218 Personality and Social Psychology Review 18(3) Reicher Revnolds Schmitt 2010)It has also be From an SIA social relationshins ingly used as a framework for understanding health phenom fore not between ena(S.A.Haslam,Jetten,Postmes,&Haslam,2009:Jetten. individuals(e.g.friendships)that provide a pleasant accom Has Haslam 2012 ngoing personal act Instead,they hav ed in the SIA was not develoned to exnlain the nennd as a connectedness.and it did not emerge from a bio-medically above example.then.it is jane's relationshin with janet and oriented tradition (e.g.,psychiatry).Instead,the approach is and her capacity to define the three of them (and oth -psychological in social identity (as us Io ballers Th er.1999).For thisr on the n why identity-based relationships in the home,in the workplace,and in society at large are critical no in this regard,offers a well-established and long-standin only for self-definition but also for meaningful social 2010).The ga of this sction is to ouine the he。 an be se n that the sia is distin core tenets of the SIA to clarify the relevance of these for emphasis on the power of social group memberships to depression a ely,to formulate a se ructure a person self-conce and,through this, the this condition (). thatindividuals ceive themselves and their place in the world.Indeed.mon Key Premise I:Social Relationships Structure starkly,it suggests that it is social identities that give peopl Individuals'SelfConcebt and.Through This.Their plac in the wo with Behavior A key theoretical pre emise of the SIA is that people's sense of es et).A social identity is meaningful whenever self i comprised of both person and socio t has significance or importance to the individua hat .this e an group see this in o terms of interests attitudes and hehaviors that differ in ball tean meaning to her relationshin with mporta r individuals.On the othe a sense of common direc there are of context which we de This is clearly dan aligned with those of other members of the groups to which generally,it can be seen that in the world at large.social den tties (e.g.. ong (out-groups grou ne's neig A key idea here is that.to the extent that a given g activity that bind people together and allow for coordinated membership is contextually salient or provide s an ongoin goal-oriented endeavor. basis for les a basis for n light of the ising that s nd Jane)not only needs to be able to differentiate be ion it generally feels good to identify str onoly with a g Jill,say）and those s to bl people to defin hat is she ds to be able tos If and which s cial ide is a motiva usindeed,in this way,a sense of shared social identity ional preference (Tajfel&Tumer,1979:see also Elleme l fou ation for De Gil ,Haslam,2004).Here,social iden tification lit ng part o kes or (p.21;see also S.A. eations for self-esteem (Bettencourt Dorr,1997:S.A Haslam,Postmes,&Ellemers,2003). Haslam Reicher.2006:Ellemers.Kortekaas.Ouwerkerk218 Personality and Social Psychology Review 18(3) Reicher, Reynolds, & Schmitt, 2010). It has also been increas￾ingly used as a framework for understanding health phenom￾ena (S. A. Haslam, Jetten, Postmes, & Haslam, 2009; Jetten, Haslam, & Haslam, 2012). Unlike the models reviewed in the previous section, the SIA was not developed to explain the health benefits of social connectedness, and it did not emerge from a bio-medically oriented tradition (e.g., psychiatry). Instead, the approach is social-psychological in origin and is first and foremost a the￾ory of social relationships grounded in a social model of self (Turner, 1999). For this reason, the approach, although not specific to depression, is relevant to its social dimensions and in this regard, offers a well-established and long-standing model supported by four decades of empirical research (and thousands of publications; for details, see Postmes & Branscombe, 2010). The goal of this section is to outline the core tenets of the SIA to clarify the relevance of these for depression and, ultimately, to formulate a series of testable predictions that might advance our understanding of the role of social connectedness in this condition (see Table 1). Key Premise 1: Social Relationships Structure Individuals’ Self-Concept and, Through This, Their Behavior A key theoretical premise of the SIA is that people’s sense of self is comprised of both personal and social identities. On one hand, this means that we can define and understand our￾selves in terms of our personal identity—seeing ourselves in terms of interests, attitudes, and behaviors that differ in important ways from those of other individuals. On the other hand, there are also a range of contexts in which we define and understand ourselves in terms of one or more social identities—seeing our interests, attitudes, and behaviors as aligned with those of other members of the groups to which we belong (i.e., in-groups) but as different from those of groups to which we do not belong (out-groups; Turner & Oakes, 1997). A key idea here is that, to the extent that a given group membership is contextually salient or provides an ongoing basis for social identification, it provides a basis for self￾categorization whereby the group becomes “self.” For example, to play a game of football, a woman (let us call her Jane) not only needs to be able to differentiate between those players who are on her team (Janet and Jill, say) and those who are not, but she also needs to be able to see her team￾mates as interchangeable representatives of a common in￾group; that is, she needs to be able to see herself and them as “us.” Indeed, in this way, a sense of shared social identity can be seen to provide the psychological foundation for most meaningful forms of social behavior. In simple terms, this is because, as Turner (1982) puts it, “social identity is what makes group behavior possible” (p. 21; see also S. A. Haslam, Postmes, & Ellemers, 2003). From an SIA perspective, social relationships are there￾fore conceptualized not only as bonds of affiliation between individuals (e.g., friendships) that provide a pleasant accom￾paniment to ongoing personal activity. Instead, they have a fundamental bearing on a person’s understanding of who they are and, as a result, on what they are able to do. In the above example, then, it is Jane’s relationship with Janet and Jill—and her capacity to define the three of them (and oth￾ers) in terms of a shared social identity (as “us footballers”)— that allows her to play and enjoy a game of football. The same logic explains why identity-based relationships in the home, in the workplace, and in society at large are critical not only for self-definition but also for meaningful social functioning. From this example, it can be seen that the SIA is distin￾guished from other models of social connectedness by its emphasis on the power of social group memberships to restructure a person’s self-concept and, through this, their behavioral repertoire. The approach argues that social identi￾fication fundamentally affects the way that individuals per￾ceive themselves and their place in the world. Indeed, more starkly, it suggests that it is social identities that give people a place in the world, and thereby also furnish them with a sense of purpose and meaning (Dingle, Brander, Ballantyne, & Baker, 2012; S. A. Haslam, Jetten, & Waghorn, 2009; Jones et al., 2011). A social identity is meaningful whenever it has significance or importance to the individual—that is, when he or she identifies with the group. We see this in our example, where it is Jane’s sense of herself as a member of a football team that gives meaning to her relationship with Janet and Jill and also gives them a sense of common direc￾tion and purpose—by virtue of the fact that this social iden￾tity specifies a constellation of shared norms, goals, and aspirations. This is clearly a mundane example, but more generally, it can be seen that in the world at large, social identities (e.g., where “us” encompasses one’s family, one’s workgroup, one’s church, one’s neighborhood community, etc.) provide the basis for networks of shared meaning and activity that bind people together and allow for coordinated goal-oriented endeavor. In light of the above points, it is not surprising that social identities have a profound impact on well-being. Indeed, pre￾cisely because they engender a sense of purpose and direc￾tion, it generally feels good to identify strongly with a group. This is particularly true, however, to the extent that social￾structural features of the world allow people to define in￾group identity as positive, distinct, and enduring—something for which social identity theory suggests there is a motiva￾tional preference (Tajfel & Turner, 1979; see also Ellemers, De Gilder, & Haslam, 2004). Here, social identification liter￾ally entails being part of something bigger and better, and a large body of research confirms that this has positive impli￾cations for self-esteem (Bettencourt & Dorr, 1997; S. A. Haslam & Reicher, 2006; Ellemers, Kortekaas, & Ouwerkerk, Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at Remen University of China on September 6, 2015