Political Psychology, Vol. 31, No. 3, 2010 doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00763.

Personal Value Priorities and National Identication

Sonia Roccas The Open University of Israel Shalom H. Schwartz The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Adi Amit The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

pops_763

393..420

We examine relations of personal value priorities to identication with ones nation. We hypothesize that relations of values to identication depend on the motivations that can be attained by identifying with a nation. Study 1 conrmed the hypothesis that identication with ones nation correlates positively with conservation values and negatively with openness to change values in Israel and the USA. Moreover, values predicted identication with the nation above and beyond Right-Wing Authoritarianism. Study 2 showed that increasing the salience of conservation values produced higher identication with Israel, whereas increasing the salience of openness to change values produced lower identication. Study 3 tested the hypothesis that when identication with a national group conicts with social expectations it has different, even reversed relations with value priorities. We examined identication of recent immigrants to Israel. The more pressure immigrants felt to assimilate, the more positive the correlation of conservation values with identication with the country of residence (Israel) and the more negative the correlation of conservation values with identication with the country of origin (Russia). Taken together, the ndings point to the utility of values in revealing the motivational functions of identication with a nation.
KEY WORDS: Values, Group processes, Identity, Identication, National identication, Authoritarianism, Immigration

The nation is one of the most important groups people use to dene their identity (e.g., Billig, 1995). National identication has profound consequences that may range from extreme self-sacrice for the benet of compatriots to endorsement of brutal violence against outgroups (e.g., Doosje, Branscombe,
393
0162-895X 2010 International Society of Political Psychology Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc., 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, and PO Box 378 Carlton South, 3053 Victoria Australia

394

Roccas et al.

Spears & Manstead, 2006; Li & Brewer, 2004; Sahdra & Ross, 2007). Within each country there are extensive individual differences in the extent to which people identify with the country. Some people view their national identity as a core aspect of their self concept, others attribute only limited importance to it. These differences have important consequences. For example, individual differences in the extent of national identication are related to political involvement (Huddy & Khatib, 2007), to group based guilt (Roccas, Klar, & Liviatan, 2006), and to attitudes towards asylum seekers (Nickerson & Louis, 2008). Relatively little research has been devoted to understanding the source of individual differences in national identication (Huddy, 2002). Studies on this issue focused mainly on Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA, Altemeyer, 1981) and on Social Dominance Orientation (SDO, Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Both SDO and authoritarianism consistently correlate positively with national identication across different measures (e.g., Blank, 2003; Burris, Branscombe, & Jackson, 2000; Ray & Furnham, 1984, for authoritarianism, and Altemeyer, 1998; Pratto, Stallworth, & Conway-Lanz, 1998, for SDO).1 In the present research we seek to extend the study of the sources of individual differences in identication by exploring basic motivations. Thus, we move from asking who is especially likely to identify with their nation? to asking Why are some people especially likely to identify with their nation? Motivational constructs are at the core of theories of group processes. Groups serve as a social resource to satisfy basic human needs (see Correll & Park, 2005, for a review). Extensive studies have been conducted on the role of the need for self-enhancement (Social Identity Theory, Tajfel & Turner, 1979, 1986), the need to reduce uncertainty (Hogg & Abrams, 1993), the opposing needs of differentiation and inclusion (Optimal Distinctiveness Theory, Brewer, 1991), and the need to reduce death-related anxiety (Terror Management Theory, Greenberg et al., 1990; Solomon, Greenberg, & Pyszczynski, 1991). This body of research has largely examined the effects of situational factors. It shows that the shared level of identication of group members is higher when these needs are aroused. In the present research we use a motivational approach to study individual differences in national identication. Specically, we examine individual differences in basic motivations as reected in personal values. Values: Individual Differences in Motivational Goals Values are cognitive, social representations of basic motivational goals that serve as guiding principles in peoples lives (Rohan, 2000; Rokeach, 1973; Schwartz, 1992). Values express basic human needs (Rohan, 2000; Schwartz, 1992; Seligman, Olson, & Zanna, 1996) and motivate behavior by determining the
1

For an exception, see ndings for the Canadian sample in Burris et al. (2000).

Value Priorities and National Identication

395

extent to which different courses of actions are viewed as attractive (Feather, 1995). Values are especially suited to examine the motivational basis for individual differences in national identication for several reasons: Unlike needs and motives, values are inherently desirable and are represented cognitively in ways that enable people to communicate about them (Bilsky & Schwartz, 2008; McClelland, 1985). Furthermore, values encompass a variety of broad motivational goals. Thus a focus on values enables us to examine multiple motivations within a single theoretical framework. Finally, values are trans-situational, referring to general goals that are relevant across social contexts. Theory and measures of values were not developed within the specic theoretical framework of group processes. Thus, observed relationships of values and national identication are unlikely to be due to overlap in content and measurement. Research on individual differences in value priorities has uncovered the underlying motivational basis of many types of group-related behaviors and attitudes. For example, values predict group members readiness for social contact with outgroup members (Sagiv & Schwartz, 1995) and the guilt members feel when their group harms members of an outgroup (Roccas, Klar, & Liviatan, 2004). Values correlate with attitudes towards gender relations (Feather, 2004) and with the complexity of peoples social identity (Roccas & Brewer, 2002; for other examples of studies on values and group related attitudes, see Roccas, 2003; Rokeach, 1973; Struch & Schwartz, 1989; Tartakovsky & Schwartz, 2001). Perhaps the most notable example of the contribution of values in understanding the motivational underpinnings of group-related phenomena is the case of RWA and SDO. Extensive research shows that both SDO and RWA strongly predict generalized prejudice (see Altemeyer, 1998; Duckitt, 2001, for reviews). However, the two constructs are different: The relationship between SDO and RWA is sometimes very weak, ranging from -.03 to .66 (Duckitt, 2001; Roccato & Ricol, 2005), and they predict prejudice independently of one another (e.g., Altemeyer, 1998; Roccato & Ricol, 2005). Studying their relations with values helped uncover the basic motivations underlying SDO and RWA. It led to the conclusion that there are two distinct types of prejudice, driven by different motivations (Duckitt, 2001). RWA is more closely related to values that express the motivation to maintain the status quo and avoid uncertainty than is SDO; SDO is more closely related to values that express the motivation to further ones own interests even at the expense of others than is RWA (Altemeyer, 1998; Cohrs, Moschner, Maes, & Kielmann, 2005; Duckitt, 2001; Duriez, Van Hiel, & Kossowska, 2005; Feather, 1996; Heaven & Connors, 2001; McKee & Feather, 2008; Rohan & Zanna, 1996). Few studies have examined the role of values in explaining the extent of identication with ones nation (e.g., Feather, 1994a, 1994b; Gouveia, de Albuquerque, Clemente, & Espinosa, 2002; Heaven, Stones, Simbayi, & Le Roux, 2000). These studies have yielded inconsistent ndings: Values emphasizing

396

Roccas et al.

tradition correlated positively with national identication in Spain and Brazil (Gouveia, de Albuquerque, Clemente, & Espinosa, 2002), but did not relate to national identication among Australians (Feather, 1994a). Values of national strength and order correlated positively with national identication among Black South Africans (Heaven et al., 2000) and Australians (Feather, 1994a) but did not correlate with national identication among Afrikaners (Heaven et al., 2000). Yet, identication with their own ethnic ingroup correlated positively with these values in both South African groups (Heaven et al., 2000). The present research aims to clarify the underlying mechanism that links national identication to values. We seek to understand what determines which values relate positively or negatively to national identication. The Schwartz Values Theory To examine the links between values and identication, we draw on the Schwartz (1992) value theory. This theory identies 10 motivationally distinct types of values derived from universal requirements of human existence: hedonism, stimulation, self-direction, universalism, benevolence, tradition, conformity, security, power, and achievement. The 10 values form a circular structure that can be summarized with two basic conicts. One conict pits values that emphasize conservation against those that emphasize openness to change. Conservation values (tradition, conformity, security) emphasize self-restriction, order, and resistance to change. These values express the motivation to avoid uncertainty, ambiguity, and instability. Individuals who emphasize conservation values are motivated to perceive themselves and others in simple unequivocal terms. In contrast, openness to change values (selfdirection, stimulation) emphasize independent action and thought and readiness for new experience. Individuals who value openness to change are motivated to explore and discover, to seek novel and unexpected situations. They are less likely to accept prevailing social norms and more likely to make independent judgments based on their own experience. The second conict pits values that emphasize self-enhancement against those that emphasize transcending personal interests and promoting the welfare of others. Individuals who attribute high importance to self-enhancement values (achievement, power) are motivated to pursue social status and prestige, to control and dominate people and resources, to be seen as successful, and to demonstrate competence according to social standards. Self-transcendence values (universalism, benevolence) emphasize serving the interests of others: understanding, appreciating, and tolerating all people, regardless of their rank or status. Individuals who attribute high importance to self-transcendence values are motivated to seek social justice and equality for all people and to be helpful, loyal, and honest in their everyday interactions. Hedonism values share elements of both openness and self-enhancement.

Value Priorities and National Identication

397

The Schwartz value theory has been tested in more than 270 samples from more than 70 countries, using different measurement instruments. In the vast majority of samples, the distinctiveness of the 10 values and the structure of relations among them has been veried (Schwartz, 1992, 2006). The Mechanisms Linking National Identication to Values Following Feather (1994a), we reason that identication with a group is affected by the extent to which membership in the group facilitates the pursuit, attainment, and protection of important values. Like any other group, the national group provides opportunities and resources that may facilitate individuals pursuit and attainment of some values, and it poses demands and constraints that may thwart other values. Hence, relations of particular values to identication with a national group depend on the values that are attainable through identication with that group. Which values are most compatible with identication with ones nation? The dominant expectation of most citizens is that one should identify with the nation as an expression of patriotism. Thus, identifying with the nation is a positive, normative attribute (Bar-Tal, 1993). Such normative identication is likely to provide safety and stability and a sense that one is meeting widely accepted social expectations. By conforming to the group norm of identifying with the nation, people gain assurance that their attitudes and behavior are proper and legitimate, even when faced with challenges or threats. For people who attribute high importance to conservation values, identication with their nation thus provides a compatible environment in which to attain their values. It creates a feeling of belonging, of being part of a collective with shared interests and a shared fate, a group that is led by a concerned leadership committed to protecting its followers. In contrast, people who attribute high importance to openness to change values may perceive the national group as a source of expectations to conform to widespread norms and therefore as likely to constrain their freedom to pursue and protect their own unique values. Thus, identication with ones nation is consistent with the goals of conservation values but may limit attainment of the goals of openness to change values. Our analysis of the relationship of national identication and values is reminiscent of a large body of research on the motivation to reduce uncertainty. Extensive research indicates that, under conditions of temporary uncertainty, individuals tend to identify more with groups (e.g., Grieve & Hogg, 1999; Hogg & Grieve, 1999; Mullin & Hogg, 1999). This supports the reasoning that reducing uncertainty is one of the main functions of identication with groups (Hogg & Abrams, 1993; see Hogg & Williams, 2000, for a review). We suggest that individual differences in the importance of conservation and openness to change values reect individual differences in the strength of the motivation to reduce uncertainty. Thus these values should be related to identication with the nation.

398

Roccas et al.

Studies 1 and 2 test the hypotheses that: H1: The extent of identication with ones nation correlates positively with the importance of conservation values. H2: The extent of identication with ones nation correlates negatively with the importance of openness to change values. A Boundary Condition for the Hypothesized Relations of National Identication with Values Some past studies supported the hypothesized positive correlation between conservation values and identication with ones nation (e.g., Gouveia et al., 2002), but others did not. Most notable is the negative correlation of identication with South Africa among Afrikaners cited above (Heaven et al., 2000). Apparently, identication with the nation is incompatible with conservation values for Afrikaners. Possibly, this is due to the extensive changes in the social structure of South Africa that accompanied its democratization, changes that many Afrikaners perceived as a threat to their political identity (e.g., Nauright, 1996). For this group, identication with South Africa could therefore not serve to afrm conservation values and reduce uncertainty. This interpretation points to one possible boundary condition for the relationship of conservation values and national identication: A positive correlation between conservation values and national identication is to be expected only when identication with the nation is likely to provide a sense of security and stability. This is usually the case for the dominant group in society. But for some subgroups, national identication may raise uncertainty and thus limit the possibility of afrming conservation values. This depends on the social context. Study 3, presented below after our tests of the hypotheses in Studies 1 and 2, assesses this boundary condition by examining the special case of people with dual national identities. The Dual-Nationality Dilemma The vast majority of a countrys population evaluates their country positively and sees it as a desirable object of identication. Thus, it is normative to identify with ones country of residence. To identify with an additional national group is often not normative, however. Social identities are dened to a large extent through distinguishing and differentiating the ingroup from other groups, and people construe their national identity by contrasting it with other national groups (e.g., Hopkins & Murdoch, 1999; Triandafyllidou, 1998). Consequently, identication with two national groups is often viewed with suspicion (e.g., Renshon, 2001), and immigrants often feel pressured to relinquish their ties with their country of origin (e.g., Horenczyk, 1997).

Value Priorities and National Identication

399

We reason that people who identify with a country other than the one in which they reside must resolve inconsistencies between incompatible social expectations deriving from two national identities, the host country and the country of origin. This might undermine the sense of safety and stability usually associated with national identication. When identication with a foreign country dees social expectations it entails the threat of being the target of social sanctions, discrimination, and prejudice. Everyday encounters with members of the dominant national group may be anxiety producing and uncomfortable. In sum, we suggest that for people with dual national identities, identication with the national group of origin may not provide safety, stability, and certainty. Thus, we expect a negative correlation between endorsing conservation values and identifying with ones country of origin. H3: For people with dual national identities, conservation values correlate negatively with national identication with the country of origin. Relations of identication with openness values are more complex. On the one hand, identication with a national group, even a foreign one, implies willingness to conform to the norms of that country and to follow its leadership. This may conict with the pursuit of openness to change values, which emphasize independence in thought and action. On the other hand, identication with a group that dees social expectations can be a vehicle for expressing the motivation for personal autonomy and freedom. In sum, identication with a foreign national group may or may not provide opportunities to pursue openness values. Overview of the Current Research We investigated relations of national identication with value priorities in three studies. Study 1 examined relations of value priorities with identication with ones country in the United States and in Israel. It tested the hypotheses that identication with ones country correlates positively with the importance individuals attribute to conservation values and negatively with the importance they attribute to openness to change values. Study 1 also examined whether values contribute distinctively to explaining individual differences in national identication above and beyond right-wing authoritarianism. Study 2 examined the effect of raising the accessibility of conservation and openness to change values on identication with the nation. Study 3 examined identication of immigrants with both their national group of origin and their current country of residence, relating these to their value priorities. It tested the hypothesis that conservation values correlate positively with identication with their current national group and negatively with identication with their national group of origin.

400

Roccas et al.

Study 1 Method Participants Three samples of college students participated in this study. Sample 1: 101 American students (mean age 19.63, 65% female) completed, as part of a larger survey, a measure of their personal values and a measure of their identication with the United States. They responded to the questionnaire in group sessions (520 per session) and received course credit for their participation. Sample 2: 160 Israeli students (mean age 22.58, 52% female) completed, as part of a larger survey, a measure of their personal values, and a measure of their identication with Israel. They completed the questionnaires in group sessions (3040 per session) and received course credit or a small payment for their participation. Sample 3: 72 Israeli students (mean age 24.16, 62% female) completed a measure of their personal values and a measure of right-wing authoritarianism. Three months later they completed a measure of their identication with Israel. They completed the questionnaires in individual sessions and received a small payment for their participation. Measures Personal Values. Respondents rated the importance of each of 56 single values in the Schwartz (1992) value survey as a guiding principle in their life on a 9-point scale ranging from opposed to my principles (-1), through not important (0), to of supreme importance (7). The score for openness to change values was the average importance attributed to creativity, freedom, independent, curious, choosing own goals, daring, a varied life, and an exciting life (Cronbach a: sample 1 = .71; sample 2 = .77; sample 3 = .83). The score for conservation values was the average importance of humble, accepting my portion in life, devout, respect for tradition, moderate, politeness, obedient, self-discipline, honoring parents and elders, family security, social order, clean, and reciprocation of favors (a: sample 1 = .79; sample 2 = .79, sample 3 = .78). The score for selfenhancement was the average importance of social power, wealth, authority, ambitious, inuential, capable, and successful (a: sample 1 = .71, sample 2 = .77, sample 3 = .78). The score for self-transcendence was the average importance of broadminded, wisdom, social justice, equality, a world at peace, a world of beauty, unity with nature, protecting the environment, helpful, honest, forgiving, loyal, and responsible (a: sample 1 = .80; sample 2 = .75; sample 3 = .84).2
2

The standard indexes recommended in Schwartz (1992, 1994) were used to measure the importance given to all values types except security. Schwartz (1992) includes the value national security in the

Value Priorities and National Identication

401

Identication. In the political psychology literature there are diverse conceptualizations and measures of national identication. Following Huddy and Khatib (2007), the present research adopts the social identity approach to national identication. We dene and measure identication as the importance of the nation in ones personal identity. Respondents indicated their agreement with statements on a 7-point scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). Exemplary items are: Being American (Israeli) is an important part of my identity; When I talk about Americans (Israelis), I usually say we rather than they. Participants in sample 1 responded to three items (a = .72), participants in samples 2 and 3 responded to four items (a = .85, .86, respectively).3 Right-Wing Authoritarianism. In sample 3 we also included a measure of RWA. We used a measure based on the McFarland (2005) RWA scale. This 10-item instrument correlated .87 in a separate sample with the 30-item version of the RWA scale (Altemeyer, 1999). Participants indicated their disagreement or agreement with statements on a 7-point scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). Exemplary items are: There are many radical, immoral people in our country today, who are trying to ruin it for their own godless purposes, whom the authorities should put out of action. The only way our country can get through the crisis ahead is to get back to our traditional values, put some tough leaders in power, and silence the troublemakers spreading bad ideas (a = .81). Results and Discussion Table 1 presents the means and standard deviations of identication and conservation, openness to change, self-enhancement, and self-transcendence values in each sample. As hypothesized, national identication correlated positively with the importance attributed to conservation values (r = .33, .31, .35 in the American and the two Israeli samples, respectively, p < .05) and negatively with the importance attributed to openness to change values (r = -.30, -.31, -.42 in the American and Israeli samples, respectively, p < .05). Correlations between identication and values of self-enhancement and self-transcendence were low and nonsignicant (.06 and -.11, -.07 for self-enhancement and -.09, .08, and .15 for self-transcendence in the American and Israeli samples, respectively).4

standard index of security. We exclude this value because it might articially enhance the correlation of conservation values with national identication. When we use the three-item index in the Israeli sample as well, the pattern of correlations with values reported below does not change. All correlations in this and subsequent analyses were partialed on each respondents mean rating of all values to correct for scale use (Schwartz, 1992). One-tail signicance is reported for hypothesized associations, two-tail signicance for nonhypothesized associations.

402

Roccas et al. Table 1. Means and Standard Deviations of Identication and Values (Study 1) Sample 1 (USA) M SD Sample 2 (Israel) M SD 5.62 1.32 3.75 .83 4.27 .94 3.82 .97 4.37 .70 Sample 3 (Israel) M SD 5.58 1.26 4.35 .87 4.64 1.08 4.19 1.09 4.73 .88

National Identication Conservation Values Openness to Change Values Self Enhancement Values Self Transcendence Values

5.32 .93 3.99 .83 4.47 .83 3.71 .93 4.46 .72

Correlations of the 10 Values with National Identication For a more elaborate examination at the relationships of values and identication, we also computed the correlations with all 10 types of values. These correlations are presented in Figure 1. The circular motivational structure of values implies that the whole set of ten values relates to any other variable in an integrated manner. Specically, if national identication correlates most positively with one value and most negatively with another, correlations should decrease monotonically in both directions around the circle from the most positively to the most negatively associated value. When the whole pattern of associations is predicted, even nonsignicant associations provide meaningful information (Roccas, Sagiv, Schwartz, & Knafo, 2002; Sagiv & Schwartz, 1995). Consistent with the motivational value circle, in all samples the pattern of correlations formed a sinusoid curve: Correlations were most positive with tradition values and most negative with either stimulation or self direction values. The remaining correlations were in between, following their postulated order around the values circle. The only two exceptions were conformity-security values in sample 2 (the correlation for conformity values was less positive than for security values rather than more positive), and self-direction-universalism values in sample 1 (the correlation for self direction values was less negative than for universalism values rather than more negative). We tested the consistency in the pattern of correlations of values and national identication by computing the pair-wise Spearman correlations between the orders of the correlations in the three samples. Correlations were .79 for samples 1 and 2, .88 for samples 1 and 3, and .90 for samples 2 and 3 (all p < .05). There were also differences between the samples in the correlations of national identication with the 10 values: For example, the correlation of hedo-

Value Priorities and National Identication

403

Figure 1. Correlations of national identication with the ten values (Study 1).

nism with national identication was much more negative in sample 3 than in the other two samples, and the correlation of conformity was less positive in sample 2 than in the other two samples. Such differences between the samples should, however, be interpreted with caution because they may well reect random variation. Examining the correlations with the 10 values points to another noteworthy nding: Correlations of national identication with universalism values are all negative, while correlations with benevolence values are all positive. The correlations of national identication with universalism and benevolence values are small. Nonetheless, this difference is remarkable because both benevolence and universalism values share the same basic motivational goal of promoting the welfare of others. Benevolence and universalism values differ, however, in the target of the concern. Benevolence values refer to concern for people with whom one has frequent interaction. Universalism values express concern for all humanity. Thus, the goal of universalism values imply an extension of ones concern from the bounded group of people with whom one has frequent personal contact to the whole of humankind (Roccas & McCauley, 2004; Schwartz, 1992). The pattern of correlations of universalism and benevolence values with national identication underscores the potential tension between concern for close others and concern for all humankind. Concern for close others is seen as compatible with national identication, while a concern for the whole of humankind is viewed as incompatible with national identication. Thus ndings of the present

404

Roccas et al.

study provide further support for the importance of common category membership in expressing concern for others (e.g., Levine, Prosser, Evans, & Reicher, 2005; Nickerson & Louis, 2008). Values, RWA, and National Identication Consistent with previous studies, identication with Israel also correlated positively with RWA (r = .25 p < .05). To assess the distinctiveness of the contribution of values to the prediction of national identication, we performed two hierarchical regressions (Table 2). Entering RWA in the rst step, it explained 6% of the variance in identication (F(1,71) = 4.78; p < .05). Entering conservation and openness to change values in the second step added 10% to the total variance explained (Fchange(2,69) = 4.20; p < .05). Thus, values predicted identication with ones nation above and beyond the effect of RWA. In a second regression we reversed the order of the predictors: Conservation and openness to change values, entered in the rst step, explained 15% of the variance in identication (F(2,70) = 5.97; p < .005). RWA, entered in the second step, did not add signicantly to the total variance explained (Fchange(1,69) = 1.58, n.s.). Previous research suggests that conservation values are the core motivational aspect of RWA. The present ndings add to this line of research by showing that the relations previously found between RWA and national identication may be due to the common underlying motivation expressed by the importance attributed to conservation and openness to change values. In sum, results of Study 1 uncover the motivational basis of national identication. As hypothesized, national identication correlated positively with the importance individuals attribute to conservation values and negatively with the importance they attribute to openness to change values. The pattern of correlations

Table 2. Regressions of National Identication on RWA, Conservation Values, and Openness to Change Values (Sample 3 of Study 1) Independent variable Model 1 Model 2 RWA RWA Conservation values Openness to change values Independent variable Model 1 Model 2 Conservation values Openness to change values Conservation values Openness to change values RWA b .25 .17 -.03 -.35 b .10 -.30 -.03 -.35 .17 t 2.19 1.26 -.15 -2.06 t .61 -1.81 -.15 -2.06 1.26 p .03 .21 .88 .04 p .54 .07 .88 .04 .21 R2 .06 .16 Fchange 4.78 4.20 p .03 .02

R2 .15 .17

Fchange 5.97 1.58

p .004 .213

Value Priorities and National Identication

405

was consistent across two national groups despite the different social, political, economic, religious, and historical characteristics of the two nations. We do not claim, however, that correlations of values with national identication are independent of social context. The effects of the social context on these relationships are discussed in Study 3. The correlations of values and identication could result from multiple complementary processes: Individuals value priorities, grounded in their personal needs and experiences, lead them to identify with groups that facilitate the attainment of their values and to reject groups that restrict the attainment of their values. In addition, people who are highly identied with the nation could come to emphasize values that are consistent with national identication. Finally, additional variables, could affect both identication and values in the same direction. For example, family socialization could lead to the development of values and compatible levels of national identication. Examining all the pathways of causation between values and identication is beyond the scope of the present research. As a rst step, Study 2 examined the effect of the situational salience of values on national identication. Study 2 Numerous studies indicate that personality attributes change little during adulthood (see Caspi & Roberts, 2001, for a review). Findings of the few studies that have examined value stability also show little change in the importance that individuals attribute to values (e.g., Johnson, 2001; Lindsay & Knox, 1984; Schwartz, 2005). The stability of values poses a methodological challenge when trying to establish the causal effects of values. Researchers have therefore examined the causal effects of values in experiments by manipulating their accessibility rather than trying to change their importance (e.g., Maio, Olson, Allen, & Bernard, 2001; Verplanken & Holland, 2002). The justication for this procedure is both conceptual and empirical. People are more likely to act on their values when they are accessible than when they are not (e.g., Assor, 1999). When accessible, values direct attention to features in the situation that provide opportunities for goal attainment; they guide people to perceive situations as occasions for value-relevant action (Schwartz, Sagiv, & Boehnke, 2000). Finally, people behave more consistently with their values when they are salient and even more after they have thought about them and stated the reasons for why they hold or reject them (Maio et al., 2001). Therefore, to further test the effect of conservation and openness to change values on national identication we manipulated the temporary accessibility of these values. We hypothesized that: (a) increasing the accessibility of conservation values produces greater identication with the nation; (b) increasing the accessibility of openness to change values reduces identication with the nation.

406

Roccas et al.

Method Participants and Procedure Participants were 114 Israeli college students (76% female, mean age = 27.7), who received course credit. All were Jewish Israelis born in Israel. We randomly assigned 38 participants to the openness experimental condition, 38 participants to the conservation condition, and 38 to a control condition. Participants underwent the values accessibility manipulation. Then they completed the measure of national identication and demographic items. Upon completion, participants were thanked and debriefed. None of the participants were suspicious of the procedure employed. Manipulation of value accessibility. Studies that have manipulated the accessibility of values have employed a variety of methods (e.g., Amit & Roccas, in press; Biernat, Vescio, & Theno, 1996; Hertel & Kerr, 2001; Maio et al., 2001; Verplanken & Holland, 2002). In the present research we developed a manipulation that encouraged participants to think about specic values, making them more accessible, without any reference to the nation or to any other group. Participants received descriptions of six students who had applied to live in a university dormitory. They were instructed to read the description of each student carefully and to allocate two students to each room, matching them according to how similar they appeared to be. In the conservation condition, all six applicants were described as holding conservation values. For example, the description of one student was, It is important to him to live in secure surroundings. He avoids anything that might endanger his safety. The description of another was, It is important to him to behave properly. He wants to avoid doing anything people would say is wrong. In the openness to change condition, each of the six students was described as endorsing openness to change values. For example, Thinking up new ideas and being creative is important to him. He likes to do things in his own original way or He thinks it is important to do lots of different things in life. He looks for new things to try. These descriptions were taken from the conservation and openness to change items in the Portrait Values Questionnaire (Schwartz, 2005; Schwartz, Lehman, & Roccas, 1999). In the control group, the six students were described in terms of their hobbies and their social life (e.g., She likes to cook. or She has many friends in the dormitories.). Identication. We measured national identication with the same four items used with the Israeli samples in Study 1 (a = .83). Results and Discussion To test the hypothesis that increasing the accessibility of conservation values induces greater national identication whereas increasing the accessibility of openness to change values reduces national identication, we compared the mean

Value Priorities and National Identication

407

level of identication with Israel in the three groups. The extent of identication differed signicantly across the three conditions F(2, 111) = 7.25; p < .001. Participants in the conservation condition rated their Israeli identity as a more important part of their self-concept than participants in the openness to change condition did (M = 5.83, SD = .73 versus M = 4.95, SD = 1.13). Participants in the control group were in between (M = 5.34, SD = 1.09). The planned contrasts comparing identication in the conservation and in the openness to change conditions to identication in the control condition were signicant (conservation: t (111) = 2.09; p < .05; openness to change: t (111) = -1.71; p < .05). These ndings indicate that increasing the accessibility of openness to change and conservation values affects peoples sense of identication with their nation, at least temporarily. This supports our reasoning that individuals salient value priorities lead them to identify with groups that enable them to fulll these values. If the correlations found in Study 1 were exclusively the result of the effect of identication on values, or the effect of some external variable that affects both values and identication, then temporarily raising the salience of values would not affect national identication. Do conservation and openness to change values affect identication with all national groups in this same way? We do not think so. The social context may have a profound inuence on relations between values and identication because the social context determines the opportunities a national group provides for the attainment of particular values. Findings from Australia (Feather, 1994a) exemplify this point: Like Americans and Israelis, Australians identied more the greater the importance they attributed to security values (r = .21) and like Americans (but not Israelis), Australians identied less the greater the importance they attributed to universalism values (r = -.17). But unlike Americans and Israelis, Australians identied more the greater the importance they attributed to achievement (r = .14) and hedonism (r = .17) values. Following Feather (1994a), we reason that what inuences individual differences in identication is the interaction between characteristics of the social context that hinder or promote the expression, attainment, or preservation of specic personal values and the importance of those values to the individual. Thus, relations of a particular value to national identication are determined by the extent to which the nation is perceived as promoting or hindering the attainment of that value. Study 3 assesses this reasoning by examining identication among immigrants with two national identities, one linked to their nation of origin and another linked to their nation of residence. We reason that identication with each of these national groups provides opportunities to attain different values. Study 3 Studies 1 and 2 examined the simple case of identication with the national group of residence among members of the dominant group in society. Study 3 is a

408

Roccas et al.

rst step in examining systematically the effects of the social context on the relationship between values and national identication. We posit that relations of national identication to values are affected by the social context because the social context, by determining the types of values than can be attained through identication, determines the very meaning of identication. National identication has a different meaning (and different consequences) when it provides a sense of safety and security than when it provides a sense of distinctiveness. To exemplify this point, we examine relations of value priorities to identication in the complex, yet common, case of the dual national identities of immigrants. Participants in this study were immigrants to Israel from Russia. Because both the national group of residence and the national group of origin are large social categories, identication is likely to be based on symbolic attachment to the group as a whole rather than on the personal ties among specic group members (see the Lickel et al., 2000, taxonomy of groups). However, identication with the two groups has a different meaning and facilitates the attainment of different values. Identifying with the country of residence ts the expectations of the dominant societal group. It signies successful integration and implies that the overt change in residence is accompanied by a more profound change in identity. Thus, for immigrants, as for members of the dominant group, identication with their country of residence can provide a sense of safety and stability. We therefore hypothesized that attributing importance to conservation values correlates positively with identication with the country of residence (as found in Study 1). Identication with the country of origin, however, may have a different meaning. Previous research revealed that Israelis typically expect immigrants to identify as Israelis rather than as natives of their country of origin (e.g., Horenczyk, 1996). For many years, expectations toward immigrants to Israel were at least implicitly and often overtly assimilationist (Horowitz & Leshem, 1998; Smooha, 1978). Both ofcial policy and practices and informal public attitudes encouraged immigrants to relinquish their distinctive cultural identity and to assimilate into the larger Israeli nation as soon and as much as possible (Ilatov & Shamai, 1996). Hence, identifying with ones country of origin might be seen as non- or even counternormative. Behaving in a way that violates social expectations opposes the core motivation of conservation values. We therefore expected that identication with the country of origin would correlate negatively with the importance of conservation values. The Moderating Role of Perceived Pressure to Assimilate Peoples perceptions of what others expect of their ingroups vary. Some immigrants feel stronger pressure to assimilate than others. We suggest that it is the subjective perception of social expectations that determines the motivational role of values in affecting identication with groups. We posit that conservation values correlate positively with identication with the country of residence only to

Value Priorities and National Identication

409

the extent that people think that such identication is socially expected. Similarly, we posit that conservation values correlate negatively with identication with the country of origin only to the extent that people think that such identication violates what the dominant group expects. We therefore hypothesized that perceived pressure to assimilate moderates relations of conservation values with identication: The stronger the perceived pressure to assimilate, the more positive the correlation between conservation values and identication with the country of residence and the more negative the correlation between conservation values and identication with the country of origin. Method Participants One hundred immigrants to Israel from Russia, who had lived in Israel for ve years or less, completed a questionnaire anonymously in their native language (Russian) as part of a larger survey. All were university students of humanities or social sciences (61% female, mean age = 21.19). Measures Values. Values were measured as in Study 1. Identication. Identication with Israel was measured with the same four items as in Study 1 (a = .83). Identication with the immigrant national group was measured with three of these items, modied to refer to the group of immigrants from their country of origin (a = .85). Perceived pressure to assimilate. We used a slightly modied version of a questionnaire from Horenczyk (1996). Based on previously collected informal data, we identied ve areas of identity-related behaviors relevant to the acculturation of Russian immigrants in Israel: language, culture, festivals, friendship, and values. Respondents indicated their agreement with the 15 statements, on a 7-point scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). For each area, the questionnaire included three items corresponding to three types of acculturation attitudesassimilation, separation, and integration (for example: We live in Israel and we should relinquish our Russian culture and our old habits; we should adopt the Israeli way of lifeto think and act like Israelis). The assimilation scale included an additional item in which respondents rated the importance they attributed to involvement in the host society. Participants responded to the acculturation items twice. First they gave their own view; then they reported what they believed a typical Israeli student would want a good immigrant to answer. We used responses to the assimilation items in the latter questionnaire as a measure of pressure to assimilate (a = .89).

410 Table 3. Regression Analysis of National Identication among Immigrants with Dual Nationalities. Relations between Conservation Values and National Identication Moderated by Perceived Pressure to Assimilate (Study 3)a Identication with the country of residence AdjR2 = .08, F(3, 89) = 3.65, p < .05 b Conservation Perceived pressure to assimilate Pressure to assimilate* Conservation Identication with the country of origin AdjR2 = .08, F(3, 89) = 3.56, p < .05 b Conservation Perceived pressure to assimilate Pressure to assimilate* Conservation -.17 .15 -.23 t -1.68 1.43 -2.19 p n.s. n.s. <.05 .30 .11 .22 t 2.93 1.09 2.09 p <.005 n.s. <.05

Roccas et al.

a. All independent variables were centered by subtracting the sample mean from each score.

Results and Discussion We assessed the role of conservation values and subjective pressure to assimilate in predicting identication with Israel and Russia with regression analyses (Table 3). In one regression, we entered conservation values, perceived pressure to assimilate, and the interaction between the two as predictors of identication with the country of residence (Israel). In another regression, we entered the same variables as predictors of identication with the country of origin (Russia). The regression revealed that perceived pressure to assimilate moderated the association of conservation values and identication with the county of residence. A signicant interaction between conservation values and perceived pressure to assimilate indicated that conservation values related more positively to identication with Israel the stronger the perceived pressure to assimilate. Relations of conservation values with identication with the country of origin differed greatly from their relations with identication with the country of residence. Conservation values did not correlate with identication with Russia. Their effect on identication became apparent only when perceived pressure to assimilate was taken into account in the regression. A signicant interaction between conservation values and perceived pressure to assimilate indicated that conservation values related more negatively to identication with Russia the stronger the perceived pressure to assimilate. Figures 2 and 3 illustrate the two interactions. Identication is plotted for participants whose perceived pressure to assimilate score is one standard deviation

Value Priorities and National Identication

411

8 7 Identification with Israel 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Low Conservation High Conservation Low Assimilation Pressure High Assimilation Pressure

Figure 2. Regression of identication with the country of residence (Israel) as predicted by conservation values for two levels of subjective pressure to assimilate (Study 3).

8 Identification with Russia 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Low Conservation High Conservation Low Assimilation Pressure High Assimilation Pressure

Figure 3. Regression of identication with the country of origin (Russia) as predicted by conservation values for two levels of subjective pressure to assimilate (Study 3).

above the mean and for participants whose perceived pressure to assimilate score is one standard deviation below the mean (Aiken & West, 1991). The gures are plotted for the full range of conservation values. As predicted, Figure 2 shows a more positive regression slope predicting identication with Israel from conser-

412

Roccas et al.

vation values for individuals who feel strong pressure to assimilate than for individuals who feel weak pressure to assimilate (b = 0.80, t = 3.21, p < .01; b = 0.14, t = 0.73, p = n.s., respectively). In contrast, Figure 3 shows a more negative regression slope predicting identication with Russia from conservation values for individuals who feel strong pressure to assimilate than for individuals who feel weak pressure to assimilate (b = -0.53, t = -2.46, p < .05; b = 0.06, t = 0.36, p = n.s., respectively). In sum, this study provides support for the hypothesis that the interaction between individuals own values and the values whose attainment group membership facilitates affects their level of identication with the group. Thus, for people who felt strong pressure to assimilate, conservation values correlated positively with identication with their country of residence but negatively with identication with their country of origin. We attributed the opposing patterns of correlation with country of residence versus country of origin to the difference in the nature of these two national groups. Whereas identication with ones country of residence is normative, participants viewed identication with their immigrant group as conicting with prevailing social expectations. Therefore, identifying with the two groups was likely to express or afrm opposing values: Identifying with ones country of residence would promote or protect conservation values, whereas identifying with ones country of origin would threaten these values. General Discussion The present research reveals systematic associations between personal values and the extent of identication with the nation. Participants identied more with their country of residence the more they endorsed conservation values and the less they endorsed openness to change values. These results replicated across samples of Americans, Israelis, and recent immigrants to Israel from Russia. Further evidence for the motivational role of conservation and openness values in explaining identication was provided in Study 2: Identication was affected by experimentally increasing the salience of conservation values versus openness to change values. We would like to underscore the negative correlation we found between openness to change values and national identication. Previous research focused on the attractiveness of groups as a source of stability and safety, as means to reduce uncertainty. Our ndings suggest that a group that provides a sense of safety and stability is not attractive to all to the same degree; it is rejected by people who attribute high importance to values that express motivations for novelty and change. Thus, a seemingly positive characteristic of group membership can deter some people from identifying with a group. Identication with a national group does not always facilitate the attainment of conservation goals. As ndings of Study 3 indicate, relations of values to identication depend on the specic social context in which the group operates.

Value Priorities and National Identication

413

The more pressure recent immigrants felt to assimilate the more negative was the correlation of conservation values with identication with their national group of origin. When identication with the national group of origin is perceived as conicting with prevailing social expectations, it may increase uncertainty and challenge stability. Hence, identifying with this group is inconsistent with an emphasis on conservation values. Taken together our ndings support our general hypothesis that identication with a group is affected by the extent to which that group serves to satisfy important motivations. Note, however, that we do not suggest that identication with their country of origin is negatively correlated with the importance of conservation values for all immigrant groups. We examined dual identication among immigrants from Russia to Israel. These immigrants tend to emphasize conservation values more than the general population does, but not dramatically more (Knafo & Schwartz, 2001). This may not be the case for other immigrant groups. In such cases, identication with ones country of origin and of residence may have different social meanings than in the present study and may therefore offer different opportunities to attain important values. Furthermore, we do not suggest that identication with any group that dees widespread social expectations relates negatively to conservation values. Nonnormative groups (e.g., religious cults) can provide certainty to their members by endorsing unequivocal rules or by emphasizing clear distinctions between ingroup and outgroup members. But other things being equal, we expect identication with a normative group to relate more positively to conservation values than identication with a nonnormative group. Self-Enhancement Values and Identication In the present research, self enhancement values showed near-zero correlations with national identication (ranging from -.10 to .06). Feather (1994a) too mentioned that power values did not correlate with identication and reported a .14 correlation for achievement values. One may wonder whether these ndings are consistent with the pivotal role of self-enhancement motivation in Social Identity Theory. Social Identity Theory posits that identication with groups is motivated by self-enhancement (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). However, according to Social Identity Theory the link between self-enhancement motivation and identication is complex: It can lead to higher identication when the group has high status and to low identicationeven a wish to leave the groupwhen the group has low status. We have investigated the complex relationship between identication and self-enhancement values in the context of identication with ones university department or work organization (Gandal, Roccas, Sagiv, & Wrzesniewski, 2005; Roccas, 2003). In these studies, self-enhancement values did not relate directly to identication. However, self-enhancement values moderated the relationship

414

Roccas et al.

between perceived group status and identication. Among people who attributed high importance to self-enhancement values, identication related strongly, positively to perceived group status. Whereas among people who attributed low importance to self-enhancement values, the relationship of identication to status was weak. We postulate that self-enhancement values play a similar role in relation to national identication: The greater the importance of self-enhancement values for people, the more strongly national identication is likely to depend upon the perceived status of the nation. Implications for Relations of RWA with National Identication The nding that relations of conservation values with national identication depend upon the social context may have implications for relations of RWA with national identication. Studies that have examined relations of RWA with national identication have reported positive correlations. However, these studies focused exclusively on members of the dominant societal group. The social context may well affect relations of RWA to national identication in a manner similar to its effect on the relations of values with national identication. Thus, there may be circumstances that would lead people high on RWA to identify less with the nation than people low on this dimension. Conclusion Examining relations of values and national identication helps uncover the motivational basis for identication. Our ndings make clear that there are no general motivations that always lead to identication. Rather, identication is affected by the t between personal motivations and group characteristics. Thus, this research illustrates the importance of both individual differences and the social context in explaining identication. The inuence of situational factors on identication has long been acknowledged. Our research highlights a more subtle, yet important, aspect of the social context. The social context denes both the dimensions of individual difference that are most likely to affect identication and the direction of their effects. As our understanding of the impact of individual differences in motivation on human behavior deepens, the importance of identifying the contextual factors that inuence the operation of different motivational goals also grows. One important challenge is to clarify which values may be afrmed or thwarted and which needs may be satised or frustrated by identifying with which types of groups. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This paper was written in part during the rst authors residence as Visiting Scholar at the Centre for the Study of Group Processes at the University of Kent,

Value Priorities and National Identication

415

Canterbury. The work of the rst author on this research was supported by Israel Science Foundation Grant No. 774/06. The work of the second author on this research was supported by Israel Science Foundation Grant No. 921/02-1. We thank Anat Bardi, Lilach Sagiv, and anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of this paper. Correspondence concerning this article should be sent to Sonia Roccas, Department of Education and Psychology, The Dorothy de Rothschild Open University Campus, 108 Ravutski Street, P.O. Box 808, Raanana 43104, Israel. E-mail: soniaro@openu.ac.il REFERENCES
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Amit, A., & Roccas, S. (in press). A group just like me: The moderating role of conservation values on social projection. European Journal of Social Psychology. Altemeyer, B. (1981). Right-wing authoritarianism. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press. Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other authoritarian personality. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (vol. 30, pp. 4792). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Altemeyer, B. (1999). Right-wing authoritarianism. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of political attitudes, Vol. II. Measures of social psychological attitudes (pp. 102106). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Assor, A. (1999). Value accessibility and teachers ability to encourage independent and critical thought in students. Social Psychology of Education, 2, 124. Bar-Tal, D. (1993). Patriotism as fundamental beliefs of group members. Politics and the Individual, 3, 4562. Biernat, M., Vescio, T. K., & Theno, S. A. (1996). Violating American values: A value congruence approach to understanding outgroup attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32, 387410. Billig, M. (1995). Banal nationalism. London: Sage. Bilsky, W., & Schwartz, S. H. (2008). Measuring motivations: Integrating content and method. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 17381751. Blank, T. (2003). Determinants of national identication in East and West Germany: An empirical comparison of theories on the signicance of authoritarianism, anomie, and general self-esteem. Political Psychology, 24, 259288. Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 475482. Burris, C. T., Branscombe, N. R., & Jackson, L. M. (2000). For God and country: Religions and the endorsement of national self-stereotypes. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 517527. Caspi, A., & Roberts, B. W. (2001). Personality development across the life span: The argument for change and continuity. Psychological Inquiry, 12, 4966. Cohrs, J. C., Moschner, B., Maes, J., & Kielmann, S. (2005). The motivational bases of right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation: Relations to values and attitudes in the aftermath of September 11, 2001. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 14251434. Correll, J., & Park, B. (2005). A model of the ingroup as a social resource. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9, 341359. Doosje, B. E. J., Branscombe, N. R., Spears, R., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of group-based guilt: The effects of ingroup identication. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 9, 325338.

416

Roccas et al.

Duckitt, J. (2001). A dual-process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 33, pp. 41113). San Diego: Academic Press. Duriez, B., Van Hiel, A., & Kossowska, M. (2005). Authoritarianism and social dominance in western and eastern Europe: The importance of the socio-political context and of political interest and involvement. Political Psychology, 26, 299320. Feather, N. T. (1994a). Values and national identication: Australian evidence. Australian Journal of Psychology, 46, 3540. Feather, N. T. (1994b). Values, national identication and favouritism towards the in-group. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 467476. Feather, N. T. (1995). Values, valences, and choice: The inuence of values on the perceived attractiveness and choice of alternatives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 11351151. Feather, N. T. (1996). Reactions to penalties for an offense in relation to authoritarianism, values, perceived responsibility, perceived seriousness, and deservingness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 571587. Feather, N. T. (2004). Value correlates of ambivalent attitudes toward gender relations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 312. Gandal, N., Roccas, S., Sagiv, L., & Wrzesniewski, A. (2005). Personal value priorities of economists. Human Relations, 58, 12271252. Gouveia, V. V., de Albuquerque, J. B., Clemente, M., & Espinosa, P. (2002). Human values and social identities: A study in two collectivist cultures. International Journal of Psychology, 37, 333 342. Greenberg, J., Pyszczynski, T., Solomon, S., Rosenblatt, A., Veeder, M., Kirkland, S., et al. (1990). Evidence for terror management theory: II. The effects of mortality salience on reactions to those who threaten or bolster the cultural worldview. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 308318. Grieve, P. G., & Hogg, M. A. (1999). Subjective uncertainty and intergroup discrimination in the minimal group situation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8, 926940. Heaven, P. C. L., & Connors, J. (2001). A note on the value correlates of social dominance orientation and right wing authoritarianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 925930. Heaven, P. C. L., Stones, C., Simbayi, L., & Le Roux, A. (2000). Human values and social identities among samples of white and black South Africans. International Journal of Psychology, 35, 6772. Hertel, G., & Kerr, N. L. (2001). Priming in-group favoritism: The impact of normative scripts in the minimal group paradigm. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 316324. Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1993). Towards a single process uncertainty-reduction model of social motivation in groups. In M. A. Hogg & D. Abrams (Eds.), Group motivation: Social psychological perspectives (pp. 173190). New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Hogg, M. A., & Grieve, P. (1999). Social Identity Theory and the crisis of condence in social psychology: A commentary and some research on uncertainty reduction. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 2, 7993. Hogg, M. A., & Williams, K. D. (2000). From I to We social identity and the collective self. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 4, 8197. Hopkins, N., & Murdoch, N. (1999). The role of the other in national identity: Exploring the context-dependence of the national ingroup stereotype. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 9, 321338. Horenczyk, G. (1996). Migrating selves in conict. In G. Breakwell & E. Lyons (Eds.), Changing European identities (pp. 241250). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Horenczyk, G. (1997). Immigrants perceptions of host attitudes and their reconstruction of cultural groups. Applied Psychology, 46, 3438.

Value Priorities and National Identication

417

Horowitz, T., & Leshem, E. (1998). The immigrants from the FSU in the Israeli cultural sphere. In M. Sicron & E. Leshem (Eds.), Prole of an immigration wave (pp. 291333). Jerusalem: The Magnes Press (Hebrew). Huddy, L. (2002). Context and meaning in social identity theory: A response to Oakes. Political Psychology, 23, 825838. Huddy, L., & Khatib, N. (2007). American patriotism, national identity, and political involvement. American Journal of Political Science, 51, 6377. Ilatov, Z., & Shamai, S. (1996). Israeli students attitudes toward children immigrants from Russia. Journal of Culture and Society, 3, 7794. Johnson, M. K. (2001). Job values in the young adult transition: Change and stability with age. Social Psychology Quarterly, 64, 297317. Knafo, A., & Schwartz, S. H. (2001). Value socialization in families of Israeli-born and Soviet-born adolescents in Israel. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, 213228. Levine, M., Prosser, A., Evans, D., & Reicher, S. (2005). Identity and emergency intervention: How social group membership and inclusiveness of group boundaries shape helping behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 443453. Li, Q., & Brewer, M. B. (2004). What does it mean to be an American? Patriotism, nationalism, and American identity after 9/11. Political Psychology, 25, 727739. Lickel, B., Hamilton, D. L., Wieczorkowska, G., Lewis, A., Sherman, S. J., & Uhles, A. N. (2000). Varieties of groups and the perception of group enititativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 223246. Lindsay, P., & Knox, W. E., (1984). Continuity and change in work values among young adults: A longitudinal study. American Journal of Sociology, 89, 918931. Maio, G. R., Olson, J. M., Allen, L., & Bernard, M. M. (2001). Addressing discrepancies between values and behavior: The motivating effect of reasons. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 104117. McClelland, D. C. (1985). How motives, skills and values determine what people do. American Psychologist, 40, 812825. McFarland, S. G. (2005). On the eve of war: Authoritarianism, social dominance, and American students attitudes toward attacking Iraq. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 360 367. McKee, I. R., & Feather, N. T. (2008). Revenge, retribution, and values: Social attitudes and punitive sentencing. Social Justice Research, 21, 138163. Mullin, B-A., & Hogg, M. A. (1999). Motivations for group membership: The role of subjective importance and uncertainty reduction. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21, 91102. Nauright, J. (1996). A besieged tribe: Nostalgia, white cultural identity and the role of rugby in a changing South Africa. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 31, 6377. Nickerson, A. M., & Louis, W. R. (2008). Nationality versus humanity? Personality, identity, and norms in relation to attitudes toward asylum seekers. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38, 796817. Pratto, F., Stallworth, L. M., & Conway-Lanz, S. (1998). Social dominance orientation and the ideological legitimization of social policy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 18531875. Ray, J. J., & Furnham, A. (1984) Authoritarianism, conservatism and racism. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 7, 406412. Renshon, S. (2001). Dual citizenship and American national identity. Washington, DC: Center for Immigration Studies. Roccas, S. (2003). Identication and status revisited: The moderating role of self-enhancement and self-transcendence values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 726736. Roccas, S., & Brewer, M. (2002). Social identity complexity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 88106.

418

Roccas et al.

Roccas, S., Klar, Y., & Liviatan, I. (2004). Exonerating cognitions, group identication, and personal values as predictors of collective guilt among Jewish-Israelis. In N. R. Branscombe & B. Doosje (Eds.), Collective guilt: International perspectives (pp. 130147). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Roccas, S., Klar, Y., & Liviatan, I. (2006). The paradox of group-based guilt: Models of national identication, conict vehemence, and reactions to the in-groups moral violations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 698711. Roccas, S., & McCauley, C. (2004). Values and emotions in the relational models: What happens when relationship norms are violated? In N. Haslam (Ed.), Relational models: Theories, advances and prospects (pp. 263286). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Roccas, S., Sagiv, L., Schwartz, S. H., & Knafo, A. (2002). The big ve personality factors and personal values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 789801. Roccato, M., & Ricol, L. (2005). On the correlation between right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 27, 187200. Rohan, M. (2000). A rose by any name? The values construct. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 255277. Rohan, M. J., & Zanna, M. P. (1996). Value transmission in families. In C. Seligman, J. M. Olson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The psychology of values: The Ontario symposium, Volume 8 (pp. 253276). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press. Sagiv, L., & Schwartz, S. H. (1995). Value priorities and readiness for out-group social contact. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 437448. Sahdra, B., & Ross, M. (2007). Group identication and historical memory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 384395. Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 165). New York: Academic Press. Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the content and structure of values? Journal of Social Issues, 50, 1945. Schwartz, S. H. (2005). Robustness and fruitfulness of a theory of universals in individual human values. In A. Tamayo & J. B. Porto (Eds.), Valores e comportamento nas organizaes [Values and behavior in organizations] (pp. 5695). Petrpolis, Brazil: Vozes. Schwartz, S. H. (2006). Les valeurs de base de la personne: Thorie, mesures et applications [Basic human values: Theory, measurement, and applications]. Revue Franaise de Sociologie, 47, 249288. Schwartz, S. H., Lehman, A., & Roccas, S. (1999). Multimethod probes of human values. In J. Adamopoulos & Y. Kashima (Eds.), Social psychology and cultural context: Essays in honor of Harry C. Triandis (pp. 107123). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Schwartz, S. H., Sagiv, L., & Boehnke, K. (2000). Worries and values. Journal of Personality, 68, 309346. Seligman, C., Olson, J. M., & Zanna, M. P. (Eds.). (1996). The psychology of values: The Ontario Symposium, Vol. 8. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. New York: Cambridge University Press. Smooha, S. (1978). Israel: Pluralism and conict. Berkeley: University of California Press. Solomon, S., Greenberg, J., & Pyszczynski, T. (1991). A terror management theory of social behavior: The psychological functions of self-esteem and cultural worldviews. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 93159). San Diego: Academic. Struch, N., & Schwartz, S. H. (1989). Intergroup aggression: Its predictors and distinctness from in-group bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 364373.

Value Priorities and National Identication

419

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 3347). Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social-identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 724). Chicago: Nelson-Hall. Tartakovsky, E., & Schwartz, S. H. (2001). Motivation for emigration, values, well-being, and identication among young Russian Jews. International Journal of Psychology, 36, 8899. Triandafyllidou, A. (1998). National identity and the other. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 21, 593612. Verplanken, B., & Holland, R. W. (2002). Motivated decision making: Effects of activation and self-centrality of values on choices and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 434447.