When I equals we: Exploring the relation between social and personal identity of extreme right‐wing political party members
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper introduces the concept of self-defining groups to explain how personal and social aspects of identity relate to each other among members of an extreme right-wing political party. Two studies were conducted. Study 1 examined how affiliation with a social group that has clear-cut, rigid norms and values affects the personal and social self-concept. Participants were members of a (self-defining) Turkish nationalist organisation (N=66) and a control group of Turkish university students (N=58). Paradoxically, high levels of national identification were associated with stronger personal identity. Study 2 used the same participant population (N=177) and manipulated self-focused attention by means of a mirror. Self-aware members reported the highest levels of identification with the nationalist organisation. Results suggest that members of this groups show no signs of 'vanishing individuality': although boundaries between personal and social identities are blurred, extremist group members retain a distinct and strengthened sense of personal identity. This raises some interesting questions for the concept of personal identity and how it can be informed by the content of one's social identity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".