HomeIndividual and the Group: Social Identity Theory (Knowledge) Social Identity Theory, proposed by Henri Tajfel and John Turner in the 1970s, posits that individuals derive a portion of their self-concept from their membership in social groups. The theory seeks to explain the cognitive processes and social conditions underlying intergroup behaviors — especially those related to prejudice and discrimination. Tajfel and Turner (1979) proposed that the groups people belong to (e.g., social class, family, football team) are important sources of pride and self-esteem. ⸻ Social identity groups can give you a sense of: 1. Belonging: Being part of a group can instill feelings of connection and unity, giving individuals the comforting sense that they’re not alone in their experiences or perspectives. 2. Purpose: Group affiliations often come with shared goals or missions, which can provide direction and motivation to individual members. 3. Self-worth: Affiliating with a group can boost self-esteem, as individuals derive pride from group achievements and a positive group image. 4. Identity: Groups provide a framework to understand oneself in the context of a larger community. They help define who you are based on shared attributes, values, or goals.

Individual and the Group: Social Identity Theory (Knowledge) Social Identity Theory, proposed by Henri Tajfel and John Turner in the 1970s, posits that individuals derive a portion of their self-concept from their membership in social groups. The theory seeks to explain the cognitive processes and social conditions underlying intergroup behaviors — especially those related to prejudice and discrimination. Tajfel and Turner (1979) proposed that the groups people belong to (e.g., social class, family, football team) are important sources of pride and self-esteem. ⸻ Social identity groups can give you a sense of: 1. Belonging: Being part of a group can instill feelings of connection and unity, giving individuals the comforting sense that they’re not alone in their experiences or perspectives. 2. Purpose: Group affiliations often come with shared goals or missions, which can provide direction and motivation to individual members. 3. Self-worth: Affiliating with a group can boost self-esteem, as individuals derive pride from group achievements and a positive group image. 4. Identity: Groups provide a framework to understand oneself in the context of a larger community. They help define who you are based on shared attributes, values, or goals.

Social Identity Theory, proposed by Henri Tajfel and John Turner in the 1970s, posits that individuals derive a portion of their self-concept from their membership in social groups. The theory seeks to explain the cognitive processes and social conditions underlying intergroup behaviors — especially those related to prejudice and discrimination.

Tajfel and Turner (1979) proposed that the groups people belong to (e.g., social class, family, football team) are important sources of pride and self-esteem.

Social identity groups can give you a sense of:

Belonging: Being part of a group can instill feelings of connection and unity, giving individuals the comforting sense that they’re not alone in their experiences or perspectives.
Purpose: Group affiliations often come with shared goals or missions, which can provide direction and motivation to individual members.
Self-worth: Affiliating with a group can boost self-esteem, as individuals derive pride from group achievements and a positive group image.
Identity: Groups provide a framework to understand oneself in the context of a larger community. They help define who you are based on shared attributes, values, or goals.

Main Components of Social Identity Theory

Social Categorization	Social Identification	Social Comparison
1. Social Categorization: Refers to the tendency of people to classify themselves and others into social groups based on attributes like race, gender, nationality, or religion. We categorize people to understand them and identify them. Categorization helps simplify the social environment but can also lead to stereotyping.	2. Social Identification: Once individuals categorize themselves as members of a particular group, they adopt the identity of that group. This means they begin to see themselves in terms of group characteristics and adopt its values, norms, and behaviors. For example, if you categorize yourself as a student, you will adopt the identity of a student and begin to act in line with that role. There is an emotional significance to identifying with a group, and your self-esteem becomes tied to your group membership.	3. Social Comparison: After categorizing and identifying with a group, individuals compare their group to others. This comparison is often biased in favor of oneâ€™s own group, leading to in-group favoritism. The comparison is critical for maintaining self-esteem, as groups identified as rivals compete for positive self-evaluation.

In-group (us) and Out-group (them):
- Within the context of SIT, the in-group refers to the group an individual identifies with, while the out-group refers to groups they don’t identify with.
- People have a natural inclination to perceive their in-group positively and view out-groups as neutral or negative, which enhances their self-image.
Positive Distinctiveness:

The desire for positive self-esteem motivates individuals to view their in-group as positively different or distinct from relevant out-groups.
Prejudiced views between cultures may arise from this process; in extreme cases, it can result in racism or even genocide (e.g., Germany with the Jews, Rwanda between the Hutus and Tutsis, and Yugoslavia between Bosnians and Serbs).

Individual and the Group: Social Identity Theory — Study

Tajfel (1970)

Topic: Social categorization and intergroup behavior

Aim:

To see if people, when randomly allocated to a condition, would see themselves as part of their in-group and show in-group favoritism and discrimination against the out-group.

Variables

• IV: Group they are in (Klee or Kandinsky)

• DV: Number of points the group received

• Research Method: Lab experiment

Ethical Considerations

• Deception

• Confidentiality

• Debriefing

Method

• Participants: Schoolboys (14–15 years old) from Bristol.

• Shown 12 slides of different paintings — some by Klee and some by Kandinsky.

• After viewing, they were told they had been assigned to groups based on which painter they preferred (though in reality, the assignment was random).

• The boys did not know each other or who was in which group.

After grouping, boys completed a point allocation task.

• Each boy was asked to award 15 points to two other boys — one from his in-group and one from the out-group.

• Choices were structured with paired options (e.g., 14–15, 10–5, 7–8).

• They were told that the total points awarded would determine the boys’ rewards.

• The boys never met each other, and all allocation was done anonymously.

Results

• Boys maximized differences between groups (category accentuation effect), even when this was disadvantageous to their own group.

• In the first system of point awarding, the boys generally gave more points to members of their in-group, showing in-group favoritism.

• In the second system of point awarding, the boys tended to maximize the difference between the two groups — favoring their in-group’s relative advantage, even if it reduced total profit.

⸻

Conclusion

• Tajfel’s study demonstrated that in-group favoritism can occur even under minimal conditions.

• Merely being categorized into a group is enough to trigger discriminatory behavior toward the out-group.

• Supports Social Identity Theory — group identity influences behavior and perceptions of others.