Subgroup differentiation as a response to an overly-inclusive group: A test of optimal distinctiveness theory

European Journal of Social Psychology

Volumn 29, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 543-550

  Hornsey, Matthew J ^a   Hogg, Michael A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0033137458     PISSN: 00462772     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199906)29:4<543::AID-EJSP945>3.0.CO;2-A     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Brewer, M. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 475-482.
2. Brewer, M. (1993a). The role of distinctiveness in social identity and group behaviour. In M. Hogg, & D. Abrams (Eds), Group motivation: Social psychological perspectives (pp. 1-16). New York: Harvester-Wheatsheaf.
3. Brewer, M. (1993b). Social identity, distinctiveness, and in-group homogeneity. Social Cognition, 11, 150-164.
4. Brewer, M. B., Manzi, J., & Shaw, J. (1993). Ingroup identification as a function of depersonalisation, distinctiveness and status. Psychological Science, 4, 88-92.
5. Brewer, M. B., & Weber, J. G. (1994). Self-evaluation effects of interpersonal versus intergroup social comparison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 268-275.
6. Duck, J. M., Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. T. (1996). Social comparison, social identity, and group distinctiveness. Unpublished manuscript, University of Queensland.
7. Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., Anastasio, P. A., Bachman, B. A., & Rust, M. C. (1993). The common ingroup identity model: Recategorisation and the reduction of intergroup bias. European Review of Social Psychology, 4, 3-24.
8. Gaertner, S. L., Mann, J. A., Dovidio, J. F., Murrell, A. J., & Pomare, M. (1990). How does cooperation reduce intergroup bias? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 692-704.
9. Gaertner, S. L., Rust, M. C., 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.
10. 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. Bower (Eds), What's social about social cognition: Research on socially shared cognition in small groups (pp. 230-260). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11. Hains, S. C., Hogg, M. A., & Duck, J. M. (1997). Self-categorization and leadership: Prototypicality and leader stereotypicality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1087-1100.
12. Hogg, M. A., & Hains, S. C. (1996). Intergroup relations and group solidarity: Effects of group identification and social beliefs on depersonalized attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 295-309.
13. Hogg, M. A., & Holland, N. (1996). Effects of cohesiveness and optimal distinctiveness on identification and assimilation in groups. Unpublished manuscript, University of Queensland.
14. Hornsey, M. J., & Hogg, M. A. (1999a). Subgroup relations: Two experiments comparing subgroup differentiation and common ingroup identity models of prejudice reduction. Revision under consideration in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
15. Hornsey, M. J., & Hogg, M. A. (1999b). Intergroup similarity and subgroup relations: The role of threat. Submitted for publication in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
16. Nunnally, J. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
17. Pedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. (1991). Measurement, design and analysis: An integrated approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18. Thorndike, R. M., Cunningham, G. K., Thorndike, R. L., & Hagen, E. P. (1990). Measurement and evaluation in psychology and education. New York: Macmillan.
19. Turner, J. C. (1981). The experimental social psychology of intergroup behaviour. In J. C. Turner, & H. Giles (Eds), Intergroup behaviour (pp. 66-101). Oxford: Blackwell.