Why do we label people ‘Us’ versus ‘Them’?

The Social Identity Theory explained

🏷️ Categories: Social relationships, Behavior.

---

There’s something we all do every day, without even realizing it. It’s almost instant.

We walk down the street, glance at someone—the way they dress, the way they speak, who they’re with—and in a split second, we slap a label on them. We put them in a box. And it’s not because we’re bad people who want to judge the world as we pass by…

It’s simply part of being human.

You’ll see why we feel the need to belong to something bigger than ourselves, and how that innate need is also at the root of many prejudices.

• Why do we label people?

• Why do we seek to be part of groups?

• Why do we divide the world into “us” versus “them”?

Here’s the psychological explanation behind this behavior…

Social Identity Theory

Look, you’re not just you.

You’re a son or daughter, maybe a sibling. Perhaps you’re a student, an engineer, an artist, a writer, an athlete, a reader, a vegan... You’re part of something. Many “somethings.” And each of those “somethings” influences how you see yourself.

And even more than that: how you act (Tajfel & Turner, 1997).

Social identity is exactly that: the part of your identity that comes from your membership in a group. It could be an ethnic group, a profession, a hiking club, political party, soccer team—even a fan club. You have multiple identities that are activated depending on the context (Turner et al., 1987).

We form groups because they provide us with essential human needs:

• Sense of belonging: Knowing you’re not alone. That there are others like you.

• Purpose: Because there are shared goals. There’s direction in your life.

• Self-esteem: Because if your group is valued, you are too.

Belonging is not optional. It’s a human need.

Psychologist Henri Tajfel showed that even when people were randomly assigned to groups, they still favored members of their own group at the expense of the other (Tajfel et al., 1971). This reveals something important.

The mere fact of belonging to a group creates a bias toward “our own.”

Even if you don’t know them at all.

In fact, studies have shown these divisions can arise even in early childhood, indicating that this impulse is deeply rooted in us (Dunham et al., 2008).

And this is key: if our self-worth is tied to our group’s value, then defending that value becomes personal. That’s why many intergroup debates aren’t rational.

They’re identity-based: My group versus yours.

Let’s break down the three processes that explain the theory…

The 3 Social Processes

1. Categorization

Our brains are lazy. They like to sort things, ideally in simple ways.

Just like we group objects by shape or color, we group people. “He’s young,” “she’s conservative,” “he’s from the north.” The brain uses mental shortcuts to save effort. But there’s a problem: once someone is placed in a category, we tend to see everyone in that category as the same. And everyone outside of it as different.

That’s where stereotypes are born (Fiske & Neuberg, 1990).

2. Identification

Once you identify with a group, your behavior shifts.

“I’m a student,” “I’m a designer,” “I’m Christian”... With these labels, you start acting accordingly. We adopt the culture, language, and behavior of the group. No one forces us—it just gives life meaning. And in the process, our personal worth becomes tied to the group’s worth.

The stronger the identification, the more likely someone is to defend the group even in questionable situations (Ellemers et al., 2002).

That’s where extremism begins.

3. Comparison

Once we’ve identified with a group, we compare it to others.

Are we smarter? More successful? More just? We strive to be better in order to maintain a collective self-esteem that makes us feel valuable. That’s where cultural arrogance, exaggerated nationalism, elitism come from… (Brewer, 1999). Because if our group is superior, then we are superior.

That’s how in-group bias arises: the skewed preference for our own group.

Because of this bias, we grant benefits, sympathy, and trust to members of our group, which leads to discrimination in hiring, justice, and even healthcare (Greenwald & Krieger, 2006).

To sum up the 3 social processes:

• Categorization: We distinguish groups, often with bias.

• Identification: We join groups and it changes our behavior.

• Comparison: We compare our group to others and prefer it—unfairly.

The need to belong can lead us to prejudice… but it can also lead us to compassion. To understanding. If we can see others through what unites us rather than what separates us, everything changes.

Even the most opposing people have almost everything in common.

It’s all about shifting perspective—and looking beyond our own bubble.

✍️ Your turn: Have you ever labeled someone without thinking, only to discover they were completely different from what you assumed?

💭 Quote of the day: “Madness in individuals is something rare; but in groups, parties, and nations—it is the rule.”
— Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil

See you next time, take care! 👋

References 📚

1. Brewer, M. B. (1999). The Psychology of Prejudice: Ingroup Love and Outgroup Hate? Journal Of Social Issues, 55(3), 429-444. URL

2. Dunham, Y., Baron, A. S., & Banaji, M. R. (2008). The development of implicit intergroup cognition. Trends In Cognitive Sciences, 12(7), 248-253. URL

3. Ellemers, N., Spears, R., & Doosje, B. (2002). Self and Social Identity. Annual Review Of Psychology, 53(1), 161-186. URL

4. Fiske, S. T., & Neuberg, S. L. (1990). A Continuum of Impression Formation, from Category-Based to Individuating Processes: Influences of Information and Motivation on Attention and Interpretation. En Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 1-74). URL

5. Greenwald, A. G., & Krieger, L. H. (2006). Implicit bias: Scientific foundations. URL

6. Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundy, R. P., & Flament, C. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1(2), 149–178. URL

7. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. URL

8. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Basil Blackwell. URL