Human beings are inherently born into various social groups whether it be through race, ethnicity, gender or cultural backgrounds. As an individual grows and develops these social group become more complex through friends, beliefs, sexual preferences, interests and desires. It is within these social groups individuals develop and form sense of pride, belonging, validation and identity. The aim of this essay is to compare and contrast Social Identity Theory and Social Representations Theory using race and discrimination as an underlying theme. This essay will largely focus on the differences between the two theories whilst still focusing on the major similarities. This essay will also explore how these two theories can be used to gain a better …show more content…
In a more recent definition in (Burke, 2006) book on contemporary social theories (Hogg, 2006) defined Social Identity Theory as a psychological analysis of the role self-conception has within group membership, group processes, and intergroup relations. Social Representations Theory (Moscovici, 1984) is defined as the values, ideas, beliefs, and practices that are shared between groups and communities. According to (Liu & Hilton, 2005) socially shared representations of history have been vital in creating, maintain and changing an individual’s identity, how an individual manages and negotiates this is essential to their interethnic and international relations. Social Identity Theory and Social Representation Theory both represent two very different ideologies, whilst one focuses on self and individual needs and relies heavily on inter personal needs and intergroup dynamics (SIT). The other (SRT) focuses on the processes of interpersonal communication as the main factor in the structure and content of the belief systems which are called social representations (Breakwell, 1993). However, linking these two theories together could be useful as it could be used to better understand certain area in social
Kwame Appiah, author of Racial Identities, explores the complexity between individual and collective identity. Throughout the text, Appiah attempts to define these complicated notions, noting their similarities and differences. He calls upon the ideas of other philosophers and authors to help formulate his own. Essentially, individual and collective identity are very much intertwined. Appiah argues that collective identities are very much related to behavior. There is not one particular way a certain ethnic group acts, but instead “modes of behavior (Appiah 127).” These behavioral acts provide loose norms or models. However, Appiah also notes that it is how individuals essentially make or allow these collective identities to become central
The question ‘who am I?’ raises speculations about who we are as human beings and why we behave the way we do. This is of great interest to social psychologists. One particular theory about this social identity is that it is not fixed or innate but that it is something that changes over time and is constructed through our social interactions with other people. This essay will explicate the idea of socially constructed identities and consider the evidence for and against this view with examples of research studies from both social constructionism (Phoenix, 2007) and Social Identity Theory (SIT) (Turner and Brown, 1978).
Tajifel, H. a. (1986). The social identity theory of inter-group behavior. Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/258189
People go through many obstacles when they face their social identity. Some can overcome their differences, but others may not have they change to even face them due to the treatment that they get from society. Social identity is the one of many controversial and complex problems that many individuals deal with. Because, sometimes it used to be misunderstood making reference to racism and/or others complex matters. “On Being a Cripple” and “How It Feels to Be Colored” are two essays in which both characters suffer from some kind of discrimination. Indeed, in “How It Feels to Be Colored Me” by Zora Neale Hurston and “On Being a Cripple” by Nancy Mairs, each author shows different attitude, endures challenges, and change toward social identity.
In summary, I have presented a theory for the formation and definition of racial identity, providing an example which proves it true in American Society. Yet, this does not leave me with a sense of satisfaction, rather it leaves me with great disappointment. What does this say for the society we live in; a society which is supposed to be based on the American Creed? My arguments have only proved that we are not truly individuals; the American Creed is not something America lives by. Rather we are identified as groups and not seen on a personal level…a very disturbing realization.
In the Social Identity Theory(SIT), TT, looked at inter groups relations from an identity perspective. They claimed, layered on top, beside and underneath inter group conflict is identity issues. Therefore, group identity becomes a psychological engine that allows us to understand how group conflict emerges. In this essay I will focus on 3 concepts SIT suggests. The first social comparison and distinctiveness are concepts which give insights about person’s psychology in his group’s affect on it. For gay people, it is obvious that they are not in a helathy place with these 2 concepts. After I talk about instability which is a cognitive alternative that shows gays that their relative position in the society can be changed. Later, I talk about 5 stage model which incorporates macro and micro to explain intergroup relations. I
Social identities and factors and/or experiences that have shaped your worldview. My Ethnic and cultural traditions and values have molded my social identities, in which both my Ethnic and cultural traditions and values and social identities have formed my worldview. According to my social identity wheel: My race is Asian/Pacific Islander and Filipino American. My ethnicity is Filipino. My sexual orientation is heterosexual. My religion is Roman Catholic. My age is of a young adult. I am a female. My national origin is the United States of America. My sense of who I am is based on my ethnic group that I have identified myself to belong in.
The social identity theory is a person’s sense of who they are based on their social
Some of the strengths of the social identity theory are that; throughout the years it has supported many empirical studies, it has also demonstrated the social categorization in intergroup behaviors, allowed us to differentiate between social and personal identities and has provide explanations for other areas of psychology (conformity). A weaknesses of the Social identity theory is that its application is restricted in the sense that it has very low ecological validity. Another weakness is that SIT favors situational factors rather than dispositional is not supported by evidence. The social Identity theory can be used to how to explain how we form our social and personal identities in the terms of in and out groups. SIT can also be used to explain why there is conflict between humans and different societies.
In all aspects of their lives we associate with various groups, for example demographic, cultural or peer groups. Social Identity theory developed by Henri Tajfel in 1979 explains how people develop a sense of belonging and membership in particular groups. This theory explains behaviors in terms of social groups, we form social groups and create perceptions of others and ourselves that are influenced by the various groups to which we belong. A social group is a set of individuals who hold a common social identification or view themselves as members of the same social category (Chen & Li, 2009). Individuals can have multiple, co-occurring identities which could vary. This paper aims to explain how the Social Identity theory is used to explain violence and prejudice behavior and it also looks at the advantages and disadvantages of this theory compared to other theories in explaining the same behavior.
Social institutions, like educational and religious groups, enhance rule obedience and contribute to the formation of identity and sense of belonging to certain groups. People possess a set of beliefs that condition their everyday behavior, like one can think that education is the most important four our future, while other people might believe that staying at home and raising their children is their reality. However, our beliefs are influenced by the groups that we interact. For instance, if we join a feminist movement, we might start reflecting a positive attitude towards gender equality. This illustrates how our social interaction can influence or beliefs related to race, and gender. Similarly, religious institutions and
Being able to identify with a certain group has been an issue that individuals hesitate with daily. Am I Black, are you a girl, what religion do you practice? These are all common questions that society has forced individuals to concentrate on. Should an individual have to pick a side or is it relevant to the human race to identify with any group? One may believe not, but for others having and knowing one’s own identity is important, because it is something that they have been developing their entire life. Along with how their identity influenced their life chances and their self-esteem. This can also affect how society interact with whatever identity an individual chooses to live. Which is why it was important to recognize how identifying
Burke, P.J. & Stets, J.E. (2000). Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory. Social Psychology Quarterly 63(3), 224-237
Salazar, J.M., 1998, ‘Social identity and national identity’, in Worchel, S., Morales, J.F., Páez, D., Deschamps, J.-C. (Eds.), Social Identity, International Perspectives. Sage, London.
In conclusion, social identity theory suggests that intergroup members will discriminate the out-group to increase their own self-image. There are four main concepts in the theory and they are supported by studies such as Cialdini et al. and Tajfel. The theory has both strengths such as it is supported by large amount of research and it demonstrates the roles of social categorization in intergroup behaviours but also limitations such as aim of the theory to favour situational factors rather than dispositional factors is not supported by evidence and that self-esteem hypothesis is not longer central to social identity theory. Therefore, social identity theory can be used to explain how we from our individual and group identities in terms of “in” and “out” groups. It can also be used to explain why prejudice exists in all human societies.