Social Identity Theory: Your Group Rules, Others Drool | STUFF YOU SHOULD KNOW

[music]. Welcome to Stuff You Should Know, a. production of iHeart Radio. [music]. Hey, [music] and welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh and there's Chuck and Jerry's. here, too. And we're [music] just a. super cool inroup looking down on your. out group. You're on stuff you should. know. >> That's right. Did you hear that thunder? Can you hear that? >> No. It was a little too delicate. The. sound was.

Uh yeah, it just started raining and. it's thundering pretty good. So maybe. people can hear that. It might add a. little mood. >> That's nice because yeah, I think we. could use a little mood on this one. This is a very rigid look at um what I. think is a very interesting social. psychology theory. >> Oh yeah, >> that's Yeah. Do you not find it very. interesting? >> I didn't find this one super. interesting. this, you know, like a lot. of social psychology, this one I filed. under like, yeah, I guess you're, you.

know, you're observing something that. happens. That's about where it ended for me. >> I get it. I get it. Um, to me, yeah, I I. mean, I sense what you're talking about. Like there's just something I feel like. we're talking people out of listening to. this episode right now. >> Okay. >> Well, we'll just clue everybody in and. you can make up your own mind how you. feel about this, guys. But what we're. talking about is social identity theory, which you probably gleaned from the. title. And in a nutshell, social.

identity theory basically says that we. get a sense of self and belonging. And. well, we help develop our identity from. the groups we belong to. And that is. very different from the idea that we. just develop as individuals through. normal de developmental psychology. In. fact, the guys who came up with social. identity theory basically say it's the. group that's the thing, not the. individual. Like that's where we really. develop most of our identity is from.

interacting with other people. >> Yeah. You know, I I think I don't think. anyone will be talked in or out of. liking or thinking this is interesting. because I think it'll be whether or not. you're into social psychology generally. as a whole or not. >> I bet. >> Yeah. Because for a lot of social. psychology for me, I'm like sort of like. I was saying, I was like, a lot of this. stuff to me is like, well, yeah, duh. But like, what's the point? >> Sure. Well, here's the point. This is.

this is the point as far as I can tell. Like the point the part I just said is. definitely duh. >> Yeah. But the reason they came up with. social identity theory is to explain. stuff that here to for and still some. people are like I don't know about. social identity theory although it's the. dominant framework for explaining this. stuff. >> Yeah. >> Explaining things that are tough to. explain like why do normal people become. fascists get swept up in fascist. movements? >> Yeah. >> Why do sports fans get in fights with.

sports fans from rival teams? alcohol. >> like these things. Sure. [laughter]. >> Yeah. I mean, yeah, you can't really. deny that. >> Yeah. >> But but they're like they don't quite. make sense when you step back and and. look at things. And so. >> social identity theory says all of this. can be explained with this with this. theory. And I think that's where it gets. interesting for me, especially the idea. that this is so ingrained in our our. evolutionary history that um we.

basically can't do anything about it. Like even being aware of this can only. help to to such a degree like you're. still innately attracted to being a. member of a group. >> Yeah, I think that's my deal. And I. promise I'm not going to say duh like a. hundred times cuz I do think some some. of the social psychology stuff is fairly. interesting. I'm just more of a person. who's like sort of a what like where. does that get us in the end? You know. what I mean? >> Yes, I totally get that. Uh we should.

also give our caveat because we make fun. of social psychology and um the studies. involved so um frequently it would be. >> it would be pretty uh rich to just be. like yeah this is super cool and and. proven. >> A lot of the studies just like any other. social psychology um field or subdiv. discipline. >> is. >> there like 30 people who are grad. students or undergrad students that were. getting extra credit. That's that's what. the study found or that's what the study.

used and then whatever they found that's. now just universally applied to. everybody. >> Yeah. >> And in a lot of cases that's that's just. not correct. But this one is so like you. said duh that it seems like yes this is. very true. >> Yeah for sure. uh and I guess we should. start with um. uh conflict intergroup conflict uh which. is not intragroup conflict. So in this.

case we're talking about conflict. between uh two different groups. Um it's. it's sort of like if you just think of. like us versus them for a lot of this. you're along the right track. Uh and in. this case it's you know if you develop. an intergroup conflict it's developing. some sort of prejudice or bias maybe. against another group like in you like. let's say you're the in-group everyone. thinks they're the in-group but an. in-group versus an out group. And for a. long time before these two uh Henri. Tajfell and uh John Turner came along in.

the 70s there were people other social. psychologists explaining it in in a. different way uh and mainly in a couple. of different ways. starting with 1950. with uh Theodore Adorno uh and his. publishing along with his colleagues of. the authoritarian personality and trying. to trying to sort of describe like hey. what's the deal with Nazis and like the. aftermath of Nazis and like what kind of. person is going to get swept up in that.

kind of thing. >> right so Adorno basically said that it's. the people who are getting swept up that. are essentially causing the sweeping in. the first place that if you put a bunch. of what he called authoritarian. personalities, >> Yeah. >> who aren't um that doesn't describe. somebody who aspires to become an. authoritarian leader, those are people. who feel most secure when submitting to. an authoritarian leader. So, you put a. bunch of those people together, say in a. Nazi party, um that that fascism is just.

going to take off um and attract more. like-minded people. It makes sense, but. it's I don't think anybody was like, "That's it. That that explains fascism.". >> Yeah, for sure. Uh and so the other one. that I mentioned um you know before the. other two guys in the 70s that we're. going to get to was uh in the 1960s. there was a social psychologist named uh. Muzafair Sharif who um he again these.

little like small experiments. This is. at a Boy Scout camp. he'd separated two. groups at Boy Scouts. >> uh at camp and he said uh all right, you. know, you're just in two groups. Get to. know one another. Get to know each. other. >> Uh and everything was going pretty good. and nothing was unusual until all of a. sudden he introduced the idea of. competition for prizes. Yeah. >> And that's when it became Lord of the. Flies. >> Yeah, for sure. He was like, "One group. gets blue ribbons, the other gets. participant ribbons." And it was on from.

that point, you know. So he came up with. something called realistic group. conflict theory because once the prizes. were introduced there was all sorts of. conflict that came out of it. Right now. all of a sudden group A was um um. discriminating against group B and maybe. they would get into like little fights. or something like that. Stuff that was. completely outside of the competition. And he he basically said, "Okay, that. stands in for resources." Like, if you. switched out, you know, first prize with.

access to dwindling water. Um, now you. have a true general universal. explanation for why groups get in. conflict. It's over material scarcity. >> I'm not gonna say duh. I I promise. >> But even that one, realistic group. conflict theory, people are like, "Yeah, that sounds kind of good." But still it. just doesn't smack of like it doesn't. smack of duh as Chuck will eventually. put it. And that's when Tajell and.

Turner came around. >> Yeah. So uh Henri Tajfell he was uh the. first part of this this tusome. He was a. social psychologist at the University of. Bristol. >> Mh. >> Uh he was born to a Jewish family in. Poland and immigrated to France in the. 1930s and lost most of his family to the. Holocaust in World War II. And so he. changed over from chemistry um to social. psychology. I I guess the inference. there is in maybe some bid to try and. understand what the heck happened.

>> Yeah. Which was I mean he wasn't the. only one like that's where Adorno and. Sharief were like Nazi Germany just came. out of nowhere. >> Yeah. >> And then Yeah. the idea that his family. had perished at the hands of the Nazis, I could see that's what the reason was. >> Yeah. So he he hooked up with John. Turner. Uh they met at University of. Bristol. He was a PhD student. And as an. undergrad, as far as his interest in. this kind of thing, he dropped out of. college a few times,

>> ended up working just sort of, you know, regular old bluecollar jobs and through. those jobs had dealings with unions and. things. And I I I guess just became kind. of fascinated about this social dynamic. and group dynamics within a union. Yeah. So when he met uh Tajfell, I guess love. was in the air and they said, "Hey, let's get together and work on this. stuff together." Yeah. And ended up. writing sort of the watershed paper or. the initial one at least on this um from. them, an integrative theory of intergroup.

conflict which is like basically their. statement to the world of like here's. what we think about all this. >> Yeah. Um this is where social identity. theory came from. This is the paper it. was proposed in. And um should we take a. break now or or dive into to the nuts. and bolts? >> No, no. I think it's a good a good break. time. >> Okay, everybody, you're going to have to. wait for the nuts and bolts after these. messages.

[music]. >> Want to learn about [music] a terasaur. and call a pterodactyl. How to take a. perfect boo all about fractals gang is. gone until the hunt. >> The Lizzy board of murders [music] and. the cannibal runs explain everything to. your brain. Explo. [music]. >> word up Jerry. >> All right Chuck. So where we left off. we're about to dive into this seinal. paper from 1979 by Taj Fel and Turner in. integrative theory of intergroup.

conflict. And it sounds dry and boring, but it it basically changed how. psychology uh but also people outside of. academia see the world, you know. >> Um I wonder all if one of the reasons. why it seems so duh is because this. paper was persuasive and became. pervasive that now that we're living. today in 2026, it just seems of course. to us, but at the time it didn't. necessarily. I wonder about that. You. were eight years old. Do you remember if.

people were walking around already. thinking this was duh? >> Uh, didn't know at eight. By the way, that's the most Snoop Dog way you've. ever described something in your life. >> What? What' I say? >> Pervasive and persuasive [laughter]. >> for sizzle. >> Uh, yeah, I don't remember that of. course. Uh but in that paper they. proposed a few different um basically. processes uh that they think explain how. people form into groups and group.

behavior. >> Yeah. >> Uh and then get into conflict with. others and have prejudice against. others. And they started that with. >> um social categorization which is uh. basically you have to form into a group. to begin with if you're going to have. conflict with another group or compare. yourself to another group. >> Yeah. And then so within categorization, so what Tajfeld and Turner seem to have. done is they took some other existing. ideas in social psychology that hadn't.

necessarily been applied to groups or. whatever um and put them together to. kind of form social identity theory and. apply it to groups. But categorization. um had already been around. There's. something that had been identified as. the category accentuation a effect and. it is basically like once we start. identifying ourselves as members of. groups and other people as members of. other groups insroups. >> uh we start we go we get busy.

categorizing and when we get busy. categorizing what we're doing is using a. very ancient process which is. heruristics right like our brain loves. to take shortcuts so it's it does away. with all the nuance and details and just. basically does this big lumpy thing. that's good enough. And when we. categorize people into groups, it goes. through that process. So we start seeing. them differently. >> Yeah, for sure. And the reason we form. groups to begin with um is kind of. twofold is one they think evolutionary.

is that we've always wanted to just sort. of classify the the world around us by. seeking patterns in things. M and then. the sort of the obvious thing which is. that it's a benefit especially early on. when people were evolving is to form a. group for pulling resources and to. divide up the hunting and gathering and. co-parenting and protecting one another. from either predators or other uh what. would end up being you know competitive.

uh groups outside your tribe or. whatever. And so for like defense. purposes that kind of thing. >> Yeah. And I mean it's no fun to watch. knots landing by yourself. It's much. better with a group. >> That's very good point. >> So because of that the heruristics that. our brains just innately use to to kind. of take these shortcuts and use less. less uh energy um when we start. categorizing people and ourselves the. the variability within our own group the. ingroup starts to go away. So, we start.

seeing other people um say other um. Falcons fans, right? As similar to us, right? Like we're all Falcons fans and. everything else that makes us different. just kind of vanishes because we're. Falcons fans and that's what we identify. as. >> At the same time, it um does the same. thing in the out group, but in a much. less positive way. Those are Steelers. fans. They all suck. They're terrible. people. And then the differences between. the ingroup and the out groupoup are um.

boosted as well. So all these things. just basically go through this very. distorted lens when we start. categorizing people into groups. And. that's that's where trouble starts to. come. And that's just one point of. social identity theory. >> for sure. And by the way, we don't mean. that against Steelers fans because I I. have a strong feeling that Josh has no. idea that the very first game of the. season is Falcons versus Steelers this. year. Of course I knew that. Who Who. doesn't know that? [laughter]. >> No, we don't. If if you were uh um you.

were certainly weren't trying to say. Steelers fans or bad people because you. would have said Eagles fans or Patriots. fans probably. >> Um I think all three. It applies to all. three. >> Oh wow. Okay. Standing by it. I love it. >> You always get so much guff for um. talking about um any Philadelphia fans. >> Yeah, I know. It's funny because people. get really mad [laughter] at you in the. email. >> It's because they're bad people. >> That always reminds me of that Onion. teacher that said, "Uh, my local sports. team is better than your local sports.

team.". >> Oh, that's funny. >> Yeah. >> Uh, I love fans of all stripes, people. of Philly. No, I'm I'm just kidding. around. I I love the city of. Philadelphia. I love to visit there. Um, don't have the best time when our teams. play each other. And that's not my. fault. I'll just say I'll just leave it. at that. >> But look what you just did. something. that I think is worth pointing out, right? You went from being a Falcons. fan, which you remained, >> um, which is your in-group, and then. Phillies or Eagles fans are an out group. to you, >> but then you kind of rose up, your.

altitude increased, and you went to like. the 10,000 foot level and you included. Eagles fans in the inroup with yourself. as just fans in general. >> Yeah. Because if it was up to me, all. all rivalry like that would be just very. good-natured and fun and like, "Hey, let's just go have a good time at the. game and maybe rib each other." So, it's. it's when like people take it seriously. and curse in front of children and throw. beers and [laughter] like that's that's.

when it gets to the point where I'm. like, "Well, that's no fun.". >> Well, that brings up the uh the next. point or the next nut or bolt, I guess, depending on your view of um social. identity theory, which is social. identification. I think that kind of. explains what you just described. >> I think you're right. Uh that's when you. start to identify with um with my group, let's say Falcons fans. Uh and then that. becomes part of my sense of self, but. you know, we're influenced by the values.

and you know, when it comes to sports, maybe it's values and stuff don't come. as into play, but but the opinions and. values and maybe behaviors of the larger. group. Behavior. For sure. >> For sure. Yeah. And I mean, everybody, I'm sure, has met somebody who's like, "Wow, your whole identity is tied up in. being a Falcons fan. Like, this is your. life, right?". >> Well, not me, but yeah. >> No, not you. But there are people out. there, I'm sure you've met them just. from being a Falcons fan. You can't help. but rub elbows with people who you're. like, "Wow, this is really important to.

you." Like, you can tell that this. person identifies. throughout life as a Falcons fan. I. think. >> that's true. But you know the problem. with Falcons fans is that we're not as. like that as much as a lot of cities. >> Well, that's that's Atlanta for you. No. support for anybody. >> Yeah, for sure. >> Um I do feel like we should at least. acknowledge and give a hat tip to Anna. who helped us with this. >> Yeah. >> Every single um example she used was the. Mets.

>> Very clearly a Mets fan. She tried very. hard to get the Mets in there. So. >> yeah, >> go Mets. >> That's pretty funny. Uh and then the. final um of the third would be social. comparison. And that's when and we've. kind of been doing this a little bit. with our joking around about sports is. comparing our group or whatever you know. what we think is our inroup to the out. groups and other groups. Uh and you know. it can be a lot of different things. because we've just been doing just that. like you said. Uh sometimes it's a. favorable opinion, sometimes it's. unfavorable, sometimes it's neutral. Uh.

but like we're incentivized in a way to. make obviously con favorable comparisons. between our inroup and the out groupoup. because that helps your own self-esteem. and the self-esteem of of a group. overall and what they called uh positive. distinctiveness. >> Yeah. Like we're different from the out. group but in the best possible way. And. you know best possible way can mean all. sorts of things depending on the context. of the groups. >> which is what I was just doing. Like we.

don't curse out in front of kids and. throw beers and stuff. >> Exactly. Falcons fans don't do that. Um. that seems to have kind of adopted an. pre-existing theory called social. comparison theory from 1954 by. psychologist Leon Fettzinger. Yeah. And. um Fetzinger was was applying this to. individuals. Basically saying that our. self-worth is very commonly determined. by or or generated by comparison to. others. It can be, you know, comparing.

ourselves to somebody we think is above. us and then maybe that motivates us to. do better. More often than not, we. compare ourselves to people who are say. below us. I made scare quotes just now. And that that generates attitudes of. like superiority, prejudice, bias, all. that stuff. So what um Tajfell and. Turner did was they seem to have taken. social comparison theory and made it a. component of social identity theory and. applied it to groups rather than just. individuals.

>> Yeah. And you know comparison that can. be tricky because when you're talking. about comparing sports fans, it's not. that big of a deal. But. >> if you're uh talking about comparing. like a. >> you know an ethnic group that you're in. or a uh social uh socioeconomic. group that you're in, >> right, >> that's when it gets really kind of. sticky and gross and that's when or why. you hear I think um famous sayings like. comparison is the thief of joy from. Roosevelt or Twain's comparison is the.

death of joy because that's when you. know if you're really sitting around. comparing yourself to people of a of. like a higher financial class or. something like that that is truly the. the death of joy. >> Um because it can consume you I would. imagine. >> Yeah. I mean that's what makes Instagram. in particular so toxic but pretty much. all social media is it it engenders. comparison like that's the that you. can't help but do that. >> Yeah. >> You know so yeah it's a it is the death. of joy. Uh here's the thing about Taj.

Fel and Turner though is um. and this is kind of an important point. like they don't think that um like in. the case I was just talking about with. what like your socioeconomic status. that's obviously something that has a. like a material basis at its root. >> Yeah. >> But it doesn't have to have that and. that's what they posit and I agree that. conflict doesn't need a material basis. Um it can be you know there can be a. situation like back in the days of tuk. tuk where there are very very limited.

resources and um incompatible group. goals maybe within a group and uh like. it doesn't have necessarily have to do. with the material thing. >> So I disagree with that. I I think that. if you look deep enough or if you expand. your definition of um resources widely. enough. >> oh yeah maybe. >> there always is one. So dominance is is. probably a pretty common one. One group. wants to dominate the rest and have say. over what you know where the society.

that all the groups form goes. That's a. big one. >> Good point. >> You could say winning is a resource. Like there's really only one group that. can win unless you're playing soccer and. then everybody wins. [laughter]. >> Um so yeah, if you start to get more, you know, less tangible and more. esoteric or ethereal, one of those. um. ethereal I think then then I to me. there's always some sort of resource at. stake. >> Okay. So you disagree and because there. are ideas that prejudice doesn't require.

material inequality and you feel like it. does. >> Yeah. Depending on your definition of. material I think. >> All right. Well that makes sense. Um, so. Taj Feld and Turner were on to something. they felt and so they were like, "All. right, what if we dig down a little bit. deeper and we started kind of poking ho. or not poking holes but asking questions. about groups in a person's place within. a group?" Um, and one question they came. up with is like what if you don't feel. good about the group that you're in, right? >> And that could be a group that you're. born into. It could be an ethnic group.

that you're born into or a financial um. strata that you're born into. And they. said, "All right, there's a few. different strategies that you can employ. if you aren't so happy." And the first. one was individual mobility, which is. this idea of like, let's say it's high. school click and you're in the Dungeons. and Dragons club. >> Yeah. >> And you're starting to not feel so great. about that. So what you think the move. to do is is to um uh to to you know to.

climb to what you perceive as a higher. social status and and become friends. with like the popular kids or the jocks. or whatever. And this is only the key. here is this is only. >> uh a thing if if that's something that's. possible to do like you can't change. your race in other words but you may be. able to elevate from the D and D group. to the whatever perceived more popular. crowd is. It depends if that if that. high school hierarchy is so rigid that. the jocks are like nerds need not apply. Even former nerds. >> then maybe.

>> you know you're now you're an outcast. from both groups. You're just in the. middle and you're you're up the creek. They make teen movies about this very. thing. >> Oh, I mean yeah every John Hughes movie. almost is sort of has this as a basis, >> right? And then the lesson that's. learned is that that group that you. originally felt superior to or thought. were losers or whatever that they are. the ones that truly care about you. The. jacks don't care about you guys. Let's. let's just face it. >> Yeah. And in the movies though, it's. almost always possible to make that leap.

or if you don't make that leap to for. someone from that upper group to peel. away from them to recognize you anyway. >> Yes. >> You know what I'm saying? >> Yeah. What was the one with um. he was like the hot guy on Grey's. Anatomy at first. >> MC uh Dreamy. >> Yes. What was. >> Can't Buy Me Love. >> Yes. I don't think it's ever been done. better than that one. >> I love that movie and we're we're kind. of that one's a little too far along for. Ruby, but we did have recently watched. Some Kind of Wonderful and Pretty and.

Pink, which also have sort of this. >> nice. >> idea. Uh but but yeah, Can't Buy Me Love. really nails it. I I I loved all three. of those movies. >> I like I have forever. Like it's just in. my head that scene where he goes to the. Italian pizza guy. >> who's like this kind of like um uh Don. Juan. >> and he's like what do you what what have. you done before? Like if if your you. know girlfriend's husband found out. about you, he's like I take a knife and. I stab him a bunch of times. He don't.

bother me and no more. [laughter]. Oh, >> the 80s movies. Yeah, [laughter] they're. great. >> All right, so individual mobility is. one. Uh, social creativity is the next. one. If you don't feel about like great. about how your group as a whole is. perceived, >> um, you can maybe just start sort of. changing the language about how you're. comparing your group to other people. So, >> uh, the first subgroup of that is. comparing your in-group to the out group. in a different way. Uh, so like you know.

the D and D group like we may not be as. cool of the jocks but like we're a lot. smarter than them. >> Precisely. That's an excellent example. >> Yeah. >> Another one is um you can basically. change what attributes are focused on. about your group. Right. So um I guess. going to the D&D one say uh I don't. know. I can't figure out how to use that. one. You got something for that? Uh, well, it's sort of about how how. changing how others perceive your group.

So, like maybe the DND group may not be. looked at as. >> as cool, but like we have the best like. homemade uh like shirts, >> I guess. So, that that seems similar to. the first one. >> It sort of does a little bit, >> huh? >> But it's in it's in how like I think in. the in the first one, it's like how they. perceive themselves. Like we're smarter. than they are and they'll just never. know it. And the other one is is we've. got like these cool uniforms that we. wear and everyone thinks they're.

awesome. >> Gotcha. Great. Great example. >> I'll bet D and D uniforms are awesome. >> Well, I was thinking of the uh in. Stranger Things, the Hellfire Club and. the cool t-shirts. >> Oh, okay. I only saw the first season. >> Yeah, you know, I liked it all, but it. it it first season was great. >> Have you seen the Devil in Silver? It's. the third inst installation of the. terror series. >> I don't know about any of those things. Oh, well, just start watching The. Terror. >> Well, yeah, you've told us about that. I. remember that. Now,

>> skip over season two and then just go to. season 3. It was pretty good. >> Okay. Wasn't season one like uh. sailboats and frig and stuff. >> Yeah. >> Pirates pirates or something. >> It was based on I can't remember which. expedition, but a lost British Navy. expedition in the Arctic. And. >> Okay. >> It was like based on that, but also had. like all sorts of fiction. >> Okay. So, seasons one and three. >> Yes. just do not watch season two. >> All right. So, the third way you can do. that is change uh what out group you're.

comparing yourself with. So, the D&D. group would say like, well, we may be D. and D nerds, but have you seen the chess. club? >> Right. Wow. You're just on fire today, man. >> And I love chess club. I love chess. I. love D and D. I'm not slagging any of. these. If anything, I'm anti anti-J. >> There you go. Got to be anti- somebody, right? That's the whole in-group. outgroup basis. >> Oh man, I'm just getting myself in. trouble to all our teen listeners. >> Um, one of the things about the social.

creativity too is all three of those, they they don't actually change anything. in the way of like the hierarchy. The. jocks are still, >> you know, at the top. >> They rule the school. >> But things have changed. There's. something has changed, right? Social. mobility is like um. >> like the group has changed because. you've left and maybe the hierarchy has. changed because you joined this higher. group or whatever. But social creativity. does not actually change any any part of. like the larger structure say of.

society. >> Yeah, for sure. Uh so those were the. first two. The last one is very easy. It's social competition and that's when. you choose to take on the group that you. perceive ahead of you like headon. So. that's revenge of the nerds. Yes, it is. That or any um like if there was some. greedy developer who's trying to shut. something down, >> that's the basis of it, whether it's a. uh ski um resort or a car wash or a hot. dog stand.

>> That's that's it right there. Taking it. on. >> That's right. So, one of the things. these two guys, Tajel and uh and Turner, Tajell's Tajel and Turner wanted to. point out was that um like um resource. or material inequality uh or scarcity, they don't always have to lead to social. conflict. So sometimes if you're a like. a low status uh individual or something. and you might align with a new group. identity or or try and redefine that.

group in a more positive light like the. things kind of we were just talking. about. >> Yeah. >> But there's no um difference in like. your access to resources. Like it might. just happen within the group and how. you're perceiving yourself or having. others perceive you. It's not like you. went out and got like uh cooler clothes. for the D&D group to wear, >> right? That's a much better way of what. I was trying to say. >> Okay, >> Chuck, I say we take our second break. now and then come back and talk more. about social identity theory. >> Let's do it.

[music]. >> Want [music] to learn about a terror and. call it pterodactyl? How to take a. perfect boo all about fractals until the. hun the Lizzy [music] board of murders. and the cannibal runs. going to explain. everything to your brain. >> Explos. [music]. >> Word up, Jerry. >> So, uh I guess we should compare social.

identity theory with the two big ones. that we talked about before. Um Adornos. and uh what was the other guy? I can't. remember. That's right. Share. >> Oh, you want me to do that? >> Yeah. Well, the big one between um. Adorno's authoritarian personality. theory and social identity theory is. that Adorno [clears throat] is basically. saying it's a bunch of individuals. messed up issues coming together to. create fascism or to create you know. combative in-group outgroup behavior. um.

that it's it's these individuals who. have problems. And that just is it's not. the opposite, but it really does not com. it's not compatible with social identity. theory because to social identity. theory, people coming together as a. group, that group is what generates just. the fact that people are together. generates those um issues. Pos there are. positives and b and um negatives to the. whole thing. >> Yeah. Like for example, some of the. benefits just a sense of belonging which.

uh people make a case that um. >> we have developed that evolutionarily to. keep us [clears throat] in groups. >> that deep sense of well-being that we. get from feeling like we belong. >> Yeah, for sure. >> That's a huge huge benefit of being in a. group. Um a sense of purpose. >> You know, groups typically have. missions. I know that you Falcons fans. like to go on weekend retreats uh at. camps very often in the off season to. talk about the Falcons and their. prospects for the next season. >> Yeah, >> that's a purpose.

>> Yeah, totally. >> And then self-worth, just having a sense. of self-esteem from belonging to a group. like the Falcons fans, >> right? >> That that like you can't buy that kind. of self-esteem that the Falcons give. you. Boy, it's so funny that we're using. the Falcons because I don't know if. there's a collective group of humans on. planet Earth that has feels worse about. themselves. [laughter]. >> Yeah. >> Uh that's funny. Um the other one was. the realistic group conflict theory. So,

uh social ident identity theory is. probably a little closer to that one. >> Yeah. [clears throat]. >> Than Adorno's author authoritarian. personality theory or trait theory. uh. because uh it frames prejudice as a. byproduct of an intergroup conflict. Uh. I think maybe one of the differences is. is that RCT uh realistic group conflict. theory sort of frames it is like the. resource scarcity that we're talking. about and Tajfell again and Turner uh.

they say that scarcity doesn't. necessarily have to be a part of that or. a precursor at least to that. >> Yeah. And like there's a lot of. different nuances that are different. between the two. I think social identity. theory like really spreads out much. further. Um but that that's the main. difference between them. >> Yeah, agreed. >> So there's a lot of people who are like, "Yeah, duh." Including you, Chuck. But. there's also a lot of people are like, "Have you guys proven this?" Like we're. talking social psychology here. Are we. just somebody did like a study once and. and everybody says, "Well, now it's.

proven." That's um maybe. So, there's. this this thing that they use to test. social identity theory called the. minimal group paradigm. And originally, I thought minimal referred to like the. fewest number of people in a group, >> which made me think of the special. people club from Welcome to the. Dollhouse. >> Yeah. [laughter]. >> With Don Weiner and the kid. >> Yeah. Was it just like two people? >> Yes. >> Yeah. Uh but they mean minimal as far as.

like the minimum circumstances that the. people in the group have in common like. what what is the least amount of stuff. that those people can have in common and. still belong to a group together that. where this this behavior will develop. and using that as a test paradigm I. guess that actually pans social identity. theory out basically every time. >> Yeah. I this is where I thought it got. like a little more interesting for me in. that uh they in 1979 they got together.

uh with another social psychologist. named Rupert Brown for a study called. social comparison and group interest and. inroup favoritism. Part of it would help. is if they just sexied up these titles a. little bit. >> for sure. But uh again they they wanted. to see like what what what if we just. sort of arbitrarily grouped individuals. together and then tasked them with uh. some questions about something which. we'll see in a minute and see what. happens. And so in this case it was 62. um 14 and 15year-old students and to.

group them arbitrarily they just gave. them a series of abstract paintings and. said pick out which one you like the. best and that'll be your group or. whatever. >> And that they ended up in four separate. groups. the triangle group, the circle. group, the dromatic group, and the poly. chromatic group. >> Mhm. >> Uh here's what I don't understand is is. that she said really they were just all. put in the triangle group. What What. does that mean? >> I think that so I didn't get that. either. I went and looked. Essentially, they were arbitrarily put into two.

groups that had nothing to do with what. the kids involved thought they were a. group member of. So that whole triangle, circle, diromatic, poly chromatic, it. was just to fool the kids into thinking. they were a member of a group when. really they they were just arbitrarily. assigned to one of two groups. One was. the control group and one was the. experimental group essentially. But. those kids didn't think in those terms. They thought I'm team triangle or I'm. team diromatic. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I gotcha. All right. So then they they grouped them like this. and then they said uh fill out these.

forms and we're going to determine how. much each group is going to get paid for. the study and they had like uh the forms. were side by side with the like a. proposal for a dollar amount for each. group. >> Uh some of them were equal, some were. not equal. And what they observed was I. think fairly interesting is that uh even. when like like one of the things they. observed was that even when they had a. chance for both groups to make 11 bucks,

they would choose to make uh $10 for. themselves if the other group made five. So essentially they wanted they they all. chose to have a disparity between the. group. So in other words, to make their. their group like get more money than the. other one, even if there was an option. to get paid equally, and it was more. money. >> Yeah. >> So to their own detriment, they wanted. to. But essentially the the way that. they explained it was that those the. people choosing that were trying to. enhance the status of their group. They. weren't trying to maximize their money.

They're trying to maximize their group. status by making twice as much as. another group. >> Yeah. I mean, this I think this is. fascinating when you look at it in the. terms of like uh the idea of like. socialism versus capitalism and. >> um making sure everyone's taken care of. versus like screw that guy, I want the. most for myself, >> right? >> These were teenagers. It's a little. distressing. >> for sure. Um there's another one that uh. we turned up in the Journal of. Neuroscience from 2021 and it used a.

brain scan study. This was 34 people. I. don't know how many were involved in the. other one you just mentioned, but um. these people had their brain scanned, so. they were figuring out what part of. their brain they were using while they. were doing this. But the thing that. really has to do with social identity. theory is that they showed people like a. video of somebody doing something. >> This wasn't [clears throat] it, but say. carrying a a tray full of beersteines, full beersteines, right? >> Okay. and you were watching somebody. give it a shot and um then you tried it.

yourself and if you saw somebody say. like lifting it with both hands and they. were successful or trying to lift it. from the bottom and it fell over if you. thought that person was a member of a. rival out group in this case Democrats. or Republicans you would not learn from. their mistake or their successful way of. doing it when you tried it. you. It's. like you would refuse to learn from the. enemy or this out group even if it would.

help you. >> Yeah, that's fascinating to me. >> It is like super fascinating and it. really kind of jibes and makes sense. But a lot of people are like there's. some real criticisms we can level. against this and one of them is okay you. guys are scanning 34 people's brains. You're studying like 16 Boy Scouts, you. know, like the stakes are really low. here. If you take this and apply it into. the real world at higher stakes, like. say expressing prejudice or bias against.

another group. >> um publicly and then potentially have. being ostracized or shamed or whatever. in response, like are people still going. to carry out these behaviors? Like does. it hold up in the real world? >> Yeah, for sure. Uh and also this idea. that like uh kind of what you were. talking about earlier is sometimes with. these studies I feel like there's a lack. of nuance. >> Mhm. And so this idea that um personal. that like the difference between. personal identity and group identity. isn't just so cut and dried as uh.

Tajfell and Turner think it or proposed. that it is. >> right. >> uh and there have been other social. psychologists one in particular named uh. Masaki Yuki who says that um or at least. he argues that you know what the the. social identity theory has its limits uh. if the society is a little more. collectivist like in East Asia uh was. was his example. And um I think that. makes sense because you know again if. you're taking these like small groups of. like 60 teenagers or these boy scouts.

it's hard to extrapolate that to like. and this is true all over the world. >> It is it is and I saw someone say like. it is universal people discriminating. against out groupoups in favor of their. inroup. >> Um and you can make a case like there's. a lot of rivalries between um Japanese. baseball teams in Japan. >> Oh sure. You know, there's rivalries. between China and Japan and Korea, South. Korea and Japan. Yeah. Like it does. exist in one form or another. I think. that's probably what Tajfell and Turner.

would point to if they were both still. alive. >> They could be pointing from their graves. right now. We wouldn't know though. >> That's right. So, back to the uh study. with the kids choosing um to to pay the. other groups less. Again, very distressed about that. They. thought like, "Hey, we nailed that. study. everybody because that really. bolsters this idea that bias can occur. in the absence of conflict. >> Uh like there there was no reason for. these groups to like um not want the.

other group to have as much money yet. they still did. Uh and this this uh idea. of the desire for positive social. identity uh can lead to bias because the. students chose those financial options. that made them different uh from the. other group even even to their own. detriment. >> Yeah. And just to restate it again, these kids had nothing in common. They. weren't even in the groups that they. thought they were in. And yet that. immediate sense of group membership made. them discriminate against people who.

they thought were in other groups. >> Yeah, for sure. >> Yeah. So, um I think Tajfell and Turner. would be like, "Hey, we're still. pointing. Let's talk about some of this. this stuff in in real world." Like, you. want some real world proof? How about. some anecdotal proof, everybody? Yeah. And one great example they came up. with that uh where a group particular. group used social creativity. >> to achieve like a positive. distinctiveness that they were talking. about which can be attained was the.

black is beautiful movement. >> in the 1960s when black Americans were. like. >> you know what we're sort of tired of. hearing about how this idea of beauty is. so euroentric. >> and you know blonde hair and blue eyes. is all that like no no black is. beautiful uh our skin color is beautiful. our hair and our culture is all. beautiful and um just the the black. aesthetic was like fully embraced and. touted as a movement and that did a I. think a that was a huge like cultural.

change in the 1960s. >> Yeah. And that was a great example of. social creativity, right? >> Yeah. And then another example of social. creativity um is poor white racism where. a group in this case uh poor white. Americans. uh choose to discriminate against poor. black Americans because they are capable. of feeling superior of that other group. rather than comparing themselves to uh. wealthy white Americans. >> Yeah. And then uh I kind of fast.

forwarding to today, there's also a lot. I mean it's still very much going on. like in the United States. The more you. identify with not just your political. party, but like what your political. party stands for, the more you take that. on yourself as part of your identity, the more likely you are to view the. opposing party as like bad people, as um. dumb, as not having any idea what you're. supposed to do with the country, that.

kind of stuff. >> Yeah, for sure. There are people that. argue that uh in order to like. radicalize somebody into uh maybe an. extremist group, uh it really helps when. you appeal to them uh with a real. distinctive identity for for the end. group that they're trying to get you in. >> Yes. Um another one is that products. like um domestic versus um foreign made. products. >> Yeah. Yeah. that ingroup outgroup. predicts that uh your sense of uh ethno.

ethnosentrism or nationalism. >> Sure. >> And then musical preference. There was a. study done by a guy named Daniel Shepard. um who found that the more strongly you. identify with your musical preference, the more likely you were to say say. other musical preferences suck. >> And um that reminded me of disco. demolition night from 1979. You remember. that? >> Yeah, for sure. where all those rockers. like rioted because they hated disco so. much. >> Yeah. >> Um I guess that's about it. Like yeah,

duh definitely sums it up, but to me it. was like the nuts and bolts of the whole. thing that were so uh interesting that. and your all of your awesome examples. >> Well, I really I really enjoyed that. study of the kids like choosing [music]. to pay the other kids less. I thought. that was fascinating and I think I think. a lot of this stuff is fairly. fascinating. >> uh at the end of the day. [music] So, I. think you I think it won me over a bit. >> Good. I'm glad. Well, since Chuck's been. won over, you know, everybody that. automatically triggers listener mail.

>> Uh, I'm going to do the shorter one to. around on [music] this one. So, hey. guys, in the Judy Bloom episode, uh, you. guys were talking about we must we must. we must increase our bust. Uh, that. actually wasn't invented by Bloom. Uh, she's the same generation as my mother. and they did that in junior high school. Uh, the rest of the rhyme, according to. my mom, goes, "The bigger the better, the tighter the sweater. [laughter] The. boys are counting on us." Uh, Judy Bloom.

and Beverly Clearary shaped generations. of young mind guys. That is from Margot. in New York City. And we had a few. different um people write in and tell us. that. And I I tried to find online. [music] like the origination of that. And uh almost everything says Judy Bloom. until you dig into Reddit and then. [music] somebody has a pretty exhaustive. list of like, you know, in the 1950s it. was used in this thing and that was used. in this thing. But I don't think anyone. ever nailed like the first person to say. it. >> Good old Reddit. >> Good old Reddit. >> That was from Margot.

>> That was Margot in New York City. >> Awesome. Thanks a lot, Margot. That was. wonderful. Um and if you want to be like. Margot and make us laugh and delight us, you can send us an email, too. Send it. off to stuffodcast@ [music] ii. iheartradio.com. >> Stuff you should know is a production of. iHeart Radio. For more podcasts, iHeart. Radio, visit the iHeart Radio app, Apple. Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your. favorite [music] shows.