We tend to favour our group over others
Our evolutionary need to belong creates an irrational preference for our own group, causing us to behave uncooperatively and harming broader cohesion.
Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundy, R. P., & Flament, C. (1971). Social categorisation and intergroup behaviour. European journal of social psychology, 1(2), 149-178.
The study
48 teenagers were divided into 2 groups based on expressing a preference for a painting. They were then told to anonymously award money to other participants involved in the study.
The results demonstrated that when given a choice between maximising profit for all groups and maximising profit for their own group, they chose the latter.
Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundy, R. P., & Flament, C. (1971). Social categorisation and intergroup behaviour. European journal of social psychology, 1(2), 149-178.
Key Takeaways
In-Group favouritism can take many forms.
For instance, designers might feel they are the out-group in a meeting dominated by engineers, creating a sense that they're either not as welcomed or have opinions that aren't as valued. Who might be feeling excluded in your projects and meetings?
Turn “Us vs Them” into “We”.
Broaden the perception of group boundaries by cooperating with the out-group in shared activities (Gaertner et al., 1990). Which situations can you create that promote collaboration?
Actively use the benefits of your outgroup.
We tend to evaluate the work of our own group as better and more creative than it really is. However, by enlisting the aid of an out-group, you may have an accurate assessment of the actual creative value (Adarves‐Yorno, 2008).
Be careful with unconscious bias.
Groups can be formed by meaningless reasons but also by our own pre-conceived notions or bias. What might be some of the reasons you or others use to place someone in an out-group? How might you raise this in a way to bring disconnected groups together?
In further detail
We tend to favour our group over others
Our evolutionary need to belong creates an irrational preference for our own group, causing us to behave uncooperatively and harming broader cohesion.
Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundy, R. P., & Flament, C. (1971). Social categorisation and intergroup behaviour. European journal of social psychology, 1(2), 149-178.
The study
48 teenagers were divided into 2 groups based on expressing a preference for a painting. They were then told to anonymously award money to other participants involved in the study.
The results demonstrated that when given a choice between maximising profit for all groups and maximising profit for their own group, they chose the latter.
Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundy, R. P., & Flament, C. (1971). Social categorisation and intergroup behaviour. European journal of social psychology, 1(2), 149-178.
Key Takeaways
In-Group favouritism can take many forms.
For instance, designers might feel they are the out-group in a meeting dominated by engineers, creating a sense that they're either not as welcomed or have opinions that aren't as valued. Who might be feeling excluded in your projects and meetings?
Turn “Us vs Them” into “We”.
Broaden the perception of group boundaries by cooperating with the out-group in shared activities (Gaertner et al., 1990). Which situations can you create that promote collaboration?
Actively use the benefits of your outgroup.
We tend to evaluate the work of our own group as better and more creative than it really is. However, by enlisting the aid of an out-group, you may have an accurate assessment of the actual creative value (Adarves‐Yorno, 2008).
Be careful with unconscious bias.
Groups can be formed by meaningless reasons but also by our own pre-conceived notions or bias. What might be some of the reasons you or others use to place someone in an out-group? How might you raise this in a way to bring disconnected groups together?
In further detail
We tend to favour our group over others
The study
48 teenagers were divided into 2 groups based on expressing a preference for a painting. They were then told to anonymously award money to other participants involved in the study.
The results demonstrated that when given a choice between maximising profit for all groups and maximising profit for their own group, they chose the latter.
In detail
Scarcity
We value things more when they’re in limited supply
Social Proof
We copy the behaviors of others, especially in unfamiliar situations
Prospect Theory
A loss hurts more than an equal gain feels good
Reciprocity
We’re hardwired to return kindness received
Framing
We make very different decisions based on how a fact is presented
Loss Aversion
We feel more negative when losing something than positive when we gain it
Self-Expression
We constantly seek out ways to communicate our identity to others
Default Effect
We tend to accept the option pre-chosen for us
Anchoring
What we see first affects our judgement of everything thereafter
Autonomy Bias
We have a deep-seated need to control our situations
Fast & Slow Thinking
We make knee-jerk spontaneous decisions that can cause regretful damage
Status Quo Bias
We tend to stick with our previous choices, even if the alternatives might be better
Dynamic Norms
We’re more likely to change if we can see a new behavior developing
Salience
Our choices are determined by the information we're shown