Matthew Hornsey

Who they are

The university page says he has published more than 200 papers and has received more than 20 external grants. It describes his work as centred on three themes: the rejection of science and technology, pro-environmental behaviour, and intergroup relations. Its summary says he builds models to explain behaviour that may look irrational and uses them to promote attitude and behaviour change. The page lists one honour, an election in 2018 as a Fellow of the Academy of Social Scientists in Australia, as it names the body.

The page gives no education history, and this page does not supply one.

Key papers

The individual within the group (2004), with Jetten. Social identity theorists had traditionally viewed differentiation of an individual within a group as harmful to identification with it. The abstract proposes eight strategies that reconcile the need to belong with the need to be different without violating social identity principles. Four draw on optimal distinctiveness theory and resolve the tension by maximising the distinctiveness of the group. The other four allow individuals to differentiate themselves within a group while still identifying with it. The review integrates the strategies with recent empirical research and the social identity perspective. The paper appeared in volume 8, issue 3, 248-264.

Rebels in Groups: Dissent, Deviance, Difference and Defiance (2011), edited with Jetten. A Wiley-Blackwell volume. The library record's summary says it collects research on dissent, deviance, difference and defiance in groups and argues that rebellion is a normal and healthy part of group life, in contrast to classic work that stressed pressures to conform and obey.

Key ideas

For this site the useful idea is the 2004 sorting of ways to be both a member and an individual. Some strategies work at the level of the group, by choosing or building a group that is distinctive. Others work inside the group, by setting oneself apart while keeping the group identity. Marilynn Brewer's optimal distinctiveness theory supplies the first family, and the review treats the second as compatible with social identity principles.

The Why We Project article uses the review to widen the picture. The Princeton students in Jonah Berger's account chose a distinctive group and then differed within it, which the article describes as a reading of the study and not a result the study reports.

This page rests on a university page, an abstract and a library record, and is short for that reason.

---