A rejoinder to our critics and some of their misapprehensions

A response to Craig McGarty's "Social Identity Theory Does Not Maintain that Identification Produces Bias, and Self-Categorization Theory Does Not Maintain that Salience Is Identification: Two Comments on Mummendey, Klink, and Brown," Susan Condor's "Nations and Nationalism: Particular Cases and Impossible Myths," & Nick Hopkins's "National Identity: Pride and Prejudice?" An overview of the authors' (2001) objectives & findings in studying German & British citizens' attitudes towards their own nations is presented. McGarty's & Hopkins' respective contentions that the authors miscomprehended the principal tenets of social identity theory are addressed. Moreover, McGarty's & Hopkins's respective repudiations of the authors' assertion that social identities can be preserved outside of biased intergroup comparisons are answered. Although Condor's suggestion that the authors' treatment of the nation as a singular entity may be fallacious, it is noted that the data demonstrated a strong similarity in German & British participants' understanding of the connection between psychological processes & national identities. Several different points raised by the aforementioned critics are also considered, eg, McGarty's & Hopkins' respective claims that category identities are necessarily relational. 17 References. J. W. Parker