Ingroup Bias: What it is and How This Favoritism Appears

Studies on ingroup bias have allowed us to explain why and under what circumstances members of a group tend to value their own group (the ingroup) more positively, in contrast to the negative evaluation they make of a different group ( the outgroup).

Below we will briefly review the concepts of ingroup and outgroup, and then review some of the theories that social psychology has explained. the phenomenon we know as ingroup bias

Ingroup and outgroup: a brief definition

It is very common to hear that humans are social beings, but what do we mean by this phrase? Generally we mean that our identification and personality construction processes have to do with the links we establish with other people.

These links take, for example, the form of norms of behavior, roles, affections, rivalries, among other elements. Not only that, but these elements allow us to recognize ourselves as competent members of a social group (that is, as people who are part of it). At the same time, They allow us to establish differences with the other members and in this way, think of ourselves as individuals with unique characteristics.

The one with which we identify and of which we feel competent members is the one we know as the ingroup (“endo” means “within”). But, for a group to recognize and identify itself as such, it is necessary that it establishes a difference (which can be complementary or antagonistic) compared to other groups. The latter are what we know as the outgroup (“exo” means “outside”). It is then in the framework of intergroup relations where It forms a large part of our psychological and social development

Ingroup bias

Ingroup bias (or ingroup bias) is also called ingroup favoritism. As this last name suggests, it is the tendency to favor or value more positively the behaviors, attitudes or preferences of the members of the ingroup, compared to those of the outgroup. It is about establishing favoritism towards members of the ingroup although this implies a detriment to the characteristics of the outgroup.

As is easy to imagine, the latter can have important effects on discriminatory attitudes and behaviors, that is, on a psychosocial rejection towards the outgroup. And, in contrast, an esteem or overestimation towards the ingroup. But not necessarily: to explain this, some theories of social psychology have distinguished between “ingroup bias” and “outgroup negativity,” where the latter makes specific reference to the exercise of violence and discrimination by the ingroup toward the outgroup.

Although they are related, they are different phenomena, where they have to do the power relations and the majority-minority categories that are established between the ingroup and the outgroup.

To explain why the above occurs, social psychology has resorted to the study of intergroup relations of categorization in identity formation. In other words, it has been necessary to study how identity is formed through establishing a series of categories, in which both the cognitive bases and the links between members of different groups participate.

Why happens? Explanations from Social Psychology

There have been many theoretical proposals that from social psychology have explained why members of a group tend to value their own group more positively; and how said evaluation is related to the negative evaluation of the other group.

Below we will briefly explain some of the theories that have explained ingroup bias.

The theory of social identity and self-concept

The British psychologist Henry Tajfel developed important studies on categorical perception in the 1950s. Among other things he analyzed the effects of categorization on discriminatory behaviors. Later, in the 1970s, Turner and Brown reformulated these studies and finally developed the Social Identity Theory and the Self-Categorization Theory.

In very broad strokes what they did was propose that, to form an identity, it is necessary for the categorization process to occur with certain cognitive components In other words, many of the elements that define our identity have to do with belonging to different groups and social categories. For this reason, the self-concept (the image we have about ourselves) is built through social identity, always related to categories and roles.

Thus, self-concept and self-esteem are consolidated through identification with social groups; Therefore, they are a reflection of the norms and practices expected in a particular group. In this sense, ingroup bias occurs as a way of maintaining self-esteem by intensifying the differences between the ingroup and the outgroup (known as the accentuation principle); For this, identification with a social group and also comparison with others is necessary.

Conflict and competition theory

Through the thieves’ den experiment Muzafer and Carolyn Sherif showed that a competitive context favors the increase of hostility of the ingroup before the outgroup.

In contrast, an environment where tasks that require interdependence prevail and where members of different groups pursue common goals can reduce such hostility. According to their research, ingroup bias and negative attitudes toward the outgroup arise when group members They have to compete with limited resources

Ingroup derogation theory

Although ingroup bias specifically refers to the favoritism of the ingroup to the detriment of the outgroup, multicultural studies have also offered us explanations for the opposite phenomenon.

That is, when the members of a group tend to value the members of their own group more harshly and not those of the outgroup. This occurs especially when the ingroup belongs to a social minority Some research has also suggested that people who belong to more collectivistic cultures tend to judge their own group less favorably than the outgroup (although they value its individual members positively); and people from more individualistic cultures rate the ingroup more positively, and each member more negatively.