- Email: [email protected]
Setting the frame of mind for social identity
\
Pergamon
Int[ J[ Intercultural Rel[ Vol[ 12\ No[ 1\ pp[ 088Ð103\ 0888 Þ 0888 Elsevier Science Ltd[ All rights reserved Printed in Great Britain 9036Ð0656:88:, ! see front matter
PII] S9036Ð0656"87#99924Ð1
SETTING THE FRAME OF MIND FOR SOCIAL IDENTITY HO!YING FU\ SAU!LAI LEE and CHI!YUE CHIU The University of Hong Kong\ Hong Kong YING!YI HONG The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology\ Hong Kong ABSTRACT[ We propose that when the intergroup context changes\ the frame of reference for social comparison\ the referential meaning of an identity\ as well as the de_nition of group membership may also change[ To test this proposal\ we manipu! lated Hong Kong college students| "N 83# frame of reference for social comparison by having them read a narrative account of the Diaoyu Islands sovereignty dispute and then write an essay on the responsibility of either the Beijing government "Beijing condition# or the Japanese government "Japan condition#[ Next\ participants| social identities and their intergroup attitude toward Mainland Chinese and Hongkongers were assessed[ As predicted\ in the Beijing condition\ a Chinese vs Hongkonger identity was related to the preference for assimilation into the Chinese Mainlanders group\ whereas social identity was unrelated to such preference in the Japan condition[ The results| implications for social identi_cation processes during the political tran! sition in Hong Kong were discussed[ Þ 0888 Elsevier Science Ltd[ All rights reserved[
The present study sought to understand how subtle contextual cues may change the frame of reference for social comparison and hence the referential meaning of a social identity[ We contend that an identity label may have multiple meanings\ and that each of these alternative meanings\ when activated by the relevant contextual cue\ will guide an individual|s self!categorization and intergroup perception "see also Deaux\ Reid\ Mizrahi + Either\ 0884#[
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Ho!ying Fu\ Department of Psychology\ The University of Hong Kong[ E!mail] hyfuÝhkusua[hku[hk The research reported in this article was supported by a research grant "HKUST:440:84H# from the Research Grant Council\ Hong Kong[ We thank Yuk!yue Tong\ May Pang and Grace Oh for their help in data collection[
088
199
H[!Y[ Fu et al[
In July 0886\ the British government returned the sovereignty of Hong Kong to China[ After the handover\ Hong Kong people are formally de_ned as Chinese nationals[ To many Hong Kong people\ as the Chinese national ~ag went up at the handover ceremony on July 0\ 0886\ which marked the establishment of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region\ China\ their Chinese identity was highly signi_cant[ Yet\ being a Chinese person could have di}erent meanings to di}erent people and to the same person on di}erent occasions[ A Hong Kong person who identi_es him or herself as a Chinese may identify with the nation "a national identi_cation#\ the political ideology of the Beijing government "a political identi_cation#\ the Chinese race "an ethnic identi_cation#\ the people and the homeland of China "an ethno!geographical identi_cation#\ or China|s history and culture "an ethnocultural identi_cation#[ The establishment of a special administrative region also reminded Hong Kong people of the city|s distinctiveness\ which has made complete assimilation of this ex!colony into China|s sociopolitical system imposs! ible[ For a substantial proportion of Hong Kong people\ the handover has made their Hongkonger identity more salient than before "see Chiu + Hong\ this issue#[ Like the Chinese identity\ a Hongkonger identity may also carry di}erent meanings[ A Hong Kong citizen who claims him or herself to be a Hongkonger on a particular occasion may identify with Hong Kong|s economic and political system\ the city|s economic a/uence and modernity\ or the relatively Western lifestyle in the city "see Hong\ Chiu\ Yeung + Tong\ this issue#[ In the present study\ we predicted that Hong Kong people|s psycho! logical reactions to the transition "e[g[\ whether they wanted the intergroup boundary between Hong Kong people and Chinese Mainlanders to blur or be sharpened after the transition# would be related to the meaning they attributed to the Chinese and Hongkonger identities "see Lee + Ottati\ 0884^ Turner\ 0874^ Tajfel + Turner\ 0875#\ which in turn would be a}ected by which meaning of the identities was made salient in the immediate intergroup context[ To ~esh out our predictions\ we will _rst review the relevant social psychological theories and research on intergroup relations[
THE DYNAMIC NATURE OF SOCIAL IDENTIFICATION One assumption underlying our prediction is that social identi_cation is a dynamic process[ When the context changes\ people may change their social identi_cation\ or they may keep the same identity but attribute a di}erent meaning to the identity label[ This assumption is central to John Turner|s self!categorization theory "Turner\ Hogg\ Oakes\ Reicher + Wetherell\ 0876#[ According to Turner et al[ "0876#\ an individual|s self concept in a particular social context is derived from the principle of
Framing Social Identity
190
metacontrast\ i[e[\ the comparison between the intragroup di}erence and the intergroup di}erence[ Intragroup di}erence refers to variability among ingroup members on relevant social comparison dimensions\ whereas intergroup di}erence refers to between!group di}erences on the same dimensions[ As the ratio of intragroup di}erence to intergroup di}erence increases from zero to unity\ group boundary will become fuzzy and individuals will begin to perceive memberships of the relevant groups as interchangeable[ Thus\ self!categorization depends heavily on both the comparisons between the self and one|s ingroup members as well as between ingroup and outgroup members on the relevant dimensions[ It has been suggested that {{particular self!concepts tend to be activated in speci_c situations producing speci_c images|| "Turner et al[\ 0876\ p[ 33#[ When the metacontrast ratio in the intergroup context changes\ individuals may change their social identities or the meaning they attribute to their identities "Abrams\ 0885#[ Experimental studies in which the metacontrast ratio was directly manipulated have provided clear support for the prin! ciple of metacontrast "Haslam + Turner\ 0881^ Haslam\ Turner\ Oakes + McGarty\ 0881#[ Brewer "0880^ see also Brewer\ 0882\ 0885^ Brewer\ Manzi + Shaw\ 0882# also acknowledges the dynamic nature of social identi_cation in her optimal distinctiveness model[ According to this model\ identi_cation serves at the same time two fundamental social needs\ the need for being included in a collective and the need for di}erentiation from other people[ Thus\ people on the one hand seek to satisfy the need for inclusiveness by connecting themselves to ingroup members\ who share certain common features with them[ On the other hand\ they seek to ful_l their need for distinctiveness by di}erentiating the self "embedded in the ingroup# from outgroup members\ who are perceived to be di}erent from them[ An individual tries to simultaneously satisfy both needs by identifying the self with a collective that is neither overly inclusive "so as to avoid complete submersion of the self in the collective# nor overly distinctive "so as to avoid too much isolation#[ Thus\ social identi_cation should be understood within the individual|s basic social motivational structure[ Furthermore\ Brewer "0880# asserts that distinctiveness is subject to contextual changes] {{The distinctiveness of a given social identity is con! text!speci_c[ It depends on the frame of reference within which possible social identities are de_ned at a particular time\ which can range from participants in a speci_c social gathering to the entire human race|| "p[ 367#[ In other words\ as the context changes\ the frame of reference for social comparison may also change[ Accordingly\ to achieve an optimal level of inclusiveness in social identi_cation\ individuals may attribute a di}erent meaning to their social identities when the relative salience of the inclusiveness and distinctiveness needs varies in the context "Brewer\ this issue#[ Consistent with this idea\ Pickett and Brewer "0885# found that an
191
H[!Y[ Fu et al[
experimentally induced need for di}erentiation increased the importance of group memberships in distinctive subgroups more than it did the import! ance of group memberships in inclusive\ superordinate groups[
THE PRESENT STUDY Consistent with the self!categorization model and the optimal dis! tinctiveness model\ we propose that when the context changes\ the frame of reference for social comparison also changes "Abrams + Hogg\ 0876#[ As a result\ the referential meaning of an identity and the de_nition of ingroup and outgroup membership may be di}erent[ As an illustration\ in a communication context\ pointing at a group of three old men and one old lady\ A says to B\ {{Do you see the old lady over there<|| In this situation\ the context has set up a frame of reference within which the old lady is to be distinguished from the three men[ The distinguishing information in this utterance\ as constrained by the frame of reference\ would be gender\ and the referential meaning of old lady emphasizes the referent|s gender rather than her age[ However\ if the group is consisted of three young women and one old woman\ the frame of reference will change to one within which the old woman is to be distinguished from the other women[ The distinguishing information becomes age\ and the referential meaning of old lady now emphasizes the referent|s age rather than her gender[ Thus\ when the context "the composition of the group# changes\ the frame of reference as well as the referential meaning of an utterance changes accordingly[ The idea is consistent with the _ndings from a language attitude study reported by Abrams + Hogg "0876#[ Using a matched guise technique\ the investigators studied how a group of participants from Dundee evaluated a speaker with a Glasgow accent "a Scottish accent# in terms of solidarity\ status and job performance[ The results showed that subjects| evaluation changed with the intergroup context[ When compared to a speaker with a Dundee accent "also a Scottish accent#\ the target person was evaluated more negatively[ However\ when compared to a speaker with an RP accent "the standard British accent#\ the target person was evaluated more positively[ This experiment suggested that in the presence of a speaker with an RP accent\ subjects would identify themselves as Scots "a relatively superordinate group#[ However\ in the presence of another Scottish group\ they tended to identify themselves with a more subordinate group\ which excluded Scots with a Glasgow accent[ The present experiment applied this analysis to intergroup relations in Hong Kong during the political transition[ We were interested in how Hong Kong people may attribute di}erent meanings to the Chinese and the Hongkonger identities depending on changes in the intergroup context[ As noted\ a person|s social identity should be understood with
Framing Social Identity
192
reference to the multiple meanings of an identity[ For example\ Hong Kong Chinese people who claim themselves to be a {{Hongkonger|| may nonetheless refer to di}erent senses of the identity label[ Some may identify with Hong Kong|s post!industrial\ metropolitan culture\ which distinguishes Hong Kong from the culture of Mainland China[ Others may identify with Hong Kong|s democratic\ capitalistic social!political systems[ Simi! larly\ Hong Kong Chinese people may identify themselves as {{Chinese||\ but for di}erent reasons and hence ascribe di}erent meanings to the identity[ Some may choose this identity in relation to China|s cultural\ historical heritage\ whereas others may do so in relation to the PRC government in Beijing[ As illustrated in these examples\ both the {{Hongkonger|| identity and the {{Chinese|| identity could imply identi_cation at the cultural level\ where the discriminating feature of the social identities is the people or the historical!cultural heritage\ or at the political level\ where the dis! criminating feature is the government or sociopolitical system[ Accord! ingly\ beyond the categorization label\ the important issue is the referential meaning of the identity\ which depends on the discriminating features the individual uses to de_ne ingroup and outgroup memberships[ In social identi_cation\ when the frame of reference changes with the context\ the de_nition of group membership may vary accordingly\ result! ing in a di}erent referential meaning for the same social identity label[ For example\ when the context makes the boundary between Chinese and non! Chinese salient "as in a situation where a non!Chinese group initiate aggression against Chinese#\ the frame of reference will be one within which Chinese can be distinguished from non!Chinese\ and the dis! criminating feature is ethnicity[ If in this context a Hong Kong person claims herself to be a Chinese\ she may want to be connected to other ethnic Chinese and di}erentiate herself from the non!Chinese aggressors[ When the context changes to make salient the boundary between the pro! Beijing groups and the groups that are relatively nonsympathetic towards Beijing|s political positions\ the frame of reference may be one within which the pro!Beijing groups can be distinguished from the non! sympathetic groups[ In this context\ political ideology may be the dis! criminating feature of social identities[ A Hong Kong person who claims to be a Chinese in this context may want to be associated with the pro! Beijing groups and distance him or herself from the relatively non! sympathetic groups[ Thus\ depending on the context\ ethnicity is the dis! criminating feature in the _rst example\ and political ideology is the discriminating feature in the second example[
The David Chan Case We tested this proposal in the present experiment by inducing changes in Hong Kong Chinese|s frame of reference for social comparison[ In this
193
H[!Y[ Fu et al[
experiment\ Hong Kong university students read a narrative account of the death of David Chan\ a Hong Kong Chinese patriot who accidentally drowned himself in a mission to defend China|s sovereignty over the Diaoyu Islands[ Diaoyu Islands were originally owned by China[ They were set forth to Japan by the United States after World War II[ China has continuously made claims about her sovereignty over the Diaoyu Islands\ and there have been several sovereignty disputes since the seventies[ However\ in July 0885\ Japanese right!wing activists built a light!house and several military bases on the Diaoyu Islands\ which was seen by China an indication of Japan|s intention to take over the sovereignty of the islands[ This gesture enraged many Chinese\ including those in Hong Kong\ Taiwan and Mainland[ They organized campaigns to demonstrate against Japan|s actions and urged the Beijing government to issue an ultimatum to Japan and take military action against Japan if necessary[ In response to these pleads\ the Beijing government has tried to avoid direct confrontation with Japan[ As reported in a Hong Kong newspaper] It is understood the Politburo Standing Committee "of the PRC# is sticking to a low!key\ diplomatic solution to the dispute[ This is despite complaints by generals and diplomats that Beijing|s appar! ently soft approach would project a {{false image|| of indecision "Wo\ 0885# In September\ 0885\ a group of Hong Kong activists\ including David Chan\ launched an expedition to the island in September 0885 to protect China|s sovereignty over the Diaoyu Islands[ David Chan was drowned when he and other activists decided to swim near the waters of the island to declare China|s sovereignty of the island[ The death of David Chan stirred up strong emotional reactions among many Hong Kong people[ Despite this\ the Beijing government and the Japanese made only low key o.cial statements on this issue[
Predictions The Diaoyu Islands dispute allowed us to manipulate the frame of reference for social comparison[ On the one hand\ the dispute is a con~ict between the Beijing government and the Japanese government[ On this issue\ many Hong Kong|s people were in disagreement with the soft approach the Beijing government had taken[ However\ there were also some Hong Kong people who agreed with Beijing|s non!confrontational policies[ On the other hand\ it is also a con~ict between the Chinese people "as an ethnic cultural group# and the Japanese people[ To induce di}erences in the frame of reference\ we had the participants write an essay either on the Beijing government|s responsibility or on the Japanese government|s responsibility for David Chan|s death\ and then
Framing Social Identity
194
indicate whether they identi_ed themselves as primarily Chinese or as primarily Hongkongers[ We assumed that having the participants write an essay on the Beijing government|s responsibility would lead them to frame the con~ict as one between the Beijing government and the Japanese government[ This con~ict should make salient the boundary between groups that were sympathetic to the Beijing government|s position on the issue\ and those that did not agree with such a position[ Within this frame\ participants who identi_es themselves as {{primarily Chinese|| should identify with the pro!Beijing groups and wanted to set themselves apart from the disagreeing groups[ Thus\ the discriminating feature of their identities would be the attitude towards the Beijing government|s position on the issue[ In short\ in this experimental condition\ a {{primarily Chinese|| identity might imply identi_cation with the Beijing government and:or her Diaoyu Islands policy[ On the other hand\ a.rmation of the {{primarily Hong! konger|| identity might imply a lack of identi_cation with the Beijing government and her Diaoyu Islands policy[ Furthermore\ people who identi_ed themselves as {{primarily Chinese|| might see the Mainland Chi! nese "under the Beijing government# as ingroup members[ By contrast\ people who choose the {{primarily Hongkonger|| identity should see Main! land Chinese as outgroup members and want to di}erentiate themselves from the {{Chinese||[ Thus\ we predicted that subsequent to writing an essay on the Beijing government|s responsibility\ compared to those who chose a {{primarily Hongkonger|| identity\ people who chose a {{primarily Chinese|| identity would display a greater preference for intergroup assimi! lation\ i[e[\ wanting to see less di}erences between Hong Kong people and Mainland Chinese in the transition[ However\ writing an essay on the Japanese government|s responsibility might lead the participants to frame the con~ict as a con~ict between the Chinese people "mostly Taiwan Chinese and Hong Kong Chinese# and the Japanese[ This con~ict might make salient the boundary between ethnic Chinese and the Japanese\ and the discriminating feature of social ident! ities would be ethnicity or historical\ cultural heritage[ In this condition\ both {{primarily Hongkonger|| and {{primarily Chinese|| belong to the superordinate category {{ethnic Chinese||[ In this condition\ participants who claim a {{primarily Chinese|| identity should identify with the mission of protecting the sovereignty of the Islands for the Chinese people\ and those who claim themselves to be {{primarily Hongkongers|| should ident! ify with Hong Kong people|s enthusiasm in their patriotic expeditions[ Thus\ in this experimental condition\ both participants with a {{primarily Chinese|| identity and participants with a {{primarily Hongkonger|| ident! ity should identify with the same goal "protection of China|s sovereignty over the Islands against an external {{aggressor||#[ In this situation\ the boundary between the Mainland Chinese and Hong Kong people would
195
H[!Y[ Fu et al[
become less salient for both identity groups "Abrams + Hogg\ 0876#[ Accordingly\ we predicted that when asked whether they wanted to see greater or less di}erences between Mainland Chinese and Hong Kong people after 0886\ the two identity groups in this condition should not di}er in the assimilationist vs divergent intergroup orientation[
METHOD Participants Ninety!four undergraduates "05 men\ 66 women\ 0 missing# from the University of Hong Kong participated in this study[ They took part in the study to ful_l course requirement[
Framin` Manipulation To induce the relevant frame of reference in the two experimental conditions\ we used a news excerpt describing the death of a Hong Kong patriot\ David Chan\ in his expedition to protect China|s sovereignty of the Diaoyu Islands[ The news excerpt described how David Chan and some other crew members decided to swim in the waters near the Islands to declare China|s sovereignty over the Islands\ how the captain agreed to let them carry out the plan\ and the futile attempt of the crew to save David Chan|s life[ The excerpt was a descriptive narration of the course of the event\ and did not contain any comments on the responsibility of either the Beijing government or the Japanese government in the event[ Having read the excerpt\ the participants answered a question regarding the responsibility of either the Beijing government or the Japanese govern! ment for David Chan|s death[
Social Identity Measure Participants were then asked to indicate their social identity in a ques! tionnaire[ They were asked to use one of the following options to describe themselves] "0# Hongkonger\ "1# Hongkonger\ only secondarily Chinese\ "2# Chinese\ only secondarily Hongkonger\ and "3# Chinese[ This measure of social identity has been widely used in previous research to tap Hong Kong people|s social identity "Hong + Chiu\ 0884^ Hong + Chiu\ 0886^ Hong\ Chiu\ Fu + Tong\ 0885a^ Hong\ Chiu\ Wong\ Fu\ Tong + Lee\ 0885b#[ Participants who chose options "0# or "1# were grouped together into a {{primarily Hongkonger|| group\ and participants who chose options "2# or "3# were grouped together into a {{primarily Chinese|| group[
Framing Social Identity
196
Inter`roup Perception Measures A twenty item questionnaire designed by Hong et al[ "0885b# was used to assess participants| intergroup orientations[ The items\ scored on either a 3!point or a 6!point Likert scale\ measured di}erent aspects of group identi_cation\ group perceptions and intergroup relations in Hong Kong\ as well as the perceived social!political changes after the handover[ Since some items in the questionnaire were scored on a 3!point scale and others were scored on a 6!point scale\ the ratings on each item were transformed into standardized scores for further analysis[ A factor analysis with varimax rotation was performed on the stan! dardized scores of the items[ Three factors "with eigenvalue × 0[73# were extracted based on the result of the scree test[ Items with factor loading greater than 9[23 were selected to represent the factor[ Factor I consisted of nine items that depicted a pessimistic prognosis of Hong Kong|s social political situation after the handover "e[g[\ {{After 0886\ no matter how hard Hong Kong people try\ Mainland Chinese will not change their perception of Hong Kong people|| and {{Hong Kong people are unable to change the PRC government|s policy on Hong Kong a}airs||#[ Factor I was labeled as Pessimistic Prognosis[ Factor II consisted of the following three items] {{Compared to people from other countries\ Chinese are * "obviously superior:obviously inferior#[|| {{If given a choice\ would you be willing to be Chinese< "very willing:very unwilling#|| and {{As Chinese\ I feel * "very proud:not proud at all#[|| All of these items depicted evaluation of being a Chinese\ and the factor was labeled as Negative Evaluation of Being a Chinese[ Factor III consisted of the following _ve items] "0# {{After |86\ we are Chinese citizens\ there is no need to keep the identity of being a Hong Kong person\|| "1# {{After |86\ the people of Hong Kong should always try to use Potunghua as the language of everyday communication\|| "2# {{After |86\ mainland Chinese will come up with obstacles to prevent Hong Kong people to assimilate into the mainland society|| "reverse coding#\ "3# {{Com! pared to mainland Chinese\ people of Hong Kong are * "obviously superior:obviously inferior#\|| and "4# {{After 0886\ I hope the di}erence between mainland Chinese and the people of Hong Kong would * "mini! mize:maximize#|| "reverse coding#[ We labeled this factor as Assimilation as the items assessed participants| willingness to give up their Hong Kong identity and be assimilated into the Mainland Chinese group[ The three factors explained 34[5) of the total variance[ Based on the results of the factor analysis\ three variables were created using the unweighted means of the relevant standardized item scores[ The internal reliability of Factor I\ II and III was 9[67\ 9[67 and 9[40\ respectively[ We predicted a Framing×Social Identity interaction on Assimilation] In the Beijing framing condition\ those who identi_ed them!
197
H[!Y[ Fu et al[
selves as Chinese would score higher than those who identi_ed themselves as Hongkonger on this measure[ No simple social identity e}ect was expected however in the Japan framing condition[ We also expected an identity main e}ect on the Negative Evaluation of being a Chinese\ with those who identi_ed themselves as Chinese having less negative evaluation of being a Chinese than did those who identi_ed themselves as Hong! konger[ However\ we did not make any a priori predictions about Pessi! mistic Prognosis[
Procedures Participants were _rst asked to read a news excerpt describing the drowning of David Chan[ Depending on their experimental condition\ they then wrote an essay either on the Beijing government|s responsibility "Beijing condition# or on the Japanese government|s responsibility "Japan condition# for David Chan|s death[ After that\ they _lled out the Inter! group Perception Measure[ Participants were debriefed after they had completed the questionnaire[
RESULTS The results generally supported our hypotheses[ When a di}erent frame of reference was induced\ the meaning of the participants| social identity also changed\ as re~ected in the relationship between the participants| social identity and their assimilationist vs divergent intergroup orientation[
Social Identity Among the 83 participants\ 8[5) identi_ed themselves as Hongkonger^ 42[1) as Hongkonger\ only secondarily Chinese^ 11[2) as Chinese\ only secondarily Hongkonger^ and 6[3) as Chinese[ The remaining 6[3) of the respondents did not choose any of the four options and their data were not included in the analyses reported[ The distribution of social identities in the present study "primarily Hongkonger] 51[7)^ primarily Chinese] 18[6)# was comparable to those reported by Hong et al[ "0885a# "primarily Hongkonger] 53)^ primarily Chinese] 25)#[ Chi!square test showed that there was no signi_cant di}erence in social identity "primarily Hongkonger vs primarily Chinese# between the two framing conditions x1"0# 9[94\ ns[0 0
When social identity was treated as a four!level factor\ x1"2# 9[94\ ns[ Four cells had expected counts less than 4[9 in this analysis due to the small number of participants in the {{Chinese|| identity group[
Framing Social Identity
198
Group Perceptions The three factors were correlated with each other "r ranged from −9[13 to 9[21#[ Therefore\ a 1 "Framing] Beijing or Japan#×1 "Social Identity] Hongkonger or Chinese# multivariate analysis of variance was performed on the three factors] Pessimistic Prognosis\ Negative Evaluation of Being a Chinese and Assimilation[1 The analysis revealed a signi_cant multivariate main e}ect of social identity\ l 9[65\ F"2\70# 7[45\ p ³ 9[9990\ and a signi_cant multivariate Framing×Social Identity interaction\ l 9[80\ F"2\70# 1[57\ p 9[94[ Univariate analyses of variance were then per! formed to understand these multivariate e}ects[
1
In the analyses reported in the text\ social identity was treated as a two!level factor because there were only a small number of participants in {{Chinese|| identity group[ However\ when we treated social identity as a four!level factor\ the results were similar to those reported in the text[ In the 3×1 MANOVA\ there were a signi_cant multivariate main e}ect of social identity\ l 9[52\ F"8\076[44# 3[39\ p ³ 9[990\ a signi_cant multivariate main e}ect of framing\ l 9[77\ F"2\66# 2[28\ p ³ 9[94\ as well as a signi_cant multivariate Framing× Social Identity interaction\ l 9[61\ F"8\076[44# 2[94\ p ³ 9[90[ A follow!up univariate analysis of variance performed Assimilation revealed a signi_cant framing main e}ect\ F"0\68# 6[53\ p ³ 9[990\ a signi_cant social identity main e}ect\ F"2\68# 01[54\ p ³ 9[990\ and a signi_cant Framing×Social Identity interaction\ F"2\68# 8[25\ p ³ 9[990[ In the Beijing condition\ participants who identi_ed themselves as {{Hongkonger|| "M −0[42\ S[D[ 9[63# had the lowest assimilation score\ followed by those who identi_ed themselves as {{Hongkonger\ only secondarily Chinese|| "M −9[15\ S[D[ 9[31#[ Participants who claimed themselves to be {{Chinese\ only secondarily Hongkonger|| "M 9[50\ S[D[ 9[27# and those who claimed themselves to be {{Chinese|| "M 9[29\ S[D[ 9[23# had relatively greater assimilation tendency[ However\ in the Japan condition\ the four identity groups did not di}er in their assimilation tendency "M 9[17\ −9[97\ 9[11\ 9[14 for {{Hongkonger\|| {{Hongkonger\ only secondarily Chinese\|| {{Chinese\ only secondarily Hongkonger|| and {{Chinese\|| respectively#[ Thus\ the _ndings supported our prediction independent of whether social identity was coded as a two!level factor or a four!level factor[ There was a signi_cant social identity main e}ect on Negative Evaluation of Being a Chinese\ F"2\68# 2[02\ p ³ 9[94[ Those who identi_ed themselves as {{Hongkonger|| had the most Negative Evaluation of Being a Chinese "M 9[36\ S[D[ 0[26#\ which was followed by the {{Hongkonger\ only secondarily Chinese|| group "M 9[01\ S[D[ 9[69#\ the {{Chinese|| group "M −9[05\ S[D[ 9[67#\ and the {{Chinese\ only secondarily Hong! konger|| group "M −9[25\ S[D[ 9[73#[ Finally\ an unexpected signi_cant main e}ect of framing was found on Pessimistic Prog! nosis\ F"0\68# 3[85\ p ³ 9[94[ Participants in the Beijing condition "M 9[09\ S[D[ 9[54# scored higher on this measure than did those in the Japan condition "M −9[98\ S[D[ 9[44#\ indicating that participants were more pessimistic about Hong Kong|s future in the Beijing condition than in the Japan condition[ One possible reason for this e}ect was that participants in the Beijing condition was led to attend to the Beijing government|s indecision on the sovereignty dispute despite Hong Kong people|s campaigns for more confrontational actions\ which might weaken the participants| con_dence in the perceived responsiveness of the Beijing government to the pleads of Hong Kong people in the future[
109
H[!Y[ Fu et al[
Assimilation There was a signi_cant main e}ect of social identity\ F"0\72# 11[39\ p ³ 9[990\ which was quali_ed by the signi_cant Framing×Social Identity\ F"0\72# 6[81\ p ³ 9[90[ Figure 0 shows that\ as predicted\ in the Beijing condition\ participants who identi_ed themselves as primarily Chinese "M 9[41\ S[D[ 9[28# had higher assimilation score than did those who identi_ed themselves as primarily Hongkonger "M −9[23\ S[D[ 9[42#\ p ³ 9[94[ However\ there was no di}erence between the two identity groups in the Japan condition "M 9[11\ S[D[ 9[36 for primarily Chinese and M 9[90\ S[D[ 9[41 for primarily Hongkonger#[ The results indicated that social identity had an e}ect on intergroup orientation only in the Beijing condition\ when the discriminating feature of social identities was the Beijing government|s policy on the Diaoyu Islands\ but not in the Japan condition[ In the Beijing condition\ relative to those who identi_ed themselves as primarily Hongkonger\ participants who identi_ed themselves as primarily Chinese felt more strongly that Hong Kong people should give up their Hongkonger identity and be assimilated into the Mainland Chinese group[ In the Japan condition\ when the discriminating feature was Chinese ethnicity\ the participants| social identity was not related to their intergroup orientation[ These _n! dings suggest that the meaning of the social identities might have changed from one framing condition to the other[
FIGURE. 1. Assimilation as a function of social identities and experimental framing.
Framing Social Identity
100
Ne`ative Evaluation of Bein` a Chinese and Pessimistic Pro`nosis Also as expected\ there was also a signi_cant main e}ect of social identity on negative evaluation of being a Chinese\ F"0\72# 5[35\ p ³ 9[994[ Participants who identi_ed themselves as {primarily Hongkonger| had higher scores on this measure "M 9[07\ S[D[ 9[72# than did those who identi_ed themselves as {primarily Chinese| "M −9[20\ S[D[ 9[71#[ Finally\ there were no signi_cant e}ects on Pessimistic Prognosis[
DISCUSSION The results support our proposal that when the context changes\ the frame of reference will change accordingly\ and so will the referential meaning of an identity[ Speci_cally\ when the disagreement between Hong Kong people and the Beijing government was made salient\ the Hong Kong students in the present research faced the issue of whether or not they agreed with China|s political positions[ Those who chose a primarily Hongkonger identity in this condition might be those who disagreed with China|s political positions and those who wanted to distance themselves from China as a political entity[ By contrast\ those who chose a primarily Chinese identity in this condition might _nd China|s political positions more agreeable and wanted to be more connected with China[ Thus\ in this condition\ compared to those who identi_ed themselves as primarily Hongkongers\ those who identi_ed themselves as primarily Chinese had a stronger preference for Hong Kong and China to form a unit relationship[ They wanted the di}erences between Hong Kong people and Mainland Chinese to decrease more than did those who identi_ed themselves as primarily Hongkonger[ By contrast\ when the contest for the sovereignty of the Diaoyu Islands brought forth the frame of reference within which Hong Kong people wanted to di}erentiate themselves from the Japanese {{aggressors||\ the boundary between Chinese and non!Chinese became relatively salient[ In this condition\ the intergroup orientation became the same for both those who identi_ed themselves as primarily Chinese and those who identi_ed themselves as primarily Hongkonger[ They both wanted to connect them! selves to other ethnic Chinese and di}erentiate themselves from the Japanese[ As a result\ the two identity groups did not di}er in their preference for the formation of a unit relationship between Hong Kong people and Mainland Chinese[ Changes of context\ either temporary "Abrams\ 0885^ Abrams + Hogg\ 0876^ Haslam + Turner\ 0881^ Haslam et al[\ 0881^ Waddell + Cairns\ 0875# or permanent "Ethier + Deaux\ 0883#\ have been shown to have e}ect on people|s social identity[ The present study extended this _nding by demonstrating a context e}ect on the referential meaning of an identity
101
H[!Y[ Fu et al[
label[ Speci_cally\ depending on the referential context\ an identity label may carry di}erent referential meanings[ For example\ a {{Hongkonger|| may refer to someone who was born and brought up in Hong Kong and had lived under the ruling of the Hong Kong government for many years[ When this meaning of the identity is made salient\ a person who accepts this identity may want to connect him or herself to those who have similar background and di}erentiate him or herself from people who do not share this background "including people in Mainland China#[ However\ {{Hongkonger|| may also be a subordinate identity nested within a Chinese identity\ as Hong Kong Chinese together with other Chinese are also ethnic Chinese[ When this sense of the Hongkonger identity is activated\ a person who accepts this identity may want to connect him or herself to other ethnic Chinese and to di}erentiate him or herself from people who are not ethnic Chinese[ One implication of this analysis is that since the meaning of a social identity may change with the context\ social identity researchers should be aware of the subtle nuances of the social identities in di}erent experimental conditions[ In assessing people|s social identity\ researchers may need to identify not only the identities an individual adopts\ but also the frame of reference the individual uses for social comparison\ the meaning the individual assigns to those identities\ as well as how each of these factors may change as a function of the context of assessment[ Another implication of the present study is that the adoption of a regional Hongkonger identity may not always create di.culties for the formation of a unit relationship between Hong Kong and China[ Past research has shown that Hong Kong people who claimed themselves to be Hongkonger tend to have more prejudicial perceptions of Mainland Chinese "Lam\ Lau\ Chiu\ Hong + Peng\ 0886^ Lau et al[\ 0884#[ The present study revealed that this is the case only when people politicize social identity\ i[e[\ making the political positions and political systems the discriminating feature of a social identity[ However\ as suggested by the present study\ under some conditions\ a Hongkonger identity may be a subordinate identity nested within a more superordinate ethnic identity[ Moreover\ the activation of this nested identity does not increase resistance to form a unit relationship with people from Mainland China "Brewer\ this issue#[ Thus\ the development of a local Hongkonger identity is not necessarily in the way of intergroup harmony in transitional Hong Kong[ Indeed\ a creative way of promoting intergroup harmony may be to make the Hongkonger identity as a nested identity more chronically accessible "salient across situations#[ This goal can be facilitated by depoliticizing social identities\ i[e[\ by making it possible for Hong Kong people to identify with China without identifying with China|s political policies and system\ and by emphasizing the commonality between the Hong Kong culture and the Chinese culture[
Framing Social Identity
102
REFERENCES Abrams\ D[ "0885#[ Social identity] Self as structure\ self as process[ In W[ P[ Robinson "Ed[# Social `roups and identities] Developin` the le`acy of Henri Tajfel[ Oxford] ButterworthÐHeinemann\ pp[ 032Ð057[ Abrams\ D[\ + Hogg\ M[ A[ "0876#[ Language attitudes\ frames of reference\ and social identity] A Scottish dimension[ Journal of Lan`ua`e and Social Psycholo`y\ 5"2Ð3#\ 190Ð102[ Brewer\ M[ B[ "0880#[ The social self] On being the same and di}erent at the same time[ Personality and Social Psycholo`y Bulletin\ 06"4#\ 364Ð371[ Brewer\ M[ B[ "0882#[ Social identity\ distinctiveness\ and in!group homogeneity[ Social Co`nition\ 00"0#\ 049Ð053[ Brewer\ M[ B[ "0885#[ When contact is not enough] Social identity and intergroup cooperation[ International Journal of Intercultural Relations\ 19"2Ð3#\ 180Ð292[ Brewer\ M[ B[\ Manzi\ J[ M[\ + Shaw\ J[ S[ "0882#[ In!group identi_cation as a function of depersonalization\ distinctiveness\ and status[ Psycholo`ical Science\ 3\ 77Ð81[ Deaux\ K[\ Reid\ A[\ Mizrahi\ K[\ + Ethier\ K[ A[ "0884#[ Parameters of social identity[ Journal of Personality and Social Psycholo`y\ 57"1#\ 179Ð180[ Ethier\ K[ A[\ + Deaux\ K[ "0883#[ Negotiating social identity when contexts change] Maintaining identi_cation and responding to threat[ Journal of Per! sonality and Social Psycholo`y\ 56\ 132Ð140[ Haslam\ S[ A[\ + Turner\ J[ C[ "0881#[ Context!dependent variation in social stereotyping 1] The relationship between frame of reference\ self!categorization and accentuation[ European Journal of Social Psycholo`y\ 11\ 140Ð166[ Haslam\ S[ A[\ Turner\ J[ C[\ Oakes\ P[ J[\ + McGarty\ C[ "0881#[ Context! dependent variation in social stereotyping 0] The e}ects of intergroup relations as mediated by social change and frame of reference[ European Journal of Social Psycholo`y\ 11\ 2Ð19[ Hong\ Y[\ + Chiu\ C[ "0884\ November#[ Social identi_cation processes in the face of political transition in Hon` Kon`] The case of 0886[ Paper presented at the Countdown to 0886 Workshop\ Hong Kong[ Hong\ Y[\ + Chiu\ C[ "0886\ May#[ Social identi_cation in a political transition] The role of implicit beliefs[ Paper presented at the 8th Annual American Psychological Society Convention\ Washington D[ C[ Hong\ Y[\ Chiu\ C[\ Fu\ H[\ + Tong\ Y[ "0885a\ June# Effects of self!cate`orization on inter`roup perceptions] The case of Hon` Kon` facin` 0886[ Paper presented at the 0885 American Psychological Society Convention\ San Francisco[ Hong\ Y[\ Chiu\ C[\ Wong\ S[\ Fu\ H[\ + Tong\ Y[\ + Lee\ K[ "0885b#[ Group identi_cation and inter`roup dynamics durin` political transition] The case of 0886[ ðUnpublished dataŁ[ Lam\ S[\ Lau\ I[\ Chiu\ C[\ Hong\ Y[\ + Peng\ S[ "0886\ July#[ Differential emphases on modernity and traditional values in social cate`orization] The case of Hon` Kon` adolescents in political transition[ Paper presented at the International Conference on the Transition to HKSARPRC\ Hong Kong[ Lau\ I[ Y[\ Chiu\ C[\ Chau\ A[ W[\ Ho\ D[ Y[ F[\ Hong\ Y[\ Lam\ S[\ + Lee\ H[ "0884\ November#[ Social identity\ inter`roup orientation\ and inter`roup relations in Transition Hon` Kon`[ Paper presented at the Countdown to 0886 Workshop\ Hong Kong[
103
H[!Y[ Fu et al[
Lee\ Y[\ + Ottati\ V[ "0884#[ Perceived in!group homogeneity as a function of group membership salience and stereotype threat[ Personality and Social Psycholo`y Bulletin\ 10"5#\ 509Ð508[ Pickett\ C[ L[\ + Brewer\ M[ B[ "0885\ June#[ Distinctiveness motives affect response times for attributin` in`roup traits to the self[ Paper presented at the 0885 Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Society\ San Francisco[ Tajfel\ H[\ + Turner\ J[ C[ "0875#[ The social identity theory of intergroup behavior[ In S[ Worschel and W[ G[ Austin "Eds#\ Psycholo`y of Inter`roup Relations "1nd ed[# Chicago] Nelson!Hall[ Turner\ J[ C[ "0874#[ Social categorization and the self!concept] A social cognitive theory of group behavior[ In E[ J[ Lawler "Ed[#\ Advances in Group Processes] Theory and Research\ Vol[ 1[ Greenwich\ CT] JAI Press[ Turner\ J[ C[\ Hogg\ M[ A[\ Oakes\ P[ J[\ Reicher\ S[ D[\ + Wetherell\ M[ "0876#[ Rediscoverin` the social `roup] A self!cate`orization theory[ Oxford] Blackwell[ Waddell\ N[\ + Cairns\ E[ "0875#[ Situational perspectives on social identity in Northern Ireland[ British Journal of Social Psycholo`y\ 14\ 14Ð20[ Wo\ L[ L[ "0885#[ Jiang warns of Diaoyu threat to HK[ South China Mornin` Post\ 2 October[ General News\ p[ 0[
Pergamon
Int[ J[ Intercultural Rel[ Vol[ 12\ No[ 1\ pp[ 088Ð103\ 0888 Þ 0888 Elsevier Science Ltd[ All rights reserved Printed in Great Britain 9036Ð0656:88:, ! see front matter
PII] S9036Ð0656"87#99924Ð1
SETTING THE FRAME OF MIND FOR SOCIAL IDENTITY HO!YING FU\ SAU!LAI LEE and CHI!YUE CHIU The University of Hong Kong\ Hong Kong YING!YI HONG The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology\ Hong Kong ABSTRACT[ We propose that when the intergroup context changes\ the frame of reference for social comparison\ the referential meaning of an identity\ as well as the de_nition of group membership may also change[ To test this proposal\ we manipu! lated Hong Kong college students| "N 83# frame of reference for social comparison by having them read a narrative account of the Diaoyu Islands sovereignty dispute and then write an essay on the responsibility of either the Beijing government "Beijing condition# or the Japanese government "Japan condition#[ Next\ participants| social identities and their intergroup attitude toward Mainland Chinese and Hongkongers were assessed[ As predicted\ in the Beijing condition\ a Chinese vs Hongkonger identity was related to the preference for assimilation into the Chinese Mainlanders group\ whereas social identity was unrelated to such preference in the Japan condition[ The results| implications for social identi_cation processes during the political tran! sition in Hong Kong were discussed[ Þ 0888 Elsevier Science Ltd[ All rights reserved[
The present study sought to understand how subtle contextual cues may change the frame of reference for social comparison and hence the referential meaning of a social identity[ We contend that an identity label may have multiple meanings\ and that each of these alternative meanings\ when activated by the relevant contextual cue\ will guide an individual|s self!categorization and intergroup perception "see also Deaux\ Reid\ Mizrahi + Either\ 0884#[
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Ho!ying Fu\ Department of Psychology\ The University of Hong Kong[ E!mail] hyfuÝhkusua[hku[hk The research reported in this article was supported by a research grant "HKUST:440:84H# from the Research Grant Council\ Hong Kong[ We thank Yuk!yue Tong\ May Pang and Grace Oh for their help in data collection[
088
199
H[!Y[ Fu et al[
In July 0886\ the British government returned the sovereignty of Hong Kong to China[ After the handover\ Hong Kong people are formally de_ned as Chinese nationals[ To many Hong Kong people\ as the Chinese national ~ag went up at the handover ceremony on July 0\ 0886\ which marked the establishment of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region\ China\ their Chinese identity was highly signi_cant[ Yet\ being a Chinese person could have di}erent meanings to di}erent people and to the same person on di}erent occasions[ A Hong Kong person who identi_es him or herself as a Chinese may identify with the nation "a national identi_cation#\ the political ideology of the Beijing government "a political identi_cation#\ the Chinese race "an ethnic identi_cation#\ the people and the homeland of China "an ethno!geographical identi_cation#\ or China|s history and culture "an ethnocultural identi_cation#[ The establishment of a special administrative region also reminded Hong Kong people of the city|s distinctiveness\ which has made complete assimilation of this ex!colony into China|s sociopolitical system imposs! ible[ For a substantial proportion of Hong Kong people\ the handover has made their Hongkonger identity more salient than before "see Chiu + Hong\ this issue#[ Like the Chinese identity\ a Hongkonger identity may also carry di}erent meanings[ A Hong Kong citizen who claims him or herself to be a Hongkonger on a particular occasion may identify with Hong Kong|s economic and political system\ the city|s economic a/uence and modernity\ or the relatively Western lifestyle in the city "see Hong\ Chiu\ Yeung + Tong\ this issue#[ In the present study\ we predicted that Hong Kong people|s psycho! logical reactions to the transition "e[g[\ whether they wanted the intergroup boundary between Hong Kong people and Chinese Mainlanders to blur or be sharpened after the transition# would be related to the meaning they attributed to the Chinese and Hongkonger identities "see Lee + Ottati\ 0884^ Turner\ 0874^ Tajfel + Turner\ 0875#\ which in turn would be a}ected by which meaning of the identities was made salient in the immediate intergroup context[ To ~esh out our predictions\ we will _rst review the relevant social psychological theories and research on intergroup relations[
THE DYNAMIC NATURE OF SOCIAL IDENTIFICATION One assumption underlying our prediction is that social identi_cation is a dynamic process[ When the context changes\ people may change their social identi_cation\ or they may keep the same identity but attribute a di}erent meaning to the identity label[ This assumption is central to John Turner|s self!categorization theory "Turner\ Hogg\ Oakes\ Reicher + Wetherell\ 0876#[ According to Turner et al[ "0876#\ an individual|s self concept in a particular social context is derived from the principle of
Framing Social Identity
190
metacontrast\ i[e[\ the comparison between the intragroup di}erence and the intergroup di}erence[ Intragroup di}erence refers to variability among ingroup members on relevant social comparison dimensions\ whereas intergroup di}erence refers to between!group di}erences on the same dimensions[ As the ratio of intragroup di}erence to intergroup di}erence increases from zero to unity\ group boundary will become fuzzy and individuals will begin to perceive memberships of the relevant groups as interchangeable[ Thus\ self!categorization depends heavily on both the comparisons between the self and one|s ingroup members as well as between ingroup and outgroup members on the relevant dimensions[ It has been suggested that {{particular self!concepts tend to be activated in speci_c situations producing speci_c images|| "Turner et al[\ 0876\ p[ 33#[ When the metacontrast ratio in the intergroup context changes\ individuals may change their social identities or the meaning they attribute to their identities "Abrams\ 0885#[ Experimental studies in which the metacontrast ratio was directly manipulated have provided clear support for the prin! ciple of metacontrast "Haslam + Turner\ 0881^ Haslam\ Turner\ Oakes + McGarty\ 0881#[ Brewer "0880^ see also Brewer\ 0882\ 0885^ Brewer\ Manzi + Shaw\ 0882# also acknowledges the dynamic nature of social identi_cation in her optimal distinctiveness model[ According to this model\ identi_cation serves at the same time two fundamental social needs\ the need for being included in a collective and the need for di}erentiation from other people[ Thus\ people on the one hand seek to satisfy the need for inclusiveness by connecting themselves to ingroup members\ who share certain common features with them[ On the other hand\ they seek to ful_l their need for distinctiveness by di}erentiating the self "embedded in the ingroup# from outgroup members\ who are perceived to be di}erent from them[ An individual tries to simultaneously satisfy both needs by identifying the self with a collective that is neither overly inclusive "so as to avoid complete submersion of the self in the collective# nor overly distinctive "so as to avoid too much isolation#[ Thus\ social identi_cation should be understood within the individual|s basic social motivational structure[ Furthermore\ Brewer "0880# asserts that distinctiveness is subject to contextual changes] {{The distinctiveness of a given social identity is con! text!speci_c[ It depends on the frame of reference within which possible social identities are de_ned at a particular time\ which can range from participants in a speci_c social gathering to the entire human race|| "p[ 367#[ In other words\ as the context changes\ the frame of reference for social comparison may also change[ Accordingly\ to achieve an optimal level of inclusiveness in social identi_cation\ individuals may attribute a di}erent meaning to their social identities when the relative salience of the inclusiveness and distinctiveness needs varies in the context "Brewer\ this issue#[ Consistent with this idea\ Pickett and Brewer "0885# found that an
191
H[!Y[ Fu et al[
experimentally induced need for di}erentiation increased the importance of group memberships in distinctive subgroups more than it did the import! ance of group memberships in inclusive\ superordinate groups[
THE PRESENT STUDY Consistent with the self!categorization model and the optimal dis! tinctiveness model\ we propose that when the context changes\ the frame of reference for social comparison also changes "Abrams + Hogg\ 0876#[ As a result\ the referential meaning of an identity and the de_nition of ingroup and outgroup membership may be di}erent[ As an illustration\ in a communication context\ pointing at a group of three old men and one old lady\ A says to B\ {{Do you see the old lady over there<|| In this situation\ the context has set up a frame of reference within which the old lady is to be distinguished from the three men[ The distinguishing information in this utterance\ as constrained by the frame of reference\ would be gender\ and the referential meaning of old lady emphasizes the referent|s gender rather than her age[ However\ if the group is consisted of three young women and one old woman\ the frame of reference will change to one within which the old woman is to be distinguished from the other women[ The distinguishing information becomes age\ and the referential meaning of old lady now emphasizes the referent|s age rather than her gender[ Thus\ when the context "the composition of the group# changes\ the frame of reference as well as the referential meaning of an utterance changes accordingly[ The idea is consistent with the _ndings from a language attitude study reported by Abrams + Hogg "0876#[ Using a matched guise technique\ the investigators studied how a group of participants from Dundee evaluated a speaker with a Glasgow accent "a Scottish accent# in terms of solidarity\ status and job performance[ The results showed that subjects| evaluation changed with the intergroup context[ When compared to a speaker with a Dundee accent "also a Scottish accent#\ the target person was evaluated more negatively[ However\ when compared to a speaker with an RP accent "the standard British accent#\ the target person was evaluated more positively[ This experiment suggested that in the presence of a speaker with an RP accent\ subjects would identify themselves as Scots "a relatively superordinate group#[ However\ in the presence of another Scottish group\ they tended to identify themselves with a more subordinate group\ which excluded Scots with a Glasgow accent[ The present experiment applied this analysis to intergroup relations in Hong Kong during the political transition[ We were interested in how Hong Kong people may attribute di}erent meanings to the Chinese and the Hongkonger identities depending on changes in the intergroup context[ As noted\ a person|s social identity should be understood with
Framing Social Identity
192
reference to the multiple meanings of an identity[ For example\ Hong Kong Chinese people who claim themselves to be a {{Hongkonger|| may nonetheless refer to di}erent senses of the identity label[ Some may identify with Hong Kong|s post!industrial\ metropolitan culture\ which distinguishes Hong Kong from the culture of Mainland China[ Others may identify with Hong Kong|s democratic\ capitalistic social!political systems[ Simi! larly\ Hong Kong Chinese people may identify themselves as {{Chinese||\ but for di}erent reasons and hence ascribe di}erent meanings to the identity[ Some may choose this identity in relation to China|s cultural\ historical heritage\ whereas others may do so in relation to the PRC government in Beijing[ As illustrated in these examples\ both the {{Hongkonger|| identity and the {{Chinese|| identity could imply identi_cation at the cultural level\ where the discriminating feature of the social identities is the people or the historical!cultural heritage\ or at the political level\ where the dis! criminating feature is the government or sociopolitical system[ Accord! ingly\ beyond the categorization label\ the important issue is the referential meaning of the identity\ which depends on the discriminating features the individual uses to de_ne ingroup and outgroup memberships[ In social identi_cation\ when the frame of reference changes with the context\ the de_nition of group membership may vary accordingly\ result! ing in a di}erent referential meaning for the same social identity label[ For example\ when the context makes the boundary between Chinese and non! Chinese salient "as in a situation where a non!Chinese group initiate aggression against Chinese#\ the frame of reference will be one within which Chinese can be distinguished from non!Chinese\ and the dis! criminating feature is ethnicity[ If in this context a Hong Kong person claims herself to be a Chinese\ she may want to be connected to other ethnic Chinese and di}erentiate herself from the non!Chinese aggressors[ When the context changes to make salient the boundary between the pro! Beijing groups and the groups that are relatively nonsympathetic towards Beijing|s political positions\ the frame of reference may be one within which the pro!Beijing groups can be distinguished from the non! sympathetic groups[ In this context\ political ideology may be the dis! criminating feature of social identities[ A Hong Kong person who claims to be a Chinese in this context may want to be associated with the pro! Beijing groups and distance him or herself from the relatively non! sympathetic groups[ Thus\ depending on the context\ ethnicity is the dis! criminating feature in the _rst example\ and political ideology is the discriminating feature in the second example[
The David Chan Case We tested this proposal in the present experiment by inducing changes in Hong Kong Chinese|s frame of reference for social comparison[ In this
193
H[!Y[ Fu et al[
experiment\ Hong Kong university students read a narrative account of the death of David Chan\ a Hong Kong Chinese patriot who accidentally drowned himself in a mission to defend China|s sovereignty over the Diaoyu Islands[ Diaoyu Islands were originally owned by China[ They were set forth to Japan by the United States after World War II[ China has continuously made claims about her sovereignty over the Diaoyu Islands\ and there have been several sovereignty disputes since the seventies[ However\ in July 0885\ Japanese right!wing activists built a light!house and several military bases on the Diaoyu Islands\ which was seen by China an indication of Japan|s intention to take over the sovereignty of the islands[ This gesture enraged many Chinese\ including those in Hong Kong\ Taiwan and Mainland[ They organized campaigns to demonstrate against Japan|s actions and urged the Beijing government to issue an ultimatum to Japan and take military action against Japan if necessary[ In response to these pleads\ the Beijing government has tried to avoid direct confrontation with Japan[ As reported in a Hong Kong newspaper] It is understood the Politburo Standing Committee "of the PRC# is sticking to a low!key\ diplomatic solution to the dispute[ This is despite complaints by generals and diplomats that Beijing|s appar! ently soft approach would project a {{false image|| of indecision "Wo\ 0885# In September\ 0885\ a group of Hong Kong activists\ including David Chan\ launched an expedition to the island in September 0885 to protect China|s sovereignty over the Diaoyu Islands[ David Chan was drowned when he and other activists decided to swim near the waters of the island to declare China|s sovereignty of the island[ The death of David Chan stirred up strong emotional reactions among many Hong Kong people[ Despite this\ the Beijing government and the Japanese made only low key o.cial statements on this issue[
Predictions The Diaoyu Islands dispute allowed us to manipulate the frame of reference for social comparison[ On the one hand\ the dispute is a con~ict between the Beijing government and the Japanese government[ On this issue\ many Hong Kong|s people were in disagreement with the soft approach the Beijing government had taken[ However\ there were also some Hong Kong people who agreed with Beijing|s non!confrontational policies[ On the other hand\ it is also a con~ict between the Chinese people "as an ethnic cultural group# and the Japanese people[ To induce di}erences in the frame of reference\ we had the participants write an essay either on the Beijing government|s responsibility or on the Japanese government|s responsibility for David Chan|s death\ and then
Framing Social Identity
194
indicate whether they identi_ed themselves as primarily Chinese or as primarily Hongkongers[ We assumed that having the participants write an essay on the Beijing government|s responsibility would lead them to frame the con~ict as one between the Beijing government and the Japanese government[ This con~ict should make salient the boundary between groups that were sympathetic to the Beijing government|s position on the issue\ and those that did not agree with such a position[ Within this frame\ participants who identi_es themselves as {{primarily Chinese|| should identify with the pro!Beijing groups and wanted to set themselves apart from the disagreeing groups[ Thus\ the discriminating feature of their identities would be the attitude towards the Beijing government|s position on the issue[ In short\ in this experimental condition\ a {{primarily Chinese|| identity might imply identi_cation with the Beijing government and:or her Diaoyu Islands policy[ On the other hand\ a.rmation of the {{primarily Hong! konger|| identity might imply a lack of identi_cation with the Beijing government and her Diaoyu Islands policy[ Furthermore\ people who identi_ed themselves as {{primarily Chinese|| might see the Mainland Chi! nese "under the Beijing government# as ingroup members[ By contrast\ people who choose the {{primarily Hongkonger|| identity should see Main! land Chinese as outgroup members and want to di}erentiate themselves from the {{Chinese||[ Thus\ we predicted that subsequent to writing an essay on the Beijing government|s responsibility\ compared to those who chose a {{primarily Hongkonger|| identity\ people who chose a {{primarily Chinese|| identity would display a greater preference for intergroup assimi! lation\ i[e[\ wanting to see less di}erences between Hong Kong people and Mainland Chinese in the transition[ However\ writing an essay on the Japanese government|s responsibility might lead the participants to frame the con~ict as a con~ict between the Chinese people "mostly Taiwan Chinese and Hong Kong Chinese# and the Japanese[ This con~ict might make salient the boundary between ethnic Chinese and the Japanese\ and the discriminating feature of social ident! ities would be ethnicity or historical\ cultural heritage[ In this condition\ both {{primarily Hongkonger|| and {{primarily Chinese|| belong to the superordinate category {{ethnic Chinese||[ In this condition\ participants who claim a {{primarily Chinese|| identity should identify with the mission of protecting the sovereignty of the Islands for the Chinese people\ and those who claim themselves to be {{primarily Hongkongers|| should ident! ify with Hong Kong people|s enthusiasm in their patriotic expeditions[ Thus\ in this experimental condition\ both participants with a {{primarily Chinese|| identity and participants with a {{primarily Hongkonger|| ident! ity should identify with the same goal "protection of China|s sovereignty over the Islands against an external {{aggressor||#[ In this situation\ the boundary between the Mainland Chinese and Hong Kong people would
195
H[!Y[ Fu et al[
become less salient for both identity groups "Abrams + Hogg\ 0876#[ Accordingly\ we predicted that when asked whether they wanted to see greater or less di}erences between Mainland Chinese and Hong Kong people after 0886\ the two identity groups in this condition should not di}er in the assimilationist vs divergent intergroup orientation[
METHOD Participants Ninety!four undergraduates "05 men\ 66 women\ 0 missing# from the University of Hong Kong participated in this study[ They took part in the study to ful_l course requirement[
Framin` Manipulation To induce the relevant frame of reference in the two experimental conditions\ we used a news excerpt describing the death of a Hong Kong patriot\ David Chan\ in his expedition to protect China|s sovereignty of the Diaoyu Islands[ The news excerpt described how David Chan and some other crew members decided to swim in the waters near the Islands to declare China|s sovereignty over the Islands\ how the captain agreed to let them carry out the plan\ and the futile attempt of the crew to save David Chan|s life[ The excerpt was a descriptive narration of the course of the event\ and did not contain any comments on the responsibility of either the Beijing government or the Japanese government in the event[ Having read the excerpt\ the participants answered a question regarding the responsibility of either the Beijing government or the Japanese govern! ment for David Chan|s death[
Social Identity Measure Participants were then asked to indicate their social identity in a ques! tionnaire[ They were asked to use one of the following options to describe themselves] "0# Hongkonger\ "1# Hongkonger\ only secondarily Chinese\ "2# Chinese\ only secondarily Hongkonger\ and "3# Chinese[ This measure of social identity has been widely used in previous research to tap Hong Kong people|s social identity "Hong + Chiu\ 0884^ Hong + Chiu\ 0886^ Hong\ Chiu\ Fu + Tong\ 0885a^ Hong\ Chiu\ Wong\ Fu\ Tong + Lee\ 0885b#[ Participants who chose options "0# or "1# were grouped together into a {{primarily Hongkonger|| group\ and participants who chose options "2# or "3# were grouped together into a {{primarily Chinese|| group[
Framing Social Identity
196
Inter`roup Perception Measures A twenty item questionnaire designed by Hong et al[ "0885b# was used to assess participants| intergroup orientations[ The items\ scored on either a 3!point or a 6!point Likert scale\ measured di}erent aspects of group identi_cation\ group perceptions and intergroup relations in Hong Kong\ as well as the perceived social!political changes after the handover[ Since some items in the questionnaire were scored on a 3!point scale and others were scored on a 6!point scale\ the ratings on each item were transformed into standardized scores for further analysis[ A factor analysis with varimax rotation was performed on the stan! dardized scores of the items[ Three factors "with eigenvalue × 0[73# were extracted based on the result of the scree test[ Items with factor loading greater than 9[23 were selected to represent the factor[ Factor I consisted of nine items that depicted a pessimistic prognosis of Hong Kong|s social political situation after the handover "e[g[\ {{After 0886\ no matter how hard Hong Kong people try\ Mainland Chinese will not change their perception of Hong Kong people|| and {{Hong Kong people are unable to change the PRC government|s policy on Hong Kong a}airs||#[ Factor I was labeled as Pessimistic Prognosis[ Factor II consisted of the following three items] {{Compared to people from other countries\ Chinese are * "obviously superior:obviously inferior#[|| {{If given a choice\ would you be willing to be Chinese< "very willing:very unwilling#|| and {{As Chinese\ I feel * "very proud:not proud at all#[|| All of these items depicted evaluation of being a Chinese\ and the factor was labeled as Negative Evaluation of Being a Chinese[ Factor III consisted of the following _ve items] "0# {{After |86\ we are Chinese citizens\ there is no need to keep the identity of being a Hong Kong person\|| "1# {{After |86\ the people of Hong Kong should always try to use Potunghua as the language of everyday communication\|| "2# {{After |86\ mainland Chinese will come up with obstacles to prevent Hong Kong people to assimilate into the mainland society|| "reverse coding#\ "3# {{Com! pared to mainland Chinese\ people of Hong Kong are * "obviously superior:obviously inferior#\|| and "4# {{After 0886\ I hope the di}erence between mainland Chinese and the people of Hong Kong would * "mini! mize:maximize#|| "reverse coding#[ We labeled this factor as Assimilation as the items assessed participants| willingness to give up their Hong Kong identity and be assimilated into the Mainland Chinese group[ The three factors explained 34[5) of the total variance[ Based on the results of the factor analysis\ three variables were created using the unweighted means of the relevant standardized item scores[ The internal reliability of Factor I\ II and III was 9[67\ 9[67 and 9[40\ respectively[ We predicted a Framing×Social Identity interaction on Assimilation] In the Beijing framing condition\ those who identi_ed them!
197
H[!Y[ Fu et al[
selves as Chinese would score higher than those who identi_ed themselves as Hongkonger on this measure[ No simple social identity e}ect was expected however in the Japan framing condition[ We also expected an identity main e}ect on the Negative Evaluation of being a Chinese\ with those who identi_ed themselves as Chinese having less negative evaluation of being a Chinese than did those who identi_ed themselves as Hong! konger[ However\ we did not make any a priori predictions about Pessi! mistic Prognosis[
Procedures Participants were _rst asked to read a news excerpt describing the drowning of David Chan[ Depending on their experimental condition\ they then wrote an essay either on the Beijing government|s responsibility "Beijing condition# or on the Japanese government|s responsibility "Japan condition# for David Chan|s death[ After that\ they _lled out the Inter! group Perception Measure[ Participants were debriefed after they had completed the questionnaire[
RESULTS The results generally supported our hypotheses[ When a di}erent frame of reference was induced\ the meaning of the participants| social identity also changed\ as re~ected in the relationship between the participants| social identity and their assimilationist vs divergent intergroup orientation[
Social Identity Among the 83 participants\ 8[5) identi_ed themselves as Hongkonger^ 42[1) as Hongkonger\ only secondarily Chinese^ 11[2) as Chinese\ only secondarily Hongkonger^ and 6[3) as Chinese[ The remaining 6[3) of the respondents did not choose any of the four options and their data were not included in the analyses reported[ The distribution of social identities in the present study "primarily Hongkonger] 51[7)^ primarily Chinese] 18[6)# was comparable to those reported by Hong et al[ "0885a# "primarily Hongkonger] 53)^ primarily Chinese] 25)#[ Chi!square test showed that there was no signi_cant di}erence in social identity "primarily Hongkonger vs primarily Chinese# between the two framing conditions x1"0# 9[94\ ns[0 0
When social identity was treated as a four!level factor\ x1"2# 9[94\ ns[ Four cells had expected counts less than 4[9 in this analysis due to the small number of participants in the {{Chinese|| identity group[
Framing Social Identity
198
Group Perceptions The three factors were correlated with each other "r ranged from −9[13 to 9[21#[ Therefore\ a 1 "Framing] Beijing or Japan#×1 "Social Identity] Hongkonger or Chinese# multivariate analysis of variance was performed on the three factors] Pessimistic Prognosis\ Negative Evaluation of Being a Chinese and Assimilation[1 The analysis revealed a signi_cant multivariate main e}ect of social identity\ l 9[65\ F"2\70# 7[45\ p ³ 9[9990\ and a signi_cant multivariate Framing×Social Identity interaction\ l 9[80\ F"2\70# 1[57\ p 9[94[ Univariate analyses of variance were then per! formed to understand these multivariate e}ects[
1
In the analyses reported in the text\ social identity was treated as a two!level factor because there were only a small number of participants in {{Chinese|| identity group[ However\ when we treated social identity as a four!level factor\ the results were similar to those reported in the text[ In the 3×1 MANOVA\ there were a signi_cant multivariate main e}ect of social identity\ l 9[52\ F"8\076[44# 3[39\ p ³ 9[990\ a signi_cant multivariate main e}ect of framing\ l 9[77\ F"2\66# 2[28\ p ³ 9[94\ as well as a signi_cant multivariate Framing× Social Identity interaction\ l 9[61\ F"8\076[44# 2[94\ p ³ 9[90[ A follow!up univariate analysis of variance performed Assimilation revealed a signi_cant framing main e}ect\ F"0\68# 6[53\ p ³ 9[990\ a signi_cant social identity main e}ect\ F"2\68# 01[54\ p ³ 9[990\ and a signi_cant Framing×Social Identity interaction\ F"2\68# 8[25\ p ³ 9[990[ In the Beijing condition\ participants who identi_ed themselves as {{Hongkonger|| "M −0[42\ S[D[ 9[63# had the lowest assimilation score\ followed by those who identi_ed themselves as {{Hongkonger\ only secondarily Chinese|| "M −9[15\ S[D[ 9[31#[ Participants who claimed themselves to be {{Chinese\ only secondarily Hongkonger|| "M 9[50\ S[D[ 9[27# and those who claimed themselves to be {{Chinese|| "M 9[29\ S[D[ 9[23# had relatively greater assimilation tendency[ However\ in the Japan condition\ the four identity groups did not di}er in their assimilation tendency "M 9[17\ −9[97\ 9[11\ 9[14 for {{Hongkonger\|| {{Hongkonger\ only secondarily Chinese\|| {{Chinese\ only secondarily Hongkonger|| and {{Chinese\|| respectively#[ Thus\ the _ndings supported our prediction independent of whether social identity was coded as a two!level factor or a four!level factor[ There was a signi_cant social identity main e}ect on Negative Evaluation of Being a Chinese\ F"2\68# 2[02\ p ³ 9[94[ Those who identi_ed themselves as {{Hongkonger|| had the most Negative Evaluation of Being a Chinese "M 9[36\ S[D[ 0[26#\ which was followed by the {{Hongkonger\ only secondarily Chinese|| group "M 9[01\ S[D[ 9[69#\ the {{Chinese|| group "M −9[05\ S[D[ 9[67#\ and the {{Chinese\ only secondarily Hong! konger|| group "M −9[25\ S[D[ 9[73#[ Finally\ an unexpected signi_cant main e}ect of framing was found on Pessimistic Prog! nosis\ F"0\68# 3[85\ p ³ 9[94[ Participants in the Beijing condition "M 9[09\ S[D[ 9[54# scored higher on this measure than did those in the Japan condition "M −9[98\ S[D[ 9[44#\ indicating that participants were more pessimistic about Hong Kong|s future in the Beijing condition than in the Japan condition[ One possible reason for this e}ect was that participants in the Beijing condition was led to attend to the Beijing government|s indecision on the sovereignty dispute despite Hong Kong people|s campaigns for more confrontational actions\ which might weaken the participants| con_dence in the perceived responsiveness of the Beijing government to the pleads of Hong Kong people in the future[
109
H[!Y[ Fu et al[
Assimilation There was a signi_cant main e}ect of social identity\ F"0\72# 11[39\ p ³ 9[990\ which was quali_ed by the signi_cant Framing×Social Identity\ F"0\72# 6[81\ p ³ 9[90[ Figure 0 shows that\ as predicted\ in the Beijing condition\ participants who identi_ed themselves as primarily Chinese "M 9[41\ S[D[ 9[28# had higher assimilation score than did those who identi_ed themselves as primarily Hongkonger "M −9[23\ S[D[ 9[42#\ p ³ 9[94[ However\ there was no di}erence between the two identity groups in the Japan condition "M 9[11\ S[D[ 9[36 for primarily Chinese and M 9[90\ S[D[ 9[41 for primarily Hongkonger#[ The results indicated that social identity had an e}ect on intergroup orientation only in the Beijing condition\ when the discriminating feature of social identities was the Beijing government|s policy on the Diaoyu Islands\ but not in the Japan condition[ In the Beijing condition\ relative to those who identi_ed themselves as primarily Hongkonger\ participants who identi_ed themselves as primarily Chinese felt more strongly that Hong Kong people should give up their Hongkonger identity and be assimilated into the Mainland Chinese group[ In the Japan condition\ when the discriminating feature was Chinese ethnicity\ the participants| social identity was not related to their intergroup orientation[ These _n! dings suggest that the meaning of the social identities might have changed from one framing condition to the other[
FIGURE. 1. Assimilation as a function of social identities and experimental framing.
Framing Social Identity
100
Ne`ative Evaluation of Bein` a Chinese and Pessimistic Pro`nosis Also as expected\ there was also a signi_cant main e}ect of social identity on negative evaluation of being a Chinese\ F"0\72# 5[35\ p ³ 9[994[ Participants who identi_ed themselves as {primarily Hongkonger| had higher scores on this measure "M 9[07\ S[D[ 9[72# than did those who identi_ed themselves as {primarily Chinese| "M −9[20\ S[D[ 9[71#[ Finally\ there were no signi_cant e}ects on Pessimistic Prognosis[
DISCUSSION The results support our proposal that when the context changes\ the frame of reference will change accordingly\ and so will the referential meaning of an identity[ Speci_cally\ when the disagreement between Hong Kong people and the Beijing government was made salient\ the Hong Kong students in the present research faced the issue of whether or not they agreed with China|s political positions[ Those who chose a primarily Hongkonger identity in this condition might be those who disagreed with China|s political positions and those who wanted to distance themselves from China as a political entity[ By contrast\ those who chose a primarily Chinese identity in this condition might _nd China|s political positions more agreeable and wanted to be more connected with China[ Thus\ in this condition\ compared to those who identi_ed themselves as primarily Hongkongers\ those who identi_ed themselves as primarily Chinese had a stronger preference for Hong Kong and China to form a unit relationship[ They wanted the di}erences between Hong Kong people and Mainland Chinese to decrease more than did those who identi_ed themselves as primarily Hongkonger[ By contrast\ when the contest for the sovereignty of the Diaoyu Islands brought forth the frame of reference within which Hong Kong people wanted to di}erentiate themselves from the Japanese {{aggressors||\ the boundary between Chinese and non!Chinese became relatively salient[ In this condition\ the intergroup orientation became the same for both those who identi_ed themselves as primarily Chinese and those who identi_ed themselves as primarily Hongkonger[ They both wanted to connect them! selves to other ethnic Chinese and di}erentiate themselves from the Japanese[ As a result\ the two identity groups did not di}er in their preference for the formation of a unit relationship between Hong Kong people and Mainland Chinese[ Changes of context\ either temporary "Abrams\ 0885^ Abrams + Hogg\ 0876^ Haslam + Turner\ 0881^ Haslam et al[\ 0881^ Waddell + Cairns\ 0875# or permanent "Ethier + Deaux\ 0883#\ have been shown to have e}ect on people|s social identity[ The present study extended this _nding by demonstrating a context e}ect on the referential meaning of an identity
101
H[!Y[ Fu et al[
label[ Speci_cally\ depending on the referential context\ an identity label may carry di}erent referential meanings[ For example\ a {{Hongkonger|| may refer to someone who was born and brought up in Hong Kong and had lived under the ruling of the Hong Kong government for many years[ When this meaning of the identity is made salient\ a person who accepts this identity may want to connect him or herself to those who have similar background and di}erentiate him or herself from people who do not share this background "including people in Mainland China#[ However\ {{Hongkonger|| may also be a subordinate identity nested within a Chinese identity\ as Hong Kong Chinese together with other Chinese are also ethnic Chinese[ When this sense of the Hongkonger identity is activated\ a person who accepts this identity may want to connect him or herself to other ethnic Chinese and to di}erentiate him or herself from people who are not ethnic Chinese[ One implication of this analysis is that since the meaning of a social identity may change with the context\ social identity researchers should be aware of the subtle nuances of the social identities in di}erent experimental conditions[ In assessing people|s social identity\ researchers may need to identify not only the identities an individual adopts\ but also the frame of reference the individual uses for social comparison\ the meaning the individual assigns to those identities\ as well as how each of these factors may change as a function of the context of assessment[ Another implication of the present study is that the adoption of a regional Hongkonger identity may not always create di.culties for the formation of a unit relationship between Hong Kong and China[ Past research has shown that Hong Kong people who claimed themselves to be Hongkonger tend to have more prejudicial perceptions of Mainland Chinese "Lam\ Lau\ Chiu\ Hong + Peng\ 0886^ Lau et al[\ 0884#[ The present study revealed that this is the case only when people politicize social identity\ i[e[\ making the political positions and political systems the discriminating feature of a social identity[ However\ as suggested by the present study\ under some conditions\ a Hongkonger identity may be a subordinate identity nested within a more superordinate ethnic identity[ Moreover\ the activation of this nested identity does not increase resistance to form a unit relationship with people from Mainland China "Brewer\ this issue#[ Thus\ the development of a local Hongkonger identity is not necessarily in the way of intergroup harmony in transitional Hong Kong[ Indeed\ a creative way of promoting intergroup harmony may be to make the Hongkonger identity as a nested identity more chronically accessible "salient across situations#[ This goal can be facilitated by depoliticizing social identities\ i[e[\ by making it possible for Hong Kong people to identify with China without identifying with China|s political policies and system\ and by emphasizing the commonality between the Hong Kong culture and the Chinese culture[
Framing Social Identity
102
REFERENCES Abrams\ D[ "0885#[ Social identity] Self as structure\ self as process[ In W[ P[ Robinson "Ed[# Social `roups and identities] Developin` the le`acy of Henri Tajfel[ Oxford] ButterworthÐHeinemann\ pp[ 032Ð057[ Abrams\ D[\ + Hogg\ M[ A[ "0876#[ Language attitudes\ frames of reference\ and social identity] A Scottish dimension[ Journal of Lan`ua`e and Social Psycholo`y\ 5"2Ð3#\ 190Ð102[ Brewer\ M[ B[ "0880#[ The social self] On being the same and di}erent at the same time[ Personality and Social Psycholo`y Bulletin\ 06"4#\ 364Ð371[ Brewer\ M[ B[ "0882#[ Social identity\ distinctiveness\ and in!group homogeneity[ Social Co`nition\ 00"0#\ 049Ð053[ Brewer\ M[ B[ "0885#[ When contact is not enough] Social identity and intergroup cooperation[ International Journal of Intercultural Relations\ 19"2Ð3#\ 180Ð292[ Brewer\ M[ B[\ Manzi\ J[ M[\ + Shaw\ J[ S[ "0882#[ In!group identi_cation as a function of depersonalization\ distinctiveness\ and status[ Psycholo`ical Science\ 3\ 77Ð81[ Deaux\ K[\ Reid\ A[\ Mizrahi\ K[\ + Ethier\ K[ A[ "0884#[ Parameters of social identity[ Journal of Personality and Social Psycholo`y\ 57"1#\ 179Ð180[ Ethier\ K[ A[\ + Deaux\ K[ "0883#[ Negotiating social identity when contexts change] Maintaining identi_cation and responding to threat[ Journal of Per! sonality and Social Psycholo`y\ 56\ 132Ð140[ Haslam\ S[ A[\ + Turner\ J[ C[ "0881#[ Context!dependent variation in social stereotyping 1] The relationship between frame of reference\ self!categorization and accentuation[ European Journal of Social Psycholo`y\ 11\ 140Ð166[ Haslam\ S[ A[\ Turner\ J[ C[\ Oakes\ P[ J[\ + McGarty\ C[ "0881#[ Context! dependent variation in social stereotyping 0] The e}ects of intergroup relations as mediated by social change and frame of reference[ European Journal of Social Psycholo`y\ 11\ 2Ð19[ Hong\ Y[\ + Chiu\ C[ "0884\ November#[ Social identi_cation processes in the face of political transition in Hon` Kon`] The case of 0886[ Paper presented at the Countdown to 0886 Workshop\ Hong Kong[ Hong\ Y[\ + Chiu\ C[ "0886\ May#[ Social identi_cation in a political transition] The role of implicit beliefs[ Paper presented at the 8th Annual American Psychological Society Convention\ Washington D[ C[ Hong\ Y[\ Chiu\ C[\ Fu\ H[\ + Tong\ Y[ "0885a\ June# Effects of self!cate`orization on inter`roup perceptions] The case of Hon` Kon` facin` 0886[ Paper presented at the 0885 American Psychological Society Convention\ San Francisco[ Hong\ Y[\ Chiu\ C[\ Wong\ S[\ Fu\ H[\ + Tong\ Y[\ + Lee\ K[ "0885b#[ Group identi_cation and inter`roup dynamics durin` political transition] The case of 0886[ ðUnpublished dataŁ[ Lam\ S[\ Lau\ I[\ Chiu\ C[\ Hong\ Y[\ + Peng\ S[ "0886\ July#[ Differential emphases on modernity and traditional values in social cate`orization] The case of Hon` Kon` adolescents in political transition[ Paper presented at the International Conference on the Transition to HKSARPRC\ Hong Kong[ Lau\ I[ Y[\ Chiu\ C[\ Chau\ A[ W[\ Ho\ D[ Y[ F[\ Hong\ Y[\ Lam\ S[\ + Lee\ H[ "0884\ November#[ Social identity\ inter`roup orientation\ and inter`roup relations in Transition Hon` Kon`[ Paper presented at the Countdown to 0886 Workshop\ Hong Kong[
103
H[!Y[ Fu et al[
Lee\ Y[\ + Ottati\ V[ "0884#[ Perceived in!group homogeneity as a function of group membership salience and stereotype threat[ Personality and Social Psycholo`y Bulletin\ 10"5#\ 509Ð508[ Pickett\ C[ L[\ + Brewer\ M[ B[ "0885\ June#[ Distinctiveness motives affect response times for attributin` in`roup traits to the self[ Paper presented at the 0885 Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Society\ San Francisco[ Tajfel\ H[\ + Turner\ J[ C[ "0875#[ The social identity theory of intergroup behavior[ In S[ Worschel and W[ G[ Austin "Eds#\ Psycholo`y of Inter`roup Relations "1nd ed[# Chicago] Nelson!Hall[ Turner\ J[ C[ "0874#[ Social categorization and the self!concept] A social cognitive theory of group behavior[ In E[ J[ Lawler "Ed[#\ Advances in Group Processes] Theory and Research\ Vol[ 1[ Greenwich\ CT] JAI Press[ Turner\ J[ C[\ Hogg\ M[ A[\ Oakes\ P[ J[\ Reicher\ S[ D[\ + Wetherell\ M[ "0876#[ Rediscoverin` the social `roup] A self!cate`orization theory[ Oxford] Blackwell[ Waddell\ N[\ + Cairns\ E[ "0875#[ Situational perspectives on social identity in Northern Ireland[ British Journal of Social Psycholo`y\ 14\ 14Ð20[ Wo\ L[ L[ "0885#[ Jiang warns of Diaoyu threat to HK[ South China Mornin` Post\ 2 October[ General News\ p[ 0[