Knowt
Social Identity Theory
Social identity theory posits that an individual's self-concept is derived from perceived membership in social groups, which influences their behavior and attitudes towards others.
Overview of Social Identity and SIT
Identity Definition: Refers to the distinct characteristics that define an individual.
Social Identity: Part of one's identity based on group memberships (e.g., nationality, sports teams, political affiliation).
Social Identity Theory (SIT): Explains how individuals’ self-concept is influenced by group membership, leading to in-group and out-group distinctions ('us' vs. 'them').
History and Development
Origins: SIT emerged in the 1970s from the minimal group paradigm, showing that mere categorization can lead to intergroup discrimination.
Expansion: Became a dominant theory in explaining intergroup relations, complementing Realistic Group Conflict Theory by integrating cognitive and motivational elements.
Self-Categorisation: The process of sorting oneself into social groups forms the basis of social identity (Tajfel & Turner, 1986).
Role of Self-Esteem: Identification with a social group enhances self-esteem if the in-group is seen as superior.
Key Processes in SIT
Social Categorisation:
Definition: Classifying individuals as part of in-groups (us) or out-groups (them).
Effects:
In-group homogeneity: Members of an in-group seen as similar.
Out-group homogeneity: Members of out-groups viewed as indistinguishable from each other.
Category Accentuation Effect: Exaggerates group differences (in-group vs. out-group) and similarities within groups.
Social Identification:
Definition: Process of aligning with an in-group, adopting its norms and values.
Indicators: Reflects the individual's sense of belonging, including attitudes and behavior in line with the group.
Social Comparison:
Definition: Favorable comparison of in-groups against out-groups to boost self-esteem.
Implications: Often leads to prejudice and discrimination if self-esteem depends on in-group superiority.
Positive Distinctiveness:
Definition: Motivation to view in-groups as better than out-groups to maintain positive social identity.
Outcome: Drives competition between groups, reinforcing prejudice and discrimination.
Influence of SIT on Psychology
SIT and Stereotypes: SIT provides explanations for stereotyping and collective movements, emphasizing the internalization of group norms.
Interpersonal vs. Intergroup Behavior: SIT suggests a continuum where behavior ranges from personal interactions to group-based interactions (Turner, 2011).
Depersonalization: Turner proposed that individuals self-stereotype to align with group characteristics, a process he termed as a 'cognitive redefinition of the self.'
Self-Categorisation Theory
Limitations of SIT: While SIT explains intergroup relations, it doesn’t fully cover the process of categorization itself.
Self-Categorisation Theory: John Turner’s extension focuses on:
Self-definition as group members.
Learning group behaviors.
Internalizing norms through depersonalization and self-stereotyping.
Behavior conforming to group standards.
Applications and Implications of SIT
Globalization: Brings different social identities together, increasing the need for intergroup understanding, particularly in workplace settings.
Prejudice and Conflict: SIT posits that group rivalry is almost inevitable due to the need for positive distinctiveness, leading to conflicts and sometimes hostility.
Tajfel 1970
Aim: To investigate if boys placed in random groups based on an arbitrary task (minimal group) would display in-group favouritism and inter-group discrimination.
Procedure: Participants were 64 schoolboys, aged 14-15, from a state school in the UK. 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. In 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.
2. Social identity theory is less about people just viewing themselves and more about how group membership shapes self-esteem and behavior. People derive identity and pride from the groups they belong to.
3. Tajfel’s study with minimal groups showed that humans favor their own group (in-group bias) even when the group divisions are meaningless. No resources needed—just group labels were enough to create favoritism and prejudice.
4. The idea of stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination does connect, but they’re outcomes tied to intergroup dynamics, not necessarily the core of the theory.
5. The theory explains that people want to boost their self-esteem, so they make their group look good (positive distinctiveness) and sometimes make the out-group look bad.
You wanted definitions? Here are some essentials:
• Social categorization: Sorting people into groups based on shared traits.
• Social identification: Adopting the identity of the group you belong to.
• Social comparison: Comparing your in-group to out-groups to maintain a positive self-image.
• In-group bias: Favoring your group over others, even when it’s arbitrary
