Social And Social Identity Theory

The Social Identity theory (SIT) was proposed by Henry Tajfel. It was then later developed by Tajfel and Turner in 1971 to help them understand inter group relations. The Social Identity theory assumes that individuals strive to improve their self-image by trying to enhance their self-esteem, through social (in and out groups) and personal identities. There are 4 main concepts within the social identity theory all of which will be discussed in the essay.

Society has a way of making assumptions based on one’s physical characteristics. Often at times we categorize individuals to a particular social group. In regard to society’ perception of an individual this however, contributes to the development of social construction of racism. Most people want to be identified as individuals rather than a member of specific social group. As a result, our social identity contains different categories or components that were influenced or imposed. For example, I identify as a, Jamaican, Puerto Rican and a person of color. I identify racially as a person of color and ethically as Jamaican and Puerto Rican. According to Miller and Garren it’s a natural human response for people to make assumptions solely

Furthermore, stereotypes are used to increase an individual’s self-esteem and strengthen their social identity. Social identity theory contributes largely to the formation of stereotypes, as it states that a person’s social identity is formed from being part of a group. To justify one’s own group, they often pick out real or imaginary differences and flaws in other groups and compare those to their own group (Ford & Tonander, 1998). This led Ford

No matter how much a person desires to live according to their personal autonomy, he or she will never escape the influence of societal forces. Explicitly or subtlety, these forces shape our individuality. One intriguing manner that these societal forces manifests itself in is our name. As Ruth Graham writes, “It’s becoming increasingly clear today that names carry a wealth of information about the world around us, the family we arrived in, the moment we were born—and that they mark us as part of cultural currents bigger than we realize.” Names alone provide evidence that individuals are made by interactions with social institutions and groups. Ultimately, the inescapable nature of society’s influence demands individuals to ponder how much personal autonomy is actually autonomous and to what extent does the pursuit of personal autonomy lead to a life of emptiness and vanity.

Augoustinos and Walker (1995) stated that social identity theory is based on the concept of social identity, the part of a person’s self-concept that derives from membership in-groups that are important to the person. Such groups can include one’s family, college, nation, and so forth. This theory can be applied when the brown-eyed students were established as the in-group instead of their usual out-group. As indicated in their attitude components, self-esteem of the brown-eyed students increased when the blue-eyed students were treated in a bad

Social identity theory proposed by Tajfel & Turner (2004) is a theory of group membership and behaviour which has made significant contributions in explaining in-group favouritism, out-group denigration, competition and other interactions of an individual among social groups (Korte, 2007; Brown, 2000; Tajfel & Turner, 2004). Social identity theory can be defined as an individual’s sense of who they are based on the group that they belong to through a process of self-categorisation and depersonalisation (Tajfel & Turner, 2004). In this essay, I will define social identity theory through its three mental processes involved in group evaluation which are: social identification which is a process whereby we are placed into certain

Theoretically significant to conflict is social identity theory. It allows “predictions to incorporate who is likely to perceive and act in group terms, to remain committed to the group in times of crisis” Turner (1999), Doosje & Ellemers, (1999). Bar-Tal stresses conflict exists when an incompatible goal exists between two groups. The question of when incompatibility sets become important in understanding the cause of inter-ethnic or communal conflicts for instance, even more importantly; conflict within ingroup. Inter-ethnic or communal conflict because within the scope of peacebuilding, that is the point where building peace thrives the most. There is an assumption that for peacebuilding to be

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

Tafjel (1979) introduced the social identity theory which claims that group membership establishes a person’s sense of belonging, feeling of pride and self esteem. Discrimination occurs towards the out-group in an attempt to boost the esteem of the in-group in this theory. Lalonde (1992) studied a hockey team that was performing inadequately. The team admitted that the skill of the opposing team was greater but claimed that they played ‘dirtier’. This suggests sanctimony and favouritism to their in-group. However, after observing the teams Lalonde concluded that

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,

One could argue that this then inflates our sense of belonging in the world if we feel that there are others who share similar values to us. This then strengthens our resolve by essentially confirming that we are engaging in the right behaviours and holding the right ideals as we associate ourselves with others who feel the same as we do. This then leads them to strengthen our tenacity of in-group favouritism by rewarding our prejudiced behaviours. A positive outcome of this is that it can have a flow on effect to our altruistic nature as human beings and we would be more likely to help those with whom we feel a certain affiliation. It is in this regard that the Social Identity Theory can yield positive results through a framework of philanthropic behaviour and support for in-group members. The converse of this behaviour is that we see an increase in negative behaviours towards those with whom we feel have conflicting goals and essentially belong to an “out group”.

Social Identity Theory has a considerable impact on social psychology. It is tested in a wide range of

Social identity theory, it is a person’s sense that is based around the group they are in, either by their personal identity or with different kinds of social identities. That is, people will try to improve their own image of themselves. The theory was proposed by Henri Tajfel. People can increase their self-esteem by both their own achievement and interaction with a successful group of people. This shows the importance of social belonging. This theory is based around three mental processes, social categorization, social identification and social comparison.

This particular theory views identity as conditional and self motivated as well as being related to one’s culture. Although other theories on identity consider the personal and social identity to be separate, SCT considers the personal and social identity to be

According to Hecht (2015), the “Communication Theory of Identity” began with the study of “self” (p. 176), which found its origins in philosophy (Mead, 1913) and, more modernly, in psychology and sociology (Hecht, 2015, p. 176). The focus on individualism began as early as the 1950’s under the constructs of self-esteem and self-concepts when questions arose about how people thought and/or felt about themselves. Scholars believed that understanding how individuals thought and felt about themselves would pave the way to better understand how people communicate. When scholars referred to “self” in a singular form it assumed that an individual had one single identity. The problem with this perspective is that, as found later, people assume a “layered” identity. For example, an athlete may be hard working on the basketball court, but aggressive and self-protected on the streets of Richmond, California. The more modern study of “self” in the disciplines of psychology and sociological describes “self” as forming from social interactions and perceptions of others. For example, how key adults such as teachers, coaches, and/or church leaders influence a child’s development. Over time, the term “self” became the term “identity. “Identity” draws on the sociological “social role theory” that detailed how people define themselves through the roles they play in society. Veering away from “self” and assuming the “identity” approach presented a more complex and precise depiction of people