Social Identity Theory

Conclusion: The study Demonstrated that people seek a positive social identity and that their social identity is affected by being a part of their group so that you are more positive towards anything that your own group represents.

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

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.

For example, a female individual who believes in feminism will most likely identify higher with a group of feminists than a group of females that are ant-feminist. This strength in social identification leads to in-group favouritism whereby members see the members of their group in a positive manner and see members of other groups in a negative or denigrative manner (Swann Jr et al., 2009). Through the process of depersonalisation. self-categorisation and group membership, an individual develops a social identity that serves as a social cognitive schema for behaviours that are related to the group (Korte, 2007; Swann Jr et al., 2009).

Social media is often praised for its ability to connect people worldwide, but in reality, it is forcing us further apart; we are no longer individuals but are instead creating for ourselves a fake social identity. Nicholas Carr, author of “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” focuses on how reading on the Internet has made it almost impossible for us to do “deep reading.” In “Just Between You, Me, and My 622 BFF’S,” Peggy Orenstein looks at how social media has stolen younger girl’s identities, and formed their sexual identity. Chuck Klosterman in his article “Electric Funeral” sees the Internet as a breeding ground for “villains” who feed off our primitive impulses to draw attention and fame to ourselves. These three authors have powerful

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 theory is a person’s sense of who they are based on their group membership(s) (Harwood, 2007). “In social identity theory and identity theory, the self is reflexive in that it can take itself as an object and can categorize, classify, or name itself in particular ways in relation to other social categories or classification” (Stets & Burke, 2000). The social identity theory has been known to let individuals find their own niche and group that they want to belong to. This could include what the individuals are active in or involved in. Research has also found that the groups that they classify themselves in can cause the participants to look down upon other groups that they are not involved in (Harwood, 2007). Negative attitudes are more of a complex issue, but interesting ideas come from explanations that emerge for social identity theory (Harwood,

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

Social structure and social interaction are integral in evaluating a person’s identity. Identities are the sets of meanings people hold for themselves that define “what it means” to be who they are as persons, as role occupants and as group members (PJB article) People are generally influenced by the norms and beliefs of society. A person’s identity is formed through a combination of factors derived from social structure (macrosociology) and social interaction (microsociology). The self influences society through the actions

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,

Who are you? Who am I? These are questions that we all ponder at some point or another in our lives. As human beings we are seemingly inundated with the desire to classify and categorise. We are constantly defining and analysing the differences that we observe in the world, it seems only natural that we would apply this method of classification to our position within our society. More specifically, we want to understand our social identities and this can be achieved by acknowledging which groups we identify most with.

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

Social Identity Theory states that individuals compartmentalize themselves and others by basis of group membership, and construct social identities to justify interpersonal relationships (Tajfel & Turner, 1979).

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.

“Some…memberships are more salient than others; and some may vary in salience in time and as a function of a variety of social situations” (Tajfel, 2-3) Salience of identity, in the way that we need to understand it in the case of perception and decision making, can be operationalized as the likelihood that a particular identity will be invoked within a certain situation that the individual is being faced with (Hogg, Terry, & White, 257). As mentioned previously, everyone holds various identities but salience is the process through which we subconsciously decide which we be used to base our decision making or preferences on. “The salience of a particular social identity for an individual may vary from situation to situation and indeed from