Australia's Social Identity

Questions

What does social psychological theory and research indicate about the nature of Australian's social identity and Australian values?

How do stereotypes affect Australian Identity?

How has Australian identity changed?

How does Australian identity impact on the nature of cross-cultural relationships?

Definitions

Social Identity refers to an individuals' self definition of themself within the context of relationships within a community.

Australian values can be referred to as important standards of expected behaviour of all Australians in their everyday interactions which are vital to the harmony of our society.

A Stereotype is a mental shortcut which is based on quickly recognisable categories which groups similar people together. However this categorisations is based on gross generalisation and can have some negative connotations.

Cross Cultural relationships are connections between people who belong to different cultures.

Introduction

From the evolutionary perspective, people have evolved to form bonds with others to help increase their chances of survival. In establishing these relationships the human need to belong has been highlighted, which in turn requires social acceptance of an individual and their underlying behaviours (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008).

Australians, like all other regional groups of people are social beings who have a propensity to form a social identity and social values based on their group membership (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). Within the melting pot of Australia many different cultures influence Australia's social identity and values, and this has been seen through the changes in Australia’s identity through historical times.

Social psychological theory and research indicates an individuals' social identity is formed by social forces that effect an individual's identity processes and membership to socially categorised groups (Goar, 2003). This is supported by Tajfel's (1981) Social Identity Theory (Smith & Bond, 1993) and Sheriffs research on in-group out-group biases which can be seen in the use of stereotypes and through cross- cultural relationships within Australia (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008).

Theory and research

Charles Darwin's Evolution of Theory (Darwin, 1859, cited in Myers, 2004), provides the basis for social psychologists explanation on the nature to form human relationships based on the need for survival (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). However in today’s terms the need for such social bonds may not necessarily be only for resources or based on physiological needs, but also based on psychological needs (Burger, 2004).

According to Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (Maslow, 1954 and revised in 1970, cited in Burger, 2004), individuals require belongingness and love, and also esteem (Burger, 2004). In order to achieve these needs an individual would typically display socially accepted behaviour within cultural or social norms to instigate social acceptance and commence the formation of social bonds (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). In forming relationships with others, a social identity is formed and the individual is likely to ensure social values of the group membership are maintained, to avoid ostracism or rejection from the group.

Although evolutionary theory and Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs may indicate a basis for the nature of social identity and social values as a positive outcome, other research can suggest social identity and social values may be seen as a negative bi-product of a group membership. Tajfel's Social Identity Theory (Tajfel, 1981, cited in Smith & Bond, 1993), which states an individual's social identity is derived from groups they belong to (Smith & Bond, 1993), could indicate that this social identity could be based on the groups’ beliefs, attitudes and values. However, from this theory, research experiments into the minimal group paradigm found that when participants were randomly divided into groups they would indicate favouritism to their group more readily by behaving more favourable to the group they belonged to; this was seen in one experiment as an in-group bias by providing more rewards to their group over the other group (Dick, Wagner, Stellmacher, Christ, & Tissington, 2006).

In addition to this, research conducted by Muzafer Sheriff (Sheriff & Sheriff, 1954, cited in Baumeister & Bushman, 2008), identified the ease of establishing an ‘us versus them” mentality in a study conducted by dividing 22 eleven year old boys into two groups and having them complete activities within their groups and then in competition between the two groups (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). From the findings of this study intergroup relations were apparent and negative behaviour was displayed toward out-group members. Competition and rivalry between the two groups caused prejudice and anti-social behaviour towards members of the out- group, which demonstrated the negative effects of social identity.

Stereotypes

The negative effect of intergroup relations can be seen in people’s use of stereotypes and interactions between cross cultural relationships. Stereotypes in themselves may not be the instigator of negative behaviours but they are the cognitive element that influences thoughts. Stereotypes are mental shortcuts, which can be explained by Tolman as the principle of least effort (Tolman, 1932, as cited in Deckers, 2005), in which a person will take the easiest path to obtain an outcome, or as a cognitive miser: defined as a person’s reluctance to do extra thinking (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). Either way, the use of stereotypes is based on a human’s natural tendency to group or categorise things (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008).

Although stereotypes can be positively or negatively related towards a group of people based on their shared traits, they generally provide negative beliefs toward a specific group of people and can foster discrimination. Shamefully, this has been observed in recent times within Australia with the Cronulla riots on 11 December 2006 (Four Corners, 2006). In this incident 5000 Australians and hundreds of Middle Eastern men gathered at Cronulla beach to invoke revenge by random savage attacks on anyone appearing to belong to the opposite party (Four Corners, 2006); which corresponds with Tajfel and Sheriff’s research into an individual’s bias or favouritism to their group.

These attacks sent shocking images of racial-hatred inspired riots internationally through the media and created social outrage in Australia, so much so that the Australian Government announced the introduction of a citizenship test emphasising the importance of Australian values and the need for Australian values to be taught in Australian schools. The citizenship test was introduced on 10 September 2007 in accordance with an amendment to the Australian Citizenship Act 2007 requiring applicants for Australian citizenship to successfully complete a citizenship test in order to be eligible to become an Australian citizen (Parliament of Australia, 2007). And the National Framework for Values Education in Australian Schools was introduced in September 2006 to ensure students followed the Australian values (Department of Education and Training, 2007). These actions not only condemned the violent and racially inspired actions of the Cronulla riots but instilled the need for Australia’s social values.

Changes to Australian’s Identity

Like any other country, Australia’s identity has changed throughout its history and this can been identified over the last 200 years since Federation and the current struggles between the original inhabitants of the land (Australia’s Aboriginals) and the current generation of inhabitants that have been born here since colonisation from Britain (Costa, 2000). Obviously not all people emigrated from Britain and this can be recognised by historical trends.

Australia’s identity has changed during its history. From the beginning of the Federation of Australia in 1901 until the late 20th century the White Australia Policy was in place, which involved the colonisation of the new continent from Britian (Department of Immigration and Citizenship, 2007). It was a term used to describe a collection of historical legislation and policies which were intended to restrict non-white immigration to Australia, and promoted a population similar to Britain’s (Making Multicultural Australia, 2007). During these times, Australia’s Identity was strongly influenced by the British.

h

However, after World War II there was a need to increase Australia’s population and immigration of Europeans increased as British immigrants decreased. Even with a decrease in British immigrant, Australian policy at the time, called for these Europeans to assimilate as British- Australians, which encouraged abandoning the culture of the countries they had come from (Cook, 2004). Thankfully assimilation policy was overtaken by one of integration which promoted migrants to maintain their ethnic diversity but not interfere with their ability to function as a normal citizen. This policy was far from perfect for many migrants of Indochina that migrated to Australian after the Vietnam War in 1975 (Cook, 2004).

Australia’s current cultural climate is one based on multiculturalism, although at times there may be undertones of prejudice based on stereotypes or other areas of conflict between cross- cultural relationships. Australia’s identity has been formed on a diverse range of people from different cultures and backgrounds. Australia, although still part of the Commonwealth does not exhibit strong allegiance to Britain, instead promotes itself as a separate nation which has a unique social identity which is promoted through the diversity of the faces of its people.

Cross-cultural relationships

Given, Australia’s identity is based on the diversity of its inhabitants; there are ongoing issues between different cultures which impacts of the nature of our cross cultural relationships. The most prominent of these, is the relationships between our indigenous people, known as the first inhabitants or custodians of the land and non-indigenous Australians (Costa, 2000).

There are several factors that create tension between indigenous and non- indigenous Australians and the most prominent of these is the recognition of Aboriginals to sovereignty, which is poorly acknowledged through the Constitution (Costa, 2000). In a political environment, recognition of Australians indigenous people has been poorly emphasised. This is evident with the Referendum in 1967 which was the first legislation to recognise Aboriginals as Australians and created laws for their inclusion into Australian society, such as the right to vote (Costa, 2000).

A second major factor is the history of settlement within Australia and the atrocities the Australian settlers inflicted on the native inhabitants of the land. These atrocities have not be limited to the settlement of Australia, but can be seen as ongoing unethical acts such as the Stolen Generation, to more recent times of the social injustice measures of inadequate housing, health and education and the erosion of aboriginal culture and heritage (Costa, 2000).

These factors have created a separation of indigenous people from non-indigenous Australians as Aboriginals had not previously been included in our national identity, which has lead to a divide in cross cultural relationships between indigenous and non-indigenous Australians, and continues to be an ongoing issue in relationship formation and a unified social identity, not to mention shared social values.

Australian identity has also impacted on the nature of some other cross-cultural relationships. This is observed in Australia’s views towards people of Middle Eastern decent since “9/11” in the United States of America and increased prejudice towards Muslims, which has been highly politicised.

Conclusion

From this brief discussion it can be seen that Australian Social Identity and Social Values form a vital role in the interactions of people within Australian society (Cook, 2004). These interactions are based on deep rooted evolutionary cues that aid survival, and both physiological and psychological needs as defined by Abraham Maslow. Theory and research supports the Social Identity Theory, Minimal Group Effect and use of stereotypes in situations that highlight the negative side of human behaviour when dealing with situations based on social identity and social values.

Australian social identity has changed through historical times based on the cultural influences of its immigrants and social values. Although Australia is multicultural in demographic terms, Australia’s national identity has not always included its indigenous people and has demonstrated a divergence of its social values towards Aboriginals. This has created a divide in cross-cultural relationships between indigenous and non-indigenous Australians; and further divides can also been seen emerging towards other perceived out-groups such as Muslims and Australians of Middle Eastern decent. In conclusion, Australian’s social identity and social values indicate the nature of social norms, social acceptance, group membership and inter group relations within the field of social psychology.

References

Baumeister, R.F. & Bushman, B. J. (2008). Social Psychology and Human Nature. Belmont, California: Thomson Wadsworth.

Burger, J. M. (2004). Personality (6th ed.). South bank, Victoria, Australia: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning.

Cook, I. (2004). Governance in Australia, South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

De Costa, R. (2000). Reconciliation or identity in Australia [Electronic version]. National Identities, 2 (3) 277-291.

Deckers, L. (2005). Motivation: Biological, psychological and environmental. Boston: Pearson Education.

Department of Education and Training. http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/schooleducation/publications_
resources/profiles/implementing_national_framework_values_education.htm Retrieved 28 September 2007.

Department of Immigration and Citizenship, 30 January 2007: Fact Sheet 8 http://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets/08abolition.htm Retrieved 28 September 2007.

Dick, R.V., Wagner, U., Stellmacher, J., Christ, O., & Tissington, P. A. (2006) To be(long) or not to be(long): Social identification in organizational contexts [Electronic version]. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 131 (3), 189–218.

Goar, C.D. (2007). Social identity theory and the reduction of inequality: Can cross-cutting categorisation reduce inequality in mixed-race groups? Social Behaviour and Personality, 35 (4), 537-550.

Four Corners, 2006: Riot and Revenge http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2006/s1588360.htm Retrieved 14 October 2007.

Making Multicultural Australia: White Australian policy http://www.multiculturalaustralia.edu.au/hotwords/hottext.php?id=78
Retrieved 28 September 2007.

Meyers, D.G (2004) Psychology (7th Ed.) New York, NY: Worth Publishers.

Parliament of Australia- Parliament info: Senate bills list http://parlinfoweb.aph.gov.au/piweb/view_document.aspx?TABLE=BILLSLST&ID=1328 Retrieved 28 September 2007.

Smith, P. B. & Bond, M. H. (1993). Social Psychology across cultures. Cambridge, Great Britain: Simon & Schuster International Group.

BLOG Self Evaluation

Theory and Research

It was difficult locating the original theoretical and research documentation, therefore secondary citations were used. Although I located many interesting topics on Australia's National Identity and attitudes and values on immigration, I limited their use as they were more directly related to political science. Relevant topics of social acceptance, social identity, stereotypes and culture were outlined in the course content this semester in Social Psychology, but knowledge of other relevant psychological principles were drawn from previous years experience.

In addressing the theory and research in such a short essay, I focused on two major theories which provided a foundation and reason behind my topic and then focused on a few theories and research experiments which specifically outlined the direction I decided to take by looking into the negative effects of social identity and disregard for Australia social values.


Written Expression

With the possible depth of the main question and the suggested three questions for consideration, I decided to modify these to present an argument of continuity which would fit within the allocated word limit for this assessment piece. I was able to answer these questions thoroughly by focusing on the major element/s within each of the subheading and utilised a heading structure not only to retain focus and structure but also to assist the reader in viewing the essay in the electronic Blog format.

I believe I have utilised visual aids effectively to assist readers and draw their attention, while illustrating the main points of my argument for quick and easy review of my blog, which will assist potential readers in identifying their potential interest in my work.

Online Engagement

As this is only my second blog creation and I do not spend time on the internet for social interactions, I have found this assessment quite difficult. I am also a fairly private person who does not openly feel comfortable publishing my work on the World Wide Web, therefore I have tended to leave my submission for this assessment to the last minute. I realise this will impact on my marks but due to my fastidious nature I do not feel comfortable publishing drafts or working copies of my work before they have been completed.

In saying this I have learnt a great deal and realised the time that is required to publish a quality Blog with accurate formatting, layout and eye-catching graphics is a creative and sometimes enjoyable experience. I can see the innovation that is required to complete such a task and am aware of the value of these newly found skills for the future. I am proud of the major improvements I have made since my first blog submission and realise there is still room for improvement but given my current exposure to such new technologies, it will need to be done one step at a time. Therefore I understand that I will not be getting high mark for this criteria but would like to suggest a reflection of my previous Blog submission be taken into consideration.