Exit, loyalty, and collective action among workers in a simulated business environment: Interactive effects of group identification and boundary permeability

Social Justice Research

Volumn 16, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 95-108

  Blair, Irene V ^a   Jost, John T ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

^b STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Collective action; Group loyalty; Social dilemma; Social identity; Tokenism

Indexed keywords

EID: 4043066544     PISSN: 08857466     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1024271019738     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Barreto, M., and Ellemers, N. (2000). You can't always do what you want: Social identity and self-presentational determinants of the choice to work for a low-status group. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 26: 891-906.
2. Dawes, R. M. (1980). Social dilemmas. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 31: 169-193.
3. Dawes, R. M., McTavish, J., and Shaklee, H. (1977). Behavior, communication and assumptions about other people's behavior in a commons dilemma situation. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 35: 1-11.
4. Dawes, R. M., van de Kragt, A. J. C., and Orbell, J. M. (1988). Not me or thee but we: The importance of group identity in eliciting cooperation in dilemma situations: Experimental manipulations. Acta Psychol. (Amst.) 68: 83-97.
5. Ellemers, N., van Knippenberg, A., de Vries, N., and Wilke, H. (1988). Social identification and permeability of group boundaries. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 18: 497-513.
6. Ellemers, N., Wilke, H., and van Knippenberg, A. (1993). Effects of the legitimacy of low group or individual status on individual and collective status-enhancement strategies. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 64: 766-778.
7. Ellemers, N., Spears, R., and Doosje, B. (1997). Sticking together or falling apart: In-group identification as a psychological determinant of group commitment versus individual mobility. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 72: 617-626.
8. Etzioni, A. (ed.) (1995). Rights and the Common Good, St. Martin's Press, New York.
9. Gaertner, S., Mann, J., Dovidio, J., Murrell, A., and Pomare, M. (1990). How does cooperation reduce intergroup bias? J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 59: 692-704.
10. Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
11. James, K., and Cropanzano, R. (1994). Dispositional group loyalty and individual action for the benefit of an ingroup: Experimental and correlational evidence. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 60: 179-205.
12. Johnson, D. W., and Johnson, F. P. (1991). Joining Together (4th Ed.), Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
13. Judd, C., and McClelland, G. (1989). Data Analysis: A Model-Comparison Approach, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York.
14. Kahneman, D., and Tversky, A. (1973). On the psychology of prediction. Psychol. Rev. 80: 237-251.
15. Kelly, C., and Kelly, J. (1994). Who gets involved in collective action?: Social psychological determinants of individual participation in trade unions. Hum. Relat. 47: 63-88.
16. Kramer, R. M. (1991). Intergroup relations and organizational dilemmas: The role of categorization processes. Res. Organ. Behav. 13: 191-228.
17. Kramer, R. M., and Brewer, M. B. (1984). Effects of group identity on resource use in a simulated commons dilemma. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 46: 1044-1057.
18. Lalonde, R. N., and Silverman, R. A. (1994). Behavioral preferences in response to social injustice: The effects of group permeability and social identity salience. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 66: 78-85.
19. Lewin, K. (1941). Resolving Social Conflicts, Harper & Brothers, New York.
20. Mackie, D. (1986). Social identification effects in group polarization. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 50: 720-728.
21. Mansbridge, J. J. (ed.) (1990). Beyond Self-Interest, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
22. Orbell, J. M., van de Kragt, A. J. C., and Dawes, R. (1988). Explaining discussion-induced cooperation. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 54: 811-819.
23. O'Reilly, C., and Chatman, J. (1986). Organizational commitment and psychological attachment: The effects of compliance, identification and internalization on prosocial behavior. J. Appl. Psychol. 71: 492-499.
24. Sherif, M., and Sherif, C. (1969). Social Psychology, Harper & Row, New York.
25. Tajfel, H. (1975). The exit of social mobility and the voice of social change: Notes on the social psychology of intergroup relations. Soc. Sci. Inf. 14: 101-118.
26. Tajfel, H. (ed.) (1978). Differentiation Between Social Groups: Studies in the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, Academic Press, London.
27. Tajfel, H. (1981). Human Groups and Social Categories, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
28. Taylor, D. M., and McKirnan, D. J. (1984). A five stage model of intergroup relations. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 23: 291-300.
29. Turner, J. C., and Oakes, P. (1989). Self-categorization theory and social influence. In: Paulus, P. B. (ed.), The Psychology of Group Influence, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 233-275.
30. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Turner, P. J., and Smith, P. M. (1984). Failure and defeat as determinants of group cohesiveness. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 23: 97-111.
31. Veenstra, K., and Haslam, S. A. (2000). Willingness to participate in industrial protest: Exploring social identification in context. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 39: 153-172.
32. Wright, S. C. (2001). Restricted intergroup boundaries: Tokenism, ambiguity, and the tolerance of injustice. In: Jost, J. T., and Major, B. (eds.), The Psychology of Legitimacy: Emerging Perspectives on Ideology, Justice, and Intergroup Relations, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 223-254.
33. Wright, S. C., and Taylor, D. M. (1998). Responding to tokenism: Individual action in the face of collective injustice. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 28: 647-667.
34. Wright, S. C., Taylor, D. M., and Moghaddam, F. (1990). Responding to membership in a disadvantaged group: From acceptance to collective protest. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 58: 994-1003.