Social Identity Theory

Social identity theory posits that individuals derive a portion of their self-concept from their membership in social groups. Tajfel and Turner (1979) proposed that the groups people belonged to were important sources of pride and self esteem.

Social identity groups can give you a sense of:

• Belonging: being part of a group can instilling 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 purpose 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 can help define who you are based on shared attributes, values, or goals.

SOCIAL CATEGORISATION → SOCIAL IDENTIFICATION → SOCIAL COMPARISON

1. Social categorisation: this refers to the tendency of people to classify themselves and others into various social groups based on attributes like race, gender, nationality or religion. We categorise objects to understand them and identify them. We also categorise people to understand the social environment. Such as black, white, Australian, Christian etc. Categorisation helps individuals simplify the social environment but can also lead to stereotyping. If we can assign people to a category, that tells us things about those people.

2. Social identification: once individuals categorise themselves as members of a particular group, they adopt the identity of that group. Meaning they begin to see themselves in terms of group characteristics and adopts its norms, values and behaviours. There will be an emotional significance to your identification with a group and your self esteem will become bound up with group membership.

3. Social comparison: after categorising and identifying with a group, individuals compare their group to others. This comparison is often biased in favour of one’s own group, leading to in-group favouritism . This is critical to understanding prejudice, because once two groups idetify themselves as rivals, they are forced to compete for members to maintain their self esteem.

4. In-group and out-group: within the context of SIT, the ‘in-group’ refers to the group with which an individual identifies, while ‘out-group’ pertains to groups they don’t indemnify with. The theory asserts that people have a natural inclination to perceive their in-group in a positive light while being neutral or even negative towards out-groups, thus enhancing their self image.

5. Positive distinctiveness: the desire for positive self esteem will motivate one’s in-group to be perceived as positively different or distinct from relevant out-groups. Prejudiced views between cultures may result in racism or in extreme forms can lead to genocide.

Tajfel (1970)

Social categorisation and intergroup behaviour

Aim: see if the group people are in impact acts the number of points the group has

RM: Lab

Ethics: Confidentiality and debrief met. Deception broken.

Method: 48 schoolboys (14-15 years) from Bristol shown 12 slides portraying different paintings one half by Kandinsky and other by Klee. All the boys viewed the paintings without signatures of the painter and afterwards they were asked to express their preferences for which painting they prefferered.

After this initial stage of the experiment, the boys were allocated to two separate groups. They were given the impression