Social Identity Theory

Minimal Groups

SIT posits that people maintain a positive view of their ingroups as a way of maintaining positive self-esteem. Once people identify with a group, they begin to display ingroup favoritism, in which they seek what is known as positive distinctiveness by evaluating their group more favorably than the outgroup on some valued dimension, and outgroup distancing (avoiding the outgroup) or outgroup derogation (negative attitudes toward the outgroup).

Whereas several other theories of intergroup relations suggest that people may be prejudiced against outgroups due to historical conflicts, social hierarchies, or previous injustices, in contrast, SIT predicts that people will favor ingroups and become prejudiced against outgroups as soon as and only because group categorization exists. Because group membership makes salient categories of “us” versus “them,” group identification may cause prejudice and discrimination due to people's motivation to affiliate with and protect their group. An example can be seen in traditional school rivalries. Typically, rival schools are similar in aspects such as region, size, and type of student; despite these similarities, students at the schools maintain a negative view of each other, often via direct comparison.

This prediction led to the classic experimental procedure known as the minimal group paradigm. In this procedure, participants are divided into groups using arbitrary, meaningless categories. Examples of specific groups used in this research are underestimators versus overestimators, in which people are told that their group membership was determined by how they incorrectly estimated a large series of dots on a piece of paper given limited time, groups based on art preferences, or even groups decided by the flip of a coin. Participants are divided into groups such as these specifically because the groups are basically meaningless (or minimal). Despite the lack of meaning behind categories such as these, SIT hypothesizes that the participants will feel a certain affinity to their own group, as part of their social identity, and thus will engage in behaviors designed to protect and advance the group.

The common outcome that is measured in this paradigm is how individuals will distribute some type of desirable resource, such as points or money, between their group and at least one other outgroup. In several studies, including participants of different ages and cultures, the results are consistent: People demonstrate ingroup favoritism by providing them with a higher amount of resources while depriving the outgroups. In short, discrimination against an outgroup is elicited easily and quickly even when group assignment and categorization are random and meaningless.

...