Article summary with Schism in groups by Sani - 2005

Throughout the past decades, social psychologists have investigated the processes that lead human groups to achieve and maintain uniformity and a consensually shared reality. But, uniformity is often short-lived and some groups may live in a state of division and conflict. Factions that normally form around contrasting views may create a schism. This means that they may secede from the parent group either to join an already existing group or to create a new group. Schisms are common and they may take place in any type of group. Even groups that in their present time have stability and uniformity may have been affected by a schism at some stage of their development. Many groups that exist were born as a breakaway group, were joined by a faction that had previously detached from another group or have witnessed the secession of a faction from their own group. In the current article, the writer presents a model of schisms in social groups and then tests it by means of a field study.

Research on schisms

Some scientists tried to create a model of schisms in social groups by studying the secession of a faction from the Italian Communist Party (1991) and the succession of the Church of England because of the ordination of women to the priesthood. They found that the effect of perceived identity subversion on schismatic intentions was mediated by both perceived inability to voice dissent and perceived lack of group entitativity (cohesiveness). This model was meant to apply to common-identity groups. This model does have limitations. It doesn’t use the notion of social identification as a central theoretical tool. Also, it doesn’t include any emotional variables. This is a big limitation, because the most noticeable reaction by those who perceive identity subversion is normally one of tension or sadness. It is therefore important to explore the possibility that perceived identify subversion triggers negative emotions that may contribute to the development of schismatic intentions. Research has shown that the same social psychological variables are at the basis of both the decision to support the change and stay in the group and the decision to oppose the change and leave. When testing a model, it is not logic to not include data produced by those who are happy about the change. The use of all the members of the group under investigation should produce less biased findings.

The current model

Many social psychologists agree that a person may experience himself/herself either as a unique individual or as a member of an aggregate. The self may be construed in terms of idiosyncratic characteristics or with reference to a social aggregate. The first form concerns personal identity, the second concerns social identity. Self-categorization theorists have shown that a collection of people who categorize themselves as members of the same group, and who therefore share the same group identity, assume that they should adopt values and behaviours (norms) that are consistent with the nature of the group identity and that there should be common agreement on the content of these norms. As a consequence, group members engage in active discussion and argumentation aimed at reaching agreement on what norms are consistent with the group identity and should therefore be adopted. Members of a faction may accuse the other group members of having transformed the group into something that is radically different from what it used to be and what it is meant to be.

The current model states that the perception of identity subversion has important cognitive and affective consequences. It has a negative effect on group identification. Some members might not see the new-fashioned group as their own group any longer but as something that is different from the group they once loved. To these members, the group which they belonged to has ceased to exist because of the changes imposed by other, more powerful group members. They therefore find it harder to feel part of it and they will also find it hard to derive a sense of pride and honour from being part of it. Another consequence of perceived identity subversion is related to the experience of specific emotions. Research has shown that when group members perceive a specific norm as causing a rupture in the group’s historical continuity and therefore a radical identity change, tend to experience strong negative emotions. They feel disappointed, sadness and uneasiness. The writers therefore predicted that high levels of perceived identity subversion will intensify the experience of both dejection- and agitation-related emotions, in connection with the new norm.

Self-discrepancy theory can help explain the reason why the opponents to the change should experience these emotions. Self-discrepancy theory identifies three types of self-representation: the actual self, the ideal self and the ought self (the attributes people believe they have a duty to possess). A discrepancy between the actual self on the one hand and the ideal or the ought self on the other hand will be experienced as psychologically aversive. The actual-ideal discrepancy leads to dejection-related emotions (sadness) and the actual-ought discrepancy leads to agitation-related emotions (uneasiness). Because of the discomfort, people strive to match their actual self with their other selves. The members who claim that the group identity has been subverted will believe that the essence of the new group is dissonant both with what they wish the group to become (ideal group) and with what the group has the obligation to be (the ought group). People may possess multiple self-discrepancies at a time and they may therefore simultaneously suffer the discomfort associated with different self-discrepancies.

Another consequences of identity subversion is concerned with the perception of group entitativity. This refers to the degree to which a group is subjectively perceived as a singularity. The writers predict that a high degree of perceived identity subversion will lead to lowered perceived group entitativity. The members who hold a strong perception of identity subversion will see the group as deeply divided because of the presence of two incompatible factions. It therefore lacks entitativity.

The writers of this article predict that perceived group entitativity will have a positive effect on group identification. People, of course, want to be part of entitative rather than non-entitative groups. Entitative groups fulfill basic needs related to social identity, like uncertainty reduction and self-esteem. The writers also predict that group identification will reduce schismatic intentions. This is in line with previous findings that when people have a negative group identity they will try to achieve a more positive identity. This is often done by leaving the group to join another group. However, joining another group is seen as a collective strategy, discussed and decided by a faction as a whole, rather than an individual strategy. The writers also predicted that dejection/agitation will tend to increase schismatic intentions. This is because the group is seen as the cause of emotional distress. This is congruent with the finding that people are motivated to approach pleasure and to avoid pain. It is assumed that dejection-related emotions lead to passivity and apathy and agitation-related emotions are at the basis of activity and initiative. It could therefore be argued that, contrary to agitation-related emotions, dejection-related emotions will not have a positive impact on schismatic intentions. The writer believes that in this specific context, such a contention would be unjustified. Joining a schism is seen ultimately as a way of escaping an undesired identity and emotional distress. Members who perceive identity subversion will form a breakaway group or join an already existing group whose identity is consistent with the ought and ideal group in some extent in order to overcome their emotional discomfort.

The model also predicts that both the negative effects of group identification and the positive effects of dejection/agitation on schismatic intentions are moderated by the level of perceived voice held by those members who are against the change. The extended model that the writer proposes can be described as follows. When something changes in the social group, members may believe that the group identity has been denied and this perception will have a positive effect on schismatic intentions. This effect will be mediated by the level of group identification and by the degree of dejection- and agitation-related emotions. Perceived identity subversion will decrease group identification and increase dejection/agitation. Lower levels of group identification and higher levels of dejection/agitation will enhance schismatic intentions. The perception of identity subversion also will decrease perceived group entitativity and these lower levels of perceived entitativity will lower the degree of group identification. The negative impact of group identification and the positive impact of dejection/agitation on schismatic intentions will be moderated by the perceived ability to voice dissent of those who are against the new identity. The writer also tests another hypothesis. It is expected that those who are in favour of women priests not only will not perceive identity subversion, but they will also believe that the ordination of women strengthens the group identity. In previous studies it was found that according to group members who are in favour of change, the change is actually a development that is consonant with the core principles of the group.

The study

The model of the writer was tested by conducting a survey study concerning the Church of England’s division about the issue of women priests. These results were compared with the results from previous studies on this topic. In 1984 the General Synod of the Church of England agreed to bring forward legislation to permit ordination of women to the priesthood. The legislation passed by a two thirds majority in 1992. In 1994 the first 32 women were ordained priests. Since 1994 hundreds of clergymen and thousands of lay people have left the Church of England because of women priests. Many have moved to the Roman Catholic Church, and a small group has either converted to the Orthodox Church or joined small breakaway churches that have formed all around Great Britain.

Questionnaires were sent out to a random sample of 2000 priests in the Church of England. The questionnaire started with a measure of the respondents’ position on the ordination of women. Items measured identity subversion, dejection/agitation, group identification, schismatic intentions, entitativity and voice. The results showed that all the correlations were statistically significant. Perception of identity subversion predicted the degree of group identification, the perceived level of group entitativity and the degree to which respondents experienced dejection- and agitation-related emotions. Perceived group entitativity had a positive effect on group identification. Results also indicated that a decline in group identification and an intensification in dejection and agitation led to greater schismatic intentions. Voice had a significant moderating effect on both the path linking group identification to schismatic intentions and the path linking dejection/agitation to schismatic intentions. The results also indicated that those who favoured women priests were generally in agreement with the proposition that the ordination of women has enhanced the group identity. Those who were against women priests disagreed with this proposition. The opponents to the ordination of women experienced high levels of both dejection-related emotions and agitation-related emotions. The former emotions were experienced more intensely than the latter. The supporters of the ordination of women experienced a low level of both dejection- and agitation-related emotions. Agitation-related emotions were higher than dejection-related emotions.

The current model shows that the first step toward a group schism is the belief that the group identity has been subverted. The belief prompts negative emotions and decreases both group identification and perceived group entitativity. Group entitativity has a positive impact on group identification. Low group identification and high negative emotions increase schismatic intentions. This model also predicts that the negative impact of group identification and the positive impact of negative emotions on schismatic intentions is moderated by the perceived ability to voice dissent (the higher the perceived voice, the weaker the impact). Of course, more research is needed to test the model and to find the limitations of it.