Rejecting Minorities summary lectures
LECTURE 1 – Social Identity Theory (SIT)
SIT: Prejudices are a consequence of ingroup identification
E.g., identification with Dutch -> prejudiced towards Muslims
Research philosophy
- different disciplines have different research philosophies
- here: problem-driven research
1. problem: what do we want to know?
2. theory: how does a theory explain the problem? (e.g. SIT, RGCT, etc.)
3. research: test the predictions made by the theory
- Problem-based research questions:
o problem = societal issue and a related question
o related question = research question: judgment and value free, as specific as possible
o 4 kinds of research questions:
descriptive: to what extent do we observe a problem?
trend: how did the problem change over time?
comparison: to what extent are there differences within a problem (e.g.
between areas/groups)?
explanation (why-question): why does this problem exist? why did the
problem change? why do we observe differences?
Minimal group experiments
Group formation: why do we as humans categorize people?
- categorization process is a central component of SIT
o evolutionary perspective: necessary to distinguish friend and enemy (quick
categorization needed for survival)
o cognitive perspective: necessary to process large amounts of information (too much
to process, categorization makes it easier)
- categorization
o people search actively for information
o people simplify processing all that information by ignoring certain differences and
emphasizing (or even exaggerating) certain similarities of that information
SIT experiment 1 : non-social stimuli
- Tajfel: how do people deal with categories?
- People have to rate non-social stimuli: lines
o Line experiment (no and with categories) estimating lengths results:
- greater difference between lines in cat A and B (overestimate)
- less variance within each category (underestimate)
o we draw conclusions about stuff based on category!
- Non-social VS. social stimuli
o Categorization of non-social stimuli: similarities within groups and differences
between groups are overemphasized.
, o Can this be generalized to social stimuli?
SIT experiment 2 : minimal group experiment (with social stimuli)
- Goal: manipulate social categorization as an independent variable
• Step 1: Generate social categorization on basis of a trivial criterion
• Step 2: Let participants give rewards to members of their own and the other group
o part 1: dot estimation task (how many dots are in the picture?) 2 groups of dot-
over-estimator and under-estimator (randomly told!)
o part 2: rewarding people (favoring own group)
o results:
- Group formation leads to discriminatory behavior (ingroup favoritism)
- Even if groups are formed on basis of a trivial category!
- Tajfel: “Social categorization per se is a sufficient condition for the development of
intergroup bias” (discrimination in favor of the own group)
- ‘minimal group’ experiment: groepen nergens op gebaseerd, maken niet uit, leveren niks op,
zien elkaar niet
Social identity theory (SIT)
4 central concepts:
1. Social categorization: categorization of people into groups
“process of bringing together social objects or events in groups which are equivalent
with regard to an individual’s actions, intentions and system of beliefs” (Tajfel, 1981,
p. 254).
Similar to categorization of non-social stimuli:
– Use of any characteristic available
– Perceive more similarity within and more difference between categories
Assumptions! Dehumanization
Not just the basis of how we perceive the world, but also who we perceive
ourselves…
2. Social identity
= the realization that one belongs to a social category and the positive or negative
evaluation associated with this membership.
o divisive and exclusive: you either belong or you don’t, no in between or ‘sometimes’
o context dependent: you identify with different groups in different situation
o cultural component: with certain behaviors and normative expectation (this turns a
category into an identity)
E.g.: wearing brown shoes has no cultural component NO social identity (but it
could be a social group)
o judgment of the nature of people in a certain category
E.g.: racist thought that black people would be ‘naturally’ inferior to white people.
This is more than a minimal group. Social identities may thus have even more
powerful consequences in intergroup interaction!
3. Social comparison
Through social comparison with other groups, people try to evaluate their group’s
relative status
People strive for a positive social identity: people are motivated to belong to a
positively evaluated group
, They value their own group more than other groups
social identification (= tendency to ascribe positive characteristics to own group)
VS. contra-identification (= tendency to ascribe negative characteristics to other
groups))
main reason for discrimination!
4. Psychological group distinctiveness
On the one hand, people have a need for belonging to a positively evaluated group.
On the other hand, people also need to be distinct from others,
people try to achieve a position of their group that is distinct and positive
Understanding behavior
* Social mobility: joining the higher status group: e.g. education (but: e.g. if you have a dark
complexion, it is harder to pass as the higher status group because you can’t that)
* Intra-group comparison: comparing yourself with people within your own group: who is worse off
than you?
* Absorption: e.g. US immigrants who give up their old culture
* Redefining characteristics: giving former negative characteristics of lower status group a different
connotation (e.g. ‘black is beautiful’ movement)
* Creativity: opening up a new dimension for comparison, that did not exist before: emphasizing
different characteristics
* Compare to other group: comparing your social group to another social group worse off than you.
* Challenge: protesting and demonstrating against the treatment of your group, changing social
position through opal competition (changing status quo effectively) group doesn’t have to change,
but still gets higher status (if successful).
, Summary: SIT
- Helps understand positive and negative social relationships
- Explains behavior of dominant and subordinate group
- Allows clear hypothesis about group members’ behavior if they face negative social identity
- Is broadly applicable
LECTURE 2 – Realistic Group Conflict Theory (RGCT)
RGCT: Prejudices are a consequence of intergroup competition
E.g., perceived competition between Muslim and Dutch norms -> threat -> prejudiced towards
Muslims
Examples: prejudice against refugees and immigrants. Idea of competition: they (newcomers) will
take our (natives) jobs (politicians like Trump, Wilders).
Foundation of RGCT
1950s: Classical explanations of prejudice
- Early explanations of prejudice focused on personality characteristics:
(e.g. how can Nazis be so inherently evil?)
o Allport: the prejudiced personality is ego-alienated, longs for definitiveness, safety,
and authority (people who can’t live with themselves, they search for thing to blame,
they want things to be like they used to be)
o Authoritarian personality: wants to have someone who tells them what to do, they
don’t want to change the status quo
- But: “Prejudice is fundamentally a matter of relationship between (racial) groups.” (Blumer
1958).
Foundation of RCT: Robbers Cave Experiment (by Muzafer Sherif)
2 research questions:
- How do group conflicts develop?
- How can we solve group conflicts?
Study design:
- 22 boys (12 yrs)
- don’t know each other
- same social background
- random allocation to 2 groups
- 3 phases
(maximum group experiment!)
Phase 1: group formation (doing stuff together, unaware of other group)
Phase 2: group competition (they organized competitions and the winner could get prizes)
group dynamic changed: groups became more cohesive; tension between groups grew, started
fighting
Phase 3: ……
LECTURE 1 – Social Identity Theory (SIT)
SIT: Prejudices are a consequence of ingroup identification
E.g., identification with Dutch -> prejudiced towards Muslims
Research philosophy
- different disciplines have different research philosophies
- here: problem-driven research
1. problem: what do we want to know?
2. theory: how does a theory explain the problem? (e.g. SIT, RGCT, etc.)
3. research: test the predictions made by the theory
- Problem-based research questions:
o problem = societal issue and a related question
o related question = research question: judgment and value free, as specific as possible
o 4 kinds of research questions:
descriptive: to what extent do we observe a problem?
trend: how did the problem change over time?
comparison: to what extent are there differences within a problem (e.g.
between areas/groups)?
explanation (why-question): why does this problem exist? why did the
problem change? why do we observe differences?
Minimal group experiments
Group formation: why do we as humans categorize people?
- categorization process is a central component of SIT
o evolutionary perspective: necessary to distinguish friend and enemy (quick
categorization needed for survival)
o cognitive perspective: necessary to process large amounts of information (too much
to process, categorization makes it easier)
- categorization
o people search actively for information
o people simplify processing all that information by ignoring certain differences and
emphasizing (or even exaggerating) certain similarities of that information
SIT experiment 1 : non-social stimuli
- Tajfel: how do people deal with categories?
- People have to rate non-social stimuli: lines
o Line experiment (no and with categories) estimating lengths results:
- greater difference between lines in cat A and B (overestimate)
- less variance within each category (underestimate)
o we draw conclusions about stuff based on category!
- Non-social VS. social stimuli
o Categorization of non-social stimuli: similarities within groups and differences
between groups are overemphasized.
, o Can this be generalized to social stimuli?
SIT experiment 2 : minimal group experiment (with social stimuli)
- Goal: manipulate social categorization as an independent variable
• Step 1: Generate social categorization on basis of a trivial criterion
• Step 2: Let participants give rewards to members of their own and the other group
o part 1: dot estimation task (how many dots are in the picture?) 2 groups of dot-
over-estimator and under-estimator (randomly told!)
o part 2: rewarding people (favoring own group)
o results:
- Group formation leads to discriminatory behavior (ingroup favoritism)
- Even if groups are formed on basis of a trivial category!
- Tajfel: “Social categorization per se is a sufficient condition for the development of
intergroup bias” (discrimination in favor of the own group)
- ‘minimal group’ experiment: groepen nergens op gebaseerd, maken niet uit, leveren niks op,
zien elkaar niet
Social identity theory (SIT)
4 central concepts:
1. Social categorization: categorization of people into groups
“process of bringing together social objects or events in groups which are equivalent
with regard to an individual’s actions, intentions and system of beliefs” (Tajfel, 1981,
p. 254).
Similar to categorization of non-social stimuli:
– Use of any characteristic available
– Perceive more similarity within and more difference between categories
Assumptions! Dehumanization
Not just the basis of how we perceive the world, but also who we perceive
ourselves…
2. Social identity
= the realization that one belongs to a social category and the positive or negative
evaluation associated with this membership.
o divisive and exclusive: you either belong or you don’t, no in between or ‘sometimes’
o context dependent: you identify with different groups in different situation
o cultural component: with certain behaviors and normative expectation (this turns a
category into an identity)
E.g.: wearing brown shoes has no cultural component NO social identity (but it
could be a social group)
o judgment of the nature of people in a certain category
E.g.: racist thought that black people would be ‘naturally’ inferior to white people.
This is more than a minimal group. Social identities may thus have even more
powerful consequences in intergroup interaction!
3. Social comparison
Through social comparison with other groups, people try to evaluate their group’s
relative status
People strive for a positive social identity: people are motivated to belong to a
positively evaluated group
, They value their own group more than other groups
social identification (= tendency to ascribe positive characteristics to own group)
VS. contra-identification (= tendency to ascribe negative characteristics to other
groups))
main reason for discrimination!
4. Psychological group distinctiveness
On the one hand, people have a need for belonging to a positively evaluated group.
On the other hand, people also need to be distinct from others,
people try to achieve a position of their group that is distinct and positive
Understanding behavior
* Social mobility: joining the higher status group: e.g. education (but: e.g. if you have a dark
complexion, it is harder to pass as the higher status group because you can’t that)
* Intra-group comparison: comparing yourself with people within your own group: who is worse off
than you?
* Absorption: e.g. US immigrants who give up their old culture
* Redefining characteristics: giving former negative characteristics of lower status group a different
connotation (e.g. ‘black is beautiful’ movement)
* Creativity: opening up a new dimension for comparison, that did not exist before: emphasizing
different characteristics
* Compare to other group: comparing your social group to another social group worse off than you.
* Challenge: protesting and demonstrating against the treatment of your group, changing social
position through opal competition (changing status quo effectively) group doesn’t have to change,
but still gets higher status (if successful).
, Summary: SIT
- Helps understand positive and negative social relationships
- Explains behavior of dominant and subordinate group
- Allows clear hypothesis about group members’ behavior if they face negative social identity
- Is broadly applicable
LECTURE 2 – Realistic Group Conflict Theory (RGCT)
RGCT: Prejudices are a consequence of intergroup competition
E.g., perceived competition between Muslim and Dutch norms -> threat -> prejudiced towards
Muslims
Examples: prejudice against refugees and immigrants. Idea of competition: they (newcomers) will
take our (natives) jobs (politicians like Trump, Wilders).
Foundation of RGCT
1950s: Classical explanations of prejudice
- Early explanations of prejudice focused on personality characteristics:
(e.g. how can Nazis be so inherently evil?)
o Allport: the prejudiced personality is ego-alienated, longs for definitiveness, safety,
and authority (people who can’t live with themselves, they search for thing to blame,
they want things to be like they used to be)
o Authoritarian personality: wants to have someone who tells them what to do, they
don’t want to change the status quo
- But: “Prejudice is fundamentally a matter of relationship between (racial) groups.” (Blumer
1958).
Foundation of RCT: Robbers Cave Experiment (by Muzafer Sherif)
2 research questions:
- How do group conflicts develop?
- How can we solve group conflicts?
Study design:
- 22 boys (12 yrs)
- don’t know each other
- same social background
- random allocation to 2 groups
- 3 phases
(maximum group experiment!)
Phase 1: group formation (doing stuff together, unaware of other group)
Phase 2: group competition (they organized competitions and the winner could get prizes)
group dynamic changed: groups became more cohesive; tension between groups grew, started
fighting
Phase 3: ……
