Identity Needs Versus Social Opportunities: The Use of Group-Level and Individual-Level Identity Management Strategies

Abstract

This study investigates how relative group size and group status affect the use of direct and indirect identity management strategies, which may serve either individual or collective goals. On the basis of social identity theory, we hypothesized that strategy preference would be determined jointly by (1) the relative status of the in-group, (2) the nature of the comparison dimension, and (3) the level of in-group identification. In a laboratory situation, students were assigned randomly to groups of over- and underestimators. The in-group constituted either a majority or a minority group. Group status subsequently was manipulated by false feedback on a group creativity task. The main results showed that high status group members display in-group favoritism on status related dimensions, while low status group members consider the in-group superior on an alternative dimension. Furthermore, group members tend to accentuate the heterogeneity of the in-group on those dimensions on which they consider their group inferior. Finally, claims of in-group superiority on alternative dimensions in response to inferior status (a group-level strategy), were made only by high identifiers, while accentuation of in-group heterogeneity (an individual-level strategy) was observed only among low identifiers.