Social Identity and Self-Categorization - Research Paper

Introduction

The human social behavior has been explored and explained traditionally from different perspectives such as social-psychological, sociological, psychological and biological. Generally, this approaches maintains differences in the understanding and interpretation of social behavior despite the existence of similarities. The concept of social-psychology is a scientific study of a group or human behavior. However, Hogg and Abrams (2012) point out that ancient social psychology focused on small groups of people with a mutual relationship within a similar place and time. However, what about the large social categories such as ethnicity, religion, and gender for example? Would could be the impact of the membership within these groups?

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Behind the inter-group behaviors, there could be other possible motivations. For instance, an attribution researcher did a study on how the behaviors are explained by others. He found out that there is an underestimation of the role of the environment and the situation, as people over-attribute others traits or internal dispositions. This error is believed to occur by the attribution theorists based on the focus of on a person and when a person behavior is observed by another individual, however, the main focus is on the visibility of the situation based on the attention the person is reacting to. However, the study will seek to do an in-depth analysis of the search for meaning in the social environment, and knowing or self-evolution of the primary human motive.

Most of the studies that have used the social identity theory have adopted a quantitative approach hence leasing to the experimental testing of hypotheses and theoretical assumptions. For instance, various studies have focused on inter and intra-group behaviors such as conformity, prejudice, stereotyping and ethnocentrism, however, there is the need to conduct studies on the child and adult populations especially the college students. Various attempts have been made to validate and construct a parameter that can be used to measure social identity. However, you cannot measure social identity directly as noted by Hogg and Abrams (2012). The systematic general effects that can be measured are produced through the underlying process of self-categorization. For instance, a ten scale item inventory was developed by (Brown, 2000). With the sole purpose of measuring the identification of a social group.

Based on the (Jetten et al., 1997) study, it was found out that the in-group bias was minimal in the experimental group setting compared to the natural group setting which was stronger while Haslam et al. (1995) has different results as the in-group bias was stronger in his study. Therefore, the past studies failed to support the hypothesis of the inter-group differentiation hence basing their main focus for social comparison on a non-relevant outgroup. An individual can protect his or her value system and guide for action in an appropriate circumstance while using the stereotypes in the environment or cognitive structuring. Stereotypes provide frameworks and act as a structural constant where input is re-created, modified or adapted (Tajfel, 1982). The understanding of social change among people come into play based on the search for coherence.

Several studies criticized the Tajfel's work based on the accentuation principle that is based on the minimal group experiment. The judgments within a laboratory setting tend to be easy to interpret compared to the human characteristics in a complex social setting as acknowledged by Tajfel. However, several studies focus on the physical categories as opposed to the complex social situations that this study would seek to find out.

Individual self-interest is acknowledged by the Tajfel arguments. He argues that there is the exclusion of the social identity on behavior and that the knowledge of what is already known does not move while focusing on the individual identity. Therefore, the social identity theory is limited to certain aspects of social behavior and aspects of the self.

The self-Categorization theory and the social identity theory are significant to the analysis of the relative in-group prototypically. The two theories attempt to clarify the social psychological process that is related to group action and membership.

John Turner and Henri Tajfel are the main proponents of the social identity theory that emerged during the period referred to as a crisis in social psychology. According to Tajfel, in order for someone to understand the particular uniformities of the behaviors of members of groups. Therefore, Tajfel was of the view that it is important to understand the relationship on the form of social reality at a specific time while considering the psychological effects of construction and how the groups are constructed in a specific social system (Tafel, 1981). The social identity theory argues that people drive their identity based on their social groups. For instance, society has different social categories that include religion, sex, class, and ethnicity.

The early studies that adopted the social identity theory to intergroup relations focused on areas such as the response to the Sino-British accord, the Hindu-Muslim relations in India, the Northern Ireland conflict, trade union participation, political party affiliation, and the real world political behavior. The social identity theory was applied to the ethnolinguistic minority groups and women movements by the social psychologists and the Tajfel's model on the new social movements that propped in the 1960s and 70s as the model emphasized on the intergroup conflicts in relation to material resources and collective identity (Reicher, Spears & Haslam, 2010). However, on a later stage, the social psychologists adopted it as a general meta-theoretical perspective while few researchers looked at its relevance to political action and the attitudes (Hornsey, 2008). The past decade has been characterized by a rise in interest on how the social-categorization theory and the social identity theory on the enhancement of the the social psychological understanding of extremism, conspiracy theorizing, national separatism, schism, political activism and participation, political rhetoric, leadership, political affiliation and solidarity, party identification, informal and formal political behavior.

Social identity is defined by Tajfel "that part of an individual's self-concept which derives from his knowledge of his membership in a social group (or groups) together with the value and emotional significance attached to that membership" (Tajfel, 1978). Based on this perspective, members of a group develop a sense of belonging in the social world as they relate to one another in the group hence acting based on the desirable or appropriate forms of behavior that govern the membership of the group. Moreover, Tajfel claims that the social identity process, as opposed to the personal identity, underpins the intergroup behaviors. Meaning that individuals within the group will treat the members of a clique as group members as opposed to unique individuals as they personally identify with a specific group. The existing social psychological perspective differs with the Tajfel's approach as it tends to focus on the personality traits of a specific person as the means of explaining the intergroup behaviors. The main engine of both social change and social conflict are groups rather than individuals based on one the fundamental assumption of the social identity theory (Reicher et al., 2010). The social identity theory proposes that people are mainly concerned to achieve or maintain a positive sense of self (Hornsey, 2008). Social categories are evaluated and defined comparatively as proposed by the social identity theory. Consequently, group members will be motivated to maintain and establish positive differentiation between the relevant outgroups and in-group of valued comparison dimensions in order to achieve a positive evaluation (Tajfel, 1978). A positive social identity will be conferred to membership of a group that is consensually referred to as superior while unsatisfactory or negative social identity is regarded as inferior. Occasionally, the negative social identity leads to a collective action towards inferior status and the existing social hierarchy challenges.

Motivational Elements

The social identity theory proposes that group members are generally concerned to achieve or maintain a positive sense of self as one of the motivational element of the behavior of an intergroup, therefore, for there is the need for members of a group to belong positively in the group they identify with (Hornsey & Hogg, 2000).

Self-Categorization Theory

The self-categorization theory focuses on the consequences, antecedents, and nature of the self-categorization psychological process. Focusing on the nature of the process, the self-categorization theory that through depersonalization process, members of a group tend to see the in-group members as similar to them. However, the process of deindividuation does not involve the loss of selfhood, however, it is based on the personal experiences based on the membership of the group other than the unique characteristics of an individual (Reicher, Spears & Postmes, 2010). The social identity theory and the social-categorization theory are closely linked based on the above notion, however, the key difference lies on the level of inclusiveness as the hierarchical structure is part of the social-categorization theory social categories. A particular identity or category is not defined based on the comparison with another group of the same category hence forms one of the implications of the hierarchical structure. Moreover, the level of categorization above it dictates its definition. Specific dimensions of comparison are provided by the out groups and the in-group that are encompassed by the superordinate category. This is because the prototype of what the group should be like is defined by the superordinate category. For instance, members of the national group will compare themselves to the characteristics of a prototype of a good or greater nation other than any other random dimensions. Therefore, this dimension of comparison could help in explaining why groups would choose to the same level. Consequently, the superordinate categories might be defined by group members by comparing themselves with relevant outgroups that favor them (Mummendey & Wenzel, 1999).

Focusing on the antecedents of the self-categorization process, the self-categorization theory addresses the reasons as to why a specific category in a particular context needs to be psychologically salient. The social-categorization theory based on the ideas of Burner (1957) proposes the integration of fit and accessibility as the determinants of the psychological salience of a particular level of self-categorization (Turner, Oakes, Haslam & McGarty, 1994). The function of the present expectations and the past experiences, needs, goals, values, and motives are factors that explain an individual readiness to use any set of categories, and this is what is referred to as perceiver readiness or accessibility. The fit is defined as the relationship between the external reality and the nature of categories. Fit can also be divided into two (comparative and normative fit). In this case, the comparative fit is the relationship between the distribution of the intergroup and intragroup differences and the categories. Therefore, the most salient is the set of a category that maximizes the ratios of the differences o...