Optimal distinctiveness theory has direct implications for self-concept at the individual level and for inter-group relations at the group level. If individuals are motivated to sustain identification with optimally distinct social groups, then the self-concept should be adapted to fit the normative requirements of such group memberships.
Conversely, if optimal identity is challenged or threatened, the individual should react to restore congruence between the self-concept and the group representation. Optimal identity can be restored either by adjusting individual self-concept to be more consistent with the group norms, or by shifting social identification to a group that is more congruent with the self.
Self-stereotyping is one mechanism for matching the self-concept to characteristics that are distinctively representative of particular group memberships. Consistent with the assumptions of optimal distinctiveness theory, research has found that members of distinctive minority groups exhibit more self-stereotyping than do members of large majority groups. In addition, people tend to self-stereotype more when the distinctiveness of their group has been challenged. Optimal identities belonging to distinctive groups are also important for achieving and maintaining positive self-worth.
Group identity may play a particularly important role in enhancing self-worth and subjective well-being for individuals who have stigmatizing characteristics or belong to disadvantaged social categories. To evaluate performance, panels of senior executives rated the degree to which each team generated outcomes that align to the goals of this company.
The role of these teams was to improve operations, develop products, and serve customers. The judges assessed customer reports, spread sheets, and other information that reflected the performance of these teams on these facets. In addition, various properties of the teams were collated, such as the gender and age of members, whether or not all members belonged to the same business unit and whether or not members reported to the same supervisor. In general, teams were more effective if members belonged to three, rather than fewer, business units or reported to three, rather than fewer, supervisors--especially if each subgroup comprised the same number of people.
In contrast, teams were more effective if the majority of members were similar in age and sex. Presumably, individuals from distinct business units, or with different supervisors, access disparate knowledge. These individuals, if blended into one team, can thus contribute distinct knowledge.
This diversity of knowledge enhances innovation and problem solving, because many distinct perspectives can be applied. Nevertheless, this benefit dissipates if one source of knowledge prevails.
These benefits do not apply to subgroups that differ in identity, such as gender, rather than knowledge. Abrams, D. Political distinctiveness: An identity optimizing approach.
European Journal of Social Psychology , 24, Badea, C. The bases of identification: When optimal distinctiveness needs face social identity threat. British Journal of Social Psychology , 49, Bettencourt, B.
Social roles as mechanisms for psychological need satisfaction within social groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 81, Brewer, M. The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 17, Social identity, distinctiveness, and in-group homogeneity.
Social Cognition , 11, The psychology of prejudice: Ingroup love or outgroup hate? Journal of Social Issues , 55, Optimal distinctiveness, social Identity, and the self. Tangney Eds. In-group identification as a function of depersonalization, distinctiveness, and status. Psychological Science , 4, Distinctiveness motives as a source of the social self. Tyler, R. John Eds. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Social identity and social dilemmas: A double-edged sword.
Hogg Eds. London: Harvester-Wheatsheaf. Individual values, social identity, and optimal distinctiveness. Brewer Eds. Philadelphia: Psychology Press. Self-evaluation effects of interpersonal versus intergroup social comparison.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 66, Carton, A. The impact of subgroup type and subgroup configurational properties on work team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology , 98, Chan, C. Identifiable but not identical: Combining social identity and uniqueness motives in choice. Journal of Consumer Research , 39, Codol, J. On the so-called "superior conformity of the self behavior: Twenty experimental investigations.
European Journal of Social Psychology , 5, Social differentiation and non-differentiation. Tajfel Ed. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Demir, M. I am so happy 'cause my best friend makes me feel unique: friendship, personal sense of uniqueness and happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies , 14, Elder, G. Wartime losses and social bonding: Influence across 40 years in men's lives.
Psychiatry , 51, Frable, D. Being and feeling unique: statistical deviance and psychological marginality. Journal of Personality , 61, Henderson-King, E. In-group favoritism and perceived similarity: A look at Russians' perceptions in post-Soviet era. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 23, Hornsey, M. Subgroup differentiation as a response to an overly-inclusive group: A test of optimal distinctiveness theory.
European Journal of Social Psychology , 29, The individual within the group: Balancing the need to belong with the need to be different. Personality and Social Psychology Review , 8, Jetten, J. Rebels with a cause: Group identification as a response to perceived discrimination from the mainstream. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 27, Predicting the paths of peripherals: The interaction of identification and future possibilities.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 29, When group members admit to being conformist: The role of relative intragroup status in conformity self-reports. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 32, Changing identity: Predicting adjustment to organisational restructure as a function of subgroup and superordinate identification.
British Journal of Social Psychology , 41, European Journal of Social Psychology , 32, Suppressing the negative effect of devaluation on group identification: The role of intergroup differentiation and intragroup respect. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 41, Discrimination constrained and justified: The variable effects of group variability and ingroup identification. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 36, Intergroup norms and intergroup discrimination: Distinctive self-categorization and social identity effects.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 71, Distinctiveness threat and prototypicality: Combined effects on intergroup discrimination and collective self-esteem. European Journal of Social Psychology , 27, Defining dimensions of distinctiveness: Group variability makes a difference to differentiation.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 74, Group distinctiveness and intergroup discrimination. Ellemers, R. Spears, and B. Doosje Eds. Oxford, England: Blackwell Science. Similarity as a source of differentiation: The role of group identification. European Journal of Social Psychology , 31, Intergroup distinctiveness and differentiation: A meta-analytical investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 86, Kampmeier, C.
Individuality and group formation: The role of independence and differentiation. Leonardelli, G. Minority and majority discrimination: When and why. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 37, Long, K. The self-esteem hypothesis revisited: Differentiation and the disaffected.
Spears, P. Oakes, N. Haslam Eds. Oxford, England: Blackwell. Lynn, M. Uniqueness seeking. Lopez Eds. New York: Oxford University Press. Mael, F. Identifying organizational identification. Educational and Psychological Measurement , 52, McAuliffe, B. Individualist and collectivist group norms: When it's OK to go your own way. European Journal of Social Psychology , 33, Mullen, B.
Ingroup bias as a function of salience, relevance and status: An integration. European Journal of Social Psychology , 22, Pickett, C. Motivated self-stereotyping: Heightened assimilation and differentiation needs result in increased levels of positive and negative self-stereotyping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 82, Assimilation and differentiation needs as motivational determinants of perceived ingroup and outgroup homogeneity. Remember me.
Forgotten your password? Need help? Contact SAGE. With institutional access I can: View or download all content my institution has access to. To enhance your experience on our site, SAGE stores cookies on your computer.
0コメント