Ingroups and outgroups

Last updated

The people in this stadium form an ingroup of football fans, their outgroup are those who are not fans of football. However, supporters of one team also form their own ingroup where the supporters of the opponent team are the outgroup. 091507-USCNeb-MemorialStadium.jpg
The people in this stadium form an ingroup of football fans, their outgroup are those who are not fans of football. However, supporters of one team also form their own ingroup where the supporters of the opponent team are the outgroup.

In sociology and social psychology, an ingroup is a social group to which a person psychologically identifies as being a member. By contrast, an outgroup is a social group with which an individual does not identify. People may for example identify with their peer group, family, community, sports team, political party, gender, religion, or nation. It has been found that the psychological membership of social groups and categories is associated with a wide variety of phenomena.

Sociology Scientific study of human society and its origins, development, organizations, and institutions

Sociology is a study of society, patterns of social relationships, social interaction and culture of everyday life. It is a social science that uses various methods of empirical investigation and critical analysis to develop a body of knowledge about social order, acceptance, and change or social evolution. Sociology is also defined as the general science of society. While some sociologists conduct research that may be applied directly to social policy and welfare, others focus primarily on refining the theoretical understanding of social processes. Subject matter ranges from the micro-sociology level of individual agency and interaction to the macro level of systems and the social structure.

Social psychology is the scientific study of how people's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors are influenced by the actual, imagined or implied presence of others. In this definition, scientific refers to the empirical investigation using the scientific method. The terms thoughts, feelings, and behaviors refer to psychological variables that can be measured in humans. The statement that others' presence may be imagined or implied suggests that humans are malleable to social influences even when alone, such as when watching videos, sitting on the toilet, or quietly appreciating art. In such situations, people can be influenced to follow internalized cultural norms. Social psychologists typically explain human behavior as a result of the interaction of mental states and social situations.

Social group two or more humans who interact with one another

In the social sciences, a social group can be defined as two or more people who interact with one another, share similar characteristics, and collectively have a sense of unity. Other theorists disagree however, and are wary of definitions which stress the importance of interdependence or objective similarity. Instead, researchers within the social identity tradition generally define it as "a group is defined in terms of those who identify themselves as members of the group". Regardless, social groups come in a myriad of sizes and varieties. For example, a society can be viewed as a large social group.

Contents

The terminology was made popular by Henri Tajfel and colleagues during his work in formulating social identity theory. The significance of ingroup and outgroup categorization was identified using a method called the minimal group paradigm. Tajfel and colleagues found that people can form self-preferencing ingroups within a matter of minutes and that such groups can form even on the basis of completely arbitrary and invented discriminatory characteristics, such as preferences for certain paintings. [1] [2] [3] [4]

Henri Tajfel british psychologist

Henri Tajfel was a Polish social psychologist, best known for his pioneering work on the cognitive aspects of prejudice and social identity theory, as well as being one of the founders of the European Association of Experimental Social Psychology.

Social identity is the portion of an individual's self-concept derived from perceived membership in a relevant social group. As originally formulated by social psychologists Henri Tajfel and John Turner in the 1970s and the 1980s, social identity theory introduced the concept of a social identity as a way in which to explain intergroup behaviour.

The minimal group paradigm is a methodology employed in social psychology. Although it may be used for a variety of purposes, it is most well known as a method for investigating the minimal conditions required for discrimination to occur between groups. Experiments using this approach have revealed that even arbitrary distinctions between groups, such as preferences for certain paintings or the color of their shirts, can trigger a tendency to favor one's own group at the expense of others, even when it means sacrificing in-group gain.

Associated phenomena

The psychological categorization of people into ingroup and outgroup members is associated with a variety of phenomena. The following examples have all received a great deal of academic attention.

In-group favoritism

This refers to the fact that under certain conditions, people will prefer and have affinity for one's ingroup over the outgroup, or anyone viewed as outside the ingroup. This can be expressed in one's evaluation of others, linking, allocation of resources, and many other ways. [5]

Outgroup derogation

Discrimination between ingroups and outgroups is a matter of favoritism towards an ingroup and the absence of equivalent favoritism towards an outgroup. [6] Outgroup derogation is the phenomenon in which an outgroup is perceived as being threatening to the members of an ingroup. [7] This phenomenon often accompanies ingroup favoritism, as it requires one to have an affinity towards their ingroup. Some research suggests that outgroup derogation occurs when an outgroup is perceived as blocking or hindering the goals of an ingroup. It has also been argued that outgroup derogation is a natural consequence of the categorization process. [8]

Social influence

People have been shown to be differentially influenced by ingroup members. That is, under conditions where group categorization is psychologically salient, people will shift their beliefs in line with ingroup social norms.

Group polarization

This generally refers to the tendency of groups to make decisions that are more extreme than the initial inclination of its members, although polarization toward the most central beliefs has also been observed. It has been shown that this effect is related to a psychologically salient ingroup and outgroup categorization.

Group homogeneity

Categorization of people into social groups increases the perception that group members are similar to one another. An outcome of this is the outgroup homogeneity effect. This refers to the perception of members of an outgroup as being homogenous, while members of one's ingroup are perceived as being diverse, e.g. "they are alike; we are diverse”. [9] [10] This is especially likely to occur in regard to negative characteristics. Under certain conditions, ingroup members can be perceived as being similar to one another in regard to positive characteristics. This effect is called ingroup homogeneity. [11]

Postulated role in human evolution

In evolutionary psychology, ingroup favoritism is seen as an evolved mechanism selected for the advantages of coalition affiliation. [12] It has been argued that characteristics such as gender and ethnicity are inflexible or even essential features of such systems. [13] [14] However, there is evidence that elements of favoritism are flexible in that they can be erased by changes in social categorization. [15] One study in the field of behavioural genetics suggests that biological mechanisms may exist which favor a coexistence of both flexible and essentialist systems. [16]

See also

Related Research Articles

Prejudice is an affective feeling towards a person based on that person's perceived group membership. The word is often used to refer to a preconceived, usually unfavourable, evaluation of another person based on that person's political affiliation, sex, gender, beliefs, values, social class, age, disability, religion, sexuality, race/ethnicity, language, nationality, beauty, occupation, education, criminality, sport team affiliation or other personal characteristics.

The out-group homogeneity effect is one's perception of out-group members as more similar to one another than are in-group members, e.g. "they are alike; we are diverse". Perceivers tend to have impressions about the diversity or variability of group members around those central tendencies or typical attributes of those group members. Thus, outgroup stereotypicality judgments are overestimated, supporting the view that out-group stereotypes are overgeneralizations. The term "outgroup homogeneity effect", "outgroup homogeneity bias" or "relative outgroup homogeneity" have been explicitly contrasted with "outgroup homogeneity" in general, the latter referring to perceived outgroup variability unrelated to perceptions of the ingroup.

In-group favoritism, sometimes known as in-group–out-group bias, in-group bias, intergroup bias, or in-group preference, is a pattern of favoring members of one's in-group over out-group members. This can be expressed in evaluation of others, in allocation of resources, and in many other ways.

In psychology and other social sciences, the contact hypothesis suggests that intergroup contact under appropriate conditions can effectively reduce prejudice between majority and minority group members. Following WWII and the desegregation of the military and other public institutions, policymakers and social scientists had turned an eye towards the policy implications of interracial contact. Of them, social psychologist Gordon Allport united early research in this vein under intergroup contact theory.

Robert Kurzban is a psychologist specializing in evolutionary psychology.

Black sheep

In the English language, black sheep is an idiom used to describe an odd or disreputable member of a group, especially within a family. The term stems from sheep whose fleece is colored black rather than the more common white; these sheep stand out in the flock and their wool was traditionally considered less valuable.

Optimal distinctiveness is a social psychological theory seeking to understand ingroup–outgroup differences. It asserts that individuals desire to attain an optimal balance of inclusion and distinctiveness within and between social groups and situations. These two motives are in constant opposition with each other; when there is too much of one motive, the other must increase in order to counterbalance it and vice versa. The theory of optimal distinctiveness was first proposed by Dr. Marilynn B. Brewer in 1991 and extensively reviewed in 2010 by Drs. Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Cynthia L. Pickett, and Marilynn Brewer.

Self-categorization theory is a theory in social psychology that describes the circumstances under which a person will perceive collections of people as a group, as well as the consequences of perceiving people in group terms. Although the theory is often introduced as an explanation of psychological group formation, it is more accurately thought of as general analysis of the functioning of categorization processes in social perception and interaction that speaks to issues of individual identity as much as group phenomena. It was developed by John Turner and colleagues, and along with social identity theory it is a constituent part of the social identity approach. It was in part developed to address questions that arose in response to social identity theory about the mechanistic underpinnings of social identification.

Stereotype Over-generalized belief about a particular category of people

In social psychology, a stereotype is an over-generalized belief about a particular category of people. It is an expectation that people might have about every person of a particular group. The type of expectation can vary; it can be, for example, an expectation about the group's personality, preferences, or ability.

The ultimate attribution error is a group-level attribution error that offers an explanation for how one person views different causes of negative and positive behavior in ingroup and outgroup members.

An implicit bias, or implicit stereotype, is the unconscious attribution of particular qualities to a member of a certain social group.

Intergroup anxiety is the social phenomenon identified by Walter and Cookie Stephan in 1985 that describes the ambiguous feelings of discomfort or anxiety when interacting with members of other groups. Such emotions also constitute intergroup anxiety when one is merely anticipating interaction with members of an outgroup. Expectations that interactions with foreign members of outgroups will result in an aversive experience is believed to be the cause of intergroup anxiety, with an affected individual being anxious or unsure about a number of issues. Methods of reducing intergroup anxiety stress facilitating positive intergroup contact.

The common ingroup identity model is a theoretical model proposed by Samuel L. Gaertner and John F. Dovidio that outlines the processes through which intergroup bias may be reduced. Intergroup bias is a preference for one's in-group over the out-group. Derived from the social identity approach to intergroup behaviour, the common ingroup identity model is rooted in the process of social categorization, or how people conceive of group boundaries. The model describes how intergroup bias can be reduced if members of different groups can be induced to conceive of themselves to be part of the same group, then they would develop more positive attitudes of the former outgroup members. An individual will change the way they view the out-group through a social categorization process called recategorization where former out-group members become incorporated into individual's representations of the in-group.

Male warrior hypothesis evolutionary psychology hypothesis

The male warrior hypothesis (MWH) is an evolutionary psychology hypothesis by Professor Mark van Vugt which argues that human psychology has been shaped by between-group competition and conflict. Specifically, the evolutionary history of coalitional aggression between groups of men may have resulted in sex-specific differences in the way outgroups are perceived, creating ingroup vs. outgroup tendencies that are still observable today.

Prejudice can be considered from an evolutionary perspective. Evolutionary psychologists posit that our psychology, e.g. emotion and cognition, has not been uniquely isolated from the forces of evolution. Although there is psychological variation among individuals, the majority of our psychological mechanisms should be adaptations designed specifically to solve recurrent problems, many of which were social in nature, in our evolutionary history. To balance the costs and benefits of sociality we must be able to recognize and functionally respond to threats and opportunities, and our errors in judgment should be biased toward minimizing costs to reproductive fitness. Our implicit responses to others result from the activation of functionally specific adaptations to motivate action, either to take advantage of opportunities, avoid or confront threats. The valence—positive or negative—of those responses can be measured using implicit association tests. Unconscious, negative reactions are often referred to as prejudice, but these prejudices are much more contextually rich than simple, positive or negative affect, and often involve discrete emotions, which likely represent unique adaptations to motivate functionally distinct actions. Our evolved biases toward minimizing fitness costs may have implications for the function and/or malfunction of stigma, prejudice, and discriminatory behavior in post-industrial societies. Some common biases are discussed.

Intergroup relations refers to interactions between individuals in different social groups, and to interactions taking place between the groups themselves collectively. It has long been a subject of research in social psychology, political psychology, and organizational behavior.

In social psychology, a metastereotype is a stereotype that members of one group have about the way in which they are stereotypically viewed by members of another group. In other words, it is a stereotype about a stereotype. They have been shown to have adverse effects on individuals that hold them, including on their levels of anxiety in interracial conversations. Meta-stereotypes held by African Americans regarding the stereotypes White Americans have about them have been found to be largely both negative and accurate. People portray meta-stereotypes of their ingroup more positively when talking to a member of an outgroup than to a fellow member of their ingroup.

References

  1. ↑ See "Kandinsky versus Klee experiment", Tajfel et al. (1971) in Tajfel, H. (1970). Experiments in Intergroup Discrimination.
  2. ↑ Tajfel, H. (1970). "Experiments in intergroup discrimination". Scientific American . Springer Nature. 223 (5): 96–102. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican1170-96. JSTOR   24927662. PMID   5482577.
  3. ↑ Tajfel, H.; Billig, M. G.; Bundy, R. P.; Flament, C. (April–June 1971). "Social categorization and intergroup behaviour". European Journal of Social Psychology . 1 (2): 149–178. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420010202.
  4. ↑ Tajfel, H. (1974). Social Identity and Intergroup Behavior.
  5. ↑ Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., Akert, R. D. & Sommers, S. R. (2015). Social psychology (9th, illustrated, revised ed.). London: Pearson Education. ISBN   978-0-13393654-4.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  6. ↑ Brewer, Marilynn B. (Fall 1999). "The Psychology of Prejudice: Ingroup Love and Outgroup Hate?". Journal of Social Issues . 55 (3): 429–444. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00126.
  7. ↑ Hewstone, Miles; Rubin, Mark; Willis, Hazel (February 2002). "Intergroup Bias". Annual Review of Psychology . 53: 575–604. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135109. PMID   11752497.
  8. ↑ Zhong, Chen-Bo; Phillips, Katherine W.; Leonardelli, Geoffrey J.; Galinsky, Adam D. (2008). "Negational categorization and intergroup behavior". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin . 34 (6): 793–806. doi:10.1177/0146167208315457. PMID   18391025.
  9. ↑ Leyens, Jacques-Philippe; Yzerbyt, Vincent; Schadron, Georges (1994). Stereotypes and Social Cognition. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications. pp. 104–107. ISBN   978-0-80398583-4.
  10. ↑ Quattrone, George A.; Jones, Edward E. (1980). "The perception of variability within in-groups and out-groups: Implications for the law of small numbers". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology . 38 (1): 141–152. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.38.1.141. ISSN   0022-3514.
  11. ↑ Jackson, Lynne M. (2011). The Psychology of Prejudice: From Attitudes to Social Action. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. pp. 110–112. ISBN   978-1-43380920-0.
  12. ↑ L. Cosmides; J. Tooby; R. Kurzban (April 1, 2003). "Perceptions of race". Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 7 (4): 173–179. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00057-3. PMID   12691766 . Retrieved 16 July 2012.
  13. ↑ L. A. Hirschfeld (1996). Race in the Making: Cognition, Culture, and the Child's Construction of Human Kinds. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Mit Press. ISBN   978-0-26208247-1.
  14. ↑ F. J. Gil-White (August–October 2001). "Are Ethnic Groups Biological "Species" to the Human Brain? Essentialism in Our Cognition of Some Social Categories". Current Anthropology . University of Chicago Press. 42 (4): 515–553. doi:10.1086/321802. JSTOR   10.1086/321802.
  15. ↑ R. Kurzban; J. Tooby; L. Cosmides (December 18, 2001). "Can race be erased? Coalitional computation and social categorization". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America . 98 (26): 15387–15392. Bibcode:2001PNAS...9815387K. doi:10.1073/pnas.251541498. PMC   65039 . PMID   11742078.
  16. ↑ G. J. Lewis; T. C. Bates (November 2010). "Genetic Evidence for Multiple Biological Mechanisms Underlying In-Group Favoritism". Psychological Science . 21 (11): 1623–1628. doi:10.1177/0956797610387439. PMID   20974715 . Retrieved 16 July 2012.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.