1
Content Summary
Social Psychology Article
Christopher Theriault
Department of Psychology, Liberty University
PSY 512: Social Psychology
Dr. Snyder
September 01, 2025
2
Content Summary
Introduction
People naturally want to know what type of community they belong to, as this helps
them understand who they are. Ingroup and outgroup mentality provides a framework for
identifying which groups they are a part of and influences how they view and treat members of
outgroups, depending on the culture of their ingroup. However, this dynamic can also lead to
discrimination, as individuals may adopt negative attitudes or behaviors toward outgroups in
alignment with the norms of their ingroup.
Social Categorization
Human beings are naturally wired to seek connection, and they tend to gravitate toward
others who are similar to them. People become members of multiple groups based on race, age,
or other shared attributes through a process called social categorization (Kassin et al., 2025).
Individuals naturally fall into these groups when seeking affiliation with others, often based on
similarity, proximity, or shared fate, and this process typically occurs quickly and automatically
(Chadee, 2022). Through social categorization, people gain a clearer sense of who they are and
how they fit into society. For example, a Mexican American individual may be more likely to
form friendships with other Mexican Americans because they share similarities, live in close
proximity, and face a common fate. According to Shepherd and Sigg (2015), understanding these
social groups not only enhances identity but also helps individuals maintain self-esteem. Once
people establish the communities they belong to, they form ingroups, while those outside of
these communities are considered outgroups.
Ingroups and Outgroups
In society, people naturally form groups that shape their sense of belonging and identity.
An ingroup refers to a group or community in which individuals are members. This can include
affiliations such as nationality, religion, or sports teams, while those outside the group are
considered outgroups (Kassin et al., 2025). People often use terms like “we” and “them” to
3
distinguish between the groups they belong to and those they do not, which can create social
consequences. According to Chadee (2022), intergroup bias—the tendency to favor one’s
ingroup over outgroups—emerges from this way of thinking. A clear example is college football,
where fans favor the team they support and often believe their team deserves better treatment,
such as higher rankings or greater praise. Shepherd and Sigg (2015) explains that this reflects a
strategy of social competition, in which individuals seek to enhance the positive distinctiveness
of their own group. Unfortunately, this ingroup favoritism can also lead to discrimination, as the
advantages enjoyed by the ingroup may come at the expense of those viewed as part of the
outgroup.
Discrimination
European Americans, as an ingroup, hold the majority in the United States. When census
data reveals that minorities will eventually become the majority, this demographic shift is often
perceived as a threat, which has been linked to increased discrimination toward African
Americans (Kassin et al., 2025). Such fear stems from concerns about losing long-held privileges
of status and power. According to Chadee (2022), discrimination can occur when conflicting
group goals and competition over resources or power arise. This reflects a social dominance
orientation, in which members of the ingroup seek to maintain dominance over outgroups and
perpetuate systems of oppression (Kassin et al., 2025). For example, a commercial by
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, urging illegal immigrants to leave the
United States, can be understood as an expression of social dominance aimed at securing
resources and power for the majority group. As Bashir et al. (2013) notes, individuals often
resist social change because it threatens the perceived benefits of the status quo maintained by
the majority. People may not even recognize the discriminatory nature of their behavior,
believing instead that they are simply acting in the best interests of themselves and their
ingroup.
4
Conclusion
That is why we should focus more on Christian values in our approach toward others,
because we are all God’s children. As Scripture says, “Yet to all who received him, to those who
believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God—children born not of natural
descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God” (New International
Version, 2011/1978, John 1:12–13). We are united as one ingroup under God, sharing this
identity and similarity across the world.
5
References
Bashir, N. Y., Lockwood, P., Chasteen, A. L., Nadolny, D., & Noyes, I. (2013). The ironic
impact of activists: Negative stereotypes reduce social change influence. European
Journal of Social Psychology, 43(7), 614–626. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1983
Chadee, D. (2022). Theories in social psychology. John Wiley & Sons.
Kassin, S. M., Fein, S., & Markus, H. R. (2025). Social psychology. SAGE.
Shepherd, D., & Sigg, N. (2015). Music Preference, Social Identity, and Self-Esteem. Music
Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 32(5), 507–514.
https://doi.org/10.1525/mp.2015.32.5.507
The Holy Bible, New International Version. (2011). Zondervan. (Original work published 1978)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
