Let's get real: Adding an accountability layer to the minimal group paradigm

Abstract

Since its inception in the early 1970s, the minimal group paradigm (MGP) has proved a popular method of testing intergroup phenomena. In addition, the paradigm supplied early evidence that led to the formation of Tajfel and Turner's (1979, 1986) Social Identity Theory. The original studies utilizing the MGP were developed to find a baseline intergroup situation that produced ingroup favoritism. Later minimal group studies confirmed a mere categorization effect--that is, simply categorizing subjects into one of two groups, even on a trivial basis, was enough to bring on discriminatory behavior. The present study seeks to clarify the mere categorization phenomenon. A minimal group scenario in some ways represents an intergroup environment in which discrimination is fostered. It is suggested that subjects who believe they will have to justify their allocation decisions to others will be less likely to exhibit ingroup-favoring behavior. In addition to typical minimal group findings of discrimination under non-accountable conditions, results also show that the presence of accountability eliminates discrimination under conditions of high ingroup status and majority ingroup standing. Discriminatory behavior is revived when the ingroup is in a numerical minority.