This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: Even minimal groups can impact social identity Phase 1: Form a minimal group Subjects told it is on the basis of some made-up factor Overestimator vs. Underestimator Klee vs Kandinsky Assignment to groups is random Phase 2: Bring group members together Subjects allocate points to pairs of other subjects (NOT to self) Subjects identified by code number and group membership but no other info. Results In-group is consistently favored: 70% of participants demonstrated in-group favoritism. No emotional attachment to the in-group or learned revulsion to out-group...
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 11/17/2010 for the course SOC 330P taught by Professor Maryrose during the Fall '10 term at University of Texas.
- Fall '10