Social Identity in the US

10 Key excerpts on "Social Identity in the US"

• 

  eBook - PDF

  Social Identity and Conflict

  Structures, Dynamics, and Implications

  • K. Korostelina(Author)
  • 2007(Publication Date)
  • Palgrave Macmillan

    (Publisher)

  The theory of social identity (Tajfel 1978, Tajfel and Turner 1986) stresses that together with personal identity, an individual has a social identity that is reflected in his or her membership in different groups. This identity is an important part of self-conception and influences the individual’s percep- tion of himself or herself and of society as a whole. Social identity is devel- oped through the affiliation of individuals to different groups, along with a determination of their position in society. Individuals perceive themselves as 24 S o c i a l I d e n t i t y a n d C o n f l i c t members of a group and identify themselves with it in order to distinguish between their groups (ingroups) and outgroups. People with similar social positions and common histories have compa- rable social identities. Therefore, social identity is connected not only with the perception of similarities within an ingroup (common history, attitudes, values, etc) but also with the perception of differences between this group and the members of other groups or categories. The more salient social iden- tities are, the more people differentiate their groups from those of others. The theory of social identity stresses the importance of two aspects: cog- nitive and emotional. According to Tajfel and Turner (1986), social identity is “that part of an individual’s self-concept which derives from his knowledge of his membership in a social group (or groups) together with the value and emotional significance attached to that membership” (255). The cognitive basis of social identity is the process of social categorization and intergroup comparison. Therefore, the cognitive component is connected with the emotional one, which reflects such feelings of belonging to a group as love, hate, amity, and enmity. This cognitive-emotional involvement strengthens a person’s social identity.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  The SAGE Handbook of Prejudice, Stereotyping and Discrimination

  • John F Dovidio, Miles Hewstone, Peter Glick, Victoria M Esses, John F Dovidio, Miles Hewstone, Peter Glick, Victoria M Esses, SAGE Publications Ltd(Authors)
  • 2010(Publication Date)
  • SAGE Publications Ltd

    (Publisher)

  These distinctions highlight that, even if a particular interaction is between two individuals (e.g., a dyadic discussion), they involve social identity if interactants view one another in terms of shared category or group characteristics. This may depend on the task at hand and the wider socio-cultural context. For example, Marques, Abrams and Seriodio (2001: Experiment 2) showed that participants more strongly derogated a person whose opinion (on an ethical issue) differed from those of the majority if they viewed the person and majority as part of their ingroup rather than purely as individuals. In a further elaboration, Roccas, Sagiv, Schwartz, et al. (2008) proposed that, for national identity, there are four distinct modes of group identification – the impor-tance of identity, commitment to benefit the group, superiority (desire for positive distinctiveness), and deference (embracing norms and leadership goals as one’s own). These modes may differ in terms of situational and dispositional variability. Identification in different modes might have contradictory implications for behavior (e.g., if commitment suggests one course of action but deference another). A related debate surrounds the connection between social identity and other aspects of the self. Individual, relational, and collective selves may be connected in complex ways (Brewer & Gardner, 1996). For example, social identity may develop through personal acceptance/adoption of group memberships, relational social identities that are specific to particular group contexts (Brewer, 2001), and through sustained interpersonal attraction and interdependence among group members (Henry, Arrow, & Carini, 1999). SIT holds that personal and social identity are at opposite ends of a single continuum, and SCT describes them as being different levels of a hierarchy of self-categorizations.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  The SAGE Handbook of Identities

  • Margaret Wetherell, Chandra Talpade Mohanty, Margaret Wetherell, Chandra Talpade Mohanty, SAGE Publications Ltd(Authors)
  • 2010(Publication Date)
  • SAGE Publications Ltd

    (Publisher)

  Tajfel reasoned that we can only understand why allocation to ostensibly meaningless groups should affect behaviour if we start by assuming that people come to define their selves in terms of group mem-bership. His critical starting point is to break with the traditional assumption that the self should only be understood as that which defines the individual in relation to other individuals, and to acknowledge that, in some circumstances, we can define our selves through the groups to which we belong. In this way group behaviour is underpinned by social identity (Tajfel, 1978). There are two further aspects of ‘social identity’ that need to be understood. The first is that it is simultaneously individual and social. First, a person’s social identities – ‘I am a woman’, ‘I am a Scot’ or whatever – speak in a fundamental way to who they are in the world. However, what any of these memberships mean cannot be reduced to a person’s own or indeed anybody else’s individuality. What a gender, or national iden-tity means is a historical, cultural and con-tested identity, enshrined as much in museums and monuments as in debates between people. Thus social identity provides a conduit through which society inhabits the subject. In the tradition of social interactionists, such as Kurt Lewin (1952) and Solomon Asch (1952; see also Turner and Giles, 1981), it provides substance to the notion of a socially structured field within the individual. It thereby explains how large numbers of people can act in coherent and meaningful ways, by reference to shared group norms, values and understandings rather than idiosyncratic beliefs. Second, while there are clearly psycho-logical dynamics associated with social iden-tification, the act of defining oneself as a group member should not be seen as arising out of some individual need. In other words, there is nothing more basic about individual identities and individual processes than about social identities and social processes.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Social Identity

  International Perspectives

  • Stephen Worchel, J Francisco Morales, Darío Páez, Jean-Claude Deschamps, Stephen Worchel, J Francisco Morales, Darío Páez, Jean-Claude Deschamps(Authors)
  • 1998(Publication Date)
  • SAGE Publications Ltd

    (Publisher)

  Thus social ident ity refers to the fact that the individual perceives him-or herself as sim ilar to others of the same background (the we), but social Social identity and personal identity 3 identity also refers to a difference, to a specificity of that we in connection with members of other groups or categories (the them). We have then a double motion which combines ingroup similarities and intergroup or categorial differentiation. The stronger the identification with a group, the more signif icant the differentiation of that group from other groups wil l be. More personal features or specific character attributes of each individual refer to personal identity and the idea that each individual is a unique combination of features which make him different from others, and which explains his uniqueness and the fact that he is specific. Personal identity is not wel l defined. However, it ind icates how an individual is aware of his difference with respect to others. That feeling can only be experienced in relation to others and personal identity refers to the fact that the individual perceives himself as identical to himself; in other words he is the same in time and in space, but that is also what specifies him and marks him out from others. Personal identity is what makes you similar to yourself and different from others. Of course, one could debate this postulate regarding self-permanence as a relative ly stable and durable concept held by everyone (see, for instance, Goffman [1956] with his descriptions of the ind iv idual who plays different roles for different audiences and Gergen [1965, 1982] with his idea of fluidity of the self). It is therefore necessary to speak of identit ies in the plura l, considering that every social agent -whether individual or collective -can actualize, mobilize or produce identities according to the context. This also leads us to the question of the historical universality of this feeling of identity.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Social Psychology

  Fourth Edition

  • Eliot R. Smith, Diane M. Mackie, Heather M. Claypool(Authors)
  • 2014(Publication Date)
  • Psychology Press

    (Publisher)

  The chapter concludes with a discussion of the effects of belonging to a group that others look down on. From playgrounds to boardrooms, being Muslim, speaking with an accent, using a wheelchair, being gay or lesbian, or being on welfare can provoke scorn, dislike, and avoidance. Such negative group identities can take their toll on individuals and groups. But this outcome is not inevitable, and the chapter concludes by describing how people resist the implications of a negative identity and even work to change society’s evaluation of their groups.

  CATEGORIZING ONESELF AS A GROUP MEMBER

  Some group memberships are so important that they become a basic part of our view of ourselves. Try asking a friend to take a piece of paper and write 10 different sentences beginning “I am …” When people perform this task they typically list some individual characteristics such as “I am outgoing” or “I am tall,” but they also list group memberships: “I am a woman,” “I am German.” In fact, most people list more group than individual characteristics (M. H. Kuhn & McPartland, 1954). The process of seeing oneself as a member of a group is known as

  self-categorization

  (J. C. Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987). Self-categorization is flexible and can readily shift (Mussweiler, Gabriel, & Bodenhausen, 2000). Depending on the social context, for example, sometimes you may see yourself as a Mexican-American, other times as a student, and still other times as a unique individual, with group memberships temporarily receding into the background. The term

  social identity

  refers to the way we feel about the group memberships that we share with others (M. Rosenberg, 1979; Tajfel, 1972). Social identity turns “I” into “we”; it extends the self out beyond the skin to include other members of our groups—and, as we will see, it generally involves positive feelings about both ourselves, and those others.

  self-categorization

  the process of seeing oneself as a member of a social group

  social identity

  those aspects of the self-concept that derive from an individual’s knowledge and feelings about the group memberships he or she shares with others

  Although some group memberships are only fleetingly important—being part of the “white shirts” team in a lunch-hour basketball game, for example—most group memberships are stable and enduring. Membership in gender and ethnic groups lasts a lifetime. Being a member of the Kardashian or the Hilton family, or being Muslim, Roman Catholic, or Buddhist can be just as long-lasting. How do we learn what characteristics are associated with our groups?

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  The New Psychology of Health

  Unlocking the Social Cure

  • Catherine Haslam, Jolanda Jetten, Tegan Cruwys, Genevieve Dingle, S. Alexander Haslam(Authors)
  • 2018(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  Primarily, then, it is a theory of intergroup relations. It is clear, however, that there is a broader set of questions that relate to the functioning of social and personal identity and social groups more generally. When do we define ourselves in terms of social identity? What determines which particular social identity defines our sense of self in any given context? What are the conse- quences of defining the self in terms of a particular social identity? The depersonalisation process It was to answer such questions that Turner and his colleagues developed self-categorization the- ory in the 1980s and 1990s. At the outset a core goal of the theory was to explain what it was, psycho- logically, that allowed people to engage in group behaviour. Traditional answers to this question had pointed to the importance of interdependence and mutual attraction, but Turner found these unsatis- factory. For a start, this was because these elements were absent in the minimal group paradigm, and yet this produced clear evidence of group behaviour (in the form of ingroup favouritism). Other work, dating back to a series of famous studies conducted in boys camps in the United States by Muzafer Sherif and his colleagues (see Sherif, 1956; Platow & Hunter, 2017), also showed that when it comes to predicting people’s behaviour in intergroup contexts, personal liking and friendship are often trumped by a sense of shared (or non-shared) group membership. As we have seen, Turner thus argued that it was social identity that provided the psychological platform for group behaviour. Beyond this, he also argued that group behaviour arose from the process of defining oneself in terms of social identity – a process he termed depersonalisation.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology

  Volume Two

  • Paul A M Van Lange, Arie W Kruglanski, E Tory Higgins, Paul A M Van Lange, Arie W Kruglanski, E Tory Higgins, Author(Authors)
  • 2011(Publication Date)
  • SAGE Publications Ltd

    (Publisher)

  In line with this point, the original definition quoted above HANDBOOK OF THEORIES OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 390 (Tajfel, 1974) makes it clear that the knowl-edge and emotional significance of group membership together comprise social iden-tity. Nevertheless, because this conceptuali-zation incorporates these different aspects, they can be considered either as separate components or as comprising a single over-arching construct. Accordingly, it has been convincingly argued, and shown, that – depending on the issue under concern – it can be useful to focus either on specific components of social identity or to address social identity as a broader multidimen-sional construct (Ellemers et al., 1999b; Hogg, 1992; Leach et al., 2008; Ouwerkerk et al., 1999). Treating identification as a multidimen-sional construct also made it possible to fur-ther specify different forms of identity threat that ensue when different identity components are not aligned (Branscombe and Doosje, 2004; Branscombe et al., 1999a; Doosje et al., 1989). For instance, people may experience social identity threat when they feel emotionally involved with a group in which they are not cognitively included, or vice versa. This is likely to happen, for instance, in the process of transitioning to another group during individual mobility, or when internal definitions of self do not cor-respond to the way in which one is treated by others. Additionally, this work has made it clear that both cognitive and emotional com-ponents of identification have to exceed a minimum threshold level before individuals can be expected to respond in terms of their group-based identity.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Second Language Identities

  • David Block(Author)
  • 2009(Publication Date)
  • Continuum

    (Publisher)

  Identities are about nego-tiating new subject positions at the crossroads of the past, present and future. Individuals are shaped by their sociohistories but they also shape their sociohistories as life goes on. The entire process is con-flictive as opposed to harmonious and individuals often feel ambiva-lent. There are unequal power relations to deal with, around the different capitals – economic, cultural and social – that both facilitate and constrain interactions with others in the different communities of practice with which individuals engage in their lifetimes. Finally, identities are related to different traditionally demographic categories such as ethnicity, race, nationality, migration, gender, social class and language. As I have made clear thus far, identity is a complex and multi-layered construct. It also is a construct that has tended to be examined from particular perspectives by theorists and researchers. In the sec-tions that follow, I examine what I consider to be the seven most common perspectives taken. I begin with a discussion of race and ethnicity together, as these two constructs are often conflated both in lay and academic discourses. I then consider, in separate sections, national identity, migrant identity, gender identity, social class iden-tity and language identity. Identity in the social sciences today 27 Ethnicity and race As May (2001) notes, most researchers who focus on ethnicity do not usually say what they mean by the term. In such cases, one is generally left to wonder if ethnicity is about culture, or if it is a polite way to talk about race. In the former case, ethnicity may be seen to be more about ‘common descent and . . . a cultural heritage shared because of com-mon descent’ (Joseph, 2004: 162). Elsewhere, Puri (2004) echoes Joseph’s cultural view of ethnicity as follows: Ethnicity is . . . a form of collective identity based on shared cul-tural beliefs and practices, such as language, history, descent, and religion.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Identity Process Theory

  Identity, Social Action and Social Change

  • Rusi Jaspal, Glynis M. Breakwell(Authors)
  • 2014(Publication Date)
  • Cambridge University Press

    (Publisher)

  This appears to mark a crucial point of difference between the two approaches that merits closer inspection. In addressing these contrasting perspectives on the distinction between personal and social identity, let us consider some background to Tajfel’s notion of social identity in early accounts of SIT. Many readers will be familiar with the following routinely quoted definition of social identity given by Tajfel (1978): “For the purpose of this discussion, social iden- tity will be understood as that part of an individual’s self-concept which derives from his [sic] knowledge of his membership of a social group (or groups) together with the value and emotional significance attached to that membership” (p. 63). Less often quoted, however, are the sentences that immediately follow: “It will be clear that this is a limited definition of ‘identity’ or ‘social identity.’ This limitation is deliberate and it has two aims. The first is not to enter into endless and often sterile discussions as to what ‘is’ identity. The second is to enable us to use this limited concept in the discussions of theory and research which follow” (p. 63). Thus, it is clear that Tajfel had no interest here in developing a com- prehensive theory of “identity” per se. Rather, as he went on to explain, his concern was specifically with understanding intergroup behavior and social change. He was interested in identity insofar as it was instrumental to that goal. Tajfel’s most fundamental contention in this work was that, in order to understand intergroup phenomena such as conflict, stereo- typing and prejudice, one needs a theoretical perspective that not does assume people to be “randomly interacting individual particles” (Tajfel, 1972, p. 16) and that instead recognizes that they can act on the basis of A social identity perspective on IPT 99 understanding themselves as group members.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Conversations of Intercultural Couples

  • Kellie Goncalves(Author)
  • 2013(Publication Date)
  • De Gruyter Akademie Forschung

    (Publisher)

  The last section deals with identity and social practice and the notions of performance , performativity and doing identity. I look into West and Fenstermaker’s model of doing gender, race and class, followed by an out-line of Bucholtz and Hall’s sociocultural model of analyzing identity, which I incorporate into my analysis. Despite its ambiguity and fuzziness, I use the term “identity” throughout this study because it is an “everyday word for people’s sense of who they are” (Ivanic 1998: 10) and “ who people are to each other ” (Benwell and Stokoe 2006: 6, italics in original). “Iden-tity” in singular form implies that individuals have or are able to perform one identity, but for me “identity” is understood in its plural form, in its complexity and multiplicity. 4.1 Conceptualizing identity “[T]he term ‘identity’ itself is by no means universally accepted in current research literature”(Joseph 2004: 9). In the numerous fields of social sciences that study identity – sociology, feminist theory, psychology, cultural studies, linguistics, gender studies and anthropology, for example – the studies tend to focus on singular identity categories such as national or ethnic identities (De Fina 2003; Fishman 1999; Joseph 2004), personal and social identities (Layder 2004), or gendered identities (Bucholtz and Hall, 1995; Bucholtz et al.; 1999; Butler 1990, 2004; Gal and Kligman 2000; Kulick 1993; West and Zimmerman 1987, 2002). In her study of identity narratives, Schüpbach (2005: 46) adds that the use of various terms “is further complicated when authors do not specify how they conceptualize the terms they use and the picture is obscured even more when sub-4 Early psychological studies placed the concept of identity within the “broader area of ‘personality’, and viewed identity as a ‘person’s essential, continuous self, the internal, subjective concept of one-self as an individual’” (Reber 1985: 341, as quoted by Bhavnani and Phoenix 1994: 8).

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book