Keywords
common ingroup identity
dual identity
prejudice
How to Cite
Abstract
Reducing the prejudices among the groups is one of the primary issues that social psychologists have been dealing with for many years. The main purpose of this review article is contribute to the Turkish literature by examining the effectiveness of the recategorization process in improving the negative attitudes towards the outgroups. To this end, the present review article consists of four parts. The first part includes the hypotheses of focusing on personal identities in reducing negative attitudes towards outgroups and the research findings about this approach. In the second part, studies related with the common ingroup identity representation which emphasizes the necessity of transforming the mental representation of the group members from the two groups (us and them) to a group (we) were examined. Next part contains theoretical information and research findings related with dual identity representation, which developed as an alternative to common group identity. In the fourth and the last part, studies related with the relationship between effectiveness of identity representation and group status were presented.
References
Adorno, T., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. ve Sanford, R. (1950). The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper.
Allport, G. (1954) The nature of prejudice. New York: Addison-Wesley.
Banfield, J. C. ve Dovidio, J. F. (2013). Whites' perceptions of discrimination against Blacks: The influence of common identity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(5), 833-841.
Banker, B. S. ve Gaertner, S. L. (1998). Achieving stepfamily harmony: An intergroup-relations approach. Journal of Family Psychology, 12(3), 310-325.
Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 46(1), 5-34.
Billig, M. ve Tajfel, H. (1973). Social categorization and similarity in intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 3(1), 27-52.
Brewer, M. B. (1991). On the social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17(5), 475– 482.
Brewer, M. B. ve Gaertner. S. L. (2001). Toward reduction of prejudice: Intergroup contact and social categorization. R. Brown & S. Gaertner (Ed.). Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Intergroup processes içinde (s. 451-472). Oxford: Blackwell.
Crisp, R. J. ve Beck, S. R. (2005). Reducing intergroup bias: The moderating role of ingroup identification. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 8(2), 173-185.
Crisp, R. J., Hewstone, M. ve Rubin, M. (2001). Does multiple categorization reduce intergroup bias?. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(1), 76-89.
Crisp, R. J., Stone, C. H. ve Hall, N. R. (2006). Recategorization and subgroup identification: Predicting and preventing threats from common ingroups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(2), 230- 243.
Crisp, R. J., Walsh, J. ve Hewstone, M. (2006). Crossed categorization in common ingroup contexts. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(9), 1204-1218.
Dixon, J., Tropp, L. R., Durrheim, K. ve Tredoux, C. (2010). “Let them eat harmony” prejudice-reduction strategies and attitudes of historically disadvantaged groups. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(2), 76-80.
Doosje, B., Spears, R. ve Ellemers, N. (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(1), 57-76.
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L. ve Kafati, G. (2000). Group identity and intergroup relations. The common in- group identity model. S. R. Thye & E. J. Lawler (Ed.). Advances in group processes içinde (s. 1-35). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., Niemann, Y. F. ve Snider, K. (2001). Racial, ethnic, and cultural differences in responding to distinctiveness and discrimination on campus: Stigma and common group identity. Journal of Social Issues, 57(1), 167-188.
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., Pearson, A. R. ve Riek, B. M. (2005). Social identities and social context: Social attitudes and personal well-being. S. R. Thye & E. J. Lawler (Ed.). Social Identification in Groups içinde (s. 231-260). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L. ve Saguy, T. (2007). Another view of “we”: Majority and minority group perspectives on a common ingroup identity. European Review of Social Psychology, 18(1), 296-330.
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L. ve Saguy, T. (2009). Commonality and the complexity of “we”: Social attitudes and social change. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13(1), 3-20.
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., Validzic, A., Matoka, K., Johnson, B. ve Frazier, S. (1997). Extending the benefits of recategorization: Evaluations, self-disclosure, and helping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33(4), 401-420.
Ensari, N., Christian, J., Kuriyama, D. M. ve Miller, N. (2012). The personalization model revisited: An experimental investigation of the role of five personalization-based strategies on prejudice reduction. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 15(4), 503-522.
Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., Anastasio, P. A., Bachman, B. A. ve Rust, M. C. (1993). The common ingroup identity model: Recategorization and the reduction of intergroup bias. European Review of Social Psychology, 4(1), 1-26.
Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F. ve Bachman, B. A. (1996). Revisiting the contact hypothesis: The induction of a common ingroup identity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20(3-4), 271-290.
Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., Banker, B. S., Houlette, M., Johnson, K. M. ve McGlynn, E. A. (2000). Reducing intergroup conflict: From superordinate goals to decategorization, recategorization, and mutual differentiation. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 4(1), 98-114.
Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., Rust, M. C., Nier, J. A., Banker, B. S., Ward, C. M., Mottola, G. R. ve Houlette, M. (1999). Reducing intergroup bias: elements of intergroup cooperation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(3), 388.
Gaertner, S. L., Mann, J. A., Dovidio, J. F., Murrell, A. J. ve Pomare, M. (1990). How does cooperation reduce intergroup bias?. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(4), 692-704.
Gaertner, S. L., Mann, J., Murrell, A. ve Dovidio, J. F. (1989). Reducing intergroup bias: The benefits of recategorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(2), 239-249.
Gaertner, S. L., Rust, M. C., Dovidio, J. F., Bachman, B. A. ve Anastasio, P. A. (1994). The contact hypothesis: The role of a common ingroup identity on reducing intergroup bias. Small Group Research, 25(2), 224-249.
Glasford, D. E. ve Dovidio, J. F. (2011). E pluribus unum: Dual identity and minority group members' motivation to engage in contact, as well as social change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(5), 1021-1024.
Gonzalez, R. ve Brown, R. (2003). Generalization of positive attitude as a function of subgroup and superordinate group identifications in intergroup contact. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33(2), 195-214.
Gonzalez, R. ve Brown, R. (2006). Dual identities in intergroup contact: Group status and size moderate the generalization of positive attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42(6), 753- 767.
Guerra, R., Rebelo, M., Monteiro, M. B., Riek, B. M., Mania, E. W., Gaertner, S. L. ve Dovidio, J. F. (2010). How should intergroup contact be structured to reduce bias among majority and minority group children?. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 13(4), 445-460.
Hall, N. R. ve Crisp, R. J. (2005). Considering multiple criteria for social categorization can reduce intergroup bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(10), 1435-1444.
Haslam, S.A. ve Dovidio, J. F. (2010). Prejudice. J. M. Levine & M. A. Hogg, (Ed.), Encyclopedia of group processes and intergroup relations içinde (s. 655-660). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hehman, E., Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., Mania, E. W., Guerra, R., Wilson, D. C. ve Friel, B. M. (2012). Group status drives majority and minority integration preferences. Psychological Science, 23(1), 46- 52.
Hewstone, M. ve Brown, R. (1986). Contact is not enough: An intergroup perspective on the 'contact hypothesis'. M. Hewstone & R. Brown (Ed.), Social psychology and society. Contact and conflict in intergroup encounters içinde (s. 1-44). Cambridge, MA, US: Basil Blackwell.
Hewstone, M., Rubin, M. ve Willis, H. (2002). Intergroup bias. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 575- 604.
Hogg, M. A. ve Vaughan, G. M. (2014). Sosyal psikoloji. (A. Gelmez ve İ. Yıldız, Çev.). İstanbul: Ütopya Yayınevi.
Hornsey, M. J. ve Hogg, M. A. (1999). Subgroup differentiation as a response to an overly inclusive group: a test of optimal distinctiveness theory. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29(4), 543-550.
Hornsey, M. J. ve Hogg, M. A. (2000a). Subgroup relations: A comparison of mutual intergroup differentiation and common ingroup identity models of prejudice reduction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(2), 242-256.
Hornsey, M. J. ve Hogg, M. A. (2000b). Intergroup similarity and subgroup relations: Some implications for assimilation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(8), 948-958.
Hornsey, M. J. ve Hogg, M. A. (2002). The effects of status on subgroup relations. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41(2), 203-218.
Huo, Y. J., Smith, H. J., Tyler, T. R. ve Lind, E. A. (1996). Superordinate identification, subgroup identification, and justice concerns: Is separatism the problem; is assimilation the answer?. Psychological Science, 7(1), 40-45.
Jetten, J., Spears, R. ve Manstead, A. S. (2001). Similarity as a source of differentiation: The role of group identification. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31(6), 621-640.
Macrae, C. N. ve Bodenhausen, G. V. (2000). Social cognition: Thinking categorically about others. Annual Review of Psychology, 51(1), 93-120.
Miller, N. (2002). Personalization and the promise of contact theory. Journal of Social Issues, 58(2), 387- 410.
Miller, N. ve Brewer, M. B. (1984). The social psychology of desegregation: An introduction. N. Miller & M. B. Brewer (Ed.), Groups in contact: The psychology of desegregation içinde (s. 1-8). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Mummendey, A. ve Wenzel, M. (1999). Social discrimination and tolerance in intergroup relations: Reactions to intergroup difference. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(2), 158-174.
Nier, J. A., Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., Banker, B. S., Ward, C. M. ve Rust, M. C. (2001). Changing interracial evaluations and behavior: The effects of a common group identity. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 4(4), 299-316.
Park, B. ve Judd, C. M. (2005). Rethinking the link between categorization and prejudice within the social cognition perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9(2), 108-130.
Pettigrew, T. F. (1998). Intergroup contact theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 49(1), 65-85.
Roccas, S. ve Schwartz, S. H. (1993). Effects of intergroup similarity on intergroup relations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23(6), 581-595.
Rokeach, M. (1954). The nature and meaning of dogmatism. Psychological Review, 61, 194-204.
Saguy, T., Tausch, N., Dovidio, J. F. ve Pratto, F. (2009). The irony of harmony: Intergroup contact can produce false expectations for equality. Psychological Science, 20(1), 114-121.
Saguy, T., Tausch, N., Dovidio, J. F., Pratto, F. ve Singh, P. (2011). Tension and harmony in intergroup relations. P.R., Shaver & M. Mikulincer (Ed.). Understanding and reducing aggression, violence, and their consequences içinde (s. 333-348). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Sherif, M., Harvey, O. J., White, B. J., Hood, W. R. ve Sherif, C. W. (1961). Intergroup conflict and cooperation: The Robbers Cave experiment. Norman: University of Oklahoma Institute of Intergroup Relations.
Shi, Y., Dang, J., Zheng, W. ve Liu, L. (2017). Dual Identity and Prejudice: The Moderating Role of Group Boundary Permeability. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1-8.
Simon, B., Mlicki, P., Johnston, L., Caetano, A., Warowicki, M., Van Knippenberg, A. ve Deridder, R. (1990). The effects of ingroup and outgroup homogeneity on ingroup favouritism, stereotyping and overestimation of relative ingroup size. European Journal of Social Psychology, 20(6), 519-523.
Stone, C. H. ve Crisp, R. J. (2007). Superordinate and subgroup identification as predictors of intergroup evaluation in common ingroup contexts. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 10(4), 493-513.
Tajfel, H. (1982). Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 33(1), 1-39.
Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundy, R. P. ve Flament, C. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1(2), 149-178.
Tajfel, H. ve Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Ed.), The social psychology of intergroup relations içinde (s. 33-47). Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole.
Turner, J. C. (1999). Some current issues in research on social identity and self-categorization theories. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje (Ed.), Social identity: Context, commitment, content içinde (s. 6- 35). Oxford: Blackwell.
Turner, R. N. ve Crisp, R. J. (2010). Explaining the relationship between ingroup identification and intergroup bias following recategorization: A self-regulation theory analysis. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 13(2), 251-261.
Ufkes, E. G., Calcagno, J., Glasford, D. E. ve Dovidio, J. F. (2016). Understanding how common ingroup identity undermines collective action among disadvantaged-group members. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 63, 26-35.
Ufkes, E. G., Dovidio, J. F. ve Tel, G. (2015). Identity and collective action among European Kurds. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54(1), 176-186.
Van Oudenhoven, J. P., Prins, K. S. ve Buunk, B. P. (1998). Attitudes of minority and majority members towards adaptation of immigrants. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28(6), 995-1013.
Van Zomeren, M., Spears, R., Fischer, A. H. ve Leach, C. W. (2004). Put your money where your mouth is! Explaining collective action tendencies through group-based anger and group efficacy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(5), 649-664.
Verkuyten, M. ve Brug, P. (2004). Multiculturalism and group status: The role of ethnic identification, group essentialism and protestant ethic. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34(6), 647-661.
Waldzus, S., Mummendey, A., Wenzel, M. ve Boettcher, F. (2004). Of bikers, teachers and Germans: Groups' diverging views about their prototypicality. British Journal of Social Psychology, 43(3), 385-400.
Wenzel, M., Mummendey, A. ve Waldzus, S. (2007). Superordinate identities and intergroup conflict: The ingroup projection model. European Review of Social Psychology, 18(1), 331-372.
Wenzel, M., Mummendey, A., Weber, U. ve Waldzus, S. (2003). The ingroup as pars pro toto: Projection from the ingroup onto the inclusive category as a precursor to social discrimination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(4), 461-473.
Wright, S. C. ve Lubensky, M. (2009). The struggle for social equality: Collective action vs. prejudice reduction. Demoulin, J. P. Leyens, & J. F. Dovidio (Ed.), Intergroup misunderstandings: Impact of divergent social realities içinde (s. 291–310). New York: Psychology Press.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2019 Nesne Psikoloji Dergisi