Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
J. Jetten and M. J. Hornsey: Deviance and Dissent in Groups (REASONS FOR…
J. Jetten and M. J. Hornsey:
Deviance and Dissent in Groups
Video:
Intro:
In this review, we focus on
the
motivations that group members have to deviate and dissen
t, and
the functional as well as the dysfunctional
effects of deviance and dissent
. In doing so we aim for a balanced and complete account of deviance and dissent, highlighting
when such behaviors will be encouraged as well as when they will be punished
.
1/ HISTORICAL OVERVIEW
Asch’s (1951) line judgment studies is
that conformity is a powerful and prevalent force in groups
and that nonconformists risk mockery.
Social psychological theorizing argues that group members
will see deviance and dissent as dangerous for the group;
that they threaten people’s worldview, create uncertainty, and rob groups of momentum (Festinger 1950).
This classic view sometimes obscures the fact that deviance and dissent are
also prevalent phenomena within groups
(Haslam & Reicher 2012a,b; Jetten & Hornsey 2011, 2012; Reicher & Haslam 2006; see also Moscovici 1976
In sum, a growing body of literature argues that deviance and dissent—although potentially stressful—
are normal and healthy aspects of group life
and are often recognized as such by group members.
In our review, we focus mainly on work that has been published
in the past 20 years.
For reviews of earlier work, we refer the reader to Levine (1989), Levine & Kerr (2007), Moscovici (1976), and Turner (1991).
Definitions
We define deviance as
the violation of the norms of a group. As such, the likelihood that behavior will be labeled as deviant is always determined in relation to (a) the content of a group norm that is salient and (b) the contexts in which deviance and dissent are expressed.
When we define deviance as the violation of group norms, we need to be open to the possibility
that norms can be violated in two ways:
Individuals can fail to live up to important group norms or reject group norms (
i.e., negative deviants
), or individuals can deviate by contributing more to the group than the average group member (
i.e., positive deviants)
.
We define dissent
as the expression of disagreement with group norms, group action, or a group decision.
REASONS FOR DEVIANCE AND DISSENT
Traditionally, group members are seen
to conform
for two reasons (Deutsch & Gerard 1955).
1 people look to others
as a guide to reality
and as a guide to the appropriate way to behave
получается что здесь нет разницы между КК и ИК
2 people may conform so they fit in,
obtain approval
from others, or avoid punishment and social isolation
а здесь разница должна быть потому что в КК культурах выше потребность в социальном одобрении и больше страх оказаться в социальной изоляции.
Motive 1
captures the implicit assumption of the majority of the literature: Because it is assumed that conformity is a sign of loyalty, then deviance and dissent are seen to
be motivated by disloyalty or disengagement
(Blanton & Christie 2003).
conformity is a sing of SI? чем сильнее себя идентифицирую с группой тем комформней к ней я должен быть?
Разница должна быть значимой, для КК важно быть частью группы, а следовательно важно быть комформным
The social identity approach (comprising social identity theory and self-categorization theory)
points to the importance of group identification in understanding conformity (Turner 1991).
4.3.2. Теория социальной идентичности г. Тэджфела и д. Тернера
https://studfiles.net/preview/6266662/page:34/
http://www.iskhakov.narod.ru/tedter.html
более подробно -
https://psyera.ru/struktura-socialnoy-identichnosti_9049.htm
смотри статью в папке культура
Social Identity: Clarifying its Dimensions across Cultures
Если коротко то статья описывает, что в коллективистких культурах будет более сильная СИ особенно по
Proposition 1: Individuals from collectivistic cultures will have
higher scores
within
both affective dimensions
– sense of belonging and positive attitudes – of social identity measures than individuals from individualist cultures.
Interdependence-Independence
Предположительно (не могу найти материала), но в коллективистских культурах соотношение личной и социальной идентичности будет в пользу последней то есть личность будет в большей степени определяться через социальную идентичность
http://www.hr-portal.ru/article/predstavleniya-o-sootnoshenii-socialnoy-i-lichnostnoy-identichnosti-v-sovremennoy-zapadnoy
Motive 2
describes the other side of the coin of Motive 1: that dissent and deviance
can be motivated by group loyalty
.
This model suggests that
both lower and higher identifiers
might be motivated to dissent, but for different reasons.
The normative conflictmodel of dissent (Packer 2008, 2011)
Исходя из этой мысли возникает идея что в КК должны быть МД мотивированные высокой лояльностью? Слабо вериться. Наверно целесообразно понимать, что в ИК группы больше ориентированны на цель, в КК больше на отношения... ситуация с МД это ситуация выбора - отношения или цель, для обеих культур. Хотя остается вопрос про нормативный конфликт.
Motive 3
describes the fact that people often
have moral convictions
that prevent them from following and acting in line with group norms (“moral rebels,” see Monin et al. 2008).
Эффектом социализации в КК может быть включение определенных коллективистских позиций (норм), в систему моральных ориентиров, таких как например представление о том что вежливо или невежливо
Посмотреть
связь моральных убеждений / ценностей
(это одно и тоже или нет)?
Изучить предполагаемую связь
культуры и моральных убеждений
(в контексте диссетна)
Например: П
ример с зав каф философии - с точки зрения продуктивности было бы правильно создать расписание быстрее, но это могло бы привести к нарушению отношений между профессорами и администрацией, поэтому зав каф, предлагает подождать пока он согласует новое расписание с профессорами.
Итог: на первом месте отношения, на втором дело (хотя не факт, если не учитывать отношения то работы так же не будет).
Motive 4 relates
to the notion that group members might dissent and deviate because they want
to express individuality and uniqueness
(Imhoff & Erb 2009)
Particularly when publicly expressed, dissent and deviance might be good
ways to enhance individuality
and
uniqueness in group contexts (Blanton & Christie 2003)
... other research has found that people can endorse a minority position (rather than a majority position) as a way of clarifying their self- concept and communicating to otherswho they are (Rios Morrison&Wheeler 2010)
In this sense we agree with Codol (1984, p. 317), who argued that
“both conformity and resistance to conformity are fundamentally linked to the image
of oneself that one wishes to present to others (and undoubtedly also to oneself).” In
Finally, people might engage in deviance and dissent because norm violations are associated
with tangible rewards
, making the costs of punishment less of a deterrent
(Motive 5)
Таким образом
вероятность МД находится в зависимости от значимости противоречия.
Исходно мы понимаем что за отстаивание своей точки зрения придется платить (стоимость), одновременно мы представляем себе преимущества которые получим если отстоим точку зрения (выигрыш), соответственно чем сильнее выигрыш и чем меньше стоимость противостояния тем выше вероятность dissent
MOTIVES FOR REJECTING DEVIANCE AND DISSENT
1/Restoring Threatened Group Positivity
Similarly, people who criticized their groups faced heightened censure if they made their comments in public or directly to an out-group audience (Elder et al. 2005, Hornsey et al. 2005). It has also been found that deviants are more likely to be derogated
(a) when
the deviant behavior relates to a dimension of comparison that is directly relevant to in-group identity (Abrams et al. 2008b),
(b) when
the group identity is threatened (Branscombe et al. 1993), or
(c) when
the group’s position is unstable or challenged (Marques et al. 2001).
group members a
re motivated to see their group in a positive light
2/Restoring Threatened Group Cohesion
they also are motivated to see their group as
tight, well defined, and cohesive
One reason
for this is that cohesive groups offer certainty and structure about what to think and how to behave (Festinger
1950).
Another reason
why cohesion is important is because it offers resilience in the intergroup
context.
3/Restoring Threatened Group Distinctiveness
thus reducing the clarity of
in-group boundaries
Distinctiveness from relevant out-groups might be particularly important for
minority group
s
4/Restoring Threatened Group Locomotion
deviants and dissenters may cause
emotional, cognitive, and communicative stress
, undermining the ability of group to achieve its goals [what Festinger (1950) described as group locomotion]
group locomotion: the ability of a group to achieve its goals
5/Restoring a Threatened Self-Image
what might happen if the attitudinal deviance has a
clear moral flavor?
Monin and colleagues concluded that moral rebellion represents a threat to group members on t
hree fronts
: (a) The rebel’s moral stance is seen as an implicit criticism of those who did not take the stance, so group members anticipate condemnation from the rebel; (b)the actions of the rebel make you question your own assumptions and attitudes, leading to a dissonance-like state; and (c) the rebel strips those of us who conspire in immoral acts from the rationalization that we had no choice.
THE VALUE OF DISSENT AND DEVIANCE
Dissent!
The value of opinion minorities
lies in their ability to guard the group against complacency, to challenge conventional wisdom, and to keep the group sharp and on its toes
тут много всего, можно сделать хороший обзор по тому в чем позитивные эффекты МД
Deviance
Second, deviance
is functional and valuable for groups because it draws attention to alternative forms of behavior and thereby allows for social change (Choi & Levine 2004, Ellemers & Jetten 2013, Hansen & Levine 2009, Prislin & Christensen 2005, Prislin & Filson 2009).
Durkheim (1958) identified several ways in which groups benefit from having deviants in their midst.
First, deviants
have an important role to play in affirming group values, clarifying norms, and in helping group members to understand how they are different and distinct from other groups (for a similar point in the organizational context, see Markova & Folger 2012)
TOLERANCE FOR DISSENT AND DEVIANCE
Tolerance for Dissent
Contrary to the assumed wisdom that dissenters face personal censure, there is a
growing body of work showing that groups can be surprisingly accepting
of dissenters within their ranks (Esposo et al. 2013, Hiew & Hornsey 2010, Hornsey et al. 2002, Rabinovich & Morton 2010)
This relative tolerance toward internal critics appears to be rooted in the relatively generous attributions that group members make about their motives. When in-group members criticize the group, they are more likely to be seen to be doing so b
ecause they care for the group and want to create constructive change
Tolerance for Deviance
Sociologists have even suggested that a group’s solidarity benefits from tolerating the deviant
because it shows the strength of the group to deal with a plurality of views
and behaviors (Coser 1962, Erikson 1966)
Whereas sociologists perceive deviants as part of a healthy group,
social psychologists perceive deviants as separate from a healthy group
. In the latter view, healthy group life can exist only after the deviant has been removed ( Jetten & Hornsey 2011).
FACTORS THAT AFFECT GROUP TOLERANCE
Qualities of the Dissenter/Deviant
Qualities of the Group
Group Treatment of the Deviant or Dissenter
Strategic Factors
AN APPRECIATION FOR THE IMPORTANCE OF DEVIANCE AND
DISSENT IN GROUPS
T
hree pointers in particular
emerge from this review that might be useful to keep in mind when embarking on further research in this field.
SUMMARY POINTS
/ FUTURE ISSUES
Смотреть итоги в статье очень хорошее саммари
