Explain Social Identity Theory / Social groups, making use of one study

Social identity theory

• Social identity theory is proposed by Tajfel and is commonly used to explain inter-group behaviour, discrimination, and prejudice 

• The theory states that our identity and behaviours are influenced by the social groups we belong to 

Formation of social group

The formation of such social groups is based on the cognitive process of social categorization, which is a process of classifying people into in-groups and out-groups based on similar characteristics

In group & Out group

• In-groups are social groups in which individuals psychologically identify as being a member → we identify and conform to the norms, behaviours and values of our in-groups through social identification 

• Out-groups, by contrast, are social groups which individuals do not identify with

In group bias

• Belonging to an ‘in-group’ causes us to discriminate against out-group people, which is known as in-group bias 

  • Hence, positive distinctiveness may occur, achieved through social comparison, individuals highlight positive aspects of in-group → perceive ingroups better than outgroups (more superior) to increase self-esteem and social status 

• We also see the out-group as all sharing common traits, some of which are often negative → this out-group bias forms the basis of stereotyping 

Tajfei

• One of the studies that support the social identity theory is the Tajfel study 

• Aim 

  • Tajfel aims to investigate whether intergroup discrimination and prejudice(ingroup bias) would take place from being randomly allocated to groups 

• Procedure 

  • Researchers gathered a sample of 48 British schoolboys, aged 14-15 years old 

  • They were randomly allocated to groups → telling them it was based on their artistic preferences 

  • Each boy was then given a task to award points to two other boys, one from his same group and one from the other group, who’s identity they did not know 

  • They were given three options of distribution: 

    • 1) Maximum joined profit (in-group and out-group)

    • 2) Maximum in-group profit (in-group favoritism)

    • 3) Maximum difference in profit, meaning that boys would accept in-group losing money if that means the out-group would suffer a profit loss (out-group discrimination)

Results

• Generally, participants favored their own in-group, showing ingroup favourtism. 

• It was also found that the boys were willing to give their in-group smaller amount of points with the goal of maximizing the difference between themselves and the out-group

Conclusion

• It was concluded that there is a natural tendency of members of a group to favour their in-group despite being categorised into a seemingly meaningless group

• They concluded that a minimal group is all that is necessary for in-group favouritism to occur → supporting minimal group paradigm → the mere act of categorizing individuals into groups is sufficient in triggering in-group favouritism and discrimination against the out-group.

Link

• The study supports the theory as it show how the boys were able to identify with their in group by awarding their groups with more points to create a positive social identity

• supporting the inherent process of social categorization, social identification, positive distinctiveness, social comparison that results in in-group favourism