Introduction Collective self-esteem is a theoretical construct that operationalizes the measurement of an individual’s evaluation of his or her ascribed group memberships as they relate to feelings of personal worth and self-esteem (Luhtanen & Crocker, 1990). Based on social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979, 1986), the Collective Self-Esteem Scale (CSES; Luhtanen & Crocker, 1990; 1992) was conceived and developed as a trait-based assessment tool for measuring individual differences in general collective self-esteem relating to the totality of an individual’s group memberships. Social identity theory posits that an individual’s awareness of belonging to multiple social groups, together with his or her cognitive and affective evaluation of these memberships, is an important element of the individual’s self-concept (Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992; Tajfel, 1981; Tajfel & Turner, 1979, 1986). Furthermore, the theory asserts that individuals engage not only in strategies for maintaining and augmenting a positive personal identity; they also engage in group-level strategies aimed at establishing and defending a positive collective identity (Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992; Tajfel, 1981; Tajfel & Turner, 1986). The creators of the CSES viewed the self-esteem measures available at the time as excessively individualistic, failing to capture crucial social evaluations and feelings thought to be important for a more complete understanding individual identity and other psychological and
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
Most people face self esteem problems at different levels. At some point in life people face this problem without realizing it. In the essay The Trouble with Self-Esteem written by Lauren Slater starts of by demonstrating a test. Self esteem test that determines whether you have a high self-esteem or low self-esteem. The question to be answered however is; what is the value and meaning of self-esteem? The trouble with self-esteem is that not everyone approaches it properly, taking a test or doing research based of a certain group of people is not the way to do so.
The world has become modern and global. Identification of the self is a complicated, though, an important problem of every individual. Self- identity is based on inner values and reflections on culture, politics and social interactions. The main point is that people label themselves to any particular group in the society (Worchel etc., 1998). According to Ferguson: “Identity commonly refers to which it makes, or is thought to make
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
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,
Our identity can sometimes be shaped by the way others see us. As we have seen, the way in which others view us can have some sort of impact on how we see ourselves. There are also other contributing factors such as our years of adolescence, the basic human need of wanting to belong and maturing; all play an equally important part in the forming of our character and who we are. On balance it appears that there is not only one influence in the shaping of our identity, but there are many.
We each have a unique personality that no one else can match perfectly but our social identity is a way to connect to other through our similar characteristics. King (2012) states “Social identity is the way individuals define themselves in terms of their group membership” (pg. 428). We all have titles we carry with us like being a mother or father, a daughter or son, and even a sister or brother the list can go on and on. Within these individualities we have a
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, 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.
There are a series of important steps in the development of one 's self-concept, self-esteem and social identity. These steps begin from birth and continue into the adult years.
“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
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