# data[].attributes.body
A weakness of Social Identity Theory is that it conflicts with Sherif's Realistic Conflict Theory (1966). A study carried out by Sherif explored this theory (Robbers Cave experiment (1954)) and demonstrated the effects of prejudice and conflict forming between two groups, however, this only occurred when competition between the two group

# data[].attributes.body
The experiment Jane Elliot (1970) conducted supports the Social Identity Theory as a group of otherwise normal children became vicious towards others armed with a new belief that they were superior.

# data[].attributes.body
Tajfel and turner 1979, states in their theory that social categorisation implements an in-group and an out-group. Evidence in real life can be seen and provide a strength for this theory as in a school environment individuals dress and act in a certain way depending on the their choice of music relating to a certain genre. If an individual does not like the that type of music they may dress differently and act differently in accordance with another’s genre and seen to be in the out- group by those who prefer Another type of music.

# data[].attributes.body
The theory was criticised for presenting racist and prejudice thoughts as normal characteristics of human thought and could be misinterpreted as an explanation and justification for racism. (Gross, 2001)

# data[].attributes.body
The Social Identity Theory fails to take into account any other factors that influence prejudice other than groups. For example, the theory does not measure the levels of prejudice and why there is greater prejudice against the out-group in certain situations in comparison to others.

# data[].attributes.body
There has been few group experiments involved in social identity theory, and the ones that have been done, have been criticised.

# data[].attributes.body
Jane Elliots (1970) blue eye brown eye study supports the theory, particularly social comparison, as she created an in-group and out-group within a class of friends. Within 15 minutes the children went from being 'thoughtful and kind' to 'nasty and vicious'. Children in opposite groups were fighting and belittling each other. the children developed their prejudiced behaviour and attitudes and ridiculed each other to raise their own self esteem.

# data[].attributes.body
Much research into prejudice comes from experiments which have strong controls and are replicable and some are field experiments (Sherif et al) which have ecological validity & Jane elliot.

Social identity theory is not incompatible with other explanations for prejudice such as Sherif’s social conflict theory – research into both has produced similar results.

# data[].attributes.body
highlights the fact that all individuals have the potential to discriminate and be prejudiced towards others if given the opportunity.

# data[].attributes.body
The suggests explanations of prejudice and only consider one aspect (in-group/out-group) which means it does not consider the whole complexity of prejudice and discrimination but a holistic view which does not consider all aspects of prejudice which would be needed for a valid and credible explanation.

Studies are therefore likely to lack validity because they do not represent the ‘real situation’ which exemplifies prejudices

# data[].attributes.body
This is shown in recent wars between two sides. One fighting for what they believe in and potentially killing innocent people along the way. Then the other side retaliating by killing other innocent people but both sides feeling that they did what they had to do to protect their country and people. Whilst both sides are unable to see the others points of views and mostly regarding two separate religions.

# data[].attributes.body
individuals will discriminate if given the opportunity

# data[].attributes.body
A weakness of Social Identity Theory is that it conflicts with Sherif's Realistic Conflict Theory (1966). A study carried out by Sherif explored this theory (Robbers Cave experiment (1954)) and demonstrated the effects of prejudice and conflict forming between two groups, however, this only occurred when competition between the two groups was created. RCT suggests that prejudice and conflict is formed due to the need for resources and/or shared goals (power, control, wealth). This differs to Social Identity Theory, which suggests that conflict, prejudice and discrimination are formed by the need for identity (in and out groups).

Sources: https://www.spring.org.uk/2007/09/war-peace-and-role-of-power-in-sherifs.php
http://www.psychologywizard.net/realistic-conflict-theory-ao1-ao2-ao3.html

# data[].attributes.body
To further support and negate social identity theory (SIT) as proposed by Tajfel & Turner (1979). Elliott (1970) aimed to expose discrimination as a behaviour in social acceptance. However, this only portrays the individuals need to be accepted within a group. In Elliott’s blue eyed / brown eyed experiment, the children were influenced to segregate part of the group of which they were previously all wholly accepted. The theory supported (SIT) in that; the children once instructed would discriminate against those had previously considered equal, prior to the differences in their eye colour. In some way it tries to explain how and why humans can conduct themselves in a manner to feel part of an in group. An aspect is that in understanding how people perceive themselves within a group, can inspire influences to change how the group behave towards them. Though the findings of Elliott (1970) can only relate to one specific group behaviour, it fails to recognise that unless confines are restricted the individual will continue to adjust their position to acceptance in different groups. Minard (1952) has shown that while miners of different race worked in unison below ground. They discriminated against their fellow workers above ground. Needing to fit into the differentiated group for social acceptance.

# data[].attributes.body
Elliot (1970) study, supports the Social Identity Theory because it shows on day 1, the blue eyed children as the 'in-group' and the brown eyed children as the 'out-group'. Her study showed the behaviour displayed by the 'in-group' pointed out the bad in the brown eyed children in order to highlight why the blue eyed children were suggested to be superior.

# data[].attributes.body
Jane Elliot (1970) study, this showed the children that people should not be treated unfairly for being different. The experiment enabled them to see what it was like on both sides, giving all the children a feeling of what it is like to be left out. it was a well controlled experiment giving it strength.

# data[].attributes.body
Can explain why people behave differently when in a group rather than on their own as they change attitudes and appearances to fit in, for example street gangs.

# data[].attributes.body
Adler (2000) used research using electroencephalogram scans (EEG) measuring brainwaves to record the brain's reaction to stereotypes. Participant's responses to sentences 'violating' gender stereotypes such as "The surgeon prepared herself for the operation" were recorded and a strong positive brainwave (P600) was noted in these cases. The brain response to violated gender stereotypes was the same as that to grammatically incorrect sentences such as "The cat won't eating".  This supports SIT in its evidence of a significant brain reaction to a stereotype, supporting the existence of such.  The experiment is highly reliable due to its scientific nature and can be adjusted in order to test other types of stereotype besides gender roles.

References

Gross, RD 2015, Psychology: The Science of Mind and Behaviour 7th Edition, Seventh edition, Hodder Education Group, London.

# data[].attributes.body
Allowed the children to gain and understanding of what it feels like to be branded an outsider and taught them that everyone deserves to be treated as equals and respected regardless of their age, gender, eye colour, race etc

# data[].attributes.body
Caused unnecessary conflicts and fights between children who were best friends right up until Elliot began her experiment.

# data[].attributes.headline
Explains why children can be easily persuaded to behave differently according to their in-group or out-group

# data[].attributes.subject
Explains why children can be easily persuaded to behave differently according to their in-group or out-group

# data[].attributes.body
A study conducted by Jane Elliot (1970) had shown how prejudice and discrimination could be created by influencing negative stereotypes about the eye colour of children in a class. Elliot’s results found how prejudice took place against the eye colour that was viewed in a more negative perception. Behaviours changed towards each of them with one boy calling another “brown eyes” as an insult, this shows strength in the assumption that prejudice is a development of social comparison from the social identity theory (SIT).
The results also found that children who had been negatively stereotyped preformed lower in tests and when switched around on the second day the same result occurred. This is also a strength of the social identity theory as its shows how through social categorisation you can adopt a group identity resulting in a change of behaviour and performance.
The findings could be used as a tool to diffuse conflicts between students. It could also possibly be used as an anti-bullying tactic. However, considering the date of this study and how ethics has been revised an updated version of this could be developed and used.

# data[].attributes.body
Jane Elliott showed that prejudice and discrimination can be drastically reduced by giving all her students the opportunity to be in both the "in" and the "out" group. The discrimination experienced was unpleasant enough to convince the children that displaying prejudice is not a good way to behave, which goes against the concepts illustrated in Social Identity Theory.

# data[].attributes.body
I do this all the time... thus it’s very true

# data[].attributes.body
In her experiment she showed how quickly prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination take hold. It relates to today's 21st century British society for example in the surges in Islamophobic Attacks for example the Manchester Area Attacks in 2017. After the Greater Manchester Police (GMP) reported a 505% rise in Islamophobic incidents (The Guardian) depicting members of society forming the new 'In Group,' and Muslim community members as the new 'Out Group.' This is Social Identity Theory in action within British Society but it depicts a new rigidity that was not apparent in Elliott's experiment.  There is no switching now of the in or out group - where you are perceived by society as belonging is where you stay and where your social identity lies.

Here is my source:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/22/islamophobic-attacks-manchester-increase-arena-attack

# data[].attributes.body
Separation of football supporters at stadiums to prevent potential hooliganism due to in-group out-group discrimination

# data[].attributes.body
Can explain bullying between different groups.

# data[].attributes.body
Tajfel (1970) conducted research on boys from a comprehensive school. Results found that when allocating reward points, boys chose to maximise the difference between the in-group and out-group even at expense of own profit. This supports social identity theory of discrimination, as the in-group discriminated against those in out-groups.