The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Social identification and psychological group formation
Abstract
Introduction: what is a psychological group? The social group is a fundamental but currently neglected topic in social psychology. Group affiliations are a universal feature of human social life. With only the rarest exceptions all human beings live in groups and act as group members. Moreover, the latter may be true psychologically even when an individual chooses to live in physical isolation. Group memberships are basic determinants of our social relations with others (whether positive or negative), our attitudes and values, and the social norms and roles that guide our conduct. In a larger sense, they are vehicles of culture, ideology and social and historical change. A social psychology without an adequate analysis of the group concept is, to a very real extent, like Hamlet without the prince. This chapter considers the problem of psychological group formation. What are the minimal conditions for a collection of individuals to constitute a psychological group – not a sociological, political, biological or some other form of group, but a state of affairs where they feel themselves to be and act as a group, where there is some kind of psychological acceptance of the group membership? The chapter will review some research and outline some tentative hypotheses on the topic. There is a reasonable descriptive consensus in social psychology about the important empirical features of psychological group membership. There are three: firstly, there is the perceptual or ‘identity’ criterion: that a collection of people should define themselves and be defined by others as a group; they should share some collective perception of themselves as a distinct social entity, of ‘us’ as opposed to ‘them’.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
The convergent and discriminant validity of subjective fit perceptions.
Cable, D. M., & DeRue, D. S. (2002) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.5.875 · Cited by 2,224
Abrams, D., Wetherell, M., Cochrane, S., Hogg, M. A., & Turner, J. C. (1990) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1990.tb00892.x · Cited by 804
Self-citationLOYAL FROM DAY ONE: BIODATA, ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATION, AND TURNOVER AMONG NEWCOMERS
MAEL, F. A., & ASHFORTH, B. E. (1995) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01759.x · Cited by 719
Explaining intergroup differentiation in an industrial organization
BROWN, R., CONDOR, S., MATHEWS, A., WADE, G., & WILLIAMS, J. (1986) · Journal of Occupational Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8325.1986.tb00230.x · Cited by 688
Corporate social responsibility as a source of employee satisfaction
Bauman, C. W., & Skitka, L. J. (2012) · Research in Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.riob.2012.11.002 · Cited by 560
Metadata
- Authors
- Turner, J. C.
- Venue
- The Social Dimension
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 1984-05-24
- Pages
- 518-538
- OpenAlex
- W102662756
- Cited by
- 495
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 15.51
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Social identification and psychological group formation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/cbo9780511759154.008
- The paper
- Turner, J. C. (1984). Social identification and psychological group formation. The Social Dimension. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511759154.008
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.