Anna X. Huang, Jacqueline M. Chen, and Juliane Degner — Being One or the Other, Both or Neither: Self-Categorization Theory, Social Identity Theory and the Issue of Mixed Identities

68 published claims from this book.

• Beliefs about group boundary permeability shape whether individual or collective strategies are adopted
• Beliefs about race map onto SIT social change versus social mobility belief systems.
• Colour-blind ideologies threaten non-dominant group members by suppressing identity-relevant aspects of self
• Concealability of an identity and its normative status shape mixed-identity processes.
• Constructivist mixed individuals shift identification toward higher-status groups for personal gain.
• Constructivist views of race enable mixed-race identity mobility
• Different identity motives drive Mixed individuals toward different target groups.
• Dual-identity members cannot elevate one ingroup’s status at the other’s expense.
• Essentialist beliefs about race incline mixed individuals toward a single distinct mixed identity
• Even single-group settings keep mixed-race identity chronically salient
• Fitness ambiguity pushes mixed-race people toward constructivist views or identity dissonance
• Groups perceived as entitative reduce members’ self-concept uncertainty most effectively
• Humans balance opposing needs for belonging and uniqueness through group identification.
• Identity denial decreases belonging, then increases effort to regain inclusion in the excluding group.
• Identity denial lowers belonging yet raises the need for the group
• Identity denial may make mixed-race people shift identification to a different ingroup
• Identity invalidation by mono-racial others shapes mixed individuals’ self-definition
• Identity shifting to a higher-status group risks poorer well-being and distrust for mixed individuals
• Identity threats named by social identity research split into individual versus group-level types
• Ingroup rejection lowers belonging yet paradoxically heightens the need for it
• Intergroup and intragroup context boundaries blur for mixed-identity individuals
• Judgements of similarity depend on the available comparative frame, not just absolute difference.
• Mixed identities involve ambiguously crossing mutually exclusive categories within a single social domain
• Mixed individuals categorically shift toward whichever mono-racial prototype is absent
• Mixed individuals endorse less essentialist racial beliefs than monoracial peers.
• Mixed individuals face recurring identity questions, denials of belonging, and family pressures to choose
• Mixed individuals may recategorize into broader minoritized superordinate groups.
• Mixed individuals often fall back on individual mobility rather than collective status strategies
• Mixed individuals receive contradictory phenotypic similarity cues across their parental categories
• Mixed individuals seek high-entitativity ingroups to reduce identity uncertainty
• Mixed individuals shift identification within a single social domain.
• Mixed individuals shift racial self-categorization situationally, but only within boundary conditions.
• Mixed individuals shift self-categorization across situations because similarity tests prove inconclusive.
• Mixed individuals strategically select contextual identity to jointly satisfy affiliation and uniqueness.
• Mixed individuals’ identity choices are frequently invalidated by mono-racial others.
• Mixed individuals’ multiple ingroups are simultaneously present together
• Mixed individuals’ self-categorization often conflicts with how others categorize them.
• Mixed individuals’ self-similarity judgements draw on experiences and feelings, not just appearance.
• Mixed members treat racial-ethnic identities as context-switchable need satisfiers
• Mixed people face most identity threats in settings that force mono-racial categories
• Mixed-identity individuals cannot pursue collective status mobility without being accepted as group members
• Mixed-identity individuals reduce self-concept uncertainty by identifying with entitative groups
• Mixed-identity individuals shift between racial identities to meet context-specific needs.
• Mixed-identity individuals shift identification toward whichever group is the local numerical minority
• Mixed-identity individuals shift ingroup identification according to which dimension holds higher status
• Mixed-identity members may exit a rejecting group rather than fight for inclusion
• Mixed-identity people shift self-categorizations situationally because prototype-similarity assessments stay inconclusive
• Mixed-identity self-categorization strategies exceed what social identity complexity theory predicts.
• Mixed-race individuals often shift self-categorization across contexts and lifespan.
• Mixed-race individuals use their own observable behavior as similarity evidence when self-categorizing racially.
• Motives activated by social context go beyond similarity to drive further identification.
• Multiple distinct motives drive racial-ethnic group identification.
• No existing identity-complexity taxonomy maps the Mixed-strategy space fully
• Others’ questioning and ingroup invalidation force Mixed individuals into chronic self-concept uncertainty
• People identify with lower-status groups despite self-esteem motives
• Perceived permeability of group boundaries dictates whether status change is sought individually or collectively.
• Perceived similarity to a racial category drives self-categorization among mixed-race people
• Raising identification with a high-status group need not lower lower-status identification.
• Research gives conflicting results on whether appearance predicts Mixed individuals’ racial identification
• Shared discrimination or invalidation experiences shape Mixed individuals’ felt similarity to groups.
• Shared traits falsely conjure an abstract familial connectivity with racial others defined as negation
• Situationally salient dimensions drive which heritage identity a Mixed person foregrounds.
• Social identity theories presume unambiguous single-category membership that mixed individuals lack
• Status-improvement strategies fail when targets belong to both high- and low-status groups
• Stereotype alignment can heighten a mixed person’s felt similarity to a racial category.
• The term Mixed carries a stigma of confusion yet matches self-chosen labels.
• Uncertainty reduction may push mixed-race people toward the most entitative available group.
• Uncertainty reduction pushes Mixed individuals toward whichever group offers the clearest prototype