Emotion Recognition Affects Social Perception

In his often cited essay, “The Formation of In-Groups,” Gordon Allport offers his theory on how the groups with which one identifies directly influence the development of one’s individual identity. An “in-group” is a group where members share common traits such as societal status, religion, values or sexual orientation. All the members are alike in some way and that similarity unites them as a group. Allport suggests that one belongs to many in-groups throughout his or her lifetime. Individuals are born into some in-groups, such as one’s family, race or socio-economic level; this Allport terms as an “ascribed status”. People also obtain “achieved status” in a group such as one’s circle

Social identity theory states that the ‘in-group’ will discriminate against the ‘out-group’ and show favouritism towards their group to boost their self-esteem. Tajfel also proposed that there are 3 mental processes involved in putting people in to the ‘us’ and ‘them’ groups: social categorisation (putting objects in order to understand them), social identification (adopting the identity of the group we categorised ourselves as belonging to) and social comparison (showing favouritism towards the ‘in group’ and hostility towards the ‘out group’; comparing them).

Augoustinos and Walker (1995) stated that social identity theory is based on the concept of social identity, the part of a person’s self-concept that derives from membership in-groups that are important to the person. Such groups can include one’s family, college, nation, and so forth. This theory can be applied when the brown-eyed students were established as the in-group instead of their usual out-group. As indicated in their attitude components, self-esteem of the brown-eyed students increased when the blue-eyed students were treated in a bad

Social identity theory is a person’s sense of who they are based on their group membership(s) (Harwood, 2007). “In social identity theory and identity theory, the self is reflexive in that it can take itself as an object and can categorize, classify, or name itself in particular ways in relation to other social categories or classification” (Stets & Burke, 2000). The social identity theory has been known to let individuals find their own niche and group that they want to belong to. This could include what the individuals are active in or involved in. Research has also found that the groups that they classify themselves in can cause the participants to look down upon other groups that they are not involved in (Harwood, 2007). Negative attitudes are more of a complex issue, but interesting ideas come from explanations that emerge for social identity theory (Harwood,

The Social Identity theory (SIT) was proposed by Henry Tajfel. It was then later developed by Tajfel and Turner in 1971 to help them understand inter group relations. The Social Identity theory assumes that individuals strive to improve their self-image by trying to enhance their self-esteem, through social (in and out groups) and personal identities. There are 4 main concepts within the social identity theory all of which will be discussed in the essay.

The author asserts that research studies supporting these theoretic arguments are suggestive but limited as they have not addressed how class-based perceptual tendencies may have pronounced effects on emotional processes. The current study was conducted in three different experiments. First, participants were tested on whether or not lower social class is related to an elevated empathic accuracy. In the second experiment, researchers tested whether or not social class predicts accuracy in judging emotions during interaction. In addition, researchers examined whether or not a more pronounced focus on the context explains the relationship between social class and empathic accuracy. Subsequently, researchers used SES of participants to measure social class. In the third experiment, researchers manipulated

Tajfel & Turner, (1979) the proponents of social identity theory helped in the understanding of intergroup relations. The emphasis the complex “interweaving of an individual or interpersonal behavior with contextual social processes of intergroup conflict” (p.276). Social identity theory, thus emphasizes intergroup relations (the relationship an individual has with his group and between an outgroup) and categorical distinction (what sets an individual apart from another outgroup). Korostelina describes this as “the processes of identification with other group members” (p.23). Personal identities are consequently reflected in an individual’s social identity. For instance, an individual with an Islamic conviction cannot be found in a church

The social identity of African-Americans is one that is considerably disregarded by society due to its unique and complex nature. The term social identity refers to a person’s sense of who they are based on their group membership(s). According to the Social Learning Theory created by Henri Tajfel, “the groups which people belonged to were an important source of pride and self-esteem.” Tajfel states that identity is formed in three stages: social categorization, social identification, and social comparison.

Who are you? Who am I? These are questions that we all ponder at some point or another in our lives. As human beings we are seemingly inundated with the desire to classify and categorise. We are constantly defining and analysing the differences that we observe in the world, it seems only natural that we would apply this method of classification to our position within our society. More specifically, we want to understand our social identities and this can be achieved by acknowledging which groups we identify most with.

The third phase of the Social identity theory is comparison. This involves comparing the in-groups that you are a part of with out-groups in order to raise self-esteem (Burke, Stets,2000). Social groups naturally strive to be positively differentiated from other groups (Mummenfey, Kessler, Link, Mielke, 1999). In order to achieve this positive differentiation and boost in self- esteem, the in-group and out-group are judged on factors that represent the in-group to be superior to the out-group (Burke, Stets,2000). To enhance the position and status of the in-group, discrimination and prejudice will be shown towards the out-group.

In our social life, each person has one’s own roles and responsibilities, attitudes and values. Since every individual is unique and distinct compared to one another, these elements that construct our individuality are not always similar. Similarities and reflection of our values make us belong to a group, but the differences are barriers that stop ourselves from being recognized as an indivisible part of it. Belonging and identity are inseparable; nonetheless, there are distinctions that create a world of difference between the two. Belonging is not only about to whom we incorporate ourselves the way we perceive it, but also how others recognize our relationship with that group.

Aries, E., & Seider, M. (2007). The role of social class in the formation of identity: A study

Our identity can sometimes be shaped by the way others see us. As we have seen, the way in which others view us can have some sort of impact on how we see ourselves. There are also other contributing factors such as our years of adolescence, the basic human need of wanting to belong and maturing; all play an equally important part in the forming of our character and who we are. On balance it appears that there is not only one influence in the shaping of our identity, but there are many.

“Some…memberships are more salient than others; and some may vary in salience in time and as a function of a variety of social situations” (Tajfel, 2-3) Salience of identity, in the way that we need to understand it in the case of perception and decision making, can be operationalized as the likelihood that a particular identity will be invoked within a certain situation that the individual is being faced with (Hogg, Terry, & White, 257). As mentioned previously, everyone holds various identities but salience is the process through which we subconsciously decide which we be used to base our decision making or preferences on. “The salience of a particular social identity for an individual may vary from situation to situation and indeed from

Identity theory traces its root in the writing of G.H Mead, the American philosopher, sociologist and psychologist who says that the image or the feeling that a person creates for him or herself in a particular society is the result of other’s vision, which is created daily and is subjected to change. Richard Jinkens, the sociologist describes that social identity means who we are and who the others are and on the other hand what the other thinks about themselves and others. Further, Mead elaborates that a person in a particular society has two identities and which are self-identity and social identity. The self-identity is the cognition that a person has about him or herself and the social identity is the reflection of the accepted values that a person has in the society. Social Identity theory is enabling a person to answer his question of what I am and who I am based on his group membership. This is basically a line between oneself and the alien. In this assignment I will discuss the brief biography of the developers of the social identity theory, the definition of the theory, aspects of the theory, a case study, the critics and future application.