Lecture 8

Question 1

Social identity and self categorization (Theory)

Answer 1

• part of people’s self-concept derives from their social group memberships (I.e. social identities)
• people can use innumerable self categorizations. In a given context one identity is psychologically real (activated/salient)
• -> cognitive accessibility: Chronic salience & situational salience (comparative context)

We can think about ourselves (and others) as unique individuals (individuation) or in generic category terms

We identify in group terms for two main reasons:

1. Self-enhancement (self-esteem): we like to belong to positively valued groups
2. Subjective uncertainty reduction: adopting ingroups’ values and norms creates certainty
   - -> Need for positive distinctiveness

Question 2

Experiments: Minimal Group paradigm

Answer 2

Minimal group studies (Tajfel 1970);

Participants divided in two groups (random) on the basis of arbitrary critertia:

• -> in one study: dot estimations: under estimators vs over estimators
• -> In other study: preference for painter: Klee vs. Kandinsky

Dependent variable: participants distribute points based on matrix: choose column with reward for own group

Participants distribute points based on matrix, choose 1 column for ingroup/outgroup rewards

• -> fairness
• -> maximal ingroup reward/ maximal joint outcome
• -> maximal intergroup differentiation: ingroup gets way more than the outgroup.

Question 3

Diversity: differentiation within groups

Answer 3

Hogg et al + Hornsey & Hogg

Selfcategorization is dynamic (comparative context)
–> It is usually not as simple as a binary in-out group

Diversity is differentiation within groups (intragroup differentiation)

Within groups: roles, subgroups, nested categories, crosscutting categories
– subgroup relations within a superordinate identity group

Question 4

Inclusiveness: opposing drives

Answer 4

Factors in determining self categorization:

Optimal distinctiveness theory (brewer, 1991):
–> we strive for balance between individual autonomy and beloning
Opposing drives:

Overly unique > drive for belonging, inclusion (reduces anxiety + improves self-esteem)

Overly inclusive group > drive for greater distinctiveness (as a group, or individual)

Question 5

Achieving positive distinctivess

Answer 5

Hornsey & Hogg, 2000:

How do people achieve positive distinctiveness?

Positive: ingroup solidarity; use of symbols; gentle, benign intergroup competition. Relaxed and celebratory behaviors
– relative harmony between grouprs

Negative: outgroup derogation, discrimination, negative stereotyping, aggressive intergroup behaviors
– characterized by fear, anxiety, destructiveness, conflict

These identity dynamics determine whether harmony or conflict occurs between subgroups
Critical factor: identity threat

Question 6

Threats to identity

Answer 6

What is threat to identity (HOgss en Horney)

“hot” emotional definitions: results when one’s ingroup is criticized / downgraded/ attacked

• • possible loss of status, no possibilities to improve status
• • relates to reason 1: self-enhancement

“cold” cognitive definitions: results when intergroup boundaries become blurred, indistinctiveness, low entitativity
– relates to reason 2: distinctiveness, uncertainty. Reduction

Responses to threat:

Provokes behavior aimed at protecting or enhancing social identity
– Accentuate ingroup solidarity, sharpen intergroup boundaries, inhibits superordinate group identification

Disidentify from group

• • mobility strategy of “passing” (gaining acceptance of higher status/majority group
• • depends on category boundary permeability
• • But: often not accepted by the dominant group, and rejected by own/former group

Question 7

How to deal with these identity dynamics?

Answer 7

a. Political science perspectives:
Assimilation and multiculturlaism

Different ideologies/approaches in dealing with intergroup relations

1. Assimilation: encourage identification entirely at the superordinate level (colorblind approach- we are all equal)
   - - NB: possibly perceived as a threat to identity of minority subgroups
2. Multiculturalism (cultural pluralism); one cannot escape subgroup identification ,thus retain subgroup identity
   - - criticism: by preserving / reinforcing subgroups boundaries, one promotes separatism and division

b. Social psychological models

Common ingourp idenitty model (Gaertner)

Transform perception from two separate groups (us and them) to one, inclusive superodiancte group (we).

Identification with a binding, more inclusive identity

Mutual intergroup differentiation model (Hewstone)

Impossible to completely forsake a valued social category

Pressure to completely eliminate a subordinate social identity will be perceived as “a threat to those group” identities

Question 8

o what promotes harmonious intergroup relations (and reduces conflict)?

Answer 8

Hornseyy and Hog

Acknowledgement of category-based differences

Do not threaten people’s needs for distinct subgroup identities

But, nourish distinct subgroup identities within the context of a superordinate identity

– dual categorization: simultaneous activation of superordinate and subgroup identification