I enjoyed seeing you over there before the EU cut off our ability to be on Threads. 😭
I find this stuff really fascinating - I was doing my own (friendly) spying in some spaces, from a cultural studies perspective. Which paper/text on SIT would you recommend starting with?
Oooh, well the study that stands out is is Art based :-) the one where he split a group of boys into a Kandinsky and Klee group to understand minimal group effect (also see paradigm)this is the idea that group identity isn't the single source of intergroup conflict and social comparison doesn't alway lead to negative outcomes. I found this to be true in the Imposter research, comparison has both positive and negative outcomes.
Another name that pops up with SIT is Cialdini (he's the guy who wrote the book on influence and social proof) he reckons that we'll identify with a group when it is successful, but we'll put a little distance between ourselves and the social group when it fails. I always think that Cialdini's work needs to be read alongside the book Scarcity by Sendhil Mullainathan for that poverty perspective though! Cialdini's work comes across as having a privileged view point (for me at least!).
I enjoyed seeing you over there before the EU cut off our ability to be on Threads. 😭
I find this stuff really fascinating - I was doing my own (friendly) spying in some spaces, from a cultural studies perspective. Which paper/text on SIT would you recommend starting with?
Oooh, well the study that stands out is is Art based :-) the one where he split a group of boys into a Kandinsky and Klee group to understand minimal group effect (also see paradigm)this is the idea that group identity isn't the single source of intergroup conflict and social comparison doesn't alway lead to negative outcomes. I found this to be true in the Imposter research, comparison has both positive and negative outcomes.
There has been a recent (2020) study which extends the 1971 study which is interesting https://spl.psych.ucsb.edu/publication/journal-article/minimal-but/Minimal%20but.pdf
I like this article that puts SIT into organisational context https://doi.org/10.2307/258189, it also includes all the Tajfel references
SIT has limitations around cultural expectations, rewards and poverty though.
A critical review of SIT in the psychology literature, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/1099-0992(200011/12)30:6%3C745::AID-EJSP24%3E3.0.CO;2-O
Another name that pops up with SIT is Cialdini (he's the guy who wrote the book on influence and social proof) he reckons that we'll identify with a group when it is successful, but we'll put a little distance between ourselves and the social group when it fails. I always think that Cialdini's work needs to be read alongside the book Scarcity by Sendhil Mullainathan for that poverty perspective though! Cialdini's work comes across as having a privileged view point (for me at least!).
Wow this gives me a lot to explore! Thanks so much. Will check it out.