What do social psychologists mean by “identity”?
When social psychologists reference identity, they mean the part of a person’s self-concept that originates from his or her perception regarding participation in a given social group. Some social psychologists have argued that identity describes the value and emotional significance that an individual attaches to his or her membership of a particular group. Identity, therefore, develops along the border that separates groups, so that one can only discover his or her identity when he or she is content as part of a group membership or when they are able to associate and interact closely with a particular group.
According to Brewer, does liking our ingroup automatically mean disliking an out-group?
…show more content…
She demonstrates that an individual can become attached to an in-group without necessarily developing hostility towards out-groups. Based on her findings, Brewer did not find any correlation between in-group identification of negative attitudes towards out-groups. In addition, she observed that the manifestation of preferential treatment of members of the in-group can result in inter-group discrimination and bias. The implication of this observation is that one can like an in-group without necessarily disliking out-groups.
What is an alternative to thinking this way? The alternative to Brewer’s thinking is that liking an in-group would automatically contribute to disliking out-groups. Social psychologists such as Sumner have argued that people tend to enhance their in-group positivity through social comparison of in-groups with out-groups. Social comparison enables individuals to identify outcomes and attributes of their in-group, which they perceive to be superior to other groups. The more people enhance their in-group positivity, the more they develop a dislike towards out-groups.
What does Brewer mean by “optimal