Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Membership in social groups is more than mere classification; it carries emotional significance as well. Attachment to the groups to which one belongs, or ingroups, and preference for these ingroups over outgroups may be a universal characteristic of human social life. Ethnocentrism refers to this strong predilection for loyalty and preferential treatment of one's ingroups over other groups, and the tendency to judge and evaluate others from the perspective of ingroup norms and practices.

The study of ethnocentrism has a long history in social science research on intergroup relations. Theories of ethnocentrism incorporate evolutionary perspectives, psychodynamic theory, and social psychological theories of group identity. Research on ethnocentrism documents the powerful effects of ingroup attachment on both intragroup and intergroup behavior. This entry briefly reviews ethnocentrism, discussing its origins and the role played in it by ingroup bias and examining several theoretical perspectives on the concept.

History

The concept of ethnocentrism was introduced to social science in a book entitled Folkways published by William Graham Sumner in 1906. The apparently universal tendency for human beings to differentiate themselves according to group membership was documented in the rich anthropological observations compiled by Sumner. Sumner adopted the terms “ingroup” and “outgroup” to refer to social groupings to which a particular individual belongs or does not belong. He then went on to speculate that ethnocentrism is a universal consequence of this distinction between ingroups and outgroups. Ethnocentrism was defined as a kind of group self-centeredness characterized by a sense of ingroup moral superiority and contempt for outsiders.

According to Sumner's analysis, the essential characteristics of an individual's relationship to ingroups are loyalty and preference. Loyalty is represented in adherence to ingroup norms and trustworthiness in dealings with fellow ingroup members. Preference is represented in ingroup pride and differential acceptance of ingroup members over outgroup members. Sumner contended further that all groups view outgroups with contempt and hostility and that ingroup peace and cohesion is maintained by intergroup competition and conflict. As a consequence, the term ethnocentrism has come to mean both ingroup favoritism and general negativity toward outgroups. The present review will focus exclusively on the ingroup preference aspect of ethnocentrism (also known as ingroup bias) in order to distinguish ethnocentrism from outgroup prejudice as a separate topic.

Ingroup Bias

The fact that individuals value, favor, and conform to their own membership groups (ingroups) over groups to which they do not belong (outgroups) is among the most well-established phenomena in social psychology. Since Sumner's 1906 book, hundreds of studies in the laboratory and the field have documented ingroup favoritism in myriad forms. Preferential treatment and evaluation of ingroups relative to outgroups appears in evaluations of group products, application of rules of fairness in the allocation of resources to ingroup and outgroup members, attributions for positive and negative behavior, and willingness to trust and cooperate. Further, the tendency toward preferential treatment appears to arise automatically when any us–them distinction is made salient. Experimental social psychologists have demonstrated that even classifying individuals into arbitrary categories in the laboratory can elicit ingroup–outgroup feelings.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading