Modelos de negocio más comunes

The RIM predicts that perceiving discrimination towards one’s ingroup will have negative psychological consequences. However, in response to this perceived discrimination, group members will increase their identity with their stigmatised ingroup, which will buffer some of these negative effects. While the model does not account for other social identities, such as family identity, this was included in some of the relationships to control for its effect and also to examine its relationship to psychological outcomes.

The current research found mixed support for the RIM. Together, both sources of perceived discrimination explained a significant amount of variance in only the solidarity and individual self-stereotyping components measuring homeless identity. Females also reported significantly higher scores in the satisfaction and self-stereotyping components of homeless identity When the specific relationships were examined, only perceived personal

89

discrimination showed any significant relationships with measures of identity, with higher perceived personal discrimination associated with increased self-stereotyping but decreased family identity. In addition, this increase in social identity was not associated with positive psychological outcomes. Taken together, the five homeless identity components, as well as family identity, did not explain a significant amount of variance in any of the three psychological outcome measures. Furthermore, an examination of the specific relationships between social identity and the three psychological outcome measures revealed that only the solidarity component was significantly associated with perceived stress and only family identity was significantly associated with both self-esteem and psychological distress. While increased family identity was associated with increased self-esteem and reduced psychological distress, solidarity was associated with increased perceived stress, a finding which runs contrary to the RIM.

When the overall model was examined using the five homeless identity components, only one indirect effect was found to be significant. The relationship between perceived individual discrimination and perceived stress was significantly mediated by the solidarity component. Thus, in addition to the direct relationship between perceived personal discrimination and increased perceived stress, it was also indirectly associated through the positive relationship between solidarity and discrimination. Again this finding runs contrary to the RIM with minority identity associated with increased distress rather than reduced distress as predicted.

When the current results are considered in terms of previous research findings a mixed picture emerges. The findings that both forms of discrimination together were significantly associated with the solidarity component and that perceived personal discrimination was significantly associated with only individual self-stereotyping is not in line with previous research which used the same measure of identity. Leach and colleagues (Leach et al., 2008; Leach, Mosquerea, Vliek, & Hirt, 2010) found that perceived personal discrimination was associated with only increased ingroup satisfaction when measuring ingroup identity with Europeans and University students for two samples of students (ibid.). However, the current finding is in line with research conducted by Latrofa, Vaes, Pastore and Cadinu (2009) who found that perceived discrimination was significantly associated with increased self-stereotyping for Southern Italians although they did not use the same measure.

Leach et al. (2010) propose that, when faced with perceived discrimination, increases in individual self-stereotyping suggest individuals are using the ingroup identity to see themselves as more similar to other ingroup members and sharing common circumstances and thereby avoiding feeling isolated in their suffering. Given that the homeless identity is not associated with positive outcomes, and that qualitative research finds that people’s coping

90

strategies change over time from distancing oneself from the group to greater embracement (Farrington & Robinson, 1999; Snow & Anderson, 1987), an alternative view may be that perceiving discrimination towards oneself as a result of being homeless over time reinforces the view that, despite your best efforts to try to remain separate from the group, and indeed to escape from the group, you share similarities and commonalities with others who are homeless.

The finding that homeless identity was not associated with a significant amount of variance in any psychological outcome does run contrary to the RIM and some previous findings (e.g. Branscombe et al., 1999; Crabtree et al., 2010; Schmitt et al., 2003). However, the majority of research examining the buffering effects of identity report null findings (Pascoe & Smart Richman, 2009). That solidarity was significantly associated with perceived stress and also mediated the relationship between perceived discrimination and increased stress is also contrary to the RIM, although a minority of previous research has found that higher identification was associated with greater perceived stress and depression and lower self-esteem or well-being for minority groups including women, Latino Americans and African American adolescents (McCoy & Major, 2003; Pascoe & Smart Richman, 2009; Sellers, Copeland-Linder, Martin, & Lewis, 2006). Published research has not yet examined the RIM with homeless participants and therefore whether this finding holds for other homeless populations is unknown.

Research has not yet come to fully understand why some stigmatised identities buffer and some exacerbate the negative effects of perceived discrimination on psychological well- being (Barreto & Ellemers, 2010). This may depend on the power and resources available to the discriminated against group. That the homeless identity does not provide stress buffering resources to members who identify with their stigmatised group may explain this contrary finding. This is discussed further below.

4.2.5 Summary of findings for RQ 3: Examining the SIT/SCT model of stress.