TY - CHAP
T1 - Asymmetries in attachments to groups and to their members
T2 - Distinguishing between common-identity and common-bond groups
AU - Prentice, Deborah A.
AU - Miller, Dale T.
AU - Lightdale, Jenifer R.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2006 Psychology Press. All rights reserved.
PY - 2006/3/9
Y1 - 2006/3/9
N2 - Two studies sought to validate the distinction between common-identity groups, which are based on direct attachments to the group identity, and common-bond groups, which are based on attachments among group members. Study 1 focused on members of selective and nonselective university eating clubs. Study 2 focused on members of a diverse sample of campus groups. Both studies revealed asymmetries in group and member attachments: Individuals in common-identity groups were more attached to their group than to its members, whereas individuals in common-bond groups were as attached to the members as to the group (or more so). Study 2 also demonstrated that attachment to the group was more strongly related to various evaluations of individual group members in common-bond than in commonidentity groups. The authors discuss the implications of these results for the development of groups over time and speculate on how the dynamics of the two types of groups might differ.
AB - Two studies sought to validate the distinction between common-identity groups, which are based on direct attachments to the group identity, and common-bond groups, which are based on attachments among group members. Study 1 focused on members of selective and nonselective university eating clubs. Study 2 focused on members of a diverse sample of campus groups. Both studies revealed asymmetries in group and member attachments: Individuals in common-identity groups were more attached to their group than to its members, whereas individuals in common-bond groups were as attached to the members as to the group (or more so). Study 2 also demonstrated that attachment to the group was more strongly related to various evaluations of individual group members in common-bond than in commonidentity groups. The authors discuss the implications of these results for the development of groups over time and speculate on how the dynamics of the two types of groups might differ.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84909187049&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84909187049&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.4324/9780203647585
DO - 10.4324/9780203647585
M3 - Chapter
AN - SCOPUS:84909187049
SN - 0203647580
SN - 9780203647585
SP - 83
EP - 95
BT - Small Groups
PB - Psychology Press
ER -