High identity complexity requires recognizing one’s in-groups as distinct and non-overlapping

Evidence

Two basic requirements need to be met for an individual to be considered relatively high in social identity complexity. First, one needs to be aware of the existence of multiple categories, that is, one needs to be attuned to the fact that one’s multiple in-groups actually constitute distinct social categories. Second, one needs to recognize that since one’s multiple in-groups constitute distinct social categories they need not, indeed in most cases cannot, completely overlap. Individuals who perceive their multiple in-groups as constituting a relatively exclusive in-group, in which others are perceived as in-group members only if in-group membership is met on all convergent multiple category dimensions, fail to meet these basic requirements. To exemplify, if a female, Christian British student considers only her fellow students who are also female, Christian, and British as part of a largely convergent exclusive in-group, we may conclude that she is relatively lower in identity complexity than a similar student who is able to distinguish between these multiple in-groups. — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 527

Two basic requirements need to be met for an individual to be considered relatively high in social identity complexity. First, one needs to be aware of the existence of multiple categories, that is, one needs to be attuned to the fact that one’s multiple in-groups actually constitute distinct social categories. Second, one needs to recognize that since one’s multiple in-groups constitute distinct social categories they need not, indeed in most cases cannot, completely overlap. Individuals who perceive their multiple in-groups as constituting a relatively exclusive in-group, in which others are perceived as in-group members only if in-group membership is met on all convergent multiple category dimensions, fail to meet these basic requirements. — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 527

Categorization

• DEFINE: Spells out the two cognitive requirements for high social identity complexity: awareness of distinct categories plus recognition they need not converge.
• XREF: Relates to how prejudice toward outgroups rests partly on treating one’s own identities as a single convergent in-group — a mechanism-level account of ingroup/outgroup cognition. — connects to: Identity analyses should combine multiple dimensions rather than foreground one — Mary Bucholtz and Kira Hall, Identity and Interaction: A…, 113
• corroborated: 5 independent passages support this claim — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 527