63 research outputs found

    Prototypical similarity, self‐categorization, and depersonalized attraction: A perspective on group cohesiveness

    No full text
    In contrast to traditional approaches that widely equate group cohesiveness with interpersonal attraction, self‐categorization theoryargues that self‐categorization depersonalizes perception in terms of the group prototype, and transforms the basis of interindividual attitude (liking) from idiosyncracy into prototypicality. An implication is that while attraction in interpersonal relationships relates to overall similarity, attraction among group members is based on prototypical similarity. To test this idea, subjects (N = 219) participated in an experiment in which they reported their attitude towards an individual who would be their partner, or a fellow group member (of either group ‘Visual’ or group ‘Tactile’) for a subsequent task. Subject‐target similarity varied on each of two dimensions: dimension ‘A’ was more prototypical of group ‘Visual’, and dimension ‘F’ of group ‘Tactile’. The independent variables of social orientation (interpersonal, group ‘Visual’, group ‘Tactile’), similarity on dimension A (A ±), and dimension F(F±) were manipulated in a 3 × 2 × 2 design. The three hypotheses tested in this experiment were generally supported. Subjects preferred prototypically similar group members to interpersonal partners, and downgraded prototypically dissisimilar group members (HI). Identification was positively related to target evaluation (H2), more strongly for prototypically similar than dissimilar targets (H3), and the identification‐attraction relationship was mediated by perceived prototypical similarity. Group‐based effects were independent of perceptions of overall similarity. Copyrigh

    Variable style of transition between Palaeogene fluvial fan and lacustrine systems, southern Pyrenean foreland, NE Spain

    Get PDF
    Two Palaeogene fluvial fan systems linked to the south-Pyrenean margin are recognized in the eastern Ebro Basin: the Cardona–Su® ria and Solsona–Sanau¹ ja fans. These had radii of 40 and 35 km and were 800 and 600 km2 in area respectively. During the Priabonian to the Middle Rupelian, the fluvial fans built into a hydrologically closed foreland basin, and shallow lacustrine systems persisted in the basin centre. In the studied area, both fans are part of the same upward-coarsening megasequence (up to 800 m thick), driven by hinterland drainage expansion and foreland propagation of Pyrenean thrusts. Fourteen sedimentary facies have been grouped into seven facies associations corresponding to medial fluvial fan, channelized terminal lobe, nonchannelized terminal lobe, mudflat, deltaic, evaporitic playa-lake and carbonate-rich, shallow lacustrine environments. Lateral correlations define two styles of alluvial-lacustrine transition. During low lake-level stages, terminal lobes developed, whereas during lake highstands, fluvial-dominated deltas and interdistributary bays were formed. Terminal lobe deposits are characterized by extensive (100–600 m wide) sheet-like fine sandstone beds formed by sub-aqueous, quasi-steady, hyperpycnal turbidity currents. Sedimentary structures and trace fossils indicate rapid desiccation and subaerial exposure of the lobe deposits. These deposits are arranged in coarsening–fining sequences (metres to tens of metres in thickness) controlled by a combination of tectonics, climatic oscillations and autocyclic sedimentary processes. The presence of anomalously deeply incised distributary channels associated with distal terminal lobe or mudflat deposits indicates rapid lake-level falls. Deltaic deposits form progradational coarsening-upward sequences (several metres thick) characterized by channel and friction-dominated mouth-bar facies overlying white-grey offshore lacustrine facies. Deltaic bar deposits are less extensive (50–300 m wide) than the terminal lobes and were also deposited by hyperpycnal currents, although they lack evidence of emergence. Sandy deltaic deposits accumulated locally at the mouths of main feeder distal fan streams and were separated by muddy interdistributary bays; whereas the terminal lobe sheets expand from a series of mid-fan intersection points and coalesced to form a more continuous sandy fan fringe
    • 

    corecore