Week 1:
Topic 1: Social Identity theory
Ellemers, N., & Haslam, S.A. (2012). Social identity theory. In: P. van
Lange, A. Kruglanski, & T. Higgins (Eds.). Handbook of theories of social
psychology (pp. 379-398). London: Sage.
📘 Social Identity Theory (SIT) – Summary
1. Core Idea
People often see themselves not just as individuals but as
members of groups (e.g., “I am Dutch,” “I am a student,” “I am
Muslim”).
This group identity influences how we think, feel, and act in
social situations.
Social identity explains intergroup behaviour (us vs. them)
which is different from interpersonal behaviour (person-to-
person).
👉 Example: At a football game, you may see yourself primarily as a fan of
your team rather than as an individual.
2. Origins
Developed by Henri Tajfel, inspired by his experiences of
discrimination during WWII.
Minimal group experiments (1970s): Participants were
randomly put into groups (e.g., “blue vs. red”). Even with no real
reason, people favoured their own group (ingroup favouritism).
This showed that “mere categorization” (just creating groups) is
enough for bias, challenging the older Realistic Conflict Theory,
which said conflict only comes from competition for resources.
👉 Example: Even if kids are divided by shirt colour, they’ll give more
rewards to their own colour group.
,3. Key Psychological Processes
1. Social Categorization – Sorting people into groups (e.g., gender,
ethnicity, sports fans).
a. Simplifies the world but exaggerates differences between
groups.
2. Social Comparison – Judging groups by comparing them (e.g., “my
school is better than yours”).
a. Determines a group’s status.
3. Social Identification – Recognizing “I am part of this group” and
feeling emotionally attached.
a. Leads to ingroup loyalty and sometimes outgroup
hostility.
4. Identity Management Strategies
When people belong to a low-status or devalued group, they try to
improve their identity:
1. Individual Mobility – Try to leave the group or hide membership.
👉 Example: A working-class person distancing themselves from their
background to “fit in” with elites.
2. Social Creativity – Redefine comparisons to see the group
positively.
👉 Example: “We may not be rich, but we are kinder.” / “Black is
beautiful.”
3. Social Competition – Collective action to change the hierarchy.
👉 Example: Protests, unions, or social movements fighting for equal
rights.
5. Socio-structural Factors (What Strategy People
Choose Depends On…)
1. Permeability of boundaries – Can I leave my group?
a. If yes → individual mobility.
b. If no → group strategies (creativity or competition).
, 2. Stability of status – Can group positions change?
a. If no → less likely to fight, more likely creativity.
3. Legitimacy of status – Is the hierarchy seen as fair?
a. If unfair → people may resist, even those in advantaged
groups.
👉 Example: If women believe the gender pay gap is unfair (illegitimate),
they may push for equality.
6. Core Predictions
People strive for a positive social identity by making favourable
group comparisons.
Social categorization can lead to intergroup discrimination.Even
without real conflict, just being categorized can cause
discrimination.
The chosen strategy depends on permeability of group
boundaries, stability of status relations, and legitimacy of
group and individual outcomes.
• Self-esteem hypothesis: Proposed that successful intergroup
discrimination should elevate self-esteem, and threatened self-esteem should
promote discrimination. This hypothesis faced conceptual and methodological
issues and received mixed empirical support.
• Uncertainty reduction: Proposed as a broader motive for identity
enhancement, consistent with the original idea that social categorisations
imbue novel situations with meaning.
• Social reality constraints: Factors determining how and when people
express internal convictions about their group's worth.
• Self-Categorization Theory (SCT): Developed by Turner and colleagues,
it elaborates on the cognitive processes underpinning group-level self-
conceptions, specifying that self-categories exist at different levels of
abstraction.
◦ Self-categories: Cognitive representations of the self at different levels
of abstraction, ranging from personal identity ("I") to broad social identities
("us").
◦ Metacontrast principle: A core assumption in SCT stating that the
formation of self-categories depends on the extent to which differences
between categories outweigh differences within categories. It also determines
the prototypicality of category exemplars.
◦ Depersonalization: The psychological process where people perceive
the self as an interchangeable exemplar of a social category (i.e., defined by
social identity rather than personal identity). It is argued to be a basis for
group cohesion, interpersonal attraction, and social cooperation.
, ◦ Category accessibility and normative fit: Mechanisms specified in
SCT to explain which self-categorization is most likely to be used in a given
situation.
• Integrated social identity approach or perspective: How SIT and SCT
are often presented, as complementary theoretical frameworks.
• Social identity value: The content of characteristics typically associated
with a particular social group.
• Social identity strength: The extent to which an individual subjectively
perceives the self to be included in the group.
• Group identification: Indicates a person's situational inclination to think
and act in terms of a group-level self. It is seen as a dynamic construct,
developing and changing over time and across social contexts in a recursive
process.
• Social identity threat: Occurs when different identity components are not
aligned (e.g., emotional involvement without cognitive inclusion, or vice
versa)
7. Developments
Self-Esteem Hypothesis (1990s): Discrimination boosts self-
esteem (mixed evidence).
Uncertainty Reduction: People use group identities to reduce
uncertainty in new situations.
Self-Categorization Theory (SCT): (by Turner) Explains cognitive
processes:
o People categorize at different levels (“I” vs. “we”).
o Depersonalization: Seeing yourself as an interchangeable
member of the group, which builds cohesion.
8. Applications
SIT is a grand theory that helps explain:
Ethnic, religious, gender, and class conflicts.
Social movements, protests, and discrimination.
Workplace outcomes: stress, performance, cooperation.
Political identity, nationalism, and migration.
👉 Example: SIT helps explain why people may vote along ethnic or
national lines, or why marginalized groups push for recognition.
Topic 1: Social Identity theory
Ellemers, N., & Haslam, S.A. (2012). Social identity theory. In: P. van
Lange, A. Kruglanski, & T. Higgins (Eds.). Handbook of theories of social
psychology (pp. 379-398). London: Sage.
📘 Social Identity Theory (SIT) – Summary
1. Core Idea
People often see themselves not just as individuals but as
members of groups (e.g., “I am Dutch,” “I am a student,” “I am
Muslim”).
This group identity influences how we think, feel, and act in
social situations.
Social identity explains intergroup behaviour (us vs. them)
which is different from interpersonal behaviour (person-to-
person).
👉 Example: At a football game, you may see yourself primarily as a fan of
your team rather than as an individual.
2. Origins
Developed by Henri Tajfel, inspired by his experiences of
discrimination during WWII.
Minimal group experiments (1970s): Participants were
randomly put into groups (e.g., “blue vs. red”). Even with no real
reason, people favoured their own group (ingroup favouritism).
This showed that “mere categorization” (just creating groups) is
enough for bias, challenging the older Realistic Conflict Theory,
which said conflict only comes from competition for resources.
👉 Example: Even if kids are divided by shirt colour, they’ll give more
rewards to their own colour group.
,3. Key Psychological Processes
1. Social Categorization – Sorting people into groups (e.g., gender,
ethnicity, sports fans).
a. Simplifies the world but exaggerates differences between
groups.
2. Social Comparison – Judging groups by comparing them (e.g., “my
school is better than yours”).
a. Determines a group’s status.
3. Social Identification – Recognizing “I am part of this group” and
feeling emotionally attached.
a. Leads to ingroup loyalty and sometimes outgroup
hostility.
4. Identity Management Strategies
When people belong to a low-status or devalued group, they try to
improve their identity:
1. Individual Mobility – Try to leave the group or hide membership.
👉 Example: A working-class person distancing themselves from their
background to “fit in” with elites.
2. Social Creativity – Redefine comparisons to see the group
positively.
👉 Example: “We may not be rich, but we are kinder.” / “Black is
beautiful.”
3. Social Competition – Collective action to change the hierarchy.
👉 Example: Protests, unions, or social movements fighting for equal
rights.
5. Socio-structural Factors (What Strategy People
Choose Depends On…)
1. Permeability of boundaries – Can I leave my group?
a. If yes → individual mobility.
b. If no → group strategies (creativity or competition).
, 2. Stability of status – Can group positions change?
a. If no → less likely to fight, more likely creativity.
3. Legitimacy of status – Is the hierarchy seen as fair?
a. If unfair → people may resist, even those in advantaged
groups.
👉 Example: If women believe the gender pay gap is unfair (illegitimate),
they may push for equality.
6. Core Predictions
People strive for a positive social identity by making favourable
group comparisons.
Social categorization can lead to intergroup discrimination.Even
without real conflict, just being categorized can cause
discrimination.
The chosen strategy depends on permeability of group
boundaries, stability of status relations, and legitimacy of
group and individual outcomes.
• Self-esteem hypothesis: Proposed that successful intergroup
discrimination should elevate self-esteem, and threatened self-esteem should
promote discrimination. This hypothesis faced conceptual and methodological
issues and received mixed empirical support.
• Uncertainty reduction: Proposed as a broader motive for identity
enhancement, consistent with the original idea that social categorisations
imbue novel situations with meaning.
• Social reality constraints: Factors determining how and when people
express internal convictions about their group's worth.
• Self-Categorization Theory (SCT): Developed by Turner and colleagues,
it elaborates on the cognitive processes underpinning group-level self-
conceptions, specifying that self-categories exist at different levels of
abstraction.
◦ Self-categories: Cognitive representations of the self at different levels
of abstraction, ranging from personal identity ("I") to broad social identities
("us").
◦ Metacontrast principle: A core assumption in SCT stating that the
formation of self-categories depends on the extent to which differences
between categories outweigh differences within categories. It also determines
the prototypicality of category exemplars.
◦ Depersonalization: The psychological process where people perceive
the self as an interchangeable exemplar of a social category (i.e., defined by
social identity rather than personal identity). It is argued to be a basis for
group cohesion, interpersonal attraction, and social cooperation.
, ◦ Category accessibility and normative fit: Mechanisms specified in
SCT to explain which self-categorization is most likely to be used in a given
situation.
• Integrated social identity approach or perspective: How SIT and SCT
are often presented, as complementary theoretical frameworks.
• Social identity value: The content of characteristics typically associated
with a particular social group.
• Social identity strength: The extent to which an individual subjectively
perceives the self to be included in the group.
• Group identification: Indicates a person's situational inclination to think
and act in terms of a group-level self. It is seen as a dynamic construct,
developing and changing over time and across social contexts in a recursive
process.
• Social identity threat: Occurs when different identity components are not
aligned (e.g., emotional involvement without cognitive inclusion, or vice
versa)
7. Developments
Self-Esteem Hypothesis (1990s): Discrimination boosts self-
esteem (mixed evidence).
Uncertainty Reduction: People use group identities to reduce
uncertainty in new situations.
Self-Categorization Theory (SCT): (by Turner) Explains cognitive
processes:
o People categorize at different levels (“I” vs. “we”).
o Depersonalization: Seeing yourself as an interchangeable
member of the group, which builds cohesion.
8. Applications
SIT is a grand theory that helps explain:
Ethnic, religious, gender, and class conflicts.
Social movements, protests, and discrimination.
Workplace outcomes: stress, performance, cooperation.
Political identity, nationalism, and migration.
👉 Example: SIT helps explain why people may vote along ethnic or
national lines, or why marginalized groups push for recognition.
