Following the best of us to help them: Group member prototypicality and collective action

While considering the role of group-level factors as predictors of collective action, research has overlooked the role of group prototypes in determining willingness to engage in collective action. To begin to investigate this area, we conducted two correlational studies (Ns = 141 and 98) in high schools examining the association between prototypical ingroup members’ desire to engage in collective action and participants’ collective action on behalf of a disadvantaged group (immigrants). Results showed a positive association between these two variables. We also investigated boundaries of this effect, finding that the association emerged when participants lacked personal experiences with the disadvantaged group (cross-group friendships; Study 1) or identified more with their ingroup, an effect also found when including a behavioral measure of collective action (Study 2). Intentions to follow the prototypical ingroup member emerged as the mediator (Study 2). It is worth noting that our methodology allowed us to assess prototypicality in a naturalistic context by calculating a metacontrast ratio for each group member, in line with self-categorization theory’s conceptualization of prototypicality. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications, with reference to the role of prototypicality as a means of social influence and to developing social norms in the context of collective action

School climate, social identity processes and school outcomes: Making the case for a group-level approach to understanding schools

An import ant area of inquiry within the educa tional domain concerns school climate and related concepts such as school connec ted ness and school belong ing (e.g., Thapa, Cohen, Higgins­D'Alessandro and Guffey, 2013). School climate is defined in differ ent ways, but in essence, it focuses on student percep tions of academic emphasis, the way groups within a school (e.g., teach ers, students, parents) relate to one another, and the higher­ order norms, values, and prac tices (shared mission) that define the school as a whole (Thapa et al., 2013). In this chapter, we argue that incor por at ing a social­ psycho lo gical analysis of the group within the school climate domain can advance under stand ing of school life. To date, most emphasis is placed on the psycho logy of indi vidu als­ as­individuals and inter per sonal rela tion ships. What is missing is an analysis of the group

Where to from here for the psychology of social change? Future directions for theory and practice

For a vibrant and viable psychology of social change it is necessary to examine its place and contribution to the societal processes it seeks to understand, explain, and (potentially) affect. In this article, we first consider the impact that research and theorizing on social change (should) have and related issues of how we communicate about our work (and to whom) and dilemmas around researchers being active participants in the change process. Second, we consider emerging trends in the field and comment on meta-theoretical and "meta-methodological" issues in going forward, including the interaction between individual and society, having theoretical models of the person that allow us to account for such an interaction, as well as rethinking our methodology and ways of "doing" psychology to better reflect people's experiences of mobilization and participation. In line with the proposed rethinking of our theories and methods, the final section introduces a new paradigm for investigating the nexus of social change and leadership dynamics. The overall aim of the article is to reflect on key questions and dilemmas facing the field and provide some starting points for debating and shaping its future. © 2011 International Society of Political Psychology

Where to from here for the psychology of social change?:Future directions for theory and practice

For a vibrant and viable psychology of social change it is necessary to examine its place and contribution to the societal processes it seeks to understand, explain, and (potentially) affect. In this article, we first consider the impact that research and theorizing on social change (should) have and related issues of how we communicate about our work (and to whom) and dilemmas around researchers being active participants in the change process. Second, we consider emerging trends in the field and comment on meta-theoretical and “meta-methodological” issues in going forward, including the interaction between individual and society, having theoretical models of the person that allow us to account for such an interaction, as well as rethinking our methodology and ways of “doing” psychology to better reflect people's experiences of mobilization and participation. In line with the proposed rethinking of our theories and methods, the final section introduces a new paradigm for investigating the nexus of social change and leadership dynamics. The overall aim of the article is to reflect on key questions and dilemmas facing the field and provide some starting points for debating and shaping its future

Well-being, school climate, and the social identity process: A latent growth model study of bullying perpetration and peer victimization

The present study concerns longitudinal research on bullying perpetration and peer victimization. A focus is on school factors of school climate (academic support, group support) and school identification (connectedness or belonging), which are conceptualized as related but distinct constructs. Analysis of change on these factors as well as individual well-being across time contributes to understanding bullying behavior. Latent growth modeling was employed to examine the predictors of anxiety, depression, 2 school climate factors and school identification in understanding change in physical and verbal bullying behavior. The sample included 492 Australian school students (means age 15 years, 53.5% male) in Grades 7 to 10 who completed measures over 3 years. Academic support and group support were the strongest predictors of change in bullying and victimization. Positive change in school identification also predicted a decrease in bullying behavior over time. An increase in depression or anxiety across time predicted an increase in rates of both bullying and victimization over time. Future research should continue to examine the complex relationship between individual-psychological and social-psychological variables in impacting on incidence of school-based bullying. On a practical note, school-based intervention programs may benefit from an approach that aims to target the school climate, social identity with the school, and promote individual psychological well-being

The impact of school climate and school identification on academic achievement: Multilevel modeling with student and teacher data

School climate is a leading factor in explaining student learning and achievement. Less work has explored the impact of both staff and student perceptions of school climate raising interesting questions about whether staff school climate experiences can add "value" to students' achievement. In the current research, multiple sources were integrated into a multilevel model, including staff self-reports, student self-reports, objective school records of academic achievement, and socio-economic demographics. Achievement was assessed using a national literacy and numeracy tests (N = 760 staff and 2,257 students from 17 secondary schools). In addition, guided by the "social identity approach," school identification is investigated as a possible psychological mechanism to explain the relationship between school climate and achievement. In line with predictions, results show that students' perceptions of school climate significantly explain writing and numeracy achievement and this effect is mediated by students' psychological identification with the school. Furthermore, staff perceptions of school climate explain students' achievement on numeracy, writing and reading tests (while accounting for students' responses). However, staff's school identification did not play a significant role. Implications of these findings for organizational, social, and educational research are discussed

Does education really change us? The impact of school-based social processes on the person

The group context and social identity is central for understanding how educational factors can influence behavior. Social identity processes not only help explain student behavior at school but point to pathways that can be used to shape it. It is argued that to change a person's motivations, perceptions, and behavior, it is necessary to transform and change his or her social identity. It is through shifts in defining who "we" are and what "we" do that it is possible to transform who "I" am and what "I" do

How does school climate impact academic achievement? An examination of social identity processes

In explaining academic achievement, school climate and social belonging (connectedness, identification) emerge as important variables. However, both constructs are rarely explored in one model. In the current study, a social psychological framework based on the social identity perspective (Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987) is introduced that provides a way to integrate these two areas of enquiry. Using this framework, the current study (N = 340 grade 7 and 9 students) investigates: (a) school climate and social identification as distinct predictors of academic achievement; and (b) social identification as a mediator of the school climate and achievement relationship. Achievement in reading, numeracy and writing was assessed by a national standardized test. The three variables most significantly associated with achievement were parental education, socio-economic status, and school identification. In line with predictions, school identification fully mediated the relationship between school climate and academic achievement in numeracy and writing, but not reading. The research highlights the importance of feeling psychologically connected to the school as a group for academic success

Does personality explain ingroup identification and discrimination? Evidence from the minimal paradigm

The idea that a person's personality can help explain prejudice has a long history in social psychology. The classic counter-argument has been that prejudice is much more a function of people's group memberships and the nature of intergroup relations rather than individual differences. Bringing these two lines of research together, it has been suggested that personality factors may not only affect intergroup discrimination directly, but also indirectly by predisposing some individuals to identify more strongly with some relevant in-group membership. Two experiments were conducted to investigate this possibility. The participants completed various personality measures (e.g. authoritarianism, personal need for structure and ethnocentrism as well as social dominance orientation (SDO) in Experiment 2). They were then assigned to minimal groups either randomly, by choice, or (supposedly) on the basis of attitudinal similarity. In Experiment 2, the minimal group paradigm was also adapted to examine the role of SDO. Overall, there was no evidence of significant relationships between traditional personality measures and either in-group identification or discrimination. In-group identification alone emerged as the strongest predictor of discrimination. There was evidence that those participants who scored higher in SDO were more likely to act in ways that supported the creation of a power hierarchy. The implications for broader understanding of prejudice are discussed