Social Identity Theory

Social Identity Theory (SIT)

A theory that posits an individual's self-concept is derived from perceived membership in social groups, influencing behavior and attitudes towards others.

Social Categorization

The process of classifying individuals as part of in-groups (us) or out-groups (them) based on shared traits.

Social Identification

The process of aligning oneself with an in-group, adopting its norms and values.

Social Comparison

The act of favorably comparing one's in-group against out-groups to boost self-esteem.

In-group Bias

The tendency to favor one's own group over others, even when group divisions are arbitrary.

Positive Distinctiveness

The motivation to view in-groups as better than out-groups to maintain a positive social identity.

Self-Categorization Theory

An extension of SIT that focuses on how individuals define themselves as group members and internalize group norms.

Minimal Group Paradigm

An experimental method to investigate group dynamics, demonstrating that even arbitrary group distinctions lead to in-group favoritism.

Intergroup Discrimination

Prejudicial treatment of individuals based on their group membership, often resulting from social categorization.

Category Accentuation Effect

The tendency to exaggerate group differences and similarities within groups.

Aim of the study

To investigate if boys placed in random groups based on an arbitrary task (minimal group) would display in-group favouritism and inter-group discrimination.

Name of the study

tajfel (1970)

Participants of the study

64 boys in between the ages of 14-15 form a school in the UK

Part one of study method

They went to a psychology laboratory in groups of 8. All knew each other well before the experiment. Shown clusters of varying numbers of dots, flashed onto a screen, and had to estimate the number of dots in each cluster. Assigned to groups at random categorized as "over-estimator", "under-estimator", etc. Had to allocate small amounts of money to the other boys in the experiment.The only thing they knew of the boys was if they belonged to the same or different category

Part 2 of study methods

the second experiment, they were allocated to groups based on their supposed artistic preferences for 2 painters (Kandinsky and Klee). They had to award money to the other boys.

Results

:A large majority of the boys gave more money to members of their own category (in-group) than to members of the other categories (out-group).In the second experiment, the boys tried to maximize the difference between 2 groups.

Conclusion

The researchers concluded that both experiments indicated that the boys adopted a strategy of in-group favouritism and that in-group and out-group do influence one's behaviour.

Ethical concerns

Deception

Potential for stereotypes

Psychology harm: distress and making them feel uncomfortable of the groups

Research method

Laboratory experiments