Stereotypes -

SLIDE 9 :

Our social world is very complex and thus presents us with too much information.
Since our capacity to process information is limited, our social world needs to be
simplified. One way to avoid this information overload is through social
categorisation. The information is used in social categorisation is basically
called stereotypes.

To properly define a "stereotype" - it is a mental representation and a form of

social categorization made about specific individuals or a group and its members.
Once a set of characteristics is used to describe a group of people, those
characteristics are often attributed to all members of the group, thus affecting
the behaviour of the people or individual who hold the stereotype, and those who
are labelled by a stereotype.

This generalization may either be positive or negative, based on a certain group.

For example - asians are intelligent and women are bad drivers.

SLIDE 10 :

Social identity theory says that our identity and behaviour is influenced by the
groups we belong to. Its like we choose a group to belong to based on traits that
we think are similar to our own. This is called social categorization. SIT argues
that we divide the world into in-groups and out-groups. We identify with our group
and begin to conform to the norms of our group. We compare our in-group to the out-
group and also see our in-group as superior while considering that out-group has
shared common traits. Often these traits are negative. This is a way of justifying
that our in-group is better than the out-group and hence this raises our self-
esteem.

SLIDE 11 :

Social Identity Theory postulates that stereotypes and resulting disciminatory

behaviour is a product of social categorization

Secondly...
It may be formed due to illusory correlation: Cognitive bias where people see
relationship between 2 variables where there is none.

SLIDE 12 :

Tajfel (1979)

Aim - To investigate if intergroup discrimination would take place based on being

put into different groups.

Method - British schoolboys (aged 14-15) were randomly divided into groups. In one
experiment, they were divided into groups based on whether they overestimated or
underestimated the number of dots on a picture, while in another, they were grouped
based on whether they preferred the paintings of one artist or another. After
playing a number of competitive games, the participants were given the opportunity
to divide money (or points) to members of each group.

Results - Most boys gave more money (or points) to members of their own group, and
less money to members of the other group. The majority of participants divided
money (or points) between the groups in such a way as to maximize the difference
between the groups. In other words, many participants would accept less money for
their own group if it meant that the other group would receive an even greater loss
of money. Participants also rated their own group members as more likeable than the
members of the other group.

Conclusion - This study supports social identity theory. People naturally

categorize themselves into groups, identify with their own group, and seek to
compare themselves favorable with opposing groups. This study suggests that even
random, trivial and meaningless groups still have a significant effect on our
behavior, resulting in loyalty to our group and hostility to the out-group.

SLIDE 13 :

A study conducted by Hamilton and Gifford (1976) - Participants had to read

descriptions of various people from two imaginary groups: group A and group B.
Group A was considerably larger than group B. The readings contained descriptions
of the individual’s group membership and a specific behaviour. The behaviours were
either helpful or harmful. For example, a teacher called John, a member of group B,
screams at his students. Nick, a member of group A, helps at his local church. When
asked to give their impressions of a typical group member, participants considered
the behaviour of group B members (the minority) to be considerably less desirable
than members of group A. There was no actual correlation between group membership
and desirability and so participants were making an illusory correlation.

SLIDE 14 :

In Tajfel's minimal group experiments, how did most participants divide money (or
points) between their team and other teams?
(a) They sought to maximise money (or points) for their own team
(b) They sought to minimize money (or points) for the other teams
(c) They sought to maximize the difference in money (or points) between their team
and other teams
(d) They sought to minimize the difference in money (or points) between their team
and other teams
Q) What are the three steps of Social Identity Theory?
Q) In which year did Hamilton and Gifford’s case study take place?

Answers -
1. C
2. Categorization, Identification, Social comparison
3. 1976