February 16^th, 2000

Group Identity

We all identify with some groups.

See Figure 6.2: Factors that make social identity accessible.

Presence of in-group members can make your identity more salient. If in-group membership is relevant as to why you get together à makes salient.

In-group favoritism: allocate money, etc. in a favorable fashion to the in-group. You get this phenomenon even when in a meaningless group (Minimal group paradigm).

You also favor in-groups in your memory (see Figure 6.4).

Cognitive disregard: you don’t pay attention to people who aren’t very relevant to you. Study: approaching people in a park. Who is remembered? What if use odd question?

There is a general tendency to identify people of in-group better. The Own-Race Bias.

Also see figure 6.5.

Blacks also remember whites better than whites remember whites. Why? Member of minority group? à adaptive to remember majority group members.

Outgroup homogeneity: we tend to see outgroup members as very similar and in-group members as different.

There are some factors that modify this trend. Factors increasing perceived group heterogeneity:

a) increased familiarity w/ group members à more heterogeneity

b) increased dependency on individual group members

c) increased group size: bigger the group à more difft the people

Factors increasing perceived group homogeneity:

a) increased identification with the group. The more you identify w/ group, more you see them the same

b) increased knowledge of group stereotypes

c) increased dependency on the group as a whole

d) decrease group size

Implication: all things considered, get outgroup homogeneity effect. Eg.., sorority longitudinal study.

Claude Steele: negative consequences of identifying with groups.

Stereotype vulnerability: when feel you’re not just representing self, but also the group, you feel a lot of pressure. The stereotype makes you feel vulnerable. The pressure causes person to perform bad à confirming the stereotype.