This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free 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 HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lipponen, J. Articles by Juslin, M. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Subgroup Identification, Superordinate Identification and Intergroup Bias between the Subgroups

Department of Social Psychology, University of Helsinki, jukka.lipponen{at}helsinki.fi

Klaus Helkama

Department of Social Psychology, University of Helsinki

Milla Juslin

Department of Social Psychology, University of Helsinki

The primary aim of this study was to investigate the effects of subgroup and superordinate identification on intergroup differentiation between the subgroups. Hypotheses based on the social identity approach were formed and tested in two samples gathered from the same Finnish shipyard: Sample 1 consisted of the employees of 20 different subcontractors working at the shipyard, and Sample 2 consisted of the shipyard's own workforce. The results from Sample 1 supported the idea that subgroup identification (identification with the subcontractor) is positively related to ingroup bias, and superordinate identification (identification with the shipyard) is negatively related to ingroup bias toward other subgroups under the same superordinate category (shipyard). Among the shipyard's own workers (Sample 2), in turn, identification with the shipyard was significantly related to increased levels of ingroup bias toward the subcontractors working there. The results, thus, indicate that the positive effects of superordinate identification on subgroup relations may be limited to only some of the subgroups.

Key Words: identification • intergroup differentiation • social identity

References

• Arbuckle, J. L., & Wothke, W. (1999). Amos users'guide version 4.0. Chicago, IL: SmallWaters Corporation .
• Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization . Academy of Management Review, 14, 20-39 .
• Branscombe, N. R., Wann, D. L., Noel, J. G., & Coleman, J. (1993). In-group and out-group extremity: Importance of threatened social identity . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 381-388 .
• Brewer, M. B. (1993). Social identity, distinctiveness, and in-group homogeneity . Social Cognition, 11, 150-164 .
• Brewer, M. B., Ho, H. K., Lee, J. Y., & Miller, N. (1987). Social identity and social distance among Hong Kong schoolchildren . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 13, 156-165 .[Abstract]
• Brown, R., Condor, S., Mathews, A., Wade, G., & Williams, J. (1986). Explaining intergroup differentiation in an industrial organization . Journal of Occupational Psychology, 59, 273-286 .
• Brown, R., & Williams, J. (1984). Group identification: The same thing to all people? Human Relations, 37, 547-564 .[Abstract]
• 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 . European Review of Social Psychology, 4, 2-26 .
• Gaertner, S. L., Rust, M., Dovidio, J. F., Bachman, B. A., & Anastasio, P. A. (1994). The contact hypothesis: The role of a common ingroup identity on reducing intergroup bias . Small Group Research, 25, 224-249 .[Abstract]
• Hewstone, M., Islam, M. R., & Judd, C. M. (1993). Models of crossed categorization and intergroup relations . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 779-793 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
• Hinkle, S., & Brown, R. (1990). Intergroup comparisons and social identity: Some links and lacunae. In D. Abrams & M. Hogg (Eds.), Social identity theory: Constructive and critical advances (pp. 44-70). Hemel Hempsted: Harvester Wheatsheaf .
• Hornsey, M. J., & Hogg, M. A. (1999). Subgroup differentiation as a response to an overly-inclusive group: A test of optimal distinctiveness theory . European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 543-550 .[CrossRef]
• Hornsey, M. J., & Hogg, M. A. (2000). Assimilation and diversity: An integrative model of subgroup relations . Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 143-156 .
• Huo, Y. J., Smith, H. J.,Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1996). Superordinate identification, subgroup identification, and justice concerns . Psychological Science, 7, 40-45 .
• Jöreskog, K.G, & Yang, F. (1996). Nonlinear structural equation models: The Kenny-Judd model with interaction effects. In R.E. Schumacher & G.A. Marcoulides (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling: Issues and techniques (pp. 57-78). NJ: Erlbaum .
• Kelly, C. (1988). Intergroup differentiation in a political context . British Journal of Social Psychology, 27, 319-332 .
• Lipponen, J. (2001). Organizational identifications—Antecedents and consequences of identification in a shipyard context. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Social Psychology, University of Helsinki.
• Mael, F. A., & Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification . Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 103-123 .
• Malinen, P. (1998). To buy, sell, exchange and produce—A case study in the shipbuilding industry in shipyard-subcontractor exchange. [In Finnish with an English summary]. Turku, Finland: Publications of the Turku School of Economics and Business Administration .
• Mummendey, A., & Wenzel, M. (1999). Social discrimination and tolerance in intergroup relations: Reactions to intergroup difference . Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 158-174 .
• Niemelä, J. (1999). Crisis, industrial relations and organizational learning at the Finnish shipyards. In S. Lähteenmäki, L. Holden, & I. Roberts (Eds.), HRM and the learning organization. Turku, Finland: Publications of the Turku School of Economics and Business Administration .
• Oaker, G., & Brown, R. (1986). Intergroup relations in a hospital setting: A further test of social identity theory . Human Relations, 39, 767-778 .[Abstract]
• Perreault, S., & Bourhis, R. Y. (1999). Ethnocentrism, social identification, and discrimination . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 92-103 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Pusila, J. (1995). The shipyards in local labor market. In H. Leimu & J. Pusila (Eds.), A change of production paradigm in Finnish shipbuilding [In Finnish with English summaries]. Turku: Finland: Publications of the Turku School of Economics and Business Administration .
• Tajfel, H. (1978). Social categorization, social identity and social comparison. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 61-76). London: Academic Press .
• 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. 33-47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole .
• Terry, D. J., Carey, C. J., & Callan, V. J. (2001). Employee adjustment to an organizational merger: An intergroup perspective . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 267-280 .[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Turner, J. C. (1999). Some current issues in research on social identity and self-categorization theories. In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje (Eds.), Social identity: Context, commitment, content (pp. 6-34). Oxford: Blackwell .
• Vanbeselaere, N. (1991). The different effects of simple and crossed categorizations: A result of the category differentiation process or of differential category salience? European Review of Social Psychology, 2, 274-278 .
• Yang Jonsson, F. (1998). Modeling interaction and nonlinear effects: A step-by-step LISREL example. In R.E. Schumacher & G.A. Marcoulides (Eds.), Interaction and nonlinear effects in structural equation modeling (pp. 17-42). NJ: Erlbaum .

CiteULike

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

This article has been cited by other articles:

				B. E. Ashforth, S. H. Harrison, and K. G. Corley Identification in Organizations: An Examination of Four Fundamental Questions Journal of Management, June 1, 2008; 34(3): 325 - 374. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. H. Stone and R. J. Crisp Superordinate and Subgroup Identification as Predictors of Intergroup Evaluation in Common Ingroup Contexts Group Processes Intergroup Relations, October 1, 2007; 10(4): 493 - 513. [Abstract] [PDF]

				Y. J. Huo and L. E. Molina Is Pluralism a Viable Model of Diversity? The Benefits and Limits of Subgroup Respect Group Processes Intergroup Relations, July 1, 2006; 9(3): 359 - 376. [Abstract] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free 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 HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lipponen, J. Articles by Juslin, M. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?