Multicultural recognition and ethnic minority rights: A social identity perspective

By M. Verkuyten. 2006

186 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d4a67dc2ad983ce944c9820934a713aa2aa0e721

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

E pluribus unum: Dual identity and minority group members' motivation to engage in contact, as well as social change (2011, unknown): “In general, members of advantaged groups exhibit a preference for common identity and policies that promote it, such as assimilation (Verkuyten, 2006).”
Intergroup Contact and Ingroup Reappraisal: Examining the Deprovincialization Thesis (2010, unknown): “SD = 0.62; 46.8 percent female) from 77 classes in 10 schools in a medium-sized town in the east of the Netherlands.”
Infra-humanization: The wall of group differences (2007, background): “Indeed, there is abundant research on acculturation showing that host societies privilege assimilation of newcomers (Berry, 1997; Verkuyten, 2006).”
Tackling Educational Inequalities with Social Psychology: Identities, Contexts, and Interventions (2020, background): “For example, they can create institutional complacency that is not justified by the reality (Dover, Kaiser, & Major, 2020) , or arouse in members of the majority (otherwise unthreatened) group a sense of uncertainty or threat about their own fit (Verkuyten, 2006).”
Hybrid and Alternating Identity Styles as Strategies for Managing Multicultural Identities (2018, background): “This unprecedented flux of movement of culturally diverse individuals affects societies, prompting increasing research on the realities of multiculturalism (e.g., Berry, 2013; Ng Tseung-Wong & Verkuyten, 2015; Noor & Leong, 2013; Sibley & Ward, 2013; Verkuyten, 2006), the implications of diversity i”
You deplete me: The cognitive costs of colorblindness on ethnic minorities (2012, background): “Not only do minorities prefer multiculturalism (Ryan, Hunt, Weible, Peterson, & Casas, 2007; Verkuyten, 2006), they benefit when others around them endorse multiculturalism (Plaut et al.”
Assimilation ideology and outgroup attitudes among ethnic majority members (2011, background): “Majority group members may sometimes see multiculturalism as threatening to their ingroup because it requires them to relinquish some of their power and status (e.g., Correll, Park, & Smith, 2008; Verkuyten, 2006; Zárate et al., 2004).”
Self-esteem and multiculturalism: An examination among ethnic minority and majority groups in the Netherlands (2009, background): “It is important to note, however, that ‘multicultural’ and ‘multiculturalism’ are ubiquitous terms that are interpreted in various ways, including as a threat to the majority’s way of life (Verkuyten, 2006).”
Political Tolerance and Prejudice: Differential Reactions Toward Muslims in the Netherlands (2010, background): “However, multicultural interventions should be sensitive to the danger that they can lead to reified and essentialist group distinctions that promote group stereotyping and that endangers social unity and cohesion in particular settings (e.g., Verkuyten, 2006; Vogt, 1997).”
Living in a multicultural world: Intergroup ideologies and the societal context of intergroup relations (2014, background): “Nevertheless, it has been the topic of numerous on-going debates (see Green & Staerklé, 2013; Kymlicka, 2012; Verkuyten, 2006).”
Social identity: The role of self in group processes and intergroup relations (2017, background): “Overall, a carefully managed strategy of “cultural” pluralism within an overarching entity can be very effective in managing relations between distinct subgroups (Hogg, 2015; Hornsey & Hogg, 2000; Verkuyten, 2006).”
Included but Invisible? Subtle Bias, Common Identity, and the Darker Side of “We” (2016, background): “…identity but assimilation requires that minority-group members abandon racial or ethnic subgroup identities and associated values, whereas multiculturalism recognizes subgroup identities and often celebrates distinctive contributions rooted in these identities to a common good (Verkuyten, 2006).”
Multicultural and Colorblind Ideology, Stereotypes, and Ethnocentrism among Black and White Americans (2007, background): “…experiences measure were treated as continuous (centered) predictors in subsequent analyses to determine whether ethnic group differences in contact or ethnic identity might at least partially account for ethnic group differences in ideologies (cf. Verkuyten, 2006) and intergroup perceptions.”
Interminority Attitudes (2014, unknown): “Turkish respondents follow the expected pattern of ethnic hierarchy (Verkuyten 2006) by reporting the least social distance toward the ingroup, followed by the majority group, and then by the remaining minority outgroups.”
Anthropomorphism: Opportunities and Challenges in Human–Robot Interaction (2014, background): “…outgroups through media messages [50,105,152], recategorization of outgroups into a common superordinate group [50,51], valuing diversity and what each subgroup can contribute to the greater good [145,146,154], promoting positive contact with members of the outgroup [50,106,107], among others.”
Another view of “we”: Majority and minority group perspectives on a common ingroup identity (2007, background): “One is that majority group members are less supportive of multiculturalism (versus assimilation into a common national group) and minority group rights than are minority group members, and these differences are more pronounced among majority and minority group members more highly identified with the”