Search

Following Moscovici (1972), this paper addresses the questions: What is the aim of research within a social representations perspective? Is it to support or to criticize the social order? Is it to consolidate or transform it? After a brief overview of social representations theory, I argue that while the theory appears to have the conceptual tools to begin this critical task, there are serious criticisms and points of underdevelopment that need addressing. In order for social representations theory to develop into a rigorously critical theory there are three controversial issues that require clarification. These are (a) the relationship between psychological processes and social practices, (b) the reification and legitimization of different knowledge systems, and (c) agency and resistance in the co-construction of self-identity. After discussing each issue in turn, with illustrations from research on racializing representations, I conclude the paper with a discussion of the role of representations in the ideological construction and contestation of reality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is concerned with the social organization of collective memory and representations of history in the context of how post-communist democracies reckon with former regimes. It specifically centres on the textual accomplishment of coming to terms with the past in the 'Tismӑneanu Report' condemning Communism in Romania. The focus is on how the Report displays and shapes the ideological contours of coming to terms with the past around a particular 'social representation' of history. Several constitutive features of the Report that facilitate bringing off a particular 'representation of history' are identified: (a) the construction of a practical framework for the inquiry as a matter of public concern and attention; (b) the production of `Communism' as an empirical category with uniquely bound features; and (c) the structuring of time by bringing together a political agenda and national identity. The present argument tries to place representations of history (and coming to terms with the past) as something in need of constitution rather than simply relied on. It is suggested that a conception of coming to terms with the past as a textual accomplishment may lead to a fuller appreciation of the structure, function and salience of representations of history as integral part of moral/political/legal courses of action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a widely recognized tendency for people to positively differentiate Self from Other. The present paper asks: What counter dynamic constrains this othering tendency? A phenomenon, termed identification through differentiation is presented in which the positive differentiation of Self from Other collapses in a moment of identification. This phenomenon is demonstrated and explored using quasi-naturalistic group discussions with tourists in India. Three excerpts are analysed. The first demonstrates a tourist's attempt to positively differentiate him from other tourists. The second demonstrates how such an effort can collapse in a moment of identification with the previously derogated ‘other’ tourists. The third is used to explore how issues of self-presentation complicate identification through differentiation. The discussion uses concepts from Mead (1934) and Ichheiser (1949) in order to theorize about the preconditions, interactional mechanisms and wider applicability of the phenomenon. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents findings from the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) prison study - an experimental case study that examined the consequences of randomly dividing men into groups of prisoners and guards within a specially constructed institution over a period of 8 days. Unlike the prisoners, the guards failed to identify with their role. This made the guards reluctant to impose their authority and they were eventually overcome by the prisoners. Participants then established an egalitarian social system. When this proved unsustainable, moves to impose a tyrannical regime met with weakening resistance. Empirical and theoretical analysis addresses the conditions under which people identify with the groups to which they are assigned and the social, organizational, and clinical consequences of either doing so or failing to do so. On the basis of these findings, a new framework for understanding tyranny is outlined. This suggests that it is powerlessness and the failure of groups that makes tyranny psychologically acceptable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social group identification and socioeconomic deprivation have both been linked to self-reported depressive symptoms in general population samples; however, no study to date has explored the strength of the joint predictive value of these factors within a mental health population. The current study explored the impact of social group identifications and socioeconomic deprivation, together with important clinical and demographic variables, on psychological distress in a Scottish mental health sample. Participants ( N = 976) were recruited from referrals to a computerized cognitive behavioural therapy ( cCBT) programme in Scotland, 'Beating the Blues' (BtB) over a 25-month period. Participants completed the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation Outcome Measure ( CORE- OM) as a measure of psychological distress and three versions of the group identifications scale ( GIS), one for each of three groups: family, community, and a social group of choice. Demographic information and clinical information were collected on commencing BtB. Higher numbers of group identifications were significantly associated with lower psychological distress. Additionally, increased socioeconomic deprivation was significantly associated with more severe psychological distress; however, interestingly, the association was not as strong as that of group identifications. Identifying with fewer social groups predicts more severe psychological symptom presentations, even more so than living in a greater state of socioeconomic deprivation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Schmitt, Branscombe and Kappen (2003) and Wilson and Lui (2003) present a persuasive series of studies which raise major problems for the conceptualization of social dominance orientation in social dominance theory. Building on these and other data in the literature, this commentary summarizes six fundamental criticisms which can be made of the theory. We conclude that social dominance theory is flawed by conceptual inconsistencies and has been disconfirmed empirically in relation to its key hypothesis of behavioural asymmetry. The reaction of subordinate groups to the social hierarchy is better explained by social identity theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In five studies we explored how the context in which people think about the social structure and the implications of the social structure for one's in-group affect attitudes toward inequality. In Studies I and 2 we found that social dominance orientation (SDO) scores reflect attitudes toward specific types of inequality that are salient in context. Consistent with social identity theory, in Studies 3 to 5 we found that SDO scores reflected the interests of specific group identities. Indeed, when we compared existing privileged and disadvantaged groups, and when we manipulated in-group status, we found that participants held more positive attitudes toward inequality when the in-group was privileged, compared to when the in-group was disadvantaged. Across all of our studies, results were consistent with the contention that attitudes toward inequality are group-specific and depend on the social-structural position of salient in-groups. We discuss the implications of our findings for social dominance theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]