group identities Flashcards
1
Q
Henri Tajfel (1919-1982)
A
- Born in Poland, studied in France - antisemitism
- Joined French army for WWII
- Lost almost entire family in Holocaust
- Captured by Germans - prisoner of war camp
- Hid Jewish identity(?)
- Post-war – resettling Jewish orphans / refugees
- One of founders of social psychology in Europe
- Sought to understand prejudice and discrimination
- Emphasised importance of social context
- Sexual harassment of women
2
Q
John Turner (1947-2011)
A
- Born in East London to working class family
- Worked as window installer, then in print factory
- Gained experience as Trades Union Organiser
- Studied Psychology at Sussex then Bristol
- Major proponent of Social Identity Approach
- Sought to understand origins of collective behaviour and how social change is possible
- Co-author of Social Identity Theory
- Lead author of Self-Categorisation Theory
3
Q
the minimal group experiments
A
- Tajfel et al (1971) European J. Social Psychology, 1, 149-177
- Experiment presented as a test of ‘decision making’
- First decisions - choose which paintings you like, by Klee or Kandinsky
- Assignment to Klee or Kandinsky group (privately) - no knowledge of other ingroup/outgroup members.
- Then allocate money to anonymous recipients (only identified by group membership and a code number).
4
Q
explaining MGP discrimination
A
- Competitive norms in Western cultures?
- But bias not restricted to Wstern cultures
- Actually, results are a bit more complex
- Cognitive process of social categorisation
- Similar to previous studies of categorising objects.
5
Q
explaining MGP discrimination 2
A
- Competitive norms in Western cultures?
- But bias not restricted to Western cultures
- Actually, results are a bit complex
- Cognitive process of social categorisation:
- Accentuates differences between categories
- Minimises differences within categories
- Explains difference but not favouritism
- Tajfel’s explanation:
- Social identity processes:
- Discrimination helps to establish positive distinctiveness of ingroup from outgroup
- Positive group distinctiveness - self-esteem
- NB similar to downward social comparison as self-enhancement mechanism
6
Q
do MGP findings mean intergroup discrimination is inevitable?
A
- No!
- NB role of uncertainty in minimal groups:
- Higher discrimination when meanings of social context and/or self are unclear e.g., Grieve and Hogg, 1999; Mullin & Hogg, 1999
- Self-anchoring: projecting one’s own characteristics onto the group e.g., Cadinu and Rothbart, 1996; van Veelen et al., 2013
- Higher discrimination when meanings of social context and/or self are unclear e.g., Grieve and Hogg, 1999; Mullin & Hogg, 1999
7
Q
key insights from MGP
A
- Social context, not individual differences
- Positive group distinctiveness - social identity theory
- Fluidity of social identities - self-categorisation theory
8
Q
an important caveat
A
- It seems important to state at the outset that nothing written in this paper assumes, explicitly or implicitly, some kind of “primacy” or “priority” of social psychological explanations of intergroup behaviour. On the other hand, the paper is concerned with certain points of insertion of social psychological variables into the causal spiral; and its argument is that, just as the effects of these variables are determined by the previous social, economic and political processes, so they also acquire in their turn an autonomous function which enables them to deflect in one direction or another the subsequent functioning of these processes.
- Tajfel, 1974, Social Science Information, 13, 65-93
9
Q
social identity theory - Tajfel and Turner, 1979
A
- Social categories do not only simplify and bring order to our world - they also provide a basis for our identity, our sense of who we are.
- People strive to achieve/maintain a positive identity.
- Behaviour in situations where our group or social identities are salient will be driven by these, rather than our personal identities..
- Positive social identity is largely based on favourable intergroup comparisons - we seek to make our group positively distinct from other groups.
- Threats to group identity can cause people to seek to leave their group or to make it more distinctive.
- How do groups respond to threat/disadvantage?
- Social identity maintenance strategies include:
- Individual mobility - move to a better group
- Social competition - try to improve group’s status
- Including prejudice and discrimination
- Also including collective action, protest movements, etc
- Social creativity - look at things differently
- Depending on perceptions of group context
- Permeability, stability, legitimacy
10
Q
testing social identity theory - Ellemers, van Knippernberg, and Wilke, 1990
A
- 217 high school students in Groningen
- bogus skill tasks and group assignment
- 16 experimental conditions!
- Individual ability – highest/lowest in group
- Group status – group rank 2/5 or 4/5
- Permeability – (not) possible to change group
- Stability – first task predicts second or not
- Two key findings:
- Members of ‘permeable’ groups on average identified less with their group and more with a higher status group (i.e., individual mobility)
- Members of groups with ‘unstable’ status on average willing to work harder to improve the group’s position (i.e., social competition)
- What about perceived legitimacy?
11
Q
collective action
A
- Models of social identity and collective action usually emphasise 3 key predictors:
- Social identification
- Collective efficacy (~ instability)
- Anger about a perceived injustice (~ illegitimacy)
- Social Identity Model of Collective Action (SIMCA; van Zomeren, Postmes & Spears, 2008)
- Encapsulated Model of Social Identity in Collective Action (EMSICA; Thomas, Mavor & McGarty, 2012)
12
Q
key insights from SIT
A
- Importance of (perceived) social context in shaping intergroup relations
- permeability, stability, legitimacy
- Importance of identity processes
- Social identification
- Positive distinctiveness
- Not just a theory of prejudice
13
Q
some limitations of SIT
A
- SIT presupposes that identity categories already ‘exist’ in the social world
- How do categories come into being?
- What leads people to categorise themselves?
- Focus on positive distinctiveness
- What about other identity motives?
14
Q
self-categorisation theory - Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, and Wetherell, 1987
A
- We categorise people – including ourselves – similarly to how we categorise objects
- Comparative fit (bottom-up process)
- Maximise differences between categories
- Minimise differences within categories
- Normative fit (top-down process)
- Apply existing knowledge of what categories ‘exist’
and what they are supposed to be like
- Apply existing knowledge of what categories ‘exist’
- Perceiver readiness (accessibility)
- pre-existing motives, goals, etc.
- Identity salience varies with context
- Who is present?
- What are their characteristics and circumstances?
- What are they doing or communicating?
- Group stereotypes vary with context
- Maximising differences between categories
- Minimising differences within categories
- Depends on comparison group(s)
- Self-stereotyping (or “depersonalisation”)
15
Q
forming identity categories
A
- MGP suggests that identity categories are formed and can change with context
- Real-life examples:
- Leavers and Remainers
- Protest movements: BLM, XR, anti-vax
- Ethnic categories: Black, Hispanic, White
- Trans and non-binary gender identities
