This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Utz, S. Articles by Sassenberg, K. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Distributive Justice in Common-Bond and Common-Identity Groups

Free University Amsterdam, sonja.utz{at}phil.tu-chemnitz.de

Kai Sassenberg

Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena

Two experiments tested whether common-bond groups (attachment based on interpersonal bonds between the members) and common-identity groups (attachment based on attraction to the group as a whole; Prentice, Miller, & Lightdale, 1994) make different fairness judgments. Overall, the use of the equality heuristic (Messick, 1993) was expected. Moreover, based on social identity theory, we predicted that members of common-bond groups show an egocentric bias, whereas members of common-identity groups forgo their individual goals for the group goal. In both experiments, positive and negative outcomes were distributed. Experiment 1 manipulated the degree of involvement, Experiment 2 varied responsibility for the outcome. Results of both studies supported the hypothesis, thus emphasizing the importance of the distinction between common-bond and common-identity groups.

Key Words: distributive fairness • egocentric bias • interpersonal attraction • social identity • social justice

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, Vol. 5, No. 2, 151-162 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/1368430202005002542


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?