Analysis for Formation of In-Groups
This essay will analyze the article Formation of In-Groups by Gordon W. Allport. In this article, Allport explains that each person is a member of certain groups in which all the other members share the same values. He goes on to explain all the different types of in-groups and how the formation of them has led to prejudice against other in-groups, or “out-groups”.
Allport begins the article with explaining how a person might become a member of an in-group, starting with children. He explains how a person’s values take form by using examples such as “…the style of cooking, the customs, the people, we have grown up with” (1). Allport then goes on, saying that even at an early age, children start to understand …show more content…
This article brings up a study where people would choose on a scale, in what areas would they accept members of other ethnic groups into their other in-groups. The groups on the list included someone they would marry, someone they would become close friends with, someone they would be neighbors to, someone they would work with, an “acceptable” citizen to their country, a visitor to their country, or someone they would not want in their country at all. The findings concluded that people tend to choose their own in-groups in the highest regards.
The article then discusses how a person can develop prejudices based on conforming to the behaviors of their in-groups or reference groups. Allport then says that it is easier for an entire in-group to change their behaviors and prejudices rather than an individual to change them on their own.
There are also groups other than in-groups called “out-groups”. This includes all people that are not in the in-group or those that the in-group is opposing. This article says that an in-group may not be possible without an out-group. Allport cites sources that say that a common enemy can unify and strengthen an in-group. “The familiar is preferred. What is alien is regarded as somehow inferior, less ‘good,’ but there is not necessarily hostility against it” …show more content…
He used this example to “…reflect the two basic ingredients of prejudice…” (3). This was an excellent example to use. It showed how people tarnish others and overgeneralize. He used this to lead into people shifting their in-groups based on prejudices. As awful as prejudice is, this theory is accurate. Though when Allport arrived at his theory of prejudice, it seemed to fail at some points. Allport cited that it is easier for an entire group to change their views than an individual. This seems to fail because, while it makes sense that an entire group to change their views if there is growing support for it, it still requires someone to start the initial
This essay will analyze the article Formation of In-Groups by Gordon W. Allport. In this article, Allport explains that each person is a member of certain groups in which all the other members share the same values. He goes on to explain all the different types of in-groups and how the formation of them has led to prejudice against other in-groups, or “out-groups”.
Allport begins the article with explaining how a person might become a member of an in-group, starting with children. He explains how a person’s values take form by using examples such as “…the style of cooking, the customs, the people, we have grown up with” (1). Allport then goes on, saying that even at an early age, children start to understand …show more content…
This article brings up a study where people would choose on a scale, in what areas would they accept members of other ethnic groups into their other in-groups. The groups on the list included someone they would marry, someone they would become close friends with, someone they would be neighbors to, someone they would work with, an “acceptable” citizen to their country, a visitor to their country, or someone they would not want in their country at all. The findings concluded that people tend to choose their own in-groups in the highest regards.
The article then discusses how a person can develop prejudices based on conforming to the behaviors of their in-groups or reference groups. Allport then says that it is easier for an entire in-group to change their behaviors and prejudices rather than an individual to change them on their own.
There are also groups other than in-groups called “out-groups”. This includes all people that are not in the in-group or those that the in-group is opposing. This article says that an in-group may not be possible without an out-group. Allport cites sources that say that a common enemy can unify and strengthen an in-group. “The familiar is preferred. What is alien is regarded as somehow inferior, less ‘good,’ but there is not necessarily hostility against it” …show more content…
He used this example to “…reflect the two basic ingredients of prejudice…” (3). This was an excellent example to use. It showed how people tarnish others and overgeneralize. He used this to lead into people shifting their in-groups based on prejudices. As awful as prejudice is, this theory is accurate. Though when Allport arrived at his theory of prejudice, it seemed to fail at some points. Allport cited that it is easier for an entire group to change their views than an individual. This seems to fail because, while it makes sense that an entire group to change their views if there is growing support for it, it still requires someone to start the initial