Judging Groups and Society 1
Reading Summary: Judging Groups and Society
Shaneil A. Guidry
School of Psychology, Liberty University
Judging Groups and Society: Stereotypes
The more we evolve as a species, the more perplexed we become when understanding
one another. There is such a tunnel vision that overcomes humankind that disables us and
forces our need to place individuals in categories, as though this will provide a better
understanding of who we are. In addition, this labeling gives a pseudo sense of validation that
enables us to progress in life. In this week’s reading assignment, students delve deeper into
judging groups and society and the stereotypes that outline such groups. Various theories offer
insight into how individuals within the different groups think and how they derive their level of
Judging Groups and Society 2
understanding. For this assignment, this paper will focus on three of the introduced theories:
the social identity theory, optimal distinctiveness theory, and social dominance theory.
Social Identity Theory
Within the social identity theory or SIT, there is a significant focus on increasing one's
self-esteem. Self-esteem is a focal point that drives those within this in-group, presenting them
with motivation they believe would not come from outside the in-group. “Social identity theory
claims that people seek a positive social identity to maintain their self-esteem” (Fiske & Taylor,
pg. 317, 2021). The individuals who subscribe to this theory not only seek to bolster their
selfesteem, but they also seek to identify others or groups that encourage similar goals and
standards. Theorists Tajfel and Turner have concluded that bias infiltrates these in-groups due to
such demands on increasing self-esteem and high self-imposed standards. Out-groups are now
being utilized to gauge the growth of those within the in-groups despite many comparisons
based on stereotypes rather than factual information.
Optimal Distinctiveness Theory
Similar to some aspects, the optimal distinctiveness theory (ODT) aligns with the social
identity theory’s focus on the importance of self-esteem. However, the optimal distinctiveness
theory seeks to focus on how to surround oneself with like-minded individuals, as well as
maintaining one’s own identity. “Optimal distinctiveness theory (Brewer, 1991) proposes that
social identity involves a compromise between two opposing needs: the need for assimilation
and the need for differentiation" (Hewstone et al., pg. 581, 2002).” Those within in-groups that
align with the optimal distinctiveness theory see their in-groups as well balanced, as they relate
to individuals that are just like them, yet able to derive their own way of thinking. In addition,
there is a desire to grow within these in-groups and assist those within the group in growing.
While this can be an excellent attribute for any group, one must remember that the group may
also support harmful and hurtful teachings.
Judging Groups and Society 3
Social Dominance Theory
Government authorities may immediately come to mind when considering the social
dominance theory. For example, our society is facing the battle of a woman's right to choose,
and while some states believe that women have a right to choose to move forward with
abortion, other states would strongly disagree. The social dominance theory gives a clear view
into how such dominant groups work and how such in-groups perceive those around them.
“Social dominance theory (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999) proposes that society contains ideologies
that promote or attenuate intergroup hierarchies. Individual differences in the extent to which
these competing ideologies are accepted are represented by social dominance orientation
(SDO)" (Hewstone et al., pgs. 582-583, 2002). These particular in-groups not only maintain a
bias toward other social classes, races, and ethnicities, but the ideologies hold firm toward the
ideology of women being the weaker of the genders, building multiple layers of bias. Moreover,
this theory suggests that stereotypes and hypotheses are already pre-concluded by those within
in-groups that align with this theory.
Conclusion
Despite the theory, it is inevitable for humankind to conclude to some level of bias or
stereotype due to the structure of their society. Whether there are lessons taught within
homes, schools, and now the vast forms of media, both subconsciously and consciously,
individuals are predisposed to stereotypes all around them. The real question is, how can one
combat such exposure? This question can provide a twofold response. First, individuals have to
take the time to learn about others and choose to remove the stereotypes that have been
imprinted within their societies.
Two, individuals must remove the self-imposed stereotypes that hinder them from
believing beyond the limitations they have set for themselves. Third is a collective societal belief
that we all need one another and are stronger together. “I appeal to you, brothers and sisters, in
Judging Groups and Society 4
the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another in what you say and
that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly united in mind and thought”
(New International Version, 2024, 1Cor. 1:10).
References
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (2021). Social Cognition: From Brains to Culture. SAGE
Publications Ltd.
Hewstone, M., Rubin, M., & Willis, H. (2002). Intergroup bias. Annual Review of
Psychology, pp. 53, 575–604. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135109
New International Version Bible. (2024). NIV Online. https://biblegateway.com/
