Search

Environmental challenges are often marked by an intergroup dimension. Political conservatives and progressives are divided on their beliefs about climate change, farmers come into conflict with scientists and environmentalists over water allocation or species protection, and communities oppose big business and mining companies that threaten their local environment. These intergroup tensions are reminders of the powerful influence social contexts and group memberships can have on attitudes, beliefs, and actions relating to climate change and the environment more broadly. In this paper, we use social identity theory to help describe and explain these processes. We review literature showing, how conceiving of oneself in terms of a particular social identity influences our environmental attitudes and behaviors, how relations between groups can impact on environmental outcomes, and how the content of social identities can direct group members to act in more or less pro-environmental ways. We discuss the similarities and differences between the social identity approach to these phenomena and related theories, such as cultural cognition theory, the theory of planned behavior, and value-belief-norm theory. Importantly, we also advance social-identity based strategies to foster more sustainable environmental attitudes and behaviors. Although this theoretical approach can provide important insights and potential solutions, more research is needed to build the empirical base, especially in relation to testing social identity solutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current research examines how peripheral group members differ from prototypical group members in reacting to procedural discrimination (favoring self vs. favoring other procedures). Results of two experiments reveal that peripheral members react more negatively when the authority procedurally favors a prototypical member over them than when the authority favors them over a prototypical member. In contrast, reactions to procedural discrimination do not differ among prototypical members, and peripheral members paired with another peripheral member. The current research provides support for the literature on ingroup prototypicality, which argues that peripheral members are highly insecure about their inclusion in the group. It also furthers our insights into how group members’ responses to procedural experience are qualified by social identity concerns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present research examined whether reactions to procedural discrimination (favoring self vs. favoring other procedures) are qualified by whether the authority is an ingroup or an outgroup member. We argue that because we tend to demonstrate ingroup bias in an intergroup context, we should react more positively when we are favored over an outgroup other than when an outgroup other is favored over us. Furthermore, we reason that because compared with outgroup authorities, ingroup authorities are perceived to be more related to us, we should react more strongly to procedural discrimination exercised by the ingroup authority. Across the two studies, results support our predictions. Results are discussed with reference to the social identity perspective and the group-value model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This study incorporated identity constructs into the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) to investigate intentions to engage in environmental activism. First year students and participants of a students of sustainability conference (n=169) were administered a questionnaire survey that measured standard TPB constructs as well as environmental group membership and self-identity as an environmental activist. Consistent with predictions, environmental group membership and self-identity were positive predictors of intentions. Thus, greater involvement in environmental groups and a stronger sense of the self as an environmental activist were associated with stronger intentions to engage in environmental activism. There was also evidence that self-identity was a stronger predictor of intentions for participants with low rather than high environmental group membership. In accordance with the standard TPB model, participants with more positive attitudes toward and a greater sense of normative support for environmental activism also had greater intentions to engage in the behaviour. The implications for groups seeking to harness support for activities to protect the environment are discussed. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The present research integrates core aspects of social identity theory with the theory of planned behaviour to investigate factors influencing engagement in sustainable agricultural practices. Using a two-wave prospective design, two studies were conducted with samples of farmers (N = 609 and N = 259, respectively). At Time 1, a questionnaire survey assessed theory of planned behaviour variables in relation to engaging in riparian zone management (a sustainable agricultural practice). In addition, intergroup perceptions (i.e. relations between rural and urban groups), group norms and group identification were assessed. At Time 2, self-reported behaviour was measured. There was support for the integrated model across both studies. As predicted, past behaviour, attitudes and perceived behavioural control were significant predictors of intentions, and intentions significantly predicted self-reported behaviour. Group norms and intergroup perceptions were also significant predictors of intentions providing support for the inclusion of social identity concepts in the theory of planned behaviour. More supportive group norms were associated with higher intentions, especially for high-group identifiers. In contrast, more negative intergroup perceptions were associated with lower intentions and, unexpectedly, this effect only emerged for low-group identifiers. This suggests that in the context of decisions to engage in riparian zone management, an important sustainable agricultural practice, high identifiers are influenced predominantly by in-group rather than out-group considerations, whereas low identifiers may attend to cues from both the in-group and the out-group when making their decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research examines whether evaluations of positive deviates (i.e. high achieving group members) are influenced by the attributions they make for their performance. We argue that ingroup positive deviates who make group attributions help enhance the ingroup's image and thus attract favorable evaluations. In Experiment 1, ingroup positive deviates who made group attributions were generally evaluated more favorably than ingroup positive deviates who made individual attributions. There was also evidence that the positive deviates' attribution style influenced group and self-evaluations. Evaluations of outgroup positive deviates were not influenced by their attribution style. In Experiment 2, an ingroup positive deviate who was successful and attributed that success to the group was upgraded relative to an ingroup positive deviate who made individual attributions. Group evaluations were also higher when the positive deviate made group attributions. This pattern did not emerge when the positive deviate failed. The results are discussed from a social identity perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This experiment examined members' evaluations of a group leader and the group in contexts where a superordinate group comprised two subgroups and the group leader was aligned with one or other subgroup. The design varied group leader (ingroup, outgroup) and leader behavior (ingroup favoring, outgroup favoring) as well as the broader comparative context (intragroup, intergroup). Across a number of measures, results indicated a consistent Group Leader × Leader Behavior interaction that was independent of comparative context. Although group members were most satisfied with an ingroup leader who favored the ingroup, ingroup leaders were perceived positively irrespective of their behavior. Outgroup leaders who unexpectedly favored the other subgroup were also perceived positively. However, outgroup leaders who favored their own subgroup were perceived as less fair and as more biased than other leaders. They also engendered less identification with the superordinate group and a less unified perception of the group. Results demonstrate the importance of social identity concerns to leadership in nested group contexts and emphasize the fact that perceptions of leader fairness and concern for the common group mediate responses to the superordinate category. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Environmental organizations use a variety of text based communication formats to mobilize supporters to take collective action on their behalf. Yet we know little about the characteristics of collective action communication used by environmental organizations, nor its mobilization potential. In this paper we investigate whether environmental organizations' website communication reflects variables focal to the Social Identity Model of Collective Action that are known to motivate intentions to engage in collective action: identity, negative emotions, and efficacy. We use Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) text analysis software to investigate the extent to which linguistic cues associated with these focal variables are communicated in text obtained from 497 environmental advocacy organizations' websites. Findings demonstrate that environmental groups use identity and efficacy language more than the LIWC comparison text corpus, but show consistently low usage of both negative and positive emotion language. Our analyses also suggest that groups with the greatest financial resources use identity and efficacy language more frequently than groups with fewer financial resources. We suggest that future research investigating the effects of linguistic cues on message receivers is an important next step for both advancing the SIMCA framework as well as assisting environmental organizations' ability to more effectively mobilize supporters through text based communication formats. • Environmental group websites use language that makes identity and efficacy salient. • In contrast to SIMCA they do not use language which make emotions salient. • Groups with more financial resources use identity and efficacy words more in communication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]