Evaluate Social Identity Theory

In his often cited essay, “The Formation of In-Groups,” Gordon Allport offers his theory on how the groups with which one identifies directly influence the development of one’s individual identity. An “in-group” is a group where members share common traits such as societal status, religion, values or sexual orientation. All the members are alike in some way and that similarity unites them as a group. Allport suggests that one belongs to many in-groups throughout his or her lifetime. Individuals are born into some in-groups, such as one’s family, race or socio-economic level; this Allport terms as an “ascribed status”. People also obtain “achieved status” in a group such as one’s circle

The author of this piece is Dr. Gordon Allport. He is the former head of Harvard’s Department of Psychology as well as the founding father of social psychology. Allport published many books including The Nature of Prejudice (1954). The purpose of the article is to inform the audience that in-groups are everywhere and identity is based on our in-groups. This essay is an excerpt from the book The Nature of Prejudice in 1954 and is a credible source because the principles Allport discussed are still studied by psychologists and researchers today. In the essay, Allport speaks of reference groups and how it relates to in-groups. According to Allport reference groups are the group that an individual wishes to be apart of, but an in-group is

When I was asked to create a “Social Identity Wheel” during last week’s common hour, I expected the wheel to be just another icebreaker game. We’d each create a different social identity wheel; choosing not only which identities we resonate with, but then to measure the impact each identity has on what we think of ourselves. However, by the end of common hour I had realized that a social identity wheel is more of a personal project. Its purpose was not to teach myself about the identities of my peers, but to critically think of my own identities in relation to some core concepts about social identity.

Few people are going to openly admit to being prejudice against people of other races, gender, and religions. However that doesn’t stop many of us from having unintentional racist thoughts. In 1979, Henri Tajfel, a social psychologist, proposed that “the groups which people belonged to are an important source of pride and self-esteem. Groups give us a sense of social identity: a sense of belonging to the social world.” This ideal of categorizing and subconsciously labeling ourselves is better known as “Social Identity Theory”. Tajfel continues by saying “In order to increase our self-image we enhance the status of the group to which we belong. For example, England is the best country in the world! We can also increase our self-image by discriminating and holding prejudice views against the out group (the group we don’t belong to). For example, the Americans, French etc. are a bunch of losers! Therefore, we divided the world into “them” and “us” based through a process of social categorization (i.e. we put people into social groups). This is known as in-group (us) and out-group (them). Social identity theory states that the in-group will discriminate against the out-group to enhance their self-image.” We all unintentionally discriminate against others that are in the “out-group”, and by doing this we are excluding ourselves from certain religions, cultures, races, and even genders. This ideal of labeling ourselves can be traced back to childhood and factors such as where we

However, it isn’t that way in real life. Social groups have a hierarchical power structure depending on where in the world you are. For example, if you are a black person you are likely to have a 10% longer sentencing for the same crime committed by a white person (Rehavi & Starr, 2012). With this being said, creating a strong group identity can help minorities feel more comfortable with their minority identity. A healthy connection to a group identity is crucial for developing a healthy individual identity because it helps individuals connect with the world around them and decide how they fit in the world. According to Martin and Nakayama the stages of minority identity development is as follows: 1) Unexamined identity, 2) Conformity, 3) Resistance and Separatism, and 4) Integration (Martin & Nakayama,

While we are often unaware of it, Forsyth argues, that our performance and motivation can be directly linked to the groups we have chosen to associate with, which can have a significant impact on the development of our identity and future decisions. The author discusses different social theories that can relate to our understanding of group

Language is the potent tool by which a community constructs and defines its sociopolitical agenda; it is the lens through which a people’s history and culture is viewed; a devise that is used both as a controlling as well as a rewarding tool. Largely, it aligns the beliefs of its subjects even as it defines their worldview. While many studies have been done to understand obsequiousness,

The creation of a group identity means far more than placing a label on a number of people with a universe for those who are members of the group and for non-members who affirm and recognize the group’s existence. “At the individual level identity is an answer to the question ‘who am I in relation to other people?’ At the social level it is a response to the question: ‘Who are we in relation to other human groups?’” (Mach 1993:4). Those who are in a group together are identified as being closer to the “self” of one another while those outside the group are distanced from the “self” and become “other.” In most cases, this self/other divide is minimal and the opposition of “us” and “them” is little more than categories for “us” and “not

In our social life, each person has one’s own roles and responsibilities, attitudes and values. Since every individual is unique and distinct compared to one another, these elements that construct our individuality are not always similar. Similarities and reflection of our values make us belong to a group, but the differences are barriers that stop ourselves from being recognized as an indivisible part of it. Belonging and identity are inseparable; nonetheless, there are distinctions that create a world of difference between the two. Belonging is not only about to whom we incorporate ourselves the way we perceive it, but also how others recognize our relationship with that group.

Since the beginning of time it has been human nature to seek community and inclusion, over isolation and separation. We as a species have a need to belong, and it has been theorized that we are fundamentally pack animals. However our ideology of community can harm the individual, putting them at risk of becoming a drone for “higher ranking” members of the group. Lacking free thinking, and only reviewing choices or decisions as a group, limiting the individual's liberal cognitive functioning. But the group as a whole is also at risk of becoming biased, viewing other groups with different ways of thinking, life, or even as simple as skin color as inferior. This correspondingly will lead to the unfair treatment and bigotry of others, and

This essay will evaluate theories of identity, community and freedom. This will also explore how the three theories influence the homosexualities in Russia. Identifying identity is inevitable theory, various theoretician have different opinions and beliefs about sex and gender. “This is formed through a combination of person’s understanding of how a person see himself and how other react” (Thornes, 2008). The creation of distinguishing an individuals play an enormous role in the society as well as the community they reside. In addition, community is a place where people live with the same belief and characteristics. Functionalists such as Parsons suggests that “community and culture has the function of maintaining the social integration

The social group we belong to helps to make our identity (Tajfel, 1974). These differences

The social theory perspective that intrigues me is the second process known as identification. After one finds a specific category/group identify with, the person adopts the identify of the group as their own. These identifications then become tied to the person’s emotional being as well as self-esteem. Moreover, if the identity of a person is compromised or threatened, positive and negative responses are likely to occur.

We as humans tend to relate to those that are similar to us, and tend to alienate those that we deem as different than us. Whether it is by race, gender, culture, or religion, it is something that is almost always present in human interactions, and often times can be completely subconscious. In our textbook Interpersonal Communication by Kory Floyd, an ingroup is defined as “A group of people with whom one identifies.” An outgroup is conversely defined as “A group of people whom one does not identify.” Henri Tajfel first coined this terminology while he was working to devise his social identity theory. These ideas of classifying people into ingroups and outgroups can lead to many

My discourse community is one of a kind, and special, because we are all so close so we always know what's going on with each other. We also always have something to do every day there is never a day where we would just sit around and be bored. We also are all athletes, so we go to the gym and run basketball games and workout. My discourse community is important because we keep each other on the right path and not let each other go down the wrong road. If one of us has a problem we can help them handle it. It's also a place where we can tell each other things, and the whole world won't know because we keep things between us. This is extremely important because you always need someone to talk to you can't just keep everything to yourself. The type of people that thrive in my discourse community are hustlers this is because we are always thinking of ways for us to make money so you need to be able to come with ideas to contribute to our community. Self-motivated people thrive in our discourse community because you got to be willing to do things without being asked to. Another type of person that thrives in this community is someone who doesn't get pushed around, because at this time there is a lot of people mad with us for something that happened. So, when we see them in public they always are trying to start a problem. When that happens, we can't just let them push us around, because that would make us look weak so we got to be able to stand up