tajfel 1972

Question 1

author date

Answer 1

tajfel 1972

Question 2

aim

Answer 2

To investigate the minimal groups paradigm and how it is relevant to social identity theory (SIT)

Question 3

participants

Answer 3

48 males aged 14-15 from the same state school and were randomly allocated to 3 groups

Question 4

procedure

Answer 4

The boys have been shown slides of paintings by the artists Klee and Kandinsky and were asked to state which artists they preferred

They were then told that their preference for one of these two artists would form the basis of the group that would be assigned to (this didn’t actually happen and was only told that)

They were shown individually to a cubic;e and asked to conduct the following task
Assign virtual money to members of either the boys ingroup or outgroup
They didn’t know the identity of each boy and knew only a code number which identified if they were ingroup or outgroup
The trials were set up in a randomized design by the researchers and tested the boys on a range of measures including whether they would opt for maximum joint profit, maximum ingroup profit, maximum between ingroup and outgroup

Question 5

results

Answer 5

The boys tended to favor the ingroup members by going for a higher reward and to penalize the outgroup (went for the choice which maximized the biggest profit/loss difference between the ingroup and outgroup)

It was based solely on the mere idea of being apart of a group and the idea of there being a different group because were was o interaction between the boys

Question 6

conclusion

Answer 6

Ingroup favoritism can be manipulated via the minimal groups paradigm in which participants use social categorisation to make decisions (the simple knowledge of a rival group suggests the idea of creating a us and them)

Question 7

strengths

Answer 7

• Reliability: This was a lab experiment which uses a standardized procedure and quantitative data which should ensure reliability

-Validity: The fact that the boys did not meet or even see the ingroup and outgroup members adds validity to the procedure as it eliminates possible sources of bias from the decision as to how to award money i.e. physical appearance and personality factors cannot have influenced the decisions made in the task