Understanding Social Identity Theory and Its Application to Interior Design
Social Identity Theory (SIT) is a powerful framework for exploring how individuals identify with and interact within social groups. Developed by Tajfel and Turner in the 1970s, SIT examines the impact of these group interactions on our self-efficacy, self-worth, and self-esteem. This theory is especially relevant for understanding professional identity within various disciplines, including interior design.
The Origins of Social Identity Theory
Tajfel and Turner recognized that just as people naturally categorize objects in their daily lives, they also categorize themselves and others into social groups. This categorization helps us make sense of our social world and form our self-concept based on the groups we identify with.
How Social Identity Shapes Self-Concept
An individual’s social identity is multifaceted and varies depending on the environment. For example, consider a hypothetical family man: at home, he may identify as a spouse and father; at work, he is an accountant or entrepreneur; with friends, he’s a Manchester United supporter; and on weekends, he might identify as a member of a local running club.
Each of these identities represents a different social group to which he belongs, influencing his values, behaviors, and attitudes. According to Tajfel and Turner, there is both an emotional and cognitive value in belonging to a social group. Being part of a high-status group can boost self-esteem, while belonging to a low-status group can have the opposite effect.
The Minimal Group Paradigm: A Key Experiment in SIT
Tajfel and Turner conducted an experiment known as the ‘minimal group paradigm’ to test their theory. Participants were randomly assigned to groups (using a coin toss) and asked to assign points to each group. Despite the points being meaningless, participants consistently awarded more points to their own group—the ‘in-group’—over the ‘out-group’.
This experiment demonstrated the inherent bias individuals have towards their in-group, favoring it at the expense of the out-groups. It also highlighted how social identity leads to intergroup comparison, resulting in discrimination and competition.
In-Groups and Out-Groups in Social Identity Theory
In SIT, the in-group refers to the social group with which an individual identifies, while the out-group consists of other relevant groups used for comparison. In-group members instinctively compare their group’s attributes to those of the out-group, often assigning more favorable qualities to their own group. This comparison aims to achieve a positive social identity and boost self-esteem.
Applying Social Identity Theory to Interior Design
So, how does Social Identity Theory apply to interior design? SIT offers a lens through which we can examine the professional identity of interior design, a discipline often subjected to unfavorable stereotypes, such as being seen as amateur, feminine, and superficial. These negative perceptions can significantly impact practitioners’ self-esteem and sense of professional worth.
Interior Design, Decoration, and Architecture: A Complex Relationship
Interior design is a discipline that overlaps with two other key fields within the built environment: decorating and architecture. These overlapping activities create frustration among practitioners and contribute to public confusion, leading to identity problems for interior design.
Viewed through the SIT lens, interior design can be considered the ‘in-group’, while decoration and architecture are the ‘out-groups’. By examining the interactions between these groups, we can better understand interior design’s social identity and the factors that influence its perceived status.
Exploring Solutions: The Role of the INGROUP Blog
Using SIT, the INGROUP blog will delve into the factors that contribute to interior design’s negative stereotypes and perceived low social status. By fully understanding these influences, we can begin to explore potential solutions to resolve the discipline’s identity crisis.
I invite you to follow the INGROUP blogs as we unpack interior design’s identity construction and work together to elevate the status and recognition of our profession within society.
Jocelyn Jones, January 2024
References
Age of The Sage. n.d. Social identity theory.
Brouard, F., Bujaki, M., Durocher, S. and Neilson, L. C. 2016. Professional accountants’ identity formation: an integrative framework. J Bus Ethics, 142: 225–238.
Hogg, M. A., Terry, D. J. and White, K. M. 1995. A Tale of Two Theories: A Critical Comparison of Identity Theory with Social Identity Theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 58(4): 255-269.
Hogg, M. A., Abrams, D., Otten, S. and Hinkle, S. 2004. The Social Identity Perspective: Intergroup Relations, Self-Conception, and Small Groups. Small Group Research, 35 (3):246-376
Jones, J. 2023. Exploring Professionalisation’s Ability to Resolve Interior Design’s Identity and Practice Frictions in South Africa. MTech. Durban University of Technology.
Martin, C. S. 1998. Professionalisation: Architecture, interior decoration and interior design as defined by Abbott. Master of Arts. University of Minnesota College of Design.
McLeod, S. A. 2008. Social identity theory. Simply psychology.
Spears, R. 2011. Group identities: the Social identity perspective. In: Schwartz, S., Luyckx, K., Vignoles, V. (eds) Handbook of Identity Theory and Research.
Stets, J. E. and Burke, P. J. 2000. Identity theory and social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63(3): 224-237.
Tajfel, H. and Turner, J. C. 2004. The social identity theory of intergroup behaviour. Political Psychology, January: 276 – 293
The True Profession of Interior Design 
Leave a comment