A useful summary of all the video lectures, live lectures and some of the articles. Some live lectures did not provide any new information or is included in the summary of the video lectures, so it is not missing information if there is not a seperate chapter of lecture.
Research question: judgement and value free, as specific as possible:
- Descriptive question: to what extent do we observe a problem?
- Trend question: how did the problem change over time?
- Comparison question: to what extent are there differences within a
problem (e.g. between areas or groups?
- Explanation question (why-question): why does this problem exist?
Why did the problem change? Why do we observe differences?
Part 2: Minimal group experiments
- This all takes place in 1960s
Group formation
Why do humans categorize people in different groups?
Categorization process is a central component of Social Identity Theory:
- Evolutionary perspective: necessary to distinguish friends and
enemy
o Quick organization is necessary for survival -> this is why
humans are good at it
- Cognitive perspective: necessary to process large amount of
information
o We are surrounded by so much information which is too much
to process so we categorize to make sense of that information
Categorization
People search actively for information -> people simplify processing all
that information by ignoring certain differences and emphasizing (or even
exaggerating) certain similarities of that information
SIT experiment 1: non-social stimuli
Tajfel: how do people deal with categories and similarities and differences?
- Line experiment -> lines with A where estimated shorter than lines
with the letter B
o Categorization of non-social stimuli: people overestimated
differences between the group and underestimated the
differences within the group
SIT experiment 2: minimal group experiment
Goal: manipulate social categorization as an independent variable:
- Step 1: generate social categorization on basis of a trivial criterion
(people have no similarities)
, - Step 2: let participant give reward to members of their own and
other group
People choose to disfavor the out-group even if this leads to less
rewards to the in-group
Conclusion research:
- Group formation leads to discriminatory behavior (in-group
favoritism)
- Even if groups are formed on basis of a trivial category
- Tajfel: ‘social categorization per se is a sufficient condition for the
development of intergroup bias’ (discrimination in favor of the own
group)
Why is this research minimal?
- There is no contact within the groups (no one of the group knows
each other)
- The group is no real group in society
Part 3: Social Identity Theory (SIT)
SIT: four central concepts
1. Social categorization (sociocultural component): “process of bringing
together social objects or events in groups which are equivalent with
regard to an individual’s actions, intentions and system of beliefs”
(not just people also objects) -> whenever meeting someone you try
to categorize them, we are tend to perceive more homogeneity
within groups
a. It is categorizing people into groups
b. Similar to categorization of non-social stimuli:
i. Use of any characteristic available
ii. Perceive more similarity within (homogeneity) and more
difference between categories
c. Not just the basis of how we perceive the world, but also who
we perceive ourselves -> this leads to social identity
2. Social identity: is based on the realization that one belongs to a
social category and the positive or negative evaluation associated
with this membership -> the groups you are part of form your social
identity -> the four criteria that turn a social category into a social
identity:
a. Are divisive and exclusive: you either belong or you don’t
b. Are context dependent (you identify with different groups in
different situations)
c. Have a cultural component (with certain behaviors and
normative expectations). This turns a category into an identity
d. Include a judgement of the nature of people in a certain
category
This is more than a minimal group -> social identities may thus have
even more powerful consequences in intergroup interaction
, 3. Social comparison: through social comparison with other groups,
people try to evaluate their group’s relative status -> by comparing
we try to make our group the best -> this is the main reason for
social discrimination according to socialists
a. People strive for a positive social identity
i. People are motivated to belong to a positively evaluated
group
b. They value their own group more than other groups
i. Social identification: you tend to describe positive
characteristics to your own group and members of your
own group (and thus to yourself)
ii. Contra-identification: we tend to describe negative
characteristics to groups we don’t belong to and their
members
4. Psychological group distinctiveness:
a. On the one hand, people want to belong to a positively
evaluated group
b. On the other hand, people have the need to distinct from
others (we want to be special)
c. People thus try to achieve a position of their group that is
distinct and positive
Part 4: understanding behavior
SIT claims that everyone tries to belong to groups that have positive and
distinct identities
Intergroup comparison: you compare your social status (or the social
status of your group) to other groups -> two outcomes:
1. Adequate social identity: the results show that your group is better -
> actions:
o Attempt to maintain superiority
o Attempt to extend superiority
, 2. Inadequate social identity: your group has a lower social status ->
you want to change this -> are there cognitive alternatives
(permeability): you believe (does not mean it is possible) that your
social group can change their social position in the system ->
actions:
o Yes: situation is not stable/ legitimized -> group strategy to
change group position
i. Absorption: you absorb in another group
ii. Redefine negative characteristics: you give a spin to
characteristics
iii. Creativity: opening up a new dimension to compare
groups which did not exist before
iv. Compare to another (worse) group
v. Challenge: you protest/ demonstrate against the position
of your group -> the only option where you don’t change
but improve perception
o NO: situation is stable/ legitimized -> individual strategy to
change personal position
i. Social mobility: you leave your social group and go to a
higher one
ii. Intra-group comparison: you don’t compare yourself to
the other group but to people inside your own group and
you might feel better
Literature
- Ellemers, N. & Haslam, S.A. (2012). Social identity theory. In: P. van
Lange, A. Kruglanski, & T. Higgins (Eds.). handbook of theories of
social psychologie (pp. 379-398). London: Sage.
- Verkuyten, M. (2018). Chapter 3: Social identity. In: Verkuyten, M.
The social psychology of ethnic identity (2nd ed.) Routledge.
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper annelindejunte. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €5,99. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
