In-group and out-group
People may for example identify with their peer group, family, community, sports team, political party, gender, sexual orientation, religion, or nation.
The terminology was made popular by Henri Tajfel and colleagues beginning in the 1970s during his work in formulating social identity theory.
[1][2][3][4] In neurology, there is an established literature[5] about the innate propensity of the human brain to divide the world into us and them valence categories, where the exact membership of the in-group and out-group are socially contingent (hence vulnerable to the instruments of propaganda), and the intensity exists along a spectrum from mild to complete dehumanization of the "othered" group (such as through pseudospeciation).
[7] On average participants judged members of their own teams to be faster, although the hand movements were the exact same speed across the board.
Similarly, Hastorf and Cantril conducted a pioneering study in 1954, where students of both Princeton and Dartmouth viewed a contentious football game between their two teams.
Research points to unconscious decision-making processes that takes place at the neurological level, where in-group favoritism and out-group bias occurs very early in perception.
[11] For example, researchers in a cross-race recognition study recorded blood oxygenation level-dependent signal (BOLD) activity from black and white participants while they viewed and attempted to remember pictures of unfamiliar black faces, white faces and objects.
That is, under conditions where group categorization is psychologically salient, people will shift their beliefs in line with in-group social norms.
This generally refers to the tendency of groups to make decisions that are more extreme than the initial inclination of its members, although polarization toward the most central beliefs has also been observed.
[29] One study in the field of behavioural genetics suggests that biological mechanisms may exist which favor a coexistence of both flexible and essentialist systems.
- People in this stadium form an in-group of American football fans and professionals vs. those who are not fans of the sport.
- Fans in attendance at the stadium vs. people spectating the match via external means, e.g. television/radio coverage.
- Fans and professionals affiliated with one team vs. those affiliated with the opposing team.
- Professionals on the field (players, officials, coaches, mascots and cheerleaders) vs. the paying customers in the stands who are denied access to the facility's secure nucleus except by invitation from a high-status individual.
- Ranks of the wealthy ownership and their senior executive staff, with access to private box suites vs. high-priced talent.
- Technical staff involved in facilities maintenance and operations vs. sporting staff (referees, timekeepers, statisticians and in-game adjudicators).
- Media with organizational endorsement and affiliation who enjoy special player access to one team vs. non-affiliated media.