The theory of categorization of the self is a set of presuppositions and related hypotheses about the functioning of the self-concept social (the concept of the self based on comparison with other people, relevant to the interaction Social). It arises from research on social categorization and the related concept of social identity, described in the previous chapter. We will sometimes use the alternative designation of group social identity theory. It places the basis of affiliation to the social group in the structures and functioning of the social self-concept. Proposes the Categorization of the Self at different levels of abstraction: As a human being at the superordinate level. As a member of a social group at the intermediate level. Personal identity at the subordinate level. Variations in the context of the interaction determine what type of categorization is salient for the individual, and will determine her behavior.
Ellermers: Focuses on the effects of: The permeability of group divisions: when they allow you to move from one group to another. The differences of status. The instability and stability and the legitimacy and illegitimacy of those differences. On the identification and choice of individual or collective strategies for change.
Sachdev and Bourhis: It focuses on the effects of differences in status, power and the fact of being a majority or minority, on intergroup identification and differentiation. Can: degree of control that a group has over its own destiny and that of other groups. Meta-analysis on the effects of status differences on intergroup differentiation (Mullen, Brown and Smith).
Results:
- There is greater identification with the group when it has a high status than a low one.
- Identification in low-status groups is reduced when group divisions are permeable.
- Subjects evaluated as high ability who are told that they can move to a higher group, reduce their identification with the group.
- The instability of the group status seems to incite to seek the change of status of the group as a whole. At the same time, there is a fairly large group identification, even among members of low-status groups.
- Opposite effect of permeability and instability: Search for individual mobility (increased by permeability) or change in group status (increased by instability of the status).
- When the assignment of a low status to the group is illegitimate, there is a high identification, which increases if, in addition, the group status is unstable, and the group divisions do not they are permeable.
- High status groups show greater intergroup differentiation and favoritism in relevant comparison dimensions.
- Groups with power discriminate more in favor of the in-group than those without it.
Combined effects of power, status, and majority or minority status:
- Low-power, low-status and minority groups: ex-group favoritism.
- Dominant groups, although of low status (majority or minority), are also discriminatory.
- Those of high status without power were less so.
This set of results supports the theory of social identity. However, the contribution of Sachdev and Bourhis has highlighted the importance of power differences in intergroup discrimination.
Recent work by Bourgis, Gagnon and Moïse: To account for intergroup relations in real contexts (differences in power, status and numerical weight), makes the point of view of the theory of social identity and realist conflict remains to be completed with those of the theory of equity and the theory of deprivation relative.
Equity theory: It allows to distinguish the mechanisms of material and psychological adjustment to restore equity in situations in which it is not present. Relative deprivation theory applied to intergroup relations: It deals with situations in which a group and its members perceive that they are getting less than their fair share. It offers a way of conceiving the illegitimacy of differences between groups. The mediating variable is the feeling of discontent.
If you want to continue with Social and Organizational Psychology: Groups and the relationship between groups.
This article is merely informative, in Psychology-Online we do not have the power to make a diagnosis or recommend a treatment. We invite you to go to a psychologist to treat your particular case.
