Social Identity Theory and Prejudice Notes

Basic premise: We feel good through group membership.
We praise the group, therefore praising ourselves.
Social identity: Portion of an individual's self-concept derived from membership in a relevant social group.

Positive Distinctiveness: Make sure people think of our group in positive terms.
Downplaying Negative Distinctiveness: Downplay negative traits of our group.
Public Affiliation: Only affiliate publicly with high-status or currently successful groups.

Publicly announce association with successful others (in-group).
Example: Mentioning you went to the same high school as a celebrity.
After university football wins, students wear school apparel and use inclusive language like "we".
BIRG enhances public image by affiliating with successful groups.
More likely to occur when public image is threatened to heighten self-concept and self-esteem.

Question: How does maintaining social identity work within an intergroup context?
Participants: University students tested for creativity.
Procedure: Naming abstract paintings and assigned to high, low, or equal creativity groups (arbitrary).
Dependent Variables:
- Rating of creativity titles by in-group and out-group members.
- Identification with group.
- Legitimacy of group membership.

Group Identification:
- High-status group identified more with membership.
- Low-status group identified less with membership.
- Equal status group fell in the middle.
Legitimacy of Status:
- Low-status group questioned legitimacy.
- High-status and equal-status groups found it legitimate.
Allocations:
- High-status group favored in-group.
- Equal-status group also favored in-group.
- Low-status group favored out-group because they were objectively "better".

When in a high status group, you are more likely to identify with that group
When in a low status group, you're going to try your best to preserve your social identity

Defect from the group to act as an individual so your best to not identify with the low status group. Trying not to act like a group member.

Rebel against the current system and status hierarchy.
Examples:
- Taxing the rich.
- Feminism: Women should be treated equally.
- Racial equality: Every person of color should be treated the same as a white person.

Question: How will high-status group members react when their status is threatened?
Experiment 1:
- Participants sorted into low and high-status groups based on reaction time (arbitrary).
- Stability conditions: unstable (group status could change) or stable (group status unlikely to change).
- Dependent variable: Blood pressure.
- Result: High-status group in unstable condition experienced heightened blood pressure.
Experiment 2:
- Pairs of university students (one male, one female) participated in debates.
- Debate topics: Neutral, conservative (mothers should stay home), progressive (affordable daycare).
- Males always defended conservative position, females opposed.
- Males were asked to oppose the progressive topic, while females defend
- Dependent variable: Blood pressure.
- Result: Males opposing progressive topics showed higher blood pressure.

Examples:
- Indigenous people in Canada receive benefits (sales tax exemptions, free tuition).
- Homeless people receive free food/shelter.
- Immigration in Canada during good vs. recession economies.
Relative deprivation: Subjective perception relative to one's own past or other persons/groups.
Temporal Comparison: Relative to one's own past.
Intergroup Comparison: Compare ourselves to other groups or persons.
The experience of being deprived of something to which one believes oneself is entitled.

Deprivation may not always feel bad.
Being used to having A and then experiencing B (absence of A) is more difficult than mostly experiencing B without prior experience of A
Relative deprivation can lead to higher instances of prejudice.
Higher frustration, anger, and aggression.
Scapegoating: Blaming certain people for deprivation.
Historical example: White on black violence spike when cotton prices plummeted.

Context: Unrest and discriminatory practices against black communities in Detroit.
Police shut down an unlicensed bar, resulting in violence
Study published in 1970: Questions relating to relative deprivation, change in white attitudes, and do riots help or hurt the black cause.
Participants rated their position on a ladder representing their ideal life.
High relative deprivation: Far from ideal. Low relative deprivation: Closer to ideal.

High relative deprivation participants indicated that riots help more than they hurt.
High deprivation participants believe that riots would force change in white attitudes
Low relative deprivation felt riots hurt
They would use persuasion to change white attitudes

Preferring to keep things simple and hold traditional values
High in group favoritism, intolerant, rigid, concrete, over generalizing
Brought up in strict hierarchical families, saw children in black and white rather than in shades of gray.
Disdainful rejection of those who were inferior.

Individual differences in whether people view intergroup relations as competition.
People high in social dominance orientation believe some groups are inferior and must be kept in their place.
People low in social dominance orientation believe most groups are equal.
Still looked at prejudice from a differential lens compared to social. What is your stance towards? Competition? Which shows their status is a personality
*

Prejudice associated with traits but not a trait on its own.
Association but not synonymous.
Association with low need for cognition (relates to cognitive miser hypothesis).
Association with high need for personal structure.
Association with high need for cognitive closure.
Association with lower intelligence.