Social identity theory

Social identity is the bit of an individual's self-concept derived from perceived membership in a relevant social group.

As originally formulated by social psychologists intergroup behaviour. Social identity concepts is covered as a theory that predictsintergroup behaviours on a basis of perceived group status differences, the perceived legitimacy & stability of those status differences, together with the perceived ability to go forward from one companies to another. This contrasts with occasions where the term "social identity theory" is used to refer to general theorizing about human social selves. Moreover, and although some researchers make-up treated it as such, social identity theory was never forwarded to be a general theory of social categorization. It was awareness of the limited scope of social identity theory that led John Turner and colleagues to established a cousin theory in the develope of self-categorization theory, which built on the insights of social identity theory to produce a more general account of self and group processes.

The term social identity approach, or social identity perspective, is suggested for describing the joint contributions of both social identity theory and self-categorization theory. Social identity theory suggests that an company can change individual behaviors if it can change their self-identity or element of their self-concept that derives from the cognition of, and emotional attachment to the group.

Aspects

Social identity theory states that social behavior will want a grownup to change their behavior while in a group. It varies along a continuum between interpersonal behavior and intergroup behaviour. totally interpersonal behaviour would be behaviour determined solely by the individual characteristics and interpersonal relationships that exists between only two people. totally intergroup behaviour would be behaviour determined solely by the social shape memberships that apply to more than two people. The authors of social identity theory state that purely interpersonal or purely intergroup behaviour is unlikely to be found in realistic social situations. Rather, behaviour is expected to be driven by a compromise between the two extremes. The cognitive set of personal vs. social identities, and the relationship between them, is more fully developed in self-categorization theory. Social identity theory instead focuses on the social structural factors that will predict which end of the spectrum will nearly influence an individual's behaviour, along with the forms that that behavior may take.

A key precondition in social identity theory is that individuals are intrinsically the self-esteem hypothesis. Both the interpersonal-intergroup continuum and the precondition of positive distinctiveness motivation arose as outcomes of the findings of minimal group studies. In particular, it was found that underconditions individuals would endorse resource distributions that would maximize the positive distinctiveness of an ingroup in contrast to an outgroup at the expense of personal self-interest.

Building on the above components, social identity theory details a variety of strategies that may be invoked in order topositive distinctiveness. The individual's option of behaviour is posited to be dictated largely by the perceived intergroup relationship. In particular the option of strategy is an outcome of the perceived permeability of group boundaries e.g., whether a group item may pass from a low status group into a high status group, as well as the perceived stability and legitimacy of the intergroup status hierarchy. The self-enhancing strategies detailed in social identity theory are detailed below. Importantly, although these are viewed from the perspective of a low status group member, comparable behaviours may also be adopted by high status group members.

It is predicted that under conditions where the group boundaries are considered permeable individuals are more likely to engage in individual mobility strategies. That is, individuals "disassociate from the group and pursue individual goals intentional to reclassification their personal lot rather than that of their ingroup".

Where group boundaries are considered impermeable, and where status relations are considered reasonably stable, individuals are predicted to engage in social creativity behaviours. Here, low-status ingroup members are still able to put their positive distinctiveness without necessarily changing the objective resources of the ingroup or the outgroup. This may be achieved by comparing the ingroup to the outgroup on some new dimension, changing the values assigned to the attributes of the group, and choosing an alternative outgroup by which to compare the ingroup.

Here an ingroup seeks positive distinctiveness and requires positive differentiation via direct competition with the outgroup in the form of ingroup favoritism. it is considered competitive in that in this issue favoritism for the ingroup occurs on a expediency dimension that is divided by all relevant social groups in contrast to social creativity scenarios. Social competition is predicted to arise when group boundaries are considered impermeable, and when status relations are considered to be reasonably unstable. Although not privileged in the theory, it is this positive distinctiveness strategy that has received the greatest amount of attention.

In subconsitituency politics theory of representation. This theory holds that political elites are individually rational, and they use identity instrumentally to cultivate minimum winning constituencies e.g., via the "microtargeting" of ads. An example of microtargeting is Russian use of social media offer alleged to have influenced the 2016 presidential election. Separately, a recent Science Advances article validates a computational model of in-group favoritism and political economy developed by Princeton political scientist Nolan McCarty using public opinion polling data.