European Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. zyxw 10, 295-301 (1980) zyx Social categorization and intergroup behaviour: does minimal intergroup discrimination make social identity more positive? P. J. zyxw OAKES University of Bristol zyxw J. C. TURNER University of Bristol zyxw INTRODUCTION zyxw It now seems well-established that social categorization per se can cause intergroup discrimination (Brewer, 1979; Doise, 1978; Tajfel et al., I971 ; Turner, 1978, 1980). This independent variable is defined as the classification of individuals into distinct groups in isolation from other factors normally confounded with the awareness of ingroupoutgroup membership. The main finding is that categorized subjects favour ingroup over outgroup members in the allocation of monetary rewards or points and evaluative ratings. It is described as minimal intergroup discrimination m d the experimental procedures which produce it as the minimal group paradigm. Tajfel (1969) has hypothesized a cognitive process associated with categorizations such that differences between stimuli which fall into distinct classes tend to be exaggerated whereas those between stimuli in the same class tend to be minimized. Doise and Sinclair (1973) suggest that social categorization per se produces its effect by means of this categorization process. They argue that the independent variable causes the perceptuai accentuation of intra-group similarities and intergroup differences and that these cognitive differentiations between ingroup and outgroup members produce evaluative and behavioural differentiations. Tajfel (1972) and Turner (1975), however, suggest that a motivational process is at work. They hypothesize that subjects define themselves in terms of the provided group memberships; that they desire positive self-esteem from these self-definitions or positive social identity; that positive social identity is conferred by favourable comparisons between the ingroup and the outgroup; and that, therefore, subjects are motivated to create intergroup differences which favour the ingroup in their monetary choices or other responses. Thus, one central difference between the cognitive and motivational analyses is that the latter expects minimal intergroup discrimination to increase subjects’ self-esteem. It is not apparent how the categorization process could produce 0046-2772/80/03 10-0295$01 .OO zyxwvuts 0 1980 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Received 28 April 1979 Rev&ed 18 February 1980