Ingroup bias: what is it and how does this favoritism appear?

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

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

• Related article: "What is social psychology?"

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? In general, 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 behavior norms, roles, affections, rivalries, among other elements. Not only that, but these elements allow us to recognize ourselves as competent members of a social group (ie, as people who are part of it). At the same time,

allow us to establish differences with other members, and in this way, think of ourselves as individuals with unique characteristics.

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

• You may be interested in: "Stereotypes, prejudices and discrimination: why should we avoid prejudging?"

Ingroup bias

Ingroup bias (or ingroup bias) is also called ingroup favoritism. As the latter name suggests, it is the tendency to favor or value more positively to behaviors, attitudes or preferences of 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 it is easy to imagine, the latter can have important effects on discriminatory attitudes and behaviors, that is, on a psychosocial rejection of the outgroup. And, in contrast, an esteem or overestimate towards the ingroup. But not necessarily: to explain this, some social psychological theories have distinguished between "ingroup bias" and "outgroup negativity", where the latter makes specific reference to the exercise of violence and discrimination of the ingroup towards 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 this occurs, social psychology has resorted to the study of intergroup relations of categorization in the formation of identity. In other words, it has been necessary to study how identity is formed through establishing a series of categories, where both the cognitive bases and the links between members of different groups.

Why happens? Explanations from Social Psychology

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

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

The theory of social identity and self-concept

The British psychologist Henry Tajfel developed important studies on category perception in the 50's. 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 of the Self.

In very broad strokes, what they did was propose that, in order 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 the same 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; with which, they are a reflection of the norms and practices that are expected in a particular group. In this sense, ingroup bias occurs as a way to maintain self-esteem by intensification of the differences between the ingroup and the outgroup (what is known as the principle of accentuation); For that, identification with a social group and also comparison with others is necessary.

Theory of conflicts and competition

Through the Thieves' Den Experiment, Muzafer and Carolyn Sherif showed that a context of competitiveness favors the increase of hostility from the ingroup to the outgroup.

In contrast, an environment where tasks requiring interdependence prevail and where members of different groups pursue common goals can reduce such hostility. According to his research, ingroup bias and negative attitudes toward outgroups arise when ingroup members have to compete with limited resources.

• You may be interested in: "The Den of Robbers Experiment: Creating Conflict Out of Nothing"

Ingroup Derogation Theory

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

That is, when members of a group tend to value members of their own group more harshly than those of the outgroup. This happens especially when the ingroup belongs to a social minority. Some research has also suggested that people from more collectivistic cultures tend to judge their own group less favorably than the outgroup (although they value their members individually positive); and people from more individualistic cultures rate the in-group more positively, and each member more negatively.

Bibliographic references:

• Scandroglio, B., Lopez, J.S. and Sebastian, C. (2008). The Theory of Social Identity: a critical synthesis of its foundations, evidence and controversies, 21(1): 80-89.
• Betancor, V., Leyens J-P., Rodríguez, A. and Quiles, M. (2003). Differential ingroup and outgroup attribution of the dimensions of morality and efficacy: an indicator of ingroup favoritism. Psychothema, 15(3): 407-413.
• Tejada, A., García C., and Navas, M. (2003). Interethnic endogroup bias test: reliability studies and evidence of validity. Psychothema, 15(1): 101-108.