首页> 外文期刊>European journal of social psychology >Group polarization and choice-dilemmas: How important is self-categorization?
【24h】

Group polarization and choice-dilemmas: How important is self-categorization?

机译:群体两极分化和选择困境:自我分类有多重要?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Self-categorization proponents (e.g., Turner, 1991) assume that group polarization occurs because discussants wish to differentiate themselves from outgroup positions and implicitly think of such groups even when they are not specifically mentioned. Ingroup/outgroup salience is thought to heighten such effects. To examine this view, we had participants discuss Choice Dilemma items either with or without explicit knowledge of outgroup positions. Contrary to a self-categorization account, this manipulation of outgroup salience did not affect the degree of group polarization. In addition, rating measures revealed little spontaneous consideration of outgroup positions on the part of participants, nor was consideration of outgroup positions related to degree of polarization. Group members did show, evidence of ingroup identification, but this identification was unrelated to participants' post-discussion community to the group consensus. Taken as a whole, these results suggest distinct limits to the self-categorization interpretation of group polarization involving Choice Dilemmas. Copyright (c) 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
机译:自我分类的支持者(例如Turner,1991)认为发生群体分化是因为讨论者希望将自己与群体位置区分开来,并且即使没有特别提及也隐含地想到这些群体。小组内/小组外的显着性被认为会增强这种影响。为了检验这种观点,我们让参与者讨论了选择困境的项目,无论有无明确的外组位置知识。与自我归类相反,这种对群体显着性的操纵并没有影响群体的分化程度。此外,评分标准显示参与者几乎没有自发地考虑小组外的职位,也没有考虑与极化程度有关的小组外职位。小组成员确实显示了团体内认同的证据,但是这种认同与参加者对小组共识的讨论后社区无关。总的来说,这些结果表明,涉及选择困境的群体极化的自分类解释存在明显的局限性。版权所有(c)2006 John Wiley&Sons,Ltd.

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号