Deliberation processes and the emergence of a new social identity

1
Deliberation processes and the emergence of a
new social identity Kate Reynolds, School of
Psychology, ANU (also Rachael Eggins, Penny
Oakes, Ken Mavor, Alex Haslam John Turner)
2

• Deliberative democracy meets social psychology
• Key ideas social psychology and in particular
  self-categorization theory
• Illustrating these ideas in the Deliberative
  context (Deliberative Poll ACT Bill of Rights
  November 2002)
• Potential applicability of this approach for
  understanding deliberative processes(?)

3

• Problem of individual mind and society
• Distinction sociological group and psychological
  group membership (self-other
• similarity).
• Variable nature of self process  salience
• Psychological group membership transforms
  motives, goals, sources of influence, and
  behaviour.

Social Identity we and us
Personal Identity I and me
4
(No Transcript)
5

• Scientific background of theory
• 20 years of research in social psychology shows
  that when social identity is psychologically
  operative individuals
• act in ways that serve to advance their groups
  interests striving to make their group (ingroup)
  better than, and different from,other groups
  (outgroups)
• view ingroup members as valid sources of
  information (legitimate, valid, right)
• 3) strive to seek agreement with other ingroup
  members and engage in mutual influence and under
  certain conditions, creative disagreement (unity
  through diversity).

6

• Scientific background of theory
• When group or social identification is strong,
  research confirms that there is
• increased liking and respect for others in the
  group
• greater cohesion and cooperation
• active striving to reach agreement
• better communication and increased trust
  within the group
• willingness to work for the benefit of the
  group as a whole
• increased motivation to resolve ingroup
  disagreement (mutual influence)
• increased acceptance of group decisions (even
  if they go against personal self-interest)

7
Different levels of self-categorization and
variable nature of the self

superordinate group
individuals
subgroups
8
Salience of superordinate identity

Assimilation
Organic pluralism
ASPIRe - Participatory decision-making tool
designed to build higher order similarity from
acceptance lower level differences
Decategorization (individual)
Pluralism
Salience of sub-group identity
9

• Deliberation context
• Opportunity to conduct research in relation to
  Deliberative Poll ACT Bill of Rights Nov 2002
  (conducted by Issues Deliberations Australia).
• Randomly selected sample ACT population invited
  to deliberate on feasibility of ACT Bill of
  Rights
• Commissioned by ACT Government and involved board
  of experts (three from ANU)
• Participants are exposed to a range of opposing
  perspectives, ask experts questions and discuss
  in smaller peer groups

Time 1 Attitude to Bill of Rights and other
measures
Time 2 Attitude to Bill of Rights and other
measures
Deliberation and poll participant experience
10

• Research Process
• 1 (strongly agree) to 9 (strongly disagree)
• Opinion on whether or not to adopt a Bill of
  Rights
• Commitment to this opinion
• Perceived exposure to information (exposed full
  range of views, all views treated with respect)
• Fair treatment (e.g., feel able to express views
  freely, all views treated with respect)
• Identification as community representative
  (confidence represent community, feel pride in
  participation)
• Political engagement (important issue, intend
  discuss issue with others, active role
  development others views)

11

• Research Findings

12

• Research Findings
• Use of hierarchical regression to test whether
  identification is a significant mediator of the
  relationship between deliberative processes and
  outcomes such as political engagement.
• Best model was where exposure predicts fair
  treatment which in turn predicts identification
  which in turn predicts political engagement

R2.58
R2.41
R2..29
Exposure to information
Fair treatment
Identification
Political engagement
Deliberative processes
Outcome
13

• Conclusions and Implications
• It is because deliberation processes affect
  identification processes that they impact on
  outcome variables such as political engagement
• Deliberation is a process through which a new
  social identity can emerge for participants that
  then creates the conditions for social influence
  and associated processes of attitude change.
• Explaining why and how deliberative polls impact
  on opinions necessary to consider the group norms
  and salient identities that emerge through the
  process itself.

14
ASPIRe

•   Intervention at appropriate psychologically
  level given issue.
• When different groups feel strongly about an
  issue, attitudes and behaviour linked to group
  membership and people need to be engaged as group
  members.
•   Sub-group participation means groups are being
  treated as valued members of broader system and
  conveys messages of importance and respect.
• Such participation means sub-groups are more
  likely to identify at the superordinate
  whole-group level and increases the likelihood
  that mutual influence will occur.
•   Sub-group participation affects the
  perceived legitimacy of the process and outcome
  and likelihood that decision will be accepted and
  affect behaviour.

15
Stages of the ASPIRe process