Social Identity 4
Group Decision Making and Social Identity Theory
As groups become more salient and cohesive, members tend to conform to the group's normative leanings. This compliance is driven by adherence to group norms tied to group identity, rather than mere social pressure.
Groupthink
Groupthink is when a group prioritizes maintaining a shared positive view and overlooks alternatives or ethical considerations. This is particularly heightened under threat.
Examples of groupthink:
2003 invasion of Iraq
Vietnam War decisions
2008 economic crisis
Groupthink is more likely to occur when group members are similar (e.g., demographically) and have strong group identity and norms.
Groupthink vs. Conformity
While related, they differ. Groupthink affects decision-making, whereas conformity involves changing actions to fit in. Conformity can contribute to groupthink, but it isn't always the primary motivator.
Group Polarization
Group polarization occurs when discussion strengthens the group's prevailing opinions, especially if members strongly identify with the group. It results in post-discussion positions that are more extreme than pre-discussion positions relative to a salient outgroup.
Traditional Explanations for Group Polarization:
Social Comparison: Extreme group members attract more attention and sway others.
Persuasive Arguments: Novel, extreme arguments tend to be more persuasive.
Social Identity Theory Explanation for Group Polarization:
Self-categorization theory suggests that individuals who identify with a group conform to a perceived prototypical group position that is more extreme than the group mean.
The norm isn't an average view but the perceived prototypical position. Group members often use an outgroup norm as a reference point, leading them to adopt a more extreme position to maintain positive distinctiveness from the outgroup.
Empirical Evidence
Research in 2019 examined support for Donald Trump before the 2016 election. It found that group polarization led to more extreme attitudes after discussions with like-minded individuals, highlighting the importance of social identification and group norms.
Social Loafing
Social loafing is the tendency to reduce effort when working collectively.
Explanations for Social Loafing
Lack of personal responsibility.
Belief that individual efforts are unimportant.
Desire not to be exploited.
Social Identity Theory Approach to Social Loafing
Individuals increase productivity when the group is an important component of their social identity. Individual interests merge with group goals, leading to increased productivity even without individual monitoring or recognition.
The stronger one identifies with the group, the greater the individual productivity.
Collective Narcissism
Collective narcissism refers to a group's belief that they collectively are superior to other groups; it is an emotional investment in unrealistic beliefs about the ingroup's greatness.
Individual Narcissism
Characterized by:
Grandiose sense of self-importance
Lack of empathy
Need for admiration
Belief in one's uniqueness and deservingness of special treatment
Reflects a discrepancy between explicit and implicit self-esteem and is linked to emotional instability and aggressiveness.
Collective Narcissism Defined
Groups hold collective beliefs that their group is superior.
It is contingent on external validation.
There is often an assumption that the group's superiority is unjustly ignored.
Not all members of a narcissistic group display individual narcissistic traits. It is about the culture of a social group.
Implications of Collective Narcissism
Secure ingroup positivity is resilient to threats, but insecure positivity leads to higher collective narcissism, creating an environment of hatred towards other groups.
Predicts negative behaviors and attitudes towards outgroups.
Related to preference for military aggression, right-wing authoritarianism, and blind patriotism.
Collective Narcissism Scale
Measured on a six-point Likert scale.
Social Identity and Prejudice in Children
Social identity theory suggests prejudice stems from the desire to identify with positively distinct groups to enhance self-esteem.
Ingroup members are perceived as similar and positive, while outgroup members are perceived negatively.
Limitations of Social Identity Theory
It is relatively silent on the development of prejudice in children.
Social Identity Development Theory
Proposed by Drew Nesdale in 2004, it is a developmental model of ethnic prejudice.
Four phases of development:
Undifferentiated (prior to age 2-3): Social groups are not salient.
Ethnic Awareness/Social Group Awareness (around age 3): Children become aware of key categories like gender and ethnicity. Self-identification, or realizing they belong to these groups, is crucial.
Ethnic/Ingroup Preference: Children focus on similarities within their group and favor their own group. Peer group membership becomes increasingly important.
Ethnic Prejudice/Outgroup Hostility: Shift from ingroup favoritism to disliking or excluding the outgroup. Acquisition of ethnic consistency (understanding that ethnicity doesn't change) is key.
Factors Influencing the Shift to Outgroup Hostility
Acquisition of identity consistency.
Social cognitive skills (e.g., perspective-taking).
Social identity processes: Group norms influence attitudes and behaviors.
Children learn to show socially appropriate attitudes and behaviors as they age, understanding that expressing prejudice is unacceptable, leading to a distinction between implicit and explicit biases.
Social identity and group norms are involved in the development of prejudice, but growing social understanding means children know expressing these attitudes is not always acceptable.
Children can hold implicit biases but explicitly express no bias.