Ibpsychologymrpoll.weebly.com



Social Identity Theory (Henry Tajfel)

History and Orientation

Social Identity Theory was developed by Tajfel and Turner in 1979. The theory was originally developed to understand the psychological basis of intergroup discrimination. Tajfel et al (1971) attempted to identify the minimal conditions that would lead members of one group to discriminate in favor of the ingroup to which they belonged and against another outgroup. This is one of the main theories in European social psychology.  Social identity theory proposes that the membership of social groups and categories forms an important part of our self concept. Therefore when an individual is interacting with another person, they will not act as a single individual but as a representative of a whole group or category of people. Even during a single conversation an individual may interact with another person both on a personal level and as a member of a particular group.

There are three fundamental psychological mechanisms underlying social identity theory. The first psychological process is categorisation which refers to the process whereby objects, events and people are classified into categories.   By doing so we tend to exaggerate the similarities of those in the same group and exaggerate the differences between those in different groups. 

The second psychological process is social comparison.   Social comparison refers to the process of comparing one’s own social group with others.  Some social groups have more power, prestige or status than others and therefore members of a group will compare their own groups with others and determine the relative status of their own group.   This also results in the tendency for members of a group to distance themselves from membership of a group which does not share the same beliefs and ideas of their group and take more account of the beliefs and ideas of their social group.

The third psychological process relates to the tendency for people to use group membership as a source of positive self esteem.  Maintaining positive self esteem is seen as a basic motivation for humans therefore if a group does not compare favourably with others we may seek to leave the group or distance ourselves from it.   However if leaving the group is impossible then people may adopt strategies such as comparing their own group to a group of a lower status.

Core Assumptions and Statements

In the Social Identity Theory, a person has not one, “personal self”, but rather several selves that correspond to widening circles of group membership. Different social contexts may trigger an individual to think, feel and act on basis of his personal, family or national “level of self” (Turner et al, 1987). Apart from the “level of self”, an individual has multiple “social identities”. Social identity is the individual’s self-concept derived from perceived membership of social groups (Hogg & Vaughan, 2002). In other words, it is an individual-based perception of what defines the “us” associated with any internalized group membership. This can be distinguished from the notion of personal identity which refers to self-knowledge that derives from the individual’s unique attributes.

Social Identity Theory asserts that group membership creates ingroup/ self-categorization and enhancement in ways that favor the in-group at the expense of the out-group. The examples (minimal group studies) of Turner and Tajfel (1986) showed that the mere act of individuals categorizing themselves as group members was sufficient to lead them to display ingroup favoritism. After being categorized of a group membership, individuals seek to achieve positive self-esteem by positively differentiating their ingroup from a comparison outgroup on some valued dimension. This quest for positive distinctiveness means that people’s sense of who they are is defined in terms of ‘we’ rather than ‘I’.

Tajfel and Turner (1979) identify three variables whose contribution to the emergence of ingroup favoritism is particularly important.

• A) the extent to which individuals identify with an ingroup to internalize that group membership as an aspect of their self-concept.

• B) the extent to which the prevailing context provides ground for comparison between groups.

• C) the perceived relevance of the comparison group, which itself will be shaped by the relative and absolute status of the ingroup. Individuals are likely to display favoritism when an ingroup is central to their self-definition and a given comparison is meaningful or the outcome is contestable.

Applications

Social Identity Theory has a considerable impact on social psychology. It is tested in a wide range of fields and settings and includes prejudice, stereotyping, negotiation and language use. The theory has also implications on the way people deal with social and organizational change.

Example (“The Robbers Cave Study” - Sherif)

In further research this example is referred to minimal group studies. Schoolboys were assigned to groups, which were intended as meaningless as possible. They were assigned randomly, excluding roles of interpersonal discrimination such as history of conflict, personal animosity or interdependence. The schoolboys assigned points to anonymous members of both their own group and the other group. Conclusions were that even the most minimal conditions were sufficient to encourage ingroup-favoring responses. Participants picked a reward pair that awarded more points to people who were identified as ingroup members. In other words, they displayed ingroup favoritism.

Questions

1. Who developed the social identity theory and for what purpose?

2. Define the social identity theory.

3. Identify the 3 psychological mechanisms underlying SIT.

4. Define self categorization.

5. Explain ingroup favouritism.

6. Identify and explain applications of the SIT.

7. From the intro to Sherif’s “Robbers Cave Study” what conclusions are there?

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download