Suzanne Skevington and Deborah Baker

THE SOCIAL IDENTITY Introduction Suzanne Skevington and Deborah Baker OF WOMEN This book presents a wide range of work on social identity and gender taking its original stimulus from social identity theory (Tajfel, 1974, 1978, 1984). It airns to make the ideas expressed by Tajfel more accessible in the context of research focused on a topic familiar to everyone, namely their sex group. We intend to edited by evaluate how far social identity theory can take us in understanding the many Suzanne Skevington and Deborah Baker. faces of womanhood, and also to look at ways in which studies of women can and do challenge the boundaries of such a theory. We hope that the content of this volume will contribute to debates about the dynamics of intergroup relations between the sexes and the changing social identities of women in contemporary societies. This first chapter lays the groundwork for the rest of the book with an SAGE introduction to the main features of social identity theory, followed by a review of the ways in which this theory has been applied to women. Within this context we outline how the studies in this book have elaborated upon, developed, or sometimes rejected the social identity approach. We then review the kinds of methodologies that have been used by social identity theorists and introduce Publications those used or recommended by the authors in this volume. Our overall emphasis London - Newbury Park - New Delhi here is that social identity can and should be studied using methods which accommodate the dimensions of real-life situations and the wider social context, so addressing practical and political as well as theoretical issues.

Social Identity Theory

The essence of social identity theory is its concern with those aspects of identity that derive from group memberships. Tajfel (1978; Taifel and turner, 1979) stressed the fact that society is composed of social groups that stand in power and status relations to one another-, he believed that this group structure has important implications for identity formation. Tajfel followed Festinger (1954) in thinking that identity formation rests on the process of social comparison, whereby in order to evaluate their opinions and abilities people compare

1 themselves with similar others in the course of social encounters. Here the behavioural consequences of social identification come into play. However, Tajfel stressed the importance of comparisons between social Members of low-status groups may seek to change their position and so groups; he theorized that as well as evaluating themselves through attain a sense of positive distinctiveness, whereas members of high-status interpersonal comparisons, people also need to assess the value of their groups will act to maintain superiority own group in relation to other similar groups, and they do this by means of intergroup comparison. Here, own group or ingroup is compared with similar but distinct outgroups; the dimensions that are used to make these (Turner, 1982). The sort of action taken by low-status groups depends comparisons - that is, to distinguish self and ingroup from other upon their beliefs about the nature of intergroup relations. If individuals comparable groups - are called social categorizations. These are by their believe that membership of the higher-status group is achievable by very nature stereotypic or consensual constructions since they mark out individual effort then they will attempt to move upwards into the the agreed boundaries of group membership. Social identity is founded dominant group by these means. This is referred to as individual upward on an internalization of these social categorizations. social mobility (Tajfel, 1978), and as Hogg and Abrams (1988) point Turner (1982; Turner et al., 1987) has linked the processes of out, it is a very convenient belief as far as dominant groups are intergroup and interpersonal comparison to two essentially distinct concerned, since it leaves the status quo intact. aspects of self concept. He sees the self concept as consisting of all However, if individual upward social mobility is impossible and available constructions of self which fall into two different subsystems: members of low-status groups see the boundaries between groups as one of these is made up of social identifications derived from ingroup- impenetrable, they may adopt collective strategies to create a more outgroup categorizations (such as sex, race, occupation and class); the positive social identity for their group. These strategies are generally other consists of personal identifications - idiosyncratic descriptions of encompassed by the term social change (Tajfel, 1978). There appears to self which derive from differentiation of self as a unique individual from be a continuum between individual action at one end and collective other individuals. action at the other, whereby the more difficult it is for individuals to The primary motivational factor governing the process of intergroup improve their own personal position or status by becoming members of comparison is the need for a positive social identity: that is, one which the high-status group, the more likely it is that members of the low-status establishes self and ingroup as positively distinct on the relevant group will join together to improve the group's status. dimensions of comparison (Tajfel and Turner, 1979). Whether this is The term 'social change' subsumes three main kinds of activity. Firstly achievable or not depends initially on the relative status of groups being there is assimilation or merger (Tajfel, 1978) which involves the compared. Hogg and Abrams (1988) clearly describe how the power and adoption of the positive features of the high-status group. by the low- status relations between groups bear on social identity: the dominant status group who wish to join them. This strategy effectively dissolves groups in society have the power and the status to impose the dominant the comparison processes which maintain intergroup tensions by value system and ideology which serves to legitimate and perpetuate the reducing the psychological distance between the two groups, so status quo. Individuals are born into this structure and, simply by virtue increasing the similarity. Such a strategy requires cooperation between of their sex, social class and the like, fall into one social group rather than high- and low-status groups rather than differentiation and competition. others. By internalization of the social categorizations definitive of these group memberships, they acquire particular social identities which may have a positive or negative value. Members of dominant and higher- status groups gain a positive social identity and high self-esteem from group membership; members of the lower- status or subordinate groups have a less positive social identity and lower self-esteem.

2 Forts ofexample, social identitySkevington theory. (1980, Let 1981)us now found move merger on to consider the most how important this theory strategy consideredhas been appliedby nurses to duringthe study discussions of women. about changes in the structure of the These then are the basic tenets of social identity theory. Let us now nursing profession. By merging the low-status State Enrolled Nurses (SENS) move on to consider how this theory has been applied to the study with the high-status State Registered Nurses (SRNS) through training, it was of women. intended that the more positive characteristics of the high-status group would be attributed to all nurses. In this case the SRNs felt threatened by the potential loss of their highly valued and positive social identity. They tended to see the inclusion of the low-status members as having a diluting effect, so watering down the positive distinctiveness of their group. In contrast, the low-status SENs generally wished for change and supported the dissolving of status relations through merger. A second type of action is referred to as social creativity (Tajfel, 1978), whereby the subordinate group seeks to create a new and positive image for itself. For example, low-status groups may create brand new characteristics for the group which effectively make it so different from the group it compares itself with that it reduces the need for any further comparisons with the high- status group and hence creates a more positive social identity. Giles (1978) has provided many instances of how language or dialect has been used by ethnic minorities such as the Welsh, French Canadians and American Blacks, to assert their positive distinctiveness from the majority. Subordinate groups may also reinterpret negative features currently attributed to the group so that they become positive characteristics that enhance their social identity. One of the most quoted examples of this type of activity in recent years relates to the rise in black consciousness in the 1960s, when the negative image of being black was reinterpreted through the 'Black is Beautiful' slogan. Finally, rather than compare themselves with the superior group, low-status groups may seek comparisons with equivalent or more subordinate groups to themselves in order to enhance their own social identity. The third type of strategy for social change is social competition (I'ajfel and Turner, 1979), when the subordinate group challenges the basis of'the status hierarchy and seeks to change the relative power and status of groups by active or passive resistance. Good examples of this form of action are the American Civil Rights movement and the Black Panthers, both resisting White domination in the 1960s and 1970s.