Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Common Ingroup Identity Model and the Development of a Functional Perspective: A Cross-National Collaboration

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Social Developmental Construction of Violence and Intergroup Conflict

Abstract

This chapter proposes a new, functional approach to the understanding of how effectively prejudice can be reduced among members of majority and minority groups. According to the functional perspective, derived from the Common Ingroup Identity Model, groups prefer and adopt the representation that most effectively promotes their group’s goals. Majority groups generally prefer a one-group representation (e.g., we are all on the same team) because it deflects attention away from disparities between groups and reduces subgroup identification, thereby reducing the likelihood of collective action that challenges the status quo. By contrast, minority groups prefer a dual identity (e.g., we are minority and majority group members on the same team) because it recognizes group distinctiveness, drawing attention to group disparities, which can motivate both majority and minority group members to mobilize to address injustices. However, contradicting these findings, results obtained in the US and in Portugal required and inspired the development of the functional approach presented in this chapter. It emphasizes the importance of taking into account the larger social and historical context when considering the groups’ interests as causing and motivating group members’ preferences for one-group or dual identity representations, and that these preferences of majorities and minorities are more flexible than we previously thought.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abrams, D. (1985). Focus of attention in minimal intergroup discrimination. British Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 65–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abrams, D., & Hogg, M. A. (2010). Social identity and self-categorization. In J. F. Dovidio, J. H. Hewstone, P. Glick, & V. M. Esses (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination (pp. 179–193). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. New York: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. B. (1979). Ingroup bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 307–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. B. (1988). A dual process model of impression formation. In T. Srull & R. Wyer (Eds.), Advances in social cognition (Vol. 1, pp. 1–36). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. B. (2000). Reducing prejudice through cross-categorization: Effects of multiple social identities. In S. Oskamp (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination: The claremont symposium on applied social psychology (pp. 165–183). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. B., & Miller, N. (1984). Beyond the contact hypothesis: Theoretical perspectives on desegregation. In N. Miller & M. B. Brewer (Eds.), Groups in contact: The psychology of desegregation (pp. 281–302). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T. (1958). Common fate, similarity and other indices of the status of aggregates of persons as social entities. Behavioral Science, 3, 14–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T. (1965). Ethnocentric and other altruistic motives. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (Vol. 13, pp. 283–311). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castelli, L., Tomelleri, S., & Zogmaister, C. (2008). Implicit ingroup metafavoritism: Subtle preference for ingroup members displaying ingroup bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 807–818.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Crisp, R. J., Walsh, J., & Hewstone, M. (2006). Crossed categorization in common ingroup contexts. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 1204–1218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doise, W. (1978). Groups and individuals: Explanations in social psychology. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (2004). Aversive racism. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 36, pp. 1–51). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., & Saguy, T. (2009). Commonality and the complexity of “we”: Social attitudes and social change. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13, 3–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (2010). Intergroup bias. In S. T. Fiske, D. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, 5th ed., pp. 1084–1121). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., & Kawakami, K. (Eds) (2003). Group processes and intergroup relations. Special Issue: Intergroup Contact.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., Niemann, Y. F., & 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, 167–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., Validzic, A., Matoka, K., Johnson, B., & Frazier, S. (1997). Extending the benefits of re-categorization: Evaluations, self-disclosure and helping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 401–420.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Esses, V. M., Wagner, U., Wolf, C., Preiser, M., & Wilbur, C. J. (2006). Perceptions of national identity and attitudes toward immigrants and immigration in Canada and Germany. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30, 653–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feagin, J. R. (1978). Race and ethnic relations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, S. T., Lin, M., & Neuberg, S. L. (1999). The continuum model: Ten years later. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual process theories in social psychology (pp. 211–254). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (2007). Social cognition: From brains to culture. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (1986). The aversive form of racism. In J. F. Dovidio & S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 61–89). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaertner, S. L., Bachman, B. A., Dovidio, J. D., & Banker, B. S. (2001). Corporate mergers and stepfamily marriages: Identity, harmony, and commitment. In M. A. Hogg & D. Terry (Eds.), Social identity in organizations (pp. 265–282). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Reducing intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model. Philadelphia, PA: The Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2009). A common ingroup identity: A categorization-based approach for reducing intergroup bias. In T. Nelson (Ed.), Handbook of prejudice. (pp. 489–506). New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., Anastasio, P. A., Bachman, B. A., & Rust, M. C. (1993). The common ingroup identity model: Recategorization and the reduction of intergroup bias. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 1–26). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaertner, S. L., Mann, J., Murrell, A., & Dovidio, J. F. (1989). Reducing intergroup bias: The benefits of recategorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 239–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaertner, S. L., Riek, B. M., Mania, E. W., & Dovidio, J. F. (2007) When does a dual identity reduce intergroup bias? In R. J. Brown, D. Carpozza., & O. Licciardello (Eds.), Contact hypothesis and immigrant acculturation (pp. 19–31). Rome: Franco Angeli.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaertner, S. L., Rust, M. C., Dovidio, J. F., Bachman, B. A., & Anastasio, P. A. (1996). The contact hypothesis: The role of a common ingroup identity on reducing intergroup bias among majority and minority group members. In J. L. Nye & A. M. Brower (Eds.), What’s social about social cognition? (pp. 230–360). Newbury.

    Google Scholar 

  • González, R., & Brown, R. (2003). Generalization of positive attitude as a function of subgroup and superordinate group identification in intergroup contact. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 195–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • González, R., & Brown, R. (2006). Dual identities and intergroup contact: Group status and size moderate the generalization of positive attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 753–767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guerra, R., Rebelo, M., & Monteiro, M. B. (2004, June). Changing intergroup relations: Effects of recategorization, decategorization and dual identity in the reduction of intergroup discrimination. Paper presented at Change in Intergroup Relations: 7th Jena Workshop on Intergroup Processes, Friedricht Schiller University, Jena.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guerra, R., Rebelo, M., Monteiro, M. B., Riek, B. M., Maia, E. W., Gaertner, S. L., & 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, 445–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guerra, R., Rebelo, M., Monteiro, M. B., & Gaertner, S. L. (2013). Translating recategorization strategies into an anti-bias educational intervention. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43, 14–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hehman, E., Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., Mania, E. W., Guerra, R., Wilson, D. C., & Friel, B. M. (2012). Group status drives majority and minority integration preferences. Psychological Science, 23, 46–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, M. A. & Hains, S. C. (1998). Friendship and group identification: a new look at the role of cohesiveness in groupthink. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 323–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, J. M., & Rothbart, M. (1980). Social categorization for in-group and out-group behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 301–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Insko, C. A., Schopler, J., Gaertner, L., Wildschut, T., Kozar, R. Pinter, B., et al. (2001). Interindividual-intergroup discontinuity reduction through the anticipation of future interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 95–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, J. M. (1997). Prejudice and racism (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kovel, J. (1970). White racism: A psychohistory. New York: Pantheon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahajan, N., Martinez, M. A., Gutierrez, N. L., Diesendruck, G., Banaji, M. R., & Santos, L. R. (2011). The evolution of intergroup bias: Perceptions and attitudes in rhesus macaques. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 387–405.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maurício, I., & Monteiro, M. B. (2003). Cape-Verdean adolescents living in Portugal: Levels of national and ethnic identity and social integration. In A. Ross (Ed.), A Europe of many cultures (pp. 123–129). London: CiCe Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, N. (2002). Personalization and the promise of contact theory. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 387–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mouro, C. (2003). Estratégias de gestão da identidade e percepção de variabilidade intragrupal em adolescentes portugueses de origem cabo-verdiana (Unpublished master thesis). Lisbon: ISCTE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullen, B., & Hu, L. T. (1989). Perceptions of ingroup and outgroup variability: A meta-analytic integration. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 10, 233–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mummendey, A., & Wenzel, M. (1999). Social discrimination and tolerance in intergroup relations: Reactions to intergroup difference. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 158–174.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Otten, S., & Moskowitz, G. G. (2000). Evidence for implicit evaluative in-group bias: Affect-based spontaneous trait inference in a minimal group paradigm. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 3, 77–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paladino, M.-P., & Castelli, L. (2008). On the immediate consequences of ingroup categorization: Activation of approach and avoidance motor behavior toward ingroup and outgroup members. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 755–768.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Park, B., & Rothbart, M. (1982). Perception of out-group homogeneity and levels of social categorization: Memory for the subordinate attributes of in-group and out-group members. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 1051–1068.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, T. & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A Meta-Analytic Test of Intergroup Contact Theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751–783.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2011). When groups meet: The dynamics of intergroup contact. New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rebelo, M., Guerra, R. & Monteiro, M. B. (2004, June). Reducing prejudice: Comparative effects of three theoretical models. Paper presented at the Fifth Biennial Convention of the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rebelo, M., Guerra, R., & Monteiro, M. B. (2005, July). Generalising positive intergroup relations in realistic settings: A comparison among recategorization, decategorization and dual identity models. Paper presented at the XIV General Meeting of the European Association of Experimental Social Psychology, Wurzburg, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schofield, J. W. (1986). Causes and consequences of the colorblind perspective. In S. Gaertner & J. Dovidio (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination and racism: Theory and practice. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherif, M., Harvey, O. J., White, B. J., Hood, W. R., & Sherif, C. W. (1961). Intergroup conflict and cooperation: The Robbers Cave experiment. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Book Exchange.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, E. R., & Mackie, D. M. (2010). Affective processes. In J. F. Dovidio, J. H. Hewstone, P. Glick, & V. M. Esses (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination (pp. 131–145). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H. (1969). Cognitive aspects of prejudice. Journal of Social Issues, 25(4), 79–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–48). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tropp, L. R., & Pettigrew, T. F. (2005). Relationship between intergroup contact and prejudice among minority and majority status groups. Psychological Science, 16, 951–957.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. C. (1975). Social comparison and social identity: Some prospects for intergroup behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 5, 5–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. C. (1985). Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 2, pp. 77-122). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D. & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T., & Blader, S. L. (2003). The Group Engagement Model: Procedural justice, social identity, and cooperative behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 349–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldzus, S., Mummendey, A., Wenzel, M., & Boettcher, F. (2004). Of bikers, teachers and Germans: Groups’ diverging views about their prototypicality. British Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 385–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wilder, D. A. (1981). Perceiving persons as a group: Categorization and intergroup relations. In D. L. Hamilton (Ed.), Cognitive processes in stereotyping and intergroup behavior (pp. 213–257). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worchel, S., Rothgerber, H., Day, E. A., Hart, D., & Butemeyer, J. (1998). Social identity and individual productivity within groups. British Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 389–413.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, S.C. & Lubensky, M. (2009). The struggle for social equality: Collective action versus prejudice reduction. In S. Demoulin, J. P. Leyens & J. F. Dovidio (Eds.), Intergroup misunderstandings: Impact of divergent social realities (pp. 291–310). New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Aknowledgments

Preparation of this chapter was supported by NSF Grant # BCS-0613218 awarded to Samuel L. Gaertner and John F. Dovidio.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA

    Sam Gaertner & Mathew Deegan

  2. Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), CIS-IUL, Lisbon, Portugal

    Rita Guerra

  3. National Laboratory of Civil Engineering (LNEC), Lisbon, Portugal

    Margarida Rebelo

  4. Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA

    John Dovidio

  5. Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA

    Erick Hehman

Authors
  1. Sam Gaertner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rita Guerra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Margarida Rebelo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. John Dovidio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Erick Hehman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Mathew Deegan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sam Gaertner .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Universidade de Lisboa, Instituto de Ciências Sociais (ICS-UL) Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal

    Jorge Vala

  2. CIS -IUL, Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), Lisbon, Portugal

    Sven Waldzus

  3. CIS -IUL, Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), Lisbon, Portugal

    Maria Manuela Calheiros

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gaertner, S., Guerra, R., Rebelo, M., Dovidio, J., Hehman, E., Deegan, M. (2016). The Common Ingroup Identity Model and the Development of a Functional Perspective: A Cross-National Collaboration. In: Vala, J., Waldzus, S., Calheiros, M. (eds) The Social Developmental Construction of Violence and Intergroup Conflict . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42727-0_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation