Test environment running 7.6.6

Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

Prototypical similarity, self‐categorization, and depersonalized attraction

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Abstract

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.

Description

Keywords

Citation

Source

European Journal of Social Psychology

Book Title

Entity type

Access Statement

License Rights

Restricted until