Intentions to participate in a group activity in newly formed groups were followed over time. Two forms of intentions were examined: traditional behavioral intention to take part in a group-based act (personal intention), and social intentions to act as an agent of the group (social intention). In addition, the study explored other group process variables as distinctive predictors of ‘social identification’. The paper concludes with a discussion of the role of social intentions, linking the findings to social identification development and maintenance over time.
According to the theory of reasoned action (TRA), intentions to engage in a behavior are derived from one’s evaluation of the action (attitude), and whether one believes that significant other people see it as the appropriate way to act (subjective norms) (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980 and Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975). Bagozzi and Lee (2002) observed that the TRA conceptualizes intentions largely as focusing on individual acts, plans to perform a behavior by oneself (i.e., personal intentions). However, as well as these individually-based intentions, many intentions contain a social element, expressing one’s intention to behave in conjunction with others. Thus, a second form of intention is more ‘social’, in the sense that it implicates ‘joint action’, where action is conceived as the person acting as an agent of the group.
It is possible to distinguish various types of intentions. For example, concerning social intentions, one form is an intention for the group. Such a notion might be an experience about something expressed as, “I intend that we act” (Bratman, 1997; e.g., “I intend that our family visit Disneyland next August”). A second form is a social intention and could be expressed, as an intention of, or by, the group, in the form, “We intend to act” (Tuomela, 1995; e.g., “We intend to implement a new defensive strategy in our next football match”). In both cases, however, the intention concerns outcomes for the group, not just the self. Distinguishing intentions in terms of their personal or social focus allows us to consider the roles of not only attitudes and subjective norms, but also of constructs that are central to group processes, specifically group norms and social identification.
Group norms provide a vehicle for social influence through the process of internalization. That is, intentions can be influenced by shared goals held with other members of the group. We conceive of group norms as the degree of shared goals concerning group activities between group members, and the more they are shared, the stronger should be one’s intention to be involved in the group activity (Levine & Moreland, 2004).
Social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) holds that social identity has three components: self-awareness of membership (cognitive), feelings of belongingness to the group (affective), and self-appraised value/importance to the group (evaluative) (Ellemers, Kortekaas, & Ouwerkerk, 1999). According to the social identity perspective on groups, and specifically self-categorization theory participation in a group makes social identity more salient and thereby raises the priority of group-oriented goals (Hogg, 1993). Thus, it is not the group norm per se but the psychological fusion between self and group that motivates intentions for and by the group (Abrams & Hogg, 1990).
