Search

This article introduces a model of the internalisation of normative social harmdoing: the MINSOH. This model seeks to explain how group members internalise harmful social norms such that they personally endorse their groups' normative actions. To this aim, the MINSOH integrates two divergent yet complementary theoretical perspectives: self‐determination theory and the social identity approach. These perspectives differ in their basic assumptions about the possibility for harm to become internalised, yet when integrated, they provide a powerful account of how harmdoing can become internalised. The MINSOH proposes specific conditions under which harmful normative actions become accepted by group members. This article outlines multiple self‐determined motivations for harmdoing and discrete group processes that enable harmdoing to be internalised and autonomously enacted, and reviews factors that facilitate (i.e., strong/unique/comparative social identification; endorsement of ideological justifications) and block the internalisation process (presence of multiple identities/diverging norms; inclusive superordinate identity). Directions for future research are then discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This experimental study (n = 115) investigates how group norms and individuals' congruence with these norms predicted internalization (i.e., self-determination) of an illegal behavior. We manipulated ingroup norms in favor of versus against illegal downloading of software, and assessed participants' behavioral intentions, their motivations for emitting this specific behavior, and how they subjectively experienced the experimental situation (compartmentalizing their illegal behavior; feeling conflicted). Participants were more likely to endorse the behavior that was normative in their ingroup. Also, participants were more self-determined to engage in the behavior when they intended to behave congruently with a norm against illegal downloading, and when they intended to behave incongruently with a norm in favor of illegal downloading. Participants who did not intend to engage in illegal downloading felt less compartmentalized and conflicted than participants who intended to engage in illegal downloading. Results are discussed in light of self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000) and social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Objective: This article tested whether hockey fans'' selfdetermined and non self-determined motivation for engaging in derogatory behaviors against an outgroup team predicted the frequency of these behaviors, fans'' psychological well-being, and the quality of their social identity as a fan of their team. The two psychological theories we employ in the current research (i.e., self-determination theory and social identity theory) have different assumptions concerning the motivation behind derogatory fan behavior. Design: Three correlational studies were conducted among hockey fans. Methods: Fans of rival hockey fans (Study 1; N = 45), fans of the Montreal Canadiens (Study 2; N = 181), and fans of NHL teams (Study 3; N = 105) completed measures of selfdetermination to engage in derogatory behaviors, frequency of these behaviors, psychological well-being, and quality of social identity. Multiple regression analyses were conducted to test if the frequency, well-being, and quality of social identity variables were predicted by the self-determined and non self-determined motivations to engage in derogatory behaviors. Results: As expected based on self-determination theory (SDT), the more hockey fans engage in derogatory behaviors for non self-determined reasons, the lower their well-being and the less frequently they report engaging in the derogatory behaviors. Moreover, as expected based on social identity theory (SIT), the more hockey fans engage in the derogatory behaviors for self-determined reasons, the higher their well-being, the frequency of these behaviors, and the more positive their social identity. Conclusions: Theses results are interpreted in light of SDT and SIT''s theoretical propositions. Comparisons are made with prior studies conducted on this topic. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]