(2) Social identity theory

What is Social Cognition in the historical context of social psychology?

• Limited cognitive resources, using of fast, efficient strategies to process and store information • Developed largely from attribution theories • Criticised for ignoring wider social context

What defines the Social Identity approach historically?

Emphasised wider social context

Highlighted motivation in group contexts

Critical of personality theories of prejudice

What motivated Henri Tajfel’s work?

• Wanted to understand how genocide could occur •Focused on minimal conditions for discrimination

• Sought the starting point of discrimination •

What is Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979)?

• Explains how group memberships shape self-concept • Accounts for intergroup behaviour and bias

What are the two components of identity in SIT?

• Personal identity: individual traits and interpersonal relationships

• Social identity: group memberships and intergroup relations

What determines the emotional significance of groups?

• Emotional value placed on the group • Importance of belonging varies across groups

How does group identification affect self-esteem?

• People are motivated to feel good about their groups • Social identity contributes to self-esteem and self-worth

How do ingroups and outgroups develop?

• Desire for positive group evaluation • Leads to ingroup favouritism • Results in intergroup bias

What is the Minimal Group Paradigm (Tajfel et al., 1971)?

• Experimental method to study discrimination • Groups formed using trivial criteria • Tests how categorisation alone leads to bias

• just merely being in different groups leads to bias

How were groups formed in the Minimal Group Paradigm study?

• Participants chose preferred pictures • Assigned to groups anonymously • No personal information shared

What did the Minimal Group Paradigm study find?

• Participants favoured ingroup in resource allocation • Bias occurred without competition or interaction • No prior group history required

What does the Minimal Group Paradigm show about discrimination?

• Discrimination can arise from simple categorisation • Group history and conflict are not necessary

How does SIT explain ingroup bias in minimal groups?

• Motivation to see ingroup positively • Differentiation even with minimal differences • Enhances self-esteem through resource allocation

What is the self-esteem hypothesis in SIT?

• Explains relationship between discrimination and self-esteem

What are the two parts of the self-esteem hypothesis?

• Intergroup discrimination increases self-esteem

• Low initial self-esteem increases intergroup discrimination

What was the design and finding of Oakes & Turner (1980)?

• One group completed resource allocation task • Control group read a newspaper • Discriminators showed higher self-esteem than those who did not allocate anything

What evidence supports part 2 of the self-esteem hypothesis?

• Crocker & Schwartz (1985): low self-esteem → more discrimination • Abrams (1982): found opposite results

What are key limitations of SIT laboratory research?

• Artificial, controlled settings • Limited real-world validity • Measures struggle to separate ingroup favouritism from outgroup derogation

What is Basking in Reflected Glory (BIRGing)?

• Gaining self-esteem from group success • Increased public association with successful groups

What evidence supports BIRGing?

• Cialdini, Borden & Thorne (1976) • College students wore more insignia after football wins

What is Cutting Off Reflected Failure (CORFing)?

• Reducing identification with failing groups • Protects self-esteem • Usually temporary

What is Self-Categorisation Theory?

Focuses on shift from personal to social identity - extension of SIT

What happens when group membership becomes salient?

• Self defined less personally • Increased identification as group member

• this is the under pinning of self categorization theory

What is depersonalisation?

• Seeing oneself as interchangeable with group members • Acting according to group norms

What was the design of Jetten et al. (1997)?

• Participants assigned to minimal groups • Told ingroup members were fair or discriminatory

Found: Participants adopted group norms • Group norm manipulation influenced resource allocation

What does Jetten et al. (1997) show about group behaviour?

• Group norms can override personal values • Norm change alone can alter behaviour

What are threats to social identity?

• Situations that undermine positive group identity • Trigger strategies to restore self-esteem

What is a threat to group esteem?

• Described by Branscombe et al. (1999) • Arises when outgroups derogate ingroup

What is a threat to group distinctiveness?

• Occurs when ingroup is too similar to an outgroup • Leads to attempts to re-establish uniqueness

overcome this: • Increased ingroup favouritism • Greater resource allocation to ingroup

What moderates responses to identity threat?

• Level of identification with the group

What was the design of Crisp, Stone & Hall (2006)?

• Measured ingroup identification • Told UoB and AU would merge - threatens the group

What were the findings of Crisp, Stone & Hall (2006)?

• Highly identified participants showed more ingroup bias • Attempted to re-establish distinctiveness, by doing the same group allocation task and assigning more resoruces