Change, yes ‘we’ can: Protesting for (ingroup) and against (outgroup) change under conditions of threatened personal control

Personal control loss and crisis have been proposed to affect people's attitudes towards social change, but there is controversy about how. From an uncertainty reduction perspective (i.e., Compensatory Control Theory), people should typically reject social change under conditions of threatened personal control. From the perspective of Group-Based Control Theory, however, social change can serve as a means to restore people's sense of control through their social self (i.e., on a collective identity level). Thus, people should welcome ingroup-initiated change following threat. Integrating these perspectives, the Integrated Stage Model of Extended and Secondary Control (INSMESC) proposes that individuals initially attempt to restore control through group-based strategies – such as supporting ingroup-led change – as a form of extended primary control. Only when such group-based approaches are unavailable or appear ineffective do individuals resort to uncertainty-reducing strategies as a secondary control approach. Across three studies ( N = 260, 431, 510), manipulated control threat reduced support for outrgroup-initiated change. However, the studies provided strong evidence that this effect was absent when change was driven by an ingroup. Further corroborating the primacy of group-based control, in Studies 4 and 5 ( N = 219, 616), control threat even increased attitudinal support for ingroup-initiated change, but not for ingroup-led efforts to preserve the status quo. This suggests that social change is only perceived as threatening when it is not an ingroup initiative, and that it can even buffer feelings of personal control loss by highlighting the collective efficacy of a relevant social ingroup. • People may reduce uncertainty or seek collective agency after personal control loss. • They oppose social change that is not initiated by relevant social ingroups. • Ingroup-initiated change, however, provides them with a sense of collective agency. • Thus, people increase support for ingroup-initiated change when lacking control. • This effect is attenuated the more pronounced the perceived social change.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
Published
2025-07-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104803
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Social and Intergroup Psychology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.20

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Change, yes ‘we’ can: Protesting for (ingroup) and against (outgroup) change under conditions of threatened personal control

Immo Fritsche, Johannes Lautenbacher, Wanda Eckert, Tina-Marie Hoke
1 citations
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
Social and Intergroup Psychology
4.20
article

Change, yes ‘we’ can: Protesting for (ingroup) and against (outgroup) change under conditions of threatened personal control

Immo Fritsche, Johannes Lautenbacher, Wanda Eckert, Tina-Marie Hoke
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Personal control loss and crisis have been proposed to affect people's attitudes towards social change, but there is controversy about how. From an uncertainty reduction perspective (i.e., Compensatory Control Theory), people should typically reject social change under conditions of threatened personal control. From the perspective of Group-Based Control Theory, however, social change can serve as a means to restore people's sense of control through their social self (i.e., on a collective identity level). Thus, people should welcome ingroup-initiated change following threat. Integrating these perspectives, the Integrated Stage Model of Extended and Secondary Control (INSMESC) proposes that individuals initially attempt to restore control through group-based strategies – such as supporting ingroup-led change – as a form of extended primary control. Only when such group-based approaches are unavailable or appear ineffective do individuals resort to uncertainty-reducing strategies as a secondary control approach. Across three studies ( N = 260, 431, 510), manipulated control threat reduced support for outrgroup-initiated change. However, the studies provided strong evidence that this effect was absent when change was driven by an ingroup. Further corroborating the primacy of group-based control, in Studies 4 and 5 ( N = 219, 616), control threat even increased attitudinal support for ingroup-initiated change, but not for ingroup-led efforts to preserve the status quo. This suggests that social change is only perceived as threatening when it is not an ingroup initiative, and that it can even buffer feelings of personal control loss by highlighting the collective efficacy of a relevant social ingroup. • People may reduce uncertainty or seek collective agency after personal control loss. • They oppose social change that is not initiated by relevant social ingroups. • Ingroup-initiated change, however, provides them with a sense of collective agency. • Thus, people increase support for ingroup-initiated change when lacking control. • This effect is attenuated the more pronounced the perceived social change.

Journal of Experimental Social PsychologyVol. 121
Leipzig University (DE)
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Social and Intergroup Psychology
4.20
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.