Mere identification with a category can produce ingroup bias without any conflict

Evidence

Identity and status are the centerpiece of Tajfel’s (1978) social-identity theory of discrimination. He demonstrated that young boys’ identification with even a meaningless social category could lead to discrimination (Tajfel, 1970). His explanation for the connection between identification and prejudice centered not on conflict but on the process of social comparison/competition whereby children attempt to attain a positive social identity by enhancing their ingroup status relative to the outgroup. In the “minimal” laboratory context, which intentionally eliminates all social groups, identities, and reactions, other than the ones being studied, identity and discrimination are strongly connected (see Bourhis & Gagnon, 2001). After this research, developmentalists could no longer assume, as Allport did, that group identity is salient, strong, and automatic, and that children understand their group’s social status Developmental stages of prejudice now refer to stages in cognitive development rather than learning stages. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2003

Categorization

• XREF: Connects directly to the minimal-group paradigm used in SocialCapitalCreation readings and to the reader’s interest in how identity alone generates bias without material stakes. — connects to: High identification amplifies whichever norms, fair or biased, the group holds — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt: International…, 836; High group identification alone need not produce ingroup bias or discrimination — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt: International…, 862; Negational identification unites out-groups through shared non-membership rather than shared membership. — Chen-Bo Zhong, Adam D. Galinsky, and Miguel M. Unzueta, Negational racial identity and…, 37