The Social Identity Theory

This essay will be looking to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the social identity theory with studies to support.

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.

Few people are going to openly admit to being prejudice against people of other races, gender, and religions. However that doesn’t stop many of us from having unintentional racist thoughts. In 1979, Henri Tajfel, a social psychologist, proposed that “the groups which people belonged to are an important source of pride and self-esteem. Groups give us a sense of social identity: a sense of belonging to the social world.” This ideal of categorizing and subconsciously labeling ourselves is better known as “Social Identity Theory”. Tajfel continues by saying “In order to increase our self-image we enhance the status of the group to which we belong. For example, England is the best country in the world! We can also increase our self-image by discriminating and holding prejudice views against the out group (the group we don’t belong to). For example, the Americans, French etc. are a bunch of losers! Therefore, we divided the world into “them” and “us” based through a process of social categorization (i.e. we put people into social groups). This is known as in-group (us) and out-group (them). Social identity theory states that the in-group will discriminate against the out-group to enhance their self-image.” We all unintentionally discriminate against others that are in the “out-group”, and by doing this we are excluding ourselves from certain religions, cultures, races, and even genders. This ideal of labeling ourselves can be traced back to childhood and factors such as where we

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

A society with an internal consensus of social norms and cultural values is essentially the BASIS of a social system. Contrarily, this system is labeled socially disorganized when there is a breakdown in social control or SOMETHING among its elements. The theory suggest the absence or reduction of cohesion and solidarity in a community, will result in a increase of crime rates and deviant behavior. To support these

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

Personal identity is essential in the human experience. Identity is complex and can be broken down into two main groups: introspective identity, and bodily identity. Introspective identity is based off of the groups, mentalities, or beliefs that you align yourself with, and bodily identity is based off of the physical side of yourself. Whether physical or introspective, your identity impacts every action you take. Whether choices ranging from what colors you prefer to which college you want to attend are primarily based off of your introspective identity, which is a combination of both memory and consciousness, physical identity impacts how others perceive you. Consciousness is mainly the awareness of bodily identity as well as continuous introspective identify, while memory is awareness of introspective identity. These two different facets of identity are imperative in the distinction between bodily identity and introspective identity. In means of personal identity introspective identity (which is evident in memory), is essential, while bodily identity (based partially in consciousness) has less credit.

Language is the potent tool by which a community constructs and defines its sociopolitical agenda; it is the lens through which a people’s history and culture is viewed; a devise that is used both as a controlling as well as a rewarding tool. Largely, it aligns the beliefs of its subjects even as it defines their worldview. While many studies have been done to understand obsequiousness,

Who are you? Who am I? These philosophical questions often get brought up and debated over by most philosophers from the past and today. Teens go through this process of who am I and what is my purpose in life? To find these purposes we affiliate ourselves with different groups such as our friend groups, extracurricular activities and peer academics. I would identity myself as being a female. I’m a part of international club and I’m a cashier at the café. We identify ourselves with the groups we choose to be a part of. Being a part of these groups help us feel like we belong and that we have some sort of place in this big world. Since most people go through this identity issue, researches have researched how we identify ourselves socially. They came up with a theory called social identity theory.

My family shaped my personal and social identity at a micro level by being the first set of influencers the moment I was born. My personal identity is significantly influenced by my family through the approach that my parents have taken to raise and nurture me. The results of my parents raising me is shown through the behaviour and beliefs that I embody. For example, because of my family I have always been aware that there is a God. In consequence, my compliant behaviour towards religion has already been constructed at a young age. Moreover, my social identity’s structure was shaped by my family through they way they have socially interacted with me. My micro level interactions with my family throughout time has created a deeply rooted influence within me. The influence that my family has had on my social identity is demonstrated in the way that I respond in certain social situations. For example, through behavioural observation as a child I have learned not to speak back to my parents when they are lecturing me.

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, 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.

It is widely known that crime is committed within all aspects of society; from the rich to the poor, those with and without formal education, and even in diverse cultures. Since the social demographic of criminals are complexly diverse, one must look to the relation that the criminal has to their social settings. The social control theory attempts to explain why individuals commit crimes by understanding why the majority chooses not to. The social control theory operates under the belief that everybody holds a predisposition to commit crime, but those who possess a positive belief and moral system, strong commitments to their community, and personal relationships with other people contain more self-control over their actions and are less likely to deviate. It is when the social traits and bonds of an individual are strained or broken that the individual would more freely engage in deviant activities.

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