Minimal groups studies - Tajfel

Question 1

Aim

Answer 1

Test whether simple act of grouping was enough to produce prejudice between groups of very similar people

Question 2

Sample population

Answer 2

48 schoolboys
14-15
Year 10
Bristol scool

Question 3

Procedure

Answer 3

Shown paintings by unknown artists
Chose preference
Randomly assigned to groups (painting preference did not matter they were preassigned)
Given rewards allocation task (chose points to award their own and other group)

Question 4

First findings

Answer 4

First result in boys awarding ingroup members more points = self interest?
Tajfels varied matrices to test further to see if it i jut self interest

Question 5

Matrice

Answer 5

Maximises ingroup benefit = 19 21
Maximises fairnes = 13 13
Maximises joint profit = 17 25
Maximising the difference = 7 1

They maximised the difference
Irrational
Social identity = ensure group was superior to other group boosting their self esteem

Question 6

Conclusion

Answer 6

Categorising boys into meaningless groups caused them to identify with ingroup and engineer a positie social identity by giving their group more points
Did this even if it meant they got fewer point as long as their group was on top

Question 7

Evaluation

Answer 7

Lemyre and smith 1985
Replicated minimal group procedure and findings
Descriminating participants had improved self esteem folowing experiment
Supports that personal identity in bound up in social identity and discrimination enhances both aspects
Lab experient = demand characteristics, acted how they believed they should act

Question 8

Issues and debate

Answer 8

Scientific
High levels of control = no interaction between groups and no prior history of conflict
Not necessarily good for measuring social behaviour