1. Social Identity Theory (SIT)

Introduction:

Social Identity Theory was proposed by Tajfel and argues that people are motivated to achieve and maintain a positive image of themselves. 

Three psychological mechanisms:

·      Social Categorization: the process of classifying people based on similar characteristics.

·      Social Identification: the process of adopting the norms of the group and taking on the characteristics of the group.

·      Social Comparison: the process of evaluating ourselves or our group by comparing with other groups to establish positive distinctiveness, which means the motivation to create a sense that the in-group is different and better than the out-group.

Explanation: Conflict is caused by our desire to create a positive social identity. To create this positive identity→we view out-groups negatively and in-groups favorably. (Self-esteem hypothesis)

 

Body:

Tajfel: et al

Aim: to investigate whether social categorization led to intergroup discrimination.

Procedure:

1. Participants are classified as the “Klee group” or “Kandinsky group” randomly based on their aesthetic preferences.

2. Point allocation systems are given to two other boys. Scores for two groups were linked together and boys were asked to choose a set of scores to evaluate the picture from both groups.

Result:

1. The boy will give more points to the in-group member

2. Maximum difference in score between in-group and out-group will always be chosen, although in-group would sacrifice rewards.

Linkback:

1. simple act of categorization on one person will lead the boy display in-group favoritism.

2. Discrimination can occur without hostility and competition between groups (out-group worse than ingroup)

Evaluation-strength:

·      High replicability (random allocation (no difference in the pictures between groups))

Evaluation-limitation:

·      Demand characteristic (boys may have interpreted the task as competitive and tried to win through having a higher score.)

 

Abrams et al

Aim: To investigate if the role of social identity affects one’s willingness to conform

Procedure:

50 participants, categorized into 2*2 factorial design of Asch paradigm (in group private/ in group public/ out group private/ out-group public)

Result:

·      Conformity was maximized in the in-group public condition group

·      Conformity was minimized in the out-group public condition group

Linkback:

·      Social categorization can play a key role in one’s decision to conform publicly. This is because we tend to exaggerate the difference between us and the out-group.

Evaluation-strength:

·      Causal relationship (IV social identity → DV level of conformity)

Evaluation-limitation:

·      Low ecological validity. Artificial tasks and the environment. do not reflect reality.

 

Conclusion:

Theory evaluation:

T→Testable (Asch and Abrams found similar results showing social 

·      categorization plays a key role in one’s conformity)

E→Empirical evidence (Asch, Abrams, Tajfel)

A→Application (SIT shows why people may conform)

·      Theory evaluation limitation:

U→Biased (Empirical evidence has sample bias)

·      More studies with less sample bias are needed to support SIT.