Social Identity Theory (Tajfel 1970)

Social Identity Theory (Tajfel and Turner, 1979)

Social Identity is the way that one identifies with himself in relation to his memberships to various social groups, and the value of being in that group ( - "Social comparison": when one weighs the pros and cons of being in his own group [ingroup] and another group [outgroup] )

Individuals try to maintain a positive self-image and self-esteem. The groups that they belong in, and the social comparisons of the groups and other groups will affect how the individual values himself. To protect oneself from low self-esteem (which would arise from being in a group with little advantages,) the individual may express ingroup favoritism, and a pattern of discrimination with the outgroup. 

= When a social comparison results in a positive outcome for the individual's ingroup, the need for a positive social identity is fulfilled. However, if the outcome is negative, this could result in low self-esteem, shame, embarrassment, etc. 

Cialdini et al (1976): College students were more likely to wear school gear (hats, sweaters, shirts) when their football team wins a match. This is mostly likely due to the students' need for a positive self-concept / self-image. The positive self-image brought on by winning a game can result in bias and predilection for ingroups, and all the things the ingroup represents.

Intergroup discrimination can be a way to uphold a positive social identity for an ingroup.

How social identity is built by an individual.

Tajfel (1970) Experiment in intergroup discrimination: minimal group paradigm

Aim: to see if boys who were randomly placed in groups based on a meaningless task would display ingroup favoritism and intergroup discrimination.

Experiment 1: 64 schoolboys of ages 14 to 15 were invited to a psychology laboratory in groups of eight. The boys all knew each other well. Boys were seen moving clusters on a computer screen, and were told to estimate the number of dots that were in each cluster. Boys were then randomly assigned to groups such as "over-estimator" and "under-estimator". Then, boys had to hand out money to the other boys in the experiment. All the boys knew was whether the other boy was in or not in his own group.

Experiment 2: boys were randomly allocated into groups according to which artist's art they liked better. The boys then had to award money to other boys.

Results: boys gave more money to members in their own category (i.e. boys that were in the ingroup). In the second experiment, the boys tried to maximise the difference between the two groups. Both experiments indicate ingroup favoritism which supports the predictions of the social identity theory.

Evaluate: results contributed to the development of the social identity theory. Tajfel demonstrated that a minimal group is all that is necessary for individuals to exhibit discrimination against outgroups. This experiment was criticised for being too artificial, and having demand characteristics. Boys might have thought the task was competitive, which caused them to react the way that they did (i.e. exhibit ingroup favoritism and discriminate between the outgroup).This study also established that intergroup conflict is not necessary to create induce ingroup favoritism. 

Social identity theory has contributed to explaining how stereotypes, prejudices and conformity to ingroup norms have occurred.