The Common Ingroup Identity Model: A Focus on a Dual Identity

社会心理学中一个经久存在的问题是，为什么在某些情况下，双重身份（即超坐标身份和子群体身份）会改善群体间关系，但在其他情况下，它们会加剧群体间的紧张和冲突。在社会心理学中，共同群体认同模型（Common In-group Identity Model， CIIM）是理解群体间关系的核心组织框架之一。拟议的研究检查cim，以了解何时以及为什么双重身份将有助于减少或增加群体间的偏见和冲突。该研究项目包括在3个不同的机构进行九项实验实验室和实地研究。综上所述，这些研究考察了以下四个潜在的调节因素，这些因素可能解释了先前研究中获得的双重身份的不一致影响：(a)少数/多数群体地位；(b)子群和从属群的域恒等式；(c)不同整合模式对原有群体认同的威胁；(d)群体间关系的预期情境（即和谐或有争议）。重要的是，这项研究将从特拉华大学和康涅狄格大学（大部分本科生是白人）和特拉华州立大学（一所历史上的黑人学院，大多数本科生是非洲裔美国人）的种族多数和少数群体学生的不同角度进行。这样做使研究人员能够研究多数和少数地位的数字和更广泛的文化概念对表征和偏见的影响。这项研究不仅具有理论意义，而且具有重要的实际意义。例如，该研究有可能证明，由于多数群体和少数群体有不同的观点，并拥有不同的融合意识形态（例如，同化主义或多元文化），减少群体间偏见和冲突的有效干预（例如，在教育环境中）需要考虑这些不同的取向。改善群体间关系需要兼顾两方面。也许更重要的是，这项研究的意义远远超出了社会心理学的范围，并有助于当前关于同化策略还是多元文化策略在促进群体间和谐关系方面最有效的争论。事实上，这项研究可以提示并解释为什么这些整合模式中的每一种可能特别有效地产生和谐的群体间关系。

An enduring question in social psychology is why in certain situations dual identities (i.e., a super ordinate identity and subgroup identities) lead to improved intergroup relations, but in other situations they heighten intergroup tensions and conflict. Within social psychology, the Common In-group Identity Model (CIIM) is well established as one of the central organizing frameworks for understanding intergroup relationships. The proposed research examines the CIIM in order to understand when and why a dual identity will serve to decrease or increase intergroup bias and conflict. The research project includes nine experimental laboratory and field studies to be conducted at 3 different institutions. Taken together, the studies examine the following four potential moderating factors that may explain the inconsistent effects of dual identity obtained in previous research: (a) minority/majority group status; (b) domain of subgroup and subordinate group identity; (c) threat to original group identity implied by different integration patterns; and (d) anticipated context (i.e., harmonious or contentious) of intergroup relations. Importantly, this research will be conducted from the different perspectives of racial majority and minority group students attending the University of Delaware and the University of Connecticut (where a large majority of undergraduate students are white) and Delaware State University (an historically Black college where a majority of undergraduate students are African American). Doing this enables the researchers to study the effects of numerical and broader cultural conceptions of majority and minority status on representations and bias. This research has as many important practical implications as theoretical benefits. For example, the research has the potential to demonstrate that, because majority and minority groups have different perspectives, and possess different integration ideologies (e.g., assimilationist or multi-cultural), effective interventions to reduce intergroup bias and conflict (e.g., in educational settings) need to consider these different orientations. Improving intergroup relations requires a consideration of both perspectives. Perhaps even more importantly, the implications of this research extend well beyond the scope of social psychology and can contribute to current debates about whether assimilationist or multicultural strategies are most effective at fostering harmonious relations between groups. Indeed, this research can suggest when and explain why each of these integration patterns may be especially effective for producing harmonious intergroup relations.