2 results
16 - Changing Behavior Using Social Identity Processes
- from Part I - Theory and Behavior Change
- Edited by Martin S. Hagger, Linda D. Cameron, Kyra Hamilton, Griffith University, Nelli Hankonen, University of Helsinki, Taru Lintunen, University of Jyväskylä
-
- Book:
- The Handbook of Behavior Change
- Published online:
- 04 July 2020
- Print publication:
- 23 July 2020, pp 225-236
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Lewin (1951) recognized that it “is usually easier to change individuals formed into a group than to change any one of them separately” (p. 228). More than sixty-five years later, social identity theory (SIT; Tajfel & Turner, 1979) and self‐categorization theory (SCT; Turner et al., 1987; collectively referred to as the social identity perspective/approach) offer many insights into why and how this is the case. At the heart of the social identity perspective is a comprehensive and systematic theory of the “group,” which generated a new view of the self-process where humans are both individuals and group members with both personal (“I”) and social (“we”) identities. Importantly, social and personal identities can change and, in turn, so too can behavior. An important part of the behavior change “puzzle”, often overlooked by researchers, policy makers, and practitioners, is that it is necessary to engage not only the “I” or “me” but also the “we.” This chapter outlines the potential of social identity processes, including in-group norms and social influence, in advancing understanding of behavior change. Taken together, research and practice applying the social identity approach to behavior change demonstrate considerable promise in promoting change in group contexts and for multiple behaviors in multiple domains such as work, education, and community settings.
3 - From Prejudice to Social Change: A Social Identity Perspective
- from Part I - General Theoretical Perspectives
-
- By Katherine J. Reynolds, Australian National University, Emina Subasic, University of Newcastle, Luisa Batalha, Australian Catholic University, Benjamin M. Jones, Australian National University
- Edited by Chris G. Sibley, University of Auckland, Fiona Kate Barlow, University of Queensland
-
- Book:
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Psychology of Prejudice
- Published online:
- 17 November 2016
- Print publication:
- 31 October 2016, pp 47-64
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
For more than 80 years, understanding the causes, consequences, and remedies for prejudice has been a central theme in social psychology. Prejudice, by definition, refers to the holding of negative attitudes toward others based exclusively on their membership of a given group (Brown, 1995, p. 6). Prejudice is a major area of academic enquiry because it is considered a necessary condition for discrimination, which affects the opportunities and well-being of its targets – the victims. Furthermore, when negative views about a particular group become widespread and shared, then intergroup conflict, violence, and civil unrest are more likely.
Much of social psychology, though, has focused on the concepts of prejudice and social change as largely distinct areas of inquiry underpinned by different levels of analysis. Many approaches to explaining prejudice are directed at individual-level factors such as personality and cognitive and motivation processes (which are potentially faulty and irrational). Other explanations of prejudice emphasize the role of system-level factors and argue that maintenance of the status quo and preservation of stable social hierarchies consequently result in the subjugation of particular minority groups. An alternative analysis is that prejudice and social change are both outcomes of ongoing and fluid intergroup relations whereby people's group memberships and relationships between groups play a central explanatory role. The overarching and fundamental questions of interest within this trajectory of work are how is the intergroup relationship perceived now and when and how does it change.
Drawing on the social identity perspective, which incorporates both social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) and self-categorization theory (Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987), the aim of this chapter is to make a case for the interdependence of prejudice and social change. This more integrated analysis relies on a new understanding of prejudice that rejects the premise that such attitudes and associated negative treatment are the product of flawed and faulty cognitive and motivational psychological processes (Oakes, Haslam, & Turner, 1994; Reynolds, Haslam, & Turner, 2012). Instead prejudice needs to be conceptualized, first and foremost, as an outcome of group processes and intergroup dynamics, whereby members of the majority and minority groups are positioned in a particular social relationship. Majority and minority do not refer to the simple numbers but to positions of power through cultural and economic dominance within a social system.