Group Identity: The Need To Feel Part Of Something

Probably the most important advantage of humanity as a species is your willingness to work in partnership, in a group However, the sword appears to be double-edged, since, at times, it seems that such social behavior may be what leads the species itself to its inevitable end.

And there is an unexpected side effect that natural selection did not take into account when deciding how beneficial social behavior was: the appearance of groups. However, this way of life does not regulate itself. In practice, when it comes to interacting socially, we often do it from a feeling of group identity which leads us to consider the other person our equal or, on the contrary, someone with whom we do not identify.

Gregariousness in human beings: a survival resource

Yes, the human species has managed to rise as the dominant species on its planet (and whether this is a merit to be proud of or not, it will be for another article), although social conflicts, discrimination, inequality and hatred They are a price that seems very high.

But why does all this occur? There are countless reasons that lead us to form part of groups Sometimes they are common interests, which is why we end up being part of the group of cyclists, geeks or vegetarians. Other times, they are ideological issues, so we can belong to the group of anarchists, feminists or atheists, and other times they are “mere” physical or biological differences, so, objectively, we can be men, women, blacks, whites…

This doesn’t seem so crazy, after all, everyone is as they are and the differences, in any case, should be a reason for celebration and not hatred… but why isn’t it like that?

Good, all part of a phenomenon that Tajfel coined as social identity which is related to self-concept, that is, the way we see ourselves.

Tajfel and his research on collective identity

Social identity is the set of aspects of individual identity that are related to social categories to which we believe we belong In this way, when we consider ourselves, let’s say, Spanish, all the behaviors and norms that, as we understand, are typical of Spaniards, become ours. In this process there is already an error of logic, which is considering that all the members who belong to a group share the same behavioral or psychological characteristics.

They are the famous stereotypes, which are nothing more than heuristics, or mental shortcuts, which fulfill the function of simplifying our environment and saving psychological resources that could be directed to other tasks, but which, as we say, are unfounded. With them, prejudices come hand in hand, that is, the display attitudes towards a certain person depending on the social group to which they may belong

In any case, as far as we have told, there doesn’t seem to be a major problem either. If we stayed there, we would simply live in a tremendously ignorant world that wastes immense potential regarding the benefits that interculturality can bring. So yes, why, in addition to developing a social identity, do we compete with other social identities?

Tajfel demonstrated, with experiments he called the “minimal group paradigm,” how the most trivial and superficial difference can lead to competition Classifying the participants into two groups regarding whether they liked one or the other painting more, each of them was invited to distribute resources (money) between their group and the other.

The results showed that the participants preferred to earn less money as long as the difference between the money received and the other group was maximum… In other words, if I have chosen Klee’s painting, and I can choose that both my group and Kandinsky’s Let’s win 20 euros, I will prefer to win 18 if they win 10… as long as the decision is anonymous.

Emotions and group identity

If something as frivolous as choosing a painting or the color of a t-shirt already leads me to harm other groups, what won’t I do when deeper elements such as ideologies or families are involved?

The mechanisms that are related to all this are closely related to self-esteem If I consider that the qualities of my group are applicable to me, if my group is valuable, then I am valuable… and as always, value is relative, and can only be awarded by comparison.

Therefore, current social conflicts are based on the search to feel valuable (self-esteem) through my group (social identity) as a result of making other people who (prejudices) belong to a different group less valuable.

Following the discourse we have carried out here, the logical conclusion is that this is a war that cannot be won, because it is based on the perceptions of each of the sides, and perhaps the solution lies in achieving self-esteem through our behaviors and not about our color, sexual organs or the very arbitrary geographical accident of our birth.

It is true that it is not realistic to try to completely control the psychological dynamics behind the sense of identity and self-concept in general. In the same way, it is not possible to develop one’s own identity separate from society; For better and worse, we see ourselves reflected in others, either to try to imitate behaviors or to distance ourselves from them.

However, to a certain extent, it is possible to question the logic and forms of reasoning that lead us towards one type of group identity or another. It is always good that, when we focus our attention on certain groups and collectives, we do so with those with positive inspiring potential; and in the same way, it is also necessary to ensure that the fact of not feeling identified with others does not become a gratuitous hatred that generates discomfort in ourselves or in others.