What happens when we identify with an ingroup?
Are collective identities “bad”?
All of this begs the more basic question… are groups bad?
- YES, groups can be at the heart of some of the worst atrocities.
- BUT, collective identities create the psychological basis for cooperation within groups
- AND, collective identities can also encourage positive behaviour toward outgroups.
Use collective identities to come together and protest something we care about- doesn’t matter where we’re from→, climate change protest, free Palestine, etc.
- AND, collective identities serve valuable functions for individual people.
- AND, collective identities are essential to social change and to resistance against oppression and tyranny.
What is categorization and its consequences?
consequences of categorization
- depersonalized:
-individuals are (to some degree) now seen as interchangeable representatives of the category.
- within- group homogeneity: we tend to see greater similarity within groups
- *accentuation of group difference
- we tend to see greater contrast between groups.
A group exists when two or more people define themselves as members of the group and when non-members recognize its existence.
What are the psychological building blocks of intergroup relations?
What are stereotypes?
Both of the two definitions imply…
- stereotypes are erroneous
- stereotypes involve flawed thinking (or lack of thinking)
- stereotypes are undesirable.
What’s wrong with this type of view on stereotypes?
It doesn’t account for the fact that…
How are stereotypes functional?
Functional for the holder
- categorization simplifies the world
- groups/ categories are meaningless without stereotypes
- allows us to know things (have expectations) about the social world.
- allows us to fill in the blanks when information is incomplete.
Functional for interpersonal interactions.
- stereotypes as knowledge (cultural sensitivity/ awareness)
Functional for intergroup relations
- multiculturalism
- colorblindness: ignoring categories/ avoiding stereotyping