Ssci 316 Study Guide Answers Essay

A fundamental part of human existence and interaction is the notion of belonging or identifying with a group. Groups form and exist for various reasons and purposes, comprising of individuals similar or diverse in nature, that often work together toward a common goal (Stanhope & Lancaster, 2014). In 1902, the American sociologist by the name of C. H. Cooley, made distinction between primary and secondary groups. Cooley (1902) classified primary group to have intimate and comparatively permanent associations as one might find in a cohort of close friends, or a family. The groups or associations in which individuals related to each other through formal and often legalistic rules, were classified as secondary groups (Nolen, 2010).

The purpose of categorizing people into different racial groups can be how we see each other and the exterior traits. Exterior traits include their skin tone, type of hair and eye color. In “Rethinking the Color Line – Understanding How Boundaries Shift,” Gallagher mentions we tend to sort out the categories by skin color and then by cultural background. These racial differences have been predetermined by having the mindset of having a superior and inferior group. The superior group are to be the whites and inferior group are the minorities. These ideas have changed because of the major influences such as time, social and politics.

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

Trait theories assume people have many traits that are continuing qualities that individuals have in different amounts. Allport’s theory suggests that there are 3 main traits: central, secondary, and cardinal. A central trait is a characteristic that controls and organizes behavior in various situations. A secondary trait can be described as a preference and is specific to certain situations. A cardinal trait is very general and pervasive. It is so pervasive that an individual is governed by it and it dictates everything a person does.

In order to understand what the differences and similarities in traits mean, we have to understand the value behind them. Values can vary from people, because everybody will not have the same

our social identity. It is these groups that can have a negative or a positive effect on ourselves. We can be part of the “in group” or the “out group” depending on somebody's experience of the membership of that group, sometimes groups maintain an us and them mentality when it comes to being part of it. The norms of the group are expected to be adhered to by members, and this can lead to members being expected to conform, non conformity can often lead to role conflict

group, even for whites on the bottom rung, confers a social status and recognition which

In the United States both scholars and the general public have been conditioned to viewing human races as natural and separate divisions within the human species based on visible physical differences. With the vast expansion of

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).

Labels are everywhere. Whether conscious or subconsciously, they are a fundamental part of our lives. We label together foods, clothing, colours and things that are alike. But what happens when we expand this form of “labelling” to split up types of people? When we assume character traits about those who belong to a certain group, this can intensely affect the way many react in life. Those who are judged for their sexual orientation, gender, income, mental problems etc., may eventually begin to conform to a stereotype that they belong to. In turn, this stereotyping may be the reason for certain people to partake in deviance acts.

Diversity extends beyond race or ethnicity, religion, culture or newcomer status to include factors such as geography, language, politics, gender, beliefs, sexual orientation, economic status, abilities, skills and interests.

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.

In-groups are often recreated to fit the needs of individual group members, and when the needs are strongly aggressive, the redefinition of the in-group may primarily be in terms of the hated out-groups (Allport 94). The hated out-group in terms of racial relations of whites is people of color.

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

Karl Marx and Max Weber were two social scientists whose work was very much influenced by the massive changes our world underwent through the past few hundred years. Marx got to witness firsthand the