S2W2SIT

Question 1

Personal identity

Answer 1

How we distinguish ourselves from others.

Our unique attributes.

Question 2

Social identity

Answer 2

How we distinguish ourselves from others in terms of group membership.

How we identify in terms of social groups.

Something you have in common with others (kinship).

Affects how you interact.

Question 3

Types of groups

Answer 3

Friendship, occupational.

Shared enthusiasms.

Demographic.

Real world groups overlap.

Question 4

Realistic conflict theory

Answer 4

How intergroup hostility can arise as a result of conflicting goals and competition over limited resources.

Explains feelings of prejudice/discrimination toward outgroup that accompany intergroup hostility.

Question 5

Criticism of RCT

Answer 5

Conflict happens even without scarcity of resources.

Maybe just identifying strongly with a group is enough to create conflict.

Question 6

Henri Tajfel

Answer 6

Prejudice is cognitive.

Trivial group membership was enoughto create bias.

Minimal group paradigm

Question 7

Oversestimators (Tajfel)

Answer 7

Group allocation at random

Overestimators vs. underestimators (no real meaning).

Individuals distribute resources to other individuals (in and outgroup).

Ingroup is significantly favoured.

Question 8

Minimal groups

Answer 8

Groups with no prior conflict.

Question 9

Kadinsky/Klee experiment (Tajfel)

Answer 9

14-15 year old boys expressed preference for one of two paintings

Randomly allocated to Kandinsky or Klee

Distributed resources (small amounts of money)

Ingroup was favoured

Question 10

Social Identity Theory (Tajfel and Turner)

Answer 10

Defined by social and personal identities.

People from ingroup seen more favourably.

Group is aspect of our identities.

Two basic aspects:

Distinction between social and personal identities (both important).

Distinction between ingroup and outgroup.

Question 11

Group identification

Answer 11

The strength of group identification varies between and within people.

High: important part of identity.

Question 12

Group identification and SIT

Answer 12

Lots of effects of SIT depend how strongly you identify with your group.

High ingroup identification = likely to be affected by self-stereotyping

(if you’re English you think and therefore do act posh).

Question 13

Positive distinctiveness

Answer 13

Unique as individuals, but part of high-status groups.

Strategies to achieve this as people strive for it.

Question 14

High status group

Answer 14

People are impressed by your group and you get positive distinctiveness from it.

Question 15

Social mobility

Answer 15

Move to a higher status group.

Not always possible

Question 16

• Social creativity

Answer 16

Most common.

Enhance the perceived status of the ingroup.

Turn negatives into positives

Change the basis of comparison (take positive aspect of your group).

Make downward rather than upward comparisons.

Question 17

Social change

Answer 17

Enhance the actual status of the ingroup via competition and mobilisation.

Japan threatened by America and realised they needed to modernise.

Group taking itself from low social status to high social status.

Uncommon.

Question 18

Strategy choice

Answer 18

If social mobility is possible it is used (preferred method).

Depends on permeability of group boundaries.

You can change music preference (high permeability)

Can’t change gender (low permeability).

High identifier = unlikely to attempt mobility.

Low identifier = less likely to change status of the group and so will leave.

Question 19

Collective self esteem

Answer 19

Group has a sense of self-esteem, know whether you are well liked and whether you should like yourselves.

Question 20

Depersonalisation

Answer 20

Feel less like an individual and more just part of the group

Question 21

Self categorisation theory (SCT)

Answer 21

Process involving identifying one’s membership of groups.

Focus on membership salience.

Supplement to SIT.

Question 22

Membership salience

Answer 22

How obvious is membership of a group at the moment.

e.g. wearing football shirts is high salience.

Question 23

Subordinate and superordinate groups

Answer 23

Self is subordinate to all groups.

Humans are superordinate to all groups.

Some groups contain other groups and whatever you’re thinking about at the time is the most salient one.

Question 24

Findings of SIT and SCT

Answer 24

Discrimination against outgroups enhances self-esteem (cause or effect).

Higher status groups display more ingroup bias.

Outgroups seen as more homogenous.

Group contact reduces stereotyping and conflict (esp. with common goals).

Question 25

Outgroup homogeneity effect

Answer 25

See outgroups as more similar to one another.

Question 26

Uncertainty-identity theory

Answer 26

Uncertainty about one’s identity can result from large-scale social change and major life events.

Uncertainty about group reduces our stability – can cause identity crisis where we search for group with distinct boundaries and stability.

A way of explaining extremist groups.

Question 27

Deindividuation

Answer 27

Early theorists: being part of a crowd allows expression of primitive impulses.

Updated: individuals ‘shed’ personal identity to conform to group norms, especially in unfamiliar settings (Stanford Prison).

Question 28

SIDE (Social Identity model of Deindividuation Effects) model

Answer 28

Steve Reicher.

Explains confrontations with police in identity terms.

Adjustable norms: individual values dominated by group norm.

Stronger under anonymity/invisibility

Role of computer-mediated communication (anonymous etc.)

Question 29

Contributors to deindividuation

Answer 29

Crowd size

Anonymity

Reduction in social cues

Self-stereotyping

Question 30

Critiques of SIT

Answer 30

Overly cognitive (social factors ignored).

Hard to generalise from lab based minimal groups to RL.

RL: groups influenced by history and are highly salient so not minimal.

Studies too reductive (only illustrate basic effects).

Question 31

Identity threat

Answer 31

People like to think highly of selves and their groups.

If positivity of their identity is threatened (group member acting badly) there are strategies:

Accept a negative view of their own group (unlikely as leads to lack of positive distinctiveness).

Ignore or dismiss threat.

Change views to align with behaviour (justified act)

Question 32

Tarrant et al. (torture justification)

Answer 32

Tortured by Britain = British participants perceive it as morally justified and feel less empathy for the victim.

Tortured by USA= American participants blamed victim, thought it justified and thought torturer was typical of group.

Americans didn’t think it was typically British but thought it was typically American (rationalising torture from ingroup).
.

Question 33

Mediation analysis

Answer 33

A causal chain in which one variable affects a second variable that, in turn, affects a third variable.

The intervening variable, M, is the mediator.

It “mediates” the relationship.

In torture study: empathy, victim blame etc. mediate group membership and justification.