Group members’ choice to work on individual or on group status improvement was examined as a function of degree of ingroup identification (low, high) and accountability of responses (anonymous, accountable to the ingroup). In Experiment 1 (N = 73), in line with the authors’ predictions, accountability elicited progroup behavior among low identifiers, whereas individualistic behavior was displayed when participants were anonymous. No similar effect of accountability was observed for high identifiers, who always chose for group status improvement. Experiment 2(N = 118) replicated and extended these findings. Degree of identification with the ingroup was shown to determine which contextual cues are likely to influence group members’ responses. The integration of traditionally separate models of social influence (self-presentation and social identity) is proposed. It is suggested that degree of identification with a group functions as a moderator of which type of influence the group is able to exert.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abrams, D. (1994). Social self-regulation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(5), 473-483.
2.
Abrams, D. , & Hogg, M. A. (1990). Social identification, self-categorization and social influence. European Review of Social Psychology, 1, 195-227.
3.
Abrams, D. , Wetherell, M., Cochrane, S., Hogg, M., & Turner, J. C. (1990). Knowing what to think by knowing who you are: Self-categorization and the nature of norm formation, conformity and group polarisation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 97-119.
4.
Ajzen, I. , & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
5.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Towards a unifying theory of behavior change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
6.
Batson, C. D. , Ahmad, N., Yin, J., Bedell, S. J., Johnson, J. W., Templin, C. M., & Whiteside, A. (1999). Two threats to the common good: Self-interested egoism and empathy-induced altruism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(1), 3-16.
7.
Baumeister, R. F. (1982). A self-presentational view of social phenomena. Psychological Bulletin, 91(1), 3-26.
8.
Branscombe, N. R. , & Ellemers, N. (1998). Coping with group-based discrimination: Individualistic versus group-level strategies. In J. K. Swim & C. Stangor (Eds.), Prejudice: The target’s perspective. New York: Academic Press.
9.
Deutsch, M. , & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629-636.
10.
Doosje, B. , & Ellemers, N. (1997). Stereotyping under threat: The role of group identification. In R. Spears, P. Oakes, N. Ellemers, & S. A. Haslam (Eds.), The social psychology of stereotyping and group life. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
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: Strategic use of sample information in generalization and stereotyping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 642-655.
13.
Ellemers, N. (1993). The influence of socio-structural variables on identity management strategies. European Review of Social Psychology, 4, 27-57.
14.
Ellemers, N. , Spears, R., & Doosje, B. (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(3), 417-426.
15.
Ellemers, N. , Van Dyck, C., Jacobs, A., & Hinkle, S. (2000). Intergroup differentiation in social context: Identity needs versus audience constraints. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63, 60-74.
16.
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.
17.
Fazio, R. H. (1990). A practical guide to the use of response latency in social psychological research. In C. Hendrick & M. S. Clark (Eds.), Research methods in personality and social psychology (Vol. 2). London: Sage.
18.
Hogg, M. A. , & Turner, J. C. (1987). Social identity and conformity: A theory of referent informational influence. In W. Doise & S. Moscovici (Eds.), Current issues in European social psychology (Vol. 2). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
19.
Insko, C. , Drenan, S., Solomon, M. R., Smith, R., & Wade, T. J. (1983). Conformity as a function of the consistency of positive self-evaluation with being liked and being right. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 341-358.
20.
James, K. , & Cropanzano, R. (1994). Dispositional group loyalty and individual action for the benefit of an ingroup: Experimental and correlational evidence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 60, 179-205.
21.
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.
22.
Karau, S. J. , & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(4), 681-706.
23.
Kelley, H. H. (1952). The two functions of reference groups. In G. E. Swanson, T. M. Newcomb, & E. L. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in social psychology (pp. 410-414). New York: Holt.
24.
Kelly, C. (1993). Group identification, intergroup perceptions and collective action. European Review of Social Psychology, 4, 59-83.
25.
Lea, M. , Spears, R., & De Groot, D. (1998, September 21-23). Knowing me, knowing you: Effects of visual anonymity on self-categorization, stereotyping and attraction in computer mediated groups. Poster presented at the annual conference of the British Psychological Society, Social Psychology Section, University of Kent, Canterbury.
26.
Leary, M. R. , & Kowalski, R. M. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107(1), 34-47.
27.
Martin, R. (1988). Ingroup and outgroup minorities: Differential impact upon public and private responses. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 39-52.
28.
Moscovici, S. (1985). Social influence and conformity. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 347-412). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
29.
Mummendey, A. , & Schreiber, H. -J. (1983). Better or just different? Positive social identity by discrimination against, or differentiation from outgroups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 13, 389-397.
30.
Noel, J. G. , Wann, D. L., & Branscombe, N. R. (1995). Peripheral ingroup membership status and public negativity toward outgroups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(1), 127-137.
31.
Ouwerkerk, J. W. , Ellemers, N., & De Gilder, D. (in press). Group commitment and individual effort in experimental and organizational contexts. In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje (Eds.), Social identity: Context, commitment, content. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
32.
Plant, E. A. , & Devine, P. G. (1998). Internal and external motivations to respond without prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(3), 811-812.
33.
Postmes, T. (1997). Social influence in computer-mediated groups. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Amsterdam.
34.
Postmes, T. , & Spears, R. (1998). Deindividuation and anti-normative behavior: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 123(3), 238-259.
35.
Raven, B. H. , & Kruglanski, A. W. (1970). Conflict and power. In P. Swingle (Ed.), The structure of conflict. New York: Academic Press.
36.
Reicher, S. D. (1984). Social influence in the crowd: Attitudinal and behavioural effects of de-individuation in conditions of high and low group salience. British Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 341-350.
37.
Reicher, S. , & Levine, M. (1994). Deindividuation, power relations between groups and the expression of social identity: The effects of visibility to the out-group. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 145-163.
38.
Reicher, S. D. , Spears, R., & Postmes, T. (1995). A social identity model of deindividuation phenomena. European Review of Social Psychology, 6, 161-198.
39.
Schlenker, B. R. (1980). Impression management: The self-concept, social identity, and interpersonal relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
40.
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(5), 538-553.
41.
Spears, R. , & Lea, M. (1994). Panacea or panopticon? The hidden power in computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 21(4), 427-459.
42.
Spears, R. , Lea, M., & Lee, S. (1990). De-individuation and group polarisation in computer-mediated communication. British Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 121-134.
43.
Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories: Studies in social psychology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
44.
Tajfel, H. , & Turner, J. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
45.
Tetlock, P. E. (1996). Accountability. In A. S. R. Manstead & M. Hewstone (Eds.), The Blackwell encyclopedia of social psychology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
46.
Turner, J. (1991). Social influence. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press.
47.
Turner, J. C. , Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987) Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorisation theory. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
48.
Van Knippenberg, A. , & Ellemers, N. (1992). Strategies in intergroup relations. In M. A. Hogg & D. Abrams (Eds.), Group motivation: Social psychological perspectives. Hemel Hempstead, NY: Harvester-Wheatsheaf.
49.
Wann, D. L. , & Branscombe, N. R. (1990). Die-hard and fair-weather fans: Effects of identification on BIRGing and CORFing tendencies. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 14(2), 103-117.
50.
Williams, K. , Harkins, S., & Latané, B. (1981). Identifiability as a deterrent to social loafing: Two cheering experiments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 303-311.
