Experiments in Intergroup Discrimination Henri Tajfel PDF – Free download as PDF File .pdf), Text File .txt) or read online for free. Experiments in Intergroup Discriminati. ON. MATRIX by Henri Tajfel. B. MATRIX 3. MATRIX 4. U. Intergroup discrimination is a feature logical causation. In The. Exp eriments in Intergroup Discrimination. Can cliscrimination be trctced to by Flenri Tajfel .. problem lvas to create experimental con- didons that would.

Author: Mum Zolonos
Country: Albania
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Software
Published (Last): 6 June 2009
Pages: 472
PDF File Size: 3.48 Mb
ePub File Size: 18.42 Mb
ISBN: 496-4-74163-479-9
Downloads: 2990
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Mizilkree

Intergroup Discrimination and the Henri Tajfel Experiments. The paper questions the reasons that attributed to these negative stereotypes. A total of 64 individuals were asked to participant in the study.

Intergroup Discrimination

The subject also did not know the identity of any member of either group. The second experiment was very similar to the first.

The experiments carried out by Tajfel clearly demonstrate that inter-group discrimination is easy to trigger off. When participants were asked to allocate money to the different participants on both lists, participants gave more money to individuals who scored similarly to themselves compared to individuals who scored differently. It should be noted that for each box, within the matrix, there henru another that held its inverse.

The subjects had to indicate their choices by ticking one box in each matrix.

Retrieved from ” http: Participants adolescent boys completed a computer task and were given a list of participants who scored similarly to them on the same task. Leave this field blank: Navigation Main Page Recent changes help! Vasily Kandinsky ‘Composition 8’ However, they were given the choice whether to maximize the profit for everyone to enjoy, or for just their own group to enjoy. Want to stay up to date?

Intergroup discrimination was the strategy used duscrimination making intergroup choices. It is claimed that the subjects are presented with a “clear alternative to discriminating against the outgroup.

Though not all conflicts between different groups stem from competition, it still cannot djscrimination avoided that people automatically discriminate against those who are not part of their own group.


There were two conditions in the first part of the experiment. On the second part of the study, the experimenters were aiming to find out the type of strategy used by the boys when allocating points. Experiments in Intergroup Discrimination. Towards the ends of the matrices a choice could be made that would help to maintain maximum joint profit, maximum ingroup profit or the maximum difference in amounts allocated between the discriminahion groups see image below.

Different social and psychological factors become roots of conflicts between groups. This page was last modified on 29 Juneat In the other two conditions, amounts were allocated in a fair manner.

Intergroup Discrimination and the Henri Tajfel Experiments

The Second Experiment aesthetic preference. All of the boys in each of the groups were from the same house in the same form at the school, so that they knew each other well before the experiment. These boys already knew each other to some extent as the all attended the same school and indeed were members of the same year group and school “house.

The first part aimed to establish an intergroup categorisation while the second part aimed to assess the effects of the said categorisation on intergroup behavior.

Intergroup Discrimination experiments Henri Tajfel

Henri Tajfel conducted a series of experiments on intergroup discrimination in Bristol City in Tajfel et al argue that, before any discrimination can occur, people must be categorised as members of an in-group or an out-group, but more significantly the very act of categorisation by itself produces conflict and discrimination. The subjects were taken to separate cubicles and told which group they were in. However, to maximise your own rewards while also maximising the differenceyou might well choose one of the middle boxes and give 12 to a member of your own group and 11 to a member of the other group.

Add a New Page. There were out-group choices, with both top and bottom row referred to members of the different group from the boy. The boys found themselves variously categorised as “overestimators” and “underestimators” or as being “accurate” or “inaccurate” and were then presented with distributing rewards to their own and other groups.


Save this course for later Don’t have time for it all now? This time the matrices consisted of 13 boxes, and were designed to facilitate the use of any one of the three strategies, mentioned above. Scientific American, The experiment aimed to demonstrate that competition was not a sufficient factor in the creation of intergroup discrimination.

Check out our quiz-page with tests about: The boys would not know the identity of the individuals to whom they would be assigning these rewards and penalties since everyone would be given a code number.

The experiment differed in two ways. The text in this article is licensed under the Creative Commons-License Attribution 4. In one condition, after the boys had completed their estimates they were told that in judgements of this kind some people consistently overestimate the number of dots and some consistently underestimate the number, but that these intergrou are in no way related to accuracy.

Social identity theory argues that the boys experimsnts their own group because it increases their self-esteem. After the judgements had been made and scored by the experimenter the boys were told that they were going to be grouped on the basis of the visual judgements they had just made.

Share this page on your website: This was then related to the stereotypes that existed for our own immigrants and their British-born children. The important choice for Tajfel is the intergroup choice. The study consisted of two laboratory experiments.

The boys were required to make three types of choice.

Tajfel infers that this is in itself an obvious form of discrimination caused by the segregation or categorisation.

Tajfel did not deny that competition between two groups influences intergroup discrimination but demonstrated that merely categorising people into in-groups and out-groups is sufficient to create intergroup discrimination.

This page has experimnts accessed 26, times.