One day we might be no more: Collective angst and protective action from potential distinctiveness loss

• Published in: European journal of social psychology Vol. 41; no. 3; pp. 289 - 300
• Main Authors: Wohl, Michael J.A., Giguère, Benjamin, Branscombe, Nyla R., McVicar, D. Neil
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Chichester, UK John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 01-04-2011; Wiley; Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
• Subjects: Anxiety; Behavioural psychology; Biological and medical sciences; Canada; Collective Action; Collectivism; Fear; France; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Group dynamics; Group Identity; Psychological effects; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry; Psychology. Psychophysiology; Quebec; Social interactions. Communication. Group processes; Social psychology; Sovereignty; Studies; Threat; U.S.A; Unions; United States of America; Canada; United States > US; Quebec Canada; Human; Affect affectivity; Singularity; Action; Social group; Anxiety; Social belonging; Predictive factor; Social identity
• ISSN: 0046-2772; 1099-0992
• DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.773

Potential loss of group distinctiveness can represent a threat to the existence of a group. Across three studies (Ns = 42, 60, 94), a mediated‐moderation model was tested in which the interactive effects of group identification and potential ingroup distinctiveness loss predicts the desire to engage in ingroup protective action to the extent that collective angst (i.e., concern for the ingroup's future vitality) is aroused. It was hypothesized that the threat of potential distinctiveness loss would result in collective angst and subsequent support for protective action among high, but not necessarily low, identified group members. Results provided support for this model within the context of French Canadian distinctiveness from English Canada (Experiment 1, where the outcome measure was the desire for a sovereign Quebec) and Canadian distinctiveness from the United States (Experiments 2 and 3, where the outcome was support for action to protect Canadian sovereignty and rejection of a North American Union respectively). When and why collective angst facilitates ingroup protective action is discussed. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.