1. Describe one study relevant to social identity theory or social groups.
The social identity theory is the study of the interplay between personal and social
identities, it aims to study and interpret the circumstances under which each individual
think of themselves as individuals or as group member. Social categorization is the process is
the way in which individuals understand what social groups that are part of and which ones
they are not. The group an individual is part of is referred to as “in-groups” and use
pronouns such as ‘us’ and ‘we’ whereas the groups they are not part of are referenced as
“out-groups”, and are referred to using pronouns ‘they’ and ‘them’. According to social
identification, once an individual is part of a group they start to assimilate with the
characteristics and behaviors of that group. Individuals then tend to engage in “social
comparison”, a way of justifying the reason they are a part of the group. They tend to seek a
way to achieve positive self-esteem by positively comparing their “in-group” to an “out-
group" on some valued dimension to achieve positive distinctiveness. By doing so, they start
favoring the “in-group” traits even though they didn’t choose to be part of the group. Tajfel
et al. was one of the studies conducted to research the effects of the social identity theory.
Tajfel et al. aimed to investigate the effects of the social identity theory and whether
it would lean individuals to identify with their in-group. To conduct this study, a sample of
48 boys, whose age ranged between 14 and 15 years old, was used. The first part of the
experiment consisted in asking the sample to rate twelve paintings from two abstract
painters: Klee and Kandinsky. The boys were not told which artist made each painting. They
were then separated into two groups based on which painter they preferred. Each boy was
then directed to award two points, one to a member of this same group and one to a
member of the other group. The only information they were given about the receivers of
the points were the code numbers and the name of the group.
Tajfel created a point allocation system to see how specific variables could influence their
choice of reward. This system was made up of: maximum joint profit (giving the largest
reward to members of both groups); maximum in-group profit (giving the largest reward to
a member of the in-group); and maximum differences (giving the largest possible difference
in reward between a member of the in-group and a member of the out-group. By doing this,
if a Klee member chose a high value for another Klee member, it would give a higher profit
to the out -group (maximum joint profit); if they chose a mid-range value for another Klee
member, it would give the same points for the other group (maximum in – group profit); if
they chose a low value for another Klee member, it would award only 1 point to the other
team (maximum differences).
The results of this study showed that: the maximum joint profit had very little effect on the
boys' choices as when the boys had a choice between maximizing profit for all and
maximizing the profit for members of their in-group, they clearly favored their own group.
When they had the choice of maximizing the difference in reward against profit for all, the
boys were willing to give their own team fewer points with the goal of maximizing the
difference between their in-group and the out-group.
The results of this study concluded that the boys left the study with less money than
they could have achieve if they had given each other the most amount possible because
they were willing to give it up to increase the different with the other group. This shows that
The social identity theory is the study of the interplay between personal and social
identities, it aims to study and interpret the circumstances under which each individual
think of themselves as individuals or as group member. Social categorization is the process is
the way in which individuals understand what social groups that are part of and which ones
they are not. The group an individual is part of is referred to as “in-groups” and use
pronouns such as ‘us’ and ‘we’ whereas the groups they are not part of are referenced as
“out-groups”, and are referred to using pronouns ‘they’ and ‘them’. According to social
identification, once an individual is part of a group they start to assimilate with the
characteristics and behaviors of that group. Individuals then tend to engage in “social
comparison”, a way of justifying the reason they are a part of the group. They tend to seek a
way to achieve positive self-esteem by positively comparing their “in-group” to an “out-
group" on some valued dimension to achieve positive distinctiveness. By doing so, they start
favoring the “in-group” traits even though they didn’t choose to be part of the group. Tajfel
et al. was one of the studies conducted to research the effects of the social identity theory.
Tajfel et al. aimed to investigate the effects of the social identity theory and whether
it would lean individuals to identify with their in-group. To conduct this study, a sample of
48 boys, whose age ranged between 14 and 15 years old, was used. The first part of the
experiment consisted in asking the sample to rate twelve paintings from two abstract
painters: Klee and Kandinsky. The boys were not told which artist made each painting. They
were then separated into two groups based on which painter they preferred. Each boy was
then directed to award two points, one to a member of this same group and one to a
member of the other group. The only information they were given about the receivers of
the points were the code numbers and the name of the group.
Tajfel created a point allocation system to see how specific variables could influence their
choice of reward. This system was made up of: maximum joint profit (giving the largest
reward to members of both groups); maximum in-group profit (giving the largest reward to
a member of the in-group); and maximum differences (giving the largest possible difference
in reward between a member of the in-group and a member of the out-group. By doing this,
if a Klee member chose a high value for another Klee member, it would give a higher profit
to the out -group (maximum joint profit); if they chose a mid-range value for another Klee
member, it would give the same points for the other group (maximum in – group profit); if
they chose a low value for another Klee member, it would award only 1 point to the other
team (maximum differences).
The results of this study showed that: the maximum joint profit had very little effect on the
boys' choices as when the boys had a choice between maximizing profit for all and
maximizing the profit for members of their in-group, they clearly favored their own group.
When they had the choice of maximizing the difference in reward against profit for all, the
boys were willing to give their own team fewer points with the goal of maximizing the
difference between their in-group and the out-group.
The results of this study concluded that the boys left the study with less money than
they could have achieve if they had given each other the most amount possible because
they were willing to give it up to increase the different with the other group. This shows that
