An Examination of the Social Identity Theory

Theories of Mass Communication IV

(MCOM 423)

Presented by Group 1

Being an Examination of the Group Work Submitted to the

Department of Mass Communication at Ahmadu Bello

University, Zaria in partial fulfilment of the Award of Bsc. In

Mass Communication.

Lecturer: Dr. Ahmad Abubakar

February, 2025
 GROUP ONE(1) MEMBERS

S/N Names Reg. Number

1. Sani Hassan Suleiman U21MM2007

2. Lawal Khadija Sa’idu U19MM1164

3. Abdulmumini Bashiru U19MM2025

Sharifai

4. Hauwa’u Abubakar U21MM2008

5. Peter Lucille U19MM1028

6. Muhammad Mahdi U19MM1042

7. Suleiman Muhammad Gama U21MM2013

8. Zainab Zakaria Riwanu U19MM1113

9. Aminat Oyewopo Titilayo U19MM1064

INTRODUCTION

Since it was first proposed in the 1970s, social identity theory has been recognized as one

of the major theories in social psychology. Social identity is defined as “part of an

individual’s self-concept which derives from his knowledge of his membership of a

social group (or groups) together with the emotional significance attached to that

membership” (Tajfel, 1974, p.64). Its core premise is that, in many social situations,

people consider themselves and others as group members such as partisan supporters—

rather than as unique individual.

History

Social identity theory developed from a series of studies, frequently called minimal-group

studies, conducted by the British social psychologist Henri Tajfel and his colleagues in

the early 1970s. Participants were assigned to groups that were designed to be as arbitrary

and meaningless as possible. Nevertheless, when people were asked to assign points to

other research participants, they systematically awarded more points to in-group

members than to out-group members.

The minimal-group studies were interpreted as showing that the mere act of categorizing

individuals into groups can be sufficient to make them think of themselves and others in

terms of group membership instead of as separate individuals. That finding deviated from

a common view at the time, namely, that an objective conflict of interest is a central

factor in the emergence of intergroup conflict.

 Thus, social identity theory originated from the conviction that group membership can

help people to instill meaning in social situations. Group membership helps people to

define who they are and to determine how they relate to others. Social identity theory was

developed as an integrative theory, as it aimed to connect cognitive processes and

behavioral motivation. Initially, its main focus was on intergroup conflict and intergroup

relations more broadly. For that reason, the theory was originally referred to as the social

identity theory of intergroup relations.

Later elaborations by Tajfel’s student John Turner and his colleagues on the cognitive

factors relevant to social identification further specified how people interpret their own

position in different social contexts and how that affects their perceptions of others (e.g.,

stereotyping), as well as their own behaviour in groups (e.g., social influence). Those

elaborations constitute self-categorization theory, or the social identity theory of the

group. Together, self-categorization theory and social identity theory can be referred to as

the social identity approach…..

Main postulates of the Theory

The Theory of Social Identity consists of several postulates that explain how

identification with a group affects individual and collective behavior. Some of the most

notable postulates are:

1. Positive identity and social distinctiveness: This postulate suggests that people seek

a positive identity by identifying with groups that have a positive evaluation

 compared to other groups. Likewise, they seek to differentiate and highlight their own

social identity to feel different and special in relation to other groups.

2. Intragroup and intergroup polarization: Intragroup polarization refers to the

phenomenon in which, within a group, opinions and attitudes tend to radicalize

towards a more extreme position than the initial position of its members. On the other

hand, intergroup polarization implies greater divergence between groups, which can

lead to intergroup conflict and prejudice.

3. Ingroup and outgroup bias: Ingroup bias refers to the tendency of people to

positively evaluate their own group and its members, even without objective reasons

to do so. In contrast, outgroup bias involves the tendency to hold negative or

stereotypical attitudes toward members of other groups, which can contribute to

discrimination and intergroup conflict.

Processes of Social Identity Theory

The process of social identity theory as outlined by McLeod (2023), include:

1. Social Categorization: This refers to the tendency of people to classify themselves

and others into various social groups based on attributes like race, gender, nationality,

or religion. We categorize objects to understand them and identify them. In a very

similar way, we categorize people (including ourselves) to understand the social

environment. We use social categories like black, white, Australian, Christian,

Muslim, student, and bus driver because they are useful. Categorization helps

individuals simplify the social environment but can also lead to stereotyping. If we

can assign people to a category, that tells us things about those people. Similarly, we

find out things about ourselves by knowing what categories we belong to. We define
 appropriate behavior by referencing the norms of groups we belong to, but you can

only do this if you can tell who belongs to your group. An individual can belong to

many different groups. For example, you have categorized yourself as a student,

chances are you will adopt the identity of a student and begin to act the ways you

believe student act.

2. Social Identification: Once individuals categorize themselves as members of a

particular group, they adopt the identity of that group. This means they begin to see

themselves in terms of group characteristics and adopt its norms, values, and

behaviors. If for example you have categorized yourself as a student, the chances are

you will adopt the identity of a student and begin to act in the ways you believe

students act (and conform to the norms of the group). There will be an emotional

significance to your identification with a group, and your self-esteem will become

bound up with group membership.

3. Social Comparison: After categorizing and identifying with a group, individuals

compare their group to others. This comparison is often biased in favor of one’s own

group, leading to in-group favoritism. This is critical to understanding prejudice,

because once two groups identify themselves as rivals, they are forced to compete in

order for the members to maintain their self-esteem. Competition and hostility

between groups is thus not only a matter of competing for resources (like in Sherif’s

Robbers Cave) like jobs but also the result of competing identities.
4. In-group (us) and Out-group (them): Within the context of SIT, the ‘in-group’

refers to the group with which an individual identifies, while ‘out-group’ pertains to

groups they don’t identify with.

The theory asserts that people have a natural inclination to perceive their in-group in a

positive light while being neutral or even negative towards out-groups, thus enhancing

their self-image. Examples of In-groups and Out-groups; It’s important to note that

ingroups and outgroups are fluid concepts. The group an individual identifies with can

change based on context, environment, or over time. Moreover, everyone belongs to

multiple ingroups across different facets of their identity. The categorization into ingroups

and outgroups also plays a significant role in intergroup dynamics, biases, and conflicts.

Ethnicity & Race: (Ingroup: Someone of Chinese descent might identify with other

Chinese individuals; Outgroup: The same individual might see people of Japanese or

Indian descent as an outgroup.)

Religion Ingroup: A Christian might identify with other Christians; Outgroup: Muslims,

Hindus, or Buddhists might be perceived as outgroups to Christians.)

Professional Affiliation: (Ingroup: Teachers might see other teachers as part of their

ingroup; Outgroup: They might see administrators, policymakers, or even other

professions like lawyers or doctors as outgroups.)

Political Affiliation Ingroup: A PDP party member might feel aligned with fellow PDP

members; Outgroup: APC, Labour Party, or members of other political parties might be

seen as outgroups.)
 Educational Institutions: (Ingroup: Alumni of a particular university might feel a sense of

camaraderie with fellow alumni; Outgroup: Alumni from rival universities might be seen

as the outgroup.)

5. Positive Distinctiveness

The desire for positive self-esteem will motivate one’s in-group to be perceived as

positively different or distinct from relevant out-groups. Prejudiced views between

cultures may result in racism; in its extreme forms, racism may result in genocide, such

as occurred in Germany with the Jews, in Rwanda between the Hutus and Tutsis, and,

more recently, in the former Yugoslavia between the Bosnians and Serbs.

Applications and relevance

The Theory of Social Identity has been widely used to explain a variety of social

phenomena, such as discrimination, intergroup conflict, national identity, leadership, and

conformity. This theory has shown that identification with a social group can influence

the perception of oneself and others, as well as attitudes and behaviors toward individuals

from other groups. In addition, understanding the Social identity is essential to address

social problems such as racism, xenophobia and sexism, since it allows us to analyze how

prejudices are formed and how they can be combated at an individual and collective

level. By promoting positive identification with diverse groups and fostering social

inclusion, it is possible to reduce intolerance and promote social cohesion in diverse

communities.

Key application areas of SIT:

• Reducing Prejudice and Discrimination: By understanding the mechanisms

behind in-group bias, interventions can be designed to foster intergroup

understanding and cooperation, tackling issues like racism, sexism, and

xenophobia.

• Organizational Behavior: SIT helps analyze group dynamics within

organizations, facilitating better team formation, conflict resolution, and

promoting a positive corporate identity by understanding how employees

identify with different work groups.

• Political and Social Movements: The theory can explain the formation and

mobilization of political groups, including understanding factors that lead to

radicalization, as people identify strongly with certain political ideologies or

social causes.

• Communication and Media Studies: SIT is used to analyze how media

portrays different groups, how people selectively consume media based on

their group identities, and how communication strategies can be tailored to

specific social groups.

• Leadership Studies: By understanding how leaders can leverage group

identities to motivate and unite teams, SIT can inform leadership development

strategies.

• Health and Wellbeing: Research shows that strong social identities can

contribute to positive health outcomes by providing social support and a sense

of belonging.
Extensions of Social Identity Theory:

• Intersectionality: This approach recognizes that individuals can belong to

multiple overlapping social groups (e.g., race, gender, class), and the interplay

of these identities can influence their experiences and behaviors.

• Social Creativity: When faced with a negative social identity, individuals may

try to redefine their group’s characteristics or find new dimensions of

comparison to achieve a positive distinction.

• Cyber-Social Identity: Applying SIT to online environments to understand

how people identify with online communities and how this affects their

behavior on digital platforms.

• Collective Action: Exploring how group identification can motivate

individuals to engage in collective action to achieve social change….

Critique and limitations

Social Identity Theory has the following limitations:

o Deterministic: Some critics argue that Social Identity Theory is overly

deterministic, implying that individuals have no agency in shaping their

own identities and are solely driven by the need to form positive identities

for themselves.

o Limited scope: The theory focuses on the role of social comparison and

group membership in shaping individuals' self-concepts and sense of self-

worth, but it does not address other factors that can shape an individual's

identity such as personal experiences, culture or personal characteristics.

 o Lack of empirical support: Despite its popularity, there is limited empirical

research to support Social Identity Theory. Some studies have found that

the theory does not always align with the findings of real-world situations.

o Limited applicability: The theory has primarily been applied to issues of

prejudice and discrimination, intergroup relations, and the formation of

stereotypes, but its applicability to other areas such as consumer behavior,

organizational change or political persuasion is less clear.

o Limited guidance for practitioners: Social Identity Theory provides a

useful framework for understanding social identity, but it does not offer

clear guidance for practitioners on how to use the theory to develop

interventions or strategies that target social issues such as prejudice and

discrimination.

Key Studies Supporting SIT

 Minimal Group Paradigm (Tajfel, 1970): Participants were

randomly assigned to groups with no prior interaction or meaning.

Despite the arbitrary grouping, participants favored their own group in

resource allocation tasks.

 Robbers Cave Experiment (Sherif, 1954): Though not originally

part of SIT, it complements the theory.

Demonstrated how competition and categorization create intergroup

conflict, but cooperative tasks reduce it.

 Brown and Ross (1982):Found evidence that individuals align

their self-esteem with the success or failure of their ingroup.

CONCLUSION

A study by Hebber & Langbort (2022) investigated the role of social identity in the

consumption of misinformation. The findings suggest that individuals are inclined to accept

information that favors their ingroup, even if it is false, highlighting the influence of social

identity on belief formation and the spread of misinformation. This goes to show that the Social

Identity Theory is one of the main foundations of social psychology, as well as most useful in

understanding human behavior, group dynamics, and societal problems.

References

https://digitalcommons.montclair.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1004&context=scom-

facpubs

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://ww1.os

wego.edu/diversity/day-3-social-

identity&ved=2ahUKEwi2wt_36qGLAxVjV0EAHQTTHhYQFnoECA8QBQ&sqi=2&usg=

AOvVaw2xJwipf8QAUqd659eApLTD

[proposed in 1979 by Polish-born British social psychologist Henri Tajfel (1919–1982)

and British social psychologist John C. Turner (1947–2011)]

Abrams, D., Wetherell, M., Cochrane, S., Hogg, M. A., & Turner, J. C. (1990). Knowing

what to think by knowing who you are: Self-categorization and the nature of norm
formation, conformity and group polarization. British Journal of Social Psychology, 29,

97–119.

Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E... Levinson. D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The

authoritarian personality. New York: Harper 1950.

Allen. V. L., & Wilder, D. A. (1975). Categorization, belief similarity, and intergroup

discrimination. Journal of Per-sonaliry & Social Psychology, 32(6), 971-977.

Aschenbrenner, K. M., & Schaefer. R. E. (1980). Minimal intergroup situations: Comments on a

mathematical model and on the research paradigm. European Journal of Social Psychology, 10,

389-398,

Bass, B. M., & Dunteman, G. (1963). Biases in the evalua-tion of one's own group, its allies, and

opponents. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2, 67-77.

Baxter, G. W. (1973). Prejudiced liberais? Race and informa-tion effects in a two-person game.

Journal of Conflici Reso-lution. 17, 131-161,

Berkowitz, L. (1962). Aggression: A social psychological analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Berkowitz, L. (1969). The frustration-aggression hypothesis revisited. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.).

Roots of aggression: A re-examination of the frustration-aggression hypothesis. New York:

Acherton Press.

Berkowitz. L. (1974). Some determinants of impulsive ag-gression: Role of mediated

associations with reinforcements for aggression. Psychological Review, 81, 165-176, Berry, J.

W., Kalin, R.. & Taylor, D. M. (1976).

Multiculturalism and ethnic antitudes in Canada. Kingston, Ontario: Queen's University.

Billig, M. (1972). Social categurization in intergroup relu-tions. University of Bristol, Bristol.

Billig, M. (1973). Normative communication in a minimal intergroup situation. European

Journal of Social Psychol-03y; 3(3). 339-343.

Billig, M. (1976). Social psychology and intergroup relations (Vol. 9). London: Academic

Press.

Tajfel, H. (1970). Experiments in intergroup discrimination. Scientific American,

223(5), 96–102.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G.

Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47).
Brooks/Cole.

Sherif, M. (1954). The Robbers Cave Experiment: Intergroup conflict and cooperation.
Classic Studies in Psychology.

Social identity theory: Principles and applications. (2023, January 16). Mentes Abiertas
Psicología. https://www.mentesabiertaspsicologia.com/blog-psicologia/social-identity-
theory-principles-and-applications

McLeod, S. (2023, October 5). Social identity theory in psychology (Tajfel & Turner,
1979). *Simply Psychology*. https://www.simplypsychology.org/social-identity-
theory.html
Hebbar, V., & Langbort, C. (2022). On the role of social identity in the market for
(mis)information. *arXiv*. https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.16660