Beyond "Practical" Reconciliation: Intergroup Inequality and the Meaning of Non-Indigenous Identity

The long-standing policy of "practical reconciliation" between Australian Indigenous and Non-Indigenous people has actively disregarded the need to redress past injustice as the basis of current intergroup inequality. While this approach has received extensive critique from reconciliation scholars, its implications for Non-Indigenous involvement in reconciliation have been neglected. When Indigenous disadvantage is divorced from its social and historical context it is also more likely to be seen as having little to do with "us" as Non-Indigenous Australians. In contrast, when inequality is seen as stemming from the past and present reality of intergroup relations, and as such shapes the meaning of Non-Indigenous identity, it will be seen as more illegitimate, in need of change, and is more likely to motivate political engagement in the reconciliation process. The current study tests and finds support for this idea. Importantly, controlling for the contributions of perceived legitimacy of inequality and need for social change, Non-Indigenous identity meaning continued to significantly predict intentions to vote and engage in political action in support of reconciliation

The problem of behaviour change: From social norms to an ingroup focus

Social norms are of increasing interest to public policy experts and those conducting behaviour change interventions (e.g. safe driving, recycling). While there is agreement that social norms play a central role in explaining behaviour, such consensus i

Changing Identities to Change Society: Leadership as a Contest for Influence and Collective Mobilization

It is difficult to think of major historical events that have changed our society without also thinking about those who spearheaded the change process. Leaders are so prominent in this context that they become the embodiments of movements for social change (Gusfield, 1966; Stewart, Denton, & Smith, 2012). Rhetorically, the promise of change features prominently in electoral campaigns of leadership contenders, with one example being Barack Obama’s message of hope and change “we can believe in.” Yet within the social psychology of social change, discussion of leadership is almost completely absent (Haslam & Reicher, 2012; Subašić, Reynolds, Reicher, & Klandermans, 2012; Subašić, Reynolds, & Turner, 2008; van Zomeren, Leach, & Spears, 2012)

Are we all in this together? Co-victimization, inclusive social identity and collective action in solidarity with the disadvantaged

Common experience of injustice can be a potent motivator of collective action and efforts to achieve social change - and of such efforts becoming more widespread. In this research, we propose that the effects of co-victimization on collective action are a function of inclusive social identity. Experiment 1 (N= 61) demonstrated that while presence (compared to absence) of co-victimization positively predicted consumer (i.e., participants) willingness to act collectively in solidarity with sweatshop workers, this effect was mediated by inclusive social identity. In Experiment 2 (N= 120), the salience of inclusive social identity was experimentally manipulated and interacted with co-victimization to predict collective action. When inclusive social identity was salient, co-victimization enhanced collective action, including willingness to pay extra for products made ethically and in support of fair wages for workers. In contrast, collective action was attenuated when co-victimization took place in the absence of inclusive social identity. Implications for understanding when co-victimization is transformed into common fate and political solidarity with the disadvantaged are discussed

The political solidarity model of social change: Dynamics of self-categorization in intergroup power relations

Social and political change involves a challenge to the status quo in intergroup power relations. Traditionally, the social psychology of social change has focused on disadvantaged minority groups collectively challenging the decisions, actions, and policies of those in positions of established authority. In contrast, this article presents a political solidarity model of social change that explores the process by which members of the majority challenge the authority in solidarity with the minority. It is argued that political solidarity as a social change process involves a contest between the authority and the minority over the meaning of a shared (higher order) identity with the majority. When identity ceases to be shared with the authority and becomes shared with the minority, majority challenge to authority in solidarity with the minority becomes possible. The model's contributions to existing social psychological approaches to social change are also discussed