Nour Khalifa
Study Guide- Sociocultural Approach
TOPICS STUDY DESCRIPTION KEY TERMS
Social identity Tajfel and Aim
theory turner et al • To investigate the minimal conditions
under which discrimination between
Minimal social groups could be brought about
Method
group
• 48 schoolboys all aged around 14 -15
paradigm
years old were randomly allocated to
either a 'Klee group' or to a 'Kandinsky
group' . This took place after they had
been involved in an exercise where
they were successively shown a series
of slides of six pairs of unlabeled and
unsigned abstract paintings.
• They were told they were by the
artists Klee and Kandinsky and were
asked to express their preferences for
one or the other as the slides were
displayed. After they had said which
paintings they preferred, the boys
were told, (on a purely random basis),
that they were in the 'Klee' group or
the 'Kandinsky' group.
• The boys were then asked to allocate
points (worth 1/10 of a penny each).
Such allocation was anonymous, and
the boys were asked to work
separately on this in individual
cubicles. A matrix was used that
allowed them to vary how the points
were allocated.
Results
• When the boys had the choice
between maximizing the profit for all
and maximizing the profit for their
own group, they chose the latter. They
were found to be more concerned
with creating as large a difference as
possible between the amounts
allocated to each group (in favor of
their own group), than in gaining a
greater amount for everybody, across
the two groups
Conclusion
• This is evidence of blatant
discrimination associated with the
categorization of the boys into
, Nour Khalifa
apparently meaningless social groups.
It forms the basis of Tajfel's minimal
group paradigm
Evaluation
• Strengths
o The study effectively established
the bare minimum for group
membership
o Clearly illustrated in group bias
in the context of resource
competition
o Starkly illustrated the
occurrence of in-group bias as a
result of very insignificant
distinctions and minimal
emotional involvement
• Limitations
o Not a natural environment (low
ecological validity) lab
experiments are artificial
o What about struggling for actual
resources
o The study was conducted on 14
-15 year old boys and therefore
the results cannot be
extrapolated or generalized to a
broader population
o So many confounding variables
Ethical considerations
• The research was conducted on
participants under the age of 18 and
therefore their parents would have
had to give their consent for their
children's participation
• Deception was used to hide the true
aim from participants
• All researchers conducting studies
within the field of psychological
research are expected to consider
ethical guidelines
Methodological considerations
• The study was conducted in a lab,
therefore it had high levels of control
over variables. This means it lacked
both ecological validity and mundane
realism
Social identity Dobbbs Aim
theory and Crano
, Nour Khalifa
Minimal • To investigate factors that affect
group minimal group paradigm-based
paradigm discrimination
• Is it really that minimal or does it need
more than that for them to have
ingroup favoritism
o Is it that simple
Method
• Lab experiment
• Used a minimal groups study and
asked people to justify their in-group
favoritism
• Introduced three new variables to
Klee and Kandinsky (independent
variables)
o Accountability and no
accountability
• Half were told to write
their name and the other
half were asked not to
o High competence and low
competence
• This is smarter than this
group, they feel like they
are stronger than this
group
o Majority and minority
• Told them that their group
was 80% of the whole
group and the rest are
20%
• They then asked them to allocate the
resources like Klee and Kandinsky
Results
• Out-group decrease in discrimination
was especially evident when the
allocator was of majority status.
Allocators of minority status tended to
discriminate more when made
accountable to the out-group
• When you are made accountable for
your choice, you discriminate less
• If they felt like they had more
competence they discriminated more
• Discrimination decreases when they
think they are from the majority while
the minority discriminated more
• Look at the people that did not
discriminate
• Tajfel and turner considered them s
discriminators but not everyone
Study Guide- Sociocultural Approach
TOPICS STUDY DESCRIPTION KEY TERMS
Social identity Tajfel and Aim
theory turner et al • To investigate the minimal conditions
under which discrimination between
Minimal social groups could be brought about
Method
group
• 48 schoolboys all aged around 14 -15
paradigm
years old were randomly allocated to
either a 'Klee group' or to a 'Kandinsky
group' . This took place after they had
been involved in an exercise where
they were successively shown a series
of slides of six pairs of unlabeled and
unsigned abstract paintings.
• They were told they were by the
artists Klee and Kandinsky and were
asked to express their preferences for
one or the other as the slides were
displayed. After they had said which
paintings they preferred, the boys
were told, (on a purely random basis),
that they were in the 'Klee' group or
the 'Kandinsky' group.
• The boys were then asked to allocate
points (worth 1/10 of a penny each).
Such allocation was anonymous, and
the boys were asked to work
separately on this in individual
cubicles. A matrix was used that
allowed them to vary how the points
were allocated.
Results
• When the boys had the choice
between maximizing the profit for all
and maximizing the profit for their
own group, they chose the latter. They
were found to be more concerned
with creating as large a difference as
possible between the amounts
allocated to each group (in favor of
their own group), than in gaining a
greater amount for everybody, across
the two groups
Conclusion
• This is evidence of blatant
discrimination associated with the
categorization of the boys into
, Nour Khalifa
apparently meaningless social groups.
It forms the basis of Tajfel's minimal
group paradigm
Evaluation
• Strengths
o The study effectively established
the bare minimum for group
membership
o Clearly illustrated in group bias
in the context of resource
competition
o Starkly illustrated the
occurrence of in-group bias as a
result of very insignificant
distinctions and minimal
emotional involvement
• Limitations
o Not a natural environment (low
ecological validity) lab
experiments are artificial
o What about struggling for actual
resources
o The study was conducted on 14
-15 year old boys and therefore
the results cannot be
extrapolated or generalized to a
broader population
o So many confounding variables
Ethical considerations
• The research was conducted on
participants under the age of 18 and
therefore their parents would have
had to give their consent for their
children's participation
• Deception was used to hide the true
aim from participants
• All researchers conducting studies
within the field of psychological
research are expected to consider
ethical guidelines
Methodological considerations
• The study was conducted in a lab,
therefore it had high levels of control
over variables. This means it lacked
both ecological validity and mundane
realism
Social identity Dobbbs Aim
theory and Crano
, Nour Khalifa
Minimal • To investigate factors that affect
group minimal group paradigm-based
paradigm discrimination
• Is it really that minimal or does it need
more than that for them to have
ingroup favoritism
o Is it that simple
Method
• Lab experiment
• Used a minimal groups study and
asked people to justify their in-group
favoritism
• Introduced three new variables to
Klee and Kandinsky (independent
variables)
o Accountability and no
accountability
• Half were told to write
their name and the other
half were asked not to
o High competence and low
competence
• This is smarter than this
group, they feel like they
are stronger than this
group
o Majority and minority
• Told them that their group
was 80% of the whole
group and the rest are
20%
• They then asked them to allocate the
resources like Klee and Kandinsky
Results
• Out-group decrease in discrimination
was especially evident when the
allocator was of majority status.
Allocators of minority status tended to
discriminate more when made
accountable to the out-group
• When you are made accountable for
your choice, you discriminate less
• If they felt like they had more
competence they discriminated more
• Discrimination decreases when they
think they are from the majority while
the minority discriminated more
• Look at the people that did not
discriminate
• Tajfel and turner considered them s
discriminators but not everyone
