me-you, we-they – a couple of words about national ... · in trempała, 2012). 256 respondents...

Justyna Leszcz, Karolina Magierek and Bogdan Pietrulewicz*

John Tivendell**

Kazimierz Wielki University in Bydgoszcz

ME-YOU, WE-THEY – a couple of words about national stereotypes on the example of Polish and Canadian respondents

Abstract

This article is devoted to the issues concerning the perception of the in-group and the out-group in the context of social identity theory by Tajfel and Turner. As social psychologists notice, the issue of national stereotypes is an extremely topical issue in the social practice. Nevertheless, it still constitutes a unique research subject in the context of empiricism (Wojciszke, 2002). 120 Polish respondents and 136 Cana-dian residents participated in the research project, to which this article is devoted. The authors of this article have decided to analyze self-stereotypes of Poles as well as their attitudes towards a reasonably neutral group – Canadians. The innovativeness of the conducted research was based on the analysis of the occurrence of a relationship between social development and the way of shaping of the image of the in-group as well as the out-group in an individual’s perception. The research project had addition-ally a comparative character. The element compared was the perception of the Polish national group in the assessment of both study populations. The statistical analysis of the gathered empirical data has confirmed the occurrence of differences in the percep-tion of the in-group as well as the out-group from the perspective of Polish respondents. The research results have also proven the existence of a relationship between the per-ception of the in-group and the out-group as well as social development. The presented scientific results can constitute a foundation for further conducting of interesting pro-jects in the context of the area of psychology.

Keywords national stereotypes, in-group, out-group, personal identity, social identity, social devel-opment, early adulthood, middle adulthood.

* Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Bogdan Pietrule-wicz, e-mail: [email protected].

** University of Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada.

106 Justyna Leszcz, Karolina Magierek, Bogdan Pietrulewicz, John Tivendell

QQ Introduction

The question of human nature is one of the utmost bothering and in-scrutable mysteries over the course of human history. Even Aristotle, in his work Politics, wrote “Man is by nature a social animal; an individual who is unsocial naturally and not accidentally is either beneath our notice or more than humans. Society is something that precedes the individual. Anyone who either cannot lead the common life or is so self-sufficient as not to need to, and therefore does not partake of society, is either a beast or a god.” (as cited in Aronson, 1997, p. 14). The uncontested connection between an individual and the surrounding social reality became a point of departure for all human sciences and in the context of a number of them there are still ongoing theo-retical and empirical analyses of this subject (Aronson, 2005; Argyle, 2002; Wosińska, 2004). Indubitably, each human being is a distinctive and unique individual. The attributes that distinguish us from others are personality traits, temperament, acuteness of the senses, or a unique external appearance (Zimbardo, Johnson and McCann, 2010). On the other hand, human nature harbors a strictly social element. Tillmann described society as the walls of human imprisonment in history. In other words, society is an external entity that is stretching in time and surrounding the life of an individual on all sides (Tillmann, 1996). By living inside of it, we become a part of a mosaic of a va-riety of social groups, such as family, peer group, or national group (Szacka, 2003). They create the so-called in-groups referred to, in the context of social sciences, as We-category (Jarymowicz, Kwiatkowska, 1988; Kofta, 2004). As experts on the subject claim, social groups occupy an important place in each person’s life – they constitute a crucial source of objectives, values as well as norms regulating our behavioral and emotional reactions (Aronson, 2005; Domachowski, 1998; Tomaszewski, 1977). According to Wosińska (2004), owing to the influence of the closer and more distant social environment, an individual gathers knowledge concerning the surrounding world and, on the basis of social comparison, gains information on other people and oneself. Moreover, an individual performs the internalization of categories, in accord-ance with which the process of self-assessment is conducted. Thus, a human being, as a social animal, is a part of wider social groups and narrower social groups (the so-called in-groups), which in the process of socialization shape one’s attitudes and social stereotypes.

Most of modern researchers define the term attitude as a set of beliefs related to a certain object – a person, a thing, an event, an issue, or a symbol

107ME-YOU, WE-THEY – a couple of words about national stereotypes…

(Hogg & Vaughan, 2010; Martin, Carlson & Buskist, 2010). Zimbardo and Ruch propose the following definition of the term under discussion: “attitude is a relatively stable, emotionally reinforced readiness to react in a certain coherent or consequent way in relation to a certain individual, group of peo-ple, or situations” (Zimbardo & Ruch, 1987, p. 557). In the context of social psychology, it was assumed that attitudes consist of cognitive, emotion-al as well as behavioral components. The cognitive component consists of knowledge, perception as well as thoughts concerning an attitude ob-ject. The second component is nothing but emotions that are evoked in an individual in relation to an attitude object. By contrast, the behavioral com-ponent is the behavior and motives towards and attitude object (Aronson, Wilson, & Akert, 1997; Wosińska, 2004). The researchers are unanimous that the attitudes have got an evaluative character – positive or negative. They develop through the synthesis of information concerning an object, they do not undergo a change, and the knowledge concerning them allows to foresee the behavior of an individual in a particular situation (Aronson, Wilson, & Akert, 1997; Sternberg, 1999). By contrast, social stereotypes constitute a specific class of attitudes – they are simplified and generalized judgments concerning other groups and their members (Crisp & Turner, 2009; Weigl, 2000; Wojciszke, 2002). In consequence, they lead to the defor-mation of the perception of the representatives of other social groups. They are simplified, due to the fact that they are usually related to a single group characterization, as well as generalized, due to the fact that they generalize a particular trait and apply the generalization to all members of a given group (Hamer, 2005; Pietrzak, 2000; Weigl, 2000).

The problem of social stereotypes, and precisely the specificity of the perception of the in-group and the out-group, was the basis for the con-ducted research project. The subject of the research presented in this article was national stereotypes. A common rule of international toler-ance is an extremely topical issue in the political and scientific contexts. In 2003, 31% of respondents from Great Britain openly admitted to racial prej-udice (Park et al., 2003). The intergroup bias, that is in-group favoritism, leads to prejudice, which in the context of social psychology is understood as “atti-tudes or emotions towards members of groups, to which we do not belong” (Crisp & Turner, 2009, p. 181). As Todd (2002) and Wojciszke (2002) notice racism, sexism, and ethnocentrism are the most discusses forms of prejudice.

The authors of this article have decided to analyze self-stereotypes of Poles as well as the attitudes of Polish respondents towards the out-group.


In the project the comparative aspect has been explored. Its basic assumption is the comparison of Polish respondents’ self-stereotypes and the image of Poles in the opinion of Canadians. In the context of social sciences, a number of research studies have been conducted concerning the attitudes of Poles to-wards nations with whom they share a common historical past. The authors of this article became interested in national stereotypes manifested towards a relatively neutral group – where there exists a large social distance between both groups. Additionally, in the literature on the subject we are able to find an interesting self-representation of Poles. It transpires that the Polish nation is still replete with complexes in comparison with more developed countries of the Eastern Europe. As Domański (2009) and Giza-Poleszczuk (2009) claim, Polish people have got a tendency to highlight negative features that are char-acteristic for their own national group rather than assets and advantages.

The basis for the conducted research was social identity theory by Ta-jfel and Turner. The main assumptions of the theory are the phenomenon of in-group favoritism as well as the out-group homogeneity effect. The re-searchers decided to analyze whether, in accordance with the assumptions of this theory, the above-mentioned phenomena will occur at the time of mak-ing an assessment about the in-group and the out-group or whether, perhaps, the self-stereotypes of Poles will be replete with complexes against a richer country, which is in a more stable economic and political situation. It should be borne in mind that after the Second World War many Poles left the country and went to Canada in search of better living conditions. Thus, this positive stereotype of Canada, as “the land of happiness,” is still present in the aware-ness of a number of representatives of the Polish nation.

The innovativeness of the conducted analysis was based on the connec-tion between social development and the perception of the in-group and the out-group. The authors of this article were searching for an answer to the following question: whether the specificity of social development di-versifies the image of Canadians and Poles from the perspective of Polish respondents? The stage of human development explored in the research was adulthood, which was divided according to the chronological age into: early adulthood, a period between 20/22 and 35/40 years of age, as well as middle adulthood, a period between 35/40 and 60/65 years of age (as cited in Trempała, 2012). 256 respondents participated in the research designed in co-operation with professor Bogdan Pietrulewicz from Kazimierz Wielki University in Bydgoszcz and with professor John Tivendell from University of Moncton in Canada. The Polish group was divided into even subgroups


in accordance with the chronological age – 60 respondents were in the first stage of adulthood, whereas the next 60 respondents in the second stage. The authors of this article decided to analyze whether national stereotypes of these two groups differ. Or whether, perhaps, the factors influencing social development, such as technological progress, widespread Internet access, unlimited flow of information as well as international communication had an impact on the existence of crucial differences in the process of perception of the national in-group and the out-group?

The description of the consecutive steps of the research as well as the ob-tained results will be presented in the subsequent part of the article. They will be preceded by a theoretical induction concerning the main assumptions of social identity theory and by the characterization of the early adulthood period and the middle adulthood period in the psychological context.

QQ Psychological treatment of the notion of identity. Personal identity versus social identity.

From the 50s identity constitutes the subject of interest for researchers specializing in different fields within the humanities. In the context of human-ities, identity is understood as the identification of an individual/a group on the basis of specific attributes, which differentiate them from other people or groups. Not only physical features, but also psychological attributes have a major role in this process. In other words, in the area of psychology, identity is understood as one’s own identity – connected with the process of self-per-ception, hence an internal perspective of an individual (Jarymowicz, 1994; Wojciszke, 2002). Some of the authors use the term of “individual identity,” which consists of properties of body and mind, external appearance, genetic code, personality, beliefs, and values. The second term is “collective identi-ty,” determining the sense of community and identification with other group members, which is expressed in the notion of WE (Bikont, 1988, Szacka; 2003; Sztompka, 2005). In this article the authors adopted, similarly to Ja-rymowicz (1984) and Wojciszke (2002), the terms “personal identity” and “social identity.”

“Personal identity” is the awareness of one’s uniqueness as an individ-ual, thus the awareness of one’s distinctiveness from other people (Szacka, 2003). It is a system of knowledge – this identity is a set of relative features,


which are used by an individual to describe oneself (Bikont, 1988; Jarymow-icz & Kwiatkowska, 1988). The process of shaping of one’s personal identity already starts during childhood in the process of cognitive and behavioral development of a child. It is dependent on the influence of socio-cultural factors (Jarymowicz & Kwiatkowska, 1988, Jarymowicz, 2000). Comparison with other people is used as the basis for the development of personal iden-tity of an individual (Wojciszke, 2002). In order to define oneself, a person performs the differentiation between ME and OTHERS, thus ME and not-ME (Bikont, 1988). By comparing ourselves with other people we are able to dis-cover the similarities that we share as well as the differences that divide us. The research conducted in the context of psychology has proven that when defining oneself we have got a tendency to highlight our individuality, thus distinctiveness from other people (Szacka, 2003).

Social identity and personal identity, apart from the fact that they are inseparable, are analyzed separately (Bikont, 1988). Wojciszke writes: “So-cial identity is connected with the formation of We, which is expressed in the cognitive relatedness of oneself to other people as well as the identifica-tion with their traits, values, code of conduct. Personal identity is connected with the formation of I, which is expressed in the perception of oneself as a unique individual as well as the identification with personal objectives and standards” (Wojciszke, 2001, p. 117). The notion of “social identity” was used for the first time by Tajfel. It was used to explain the formation of a place occupied by an individual in society, which is perceived as an ongoing result of the process of social categorization. The notion of social identity itself was defined by him as an affiliation of an individual with different social groups (Tajfel, Billig, Bundy & Flament, 1971).

As Wojciszke (2002) and Szacka (2003) indicate, social identity is a set of self-classifications that consists of a number of relative categorizations. By performing an analysis and making a distinction, an individual does not refer to the ME-OTHERS plane but to WE versus not-WE (Bikont, 1988). Social identity will manifest itself through the sense of identification with social groups, of whom the subject is a member. The group satisfies the affil-iative, support, and safety needs. The group is usually constituted by people with whom the individual is familiar and, in this case, the social identity is based on mutual dependence and the feeling of community (Szwed, 2003). The most often chosen groups are those with which an individual can identi-fy on the basis of mutual traits, such as for example social or class affiliation (Wojciszke, 2001).


QQ Social identity theory (SIT) and self-categorization theory (SCT)

In the literature on the subject we are able to find multifold theories concerning linkages between personal identity and social identity. In so-cial psychology the terms under discussion are analyzed from three points of view (Bikont, 1988; Jarymowicz, 1994; Martin, Carlson, & Buskist, 2010). According to Ziller’s theory, social identity is part of personal identity and is instrumental in this relationship. Greenwald and Pratkanis recognized social identity as a higher form of human development in comparison to per-sonal identity. On the other hand, the utmost popular social identity theory by Tajfel and Turner postulates that these attributes possess equal character (Jarymowicz, 1994).

According to Tajfel and Turner I comprises of both personal identity as well as social identity (Crisp & Turner, 2009; Tajfel et al., 1971). They de-scribe the forms of social identity in social identity theory SIT (Tajfel) as well as self-categorization theory SCT (Turner). Both these theories are based on real group membership. The main assumption of SIT recognizes social identity as the perception of common membership in a given social cat-egory (Bikont, 1988; Crisp & Turner, 2009). Social identity is also expressed in the emotional engagement in the group membership and its ideas (Jary-mowicz, 2000; Hogg & Vaughan, 2010). On the other hand, SCT represents a step forward in the understanding of the specificity and the role of social identity in the life of an individual. Turner claimed that group membership is not dependent on the subjectively perceived group membership but on inten-tional and based on cognitive premises classification of oneself as a member of a given category (Crisp & Turner, 2009; Hamer, 2005; Tajfel et al, 1971;Wo-jciszke, 2001).

Social identity theory constitutes a socio-cognitive attempt to explain the dynamics of group processes (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). Two specific phenom-ena are the basis for the discussed theory – in-group favoritism as well as out-group derogation (Crisp & Turner, 2009; Hogg, 2005; Wojciszke, 2002). The main assumption is that a human being divides the encountered people into specific categories throughout one’s life. The members of the group with which we identify constitute the category WE, whereas the representatives of other social groups belong to the category THEY (Hamer, 2005; Penning-ton, Gillen, & Hill, 1999; Tajfel & Turner, 1986). Self-valorization is a belief


concerning the superiority of one’s social group. This process is a source of the increase of self-assessment and possesses a defensive character. Owing to self-valorization, we build positive social identity. Also, the categoriza-tion WE-THEY results in a situation in which we assign internal causes to our successes, whereas we assign external causes to our failures. Other de-pendency occurs in relation to the out-group – when judging its success, we perform external attribution, whereas external factors become the reason for its failures. The consequence of categorization WE-THEY is the treatment of the out-group as an anonymous whole, therefore with the omission of indi-vidual differences (Hamer, 2005; Hogg, 2005;Weigl, 2004; Wojciszke, 2002).

The implications of Tajfel and Turner’s (1986) research are that in the mo-ments of self-esteem threat, that is a threat for the positive image of oneself, the tendency to in-group favoritism as well as out-group derogation increases. The elevation in importance of the in-group enhances identification with its members as well as increases self-esteem. The consequences of the described mechanisms are the cognitive distortions such as stereotypes or prejudice (Baran, 2004; Wojciszke, 2004). The studies conducted within the field of psychology also show that categorization is connected with decreased em-pathy in relation to the out-group members or even their dehumanization (Hamer, 2005; Wojciszke, 2002). Leyens was observing the behavior of two groups towards each other and noticed a decreasing tendency of particular members of both groups to empathy for members of the out-group. He called this type of behavior – the phenomenon of “dehumanization of outsiders,” which is based on the tendency to deny full humanity individuals who be-long to the out-group. After a series of experiments Leyens, together with his co-workers, set forth a thesis that the members of the in-group possess a latent tendency to perceive “outsiders” as not fully human beings. They also confirmed the phenomenon of in-group favoritism that is based on ascribing greater number of positive traits and emotions by an individual to a group, of whom the individual is a member (Leyens et al., 2000). The research also proves that the mere activation of the pronoun “WE” influences the increase in stereotypical perception of the out-group members as well as triggers con-formist behavior towards the in-group (Jarymowicz & Kwiatkowska, 1988; Kwiatkowska, 1999).

It is worth highlighting that the more homogeneous assessment of the out-group (out-group homogeneity) is a common phenomenon, where-as favoritism is dependent on the status which is assigned by an individual to the in-group (Nelson, 2003). In other words, high regard of the in-group


is connected with the high status of the group in an individual’s perception (Hogg, 2005; Crisp & Turner, 2009). Thus, positive self-assessment is a result of the membership in social groups that are highly valued by an individual (Crisp & Turner, 2009). The presented theory constitutes an interesting attempt to explain the intra- as well as intergroup relations on the basis of cognitive and motivational processes. “Stereotypization of I” leads, in consequence, to a sim-plified and stereotypical perception of members belonging to THEY-category (Bikont, 1988; Weigl, 2000). On the other hand, in-group favoritism as well as the phenomenon of the out-group homogeneity are, in practice, a more positive and diversified assessment of WE-category in an individual’s perception (Crisp & Turner, 2009; Tajfel, Billig, Bundy, & Flament, 1971).

QQ The understanding of social development in the context of psychology

According to Trempała (2012), we use the term development in order to define a process of dynamic changes that occur throughout an individual’s life. This means the possibility of observing a difference in the state of a par-ticular phenomenon or behavior in the case of a given subject after a certain period of time. Social development of an individual is also a dynamic process which continues throughout the entire human existence and which works in both directions. In the case of the first direction the social subject influenc-es the environment, whereas the second direction has a reverse character (Nelson, 2003; Aronson, 2005). This process serves shaping the personal identity as well as social identity, it supports the adaptation to the prevalent conditions, prepares for the fulfillment of specific roles in a group as well as shapes attitudes and behavior (Kowalik, as cited in: Harwas-Napierała & Trempała, 2002; Stephan, 2003). Social development of an individual is con-nected with the process of socialization. Socialization is “… the adaptation of a human being to living with other people, including adaptation to particular people, social groups as well as culture as a whole” (Schellenberg, 1974, p. 352–353). A successful process of socialization prepares an individual for an optimal participation in the social life, which becomes a source of satisfaction for a social subject (Hurrelmann, 1994; Oleś, 2011). As a result, an individual creates relations with a group, of whom one is a member (Tillmann, 1996; Kofta, 2004).


QQ Two dimensions of adulthood

Adulthood constitutes the longest development period in an individual’s life. In the scientific context, it was divided into three subperiods: early, middle, and advanced adulthood (Bee, 2004). Dynamic biological and socio-cultural processes influence the intra and interpsychic world of an individual and pre-clude the determination of rigid boundaries of each (Oleś, 2011). The time continuum assigned to consecutive subperiods of adulthood is a contractual value. For early adulthood it is between 20/22 and 35/40 years of age, for middle adulthood between 35/40 and 60/65, and for advanced adulthood it is above 60/65 years of age (Gurba, 2012; Olejnik, 2012). Due to the fact that the research project focused on the first two subperiods of adulthood, a short characterization of both of them will be presented below.

The early adulthood period is connected with the performance of new social roles as well as the fulfillment of life tasks which are appropriate for this period (Baley, 1964; Oleś, 2011). For a long period of time these tasks entailed starting a family and finding employment that is not solely aimed at material goods (Olejnik, 2012). Together with the changing cultural conditions, such as the longer period of education that shifts the beginning of professional career as well as the occurrence of new trends in personal life involving later and less frequent entering relationships, there was a need for a change in the descrip-tion of the above-mentioned tasks (Pietrasiński, 1990; Bee, 2004). Currently, with the present cultural conditions, an adult person is described as an indi-vidual able to determine the direction of one’s life, to formulate personal goals in the perspective of ten-/twenty-year period as well as an individual display-ing readiness to living in a stable relationship or alone (Oleś, 2011). Contrary to an adolescent, a young adult is ready to bear the responsibility for one’s actions and to anticipate one’s behavior (Przetacznik-Gierowska, as cited in: Przetacznik-Gierowska & Tyszkowa, 2002). Another criterion of adulthood is attaining independence (especially emotional) from parents. This independ-ence is described as an ability to make one’s own decisions without the need to expect acceptance and support from people fulfilling such a role during one’s childhood and adolescence. The attainment of personal independence is a crucial process required in order to enter a relationship as well as to be able to choose one’s own life path (Gurba, 2012).

The middle adulthood period is a period of the greatest productivi-ty in all spheres of life. During this period an individual achieves the peak


of professional and social capabilities (including family capabilities) as well as performs the most responsible life roles (Bee, 2004). Usually, during that period, an individual feels the greatest satisfaction in relation to the realiza-tion of particular tasks. At the same time, it is burdened with a number of duties which are the basis for the creation of requirements and expectations by the environment in relation to an individual. The increasing stress, whose impact enhances the feeling of loss of youth and the privileges connected with it, triggers a variety of anxieties (Sternberg, 2001; Oleś, 2011). Thus, this period is often simultaneously presented as the most burdening for an individual (Olejnik, 2012). The necessity to combine many roles requires the ability to maintain proportions between the realized developmental tasks and creates challenges for personal identity. It is reflected in the initial formulation of the life balance, which is typical for that period (Bee, 2004). An individual is then confronted with the effects of the decisions taken, which provide profits and losses (Oleś, 2011). During that period much satisfaction is also gained through generativity and the respect that an individual has among the younger people, for whom the individual becomes an authority figure (Strelau, 2001; Olejnik, 2012).

QQ The development of identity in early and middle adulthood

Personality development encompasses the modification of one’s own emotions, thoughts, and behavior, the changes in the way of interpreting of the meaning of life, the acquirement of new traits, or the reinforcement of an already possessed trait until a total loss of that trait (Bee, 2004; Oleś, 2011). In the perspective of trait theory, personality is described as the most stable element, yet it does not mean that it is not subject to changes (Hall & Lindzey, 2001; Oleś, 2011).

When young people enter adulthood, they undertake the fulfillment of new life tasks. The anxiety, uncertainty as well as increasing stress, which accompany the fulfillment of those tasks, influence the individual’s attitudes by making them less stable. This process supports the gaining of experience and complementing cognitive resources with new elements (Bronfenbrenner, 1970; Nowak, 1973). McCrae and Costa (2005) claim that during the early adulthood period there is an increase of agreeableness and conscientiousness,


while extraversion and openness to experience are still maintained (McCrae & Costa, 2005; Oleś, 2011; Gurba, 2012; Olejnik, 2012). Between 20 and 40 years of age there is an increase of independence, self-confidence, self-esteem, ambition as well as assertiveness. Another characteristic feature of young adults is also goal orientation as well as orientation on gaining new achieve-ments (Bee, 2004). Moreover, McCrae and Costa (2005) agreed on the fact that the stability of traits increases with age and that full development of per-sonality happens around 30 years of age. During the early adulthood period there is also the development of reflexivity which contributes to the process of the life balance, initiated at that time, whose start can be located around 30 years of age. The direction of the first life balance influences an individual’s self-assessment and, at the same time, attitudes related to the surrounding social world. A change takes place in the strength of one’s attitudes, where-as the sign undergoes change significantly less frequently (Mądrzycki, 1977; Mika, 1987; Głaz, 2006; Oleś, 2011).

The development of reflexivity undergoes even greater dynamics during the period of middle adulthood, which is accompanied by the development of generativity. During this period an individual enters a role of a mentor, who passes on knowledge about the world to the younger generation (Witkowski, 1989). It promotes the increase of self-assessment as well as the consolida-tion of the social position (Bee, 2004).

In accordance with Five-factor Model of Personality, during this pe-riod there is a decrease of extraversion, openness to experience, and neuroticism, and there is a significant increase of conscientiousness and agreeableness. The changes can also be traced in relation to the factors that create the five main components. In relation to extraversion there is a decrease in dominance during the period of middle adulthood. However, there is also an increase in the strength of positive emotionality (especially in case of women) and self-control (McCrae & Costa, 2005; Oleś, 2011; Gur-ba, 2012).

QQ The development of identity during adulthood

The occurring developmental challenges resulting from the undertaking of new roles create for an individual conditions which are needed for the de-velopment of identity and the attainment of its mature and coherent form.


This process continuously stays under the influence of past event as well as their effects and their impact on the current state of an individual (Gurba, 2012).

During the period of early adulthood the shaping of identity is connected, first and foremost, with the orientation of one’s life path (Oleś, 2011). People in that period are characterized by high ambition and aspirations (Bee, 2004). The then universally occurring phenomenon of rivalry among the individuals is connected with the pursuit of the achievement of the status of a unique person with high level of individuality (Hurrelmann, 1994). The endeavor to attain this goal consists of behavior as well as the form of proclaimed beliefs. Thus, a common, during this period, occurrence of competition has an influ-ence on the character of attitudes displayed by an individual (Hurrelmann, 1994; Bee, 2004).

Marcia (2002), in accordance with his identity theory, claims that foreclosure identity is dominant during the early adulthood period. It is characterized by a situation in which an individual borrows part of the be-havioral schemata from people who are important for the individual at a given moment (for example, a partner or a superior). This status is positive-ly correlated with the undertaking of new roles as well as tasks and leads to the attainment of the achieved identity status, which takes place at the turn of the first stage and the second stage of adulthood (Marcia, 2002; Bee, 2004; Gurba, 2012; Olejnik, 2012).

The author of psychosocial development theory, Erikson, divides the dynamics of the identity development into eight stages. During the ear-ly adulthood the sixth psychosocial crisis – intimacy vs. isolation becomes the prevailing one (Sternberg, 1999). It is characterized by young adults’ focus of energy on establishing close relationships serving the search for affiliation as well as by the readiness to sacrifices and incurring costs connected with the persistence in faithfulness and the fulfillment of declared commitments (Hall & Lindzey, 2001). The crisis can be resolved in two ways. As a result of its successful resolution, the virtue of love is developed. It enables one to cre-ate an intimate relationship with the simultaneous preservation of personal identity (Witkowski, 1989).

During the consecutive stage, which takes place during the period of middle adulthood, the prevailing problem is generativity vs. stagnation which happens within the field of commitment of an individual to the efficiency of one’s own work and the field of passing on specific values to the younger generation. The virtue of care occurs, owing to the successful resolution of


the seventh identity crisis, and leads to the enrichment of personality. It is expressed in the shape of concern for others as well as care for people in need and it is manifested through raising children or teaching. An adult gains a possibility of self-realization and expression of the fact that they are need-ed, which contributes to the good quality and the purpose of life (Witkowski, 1989; Hall & Lindzey, 2001).

During an individual’s life cycle there can occur events updating the pre-vious crises, especially if they had not been resolved through adaptation. It creates a possibility of reliving them once more in a successful way, which leads to the attainment of the achieved identity. (Bee, 2004; Gurba, 2012).

Generational factor in the research on developmentSchaie revolutionized developmental psychology in the field of exper-

iments concerning cognitive processes. He disproved theories postulating regressive cognitive changes beginning in the period of middle adulthood (Bee, 2004). In his twenty-year sequential study – SLS (Seattle Longitudinal Study) – he demonstrated that in the undertakings which had been realized by then generational factor had not been taken into consideration. As a re-sult, the drawn conclusions were that a decrease of intellectual functions can be observed in the case of individuals older than approximately 40 years of age. Schaie, owing to his study, demonstrated that individuals born after the First World War display a significantly smaller regression within the field of those functions than their ancestors born before 1914 (Bee, 1914; Olejnik, 2012). Additionally, the results of his work presented a noticeable decrease of cognitive functions even before 60 years of age, simultaneously showing that these changes gain importance around approximately 74 years of age (Olejnik, 2012).

QQ The group and the research procedure

In order to conduct the research, a questionnaire, by professor Tiven-dell from University of Moncton in Canada, was used. It contains a wide spectrum of questions concerning personal identity, social identity as well as social stereotypes. The original version of the questionnaire was used to study respondents from Canada. The Canadian version of the questionnaire was submitted to necessary modifications, in order to adjust it to the Polish conditions, by professor Bogdan Pietrulewicz.


120 people from Poland as well as 136 people from Canada participated in the conducted research, taking place between June 2012 and March 2014 in Poland and in Canada. The first part of the research on the Canadian sam-ple was conducted by professor Tivendell. The Canadian group consisted of 79 women and 57 men and its age bracket was 18–77 years of age. The av-erage age of this population is 33.4. The Polish group evenly consisted of 60 women and 60 men and its age bracket was 20–59 years of age. The aver-age age of Polish respondents is 36.3. The questionnaires were distributed among the studied people. The respondents were asked to check or to fill in the spaces with an appropriate number from the Likert-type scale according to the extent to which they agree with a given statement. The research has been conducted in accordance with the principles of ethics.

QQ Results

Due to the normal distribution of the gathered data, parametric statistics were used during the appraisal of differences in the answers of both studied groups. All calculations were made in Statistica 10. The analysis conducted with the use of Shapiro-Wilk test evidences the arrangement of data distrib-uted under the bell curve. Student’s t-test was used for independent samples for variables: dependent variable – nationality, and independent variable – social development.

The image of Canadians from the perspective of Polish respondentsIn the examined population of Poles (N=120) the mean values char-

acterizing Canadians were concentrated between 5.525 (SD=1.905) for the statement “ready for hard work” and 6.683 (SD=1.865) for “free and inde-pendent.” The highest mean value, in comparison with other statements, was obtained by “living in a very stable country” – as much as 7.392 (SD=1.497), whereas the lowest was obtained by “very religious” – 4.708 (SD=1.574).

For 22 statements characterizing the out-group the value of mode was 5. Higher values characterized the following statements: “very athletic,” very intelligent,” and “respecting others” (value of 6), “without prejudice towards foreigners,” “open to other cultures,” “possessing essential features and more,” “very disciplined,” “very similar, demonstrating solidarity” (value of 7), “free and independent,” “uninhibited” as well as “living in a very stable country” (value of 8). There was no question that achieved a lower value than 5. The ob-tained results are presented in Table 1.


Table 1. The responses of Poles concerning the out-group

QQ Self-representation of Poles

The research has shown an interesting self-representation of the studied group of Poles. The most frequent value of mode for 20 statements was 5. A higher one (7) characterized statements: “proud,” “free and independent,” “uninhibited,” “thrifty,” “very intelligent,” “open to other cultures” as well as the value of 8 for “appreciating music” and “ready for hard work.” A lower value, in comparison with the majority of statements, was obtained by “very athletic,” “unaffected by criticism” as well as “living in a very stable country.” The means concerning the in-group were accumulated around the median value 4.791 (SD=1.724) for the adjective “modest,” whereas 5.800 (SD=2.108) for “ready for hard work.” The lowest value was obtained by “living in a very stable country,” as the mean was only 3.708 (SD=1.933). Higher results were obtained by the adjective “proud,” for which the value of the mean is 6.600 (SD=1.558), by “appreciating music,” whose mean value equals 6.108 (SD=1.814), as well as by “very intelligent” – the value of the mean is 6.175 (SD=1.659).


The most frequent value of mode for 20 statements characterizing Poles was 5. A lower value of mode occurs in the case of 3 statements: “very ath-letic,””unaffected by criticism” as well as “living in a very stable country.” For the first enumerated statement the mode obtained the value of 4 and for the other two it obtained the value of 3. A higher value of mode, in com-parison with other statements, characterized statements “proud,” “free and independent,” “uninhabited,” “thrifty,” “very intelligent,” “open to other cul-tures” (mode = 7) as well as “appreciating music” and “ready for hard work” (mode = 8) (Table 2.).

Table 2. The presentation of results concerning the image of Poles from the perspective of Polish respondents

Table 2. The presentation of results concerning the image of Poles from the perspective of Polish respondents.

QQ The image of Poles from the perspective of Canadians

How did Canadians assess the Polish national group? In the group of Ca-nadian respondents the mean values of the answers concerning the image of Poles varied between 5.456 (SD=1.623) for the statement “free from su-perstitions” and 6.772 (SD=1.271) for “happy.” The highest mean value was


obtained by the statement “very clean,” which equaled 7.441 (SD=1.538). By contrast, the lowest mean value, in comparison with other statements, characterized the adjective “thrifty” – 4.691 (SD=2.064).

The most frequent value of mode for 23 statements was 7. A higher value characterized statements “free and independent,” “very clean” as well as “liv-ing in a very stable country” (8). And a lower value of mode (6) characterized statements: “knowing others well” and “not wasting time”. The lowest value (5) was obtained by the statements “very athletic,” “very religious,” “free from superstitions,” “thrifty” as well as “unaffected by criticism.” The detailed re-sults are presented in Table 3.

Table 3. The image of Poles from the perspective of Canadian respondents

QQ Research results

QQ Study 1

In H1 hypothesis it was assumed that the assessment of the in-group and the out-group from the perspective of Poles differs to a significant extent. It


was assumed that Poles present the in-group in a more favorable light than the out-group. In order to verify H1 hypothesis, Student’s t-test was applied for independent samples. The results are presented in Table 4.

Table 4. A comparison of mean sums of answers of Poles concerning Poles (Mean Group 1) and Canadians (Mean Group 2)

Table 8. A comparison of mean sums of the assessment of the in-group made by individuals who are in the

period of early (Mean 0) and middle (Mean 1) adulthood.

The statistical analysis of the gathered data has demonstrated significant statistical differences between the image of the in-group and the out-group. The analysis indicates that Polish respondents assessed the out-group better – Canadians (Mean Group 2 = 158.408) in comparison to the in-group (Mean Group 1 = 137.745).

QQ Study 2

While making another (H2) hypothesis, it was assumed that the level of internal diversification of the in-group and the out-group differs to a signif-icant extent. It was assumed that Polish respondents assess the in-group as less homogeneous in comparison to the out-group. In order to verify H2 hy-pothesis, Student’s t-test was applied for independent samples.

Table 5. The presentation of standard deviation values for the image of Poles (Standard deviation Group 1) and Canadians (Standard deviation Group 2)



The statistical analysis of results presented in Table 2 has demonstrated significant statistical differences between the level of internal diversification of the in-group and the out-group from the perspective of Poles. The analysis indicates that Polish respondents assessed the in-group as less homogeneous (Standard deviation for Group 1 =25.462) in comparison to the out-group (Standard deviation for Group 2 = 24.593).


QQ Study 3

In H3 hypothesis it was assumed that Poles assess themselves in a more positive way in comparison to the approach of Canadians to Poles. In order to verify H3 hypothesis, Student’s t-test was applied for independent samples.

Table 6. A comparison of mean sums of answers concerning Poles – Group 1 (Polish respondents) and Group 2 (Canadian respondents)



The results presented in Table 6 demonstrate that there exist signif-icant statistical differences in the assessment of Poles made by Polish and Canadian respondents. Canadians assessed Poles in a more positive way in comparison to Polish people’s assessment of their in-group – mean for Group 1 is 137.767, whereas mean for Group 2 is 160.169.

The presented and discusses statistical analysis of results has proven that Poles assesses the in-group in a more negative way in comparison to the assessment made by Canadian respondents.

QQ Study 4

While making H4 hypothesis, it was assumed that there exist significant differences in the image of Poles from the perspective of Polish and Canadian respondents. H4 hypothesis assumes that Poles assess themselves in a more diversified way in comparison to the approach of Canadians to Poles.

In order to verify the made hypothesis, Student’s t-test was applied for independent samples. The obtained results are presented in Table 7.

Table 7. Presentation of results displaying the level of internal diversification of Poles in the assessment of Polish and Canadian respondents




The analysis of the gathered empirical data has confirmed the exist-ence of significant differences in the image of Poles from the perspective of the in-group and from the perspective of the out-group. Poles assesses themselves in a more diversified way in comparison to the approach of Ca-nadians to Poles, which is reflected in the standard deviation for Group 1 which equals 25.462 as well as the standard deviation for Group 2 which equals 19.678.

The presented statistical analysis of results has demonstrated that Poles assessed the in-group in a less homogeneous way in comparison to the ap-proach of Canadians to Poles.

QQ Study 5

While making another (H5) hypothesis, the authors of the article assumed that there exist significant differences in the assessment of the in-group from the perspective of individuals who are in the periods of early and middle adulthood. It was assumed that individuals who are in the period of middle adulthood assess the in-group in a more positive way in comparison to young adults. In order to verify H5 hypothesis, Student’s t-test was applied for independent samples.

Table 8. A comparison of mean sums of the assessment of the in-group made by individuals who are in the period of early (Mean 0) and middle (Mean 1) adulthood


period of early (Mean 0) and middle (Mean 1) adulthood.The statistical analysis of the gathered data has demonstrated significant statistical differences between the image of the in-group from the perspec-tive of individuals who are in the periods of early and middle adulthood. The analysis indicates that the respondents who are in the period of middle adulthood assessed the in-group in a more positive way (Mean 1 = 142.883) in comparison to young adults (Mean 0 = 132.650).


QQ Study 6

While making H6 hypothesis, it was assumed that the level of internal diversification of the in-group is significantly different from the perspective of individuals who are in the periods of early and middle adulthood. It was expected that individuals who are in the period of early adulthood will assess the in-group as less homogeneous in comparison to individuals who are in the period of middle adulthood. In order to verify H6 hypothesis, Student’s t-test was applied for independent samples.

Table 9. The presentation of standard deviation values for the image of the in-group from the perspective of individuals in the period of early (Standard deviation Group 0) and middle

(Standard deviation Group 1) adulthood



The statistical analysis of empirical data has demonstrated significant statistical differences between the level of internal diversification of the in-group from the perspective of individuals who are in the periods of early and middle adulthood. The analysis indicates that young adults assessed the in-group as more internally diversified (Standard deviation for Group 0 =27.897) in comparison to the respondents who are in the period of middle adulthood (Standard deviation for Group 1 = 21.820).

QQ Discussion

One of the issues explored in this research project was the comparison of the assessment of the in-group and the out-group from the perspective of Poles. The first two hypotheses were related to this particular aspect of the research. The analysis of results has proven one of the assumptions of social identity theory concerning the tendency to approach the in-group as more internally diversified in comparison to the out-group (Crisp & Turner, 2009; Kofta, 2004). It has transpired that Polish respondents assessed the in-group as more diversified in comparison to the out-group (H2). However, more interesting results of the research were connected with H1 hypothesis. It was assumed in the study that Poles assess the in-group in a more positive


way in comparison to the out-group. However, the results have not confirmed this assumption. The analysis of the answers concerning the in-group and the out-group allowed to make an interesting conclusion that Poles assessed Canadians in a more positive way than themselves.

The conclusions made after the verification of the two consecutive hy-potheses were equally surprising. In H3 hypothesis it was assumed that Polish respondents assess themselves in a better way, as the in-group, in comparison to the approach of Canadians to Poles. However, the statistical analysis of data has demonstrated that the image of Poles from the perspec-tive of Canadians is significantly more positive than the self-stereotypes of Poles. By contrast, H4 hypothesis, in which it was assumed that the image of Poles is more diversified from the perspective of Polish respondents than Canadian respondents, has been confirmed. In accordance with Tajfel and Turner’s theory, Poles assessed the in-group as a less homogeneous one.

The obtained results have confirmed the multidimensionality of the phe-nomenon of the perception of individuals belonging to We-category as well as individuals representing the out-group. Some of the conclusions confirm the assumptions of social identity theory, whereas others are astonishing and compel the researchers to conduct further discussion and an in-depth analysis. The results have confirmed the occurrence of the out-group homo-geneity effect. This phenomenon is a consequence of social categorization and is based on the perception of the out-group as a more homogeneous one (Jarymowicz, 2000; Wojciszke, 2002; Wosińska, 2004). Polish respondents assessed the in-group as more diversified in comparison to the out-group. However, what is surprising is the fact that Poles assessed the Canadian group in a more positive way than their own national group. As it has already been mentioned, social identity theory postulates that the out-group homogeneity effect is a common phenomenon, whereas in-group favoritism is dependent on certain factors. The implications of Tajfel and Turner’s (1986) research are that in the moments of self-esteem threat the tendency to in-group fa-voritism as well as out-group derogation increases. This tendency enhances identification with the members of the in-group and increases self-esteem. The consequences of such a perception of the out-group are cognitive dis-tortions, where one of the examples might be stereotypes (Baran, 2004; Wojciszke, 2004).

High assessment of the out-group from the perspective of Poles can be explained by the lack of contact with the representatives of the Canadian group as well as the absence of rich information concerning Canada and its


residents. Perhaps, during the research, positive stereotypes about Canadi-ans started to play an important part, as Poles could have perceived them as representatives of a remote and rich country with a stable socioeconomic situation. Most of the respondents, during the research as well as after the re-search, claimed that they possess no information concerning Canada, thus it is difficult for them, in their subjective perception, to assess the representa-tives of Canada. Many of the respondents admitted that from their perspective Canada is a rich country with stable social and political situation and whose residents are people who are happy and satisfied with their lives and who are rather not religious just like other residents of Western countries. Such stereotypes about Canadians confirm the research results – the highest mean value was obtained by the statement “living in a very stable country” which equaled 7.392 (SD=1.497). By contrast, the lowest mean value characterized the statement “very religious” – 4.708 (SD=1.574). The presented facts can prove the moderately developed cognitive component related to the atti-tudes concerning Canadians, and thus also the affective component of weak intensity (Mika, 1987).

Another argument, which is an indication of the positive assessment of the Canadian group by Polish respondents, is the existence of a large so-cial distance between the two studied groups. It is difficult to speak about a common historical past of both nations, which can be an explanation for the positive stereotypes concerning Canadians among the Polish respond-ents. Social identity theory assumes that in-group favoritism is connected with defensive maintaining of positive self-assessment (Kofta, 2004). It can be concluded that during the research the image of the in-group was not jeopardized, thus this particular mechanism did not occur.

In conclusion, one should also pay attention to the influence of the distor-tion variable. In spite of the fact that the studied individuals made a conscious decision to participate in the project, the situation of the research is not “emotionally neutral.” This means that the respondents were influenced by the discomfort related to the assessment and the accuracy of the responses. Many of the studied individuals stated that they have no knowledge concern-ing Canadians but they were concerned to do well and to positively assess the out-group. In the context of social identity theory, the research results can also be explained by the low status of the in-group. Tajfel and Turner’s theory (1986) assumes that in-group favoritism is dependent on the sta-tus of this group. As Domański (2009) and Giza-Poleszczuk (2009) claim, Poles, as a national group, are still haunted by complexes in comparison with


the representatives of Eastern Europe. Thus, the status of the in-group is not extremely high (Wosińska, 2004). Negative self-stereotypes of the in-group could have contributed to the low assessment of the in-group in comparison to the assessment of the out-group. In-group favoritism occurred only in cer-tain areas in this case. It is evidenced by the research results – Poles assessed themselves in a more positive way in the case of the following statements: “proud,” “appreciating music,” “religious,” “intelligent” as well as “ready for hard work.” The statement “living in a very stable country” was assessed extremely low in comparison to the out-group. As Giza-Poleszczuk (2009) writes, religiousness is one of the features that is most frequently associated with the Polish nation. In the studied individuals’ opinion this feature was highly assessed – the mean is 5.683. Due to the fact that the distribution ac-quires normal form, the perception of the in-group through religiousness seems to be a common phenomenon.

The perception of the in-group from the perspective of Canadians has not been included in the research. The fact that Canadians presented Poles in a more positive light than the Polish respondents themselves seems to be ex-tremely interesting. Perhaps, in this case the factors connected with the lack of broad knowledge concerning Poles as well as the absence of direct con-tact with the residents of Poland, and lack of common historical past also played an important role. For Canadians, Polish people constitute a neutral group, thus, similarly to Polish respondents, when assessing the out-group they wanted to present a positive image of themselves, as individuals who are tolerant and without inclination to discrimination or prejudice.

SIT assumes that social identity is connected with the emotional bond with We-category (Jarymowicz, 2000; Hogg & Vaughan, 2010). Thus, social theory is expressed in the perception of common membership in a given social cat-egory (Bikong, 1988; Crisp & Turner, 2009; Jarymowicz, 2001). On the other hand, SCT assumes that identification with a given social group is depend-ent on the cognitive classification of oneself as a member of a given category (Crisp & Turner, 2009; Jarymowicz, 2000). Giza-Poleszczuk (2009) high-lights the fact that Poles have a tendency to assess their own ethnic group in a negative way. In other words, self-stereotypes of Poles are marked with negative adjectives. When the status of the in-group is low, an individu-al stops perceiving oneself as part of a greater whole, thus as a member of We-category (Giza-Poleszczuk, 2009). Researches assume that the phenome-non of in-group favoritism requires the categorization of oneself as a member of a particular social group (Crisp & Turner, 2009). Perhaps, the low status


of the group is connected with the lack of this categorization. Additionally, in the context of social research, the low status of the in-group is connected with the inclination to the valorization of the out-group (Giza-Poleszczuk, 2009).

When analyzing the research results, one should pay attention to the fact that the current socio-political situation of Poland could have an influence on the perception of the in-group. The assessment of the in-group by the respond-ents was very low in the statement “living in a very stable country” – the mean is 3.708 (SD=1.933). The comments made by the studied individuals after the research had ended showed that this feature was negatively assessed in comparison to the Canadian group. One of the properties of the positive stere-otype of Canadians from the perspective of Poles is the perception of Canada as a rich country with a stable political and economic situation, whose resi-dents are happy and satisfied with their lives. This stereotype is confirmed by the research results – the mean = 7.392; the mode is 8.

After the research had ended, the respondents commented that the social context during the research could have a significant influence on the way they had responded – the respondents wanted to “do well” in the test by avoiding discriminating answers. Hence, the outcome might be the positive assess-ment of the out-group. On this basis, it can be concluded that the studied group, in the situation of research, was aiming to maintain the positive image of themselves, as individuals who are tolerant and not inclined to prejudice. In the context of psychology, it is highlighted that in different social situations a particular identity of an individual is dominant (Jarymowicz, 2000). Most of the studied individuals obtained a higher result in the case of individual identity than social identity, hence it can be expected that they were aiming to maintain a positive self-assessment of an individual. This phenomenon can be related to cognitive dissonance theory. The need to avoid the unpleasant feeling of tension – the respondents assessed the out-group in a positive way, in order to confirm the positive self-assessment, as tolerant and open individ-uals – had an influence on the way they answered particular questions.

H5 and H6 hypotheses assumed that social development diversifies the image of the in-group. Both assumptions were corroborated by the anal-ysis of empirical data, which has shown significant differences existing in the strength of the possessed attitudes as well as in the internal diversifica-tion of the in-group from the perspective of the representatives of the periods of early and middle adulthood.

In accordance with the assumption of H5 hypothesis, the expected out-come that individuals who are in the period of middle adulthood assess


the in-group in a more positive way in comparison to young adults has been confirmed. The first of the possible explanations of this phenomenon can be made in relation to trait theory. McCrae and Costa (2005), its representatives, claim that during the period between 30 and 50 years of age the traits of an individual are characterized by the greatest stability. Additionally, the mid-dle adulthood period is characterized by the highest overall agreeableness. The authors of Five-factor Model of Personality describe agreeableness as an endeavor to be kind and polite towards others as well as to be altruistic and suppressing aggression in conflict situations. A more positive assessment of the in-group from the perspective of people in the age bracket between 35/40 and 60/65 may result from the prevailing agreeability factor in the behavior and thinking of adults, which is characteristic for this period.

The results can also be explained by the occurrence of the phenomenon of social conformity. According to its assumptions, the individuals belonging to one of the social groups conform their behavior to the generally accepted norms and rules characteristic for the group to which they belong (Aronson, 2005). According to Aronson (2005), a higher level of social conformity is more characteristic for people in the middle adulthood period than in the ear-ly adulthood period and, additionally, the reinforcement of this phenomenon can be influenced by the social situation of the research. It is highly probable that the fear of assessment, the need to do well in the eyes of a researcher as well as the need to fit in the standards of responses made by other represent-atives of that period influenced the assessment of the in-group which became more positive and it was not made in compliance with one’s own attitudes.

The positive assessment of the in-group by the individuals in the mid-dle adulthood period could have been influenced by the prevailing, in this period, identity crisis labeled by Erikson as generativity vs.stagnation. Indi-viduals in that period enter a role of a peculiar mentor, whose task is to pass on the knowledge about the world to the younger generation and this knowl-edge acquires a pro-social character to a large extent (Witkowski, 1989). Individuals in the period of middle adulthood will probably adjust their be-havior and beliefs to the character of doctrines that are passed on to the next generation, in order to avoid the occurrence of an unpleasant feeling con-nected with cognitive dissonance. Due to that, there is a high probability that the provided responses, during the filling in of the questionnaire, will build a positive image of Poles.

In research on the human development, especially when the age of an individual is taken as the independent variable, the researcher should not


ignore the affiliation of an individual with a particular generation, which is in accordance with General Model of Development by Schai. Thus, the lack of influence of the generative factor on the obtained results cannot be excluded. However, it requires the planning of further empirical research.

The next (H6) hypothesis assumed that individuals who are in the period of early adulthood will assess the in-group as less homogeneous in comparison to individuals who are in the period of middle adulthood. The statistical anal-ysis of the obtained data allowed to prove significant differences in the level of internal diversification of the in-group in the perception of individuals who are in the periods of early and middle adulthood.

Such pattern of responses provided by young adults concerning the out-group can be influenced by the strength of respective components described in Five-factor Model of Personality. According to the authors of trait theo-ry, the period of early adulthood is characterized by an increase in the level of extraversion and openness to experience. According to McCrae and Costa (2005), these features are connected with high activity, unconventionality of behavior and thinking, divergent thinking, creativity, and questioning of authority figures. These features can predispose individuals, who are in the early adulthood period, to give more internally diverse responses and, at the same time, can influence the obtained image of the in-group, as one char-acterized by low homogeneity.

The period of early adulthood is connected with high ambition and aspi-rations (Bee, 2004). The then universally occurring phenomenon of rivalry among the individuals is connected with the pursuit of the achievement of the status of a unique person with high level of individuality (Hurrelmann, 1994). The undertaking of an attempt to classify oneself as a unique individ-ual consists of behavior as well as the form of proclaimed beliefs. The still developing perception of the social world (Niemczyński, 1994), which ac-companies it, has got a high probability that it will influence the responses of the young adults. There is a high probability that the above-mentioned factors influence the assessment of the in-group in the context of the level of internal diversification.

The formulation of attitudes is also significantly influenced by the iden-tity status of an individual in the particular development period. According to Marcia (2002), foreclosure identity is the dominant one during the early adulthood period. This status is positively correlated with the undertaking of new roles by the young adults. During that period, an individual borrows the behavioral schemata from people who are important for the individual.


Together with experience an individual will be able to develop his own pat-terns of behavior, which lead to the attainment of the achieved identity status. It takes place at the turn of the first stage and the second stage of adulthood (Bee, 2004; Marcia, 2002; Gurba, 2012). The number of established rela-tionships during this period (supervisors, co-workers, family, life partner, her/his family) influences the fact that individuals acquire attitudes from other people, and, to a significant extent, implies the diversity of responses provided in the questionnaire studying attitudes – and, what is directly con-nected with it, the way of assessment of the in-group as less homogeneous. As the above-mentioned analyses demonstrated, the dynamic character of human development, the number of factors influencing the sense of social and personal identity, and the impact of experiences and external influences on the character of one’s attitudes impel the researchers to draw interest-ing conclusions. They may constitute a perfect basis for the continuation of the debate and for the planning of further research in the field of issues raised in the described research project.

QQ References

Argyle, M. (2002). Psychologia stosunków międzyludzkich. Warszawa: PWN.Aronson, E. (1997). Człowiek – istota społeczna. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe

PWN.Aronson, E. (2005). Człowiek – istota społeczna. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe

PWN, 296–350.Aronson, E., Wilson, T.D., Akert, R.M. (1997). Psychologia społeczna. Serce i umysł. Po-

znań: Zysk i S-k Wydawnictwo, 262–590.Baley, S. (1964). Wprowadzenie do psychologii społecznej. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo

Naukowe PWN, 171–188.Baran, T. (2004). Zjawisko dehumanizacji w relacjach międzygrupowych: znaczenie

kategoryzacji społecznej, kooperacji i rywalizacji, in: M. Kofta (red.), Myślenie stereotypowe i uprzedzenia (p. 117–136). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Instytutu Psychologii PAN.

Bee, H. (2004). Psychologia rozwoju człowieka. Poznań: Zysk i S-ka Wydawnictwo, 1–18, 432–542.

Bikont, A. (1988). Tożsamość społeczna – teorie, hipotezy, znaki zapytania. W: M. Jarymowicz (red.), Studia nad spostrzeganiem relacji JA-INNI: tożsa-mość, indywiduacja – przynależność (p. 16–39). Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich.


Bronfenbrenner, U. (1970). Czynniki społeczne z rozwoju osobowości. Psychologia wy-chowawcza, 1.

Crips, R.J., Turner, R.N. (2009). Psychologia społeczna. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Na-ukowe PWN.

Domachowski, W. (1998). Przewodnik po psychologii społecznej. Warszawa: PWN.Domański, T. (2009). Polacy – atuty i słabości, in: Szonburg. J. (red.), Wposzukiwaniu

portretu Polaków (p. 7–10). Gdańsk: Instytut Badan nad Gospodarką Rynkową.Giza-Poleszczuk, A. (2009) Po drugiej stronie lustra, in: Szomburg, J. (red) W poszu-

kiwaniu portretu Polaków (p. 11–16). Gdańsk: Instytut Badań nad Gospodarką Rynkow.

Głaz, S. (2006). Sens życia a religia. Wymiary filozoficzno – psychologiczne. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Fundacji Humaniora.

Gurba, E. (2012). Wczesna dorosłość, in: J. Trempała (red.). Psychologia rozwoju czło-wieka. (p. 287–311). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.

Hall, C.S., Lindzey, G. (2001). Teorie osobowości. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, 76–111; 149–195.

Hamer. H. (2005). Psychologia społeczna. Warszawa: DIFIN.Hogg, M., A. (2005). Autokategoryzacja i usuwanie subiektywnej niepewności – po-

znawcze i motywacyjne aspekty tożsamości społecznej i przynależności grupowe. W: J.P. Forgas, K.D. Williams, L. Wheeler (red.), Umysł społeczny (p. 326–343). So-pot: Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne.

Hogg, M.A. & Vaughan, G.M. (2010). Social Psychology. Pearson Australia.Hurrelmann, K. (1994). Struktura społeczna a rozwój osobowości: Wprowadzenie

do teorii socjalizacji. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM.Jarymowicz, M. (2000). Psychologia tożsamości, in: J. Strelau (red.), Psychologia. Pod-

ręcznik akademicki (107–125). Gdańsk: Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne.Jarymowicz M. (1994). Poznawcza indywiduacja a społeczne identyfikacje: model za-

leżności pomiędzy odrębnością schematów Ja – My/Inni i gotowością perspektywą widzenia siebie i świata (107–125). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Instytutu Psycho-logii PAN.

Jarymowicz, M., Kwiatkowska, A. (1988). Atrybuty własnej tożsamości: właściwo-ści spostrzegane jako wspólne dla „ja” i „innych” versus specyficzne własne, in: M. Jarymowicz (red.), Studia nad spostrzeganiem relacji JA-INNI: tożsamość, indywiduacja, przynależność (p. 65–78). Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy Imienia Ossolińskich.

Kofta, M. (2004). Stereotypy i uprzedzenia a stosunki międzygrupowe: stare proble-my i nowe idee, in: M. Kofta (red.), Myślenie stereotypowe i uprzedzenia (p. 9–32). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Instytutu Psychologii PAN.

Kofta, M., Mirosławska, M. (2004). Czy dehumanizowanie „obcych” to proces ele-mentarny?, in: M. Kofta (red.), Myślenie stereotypowe i uprzedzenia (p. 95–114). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Instytutu Psychologii PAN.


Kowalik, S. (2002). Rozwój społeczny, in: B. Harwas-Napierała, J. Trempała, Psycho-logia rozwoju człowieka (p. 71–105). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.

Kwiatkowska, A. (1999). Tożsamość a społeczne kategoryzacje. Warszawa: Wydaw-nictwo Instytutu Psychologii PAN, 61–68.

Martin, G.N., Carlson, N.R., Buskist, W. (2010) Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-versity Press.

Mądrzycki, T. (1977). Psychologiczne prawidłowości kształtowania się postaw. War-szawa: Wydawnictwo Szkolne i Pedagogiczne.

Marcia, J.E. (2002). Identity and psychological development in adulthood. Identity: an International Journal of Theory and Research, 2, 7–28.

McCrae, R.R., Costa, P.T. (2005). Osobowość dorosłego człowieka. Perspektywa teorii pięcioczynnikowe,. (przekł. B. Majaczyna). Kraków: Wydawnictwo WAM.

Mika, S. (1987). Psychologia społeczna. Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Nauko-we, 105–525.

Nelson, T.D. (2003). Psychologia uprzedzeń. Gdańsk: Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne.

Niemczyński, A. (1994). O autonomii rozwoju. (Zarys problematyki). Kwartalnik Pol-skiej Psychologii Rozwojowej, 2, 3–11.

Nowak, S. (red.), (1973). Teorie postaw. Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.

Olejnik, M. (2012). Średnia dorosłość, in: J. Trempała (red.). Psychologia rozwoju czło-wieka (p. 312–325). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.

Oleś, P.K. (2011). Psychologia człowieka dorosłego. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Nauko-we PWN.

Park, A., Curtice, J., Thomson, K., Jarvis, L., Bromley, C. (red.) (2003). British social attiudes: The 20th report. London: Sage.

Pennington, D., Gillen, K. & Hill, P. (1999) Social Psychology. London: Arnold.Pietrasiński, Z. (1990). Rozwój człowieka dorosłego. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Wie-

dza Powszechna.Pietrzak, H. (2000). Następstwa i efekty stereotypowego postrzegania człowieka

i świata społecznego. Rzeszów: WSP.Przetacznik-Gierowska, M. (2002). Zasady i prawidłowości psychicznego rozwoju

człowieka, in: M. Przetacznik-Gierowska, M. Tyszkowa, Psychologia rozwoju czło-wieka (p. 57–84). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.

Szacka, B. (2003). Wprowadzenie do socjologii. Warszawa: Oficyna Naukowa.Schellenber J.A. (1974). An introduction to social psychology. New York: Random Ho-

use, p. 352–353.Stephan, W.G., Stephan, C.W., (2003). Wywieranie wpływu przez grupy. Gdańsk:

Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne.Sternberg, R.J. (2001a). Psychologia poznawcza (tłum. Czerwniawska, E., Matczak, A.)

Warszawa: WSiP.


Sternberg, R., J. (1999). Wprowadzenie do psychologii. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Szkolne i Pedagogiczne, 193–225.

Szwed, R. (2003). Tożsamość a obcość kulturowa. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego.

Sztompka, P. (2005). Socjologia. Analiza społeczeństwa. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Znak.Tajfel, H., Billig, M., Bundy, R.P., Flament, C. (1971). Social categorization and intergro-

up behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 149–178.Tajfel, H., Turner, J.C. (1986). The social identity theory of inter-group behavior,

in: S. Worchel, L.W. Austin (eds.), Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.

Tillmann, K. (1996). Teorie socjalizacji. Społeczność, instytucja, upodmiotowienie. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.

Todd, N. (2002). Psychologia uprzedzeń. Gdańsk: GWP.Tomaszewski, T. (1977). Człowiek i otoczenie, in: Tomaszewski Tomasz (red.) Psy-

chologia (pp. 7–42). Warszawa: PWNTrempała, J. (red.), (2012). Psychologia rozwoju człowieka. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo

Naukowe PWN, 28–70.Weigl, B. (2000). Stereotypy i uprzedzenia, in: J. Strelau (red). Psychologia. Jednostka

w Społeczeństwie i elementy psychologii stosowanej. T. 3. Gdańsk: GWPWitkowski, L. (1989). Rozwój i tożsamość w cyklu życia. Stadium koncepcji Erika

H. Eriksona. Toruń: Zakład Poligrafii UMK, 123–163.Wojciszke, B. (2001). Wiedza jednostki i sądy o świecie społecznym, in: J. Strelau

(red.), Psychologia Podręcznik akademicki. Tom 3. Jednostka w społeczeństwie i elementy psychologii stosowanej (p. 25–225). Gdańsk: Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne.

Wojciszke, B. (2002). Człowiek wśród ludzi. Warszawa: Scholar.Wojciszke, W. (2004). Psychologia życia społecznego. Gdańsk: GWP.Wosińska, W. (2004). Psychologia życia społecznego. Podręcznik psychologii społecz-

nej dla praktyków i studentów. Gdańsk: GWP.Zimbardo, P.G., Johnson, R.L., McCann, V. (2010). Psychologia. Kluczowe koncepcje.

Warszawa: PWN.Zimbardo, P., Ruch, F., (1987). Psychologia i życie. Warszawa: PWN.

me-you, we-they – a couple of words about national ... · in trempała, 2012). 256 respondents...

Documents