Prejudice: Social Identity Theory (Situational)

Question 1

What does this theory suggest brings about prejudice?

Answer 1

The presence of another group.

Question 2

Define ‘social identity’.

Answer 2

A person’s sense of who they are based on their group membership.

Question 3

Give 3 examples of social groups.

Answer 3

1) Social class
2) Gender
3) Ethnicity

Question 4

What did Tajfel (1979) propose causes stereotyping?

Answer 4

The tendency to group things together.

Question 5

Define ‘in-group’.

Answer 5

The group which we belong to.

Question 6

Define ‘out-group’.

Answer 6

Groups that are different to our own.

Question 7

What mentality leads to in and out groups?

Answer 7

The concept of ‘us’ and ‘them’.

Question 8

How do in-groups enhance their self-esteem?

Answer 8

By seeking negative aspects of the out-groups.

Question 9

Give an example of an in-group and out-group situation in prejudice.

Answer 9

The events of German with the Nazis and the Jews that lead to genocide.

Question 10

Tajfel proposed that there are 3 cognitive processes involved in evaluating others as “us” and “them”, what are they?

Answer 10

1) Social categorisation
2) Social Identification
3) Social comparison

Question 11

Briefly describe social categorisation.

Answer 11

• We categorise humans in order to understand them and the social environment
• Seeing yourself as part of a group due to shared traits and interests
• We define appropriate behaviour by referencing the norms of groups we belong to

Question 12

Briefly describe social identification.

Answer 12

• We adopt the identity of the group we belong to through their norms and values by changing behaviour and appearance
• Your self-esteem will become bound with the group membership

Question 13

Briefly describe social comparison.

Answer 13

• Viewing your in-group and superior and using group identity to compare yourself with outgroups
• We find negative things about other groups to compare to maintain our self-esteem
• This can lead to prejudice and discrimination of out-groups

Question 14

Using the acronym ‘EACH’, evaluate 2 ‘evidence’ points.

Answer 14

P - Tajfel’s (1970) minimal groups study supports
E - Found that minimal groups of boys awarded their own group with points instead of sharing
E - Demonstrates that we have in-group favouritism
P - Wetherall’s (1982) study rejects
E - Found that Polynesian children were more generous to the out-group in comparison of attitudes with white children
E - This demonstrates there are cultural differences as some emphasise cooperation

Question 15

Using the acronym ‘EACH’, evaluate a ‘how’ point.

Answer 15

P - Tajfel’s (1970) minimal groups study lacks generalisability
E - The sample used 14-15 year old school boys from Bristol
E - This cannot be generalised to groups of people who aren’t at school or are ages such as 40+ from different cultures

Question 16

Are there any applications?

Answer 16

P - Yes
E - It highlights how social identity is a perception not a fact through believing you belong to a group
E - And so strategies can tackle discrimination with this in mind through getting people to expand their sense of identity to reduce social comparison and keep self-esteem high

Question 17

Using the acronym ‘EACH’, evaluate 2 ‘credibility’ points.

Answer 17

P - Reductionist
E - Reduces prejudice down to one factor (the presence of another group)
E - This is too simplistic as the cause for prejudice is much more complex
P - RCT disagrees
E - Sherif found that competition causes prejudice between groups
E - And so there is more than one way to cause prejudice not just the mere presence of another group