Abstract

This experiment was conducted to examine the relationship between the intergroup discrimination and self-esteem in the minimal group situation. It has been demonstrated repeatedly that when subjects were merely categorized into groups and asked to distribute some values to others in the groups, they discriminated competitively in favor of their own group and strived for their own group's profit even though the criterion for the categorization was very trivial or random. Tajfel in the Social Identity Theory contends that the intergroup discrimination is a strategy for achieving self-esteem via social competition. When categorized, the subjects identify themselves with their own group, compare the ingroup with the outgroup and attempt to establish relative superior status of the ingroup to the outgroup. Thus the present study was designed to test hypotheses whether the categorization into groups makes subjects discriminate in fovor of their own group, whether the categorization or the discrimination affects self-esteem, and whether various types of distributions, (either discriminatory or fair and either voluntary or forced) also affect self-esteem. The results of this study demonstrated that, when categorized, subjects discriminated in intergroup distributions, and that categorization deteriorated self-esteem and discrimination increased the deteriorated self-esteem. In addition, all types of distributions, discriminatory as well as fair and voluntary as well as forced, increased self-esteem compared to the categorization without distribution. These results suggest that social comparison and evaluation performed by oneself provides one internal locus of control and high self-esteem.