Multiple group loyalties coexist when circles differ in scope

Evidence

Within the context of the Common Ingroup Identity Model, the development of a common ingroup identity does not necessarily require each group to forsake its less inclusive group identity. As Allport (1954/ 1979) noted, every individual belongs to multiple groups and “concentric loyalties need not clash. To be devoted to a large circle does not imply the destruction of one’s attachment to a smaller circle. The loyalties that clash are almost invariably of identical scope” (p. 44). Similarly, as denoted by the “subgroups within one group” (i.e., a dual identity) representation (see figure 5.1), we believe that it is possible for people to conceive two groups as distinct units within the context of a common superordinate identity (for example, as citizens of a city within a state, parents and children within a family, or marketers and accountants within a company). — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 576

As Allport (1954/ 1979) noted, every individual belongs to multiple groups and “concentric loyalties need not clash. To be devoted to a large circle does not imply the destruction of one’s attachment to a smaller circle. The loyalties that clash are almost invariably of identical scope” (p. 44). — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 576

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to social identity theory (Tajfel/Turner) and to later superordinate identity work; also relates to the ‘one-group vs dual identity’ debate in diversity research. — connects to: Common goods nest within larger communities across nested scales — Laura Albareda and Alejo Jose G. Sison, Commons Organizing: Embedding Common…, 53
• SHARE: Allport’s line that clashing loyalties are almost invariably of identical scope is a compact, elegant formulation a colleague studying social identity or organizational psychology would immediately appreciate.
• DEFINE: Allport’s ‘concentric loyalties’ formula — the precise scope condition under which multiple group loyalties avoid clashing — offers a crisp citable formulation for the dual-identity contact account.
• corroborated: 3 independent passages support this claim — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 576