Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T13:21:58.820Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Group members differ in relative prototypicality: Effects on the individual and the group

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 October 2016

Michael A. Hogg
Michael A. Hogg*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA 91711. [email protected]://www.cgu.edu/pages/3948.asp
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

All groups are differentiated into more or less group-prototypical members. Central members readily influence and lead the group, and they define its identity. Peripheral members can feel voiceless and marginalized, as well as uncertain about their membership status – they may engage in extreme behaviors to try to win acceptance. These relative prototypicality dynamics sometimes benefit group performance but sometimes compromise performance.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 39 , 2016 , e153
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abrams, D. & Hogg, M. A. (1988) Comments on the motivational status of self-esteem in social identity and intergroup discrimination. European Journal of Social Psychology 18:317–34.Google Scholar
Abrams, D. & Hogg, M. A. (1990) Social identification, self-categorization and social influence. European Review of Social Psychology 1:195–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abrams, D. & Hogg, M. A. (2010) Social identity and self-categorization. In: The SAGE handbook of prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination, ed. Dovidio, J. F., Hewstone, M., Glick, P. & Esses, V. M., pp. 179–93. SAGE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abrams, D., Randsley de Moura, G., Marques, J. M. & Hutchison, P. (2008) Innovation credit: When can leaders oppose their group's norms? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 95:662–78. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.95.3.662.Google Scholar
Cantor, N. & Mischel, W. (1979) Prototypes in person perception. In: Advances in experimental social psychology, vol. 12, ed. Berkowitz, L., pp. 3–52. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Goldman, L., & Hogg, M. A. (2016). Going to extremes for one's group: The role of prototypicality and group acceptance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 46:544–53. doi: 10.1111/jasp.12382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haslam, S. A., Oakes, P. J., McGarty, C., Turner, J. C. & Onorato, S. (1995) Contextual changes in the prototypicality of extreme and moderate outgroup members. European Journal of Social Psychology 25:509–30.Google Scholar
Hogg, M. A. (2005a) All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others: Social identity and marginal membership. In: The social outcast: Ostracism, social exclusion, rejection, and bullying, ed. Williams, K. D., Forgas, J. P. & von Hippel, W., pp. 243–61. Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Hogg, M. A. (2006) Social identity theory. In: Contemporary social psychological theories, ed. Burke, P. J., pp. 111–36. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Hogg, M. A. (2007) Uncertainty-identity theory. In: Advances in experimental social psychology, vol. 39, ed. Zanna, M. P., pp. 69–126. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hogg, M. A. (2012) Uncertainty-identity theory. In: Handbook of theories of social psychology, vol. 2, ed. Van Lange, P. A. M., Kruglanski, A. W. & Higgins, E. T., pp. 62–80. Sage.Google Scholar
Hogg, M. A. (2014) From uncertainty to extremism: Social categorization and identity processes. Current Directions in Psychological Science 23:338–42. doi: 10.1177/0963721414540168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hogg, M. A. (2015) Constructive leadership across groups: How leaders can combat prejudice and conflict between subgroups. Advances in Group Processes 32:177–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hogg, M. A. & Van Knippenberg, D. (2003) Social identity and leadership processes in groups. In: Advances in experimental social psychology, vol. 35, ed. Zanna, M. P., pp. 1–52. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hogg, M. A. & Wagoner, J. A. (2017) Normative exclusion and attraction to extreme groups: Resolving identity-uncertainty. In: Ostracism, social exclusion and rejection, ed. Williams, K. D. & Nida, S. A., pp. 207–23. Routledge.Google Scholar
Hogg, M. A., Van Knippenberg, D. & Rast, D. E. III. (2012) The social identity theory of leadership: Theoretical origins, research findings, and conceptual developments. European Review of Social Psychology 23:258–304.Google Scholar
Marques, J. M. & Páez, D. (1994) The “black sheep effect”: Social categorisation, rejection of ingroup deviates and perception of group variability. European Review of Social Psychology 5:37–68.Google Scholar
Marques, J. M., Abrams, D., Páez, D. & Hogg, M. A. (2001) Social categorization, social identification, and rejection of deviant group members. In: Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Group processes, ed. Hogg, M. A. & Tindale, R. S., pp. 400–24. Blackwell.Google Scholar
Reicher, S. D., Spears, R. & Postmes, T. (1995) A social identity model of deindividuation phenomena. European Review of Social Psychology 6:161–98.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. Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. (1953) Philosophical investigations. Blackwell.Google Scholar