Cited by 314Social and Intergroup PsychologySocial Power and Status DynamicsPsychology of Social Influence

Polarized Norms and Social Frames of Reference: A Test of the Self-Categorization Theory of Group Polarization

Hogg, Michael A., Turner, John C., Davidson, Barbara·1990·Basic and Applied Social Psychology

Abstract

Self-categorization theory (Turner, 1985; Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987) explains group polarization as conformity to a polarized norem which defines one's own group in contrast to other groups within a specific social context. Whether the ingroup norm is polarized or not depends on the social comparative context within which the ingroup defines itself. It was predicted from self-categorization theory that an ingroup confronted by a risky outgroup will polarize toward caution, an ingroup confronted by a caution outgroup will polarize toward risk, and an ingroup in the middle of the social frame of reference, confronted by both risky and cautious outgroups, will not polarize but will converge on its pretest mean. Our experiment adopted a modified version of the risky-shift paradigm, in which subjects gave pretest, posttest, and group consensus recommendations on three choice dilemma item-types (risky, neutral, or risky). The frame of reference was manipulated by confronting the ingroup with an outgroup lying on one or the other side, or both sides, of the ingroup distribution. This procedure was successful in producing a polarized theoretical ingroup norm in the appropriate conditions. Subjects' posttest opinions converged on their estimations of the consensual ingroup position, which in turn was polarized or not in line with the theoretical norm. There was some evidence that the degree of behavioral convergence and estimations of the ingroup consensus were a…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1207/s15324834basp1101_6

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hogg, M. A., Turner, J. C., & Davidson, B.
Affiliations
The University of Melbourne (AU)
Venue
Basic and Applied Social Psychology
Published
1990-03
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
77-100
ISSN
  • 0197-3533 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-4834
OpenAlex
W2045041554
Cited by
314
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 15
FWCI
10.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Basic and Applied Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Psychology of Social Influence
Keywords
group polarization, self-categorization theory, group identification, choice dilemmas

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