Minimal group studies are sometimes interpreted as showing that social categorization per se inevitably produces discrimination. Self-categorization theory clarifies this point, suggesting that a process of self-categorization must occur to transform an external categorization into an internalized representation. Hogg and Abrams suggest that the underlying motive for self-categorization is the reduction of subjective uncertainty. Two minimal group experiments employing different manipulations of uncertainty were conducted in which categorization and subjective uncertainty were manipulated in a 2× 2 design. Across both studies, as hypothesized, intergroup discrimination only occurred when participants were categorized under conditions of subjective uncertainty. This was accompanied by enhanced group identification and elevated self-esteem. It is concluded that categorization per se is necessary but not sufficient for discrimination—people must self-categorize, and this is motivated by a need for subjective uncertainty reduction. Discrimination is not an inevitable outcome of categorization.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Grieve et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: