Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (33) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (33)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (33)
Keywords
- COVID-19 (3)
- leadership (3)
- Disadvantages (2)
- Social identity (2)
- Telecommuting (2)
- Telework (2)
- Voluntariness (2)
- anxiety (2)
- burnout (2)
- exhaustion (2)
Institute
- Psychologie und Sportwissenschaften (18)
- Psychologie (12)
- Biochemie und Chemie (1)
- Biowissenschaften (1)
- Exzellenzcluster Makromolekulare Komplexe (1)
- Gesellschaftswissenschaften (1)
- Präsidium (1)
- Sonderforschungsbereiche / Forschungskollegs (1)
- Zentrum für Biomolekulare Magnetische Resonanz (BMRZ) (1)
- keine Angabe Institut (1)
Objectives: To investigate whether citizens’ adherence to health-protective non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) during the COVID-19 pandemic is predicted by identity leadership, wherein leaders are perceived to create a sense of shared national identity.
Design: Observational two-wave study. Hypotheses testing was conducted with structural equation modelling.
Setting: Data collection during the COVID-19 pandemic in China, Germany, Israel and the USA in April/May 2020 and four weeks later.
Participants: Adults in China (n=548, 66.6% women), Germany (n=182, 78% women), Israel (n=198, 51.0% women) and the USA (n=108, 58.3% women).
Measures: Identity leadership (assessed by the four-item Identity Leadership Inventory Short-Form) at Time 1, perceived shared national identification (PSNI; assessed with four items) and adherence to health-protective NPIs (assessed with 10 items that describe different health-protective interventions; for example, wearing face masks) at Time 2.
Results: Identity leadership was positively associated with PSNI (95% CI0.11 to 0.30, p<0.001) in all countries. This, in turn, was related to more adherence to health-protective NPIs in all countries (95% CI 0.03 to 0.36, 0.001≤p≤0.017) except Israel (95% CI−0.03 to 0.27, p=0.119). In Germany, the more people saw Chancellor Merkel as engaging in identity leadership, the more they adhered to health-protective NPIs (95% CI 0.04 to 0.18, p=0.002). In the USA, in contrast, the more people perceived President Trump as engaging in identity leadership, the less they adhered to health-protective NPIs (95% CI−0.17 to −0.04, p=0.002).
Conclusions: National leaders can make a difference by promoting a sense of shared identity among their citizens because people are more inclined to follow health-protective NPIs to the extent that they feel part of a united ‘us’. However, the content of identity leadership (perceptions of what it means to be a nation’s citizen) is essential, because this can also encourage people to disregard such recommendations.
The COVID-19 pandemic has triggered health-related anxiety in ways that undermine peoples’ mental and physical health. Contextual factors such as living in a high-risk area might further increase the risk of health deterioration. Based on the Social Identity Approach, we argue that social identities can not only be local that are characterized by social interactions, but also be global that are characterized by a symbolic sense of togetherness and that both of these can be a basis for health. In line with these ideas, we tested how identification with one’s family and with humankind relates to stress and physical symptoms while experiencing health-related anxiety and being exposed to contextual risk factors. We tested our assumptions in a representative sample (N = 974) two-wave survey study with a 4-week time lag. The results show that anxiety at Time 1 was positively related to stress and physical symptoms at Time 2. Feeling exposed to risk factors related to lower physical health, but was unrelated to stress. Family identification and identification with humankind were both negatively associated with subsequent stress and family identification was negatively associated with subsequent physical symptoms. These findings suggest that for social identities to be beneficial for mental health, they can be embodied as well as symbolic.
Research on collective resilience processes still lacks a detailed understanding of psychological mechanisms at work when groups cope with adverse conditions, i.e., long-term processes, and how such mechanisms affect physical and mental well-being. As collective resilience will play a crucial part in facing looming climate change-related events such as floods, it is important to investigate these processes further. To this end, this study takes a novel holistic approach by combining resilience research, social psychology, and an archeological perspective to investigate the role of social identity as a collective resilience factor in the past and present. We hypothesize that social identification buffers against the negative effects of environmental threats in participants, which increases somatic symptoms related to stress, in a North Sea region historically prone to floods. A cross-sectional study (N = 182) was conducted to analyze the moderating effects of social identification on the relations between perceived threat of North Sea floods and both well-being and life satisfaction. The results support our hypothesis that social identification attenuates the relationship between threat perception and well-being, such that the relation is weaker for more strongly identified individuals. Contrary to our expectations, we did not find this buffering effect to be present for life satisfaction. Future resilience studies should further explore social identity as a resilience factor and how it operates in reducing environmental stress put on individuals and groups. Further, to help communities living in flood-prone areas better cope with future environmental stress, we recommend implementing interventions strengthening their social identities and hence collective resilience.
Self-compassion has been theorized to have three components, each with a positive pole and a negative pole: self-kindness versus self-judgment, common humanity versus isolation, and mindfulness versus over-identification. Neff (Self Identity 2:85–101, 2003a) proposes that they mutually influence each other, however, this proposition has not been tested yet. We conducted a pilot study to see if improvements from training one component spilled over to the other two—and whether these trainings had an impact on well-being. 80 participants completed 8 weeks of self-compassionate writing exercises to enhance either self-kindness, common humanity, or mindfulness. Trait self-compassion was assessed using the six-factor model of the self-compassion scale. To address issues of alpha-error-inflation, the false discovery rate was fixed at 5%, and critical p values were adjusted accordingly. Participants in the mindfulness condition reported increased total self-compassion (p = .009), which was accompanied by increased self-kindness (p = .027) and lower isolation (p = .045). Participants in the common humanity condition reported improved total self-compassion (p = .018), lower over-identification (p = .045), and higher life-satisfaction (p = .049). The training in self-kindness failed to improve self-kindness or any other factor. These findings provide initial evidence that the components of self-compassion mutually enhance each other. They also emphasize the importance of mindfulness within the conceptualization of self-compassion.
We propose that resilience effectively helps people cope with stress, thus predominantly reducing the negative. However, we argue that individuals’ social identification has the potential to contribute to their well-being, thus fostering the positive. A two-wave survey study of 180 students shows that resilience is more strongly (negatively) associated with ill-health (i.e. stress and depression), whereas social identification is more strongly (positively) related to well-being (i.e. satisfaction and work engagement). We believe that it is necessary to see these two routes to improving people’s health as complementary, both in future research and for therapy and interventions.
Geld allein macht nicht (un)glücklich : was Mitarbeiter der Goethe-Universität zufrieden macht
(2012)
Do leaders who build a sense of shared social identity in their teams thereby protect them from the adverse effects of workplace stress? This is a question that the present paper explores by testing the hypothesis that identity leadership contributes to stronger team identification among employees and, through this, is associated with reduced burnout. We tested this model with unique datasets from the Global Identity Leadership Development (GILD) project with participants from all inhabited continents. We compared two datasets from 2016/2017 (n = 5290; 20 countries) and 2020/2021 (n = 7294; 28 countries) and found very similar levels of identity leadership, team identification and burnout across the five years. An inspection of the 2020/2021 data at the onset of and later in the COVID-19 pandemic showed stable identity leadership levels and slightly higher levels of both burnout and team identification. Supporting our hypotheses, we found almost identical indirect effects (2016/2017, b = −0.132; 2020/2021, b = −0.133) across the five-year span in both datasets. Using a subset of n = 111 German participants surveyed over two waves, we found the indirect effect confirmed over time with identity leadership (at T1) predicting team identification and, in turn, burnout, three months later. Finally, we explored whether there could be a “too-much-of-a-good-thing” effect for identity leadership. Speaking against this, we found a u-shaped quadratic effect whereby ratings of identity leadership at the upper end of the distribution were related to even stronger team identification and a stronger indirect effect on reduced burnout.
Haben Vorurteile einen Sinn? In der Entwicklungsgeschichte des Menschen vermutlich schon, um Freund und Feind unterscheiden zu können. Aber in der heutigen globalen, wenn auch komplexeren Welt ist es wichtig zu wissen, warum Vorurteile entstehen und welche Gruppenprozesse dahinterstecken. Die Sozialpsychologie kann seit den 1950er Jahren auf eine Vielzahl von Experimenten verweisen – mit spannenden Ergebnissen. Eines lautet: Je mehr Kontakt Menschen aus unterschiedlichen Gruppen miteinander haben, desto geringer sind auch die Vorurteile.
Deutschland ist ein Einwanderungsland – wie wirkt sich das Zusammenleben von Menschen unterschiedlicher Herkunft im Alltag und am Arbeitsplatz aus? Muss es unweigerlich zu Konflikten kommen, oder welche Voraussetzungen sind notwendig, um diese Vielfalt positiv zu nutzen? Wer dies ergründen will, muss sich mit Gruppenkonflikten und sozialer Identität, die der Einzelne in der Gruppe erlebt, intensiv beschäftigen. Der Frankfurter Sozialpsychologe Prof. Dr. Rolf van Dick und seine Kollegen haben ein Modell entwickelt, das vorhersagt, wann die Heterogenität einer Gruppe eher positive und wann eher negative Effekte erzeugt.