Evaluate Social Identity Theory

Social identity theory is designed by Tajfel and Turner (1979) to explain how it is that people develop a sense of membership and belonging in specific groups, and how the mechanics of intergroup discrimination. Several interconnected mechanisms are at work with social identity theory. The core concept is that individuals tend to look for out-group membership as an affirmation of self-esteem, however that subscription in a group alone is inadequate to construct self-esteem. To feel more self-confidence, people need to believe that they remain in the right group, which produces the requirement for a favorable distinction from other groups.

There are 3 cognitive procedures that are Social Categorisation, Social Recognition and Social Contrast. Tajfel and his colleagues divided some school children in to 2 various groups, they allocated them randomly into the groups however the individuals thought that the groups were specified by their choices to paintings.

They had to offer points to the in-group and the out-group but were not permitted to provide indicate themselves.

Get quality help now

WriterBelle

Verified writer

Proficient in: Identity

4.7 (657)

“ Really polite, and a great writer! Task done as described and better, responded to all my questions promptly too! ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

The individuals would favour people in their group rather than the individuals of the other group. In most cases the participants would sacrifice points for their group simply to increase the distinction between the groups. The participants would provide 7 points to their own group and give the other group 1, although they could have given 13 to each group. This shows that you can be quickly be put in a group for a minor thing and you would stick and go versus the other group and see them as the opponent without having any genuine factor.

Caroline Howarth brought out the 2nd research. The individuals all lived in the Brixton location, which was seen as a poor and violent place and likewise where a great deal of black people were believed to have lived there and were considered being the main reason for violence. Within the very first set of focus groups (overall of 7), she asked teens to speak about Brixton, she inquired to 'inform me about Brixton-- what it is like for you to live here and how individuals outside Brixton think about Brixton'. Howarth utilized a topic guideline to ensure that main research concerns were always covered (on community, addition, exclusion, identity, ethnicity, the media, prejudice, bigotry, the school).

The organisation of focus groups into friendship groups made it possible for participants to discuss these experiences with admirable confidence, maturity and understanding. It can, nonetheless, be difficult for the social researcher to access such sensitive material. When the moderator is an outsider and when research participants assume (often correctly) that the researcher has little experience of the kind of discrimination and challenges to self-esteem that pervade their lives, mistrust and suspicion may harm the research relationship. The girls answered positively and were happy to be from Brixton and did not want to move away and did not see any problems. This would shock people, as they would have thought people would move away if they had the chance. They are creating a social identity, as they are happy to be a part of the Brixton identity.

There are some problems with this study as there are some ethical issues, they were deceived as they were lied to in the Tajfel study as they were just randomly picked and had nothing to do with their views on the paintings. Whereas the Howarth study they were not deceived which is a good way to carry out a study but they might have lied with their answers to please the examiner and have changed their behavior to be positive and not how that even the people who live there think the same as everyone else.

Both of these studies are valid as the research supports the theory and the results can be applied to everyday life. The Tajfel study shows how people at school in the playground group and pick the group they have the most in common with and communicate with them and if they do not seem to have anything in common they would not stay there. The second study by Howarth can also be applied in everyday life as people create social identity all the time, if a place is thought of negatively by people who do not live their then the people who do can make a social identity and be happy and have positive thoughts about this area and not agree with the others.

The theory seems to be a good and plausible theory as the research supports the theory that people automatically divide the social world into the in-group (people like me) and the out-group (people who are not like me). The people see the people in their group as similar to them but 2 different groups seem to be so different from each other when not in all cases they are that different from each other.