Social Identity Theory Flashcards
Social Identity theory
A01
- Humans= social animals who have evolved the tendency to identify with a group to aid co-operation, helps form societies. Can identify with 1 or more group= fundamental part of human nature
- Tajfel + Turner 1979- prejudice can be explained by our tendency to identify ourselves at part of a group, and to classify other people as either within or outside that group. Argue that conflict may not even be necessary for prejudice to manifest- just being in a group and aware of existence of another group= sufficient for prejudice to develop
- Self concept gives us a sense of who we are, Taifel and Turner suggest our self concept is made up of many self identities, closely linked with the social group we belong to
- Social identity theory- says humans have a strong desire to belong + self esteem driven through group membership + acceptance of others
- Much of social behaviour stems from drive to maintain positive sense of self as valued member of group
Social Identity theory
A01-Self categorisation
-Tajfel +Turner theory based on minimal group studies- proposed there are 3 mental/cognitive process involve in evaluated others as ‘us’ or ‘them’
-In group= we belong to
Out group= the rest
-Stage 1) SELF CATEGORISATION: Categories ourselves + others as member of PARTICULAR SOCIAL GROUP= aid understanding. Our group = INGROUP, others= OUTGROUP. Some social groups= MORE IMPORTANT than others eg gender> if you a cat owner. If we assign people to a category= tell us THINGS about those people,find out things about OURSELVES by knowing our categories. Can belong to many different groups
Examples;
-Gender
-Race
-Religion
Social Identity theory
A01- Social identification
Stage 2) SOCIAL IDENTIFICATION: Adopt IDENTITY of group we have categories self as. Then BEHAVE in ways we believe APPROPRIATE to identity. Is an EMOTIONAL SIGNIFICANCE with identification with the group + SELF ESTEEM becomes BOUND with GROUP MEMBERSHIP. Conform to SOCIAL NORMS of that group and not only take on behaviour but also VALUES they believe in too
Social Identity theory
A01- Social Comparison
Stage 3) SOCIAL COMPARISON: Final stage, after categorising and identifying within a group, begins to COMPARE that group to others. Show INGROUP FAVOURITISM and OUTGROUP NEGATIVE BIAS. Group needs to COMPARE WELL against others in order to MAINTAIN SELF ESTEEM. Critical for PREJUDICE as once 2 groups identify themselves as RIVALS= forced to COMPARE to MAINTAIN members SELF ESTEEM
-Feeling that we belong to a group and that our group is in some way BETTER than others enhances SELF ESTTEM- prejudice makes us feel good about ourselves
Social Identity theory
A01- Minimal Group studies
Theory based on LAB EXPERIMENTS= MINIMAL GROUP STUDIES. On the groups which participants would see themselves as belonging to one group or another were MINIMAL- no real reason for you feeling you were apart of that group. (Eg deciding by tossing a coin)
Social Identity Theory
A02- Cliques
Cliques- GROUPS of friends who think they’re SUPERIOR to others around them and won’t let outsiders join their circle. TAJFEL- explains this because people in the clique base their SELF ESTEEM on the STATUS of their SOCIAL CIRCLE. OVER-VALUING the products of the INGROUP(how funny they are, how trendy they dress) and UNDER-VALUE the products of the OUTGROUP(everyone else) by looking down on them
Social Identity Theory
A02-Football fans
Football fans- If you support a football team, your SELF ESTEEM is linked to the SUCCESS of the team. If the team WINS, you feel GOOD. Even if it LOSES, can still feel good by believing fans of the OTHER TEAMS, are INFERIOR to you. Show SOCIAL IDENTIFICATION by wearing their TEAM COLOURS, SINGING TEAM CHANTS, or talking incessantly about the NEW STRIKER or the OLD MANAGER.
Social Identity Theory
A03- Supporting Research: Tajfel
Tajfel conducted a series of lab experiments called minimal group studies, where school boys were placed into arbitrary groups. They carried out a task were they allocated points to boys, either on their own team or the other team. Consistently the boys awarded more points to the member of their team. Therefore, supporting the idea that we have a tendency for in group favouritism.
Social Identity Theory
A03- Wealth of evidence from supporting study
Strength- Tajfel’s minimal group studies gathered a wealth of data which supports social identity theory. With other research such as Lalonde (1992) finding similar results of ingroup favouritism in hockey teams when despite playing poorly, claimed the other teams won because they played ‘dirtier’ when there was no evidence of this. Different researchers consistency finding in-group favouritism, increases the inter-rater reliability of the findings, suggesting the theory is accurate and credible.
Social Identity Theory
A03- Authoritarian personality theory
Competing argument- Social identity theory suggests that social categorisation alone can lead to INGROUP favouritism and outgroup prejudice- however evidence has been found that some groups are more generous to outgroups than the members of their own group. Therefore, this suggests other factors such as personality may more important factors in leading to prejudice. Authoritarian personality theory explains why through the conditional love of their parents certain individuals view others with more prejudice than others, no matter what groups they belong to. Providing a better explanation for prejudice in individuals
Social Identity Theory
A03- Reductionist
Weakness- Reductionist
Social identity theory attempts to reduce the cause of prejudice to social categorisation, which has been argued to be too simplistic. It has been suggested that other factors such as competition play a role in prejudice, with realistic conflict theory suggesting a much more complex explanation. Rather than the deterministic idea of social categorisation always leading to prejudice, realistic conflict theory claims that when there is competition between 2 or more groups for limited resources- symbolic or physical, prejudice can arise as one groups loss is contingent with the others win.
