Social Identity Theory

Context for Human Relationships: Sociocultural content

Define social identity theory

• Assumes that people define themselves in relation to social groups.

• Thus, a person’s sense of who they are is based on membership of social groups.

Outline the sub-processes of SIT

1. Social categorization

2. Social identification

3. Social comparison

What occurs in the social categorization stage?

• People categorise others to easily identify and understand them.

• By understanding the categories people belong to, they can better understand themselves and begin to develop a sense of identity.

• People tend to define behaviour as “right” according to their group’s behaviour.

• Individuals belong to many groups simulteneously and depending on the associated group, behaviour is likely to change, to match the group’s behaviour.

What occurs in the social identification stage?

• People tend to assimilate into their group by adopting the group’s identity.

• This is observed as indivuduals behave in similar ways as group members.

• Therefore, this group becomes the person’s social in group.

What occurs in the social comparison stage?

People tend to compare their in-group with respect to the out-groups.

Why do individuals tend to compare the in-group with the out-group?

• Improve self esteem

  • By viewing in-group in a positive light and other groups in a negative light, or even percieve out-group members negatively.

  • Continuous comparison may lead to the out-group homogeniety effect.

Define the out-group homogeneity effect

Members of in-group will percieve its members as being more diverse in comparison to out-groups, where members are percieved as being more similar to one another.

Outline the study investigating SIT

Name	Tajfel et al. (1970)
Aim	If intergroup discrimination would take place under minimal group identity.
Procedure	Boys were randomly allocated to 1 of 2 groups. Each boy was told to award points to two other boys, one from his in-group, and the other from the out-group. The only information the boys were given were the names of the groups each boy belonged to.
Result	Boys generally awarded more points to the members of their in-group, showing in-group favoritism.
Conclusion	Natural tendency of members of a group to favour their in-group. Despite meaningless groupings, participants were able to idenfity with their respective groups and create a positive social identity, by awarding points.

What are the two behaviours that can be explained using the SIT?

• In-group favoritism in workplace collaboration.

• Cliques and exclusions in school friendship groups.

Explain in-group favoritism in workplace collaboration according to SIT & the study

• People categorize themselves into groups (eg. departments, job roles & project teams) and favour their in-group while discriminating against out-groups.

  This can lead to poor collaboration, siloed thinking & reluctance to share resources or

• credit.

• Tajfel et al. (1970) shows how even minimal group identity triggers in-group bias.

How can in-group favoritism in workplace collaboration be changed to promote collaboration?

• Recategorization by emphasising a shared overarching identity.

  • “We are all part of this company” instead of “we are HR vs. Marketing”

• Encouraging interdepartamental teamwork:

  • Cross-functional projects

  • Reward systems based on shared goals

Explain cliques and exclusions in school friendship groups according to SIT & the study

• Young people define themselves through their group membership (eg. friendship cliques).

• Social categorization & identification lead to clear in-group vs. out-group divisions.

• As a result, students form tight social cliques & may treat out-group members with hosltility or indifference even when no true conflict exists.

• Tajfel et al. (1970) shows how easily minimal group identity can lead to discrimination.

How cancliques and exclusions in school friendship groups be changed to promote collaboration?

• Teachers / mentors promote superordinate group identities:

  • whole class goals

  • shared school identity

• Mixed social group activities to reduce boundries between cliques:

  • Peer mentoring