Inclusion and differentiation needs counterbalance each other in group identification

Evidence

The optimal distinctiveness model (Brewer, 1991; Leonardelli, Pickett, & Brewer, 2010) posits that human beings are characterized by two opposing needs. The first is a need for assimilation and inclusion, a desire for belonging that motivates immersion in social groups. The second is a need for differentiation from others that operates in opposition to the need for inclusion. As group membership becomes more and more inclusive, the need for inclusion is satisfied but the need for differentiation is activated; conversely, as inclusiveness decreases, the differentiation need is reduced but the need for inclusion is activated. These competing drives hold each other in check, assuring that interests at one level are not consistently sacrificed for interests at the other. — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 667

A third strategy for fostering recategorization is to directly influence group members’ needs for inclusion and differentiation. Arousing the need for inclusion may motivate group members to identify more with the superordinate category than they otherwise might, whereas arousing the need for differentiation may motivate group members to identify more with the subgroup than they otherwise might. The data referenced in Table 6.3 are consistent with this notion; when the need for differentiation was aroused, group members were just as likely to identify with an extremely small subgroup as they were with a moderately inclusive subgroup, but this was not the case when the need for inclusion was aroused. — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 741

Categorization

• DEFINE: Definitions of the two drives anchoring all subsequent causal claims in the chapter.
• XREF: Parallels Brewer’s own model and relevant to how minority subgroups balance assimilation against distinct identity pressures. — connects to: Descriptive representation instruments must vary with the group and electoral context — Philip Pettit, Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and…, 870; 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…, 667; Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 741