Social Identity Theory Application in Australian Context: An Analysis

This essay critically analyzes the universality of social identity theory, particularly within the Australian context, by comparing and contrasting its real-world application for Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. It begins with an introduction to social identity theory, its origins, and its widespread acceptance in social psychology. The essay then delves into the complexities of applying this theory to diverse cultural landscapes, especially in Australia, where both individualistic and collectivist cultures coexist. The discussion section examines the theory's relevance in understanding group behavior and communication disparities between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal cultures. It considers the influence of race, ethnicity, and gender on cultural understanding. The essay also touches upon the historical context of oppression and colonization in Australia and the impact of multiculturalism. The conclusion highlights the sensitivity of social psychology in a globalized context and the need for a proper understanding of social identity, especially for marginalized populations, to foster better identity relationships. The essay emphasizes the importance of recognizing Indigenous populations as equitable citizens and providing them with their due rights.

Running head: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
Introduction
Social Identity theory is perhaps the most widely accepted cognitive theory of group
behaviour in social psychology in the globalised age of cross-cultural interaction. Initiated by
Tajfel in 1974, this theory has gained a wider scope through the intercultural studies
conducted in contemporary western academia in the recent times. However, the universality
of the social identity theory is still undermined by the hegemonic white centrality of the
discourse as the acceptability of the theory across a wider array of cultural groups is still
debated by theorists like Brown, Feather, McAuliffe and Lopez-Saez. (Yuki, 2003, p. 166)
The discourses of social psychology is indeed contaminated by dominant North American
perspectives and generalised to determine the behavioural and cognitive patterns of other
cultures across the globe. However, this ready generalization posits the danger of being
myopic because the scholar may be aligned to a certain ideological framework and
unconsciously or deliberately omit any culture specific characteristics prevalent in those
foreign cultures. In this juncture, it is increasingly necessary to assess how social identity
theory can just as well be applicable to diversified cultural landscapes. Speaking of diverse
cultures, Australia is a land characterized and inhabited by a complex heterogeneous
demography, where both white individualist and aboriginal collectivist cultures coexist side
by side. The essay would examine in detail how the social identity theory can be applicable in
the Australian context and how far it can explain the disparities in the communicative
framework between the aboriginal and non-aboriginal cultures.
Discussion
Social Identity theory presents a comprehensive perspective of how social groups
behave in a given geopolitical landscape and of the cognitive processes inherent in exchanges
and communications between these groups. Triandis delineates the aspects of the self in

2SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
social psychology. He comes up with the notion of a subjective culture in which a group of
people belong ‘who speak a common language’ and ‘live in close knit locations during the
same historical period’. (Triandis, p. 507) However, while some aspects of the self is
universal, others are specific to the sociocultural reality of the time in which the self is
present. He differentiates between there kinds of self, which are the private self (the cognition
of personal needs and personal behaviours), the public identity of self (cognitions regarding
the generalized other’s view of the self) and the collective self (cognitions regarding an image
of the self that is found in some specific collectives like family, friends, co-workers etc)
Tajfel’s theory concludes that an individual chooses in groups that maximise his or her
positive social identity. But his formulation also emphasizes an individualistic culture,
because in many collectivist societies people do not have the choice of an in-group. In
societies such as aboriginal Australian tribes, the individual is integrated into the framework
of the society through a process of depersonalization.
These myopic errors can be overcome if one regards the social constructionist view of
psychology as a spatially as well as historically definitive set of meaning making practices.
Psychology is closely aligned to the hegemonic structure of the society itself and therefore
the domain of psychology has to be confined within particular systems of representation,
rather than universal generalizations, to construct an empirical category of a ‘socially
accountable psychology’. (Riggs, p.2) In the Australian context, the understanding of culture
is closely related to the concepts of race, ethnicity and gender. Riggs points out the ways in
which the white representational systems construct the reading of ‘culture’ in Australia.
However, the privileges of whiteness is perhaps already much discussed in the social
sciences, but it may be useful to note how the white constructs differential categories based
on race and acquires certain privileges over non-whites in the Australian context, and also the
corollary discriminations faced by the non-white collective. Moreover, while there are

3SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
discriminations within the white demographic based on gender and class, it will be in the
essay’s interest to follow a singular understanding of white culture. This will be useful to
construct a binary reading of white and non-white cultures.
In case of a society where cultural groups ultimately define the subject, the
behavioural patterns of the group is also in turn shaped by the cognitive representations of the
subjects within a shared social category. (Yuki, 2003, p. 166) The social identity theory tries
to simply suggest that the subject is psychologically inseparable from the group. Individual
subjects come to regard themselves as interchangeable parts of a larger collective than as
unique subjects characterized by differences. This consideration of semblance over difference
is what drives an individual towards social identity. Cross cultural research is of the opinion
that individualism is the basis of social psychology in the European ‘white-centric’ cultures
while the self is defined in more of a collectivist framework in the Eastern, African, Latin
American and Australian aboriginal societies. (Jetten, Postmes & McAuliffe, 2002, p. 189)
The term ‘tribe’ that is attributed to these societies itself bears a collective notion of co-
existence and the identity of the individual is increasingly determined in relation to the group
in these collectivist societies.
The history of Australia is one of oppression and colonization, the processes of which
are still ongoing. The interstitial space where the white colonizer and the aboriginal colonized
meet is often a site of conflict characterized by epistemic violence. Similarly, the whiteness
of Australia has shaped its hegemonic dominance through ‘histories pertaining to genocide
and dispossessions of indigenous people and cultures (Moran, 2003). In this juncture, it is
useful to note how the rhetoric of multiculturalism works to consolidate the institutions of
whiteness. However, as in Canada, the advent of multicultural policies in Australia is a
product of the ideology of a cultural pluralism that seeks to minimise the differences between
white and non-white demographics and ideally seeks to establish a multicultural heterotopia

4SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
(Stratton, 1999). Through recourse to the policies of multiculturalism, the hegemonic
dominance of the white culture is undermined and it is seen as just another culture among a
repository of cultures. There is popular belief that multiculturalism promotes equality and
minimizes discrimination. But what the popular belief fails to notice is that multiculturalism
only perpetuates the hegemonic oppression under its grand neoliberal rubric. Notions of
‘equality’ is itself framed by the dominant representational systems that decides what is
considered equal and what is not. (Riggs 2003) As a consequence, the indigenous Australians
are oppressed and colonized, and their cultures demolished and endangered through processes
of epistemic rupture.
From an Anthropological point of view, native Australians are comprised of two
groups, which are, Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders. The combined Aboriginal
populace comprises of nearly 550,000 which is about 2 percent of Australia’s total
population. Indigenous Australians are thought to be the oldest living culture in the world
(Anscombe, 2010). The Torres Strait Islands consist of 275 tiny islands between the mainland
Australia and Papua New Guinea. The Torres Strait Islanders are Melanesian in nature, like
their neighbours inhabiting Papua New Guinea.
Racial and ethnic cultural identity and belonging can be underscored by the amount of
theoretical and empirical research present. The above discussion serves as a base of
understanding for understanding the context of social psychology regarding the ethnic
understanding of belonging. As stated by Odunewu et al in their study, “Although gains in
basic human rights have been achieved through struggle, Indigenous people do not have
sovereignty as there were no treatises signed.” (Odunewu et al., 2014, p. 416).
Additionally, it has been seen that the contemporary society is rife with the influences
from history and the collective effects of racism. In fact, despite all the efforts by the

5SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
Australian government, the effects of racism and politically impacted discrimination still
persist. Disparities have been and are still being seen in provision of services like healthcare,
education, finance and even in the general distribution of the justice system. All of these
effects are felt by the indigenous Australians and the discrepancies become prominent when a
global context is identified and looked at (Odunewu et al., 2014, p. 416).
Sociocultural identities regarding Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders have not only
been a matter of dispute among the Australian communities and governance systems but also
been a matter of serious identity crisis for the Indigenous individuals amongst the long lasting
citizens of the country. There have been instances where the citizens of the country were
identified as lower position holders in the society and were given lower status for their
identity and citizenship rights. Not only were they identified as individuals incapable of
performing on a scale equitable with their so called “Modernized” counterparts, they were
also historically, put through serious instances of labor and social exploitation as well as
culturally diverse cases of discrimination (Hofstede, 2001). The future of the Aboriginal
population has been deemed to be quite uncertain based on the past and present interactions
that the population experiences with the nation and its citizens. While the current situation
after the 2008 national apology by the then Prime Minister has shown promises for
improvement, the situation did not improve for the people. Even to this day, most Indigenous
people continue facing severe discriminatory actions based on several identified socio-
cultural factors (Anscombe, 2010) fueled by the monocultural policies and practices of the
prevalent whites.
More often than not, the sense of social identity gets marginalized by the aspects of
globalized understanding and expectations as posited by urbanized communities. Speaking
with the aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities can give us a better understanding
of what they consider to be their expectation from the context of social identity and social

6SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
psychology. There are clear evidences as extracted from the aforementioned study that three
aspects of society hugely impact their sense of social belonging (Odunewu et al., 2014). They
are namely History or memory, place and peoplehood. Even though there is a slight
intermingling of concepts, history and memory are crucial social factors. Memory refers to
the knowledge as passed down over generations by the ancestors whereas history refers to the
knowledge that has been uncovered externally by experts. Place is identified usually as the
geographical location of their stay but in the context of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islanders, place holds a much more important connotation with a place for them often also
being a resting place for their ancestors and their spirits, eliciting a more spiritual connection
with the location. Similarly, the aspect of peoplehood as belonging also significantly
highlights that the connections that the people have with their communities are much more
than just social, communal or biological (Odunewu et al., 2014).
Conclusion
Social psychology can be a sensitive topic to explore in a globalized context where
the identities of marginalized groups of individuals are considered. On one hand there are
conflicting ideologies as seen in the context of global populations. Many research and studies
have indicated that global populations also suffer from crises considering identities and the
connotations of special identities are not even well researched under most of the contexts. It
becomes an easy target for the researchers to overlook when the identities of aboriginals and
Torres Strait islanders are considered. What we need right now is a proper understanding of
social psychology in the context of marginalized populations to foster better identity
relationships in them. No doubt a process for the reestablishment of socio – cultural identity
and promises will be deemed important however such a process will be extremely strenuous
and time consuming. What is needed primarily is the identification of the Indigenous
populations as equitable citizens of the country and should be provided their due rights and

7SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
access to national amendments like education and healthcare. The cultural identity is the most
crucial factor that needs to be identified in this regard and that will not happen without direct
approach and initiative by the concerned governments and the authorities. However, the
individual citizens of the country should also play a significant role in identifying their native
brothers and sisters and helping in providing them their rightful; outcomes. This is the only
way to ensure that a long overdue process of identification be finished successfully.

8SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
References
Abrams, D., & Hogg, M. A. (1990). An introduction to the social identity approach.
In D. Abrams & M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Social Identity Theory. Constructive and
critical advances. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Anscombe, A. W. (2010). Indigenous rural identity in Australia: from tribesman to
prisoner. Rural Society, 20, 43-57. doi:10.5172/rsj.20.s.43
Bond, M. H. (Ed.) (1988). The cross-cultural challenge to Social Psychology (Vol.
11). London: SAGE Publications.
Feather, N. T. (2005). Social psychology in Australia: past and present.
International Journal of Psychology, 40(4), 263-276.
doi:10.1080/00207590444000203
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequences. Comparing values, Behaviors,
Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations (2 ed.). Beverly Hills: Sage
Publications.
Jetten, J., Postmes, T., & McAuliffe, B. J. (2002). ‘We're all individuals’: Group
norms of individualism and collectivism, levels of identification and
identity threat. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32(2), 189-207.
Kagitcibasi, C., & Berry, J. W. (1989). Cross-cultural psychology: Current research
and trends. Annual Review of Psychology, 40, 493-531.
Misra, G., & Gergen, K. J. (1993). On the place of culture in psychological science.
International Journal of Psychology, 28(2), 225-243.
Neville, H. A., Oyama, K. E., Odunewu, L. O., & Huggins, J. G. (2014). Dimensions
of belonging as an aspect of racialethnic- cultural identity: An exploration
of Indigenous Australians. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 61(3), 414.
Riggs, D. W. (2004). Challenging the monoculturalism of psychology: Towards a
more socially accountable pedagogy and practice. Australian Psychologist,
39(2), 118-126.

9SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
Triandis, H. C. (1988). Cross-Cultural Contributions to Theory in Social
Psychology. In M. H. Bond (Ed.), The Cross-Cultural Challenge to Social
Psychology (Vol. 11). California: SAGE.
Triandis, H. C. (1989). The self and social behavior in differing cultural contexts.
Psychological Review, 96(3), 506-520. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.96.3.506
Yuki, M. (2003). Intergroup comparison versus intragroup relationships: A cross-
cultural examination of social identity theory in North American and East
Asian cultural contexts. Social Psychology Quarterly, 66(2), 166-183.