Walden Social Categorization and In-group–Outgroup Bias Discussion

Political election cycles provide ample illustration of the relationship between social categorization and ingroup outgroup bias. Lines are clearly drawn between those who are us and those who are them. Members of us are very similar to each other, and members of them are also very similar to each other. Moreover, there is a great difference between us and them. Most vitally, us is superior to them in a wide range of ways even in the absence of any real group interaction.To prepare for this Discussion, select a current example from the news that illustrates the relationship between social categorization and ingroup-outgroup bias. Then consider how social categorization in your example might be redefined or recategorized to reduce bias.With these thoughts in mind:Post by Day 4 a current example you selected from the news and explain how it illustrates the relationship between social categorization and ingroup outgroup bias. Then explain one way the social categorization in the example might be redefined or recategorized to reduce bias.Be sure to support your postings and responses with specific references to the Learning Resources and the current literature.ReadingsFiske, S. T., Gilbert, D. T., & Lindzey, G. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of social psychology (5th ed., Vol. 2). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Chapter 29, Intergroup Bias Dasgupta, N. (2004). Implicit ingroup favoritism, outgroup favoritism, and their behavioral manifestations. Social Justice Research, 17(2), 143 169. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.Perdue, C. W., Dovidio, J. F., Gurtman, M. B., & Tyler, R. B. (1990). Us and them: Social categorization and the process of intergroup bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(3), 475 486.Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (The Nelson-Hall series in psychology) (pp. 7 24). Chicago, IL: Burnham. The psychology of intergroup relations by S. Worchel & W.G. Austin. Copyright 1986 by STEPHEN WORCHEL. Reprinted by permission of STEPHEN WORCHEL via the Copyright Clearance Center.Turner, J. C., & Reynolds, K. J. (2001). The social identity perspective in intergroup relations: Theories, themes, and controversies. In R. Brown & S. Gaertner (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Intergroup processes (pp. 133 152). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Intergroup Processes by Brown, R. & Gaertner, S., in Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology Series. Copyright 2001 by Blackwell Publishing. Reprinted by permission of Blackwell Publishing via the Copyright Clearance Center.Wenzel, M., Mummendey, A., Weber, U., & Waldzus, S. (2003). The ingroup as pars pro toto: Projection from the ingroup onto the inclusive category as a precursor to social discrimination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(4), 461 473. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

• WE OFFER THE BEST CUSTOM PAPER WRITING SERVICES. WE HAVE DONE THIS QUESTION BEFORE, WE CAN ALSO DO IT FOR YOU.
• Assignment status: Already Solved By Our Experts
• (USA, AUS, UK & CA PhD. Writers)
• CLICK HERE TO GET A PROFESSIONAL WRITER TO WORK ON THIS PAPER AND OTHER SIMILAR PAPERS, GET A NON PLAGIARIZED PAPER FROM OUR EXPERTS

Related Posts

• Middle School science

• Assignment 2: Ethical (Moral) Relativism

• Case Study Analysis Gender Issues 4-5 pages

• Working in a foreign country

• UNIT VIII Ebola Outbreak in West Africa Public Health Planning Paper