Individual + group - social identity theory Flashcards
who
Tajfel & Turner (1979)
aim
explain intergroup behaviour and conflict between groups
4 concepts
social categorisation
social identification
social comparison
positive distinctiveness
social categorisation
cognitive process of dividing social environment into :
- ingroups : group that individual identifies with
- outgroups : group that individual does not identify with
this results in the category accentuation effect:
the ingroup seems more similar to one another
the outgroup seems more similar to one another
both groups seem more different than one another
social identification
aspects of an individuals self image is derived from their ingroup
- helps develop a sense of belonging and identity
- personal identity - based on own goals, achievements
- social identity - based on goals/achievements of groups we belong to (ingroups)
social comparison
the process of comparing one’s ingroup w/ one’s outgroup
- compare in favor of ingroup to boost self esteem
positive distinctiveness
through the process of social comparison, we attempt to make our ingroup seem more distinct than our outgroup
- in favor of ingroup - boost self esteem
salient identity
the identity that is most prominent for an individual in a certain social context
Cialdini et al (1976) - aim
investigate BIRG (basking in reflected glory), the tendency for people to associate themselves with successful others
Cialdini et al (1976) - procedure
method : series of field experiments
sample : over 300 college students
experiment 1 :
Fans from large US prestigious football unis were observed in lecture halls across 7 schools the Monday following a big tournament
ex 1 results :
students were more likely to wear apparel associating themselves with the winning football team than with the losing football team
experiment 2 :
researchers called students to interview them about their school’s football team’s performance following a game
ex 2 results :
- people used the pronoun ‘we’ more when they won and ‘they’ more when they lost
- in some experiments, researchers manipulated the feelings of the participants through distraction tasks and giving them positive/negative feedback
- they were able to show that people were more likely to associate themselves more closely with successful other when their own public image was threatened
experiment 3 :
participants took a performance test on a series of 6 factual questions. 50% were given positive feedback (50% negative) regardless on how they did. it was hypothesised that participants who were told that they failed would try and regain social status by associating themselves with the winning team
ex 3 results :
- measured the difference between the amount of the “we” pronouns used to describe a football win
in the “succeeded” group vs the “failed” group
- Those in “failed” group showed a much higher use of the word “we” in describing the win: 40% used “we” in
the win group versus 14% in the “loss” group
Cialdini et al (1976) - conclusion
- shows that people tend to seek a positive social identity
- supports the basis of the SIT, that people seek to boost their self esteem, through creating a positive social identity
- social categorisation - the social environment was separated depending on the team that the participants supported
- social identification - people wore apparel associating themselves with the winning team
- social comparison/positive distinctiveness - people used the pronoun ‘we’ in favor of their ingroup to associate themselves with the winning team and boost self esteem
Cialdini et al (1976) - evaluation
Method Alternative explanations for findings Gender Ethics Culture
SIT explains conformity
referent informational conformity
- conforming to ingroups norms
- once we identify with a group we start to change to conform to the group’s norms
Abrams et al (1990) - aim
investigate the role of social identity on one’s likelihood to conform
Abrams et al (1990) - procedure
method : Asch paradigm
- independent measures design
- 2x2 factorial design
