Social dominance theory (SDT) and Social identity theory (SIT) are theoretical frameworks that have been conceptualised and examined in societies that predominantly have stable intergroup relations. The present study sought to examine both theoretical frameworks in a context that is undergoing social change. Three cross-sectional studies were conducted amongst black and white students from a South African University. Results indicated that there was no difference in the desire for group-based inequality (i.e. social dominance orientation, SDO) amongst groups affected by social change, when group status was measured subjectively. Yet, when group status was determined sociologically, dominant group members had significantly higher SDO levels. Furthermore, results indicated that the perception of social change had a conditional effect on the relationship between SDO and support for affirmative action amongst white participants, in that when white participants perceived higher in-group status loss, higher SDO levels predicted opposition towards affirmative action. Racial in-group identification had a conditional effect on the relationship between perceived social change and support for affirmative action amongst black participants; when black participants had higher racial in-group identification, greater perception of social change predicted support for affirmative action. Lastly, amongst black participants, hierarchy-attenuating legitimising myths had a conditional effect on the relationship between SDO and support for affirmative action. Specifically, when colourblindness or Ubuntu were endorsed, higher SDO predicted support for affirmative action. However, when these hierarchy-attenuating legitimising myths were rejected, higher SDO predicted opposition towards affirmative action. / Psychology / M.A. (Psychology)

Dans cette recherche, nous examinons l'effet de la justice interpersonnelle du groupe de travail sur les comportements innovants. D'abord, nous nous interrogeons sur le rôle médiateur joué par l'identification au groupe dans cette relation au niveau individuel d'analyse. Ensuite, nous examinons le rôle modérateur de la réflexivité sur ce mécanisme de médiation au même niveau d'analyse. Enfin, nous nous interrogeons sur le rôle de l'identification au groupe et l'engagement collectif au travail comme médiateurs en série des effets de la justice interpersonnelle du groupe sur les comportements innovants au niveau du groupe d'analyse sous l'angle des climats de justice. Deux études ont été menées afin de tester notre modèle. La première étude a été menée auprès de 204 employés d'hôpitaux tunisiens. Ses résultats montrent que l'effet indirect de la justice interpersonnelle du groupe de travail sur les comportements innovants, à travers l'identification au groupe, sera modéré par la réflexivité du groupe. La deuxième étude a été menée auprès de 528 étudiants regroupés dans 114 groupes de travail. Les données de cette étude ont été testées en utilisant une approche de modélisation multi niveaux par équations structurelles. Ses résultats montrent l'impact du climat de justice interpersonnelle du groupe sur les comportements individuels innovants à travers l'identification au groupe et l'engagement collectif au travail. Les implications théoriques et pratiques seront discutées. / In this research, we examine the effect of the interpersonal justice of the working group on innovative behaviors. First, we question the mediating role played by group identification in this relationship at the individual level of analysis. Next, we examine the moderating role of reflexivity on this mediation mechanism at the same level of analysis. Finally, we question the role of group identification and collective engagement at work as serial mediators of the effects of group interpersonal justice on innovative behaviors at the level of the analysis group in terms of climates of justice. Two studies were conducted to test our model. The first study was conducted among 204 Tunisian hospital employees. His results show that the indirect effect of the interpersonal justice of the working group on innovative behaviors, through identification with the group, will be moderated by the group's reflexivity. The second study was conducted with 528 students in 114 working groups. The data from this study were tested using a multi-level structural equation modeling approach. His results show the impact of the group's interpersonal justice climate on innovative individual behaviors through group identification and collective engagement at work. Theoretical and practical implications will be discussed.

<p>Three main theoretical approaches to the study of the causation of prejudice can be distinguished within psychological research. The cognitive approach suggests that prejudice is a function of cognitive processes where stereotypic information about social groups, stored in memory, is automatically activated and affects people’s judgements and behavior toward members of the target group. The personality approach suggests that prejudice is a function of people’s personality characteristics. Finally, the social psychological approach emphasizes people’s group membership and group identification as the as major source of causation.</p><p>Previous research has almost entirely focused on only one approach of causation at a time. The focus has also shifted periodically – with attention paid to one approach at each period of time. The present thesis is an attempt to integrate these approaches and suggests an integrative model where the relative contribution of each approach could be assessed. The underlying assumption is that all three approaches are meaningful and that prejudice is a complex phenomenon that is best explained by taking into account all approaches jointly.</p><p>Examining the cognitive approach, Paper I revealed that people are knowledgeable of the cultural stereotypes and that stereotypic information is automatically activated and affects people’s judgments. Paper II (and Paper III) supported the personality approach and revealed that prejudice is highly related to primary personality characteristics and, in line with a central idea in this approach, different types of prejudice (ethnic prejudice, sexism, homophobia, and prejudice toward disabled people) are highly correlated. The results of Paper III revealed the importance of group membership and group identification, supporting the social psychology approach.</p><p>The findings are discussed in relation to previous research and the necessity to integrate various approaches and disciplines to explain psychological phenomena in general and prejudice in particular. Also, implications of the findings for prejudice prevention are discussed.</p>

Three main theoretical approaches to the study of the causation of prejudice can be distinguished within psychological research. The cognitive approach suggests that prejudice is a function of cognitive processes where stereotypic information about social groups, stored in memory, is automatically activated and affects people’s judgements and behavior toward members of the target group. The personality approach suggests that prejudice is a function of people’s personality characteristics. Finally, the social psychological approach emphasizes people’s group membership and group identification as the as major source of causation. Previous research has almost entirely focused on only one approach of causation at a time. The focus has also shifted periodically – with attention paid to one approach at each period of time. The present thesis is an attempt to integrate these approaches and suggests an integrative model where the relative contribution of each approach could be assessed. The underlying assumption is that all three approaches are meaningful and that prejudice is a complex phenomenon that is best explained by taking into account all approaches jointly. Examining the cognitive approach, Paper I revealed that people are knowledgeable of the cultural stereotypes and that stereotypic information is automatically activated and affects people’s judgments. Paper II (and Paper III) supported the personality approach and revealed that prejudice is highly related to primary personality characteristics and, in line with a central idea in this approach, different types of prejudice (ethnic prejudice, sexism, homophobia, and prejudice toward disabled people) are highly correlated. The results of Paper III revealed the importance of group membership and group identification, supporting the social psychology approach. The findings are discussed in relation to previous research and the necessity to integrate various approaches and disciplines to explain psychological phenomena in general and prejudice in particular. Also, implications of the findings for prejudice prevention are discussed.

Social dominance theory (SDT) and Social identity theory (SIT) are theoretical frameworks that have been conceptualised and examined in societies that predominantly have stable intergroup relations. The present study sought to examine both theoretical frameworks in a context that is undergoing social change. Three cross-sectional studies were conducted amongst black and white students from a South African University. Results indicated that there was no difference in the desire for group-based inequality (i.e. social dominance orientation, SDO) amongst groups affected by social change, when group status was measured subjectively. Yet, when group status was determined sociologically, dominant group members had significantly higher SDO levels. Furthermore, results indicated that the perception of social change had a conditional effect on the relationship between SDO and support for affirmative action amongst white participants, in that when white participants perceived higher in-group status loss, higher SDO levels predicted opposition towards affirmative action. Racial in-group identification had a conditional effect on the relationship between perceived social change and support for affirmative action amongst black participants; when black participants had higher racial in-group identification, greater perception of social change predicted support for affirmative action. Lastly, amongst black participants, hierarchy-attenuating legitimising myths had a conditional effect on the relationship between SDO and support for affirmative action. Specifically, when colourblindness or Ubuntu were endorsed, higher SDO predicted support for affirmative action. However, when these hierarchy-attenuating legitimising myths were rejected, higher SDO predicted opposition towards affirmative action. / Psychology / M.A. (Psychology)