Evaluating the Strengths and Weaknesses of the Social Identity Theory

The third phase of the Social identity theory is comparison. This involves comparing the in-groups that you are a part of with out-groups in order to raise self-esteem (Burke, Stets,2000). Social groups naturally strive to be positively differentiated from other groups (Mummenfey, Kessler, Link, Mielke, 1999). In order to achieve this positive differentiation and boost in self- esteem, the in-group and out-group are judged on factors that represent the in-group to be superior to the out-group (Burke, Stets,2000). To enhance the position and status of the in-group, discrimination and prejudice will be shown towards the out-group.

Personal and social identity is a fundamental unit for students as it provides a starting point for them to conceptualise how their personal experiences interconnects with public knowledge and understand the role of socialisation. As mentioned in the assessment the class consists of a diverse number of ethnic backgrounds and ability so this unit is crucial for them to understand how they fit in different social and cultural settings. In a way the diversity found in a class makes for an interesting interactions and discussions which will contribute to their understanding in the unit. This of course is limited by students ' willingness to share such information thus the activities in this unit have

Social identity theory states that the ‘in-group’ will discriminate against the ‘out-group’ and show favouritism towards their group to boost their self-esteem. Tajfel also proposed that there are 3 mental processes involved in putting people in to the ‘us’ and ‘them’ groups: social categorisation (putting objects in order to understand them), social identification (adopting the identity of the group we categorised ourselves as belonging to) and social comparison (showing favouritism towards the ‘in group’ and hostility towards the ‘out group’; comparing them).

Social identity is a theory which explains how people develop a sense of belong and membership to a group. Individual’s social identity is part of their self-concept which derives from their knowledge of their membership of a social group together with the emotional significance attached to that membership (Forsyth, 13). People are influenced on the group they belong to. Belonging to the in-group makes a person feel good because they belong somewhere in this group and allows them to feel important. The out-group is where people feel to be, they do not belong to a group and have feeling of exclusion and are often times treated more harshly than someone who belongs to the ingroup. This bias of favoring the ingroup relative to the outgroup leads to false impressions being made and stereotypes forming. Stereotypes help us navigate the world around us by providing a quick representation of what we think a person is like. This does not mean our perceptions are always correct and occasionally, this quick mental shortcut can get us into trouble. For example, the film 12 Angry Men stereotyping was rampant among the jury. When a stereotype is used it can cause a disruption of procedures. Instead, of inspecting all the evidence with an objective eye a bias can allow for systematic

The social identity theory is a theory developed by Henry Tajfel, in which Tajfel believes that who we are socially determines how many positive feelings we have towards ourselves. Basically, if we like where we stand socially, then we will like who we are and display happiness. In this theory, Tajfel labels the “in group” and the “out group” and says that we will always compare our “in group” to another’s “out group.” By comparing these groups, we develop a better personal view on ourselves (King, 2009). A big factor of the social identity theory is that the groups will tend to critique the differences of the groups, and overlook the similarities. A modern day example of the social identity theory would be your everyday high school cheerleaders versus band members. The cheerleaders think of themselves as the queen bees of the school,

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 59-86). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

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.

Tajfel (1979): “...Groups give us a sense of social identity”. Tajfel’s “Social Identity Theory” adores the performance of groups, whereby any one individual can elucidate their status by joining a band of individuals for the purposes of identifying with a group in order to enhance group supremacy. This is supported by Dutton. J. E., Dukerich. J. M., & Harquail. C. V., (1994) who in “Administrative Science Quarterly” argued that the work organization strengthens one’s identity within that circle of individuals. Therefore, the stronger one identifies with a group, the more likely they are to develop characteristics attributed for or towards that group.

Social identity also influences group cohesion and dynamics based on the athlete’s self-concept in regards to how they value their attachment to the membership. If the athlete cannot maintain a positive self-concept based on their identity to the team or group, then their social identity will not be expressed as prosocial behavior (i.e., ingroup where athletes encourage nads provide support toward others), but instead antisocial (i.e., outgroup where vulgar, derogatory remarks and physical aggression could exist) (Bruner, Dunlop, & Beauchamp,

Referring to the Social identity theory we assume that the differentiation between the ingroup and outgroups is motivated by the members’ desire to improve the evaluation of the ingroup and of their social identity. So, in other words in order to create a social identity a ingroup usually derogates the outgroup, especially in contexts where the groups are interwoven in a conflict

Tajfel & Turner, (1979) the proponents of social identity theory helped in the understanding of intergroup relations. The emphasis the complex “interweaving of an individual or interpersonal behavior with contextual social processes of intergroup conflict” (p.276). Social identity theory, thus emphasizes intergroup relations (the relationship an individual has with his group and between an outgroup) and categorical distinction (what sets an individual apart from another outgroup). Korostelina describes this as “the processes of identification with other group members” (p.23). Personal identities are consequently reflected in an individual’s social identity. For instance, an individual with an Islamic conviction cannot be found in a church

“In matches between the two groups of football teams, the teams from the same state as the umpires received more favorable decisions than the other teams did by a margin of 11% for the 171 games studied.” In situations where the umpires had to allocate rewards to members of a group they identified with competing against a group they did not identify with they clearly favored their ingroup. This study helped proved the theory that intergroup competition is a prevalent reason why ingroup favoritism is often exhibited in society. This idea is completely embedded into the entire sporting culture of our society today. We group ourselves together with the “home team” or the ingroup. We prefer for that group, as well as ourselves by association, to be successful. The second explanation that is usually offered is the idea that people will have a better opinion of people in their ingroup in order to boost their own self-esteem by association. Robert Cialdini conducted a very interesting study on a concept called Basking in Reflected Glory (BIRG) at several different universities. In order to study how self-esteem was a determinant of ingroup bias, Cialdini and his team researched the behavior of students after victories and losses of the school’s football teams. Their results “Demonstrated the BIRG phenomenon by showing a greater tendency for university students to wear

The social identity theory claims that a person’s identity is directly related to their dominant social groups. According to Jan Stets and Peter Burke of Washington University, social identity theory significantly overlaps with identity theory in its descriptions of concept, bases, and activation of identity. Stets and Burke claim social groups impact a person’s identity through that person’s self-categorization and social comparison: “much of social identity theory deals with intergroup relations – that is, how people come to see themselves as members of one group/category (the

“cultural values and behaviors , sense of group membership and minority status experience (Haji et al 2011).Social identity theory (SIT) given by Tajfel and Turner, 1975 provided a framework for understanding cultural identity. According to this theory, social identity is a sense of belonging to a particular social category or group, and the importance of social identity depends upon the inter relation context as cited by (Haji et al, 2011) .So the culture or group that the person identifies with influences their pride and self esteem.