Self-categorization theory: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 17:19, 25 August 2018

Revision as of 17:37, 25 August 2018

Line 40:

===Prototypicality===

In social psychology a category [[prototype]] may be thought of as a “representative exemplar” of a category.<ref name="Billig, M. (1987)">Billig, M. (1987). Arguing and thinking: A rhetorical approach to social psychology: Cambridge University Press.</ref> Self-categorization theory predicts that what is prototypical of a category is contingent on the context in which the category is encountered.<ref name="Haslam, A. S. (2001)."/> More specifically, when the [[Self-categorization theory#Comparative fit|comparative context]] changes (i.e., the psychologically available stimuli change) this has implications for how the self category is perceived and the nature of subsequent [[Self-categorization theory#Depersonalization and self-stereotyping|depersonalization]]. To continue with a prior example, when physicists are a psychologically available comparison group to psychologists, those psychologists are more likely to adopt behaviours that reflect a perception that the ingroup is comparably unscientific. However, when artists are the psychologically available comparison group, those same psychologists are more likely to behave in a manner that highlights the scientific aspects of the category. To rephrase the above process in the language of the theory, selfSelf-categorization theory predicts that individuals adopt the features of a salient self category (self-stereotyping), and the content of the category they adopt depends on the present comparative context.

An individual’s degree of prototypicality also varies in relation to changes in the comparative context, and self-categorization theory expects this to have direct implications for interpersonal phenomenon. Specifically, prototypicality plays an important role in the social identity approach to [[Social identity approach#Leadership|leadership]],<ref name="Platow, M. J. et al. (1997).">{{cite journal | last1 = Platow | first1 = M. J. | last2 = Hoar | first2 = S. | last3 = Reid | first3 = S. Harley | last4 = Morrison | first4 = D. | last5 = Morrison | first5 = Dianne | year = 1997 | title = Endorsement of distributively fair and unfair leaders in interpersonal and intergroup situations | url = | journal = European Journal of Social Psychology | volume = 27 | issue = 4| pages = 465–494 | doi=10.1002/(sici)1099-0992(199707)27:4<465::aid-ejsp817>3.0.co;2-8}}</ref> influence, and [[interpersonal attraction]]. For example, on interpersonal attraction, self-categorization theory states that "self and others are evaluated positively to the degree that they are perceived as prototypical (representative, exemplary, etc.) of the next more inclusive (positively valued) self-category of which they are being compared".<ref name="Turner (1985)"/>