Content uploaded by Rosenmann Amir
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Rosenmann Amir on Sep 09, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
DRAFT
Social Identities in a Globalized World: Challenges and Opportunities for Collective Action
Amir Rosenmann
Gerhard Reese
Jim E. Cameron
Words (main text): 9,840
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
2
Running Head: Globalized Identities, Culture and Action
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
3
Abstract
Globalization—the increasing interconnectedness of societies, economies, and cultures—is a
defining feature of contemporary social life. Paradoxically, it underlies both the dynamics of
global crises (e.g., rising inequality, climate change), and possibilities for ameliorating them.
In this review, we introduce globalization as a multifaceted process, and elaborate its
psychological effects with respect to identity, culture, and collective action. Using a social
identity approach, we discuss three foci of identification: local culture, globalized-Western
culture, and humanity in its entirety. Each source of identification is analyzed in terms of its
psychological meaning and position vis-à-vis the global power structure. Globalized-Western
culture forms the basis for an exclusive globalized identity, which privileges only some
cultures and ways of life. We conceptualize reactions to its core values in terms of cultural
identification and rejection, and acceptance of, or opposition to, its global social order.
Opposition to this inequitable global order is central to inclusive globalized identities (e.g.,
identification with humanity). These identities may encourage globally-minded collective
action, even as more research is needed to address their potential caveats. We consider
possibilities for social change and action, and conclude that a focused application of
psychological science to the study of these issues is overdue.
Keywords: Globalization; Globalized Culture; Identification with all Humanity; Social
Identity; Social Categorization; Political Psychology.
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
4
Social Identities in a Globalized World: Challenges and Opportunities for Collective
Action
"We often talk about the globalisation of our world, referring to our world as a global
village. Too often those descriptions refer solely to the free movement of goods and
capital across the traditional barriers of national boundaries. Not often enough do we
emphasise the globalisation of responsibility… Where globalisation means, as it so
often does, that the rich and powerful now have new means to further enrich and
empower themselves at the cost of the poorer and weaker, we have a responsibility to
protest in the name of universal freedom." (Mandela, 2000)
In April 2013, global audiences were horrified by the deaths of more than 1100 people
following the collapse of a Bangladeshi apparel factory. This event vividly demonstrated the
interconnectedness of those in the global center (e.g., consumers and brand-owners from
developed countries) and those in the global periphery (e.g., low-wage workers in developing
countries). That same interconnectedness created a public demand for brand-owners to be
held accountable for the disaster, spearheaded by a non-governmental organization ("the
Clean Clothes Campaign," 2013) that grew out of textile labor unions in Europe 24 years
earlier. Both the conditions that led to this disaster, and those that facilitated a global response
to it, illustrate the complexities and contradictions of globalization. As in Nelson Mandela’s
quote above, globalization simultaneously brings about injustice and human misery, as well as
the collective opportunity (and indeed responsibility) to strive for universal freedom and
equality.
Globalization thus is manifested not just in economic, political, and technological
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
5
interdependence, but also in changes at the psychological level, in terms of human experience,
behavior, and identity. These include the “deterritorialization” of identity (Scholte, 2000),
which refers to the unmooring of identities from their traditional attachments (e.g., those
defined by ethnicity or nationality), and the emergence of broader categories that reflect the
global culture or humanity as a whole. This expansion of identity facilitates a growing
awareness of global crises (such as the conditions of disenfranchised "sweat laborers," or
climate change), and the coordination of responses to them (e.g., Batalha & Reynolds, 2012).
At the same time, changes associated with globalization bring about increased uncertainty
(Hermans & Dimaggio, 2007) and socioeconomic strife (Kasser, Cohn, Kanner, & Ryan,
2007), which can lead to reactionary responses by people who feel their culture is threatened
(Berry, 2008). In all of this, globalization provokes an unprecedented “crisis of identities”
(Kennedy, 2001), and possibly sets the world stage for a "clash of civilizations" (Huntington,
1996).
We propose that paths to either transnational cooperation or conflict involve different
varieties of globalized identities, and divergent responses to globalized culture and the social
order it establishes. Indeed, some of the apparent paradoxes of globalization arise from
contradictions within globalized culture itself, and we use a social identity approach to
analyze why its values are accepted or rejected. We also draw on recent research on
identification with humanity (e.g., McFarland, Webb, & Brown, 2012; Reese, Proch, & Finn,
2015) to explore potentially more inclusive versions of global identities. Throughout, we pay
close attention to intergroup power dynamics and implications for collective action (e.g., pro-
environmental mobilization). We conclude by critically integrating emerging strands of
research on globalized identities, and presenting some ideas for future research and social
action.
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
6
Globalization
Globalization—the increasing interconnectedness of societies, economies, and cultures
(e.g., Arnett, 2002; Beck, 2000; Chiu, Gries, Torelli, & Cheng, 2011; Giddens, 1999)—can be
elaborated in terms of its economic, political, and socio-cultural processes (Dreher & Gaston,
2008). Economic globalization refers to phenomena such as increased international trade, the
lifting of restrictions on movements of commodity and capital, and the rise of multi-national
corporations with economic girth far surpassing that of many nations (Kasser et al., 2007).
Generally speaking, this process has made the world’s economies more interdependent and
richer than ever before —with aggregated global wealth nearly doubling in just a decade,
2002-2012—but also more stratified by economic inequality (United Nations Development
Programme, 2011; see also Babones, 2002; Milanovic, 2005).
The process of political globalization has strong connections with its economic
counterpart, leading some to argue that its de-facto function is to ensure the smooth operation
of the global economy (Kasser et al., 2007). Undeniably, however, institutions such as the
United Nations facilitate political cooperation, and coordinate humanitarian efforts by
national, international, and non-governmental organizations. There is also a corresponding
political and public awareness of global challenges, even if their impacts are felt most
severely in geographically distant places (e.g., climate change, pandemics, and other natural
or anthropogenic crises of global scale; Batalha & Reynolds, 2012).
Economic and political aspects of globalization contribute to its contemporary
sociocultural features. Unprecedented numbers of individuals visit other countries, immigrate
to them, or otherwise interact with foreign cultures via consumption of products, information,
and media. These intercultural interactions often occur in people’s home countries, as
representations of foreign cultures abound almost everywhere around the world (Chiu,
Mallorie, Keh, & Law, 2009). Far from having a simple homogenizing effect, this
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
7
sociocultural intermingling often evokes efforts to buttress local culture against incursions of
an “Americanized” global culture (e.g., Berry, 2008). Indeed, globalization potentiates both a
“softening” of identity, given the expanded range of available worldviews and affiliations,
and a “hardening [of identities], as fundamentalist ideologies of various stripes take on an
attractive certainty for many people living in what they perceive as a world in flux” (Short,
2001, p. 175).
We examine these possibilities in detail, using the concept of globalized culture and its
core values as a key reference point. First, however, we describe our theoretical focus on the
psychology of social categorization, social identity, and intergroup relations.
A Social Identity Approach to the Study of Globalization
Social groups are an essential feature of human life. According to social identity
theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979), social groups guide their members’ perception and behavior
via shared norms, beliefs, and values. More fundamentally, they shape the self; social (or
collective) identity is defined as the contribution of social group membership to the self-
concept. Furthermore, social identities allow individuals to fulfill motivations for self-worth
and distinctiveness, by drawing favorable comparisons between the ingroup and outgroup on
relevant and valued dimensions.
Whereas social identity theory is often used as an explanation of intergroup
discrimination, competition, and conflict, it affords a broader framework for understanding
how people manage their collective identities in the context of status and power relations
between groups (e.g., see Reicher, 2004). Moreover, it was formulated from the perspective
of disadvantaged (e.g., ethnic minority) groups, and described the psychological and
structural factors that enable group members to challenge the status quo (Tajfel & Turner,
1979). Collective identities are therefore more than simply a basis for self-definition and
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
8
worth, but also psychological vehicles for social change, or the resistance of change.
An important offshoot of social identity theory, self-categorization theory (Turner,
Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987), elaborates the social cognitive processes
underlying collective behavior. Specifically, it predicts that group behavior (e.g., conformity
to group norms) follows from the internalization of social categories into the self-concept (i.e.
social identification, Haslam & Reicher, 2012; Turner, 1999; Reicher & Haslam, 2006), as
well as the extent to which these categorizations are relevant in a particular situation.
Moreover, self-categorization occurs at different levels of inclusiveness: as a unique
individual, as a member of an intermediate collective (an ingroup; e.g., a nation state), or even
as a human being. More inclusive (or higher-order) categories are referred to as superordinate
groups. Because groups are always situated within a common superordinate category (i.e., one
that contains both the ingroup and relevant outgroups), the superordinate group provides the
background for intergroup comparisons. Compared with a salient outgroup, individuals more
positively evaluate their ingroup to the extent that they perceived it to be prototypical of the
superordinate, inclusive group (Mummendey & Wenzel, 1999). As an illustration, Germans
and Greeks can each identify with their respective national ingroup, and the shared
superordinate group of Europeans. According to the theory, the superordinate prototype of
"Europeans" defines the positive standard in this intergroup comparison. Thus, the extent to
which Germans or Greeks view themselves in relatively more favorable terms depends on
how representative they see themselves of Europeans (see also Reese & Lauenstein, 2014).
This “social identity approach” is arguably the most influential perspective for
understanding both intragroup and intergroup processes. However, a noteworthy caveat is the
assumption of a clear division between ingroup and outgroups, between "us" and "them" (e.g.,
Hornsey & Hogg, 2000). Similarly, self-categorization theory is most readily applied to
discrete identities that have well-defined stereotypical and normative content. In many real-
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
9
life settings, however, these distinctions and definitions are blurred, and this is especially true
with respect to cultural groups.
Cultural groups aggregate around shared systems of meaning. Because human
interaction continuously produces and reproduces culture, its content is dynamically changing
(Kashima, 2007, 2008). Thus, while clear divisions between cultural ingroups and outgroups
do emerge (Hammack, 2008; Kashima, 2007, 2008), individuals’ sense of cultural identity is
often fuzzier, and represents degrees of attachment to several (possibly conflicting) cultural
worldviews (e.g., Mok & Morris, 2012). Moreover, because of this plasticity, cultural
identities carry the possibilities of cultural rejection or resistance (Gjerde, 2004; Hammack,
2008).
Cultural rejection relates to an available culture of reference, such as today’s
globalized culture. However, the individual’s identity is contrasted away from this reference
point, a possibility generally not considered in traditional formulations of social identities.
Whereas identification reflects "who and what we are," rejection focuses on "who and what
we are not" (Verkuyten & Yildiz, 2007). These possibilities of affirmative or rejective cultural
identities make them especially relevant to the psychological study of globalization, which
propagates cultural content across established group boundaries.
The Content of Globalized-Western Culture and Reactions to It
Typically Western values and cultural content form the base of contemporary
globalized culture (e.g., Arnett, 2002; Moghaddam, 2009; for a more nuanced discussion see
Yang et al., 2011). Moreover, because the USA has long been the forerunning economic,
military and political global superpower, specific attributes of the American version of
Western culture most clearly manifest in globalized culture. Indicatively, American English is
the lingua franca of globalization (Aneesh, 2012), and the US$ the most widely recognized
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
10
currency.
This is not to say that what we term globalized-Western culture (Rosenmann, 2015) is
synonymous with American culture. Whereas American pop-culture and brand names are
available worldwide, it is their form, format, and function that are truly ubiquitous (Ram,
2004). As an illustration, MTV India has songs in Hindi, and imagery clearly referencing
Indian culture; the format, however, is distinctly American. Tellingly, typing www.mtv.com
into a browser address line brings up the American MTV site. For the "local" (i.e., non-
American) sites, the nation’s abbreviation is added (www.mtv.in.com): America is the default
that requires no qualification. Neither is American culture synonymous with globalized-
Western culture. Rather, this globalized culture incorporates simplifications of
American/Western cultures' most universalistic elements. Hence, while Christian symbolism
and rituals are evident in current globalized culture (e.g., Valentine’s Day, New-Year’s Eve),
their meaning is secularized so as to not interfere with non-Christians’ ability to join the
festivities (and accompanying consumer activities; see Schmitt, Davies, Hung, & Wright,
2010).
Therefore, the emergence of contemporary globalized-Western culture is a noteworthy
phenomenon not only with regard to its scope, but also its cultural content – the values and
worldviews it represents to different people around the world. As an extension of core
American/Western values, it emphasizes an individualistic worldview, stressing individual
autonomy, self-expression, and free choice in the pursuit of personal happiness (Fu & Chiu,
2007; Inglehart & Baker, 2000). Globalized-Western culture prioritizes not only personal
autonomy, but also pleasure-seeking and hedonism, which are key elements of the consumer
worldview cultivated by commercial interests (Kasser et al., 2007; Rindfleisch, Burroughs, &
Wong, 2009). Through globalization, commercial interests gain unprecedented power, and
propagate consumer hedonism as a marketing tool (O’Shaughnessy & O’Shaughnessy, 2002).
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
11
This culture additionally enshrines a free market system, which stresses competitiveness,
innovation (Shokef & Erez, 2006), and the pursuit of quantifiable gains (Kasser et al., 2007;
Ritzer, 2009). In this global meritocracy, all individuals (regardless of their ascribed
background) are ostensibly free to acquire self-worth and status based on fame, money or
personal achievement
These features of globalized-Western culture are tied to a set of liberal-humanistic
political ideals rooted in Western traditions as safeguards for personal autonomy. These
include tolerance for human diversity (Shokef & Erez, 2006) and the discourse of universal
human rights (McFarland & Mathews, 2005). Indeed, participants induced to identify with
this cultural frame expressed less bias against gay people (Rosenmann, 2015), a group that
has benefited from the global movement towards greater civil-liberties and societal tolerance
(Encarnación, 2014). Moreover, with increased awareness of the "imagined community of
humanity" (cf. Anderson, 2006) depicted on global media, globalized culture may foster an
all-encompassing sphere of moral sensibility and encourage global citizenship (Reysen &
Katzarska-Miller, 2013).
The content of globalized-Western culture is thus consistent with moving away from
local, particularistic traditions and onto more transnational forms of cultural identification.
Particularistic heritages are viewed as potential obstacles to the smooth operation of inter-
cultural exchange (Aneesh, 2012). Scholars maintain that economic globalization operates
best when particularistic traditions are flattened sufficiently to create a local flavor that can be
easily added to global commodities (Ram, 2004). Travelers can literally sample these local
flavors in McDonald’s branches around the world (e.g., McArabia Kofta Burgers in Egypt).
To the extent that particularistic traditions anchor deep-seated identities (e.g., based on
national, ethnic, gender, or religious categories), globalized-Western culture may pose an
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
12
identity threat. Moreover, heritage traditions evolve within local systems of social hierarchy
and serve to legitimate them. Thus, the content of this emergent global culture often clashes
with the content of local heritages, while it simultaneously disrupts local social arrangements
and undermines social stability. The result is an increase in both symbolic and objective
uncertainty for people around the world (Hammack, 2008; Hermans & Dimaggio, 2007;
Moghaddam, 2009). Given this, we contend that globalized-Western culture forms the basis
for an exclusive globalized identity: while it is presented as relevant for all human-beings, its
worldviews conflict with other cultures and ways of life and thus exclude them. This sets
globalized-Western culture apart from more inclusive versions of globality, as well as from
local, heritage cultures (see Figure 1, Panel A).
In sum, previous research shows that globalized-Western culture includes a set of
worldviews that emphasizes individuality, self-expression, and personal freedom, together
with a glorification of personal achievement, hedonism, and consumerism. Yet it also
encourages transnational identification, and prescribes a discourse of universal human rights
and global concern, even as these are incongruent with its more self-serving elements.
--------------------
FIGURE 1
--------------------
The Internal Contradictions within Globalized-Western Culture
Examining the content of globalized-Western culture reveals that some of its value
priorities (e.g., the maximization of personal gains) can be pursued only at the expense of
other priorities (e.g., caring for all human beings). Mapping these value priorities onto the
circumplex model of values (Schwartz, 1992) demonstrates this culture's internal
contradictions. According to the model, values represent motivational priorities that are either
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
13
compatible or antagonistic with one another. Table 1 provides a summary of the values
globalized-Western culture emphasizes, alongside their antagonist values.
--------------------
TABLE 1
--------------------
The value contradictions demonstrated in Table 1 can be understood from several
perspectives. First, any static description of culture is limited, and the treatment of any
culture, let alone a global one, as a monolithic entity is necessarily incomplete (Hammack,
2008; Wan, Chiu, Peng, & Tam, 2007). Second, the traits and values associated with any
social category cannot themselves provide a full explanation of individual or collective
behavior, because they need to be explicated within an intergroup system (Reicher &
Hopkins, 2001). Thus, a discussion of the content of globalized-Western culture requires
careful attention to the way it is construed and negotiated within local contexts. We next
examine options for globalized identities as dynamic processes involving the emergent
globalized-Western culture, local heritage ingroup, and the power structure of the global
social order.
What is the Appeal? The Stability and Legitimacy of the Global Social Order
Social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) posits that those disadvantaged by any
social order may express agency on either a personal or collective level; i.e., by striving for a
better position as individuals or as a group. It seems that although the current global social
order disadvantages many, the overwhelming reaction to it is positive. According to the Pew
Global Attitudes Project (2003), for example, “people almost everywhere like globalization”
(p. 71). Why then do so many people and groups around the world hold globalization, and
globalized-Western culture, in high regard?
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
14
First, given disproportionate Western access to, and control of, global resources (e.g.,
financial, military, and diplomatic power), it is clear that globalized-Western culture is
dominant. Aligning with it thus yields great benefits for groups and individuals, in terms of
access to both resources and a sense of worth or superiority. This sense of superiority rests on
the prevailing portrayals of globalized-Western culture as the route to enlightenment,
progress, modernity, and prosperity (Moghaddam, 2009; Rosenmann, 2015). Most media
outlets around the world feature globalized-Western images of the individual "Good Life"
(Dittmar, 2007), and the collective "Good World" (of technological innovation and social
progress). By identifying with globalized-Western culture, every person and group can
ostensibly buy into these promises.
Second, in social identity theory's terms, globalized-Western culture creates a
relatively stable and legitimate social order, where even subordinates often accept their
inferior position. This "consensual inferiority" (Tajfel & Turner, 1979, p. 37) seems especially
likely if rival outgroups are perceived to be further still from the top of the global ladder.
Indeed, some groups use level of participation in globalization itself to rank themselves as
superior to their rivals. Several studies demonstrate that alignment with globalized-Western
culture drives the exclusion of "backwards" outgroups, above and beyond contributions of
political and demographic variables.
In a recent series of studies of Jewish Israelis (who ally themselves with globalized-
Western culture; Ram, 2004), measured and manipulated identification with this global
culture was associated with exclusionary reactions toward local outgroups who are perceived
to be less aligned with it (e.g., Palestinian Arabs; Rosenmann, 2015). Similarly, a 2002 survey
of a large probability sample of Turkish adults showed that secularism, neo-liberal economic
attitudes, and favorable attitudes towards globalization predicted the belief that Kurds have a
deleterious impact on Turkish society (Dixon & Ergin, 2010). The researchers discussed these
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
15
findings as indicative of the Turkish desire for cultural modernization and greater global
integration. In this context, participants perceived the mostly traditional Kurdish minority as a
“cultural impediment” to Turkey's global ascension (p. 1343). Since then, Turkey has
seemingly re-positioned itself between the two cultural identities of globalized-Western
culture and global Islam, and the treatment of the (Muslim) Kurdish minority by the state has
improved substantially (Celebi, Verkuyten, Köse, & Maliepaard, 2014). It is plausible that as
alignment with globalized-Western culture became less important, its utility as a source of
social worth within the local Turkish context diminished, allowing for fuller integration of the
Kurdish minority.
Thirdly, on a more individual level, globalized-Western culture promotes the
channeling of self-expression, self-worth, and other psychological needs into consumption of
products and materialistic lifestyles. Within this cultural system, constant consumption wards
off existential insecurities and replaces them with an assurance of a better tomorrow lying
within everyone’s reach (Shachar, Erdem, Cutright, & Fitzsimons, 2011). This (arguably
illusory) sense of personal control and mastery over future life outcomes is most appealing to
those who find their current social standing ungratifying. Indeed, for members of
disadvantaged groups, belief in color-blind meritocracy predicts increased physical and
mental well-being, an effect mediated by a greater sense of personal mastery (McCoy,
Wellman, Cosley, Saslow, & Epel, 2013). Simultaneously, however, it dampens individuals'
resolve to oppose this social order, even as it positions them at a collective disadvantage
(Wiley, Deaux, & Hagelskamp, 2012). These meritocratic and consumeristic ideologies thus
have a strong palliative function for those who are individually or collectively disadvantaged
by the social order (McCoy & Major, 2007).
Finally, globalized-Western culture also promotes a specific understanding of social
reality that further stabilizes the global social order (Costa-Lopes, Dovidio, Pereira, & Jost,
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
16
2013; Kasser et al., 2007). Thus, the perception of a meritocratic reality (i.e., meritocracy as a
descriptive norm) drives the palliative, system legitimizing functions described above (Son
Hing et al., 2011). Defining the existing social order as the unavoidable result of the "way the
world works" – and thus simply the way things are and will continue to be – greatly
impoverishes the potential for imagining alternatives to it (Kasser et al., 2007).
Social identity theory suggests some societal effects of these different palliative
functions. According to the theory, group-level challenge to a social order require (a) that
social mobility of individuals is perceived to be unattainable (i.e., individuals cannot
realistically hope to exit their inferior position and enter into the dominant one); and (b) that
lower-status groups can envision an alternative to an illegitimate social order (Tajfel &
Turner, 1979; Klandermans, 1997; Reicher, 2001). Globalized-Western culture’s palliative
functions frustrate both prerequisites, as they ostensibly provide opportunities for the social
mobility of meritorious individuals, and define the status quo as a stable and legitimate state
of affairs.
In sum, this system is likely most appealing to those positioned as inferior (e.g.,
because of their race, gender, or religion) in "old," particularistic social hierarchies. However,
whereas in many cases these minority group members retain their inferior position in the
"new" social order as well, globalized-Western culture largely quashes the potential for
collective action. For others, alignment with globalized-Western culture offers access to
important resources, or a sense of superiority over collective rivals.
Who is Disenchanted? Vectors of Opposition to Globalized-Western Culture
Because the prevailing social order maximally serves the interests of only a few global
"winners," in almost every cultural group a conflict exists (albeit to varying degrees) between
the global order and the interests of self and ingroup. Despite the relative stability of this
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
17
system, then, individuals and collectives do oppose globalized-Western culture. We suggest
that two distinct options of dissent are evident: a particularistic opposition and a
universalistic opposition. Whereas these vectors of opposition stem from different
motivations, they both result in rejection of the global social order, but not necessarily of
globalized-Western culture's content. Figure 1 (Panel B) depicts these vectors and the
identities they involve.
Particularistic Opposition
As described above, globalized-Western culture may undermine heritage cultures and
threaten their vitality or survival. Maintaining the vitality of particularistic cultures is
arguably a global human interest. Because they offer a unique way of constructing and
responding to the world, their partial or full disappearance impoverishes human possibilities
and wisdom. This loss of cultural diversity, seen in recent decades, is similar to the
catastrophic reduction in natural bio-diversity – both types of diversity are treasure troves of
evolved responses to different challenges, now made inaccessible by mass extinction
(Moghaddam, 2006).
Individuals and groups who perceive such a threat to their heritage culture sometimes
voice particularistic opposition to globalized-Western culture. Heritage cultural identities are
not only central to many individuals’ sense of self, but they also root the individual within a
coherent and meaningful world. Members of cultural groups are thus often eager to maintain
the vitality of their heritages in face of assimilatory pressures from the dominant culture
(Berry, 1997). In the global arena, "reaffirmation" or “revitalization” efforts are clearly
evident in response to pressures imposed by globalized-Western culture (Berry, 2008). These
particularistic rejection buttress a local cultural enclave, "harden" its boundaries (Short,
2001), and position it in opposition to globalized-Western culture. Such opposition exists both
as a "knee-jerk" reaction to the cultural intermixing globalization brings (Chiu et al., 2009;
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
18
Chiu et al., 2011; Torelli, Chiu, Tam, Au, & Keh, 2011), and as a more collectively elaborated
response against globalized-Western cultural values and social order.
Much of the scholarly and lay discussion of particularistic opposition has focused on
religious fundamentalism and nationalism as platforms for the rejection of globalized-Western
culture and the existential uncertainties it brings (e.g., Arnett, 2002; Kinnvall, 2004). From
the perspective of social identity theory, this particularistic rejection of globalized-Western
culture allows lower-status cultural groups to disengage from the global intergroup
comparisons (e.g., in terms of progress and modernity) that render them inferior (e.g.,
"backwards"). Instead, these groups employ alternative comparison dimensions (e.g., cultural
authenticity and distinction, adherence to God’s commands) on which they rank superior to
more globalized rivals.
Studies conducted in Arab societies, widely seen as adversaries of globalized-Western
culture and interests (Alexander, Levin, & Henry, 2005) provide indirect support for these
ideas. For example, even students of the American University of Beirut most commonly
ascribe a barbarian image to the Western world. This understanding acknowledges the global
dominance of the West, yet defines it as transient because of Western culture's substantive
inferiority to the local culture (Alexander et al., 2005). In such adversarial settings,
Globalized-Western culture's universalistic aspirations are recast as missionary, and its value
inconsistencies understood as a hypocritical and cynical masking of Imperialist power
(Moghaddam, 2009). Furthermore, because the global social order is so highly polarized,
those who advocate societal egalitarianism define globalized-Western culture as an apparatus
of global dominance to be opposed whenever and however possible (Alexander et al., 2005;
Levin, Henry, Pratto, & Sidanius, 2003; Sidanius, Henry, Pratto, & Levin, 2004)., In these
settings, preferences for egalitarianism predicted support for violence against the West
(including the 9/11 attacks; Levin et al., 2003).
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
19
Universalistic Opposition
Although perhaps less visible, a second vector of opposition does not reject the values
of globalized-Western culture as a whole, but rather strives to apply its humanist, inclusive
elements more vigorously by challenging the global social order. As described above,
globalized-Western culture perpetuates a hierarchy based on neo-liberal economics and a
global consumer culture (Nafstad & Blakar, 2012). This conflicts with other elements of its
cultural content, such as its emphasis on universal human welfare and a sense of global
citizenship (Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013).
Indeed, if global citizenship is to be taken seriously, it is not possible to disregard
concerns about the (un)sustainability of global economic development. The march of
economic globalization, which lies at the core of the global social order, has incurred great
costs to the natural environment, and the distributive justice of global resources (e.g.,
Babones, 2002; Korczeniewicz & Moran, 1997; cf. Olson, 1997). Stated differently, whereas
globalized-Western culture's neo-liberal practices mandate little concern for the effects of
economic activities on the environment or people in the global periphery, humanistic values
inherent in the same culture promote such concerns. Thus, universalistic opposition to
globalized-Western culture entails the rejection of its social order, but not of its entire cultural
frame. In support of this, research shows that in globally aligned, Western settings,
endorsement of egalitarianism predicts involvement with "anti-globalization" protest and
universalistic opposition of global injustices (Cameron & Nickerson, 2009).
In summary, reactions to globalized-Western culture may be schematized in terms of
cultural identification and rejection, and acceptance of, or opposition to, its social order (see
Figure 1, Panel B). In many cases, the dominant actors on inter- and intra-national levels align
themselves with globalized-Western culture, contributing to its power, while availing
themselves of its resources (Ram, 2004). Dissenting stances toward globalized-Western
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
20
culture may take the forms of particularistic or universalistic opposition. The latter vector
coincides with other emerging strands of positive global identities, such as identification with
all of humanity or the global community (e.g., McFarland, Webb, & Brown, 2012), which has
received detailed empirical attention. Within the current analysis, we understand these
inclusive forms of identification as prioritizing globalized-Western culture's universalist-
humanist impetus, while rejecting the hierarchical social order it simultaneously creates.
Identification with All of Humanity and the World – Potential and Peril
In social psychology, the possibility of identification at the human level was first
recognized as a “hopeful possibility” (Allport, 1954/1979; p. 43) in the shadow of the
despairing realities of the Second World War. The idea of a common human identity, as we
currently know it, has evolved slowly since the 15th century, and has gained increasing
support in recent decades (McFarland, 2011). Given the potential of human or global
identification to facilitate coordinated efforts in response to emerging global challenges (e.g.,
Batalha & Reynolds, 2012), we now examine its social psychological parameters in detail.
Identification with all humanity represents the belief that "all humanity is ‘family’”
(McFarland, 2010, p. 1760). Researchers recently established this form of identification as a
psychologically meaningful construct that is negatively correlated with right-wing
authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and ethnocentrism (McFarland, 2010;
McFarland et al., 2012). More important from the perspective of collective action,
identification with all of humanity predicted commitment to human rights, and behaviors that
would benefit remote others (e.g., donating money to charity; McFarland et al., 2012).
Other recent work (e.g., Buchan et al., 2012; Reese & Kohlmann, 2015; Reese et al.,
2014; Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2012; Türken & Rudmin, 2013) similarly indicates that
identification with a global ingroup facilitates pro-social attitudes and behavioral intentions.
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
21
Using a multilevel public goods dilemma, researchers found that the more strongly people
identified with the world community, the more money they contributed to the global common
good, independent of whether participants expected a return on their investment (Buchan et
al., 2011).. This suggests that participants in this simulation acted out of concern for the
welfare of the world community, rather than their parochial self-interests. Another recent
study provides further, causal support for the association between global identification and
pro-social intentions (Reese, Proch, & Finn, 2015). Participants of this study, conducted in a
developed European context, were either primed with posters implying common humanity, or
not primed at all. In the priming condition, participants donated more to a global charity than
participants in the control condition, an effect mediated by global identity, but not national or
community identities.
The pro-social correlates of inclusive global identities also extend to environmental
actions and sensibilities. To illustrate this, we ran preliminary analyses on data from the
World Value Surveys ("What We Do", n.d.), which is one of the most extensive databases
ever compiled in the social sciences. In each wave of the survey, representative national
samples, accounting for approximately 90% of the world population, are presented with a
standardized series of questions on a range of topics.
Starting with the 5th Wave (2005 to 2009), participants indicated the degree to which
they regarded themselves as a “world citizen” on a 1 to 4 scale.
1
The same question was
repeated in Wave 6 (2010 to 2014). In both waves participants were also asked if they were
members of environmental organizations, and if so, whether their membership was active or
1
Recoded so that higher scores indicate more such identification; For simplicity of
presentation, only univariate analyses are described (see Author, forthcoming, or by request,
for complete details; See Appendix 1 for item wording).
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
22
not. Higher endorsement of world citizenship predicted greater chance of being an active (B =
0.49, SE = 0.22, Wald χ2(1) = 633.35, p < .001) or a non-active member of such an
organization (B = 0.32, SE = 0.13, Wald χ2(1) = 556.73, p < .001), R2Nagelkerke = .02. Specific
behavioral items within each wave reflected the same pattern. In Wave 5, world citizenship
correlated with greater willingness to give money directly or through a tax increase in order to
address environmental issues (r = .20, p < .001). In Wave 6, world citizenship predicted a
greater likelihood of supporting environmental causes by donation or demonstration (B =
0.28, SE = 0.03, Wald χ2(1) = 113.64, p < .001, R2Nagelkerke = .01) in the past two years.
Although these effects are small in size, they support the proposed link between world
citizenship and pro-environmentalism.
In summary, converging evidence from cross-sectional and experimental studies,
which assessed global identification in various ways, suggests that these identities do matter
for globally-minded, pro-social action. Identification with humanity is thus associated with
the belief that every human being deserves the same basic outcomes, and corresponds to a
widening of the sphere of moral inclusion (e.g., Opotow, 1990; Opotow, Gerson, &
Woodside, 2004). The World Value Survey data support this last proposition with regard to
increased environmentalism, often described as a major rallying point for global citizenship
and action (Batalha & Reynolds, 2012).
Potential Limitations of Inclusive Global Identification
Despite the promising implications of research on globally-inclusive identifications,
the realization of Allport’s “hopeful possibility” is constrained by the “special difficulty in
fashioning an in-group out of an entity as embracing as humankind” (Allport, 1954/1979; p.
43). One set of constraints centers on the situational activation of these identifications, which
is closely tied to the immediate perceptual context: a category becomes salient whenever it
offers a meaningful contrast from other social categories (Haslam & Reicher, 2012; Turner et
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
23
al., 1987). Could a human-level ingroup perceptually stand out in many situations? This is an
open question, partly because situational representations of the human ingroup are not as
ubiquitous as those of particularistic identities. Identification, however, is also regarded as a
relatively stable individual characteristic that can become chronically accessible. For some
individuals, then, human identification can remain salient even in the absence of strong
situational cues. Moreover, research indicates that a comparative background is not necessary
for the development of at least some sense of common group membership (e.g., Gaertner,
Iuzzini, Witt, & Oriña, 2006).
Another set of issues focuses on the sheer size and heterogeneity of the human
category. More inclusive and abstractly-defined groups are likely to be less motivationally
satisfying (e.g., in terms of self-esteem, continuity, distinctiveness, belonging, efficacy, and
meaning; Vignoles, Regalia, Manzi, Golledge, & Scabini, 2006) than more immediate,
particularistic identifications. According to optimal distinctiveness theory (Brewer, 1991), for
example, very large social categories are unlikely to provide a satisfactory balance between
the opposing motivations of being assimilated into a category and being distinctive in some
way, simply because they are too inclusive to allow differentiation from other groups.
Relatedly, the content and meaning of the human social category seem difficult to
define. Notably, some operationalizations of global or human-level identification (e.g.,
McFarland et al., 2012), include explicitly pro-social content (e.g., offering help when
needed), which is somewhat different from more generically-assessed identification with that
ingroup (Reese et al., 2015). The meaning attached to the human ingroup itself would have to
be loosely defined if it is to apply equally to individuals all over the world. As a case in point,
even as research links identification with humanity with support of the human rights of distant
others (e.g., Cohrs & Asbrock, 2009; McFarland et al., 2012; Reese et al., 2014), the very
concepts of human rights and civil liberties are arguably bound to the individual-centered
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
24
traditions of Western liberal-humanism. Some claim, then, that human rights cannot be
considered culturally neutral (e.g., Twose & Cohrs, 2015) or indeed, universally helpful (e.g.,
Kymlicka, 2001; but see, for example, Glendon, 2002, on non-Western influences, and
McFarland, 2015, on cross-cultural endorsement). Given the ongoing debate on even these
most fundamental concepts, it is unclear what type of culturally anodyne content could be
assigned to the category of all humans, or how it may specify in any detail a universal way of
constructing a human life, a human society, or indeed, a human psychology (Marsella, 1998).
The common ingroup identity model highlights other psychological challenges
involving inclusive human identification. This model "emphasizes the process of
recategorizing individuals formerly seen as members of different groups within a common,
superordinate, ingroup identity" (Dovidio, Saguy, Gaertner, & Thomas, 2012, p. 245). In the
current context, particularistic groups may be conceived as sources of subordinate, lower-
level identification, in relation to the inclusive superordinate group of humanity. Whereas
numerous studies have shown that a common ingroup identity can alleviate intergroup
tensions, the model also points to the potential pitfalls of such superordinate social
categorizations. Specifically, a one-group representation of the superordinate social
category—in which subordinate groups are subsumed into a unified group—can serve to
stabilize the power relations within the bounds of the inclusive ingroup and legitimize the
status quo (Dovidio et al., 2012). Not surprisingly, members of advantaged subgroups often
prefer such representations, which do not threaten their privileged status. Thus for example,
even a universal appeal for cosmopolitanism (i.e., to immerse oneself in the local culture and
understand other ways of life) is a useful justification for sex tourism in underdeveloped
countries (O’Connell, Davidson, & Sanchez-Taylor, 1995; cf. Skey, 2013).
Indeed, the theoretical possibility that the emergence of a superordinate human
category results in unequal treatment of its subgroups has received some empirical support.
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
25
The ingroup projection model (Mummendey & Wenzel, 1999; for a review, see Wenzel,
Mummendey, & Waldzus, 2007) suggests that within superordinate categorizations,
subgroups achieve relative superiority by perceiving themselves to be highly prototypical of
the superordinate group. Moreover, the perception of the rival subgroup as less representative
of the superordinate group in turn predicts judgment of its members as deviating more from
this prototype and thus legitimizes their derogation. A recent German study demonstrated
these effects in a globalized context: the degree to which participants judged their own
subgroup (i.e., “members of developed countries”; such as Germans) to be prototypical of the
world population predicted less interest in acting against global inequality. Moreover, the
belief that global inequality is legitimate mediated this association (Reese, Berthold, &
Steffens, 2012).
Integration, Implications, and Applications
In summary, we propose three (non-mutually exclusive) types of anchors for social
identities in a globalized world (Figure 1, Panel A). First are particularistic heritage cultures,
which define relatively stable local ingroups and provide them with coherent cultural
worldviews. These worldviews, however, may lose their coherence when faced with the rapid
social change of globalization. Second are globalized cultures and forms of identity that
present themselves as relevant for all human-beings, but like heritage groups, are imbued with
specific cultural meaning and worldviews. This cultural content, such as that described in
relation to globalized-Western culture, renders them exclusive as it may conflict with other
cultures and ways of life. (It is worth noting that whereas globalized-Western culture
currently informs the most dominant of these exclusive global identities, some religions offer
very different visions of the same global scope. Indeed, millions around the world subscribe
to global Islam or Christianity, with their potent universal messages to transcend the old
barriers of nation and heritage and join the community of faithful followers around the
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
26
world.) Third are the seemingly culturally-nonspecific, inclusive forms of global identities.
The emergence of these inclusive global identifications poses special challenges for
psychological theory and social practice.
Interlaced within this conceptual scheme are two major lines of scholarship. One
focuses on the potential "softening" of identities, which may follow from a growing
awareness of shared humanity, and foster identification with inclusive global categories (e.g.,
McFarland et al., 2012). The other conveys the converse possibility that globalization
"hardens" particularistic, local identities, resulting in exclusionary, protectionist, and
potentially fundamentalist responses (e.g., Alexander et al., 2005; Kinnvall, 2004; Short,
2001). In this vein, a growing body of literature documents such threat reactions whenever
groups face the possibility of being assimilated, merged, or otherwise altered by intercultural
contact or social development of the kind entailed by globalization (e.g., Smeekes &
Verkuyten, 2013; Wohl, Branscombe, & Reysen, 2010, Study 2). Analyzing these complex
dynamics with respect to multiple levels of collective identity expands our theoretical scope,
and calls attention to how the global infuses the local, and vice versa. Below we consider
some specific challenges and opportunities involving the dynamics of exclusive and inclusive
globalized identities.
Exclusive Global Identities: Social and Theoretical Challenges
Exclusive global identities form around a shared cultural worldview and content. This
cultural content makes them less vulnerable to the kinds of limitations we discussed with
respect to inclusive forms of global identification. Because of their exclusive nature, however,
they are not conducive to cooperation on a fully global scale, even if (as with globalized-
Western culture) they foster connections between aligned nations. Hence, exclusive global
identities are not necessarily a step towards an evenly inclusive human future. Indeed, even as
globalized-Western culture professes to promote justice for all, it might itself be a cause of
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
27
social injustice and strife.
Social comparison and mobility. Although globalized-Western culture promotes the
pursuit of personal happiness for every human being, it concomitantly establishes a system of
social, economic, and political arrangements that put many at a disadvantage. A recent meta-
analysis suggests that in more liberal (i.e., globally-aligned) societies, dominant and non-
dominant groups are more polarized in their view of society and their demands of it (Lee,
Pratto, & Johnson, 2011). If societies have effective means of negotiating these polarized
demands, the result may be a drive for greater equality. However, on the world stage, this
does not seem to be the case. Some global indicators point to gains made in the living
conditions of the abject poor (e.g., reduction of extreme poverty, fights against malaria and
tuberculosis, or political participation of women) while others do not (e.g., diminished
progress in fighting undernourishment; United Nations, 2014). Importantly, such global gains
go hand in hand with an overall increase in global inequality, at least in purely economic
terms. There is evidence, for example, that the economic dominance of Western countries has
only increased since the early 1980s (Milanovic, 2003, 2005).
Hence, globalized-Western culture provides the overarching liberal context in which
demands for equality are made, but often not met. It facilitates social comparison on a global
scale, and emphasizes the importance of achieving material wealth and comfort (i.e., "quality
of life") while setting unrealistically high comparative standards (Moghaddam, 2009). If these
perceptions of unjust distribution of outcomes and feelings of relative deprivation galvanize
collective identities, they become powerful engines of social change and collective challenges
to the status quo (Van Zomeren, Postmes, & Spears, 2008). However, if the potential for
collective action is effectively quelled by globalized-Western culture’s palliative abilities,
then individuals may be left without a clear course of action, except to turn against the global
system (Moghaddam, 2009), or try to move to its centers. Such movement is evident in ever
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
28
increasing numbers of immigrants and refugees, which have become a pressing cause of
humanitarian and local concerns (Hopkins, 2010).
Collective identities and the social order. Globalized-Western culture has the
potential to destabilize some forms of social injustice embedded in particularistic social
systems. At times, however, this destabilizing effect brings about contrary, "hardening"
reactions, accentuating intergroup differences and tensions (e.g., Moghaddam, 2009). Such
particularistic opposition (see depiction in Figure 1, Panel B) energizes calls within heritage
groups to defensively return to their cultural and religious fundamentals. Often, lower-status
elements within the local social hierarchy are re-subjugated in the process (e.g., reinforced
gender orthodoxy at the expense of women's rights and lives; Connell, 1998).
Within more global aligned societies, globalized-Western culture can legitimize the
maltreatment of rival outgroups, even as it prioritizes universality and inclusion. There is
recent evidence, for example, that the global discourse of democracy justifies violence
perpetrated against non-democratic others (Staerklé, Falomir Pichastor, Pereira, Berent, &
Butera, in press). Similarly, Jewish-Israelis instructed to write a short essay about their
reasons for aligning themselves with this global cultural frame (in comparison to writing
about reasons for their non-alignment or an unrelated topic) were less willing to allocate
donations to humanitarian support for Palestinian civilians harmed during the 2014 war in
Gaza (Rosenmann, 2015). Such exclusionary responses towards local outgroups are in clear
violation of globalized-Western culture's humanitarian values. Indeed, global political
institutions and public opinion widely criticize Israel's treatment of Arab civilians.
Earlier we described the importance of ingroup position within the local and global
system in shaping the reactions to globalized-Western culture. This is particularly important
as it involves issues of collective emotions, which play a key role in intergroup conflicts
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
29
(Halperin, Cohen-Chen, & Goldenberg, 2014). In the Muslim Middle-Eastern context, for
example, research suggests that many (and perhaps most) understand globalized-Western
culture as a barbarian force, powerful and malicious but substantively inferior to the ancient
cultures of the region (Alexander et al., 2005; Levin et al., 2003; Sidanius et al., 2004). As
globalized-Western culture increasingly penetrates local heritages, many experience
humiliation as the ingroup is vanquished (at least symbolically) by its inferior opponents
(Fattah & Fierke, 2009). A mirror-image of these perceptions creates a sense of humiliation in
globally-aligned societies as well, whenever they are effectively threatened by these
"backwards" forces. In both cases, calls to restore the ingroup’s lost standing and honor
resonate across the region, and energize its violent clashes.
Critically, the fault lines between those who align with globalized-Western culture and
those who campaign against it underlie many of the violent intergroup conflicts plaguing the
world today. The rhetoric re-introduced by the "clash of civilizations" thesis (Huntington,
1996) seems to frame many of these conflicts. According to this thesis, such conflicts are
expected to intensify further, as different exclusive global identities (e.g., global Islam) rise to
challenge globalized-Western culture's hegemony.
The Conceptualization and Operationalization of Inclusive Global Identities
Defining and operationalizing inclusive globalized identities presents some theoretical
challenges. Indeed, the “world community” (Buchan et al., 2011), “all of humanity”
(McFarland, 2010), or “global citizenship” (Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2012) are very broad
social representations that include the heterogeneity of roughly 7 billion individuals and their
countless intersecting, more localized social categories.
The meaning of inclusive global identity. Research on identification with humanity
and other inclusive global identities will undoubtedly continue to demonstrate their
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
30
psychological meaningfulness. However, more nuanced exploration of their behavioral
outcomes will have to convincingly pit them against the interests of self, heritage ingroup, and
established social systems, as is often the case in the real world (Feygina, Jost, & Goldsmith,
2010). Researchers should also pay careful attention to the exact mental image conjured by
globally-inclusive identity terms. Because the content of the human social category is difficult
to define, it can assume very different meanings, some of which can justify or normalize
intergroup violence (e.g., by attributing an inherent destructiveness to humans; see Morton,
Hornsey, & Postmes, 2012).
Moreover, people are motivated to project the content of salient subordinate ingroups
(e.g., their nation) onto inclusive superordinate categories (e.g., humans; Wenzel et al., 2007).
This ingroup projection can reinforce those particularistic, subordinate identities, and bolster
their superiority (Reese et al., 2012). Thus, perceived prototypicality vis-à-vis the human
category seems to drive opposite outcomes than identification with humanity. According to
the ingroup projection model, however, identification with both a subgroup and the inclusive
superordinate group are required to judge the ingroup as more prototypical (Wenzel et al.,
2007). Therefore, future studies should aim to reconcile the effects of both prototypicality and
identification with respect to the human ingroup.
Nonetheless, research suggests that individuals tend to perceive members of rival sub-
groups as deviating from the superordinate prototype. When the superordinate category
comprises of the entirety of humanity, such deviation might call rivals' very humanness into
question. While a full exploration of dehumanization is beyond the current scope, the
perception of others as somehow less than human is a powerful determinant of negative
intergroup dynamics, and indeed, horrific atrocities (reviewed in Haslam, 2006). In short, the
abstraction of content required for global identities to be inclusive of all, may paradoxically
open the door for new forms of (sub)group derogation and systemic inequalities.
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
31
Agency and inclusive global identities. A related problem with a simple appeal to an
inclusive humanity is that it is devoid of the cultural and political realities that give meaning
and agency to particularistic identities. Thus, whereas human or global identities may focus
attention on intergroup inequalities (e.g., Reese et al., 2014), they do not reflect the local
circumstances and relations of power in which members of disadvantaged groups negotiate
their social positions and identities. It is necessary, then, to examine how and when global
identities may enrich lower-level identities, and how local identities can provide platforms for
global presence and action (e.g., see Gigoux & Samson, 2010).
This direction may be aided by dual-identity representations of superordinate social
groups (Dovidio et al. 2012). In contrast to the one-group alternative, dual-identity
representations retain the divisions between subordinate groups within the higher-level
grouping. Whereas these dual-identity representations may not always mitigate intergroup
tensions as effectively as one-group representations, this tension can facilitate social change.
Indeed, members of disadvantaged groups favor this type of representation, as it does not
deflect attention away from existing status differentials (see Dovidio et al., 2012). Dual
identities may also foster a new sense of moral inclusion which in turn could de-legitimize the
social ranking of sub-groups, and sensitize dominant group members to claims of
disadvantage.
The dual identity model echoes research on the psychology of acculturation. This
literature stresses the adaptability of integration strategies, whereby heritage cultures retain
their vitality, while their members simultaneously value contact with the dominant culture
(e.g., Berry, 1997; Berry, Phinney, Sam, & Vedder, 2006). This allows for reciprocal
influences to flow to and from each culture, consistent with an inclusive, multicultural
superordinate framework in which issues of power are continually negotiated.
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
32
Toward a psychology of cosmopolitanism. Elsewhere in the social sciences, there is
a well-articulated literature on cosmopolitanism, which has various facets and definitions
(e.g., Skey, 2012). In contrast to a set of mutually exclusive identities, cosmopolitanism is
conceptualized precisely to reflect forms of social interconnectedness and blended affiliations
engendered by globalization. Consistent with the notion of “rooted” cosmopolitanism
(Appiah, 2006), people can regard themselves as “citizens of the world” without rejecting
their local or national culture. Emerging empirical evidence indicates that this is part of a
“cosmopolitan disposition” involving interest in diverse cultural products (e.g., food and
media) and the endorsement of cultural diversity and human rights (Woodward, Skrbis, &
Bean, 2008).
Moreover, contemporary conceptualizations of cosmopolitanism explicitly reject
universalism because it obscures real differences between cultures and their history, including
those that reflect colonial patterns of subjugation, domination, and Eurocentricity (Beck &
Sznaider, 2005). Cosmopolitanism—referring both to a blend of collective identities and a
cultural manifestation of globalization processes—is fostered (a) when people are encouraged
to maintain dual identifications (i.e., retain their particularistic heritage and also value their
attachment to the overarching, dominant culture); and (b) when multiculturalism is itself a
valued part of the superordinate identity (e.g., Cameron & Berry, 2008). The characteristics of
resilient multicultural societies may thus be extrapolated to the global arena, empowering
dual-identity representations of the global superordinate group. Under such conditions,
perhaps globality could indeed become a more even platform for intergroup cooperation and
equality, in a way that retains the enormous wealth of human cultural diversity. The
interwoven benefits and perils of globality, and associated reactions, are summarized in Panel
C of Figure 1.
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
33
But… "It’s a Small World (After All)"
It is worth reiterating that social identities do not emerge in vacuum, but rather operate
within a constrained set of options in specific sociocultural contexts. Context imbues social
categories with meaning and value, making them suitable bases for individual identifications
(Tajfel & Turner, 1979). In this sense, the revitalization, rediscovery, or outright invention of
new cultural content is the rule rather than the exception in the construction of social
identities. For example, the notion of nation-states, which comprise our political world, is
very recent in historical terms. Securing loyalty, obedience, and commitment to these
"imagined communities" requires the mobilization of a host of discourses, historical
narratives and cultural symbols. These are used to justify the nation’s existence and present it
simply as the way things are and always should be (Anderson, 2006). Having been socialized
into these nation-states it is hard for many to imagine a world without them. Nonetheless,
because all social identities and social orders were formulated and reformulated through
social processes, they cannot be considered an immutable, naturally occurring feature of
social and psychological reality.
It follows that whereas at this point in human history, globalized identities may
perpetuate forms of social injustice, the future can hold other options. Cultures and identities
are fluid and dynamic, influenced by changing circumstances and shaping them reciprocally.
(Kashima, 2007, 2008) Thus, the contemporary social reality that renders inclusive globality a
somewhat frail and problematic prospect may be changed. Additionally, if inclusive identities
gain momentum, we can expect their meaning and content to become clearer, and less
susceptible to the pitfalls detailed above. With this societal shift, people may become more
inclined to self-categorize in such globally inclusive terms, reinventing social reality again, as
humankind has done countless times before.
Temporal comparisons. One way to bring identity change into focus is to
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
34
operationalize comparisons across time. This could also effectively provide a comparative
background for abstract categories, such as identification with humankind, that are typically
not salient in everyday situations. Thus, people can be encouraged to self-categorize into a
globally inclusive ingroup by contrasting it with historical alternatives, or with possible future
versions of humanity (cf. Mummendey, Klink, Mielke, Wenzel, & Blanz, 1999). Other
scholars (de la Sablonnière, Bourgeois, & Najih, 2013; Postmes, Rabinovich, Morton, & van
Zomeren, 2014) have argued that temporal comparisons are both likely and influential in the
context of dramatic social change of the type we have discussed here. Taken together, it
seems plausible that members of a human ingroup may use its past or future representations
as a comparison standard, making "us humans" a potent social identity after all.
Common fate. Another way to change the impact of globalized identities focuses less
on their content, and more on the interconnectedness of fate engendered by globalization
processes. The potential of a social group to satisfy identity motives depends on the
“groupness” or entitativity of a social category (Hamilton, Sherman, & Lickel, 1998), which
reflects the degree of interconnectedness of group members. Members of a highly entitative
group come to perceive themselves, and their futures, as bound together. Moreover, when
people believe they share a common fate, they tend to include all concerned within the bounds
of the same category (Ashmore, Deaux, & McLaughlin-Volpe, 2004). Because globalization
involves “the intensification of worldwide social relations which link distant localities in such
a way that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away” (Giddens,
1990, p. 64), it encourages the realization that human-beings do indeed share a common fate.
Thus, identification with humanity might supply individuals with meaning derived from this
common fate, and the agency of cooperative efforts beyond that of their heritage cultures
(Reese et al., 2014; Reese & Kohlmann, 2015).
As awareness of global interdependence intensifies, and as potential global scenarios
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
35
become bleaker, potent inclusive identities may indeed emerge. Thus, an additional path
toward encouraging the formation of cooperative global identities is to confront individuals
and nations with challenges and opportunities that can be dealt with only collectively, on a
global level. There are multiple forms of dire global contingencies (e.g., economic crises,
terrorism, and infectious diseases) that could spur humanity to recognize a shared global fate.
Of these, the challenges involving with climate change are arguably the most monumental,
illustrating the need for international cooperation, the difficulties of attributing (and
assuming) collective responsibility, and the recognition of local vulnerabilities.
In their study of international efforts to counter these ongoing environmental crises,
Batalha and Reynolds (2012) point to the urgent need for a re-conceptualization of identity in
global terms, if humanity is to effectively respond to these challenges. Based on the
actualizing social and personal identity resources model (ASPIRe; Haslam, Eggins, &
Reynolds, 2003), these authors described how a meaningful superordinate identity in global
climate negotiations could be induced. Specifically, the model proposes that relevant
subgroups (e.g., nation states) form collectives of the like-minded (see also Eggins, O’Brien,
Reynolds, Haslam, & Crocker, 2008), which in turn engage in a process of establishing a
superordinate framework. In other words, the heterogeneity of nations and cultures may be
transformed in a way that “integrates individual and group differences in a higher-order goal
that is shared by all members” (Batalha & Reynolds, 2012, p. 749; see Haslam et al., 2003).
Calamities hence carry the potential to energize common identities, and drive their members
to take collective action (van Zomeren et al., 2008). These efforts, however, also require
group leaders to actively construct and promote cooperative social identities, and make them
compelling representations of social reality (see Haslam, Reicher, & Platow, 2011).
Concluding Remarks
Never before in human history have so many identities been possible for so many
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
36
people. Inasmuch as globalization has provoked a “crisis of identities” (Kennedy, 2001), it
presents a turning point, where individuals can re-position and re-evaluate their self-
definitions within a global context (Arnett, 2002; Giddens, 1999), and a point of difficulty,
where global interdependence threatens human security and development (United Nations,
2000). This threat is not only to humankind's future (e.g., catastrophic climate change), as
some dangers are already clearly evident; in this interconnected "World at War" (United
Nations Refugee Agency, 2014) the number of forcefully displaced people, for example, has
reached a new high. This crisis, however, also presents opportunities to explore and promote
new approaches to global problems. Indeed, we contend that paths to both cooperation and
conflict are contingent on the emergent dynamics of globalized identities.
With these perils and potentials in mind, the cultivation of a cosmopolitan orientation,
a shared sense of global identity—one potent enough to transcend parochial subgroup
interests in the face of these imminent collective crises—is a desirable goal. Equally
important is that this re-conceptualized globality is multiculturally framed, encouraging
discussions of differences between sub-groups, instead of silencing them under imposed
sameness. The utility of this approach in intra-national settings (Dovidio et al., 2012) warrants
its extrapolation to the global arena. A next step could thus be to promote multiple-identity
representations of the world-wide community of humanity, replacing the endless competition
over symbolic superiority with mutual intergroup respect. Within such a frame of reciprocal
responsibility, objective inequalities can be negotiated and mitigated consensually, as the
greater human common good takes precedence.
Arguably, time is running out for humanity to opt out of its destructive trajectory, and
choose instead what has been the dream and goal of countless visionaries. This dream may
indeed be realized if we heed JFK’s (Kennedy, 1963) remarks:
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
37
So let us not be blind to our differences, but let us also direct attention to our common
interests and the means by which those differences can be resolved. And if we cannot
end now our differences, at least we can help make the world safe for diversity. For in
the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet.
We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children’s futures. And we are all
mortal."
In this spirit, we urge our professional community to engage with the problems and
promises of globality. Through rigorous research, effective intervention, and compassionate
social critique, psychology can make a significant difference in the rapidly globalizing world,
and the human lives that comprise it. In this era of "globalisation of responsibility" (Mandela,
2000), this is an obligation we can no longer avoid.
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
38
References
Alexander, M. G., Levin, S., & Henry, P. J. (2005). Image theory, social identity, and social
dominance: Structural characteristics and individual motives underlying international
images. Political Psychology, 26(1), 27-45. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00408.x
Allport, G.W. (1954/1979). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of
nationalism. London, UK: Verso.
Aneesh, A. (2012). Negotiating globalization: Men and women of India’s call centers.
Journal of Social Issues, 68(3), 514-533. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.2012.01761.x
Appiah, K.A. (2006). Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a world of strangers. New York: W.W.
Norton.
Arnett, J. J. (2002). The psychology of globalization. American Psychologist, 57(10), 774-
783. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.57.10.774
Ashmore, R. D., Deaux, K., & McLaughlin-Volpe, T. (2004). An organizing framework for
collective identity: Articulation and significance of multidimensionality. Psychological
Bulletin, 130(1), 80-114. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.130.1.80
Babones, S. J. (2002). The country-level income structure of the world-economy. Journal of
World-Systems Research, 11(1), 29-55.
Batalha, L., & Reynolds, K. J. (2012). ASPIRing to mitigate climate change: Superordinate
identity in global climate negotiations. Political Psychology, 33, 743-760. doi:
10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00896.x
Beck, U. (2000). What is globalization? Cambridge: Polity Press.
Beck, U., & Sznaider, N. (2005). Cosmopolitan sociology. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), Encyclopedia of
social theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doi: 10.4135/9781412952552.n63
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
39
Becker, J. C., & Tausch, N. (2014). When group memberships are negative: The concept,
measurement, and behavioral implications of psychological disidentification. Self and
Identity, 13(3), 294-321. doi: 10.1080/15298868.2013.819991
Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology: An
International Review, 46, 5-34. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.1997.tb01087.x
Berry, J. W. (2008). Globalisation and acculturation. International Journal of Intercultural
Relations, 32(4), 328-336. doi: 10.1016/j.ijintrel.2008.04.001
Berry, J. W., Phinney, J. S., Sam, D. L., & Vedder, P. (2006). Immigrant youth:
Acculturation, identity, and adaptation. Applied Psychology: An International Review,
55, 303-332. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2006.00256.x
Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 475-482. doi:
10.1177/0146167291175001
Buchan, N. R., Brewer, M. B., Grimalda, G., Wilson, R. K., Fatas, E., & Foddy, M. (2011).
Global social identity and global cooperation. Psychological Science, 22(6), 821. doi:
10.1177/0956797611409590
Cameron, J.E., & Berry, J.W. (2008). True patriot love: Structure and predictors of Canadian
pride. Canadian Ethnic Studies, 40(3), 17-41. doi: 10.1353/ces.2008.0022
Cameron, J. E., & Nickerson, S. L. (2009). Predictors of protest among anti-globalization
demonstrators. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39(3), 734-761. doi:
10.1111/j.1559-1816.2009.00458.x
Celebi, E., Verkuyten, M., Köse, T., & Maliepaard, M. (2014). Out-group trust and conflict
understandings: The perspective of Turks and Kurds in Turkey. International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, 40, 64-75. doi: 10.1016/j.ijintrel.2014.02.002
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
40
Chiu, C., Gries, P., Torelli, C. J., & Cheng, S. Y. (2011). Toward a social psychology of
globalization. Journal of Social Issues, 67(4), 663-676. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-
4560.2011.01721.x
Chiu, C., Mallorie, L., Keh, H. T., & Law, W. (2009). Perceptions of culture in multicultural
space: Joint presentation of images from two cultures increases in-group attribution of
culture-typical characteristics. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40(2), 282-300.
doi:10.1177/0022022108328912
Cohrs, J. C., & Asbrock, F. (2009). Right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation
and prejudice against threatening and competitive ethnic groups. European Journal of
Social Psychology, 39(2), 270-289. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.545
Connell, R. W. (1998). Masculinities and globalization. Men and Masculinities, 1(1), 3-23.
doi: 10.1177/1097184X98001001001
Costa-Lopes, R., Dovidio, J. F., Pereira, C. R., & Jost, J. T. (2013). Social psychological
perspectives on the legitimation of social inequality: Past, present and future. European
Journal of Social Psychology, 43(4), 229-237. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.1966
de la Sablonnière, R., Bourgeois, L. F., & Najih, M. (2013). Dramatic social change: A social
psychological perspective. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 1(1), 253-272.
Dittmar, H. (2007). The costs of consumer culture and the "Cage within": The impact of the
material "Good life" and "Body perfect" ideals on individuals’ identity and well-being.
Psychological Inquiry, 18(1), 23-31. doi: 10.1080/10478400701389045
Dixon, J. C., & Ergin, M. (2010). Explaining anti‐Kurdish beliefs in Turkey: Group
competition, identity, and globalization. Social Science Quarterly, 91(5), 1329-1348.
doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6237.2010.00734.x
Dovidio., J. F., Saguy, T., Gaertner, S. L., & Thomas, E. L. (2012). From attitudes to
(In)action: The darker side of “we”. In Dixon, J. & Levine, M. (Eds.), Beyond the
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
41
‘Prejudice Problematic’: Extending the social psychology of intergroup conflict,
inequality, and social change (pp. 248-269). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
Dreher, A., & Gaston, N. (2008). Has globalization increased inequality?. Review of
International Economics, 16(3), 516-536. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9396.2008.00743.x
Eggins, R., O’Brien, A. T., Reynolds, K. J., Haslam, S. A., & Crocker, A. S. (2008).
Refocusing the focus group: AIRing as a basis for effective workplace planning. British
Journal of Management, 19, 277–293. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2007.00541.x
Elsbach, K. D., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Defining who you are by what you're not:
Organizational disidentification and the National Rifle Association. Organization
Science, 12(4), 393-413. doi: 10.1287/orsc.12.4.393.10638
Encarnación, O. G. (2014). Gay rights: Why democracy matters. Journal of Democracy, 25,
90-104. doi: 10.1353/jod.2014.0044
Fattah, K., & Fierke, K. M. (2009). A clash of emotions: The politics of humiliation and
political violence in the Middle East. European Journal of International
Relations, 15(1), 67-93. doi: 10.1177/1354066108100053
Feygina, I., Jost, J. T., & Goldsmith, R. E. (2010). System justification, the denial of global
warming, and the possibility of "system-sanctioned change" Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 36(3), 326-338. doi: 10.1177/0146167209351435
Fu, J. H. Y., & Chiu, C. Y. (2007). Local culture’s responses to globalization. Journal of
Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38(5), 636-653. doi: 10.1177/0022022107305244
Gaertner, L., Iuzzini, J., Witt, M. G., & Oriña, M. M. (2006). Us without them: evidence for
an intragroup origin of positive in-group regard. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 90(3), 426-439. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.426
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
42
Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Giddens, A. (1999). Runaway world: How globalization is reshaping our lives. New York:
Routledge.
Gigoux, C., & Samson, C. (2010). Globalization and Indigenous peoples: New old patterns. In
B.S. Turner (Ed.), The Routledge International Handbook of Globalization Studies (pp.
287-311). New York: Routledge.
Gjerde, P.F. (2004). Culture, power, and experience: Toward a person-centered cultural
psychology. Human Development, 47, 138-157. doi: 10.1159/000077987
Glendon, M. A. (2002). A world made new: Eleanor Roosevelt and the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights. New York: Random House.
Halperin, E., Cohen-Chen, S., & Goldenberg, A. (2014). Indirect emotion regulation in
intractable conflicts: A new approach to conflict resolution. European Review of Social
Psychology, 25(1), 1-31. doi: 10.1080/10463283.2014.923155
Hamilton, D. L., Sherman, S. J., & Lickel, B. (1998). Perceiving social groups: The
importance of the entitativity continuum. In C. Sedikides, J. Schopler, & C.A. Insko
(Eds.), Intergroup cognition and intergroup behavior (pp. 47-74). Mahwah, NJ, US:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hammack, P. L. (2008). Narrative and the cultural psychology of identity. Personality and
Social Psychology Review, 12(3), 222-247. doi: 10.1177/1088868308316892
Haslam, N. (2006). Dehumanization: An integrative review. Personality and Social
Psychology Review, 10(3), 252-264. doi: 10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_4
Haslam, S. A., Eggins, R. A., & Reynolds, K. J. (2003). The ASPIRe model: Actualizing
social and personal identity resources to enhance organizational outcomes. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76, 83–113. doi:
10.1348/096317903321208907
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
43
Haslam, S.A., Reicher, S.D. & Platow, M.J. (2011). The new psychology of leadership:
Identity, influence, and power. New York: Psychology Press. doi: 10.1111/pops.12046
Henry, P. J., Sidanius, J., Levin, S., & Pratto, F. (2005). Social dominance orientation,
authoritarianism, and support for intergroup violence between the Middle East and
America. Political Psychology, 26(4), 569-583. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00432.x
Hermans, H. J., & Dimaggio, G. (2007). Self, identity, and globalization in times of
uncertainty: A dialogical analysis. Review of General Psychology, 11(1), 31-61. doi:
10.1037/1089-2680.11.1.31
Hopkins, D. J. (2010). Politicized places: Explaining where and when immigrants provoke
local opposition. American Political Science Review, 104(01), 40-60. doi:
10.1017/s0003055409990360
Hornsey, M.J., & Hogg, M.A. (2000). Assimilation and diversity: An integrative model of
subgroup relations. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 143-156. doi:
10.1207/s15327957pspr0402_03
Huntington, S. P. (1996). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. Penguin
Books UK.
Inglehart, R., & Baker, W. E. (2000). Modernization, cultural change, and the persistence of
traditional values. American Sociological Review, 65(1), 19-51. doi: 10.2307/2657288
Kashima, Y. (2007). Globalization, diversity and universal Darwinism. Culture &
Psychology, 13(1), 129-139. doi: 10.1177/1354067X07073666
Kashima, Y. (2008). A social psychology of cultural dynamics: Examining how cultures are
formed, maintained, and transformed. Social and Personality Psychology
Compass, 2(1), 107-120. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00063.x
Kasser, T., Cohn, S., Kanner, A. D., & Ryan, R. M. (2007). Some costs of American
corporate capitalism: A psychological exploration of value and goal conflicts.
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
44
Psychological Inquiry, 18(1), 1-22. doi: 10.1080/10478400701386579
Kennedy, J. F. (1963). American University Speech. Retrieved (11.2.2014) from
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/primary-resources/jfk-
university/
Kennedy, P. (2001). Introduction: Globalization and the crisis of identities? In P. Kennedy &
C.J. Danks (Eds.), Globalization and national identities: Crisis or opportunity? (pp. 1-
28). New York: Palgrave.
Kinnvall, C. (2004). Globalization and religious nationalism: Self, identity, and the search for
ontological security. Political Psychology, 25(5), 741-767. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-
9221.2004.00396.x
Klandermans, B.(1997). The social psychology of protest. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Kymlicka, W. (2001). Politics in the vernacular: Nationalism, multiculturalism, and
citizenship. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Lee, I., Pratto, F., & Johnson, B. T. (2011). Intergroup consensus/disagreement in support of
group-based hierarchy: An examination of socio-structural and psycho-cultural factors.
Psychological Bulletin, 137(6), 1029-1064. doi: 10.1037/a0025410
Levin, S., Henry, P. J., Pratto, F., & Sidanius, J. (2003). Social dominance and social identity
in Lebanon: Implications for support of violence against the west. Group Processes &
Intergroup Relations, 6(4), 353-368. doi: 10.1177/13684302030064003
Mandela, N. (2000). Speech on receiving the Freedom Award from the National Civil Rights
Museum. Retrieved (9.2.2014) from
http://db.nelsonmandela.org/speeches/pub_view.asp?pg=item&ItemID=NMS919&txtstr
=22%20November
Marsella, A. J. (1998). Toward a “global-community psychology”: Meeting the needs of a
changing world. American Psychologist, 53, 1282-1291. Doi: 10.1037/0003-
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
45
066X.53.12.1282
McCoy, S. K., & Major, B. (2007). Priming meritocracy and the psychological justification of
inequality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(3), 341-351. doi:
10.1016/j.jesp.2006.04.009
McCoy, S. K., Wellman, J. D., Cosley, B., Saslow, L., & Epel, E. (2013). Is the belief in
meritocracy palliative for members of low status groups? Evidence for a benefit for self‐
esteem and physical health via perceived control. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 43, 307-318. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.1959
McFarland, S. (2010). Authoritarianism, social dominance, and other roots of generalized
prejudice. Political Psychology, 31, 453-477. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00765.x
McFarland, S. (2011). Presidential address: The slow creation of humanity. Political
Psychology, 32, 1-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00801.x
McFarland, S., & Mathews, M. (2005). Who cares about human rights? Political Psychology,
26, 365-385. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00422.x
McFarland, S., Webb, M., & Brown, D. (2012). All humanity is my ingroup: A measure and
studies of identification with all humanity. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 103(5), 830-853. doi: 10.1037/a0028724
McFarland, S. (2015). Culture, individual differences, and support for human rights: A
general review. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 21(1), 10-27. doi:
10.1037/pac0000083
Milanovic, B. (2003). The two faces of globalization: Against globalization as we know it.
World Development, 31, 667-683. doi: 10.1016/s0305-750x(03)00002-0
Milanovic, B. (2005). Worlds apart: Measuring international and global inequality.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Moghaddam, F. M. (2006). Catastrophic evolution, culture and diversity management policy.
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
46
Culture & Psychology, 12(4), 415-434. doi:10.1177/1354067X06067145
Moghaddam, F. M. (2009). Commentary: Omniculturalism: Policy solutions to
fundamentalism in the era of fractured globalization. Culture & Psychology, 15(3), 337-
347. doi: 10.1177/1354067x09337867
Mok, A., & Morris, M. W. (2012). Managing two cultural identities the malleability of
bicultural identity integration as a function of induced global or local
processing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(2), 233-246. doi:
10.1177/0146167211426438
Morton, T.A., Hornsey, M.J., & Postmes, T. (2012). Humanizing others without normalizing
harm: The role of human concepts and categories in intergroup reconciliation and
forgiveness. In K.J. Jonas & T.A. Morton (Eds.), Restoring civil societies: The
psychology of intervention and engagement following crisis (pp. 156-174). West
Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Mummendey, A., & Wenzel, M. (1999). Social discrimination and tolerance in intergroup
relations: Reactions to intergroup difference. Personality and Social Psychology
Review, 3(2), 158-174. doi: 10.1207/s15327957pspr0302_4
Mummendey, A., Klink, A., Mielke, R., Wenzel, M., & Blanz, M. (1999). Socio-structural
characteristics of intergroup relations and identity management strategies: Results from
a field study in East Germany. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 259-285.
doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199903/05)29:2/3<259::AID-EJSP927>3.0.CO;2-F
Nafstad, H. E., & Blakar, R. M. (2012). Ideology and social psychology. Social and
Personality Psychology Compass, 6(4), 282-294. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-
9004.2012.00428.x
O’Connell-Davidson J, & Sanchez-Taylor J. (1995) Child Prostitution and Sex Tourism:
Dominican Republic. Bangkok: ECPAT International.
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
47
O’Shaughnessy, J., & O’Shaughnessy, N. J. (2002). Marketing, the consumer society and
hedonism. European Journal of Marketing, 36(5/6), 524-547. doi:
10.1108/03090560210422871
Opotow, S. (1990). Moral exclusion and injustice: An introduction. Journal of Social Issues,
46, 1-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1990.tb00268.x
Opotow, S., Gerson, J., & Woodside, S. (2005). From moral exclusion to moral inclusion:
Theory for teaching peace. Theory into Practice, 44(4), 303-318. doi:
10.1207/s15430421tip4404_4
Pew Global Attitudes Project (2003, June). Views of a changing world 2003. Washington,
D.C.: The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press.
Postmes, T., Rabinovich, A., Morton, T., & van Zomeren, M. (2014). Toward sustainable
social identities: Including our collective future into the self-concept. In H.C.M. van
Trip (Ed.), Encouraging sustainable behavior: Psychology and the environment
(pp.185-201). New York and London: Psychology Press.
Ram, U. (2004). Glocommodification: How the global consumes the local – McDonald’s in
Israel. Current Sociology, 52(1), 11-31. doi: 10.1177/0011392104039311
Reese, G. & Kohlmann, F. (2015). Feeling global, acting ethically: Global identification and
fair-trade consumption. The Journal of Social Psychology, 155, 98-106. doi:
10.1080/00224545.2014.992850
Reese, G. & Lauenstein, O. (2014). The Eurozone crisis: Psychological mechanisms
undermining and supporting European solidarity. Social Sciences, 3, 160-171.
Reese, G., Berthold, A., & Steffens, M. C. (2012). We are the world – and they are not:
Prototypicality for the world community, legitimacy, and responses to global inequality.
Political Psychology, 33(5), 683-700. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00892.x
Reese, G., Proch, J., & Cohrs, J. C. (2014). Individual differences in responses to global
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
48
inequality. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 14, 217-238.
Reese, G., Proch, J., & Finn, C. (2015). Identification with all humanity: The role of self-
definition and self-investment. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 426-440.
Reicher, S. (2001). The psychology of crowd dynamics. In M.A. Hogg & R.S. Tisdale (Eds.),
Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Group processes (pp. 182-208). Oxford, UK:
Blackwell.
Reicher, S. & Haslam, S. A. (2006). Rethinking the psychology of tyranny: The BBC prison
study. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 1-40. doi: 10.1348/014466605x48998
Reicher, S. (2004). The context of social identity: Domination, resistance, and change.
Political Psychology, 25, 921-945. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00403.x
Reicher, S., & Hopkins, N. (2001). Self and nation. London, UK: Sage.
Reysen, S., & Katzarska-Miller, I. (2013). A model of global citizenship: Antecedents and
outcomes. International Journal of Psychology, 48(5), 858-870.
doi:10.1080/00207594.2012.701749
Rindfleisch, A., Burroughs, J. E., & Wong, N. (2009). The safety of objects: Materialism,
existential insecurity, and brand connection. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(1), 1-
16. doi: 10.1086/595718
Ritzer, G. (2009). McDonaldization: The reader. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Rosenmann, A. (2015). Alignment with globalized Western culture: Between inclusionary
values and an exclusionary social identity. European Journal of Social Psychology. doi:
10.1002/ejsp.2130
Schmitt, M.T., Davies, K., Hung, M., & Wright, S.C. (2010). Identity moderates the effects of
Christmas displays on mood, self-esteem, and inclusion. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 46(6), 1017-1022. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.05.026
Scholte, J.A. (2000). Globalization: A critical introduction. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
49
Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical
advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social
Psychology, 25(1), 1-65. doi: 10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60281-6
Shachar, R., Erdem, T., Cutright, K. M., & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2011). Brands: The opiate of the
nonreligious masses? Marketing Science, 30(1), 92-110. doi: 10.1287/mksc.1100.0591
Shokef, E., & Erez, M. (2006). Global work culture and global identity, as a platform for a
shared understanding in multicultural teams. National Culture and Groups, 9, 325-352.
doi: 10.1016/s1534-0856(06)09013-x
Short, J.R. (2001). Global dimensions: Space, place and the contemporary world. London:
Reaktion Books.
Sidanius, J., Henry, P. J., Pratto, F., & Levin, S. (2004). Arab attributions for the attack on
America: The case of Lebanese subtleties. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35(4),
403-416. doi: 10.1177/0022022104266106
Skey, M. (2012). We need to talk about cosmopolitanism: The challenge of studying openness
towards other people. Cultural Sociology, 6(4), 471-487. doi:
10.1177/1749975512445434
Skey, M. (2013). What does it mean to be cosmopolitan? An examination of the varying
meaningfulness and commensurability of everyday ‘cosmopolitan’ practices. Identities:
Global Studies in Culture and Power, 20, 235-252. doi:
10.1080/1070289x.2013.799476
Smeekes, A., & Verkuyten, M. (2013). Collective self-continuity, group identification and in-
group defense. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(6), 984-994. doi:
10.1016/j.jesp.2013.06.004
Son Hing, L.S., Bobocel, D.R., Zanna, M.P., Garcia, D.M., Gee, S.S., & Orazietti, K. (2011).
The merit of meritocracy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(3), 433 -
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
50
450. doi: 10.1037/a0024618
Staerklé, C., Falomir Pichastor, J.M., Pereira, A., Berent, J., & Butera, F. (in press). Global
value perceptions: The legitimising functions of Western representations of democracy.
European Journal of Social Psychology.
Tajfel, H. & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G.
Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 33-47).
Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole.
The Clean Clothes Campaign. (29.4.2013). Pay up!. Retrieved (23.9.2014) from
http://www.cleanclothes.org/ranaplaza
The World Value Survey (n.d.). What we do. Retrieved (12.9.14) from
http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSContents.jsp.
Torelli, C. J., Chiu, C., Tam, K., Au, A. K., & Keh, H. T. (2011). Exclusionary reactions to
foreign cultures: Effects of simultaneous exposure to cultures in globalized space.
Journal of Social Issues, 67(4), 716-742. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01724.x
Türken, S., & Rudmin, F. W. (2013). On psychological effects of globalization: Development
of a scale of global identity. Psychology & Society, 5(3), 63-89.
Turner, J.C., Hogg, M.A., Oakes, P.J., Reicher, S.D., & Wetherell, M.S. (1987).
Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
Turner, J. C. (1999). Some current issues in research on social identity and self-cate-
gorization theories. In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje (Eds.), Social identity:
Context, commitment, content (pp. 6–34). Oxford: Blackwell.
Twose, G., & Cohrs, J. C. (2015). Psychology and human rights: Introduction to the special
issue. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology,21(1), 3. doi:
10.1037/pac0000087
United Nations. (2000). “We the peoples”: The role of the United Nations in the 21st century.
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
51
New York: United Nations.
United Nations. (2014). The millennium development goals report. New York: United
Nations.
United Nations Refugee Agency. (2014). 2014 Global trend report: World at war. Retrieved
(29.8.2015) from http://www.unhcr.org/556725e69.html.
Van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity
model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-
psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134(4), 504-535. doi:
10.1037/0033-2909.134.4.504
Verkuyten, M., & Yildiz, A. A. (2007). National (dis) identification and ethnic and religious
identity: A study among Turkish-Dutch Muslims. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 33(10), 1448-1462. doi: 10.1177/0146167207304276
Vignoles, V. L., Regalia, C., Manzi, C., Golledge, J., & Scabini, E. (2006). Beyond self-
esteem: Influence of multiple motives on identity construction. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 90(2), 308-333. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.90.2.308
Wan, C., Chiu, C. Y., Peng, S., & Tam, K. P. (2007). Measuring cultures through
intersubjective cultural norms. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38(2), 213. doi:
10.1177/0022022106297300
Wenzel, M., Mummendey, A., & Waldzus, S. (2007). Superordinate identities and intergroup
conflict: The ingroup projection model. European Review of Social Psychology, 18(1),
331-372. doi: 10.1080/10463280701728302
Wiley, S., Deaux, K., & Hagelskamp, C. (2012). Born in the USA: How immigrant
generation shapes meritocracy and its relation to ethnic identity and collective
action. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 18(2), 171-180. doi:
10.1037/a0027661
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Globalized Identities, Culture, and Action
52
Wohl, M. J., Branscombe, N. R., & Reysen, S. (2010). Perceiving your group’s future to be in
jeopardy: Extinction threat induces collective angst and the desire to strengthen the
ingroup. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(7), 898-910. doi:
10.1177/0146167210372505
Woodward, I., Skrbis, Z., & Bean, C. (2008). Attitudes towards globalization and
cosmopolitanism: Cultural diversity, personal consumption and the national economy.
The British Journal of Sociology, 59(2), 207-226. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-
4446.2008.00190.x
Yang, D. Y. J., Chiu, C. Y., Chen, X., Cheng, S. Y. Y., Kwan, L. Y. Y., Tam, K. P., & Yeh,
K. H. (2011). Lay psychology of globalization and its social impact. Journal of Social
Issues, 67(4), 677-695. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01722.x
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
Table 1: Schwartz Values Emphasized, and Deemphasized by Globalized-Western Culture (GWC), and Some of Their Specific Manifestations
Value emphasized by GWC
Examples of Specific Manifestations
Contradicting Values,
Deemphasized by GWC
Examples of Specific Manifestations
Power and Achievement
The pursuit of financial and status
gains
The pursuit of individual success
and increasing levels of narcissism
Universalism and Benevolence
Preference for short-term financial
gains over ecological sustainability, as
well as rights and well-being of
disenfranchised people elsewhere.
The commodification of inter-
personal relationships
Hedonism, Stimulation and Self
Direction
Consumerism's emphasis of
pleasure and sensation seeking;
temptations for instant gratification
Advancement of individual
freedoms from social constraints based on
gender, sexuality, religious affiliation or
race
Tradition, Conformity and
Security
Decline in job security and
laborers' lifetime commitment to
employer
Influxes of labor immigrants,
displaced people and refugees
Cultural threat reactions:
Religious fundamentalism and nationalist
revitalization efforts to counter perceived
GWC's eroding effects on local traditions.
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
More options for personal mobility
Emphasis on individual
uniqueness (at least in terms of lifestyle
choices)
New forms of consumer
conformity (to trends, fashions and
consumer identities)
Universalism
International community:
governmental and non-governmental
efforts to address global challenges
manifesting elsewhere around the globe.
Commitment to human rights in
faraway countries, at the expense of
immediate political expediency
Power and Achievement
Willingness to allocate personal
and collective resources (of the local
ingroup) to counter challenges with no
immediate return.
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
DRAFT
In press: Perspectives on Psychological Science
