.MermelsteinR. J. (2016). Smoker identity development among adolescents who smoke. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 30, 475–483. doi:10.1037/adb0000171
51.
HoggM. A. (2004). Uncertainty and extremism: Identification with high entitativity groups under conditions of uncertainty. In YzerbytV.JuddC. M.CorneilleO. (Eds.), The psychology of group perception: Perceived variability, entitativity, and essentialism (pp. 401–418). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
52.
HoggM. A.ShermanD. K.DierselhuisJ.MaitnerA. T.MoffittG. (2007). Uncertainty, entitativity, and group identification. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 135–142. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2005.12.008
53.
IacovielloV.Lorenzi-CioldiF.ChipeauxM. (2019). The identification–similarity relationship as a function of ingroup status: A social identity perspective. Self & Identity, 18, 685–708. doi:10.1080/15298868.2018.1513375
54.
IpG. W.ChiuC.WanC. (2006). Birds of a feather and birds flocking together: Physical versus behavioral cues may lead to trait- versus goal-based group perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 368–381. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.368
55.
JettenJ.HaslamS. A.CruwysT.GreenawayK. H.HaslamC.SteffensN. K. (2017). Advancing the social identity approach to health and well-being: Progressing the social cure research agenda. European Journal of Social Psychology, 47, 789–802. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2333
56.
JettenJ.SchmittM. T.BranscombeN. R.GarzaA. A.MewseA. J. (2011). Group commitment in the face of discrimination: The role of legitimacy appraisals. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 116–126. doi:10.1002/ejsp.743
57.
KesselsL. T. E.RuiterR. A. C.JansmaB. M. (2010). Increased attention but more efficient disengagement: Neuroscientific evidence for defensive processing of threatening health information. Health Psychology, 29, 346–354. doi:10.1037/a0019372
58.
KimS.-H.ShanahanJ. (2003). Stigmatizing smokers: Public sentiment toward cigarette smoking and its relationship to smoking behaviors. Journal of Health Communication, 8, 343–367. doi:10.1080/10810730305723
59.
KollmussA.AgyemanJ. (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior?Environmental Education Research, 8, 239–260. doi:10.1080/13504620220145401
60.
KrausS. J. (1995). Attitudes and the prediction of behavior: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 58–75. doi:10.1177/0146167295211007
61.
LeshnerG.BollsP.WiseK. (2011). Motivated processing of fear appeal and disgust images in televised anti-tobacco ads. Journal of Media Psychology, 23, 77–89. doi:10.1027/1864-1105/a000037
62.
LickelB.HamiltonD. L.WieczorkowskaG.LewisA.ShermanS. J.UhlesA. N. (2000). Varieties of groups and the perception of group entitativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 223–246. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.78.2.223
63.
LoukaP.MaguireM.EvansP.WorrellM. (2006). “I think that it’s a pain in the ass that I have to stand outside in the cold and have a cigarette”: Representations of smoking and experiences of disapproval in UK and Greek smokers. Journal of Health Psychology, 11, 441–451. doi:10.1177/1359105306063317
64.
ManyiwaS.BrennanR. (2012). Fear appeals in anti-smoking advertising: How important is self-efficacy?Journal of Marketing Management, 28, 1419–1437. doi:10.1080/0267257X.2012.715092
65.
MarkleG. E.TroyerR. J. (1979). Smoke gets in your eyes: Cigarette smoking as deviant behavior. Social Problems, 26, 611–625. doi:10.2307/800045
66.
McAfeeT.DavisK. C.AlexanderR. L.PechacekT. F.BunnellR. (2013). Effect of the first federally funded US antismoking national media campaign. The Lancet, 382, 2003–2011. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61686-4
67.
MeijerE.van LaarC.GebhardtW. A.FokkemaM.van den PutteB.DijkstraA.. . .WillemsenM. C. (2017). Identity change among smokers and ex-smokers: Findings from the ITC Netherlands Survey. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 31, 465–478. doi:10.1037/adb0000281
68.
MermelsteinR.CohenS.LichtensteinE.BaerJ. S.KamarckT. (1986). Social support and smoking cessation and maintenance. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 54, 447–453. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.54.4.447
69.
MoranM. B.SussmanS. (2014). Translating the link between social identity and health behavior into effective health communication strategies: An experimental application using antismoking advertisements. Health Communication, 29, 1057–1066. doi:10.1080/10410236.2013.832830
70.
NielsenJ.ShapiroS. (2009). Coping with fear through suppression and avoidance of threatening information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 15, 258–274. doi:10.1037/a0017018
71.
Peretti-WatelP.LegleyeS.GuignardR.BeckF. (2014). Cigarette smoking as a stigma: Evidence from France. International Journal of Drug Policy, 25, 282–290. doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2013.08.009
72.
PulversK.ScheuermannT. S.RomeroD. R.BasoraB.LuoX.AhluwaliaJ. S. (2014). Classifying a smoker scale in adult daily and nondaily smokers. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 16, 591–599. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntt187
73.
RhodesN.Roskos-EwoldsenD. R.EdisonA.BradfordM. B. (2008). Attitude and norm accessibility affect processing of anti-smoking messages. Health Psychology, 27, 224–232. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.27.3
74.
RileyK. E.UlrichM. R.HamannH. A.OstroffJ. S. (2017). Decreasing smoking but increasing stigma? Anti-tobacco campaigns, public health, and cancer care. The AMA Journal of Ethics, 19, 475–485. doi:10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.5.msoc1-1705
75.
RydellR. J.HugenbergK.RayD.MackieD. M. (2007). Implicit theories about groups and stereotyping: The role of group entitativity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 549–558. doi:10.1177/0146167206296956
76.
RydellR. J.McConnellA. R. (2005). Perceptions of entitativity and attitude change. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 99–110. doi:10.1177/0146167204271316
77.
SacchiS.CastanoE.BrauerM. (2009). Perceiving one’s nation: Entitativity, agency and security in the international arena. International Journal of Psychology, 44, 321–332. doi:10.1080/00207590802236233
78.
SchmaderT. (2002). Gender identification moderates stereotype threat effects on women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 194–201. doi:10.1006/jesp.2001.1500
79.
ShermanS. J.HamiltonD. L.LewisA. C. (1999). Perceived entitativity and the social identity value of group memberships. In AbramsD.HoggM. A. (Eds.), Social identity and social cognition (pp. 80–110). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
80.
SpearsR.DoosjeB.EllemersN. (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. doi:10.1177/0146167297235009
81.
Spencer-RodgersJ.HamiltonD. L.ShermanS. J. (2007). The central role of entitativity in stereotypes of social categories and task groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 369–388. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.3.369
82.
Spencer-RodgersJ.WilliamsM. J.HamiltonD. L.PengK.WangL. (2007). Culture and group perception: Dispositional and stereotypic inferences about novel and national groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 525–543. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.4.525
83.
StuberJ.GaleaS.LinkB. G. (2008). Smoking and the emergence of a stigmatized social status. Social Science & Medicine, 67, 420–430. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.03.010
84.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In AustinW. G.WorchelS. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
ThrasherJ. F.BoadoM.SebriéE. M.BiancoE. (2009). Smoke-free policies and the social acceptability of smoking in Uruguay and Mexico: Findings from the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 11, 591–599. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntp039
87.
TomborI.ShahabL.BrownJ.WestR. (2013). Positive smoker identity as a barrier to quitting smoking: Findings from a national survey of smokers in England. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 133, 740–745. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2013.09.001
88.
TomborI.ShahabL.HerbecA.NealeJ.MichieS.WestR. (2015). Smoker identity and its potential role in young adults’ smoking behavior: A meta-ethnography. Health Psychology, 34, 992–1003. doi:10.1037/hea0000191
89.
TracyJ. J.LombardoT. W.BentleyJ. P. (2012). A smoker identity measure for experimental, intermittent, and daily college student smokers. American Journal of Health Promotion, 27, 55–62. doi:10.4278/ajhp.110401-QUAN-146
90.
TurnerJ. C.HoggM. A.OakesP. J.ReicherS. D.WetherellM. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
91.
Van den PutteB.YzerM.WillemsenM. C.de BruijnG.-J. (2009). The effects of smoking self-identity and quitting self-identity on attempts to quit smoking. Health Psychology, 28, 535–544. doi:10.1037/a0015199
92.
VermeirI.VerbekeW. (2006). Sustainable food consumption: Exploring the consumer “attitude–behavioral intention” gap. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 19, 169–194. doi:10.1007/s10806-005-5485-3
93.
WakefieldM. A.LokenB.HornikR. C. (2010). Use of mass media campaigns to change health behaviour. The Lancet, 376, 1261–1271. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60809-4
94.
WestmaasJ. L.Bontemps-JonesJ.BauerJ. E. (2010). Social support in smoking cessation: Reconciling theory and evidence. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 12, 695–707. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntq077
95.
WolburgJ. M. (2006). College students’ responses to antismoking messages: Denial, defiance, and other boomerang effects. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 40, 294–323. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6606.2006.00059.x
