Social identity and negotiation: Subgroup representation and superordinate consensus

Rachael Eggins, S. Alexander Haslam, Kate Reynolds

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    Abstract

    Some models of conflict resolution propose that group membership be downplayed in negotiation because social categorization leads to ingroup bias. Challenging this view, this article argues that social conflict occurs partly as a collective attempt to establish a positive and distinct social identity. Restoration of this identity should therefore be important to negotiating groups. Two interactive studies (Ns = 104, 195) tested the effects over time of emphasizing identity-based group boundaries prior to negotiation with another group. Results indicated that where group members had the opportunity to interact with ingroup members (Study 1) or within a group (Study 2) prior to a superordinate negotiation, they consistently identified more at the subcategory level but were also more satisfied with the negotiation process. Evidence from the second study suggests that these effects were mediated by the development of a superordinate identity.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)887-899
    JournalPersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin
    Volume28
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2002

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Social identity and negotiation: Subgroup representation and superordinate consensus'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this