Identities and loyalties to the in group are formed on very small details
People will prejudice others just for being in the out group
People do this to protect themselves and their identifies
SIT is based on four interrelated concepts: Social categorization:
Social categorization divides the social environment into in-groups, to which we belong and out-groups to which we don’t belong.
This:
Reduces perceived variability within the in-group
Reduces perceived variability in the out-group
Increases perceived variability between the in-group and out-group
Social identity: Identifying yourself with a social group based on their in-group norms.
Cultural expectations
Sense of belongingness
Social comparison:
Comparing in-group member with out-group members.
By looking for benefits for being in the in-group, self-esteem is boosted
Positive distinctness:
Using verbal or non-verbal ques to make your social group more socially valued.
Evaluation of SIT: Strengths:
SIT assumes that in-group conflict is not required for discrimination to occur. This is supported by empirical research.
SIT has been applied to understanding behaviours such as ethnocentrism, in-group favouritism, conformity to in-group norms, and stereotyping.
Useful for making anti-discrimination laws
Weaknesses:
Minimal group research has been criticised for artificiality. The experimental set-up is so far from natural behaviour that it can be questioned whether it reflects how people would react in real life. This could limit the predictive value of the theory.
SIT cannot fully explain how in-group favouritism may result in violent behaviour towards outgroups.
SIT cannot explain why social constraints such as poverty could play a bigger role in behaviour than social identity.
Supporting studies: Tajfel (1970) Cialdini et al. (1976) Elliot (1968)