Explain social identity theory

Henry Tajfel proposed the social identity theory, as he explains that people try to boost their self
esteem and self image through social categorizing. Through social categorizing, individuals tend
to place other people as out groups, and consider their own groups as the in group. All individuals
have several identities, for example we have racial groups, social groups and sports clubs. The
social identity theory contributes to how we feel about ourselves.

Individuals tend to seek positive social identities to maintain and enhance their self esteem. By
developing in group favoritism, the SIT would predict that individuals becom more bias towards
their own group. however this favoritism towards one’s own group may mean that they would
discriminate have prejudice against the out groups. As humans have the need to belong, they
would feel that they should affiliate themselves with the successful groups in order to boost thir
self esteem. This shows the importance of social belonging.
Even when people are allocated to random groups, they may discriminate against other groups as
they automatically form a bond with their own group members. There are three fundamental
cognitive processes behind the social learning theory. Firstly, categorization will take place. This
is when members of the group put other people in the out group, and their own group as in the in
group. secondly, identification will take place. This is when individuals adopt and identity of the
group that they belong in it, and they adopt the value and behavior of the group. for example if the
in group thinks that the ball will drop from the 5th floor, then the rest of the group would agree on
that, as they all want to belong in the group. This may be demonstrated by cialdini’s study, where
cialdini found that after a team wins in their college football game, the supporters are more likely
to wear badges or any signs of clothing that supports their team. This shows how people like to
identify with their group in order to gain self esteem that they are in the better group. The third
cognitive process is the comparison with the other group. Individuals would enhance their self
identity through comparison with other groups. They point out the benefits of belonging in the
group.

Tajfel demonstrated the social identity theory through allocating the boys randomly to groups
based on the ones that liked the artwork by Kandinsky or Klee. The boys demonstrated that they
consider themselves as the ingroups and the others as out groups, as they gave the other team a
lower score when to rate them. this shows how despite the groups were created randomly, people
still showed in group favoritism.

Discuss the use of compliance techniques

People comply when the situation does not exert direct pressure to follow the majority, however
the pressure is often perceived by the individual as it influences their behavior. People may do this
to adapt their own actions to other people’s wishes. This usually occurs when people are
responding to a request.
These following factors would affect the extent to which one complies with a request. The
authority that the commander has, the commitment that individual has towards the task, the extent
to which the individual likes the commander, and reciprocity. If a person has a higher authority
figure or is more respectable, then people are more likely to comply. If david beckham wants you
to wash his car, you are more likely to say yes than if a stranger wants you to wash their car. If a
person is more committed to something, then they are more likely to comply to the request. As a
dance captain of 10 years, you may be more complied to help the dance academy choreograph a
dance piece, as compared to a person who has been a dance captain for 1 week. People wish to
remain consistent with their actions. The goal gradient suggests that the longer people commit to
something, the less likely they would abandon the request and idea. This may apply to simply day
to day actions too- you are more likely to wait in line to pay for the bread if you’ve already been
standing there for 15 minutes. People would also comply to the request more if they liked the
person that is asking for the favor. If you were asked to wash the dishes, the chances of you
actually doing it are more likely if the favor was requested by your mum.

The door in the face technique uses the idea of reciprocity that people feel like they should return
the favor. This technique is when someone asks for a bigger favor at first, and then followed by
the second favor – which is usually the target favor. The chances are that the person would reject
the first favor as it is too extreme and the person is unwilling to help. However the second request
is usually a smaller and less extreme favor as compared to the first, and therefore the individual
feels that since the requestor already compromised and is no longer asking for as much, they
should agree to help them. Cialdini approached 2 groups of students. When they first group of
students were approached, Cialdini asked them to chaperone a group of juvenile kids to the zoo.
When the second group of students was approached Cialdini first asked them to counsel 2 hours a
week for a minimum of two years, and then they were asked if they would take juveniles’ to the
zoo. 83% of the first group rejected the volunteer. In the second group, 0% of the students were
willing to counsel, but when they were asked if they would bring the juveniles to the zoo, 50%
agreed to help. This shows the effectiveness of the door in the face technique, as individuals feel
that since the requestor has compromised, they should make an effort too.

The foot in the door technique is based on the idea of manipulating the thoughts of the individuals.
A small request is usually presented first, and then a larger one is then presented. It is thought that
the second larger request would be more likely to accept if the person accepts the first request.
This is based on the commitment factor that causes one to comply. Sherman phoned people in the
US, asking if they would hypothetically spend 3 hours collecting donations for the American
Cancer society. Three days later, Sherman phoned them again, asking if they would actually help
out. The results showed that 31% of the participants were actually willing to help out. Another
group of participants were approached directly and asked if they would help out , and only 4% of
the participants agreed to do so. This is a significant increase in the number of people who are
willing to help. This shows how once people agreed to commit to something, they are more likely
to continue their commitment. During the first phone call, people may perceive that they are a
“helpful person”. Therefore when the researcher calls for the second time, they think that since
they are a “helpful” person, then they must help again. This shows how the initial request has
initiated the self perception that they are helpful. This is actually applicable in real life situations,
as people do tend to feel more positive about themselves after helping out at charities and
donations.

Another technique is the low balling technique. This technique is when the persuader secures a
first request, then they later reveal their hidden cost which is usually a larger request. This may be
common in our ever day lives. Children may ask their parents for $1000 to go on a school trip – so
the parents would have made the bank transfers and payments. However they may come up to you
after a few days, asking for another $200. At that point, you may be more willing to give that extra
money because you’ve already gone through the fuss to pay the $1000 the first round. This may be
shown through Cialdini’s study. Cialdini asked half the class of 1st year psychology students to
volunteer on a cognition experiment that beings at 7am. Cialdini then asked the other half of the
class of to volunteer for the cognition, and then afterwards telling them that it was at 7am. From
the first group, only 24% of the students said yes. However in the second group, 56% of the
students said yes to the first request, and even after they were told that the study began at 7am, no
one decided to drop out. on the day of the study, 95% of the students actually turned up. This may
be explained through cognitive dissonance – people want their beliefs and actions to be consistent.
But when there is inconsistency, cognitive dissonance may occur. In Cialdini’s study, cognitive
dissonance may occur between the commitment that they’ve made, and their annoyance at the
early starting time of the experiment. Because of their cognitive dissonance, the participants made
themselves believe that 7am isn’t that bad, and that they should stick with their initial opinions.

although the results from these 3 studies all suggest that the compliance techniques are effective, it
is important to note that different cultures and genders may comply differently. Females may be
more willing to comply as they depend on social support more, therefore they are more willing to
help out. Countries that have high power distance such as Malaysia may be more willing to
comply, as they accept that institution and organizations have more power over their workers.
Countries that have high masculinity rates such as Japan may be more willing to comply to
requests made by males because they agree with the gender differentiation that males have a more
dominant and powerful say in the society. Collectivistic countries such as China and Hong Kong
may also be more willing to comply as they understand the need of group harmony. They may feel
that by complying to the requests that others make, there is greater harmony in the society.

People commonly adopt compliance techniques in order to gain the favors that they want.
Marketing companies may be specially interested in familiarizing themselves with these
techniques, because if they do manage to master the compliance techniques, they may sell a lot
more of their products as consumers feel obliged to purchase from them.

Discuss factors influencing conformity

Culture is something that would influence conformity levels. Conformity is the ways in which the
society or culture passes down its values and behavior through an indirect form of social
influence. People may conform to become more socially acceptable in their community or cultural
groups. They simply change their behavior due to group pressure, even if they know that they are
correct. People have cognitive dissonance when what others are doing conflict with their own
belief – however this dissonance is resolved by conforming to the majority, as we assume that
other people are correct.

Collectivistic cultures may conform more to group norms, as Hofstede has found that collectivistic
cultures tend to focus on group harmony, rather than individual success. Collectivistic cultures
may include Hong Kong and China, where they feel that shame should be avoided, therefore by
agreeing to their group, they may not feel shameful, and instead have harmony between the
groups. On the other hand, individualistic cultures may not conform to group norms are they
believe in individual success; they don’t care what the group thinks, as long as the individual
themselves can be correct. Smith and Bond conducted a meta analysis of 31 conformity studies.
They found that collectivistic cultures had higher conformity, at an average of 37.1%. on the other
hand, individualistic cultures had lower conformity, at na average of 25.3%. this may suggest that
collectivistic cultures do have a stronger emphasis on their relationships, and that their groups are
more important than the self. However it is quite difficult to generalize that collectivistic cultures
have higher conformity just because of Smith and Bond’s study. There are many differences
between a country, and their beliefs should not be neglected. As we become more modern, less
people may follow the traditional roles. Takano has found that there are differences in conformity
between informal and formal sports groups – therefore culture is not the only reason in which
conformity is affected.

People’s professions may also affect the extent to which they conform. There tend to be a lower
conformity in those who have higher self esteem, as they have more confidence in the actions and
thoughts that they carry out. Spencer has carried out Asch’s experiment on engineers and
mathematicians, and Spencer found that only 1/396 participants conformed. This shows how the
confidence and self esteem of the participants may affect the extent to which they conform. They
don’t feel the need to conform as they think that they are correct; therefore they do not need to fit
into the group norms as they know that they are the incorrect ones.

Outline principles that define the sociocultural level

of analysis
The first principle is that human behavior is affected by the situation that they’re in. external
events have the ability to affect the individual, as it influences the individual’s behavior. However
it is extremely common for people to over emphasize on dispositional factors, as that is the
fundamental attribution error. The situation that we’re in can change the belief and attitude that we
have. This may be demonstrated in Zimbardo’s study, where a random sample was allocated the
role as a guard or prisoner. The participants were so into their role that the study had to be
cancelled after 6 days as too many people were suffering. This shows how placing a person in a
different situation may affect the way that they behave, as people tend to conform. As they
conform, they are are accepting their social roles that they have. People also comply to different
situations, as they don’t have a direct pressure to follow the majority, however the individual’s
behavior is often influenced. This may be demonstrated in milgrams study, where participants
were ordered by an authority figure to allow a confederate to be shocked. The participants may
have only complied to do so because they felt obliged to follow the instructions of an authority
figure. The idea that human behavior is affected by their situation may also be represented in real
life situations; as many people followed the rules and orders that Hitler gave out during world war
two, despite knowing that they are performing wrong and sinful actions.

The second principle is that culture can influence our behavior. This is based on the belief that
people have norms and values of the society that they follow. It is important for people to
understand the differences in different cultures, as people have different cultural norms that should
always be respected to avoid discrimination. Although it is quite hard to generalize an entire
country, Hofstede has suggested that countries such as China and Hong Kong and collectivistic,
whilst countries such as UK and US are individualistic. He thinks that collectivistic cultures value
group relationships more and wish to avoid shame, whilst individualistic cultures value individual
power and success.

The third principle is that humans have a social self, and we have a need to belong. This is
suggested by Henry Tajfel’s social identity theory, where he believes that humans try to gain and
improve self esteem by categorizing their own groups of people as in groups and other people as
out groups. By categorizing people, humans may discriminate against the others; however this is a
way of shortcut thinking that may help people understand someone. As we have a need to belong,
we’d constantly try to gain favoritism within our group members. People tend to have several
identities that they have, for example their social identity, family identity or school identity. When
people are part of those groups, they feel a sense of pride and belonging, as they manage their
thoughts based on the group.

The fourth principle is that human’s view of the world are resistant to change. This forces people
to accept different cultural norms. As humans constantly place themselves in different groups, the
way that they interpret the world would always be changing.

Discuss two errors in attributions

Attribution is the way that humans interpret information and situations, and they give it a casual
explanation for why and how it occurred. This is done by humans collecting the information that
they have just perceived, then giving a judgment and reasoning for it. The two attribution errors
that this essay will discuss are the fundamental attribution error, and the self serving bias.

Humans make these attributions unconsciously, as they are constantly making judgments on
things that happen. We don’t like to admit or think that we are making these errors, but they are
actually extremely common. Different cultures may have different ways of explaining
relationships; however that might be quite reductionist to say so, as there are a lot of different
groups of people within a culture, as there are always minor ethnic groups that should be
considered.

Self serving bias is when a person attributes their success to their dispositional factors, and they
attribute their failures to situational factors. Dispositional factors that affect the behavior are
explanations of the behavior based on internal factors that are caused by the individuals’
personality and characteristic. Situational factors that affect the behavior are explanations of the
behavior based on external factors that are not caused by the individual, and are caused by
external factors that an individual can’t control.
The theory of self serving bias may be evidence in a study by Lau and Russel. They found that
American football coaches would attribute their winnings of the game to their hard work and
ability, whilst they would attribute their losses to situational factors, such as – bad weather, or they
were wearing incorrect kit. This suggests that people tend to direct their success to internal factors
to improve their self image and self esteem. Greenberg suggests that people employ the self
serving bias in order to improve and alleviate their self esteem. When they win, they would boost
their self esteem and image by saying that it was due to internal factors. However when they lose,
they would protect their self esteem by saying that it was the external factors that influenced their
behavior. This way, the person doesn’t appear to be a failure and that would protect their own self
image.

It is important to realize that not everyone would employ the self serving bias. Different cultures
have different attitudes, and this brings into the question of whether everyone attempts to protect
their self image. Hofstede conducted a study to look at the cultural dimensions for over 50
different countries, and he found that individualistic cultures such as America and United
Kingdom may have different attitudes as compared to collectivistic cultures such as Hong Kong
and China. Kashima and triandis have investigated whether there are differences in attribution
error with Japanese people and US people. They were all given some things to remember. The US
students attributed their success to their skill with remembering, but the Japanese students
attributed their mistakes to their lack of skill. This shows how collectivistic cultures such as the
Japanese do not care about their individual image, as their care more about their group image. the
Japanese students do not overemphasize on their dispositional factors, as they willingly accept that
they make mistakes and failures. This shows how individualistic cultures wish and need individual
power and success. However this study should not be generalized to the larger population, because
the US population could not act as a representative of all individualistic cultures, and the Japanese
population could not act as a representative of all collectivistic cultures.
The fundamental attribution error is when people over emphasize on the importance of
dispositional factors that affect the human behavior as compared to situational factors. Humans do
this all the time, and this may be considered as short cut thinking. For example, when you go on
your first date and your partner is late, you would immediately assume that he is insensitive and
no caring. However humans rarely think that it is because of situational factors that are irrelevant
to the person’s control – such as, there was a lot of traffic. Here, people are naturally assuming
that the negative behavior is because of dispositional factors. This may be demonstrated in Lee et
al’s study. Lee randomly allocated students into one of the following roles: audience, host, or
contestant of the show. The audience had to rate who was more intelligent, the contestant or the
host. The host had to create their own questions to pretend that they are in a real game show. The
contestants just had to take part in the quiz. The audience generally judged the host as the most
intelligent. This suggests that people do attribute behavior to dispositional factors first (that hosts
are more intelligent), even when they knew that the host was given time to choose their own
questions, and the roles were allocated.

This way of short cut thinking may be beneficial to people, as it helps them make quick
associations and understanding about people in an instant. However at times there may be illogical
conclusions made, therefore it is important for people to spend more time to think about the
situation before using dispositional factors as an explanation straight away. However, recent
studies have found that because of clan circuitry, the way that we think is hardwired into us. So
this brings us into the question of whether we can really change the way that we think, since our
cognitive patterns are natural and innate.
The increasing evidence for neuroscience may help us understand how relationships are formed
and whether we can control the way that we judge someone. There is a common tendency for
courtrooms to misattribute, as people use their emotions to affect their jury. It is vital for people to
carefully analyze the situation before jumping to conclusions that may sometimes be false. False
conclusions may cause discrimination and prejudice on people.