Henri Tajfel and colleagues sorted participants into two groups on a deliberately trivial basis, such as a stated preference between two painters' work, then had each participant privately allocate points or money between anonymous members of the two groups identified only by a code number and their group label. Even though the groups meant nothing beyond the assignment itself and members never met or worked with anyone, participants reliably gave more to their own group's members than to the other group's, sometimes even when that meant a smaller total for their own side. The result showed that the mere act of being categorized into a group is enough to trigger in-group favoritism.
Facts
Key FindingCategory membership alone, with no history, competition or self-interest attached to it, is sufficient to produce favoritism toward one's own group and discrimination against the other, the founding evidence for social identity theory. 2 Replication Outcome Method
Study DesignControlled Experiment (Lab or Field) 1 Participants Connections
Associated With
This experiment is the founding empirical demonstration behind social identity theory.
Conducted By
In Branch
In the Other Atlases
Found In
Also in Geography Atlas: where this subject is found.
Source Wikipedia: Henri TajfelArticle text, Intergroup relationstier 2Quote, Article text, Intergroup relations
Having moved to Bristol University, Tajfel began his work on intergroup relations and conducted the renowned minimal groups experiments.
Sources
1. Henri Tajfel (Wikipedia)
2. Wikipedia: Henri Tajfel
Wikimedia FoundationDevelopment section, Minimal Group ParadigmQuote, Development section, Minimal Group Paradigm
The surprising finding was that, even in the most minimal group conditions, responses favoring the in-group occurred.
View the Source 3. FORRT: FORRT Replications and Reversals
FORRTEntry: Minimal group effectQuote, Entry: Minimal group effect
Minimal group effect (Minimal group paradigm). An intergroup bias that manifests as ingroup favouritism (i.e., a tendency to prefer ingroup members) when participants are assigned to previously unfamiliar, experimentally created and largely meaningless social identities. In essence, the paradigm investigates the impact of social categorization on intergroup relations in the absence of realistic conflicts of interests, showing that mere social categorization is sufficient to produce ingroup favouritism. Statistics Status: replicated
View the Source Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.