Issue Of The Week XLVII: We All Look Alike: Can Social Groups Trump Race?

This was a pretty interesting article. I figured that within groups of friends, obviously your membership within that group would be far more important than race. It was only a little surprising to see that test subjects remembered those within their own groups more than those in other groups. Sociology talks about the power of in-group bias, and the principle seems to hold true even if the subjects were complete strangers prior to the experiment. Researchers have found that people are more likely to have positive opinions about the members of their own group, and less favorable opinions of people in the out-group.

Group identity inevitably fosters loyalty among its members. Such loyalty often creates stronger bonds and closer friendships than might be found within communities of individuals who have only race or ethnicity in common. After all, within every race and ethnic group there are a whole host of interests and behaviors which do not always lead to friendship or compatibility within that community. Individuals with shared interests are much more likely to find and forge a much greater connection to one another.

I enjoyed the new light that this article sheds on the “in-group bias” that we hear so much about in school. It’s surprising to read that people don’t necessarily have difficulty recognizing and remembering people of other races because they prefer their own race, but because they may simply spend more time with members of their own race. It makes sense that we identify more easily with the people that we “group” ourselves with. When we form groups, members often have something in common - some underlying characteristic that allows them to relate to each other. Allan Johnson speaks of the concept of following “paths of least resistance.” When we identify with people who are similar to us on some dimension, we are likely to be accepted and meet little resistance for being different. Johnson supports the idea that we are most likely to identify with people who are most similar to us. According to Johnson, identifying with the out-group makes us feel uncomfortable, which is a type of resistance. When we meet this out-group resistance, it reinforces our behavior of sticking to the in-group, and in other words, taking the path of least resistance. I find it intriguing that race did not affect the participants ability to recognize the members of their group in the study. We are capable of looking past race and identifying with others in different ways, which means that race is not the most important characteristic that we pay attention to.

Reference
Johnson, Allan, “Privilege, Power, Difference and Us.” Michael S. Kimmel and Abby L. Ferber, Privilege: A Reader. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, from first edition

Wow. How interesting to see how the sense of belonging to something is a strong driver for identity. I thought of this in relation to sports teams and the strong sense of bonding that occurs within-even in their fan-base. We need community to create our individual identity...if that makes sense. I loved that it did not matter who was in the group, as long as it is 'my' group, everyone matters. I mean, have you ever met another Bronco fan in a jersey-'specially on game day? Instant affinity-what that person looks like has no bearing on the fact that the only colors that matter are the Orange and Blue(I am a fan). So, I see how discrimination works by making another race-one different from our own-'the other.' How easy it is for those in power of our social systems to create ridiculous parameters for who matters all preying on an individuals need to belong to their 'own' group. It's like masculinity intersecting with sexual orientation, I have started to believe that people are more afraid of their own 'personal uncomfortableness' regarding those acting outside the gender norms than the actual choice of 'same sex desire' as CJ Pascoe discusses in her book. Thus, we are so afraid of our fear that really, what 'the other' is isn't really important. Interestingly we do the same with gender difference...what IS this 'us against them' theme?? There is a saying, perspective is everything and I use it all the time. I agree, we change the race perspective, dump the racial categories and teach people that we are all on the same team, which of course we are, and we may have not just a livable but thriving community. Now how to get people to listen...

Along with everyone I found this article to be intriguing and connected with my own experiences. I was also taught just recently about 'own race bias' and I thought it made sense. After reading this article I realized that a lot of my friends are of another race than I am and I can recognize the different between Korean and Vietnamese between the two friends but I still cannot distinguish outside of my group of friends whether someone is Korean or Vietnamese. So this article makes sense and the connections people make within groups i believe makes a stronger bond that makes us remember each other easily.

This concept is very interesting, because it focuses not on people aligning themselves with their own race, gender, sexual orientation or religion, but something new to them. The sense of belonging to a group proves here to be more powerful than the sense of belonging to a certain social identity. I think it also makes a lot of sense; I mean, I would admittedly focus on my group in any scenario over any other groups, simply because it's mine, and it's what is relevant to me.

I think this takes a very interesting perspective, and I do agree that this phenomenon of remembering those of your own race does occur because of an innate need to identify with those similar to you. However, I feel this article fails to acknowledge the importance that race has over any other category. Why are we prioritizing race as an identifier of in-group or out group? I wonder is a white woman more likely to identify with a black woman or a white man? Is a poor white male more likely to identify with a wealthy white male or a poor black man?

Based on my own experience I don't know if I agree with this article. Trying to remember people is hard for me. I have to meet the person at least three to four times to actually remember their name. Even then trying to recall them in the future is difficult. The people who stick more in my memory are the people who mean the most to me, not the race.
But it is sad that we still have to identify ourselves with a certain group and the first group that we identify ourselves with is the color of our skin. Is there anyway we can get past identifying ourselves based on our skin color?

There are several issues that I would like to address in my response to this article. First, I think that people who generalize and say everyone of a certain race all look alike are biased and not interested in differentiating one person from another. I think that it is a given that the more familiar we are with certain individuals such as those within our own social groups the more likely we are to remember them, as opposed to complete strangers or those outside our social group. I truly do not think acquired observation skills are specific to race nor do I think they are completely acquired through our social groups. I feel that some people pay closer attention to detail than others for no other reason than that is what they have learned and become accustomed to. In regards to the “spy” inserted into another group, if that is their job to become familiarized with a specific person or group they will focus on characteristics that make that person or people more easily distinguishable. Theoretically, this is how police officers are trained as well. I don’t think it is reasonable to think that people in general would be willing to identify as part of the same group.

This article did not really stir anything up within me. It seems that many people were critical about this post. I think it is interesting and most of it makes sense to me because some of it is rather logical. The more time we spend with people and pay attention to details the more likely we are to able to recall all of the later on. I also think that once you are placed in a group that becomes the common ground and a sense of loyalty is created even when the groups do not matter, as the article said.

I found this article interesting because it is something that I have never thought about. It is true that I can identify people more easily if I have been in a group setting with them regardless of race. I have been in classes during a semester and have found that when the same people are in another class with me the following semester I am able to recognize them and remember the previous class we had. I also feel more comfortable around these people. It may be a characteristic of human nature, but it one that I had never consciously thought about until I read this article.

This reading was very interesting. The thought that all people in one race look alike is something I have heard before, and each time I hear it I frown at the person who says it because it is so untrue and in my opinion racist. The idea that people find common group membership with people that are like them is very true. I am comfortable with people of all races and ethnicities. I don’t prefer being around people like me (black) more than people who are different, but I have spoken to many other black people who do feel more comfortable around other blacks. I thought it was an interesting that people really thought you would remember the names of people in your own racial group over that of others. Honestly I don’t remember anyone’s name most of the time. It is really like the article stated dependent on how motivated I am to remember names.

This article described a phenomenon I hadn't considered, yet it does seem to make a lot of sense. People that you spend time with and identify with are naturally going to be easier to recognize and remember in many settings. I wonder if that's associated with human behavior.

Members of this discussion have suggested a "connection" between members that is forged by something greater than racial profile. I completely agree. Imagine how boring it would be to have literally nothing in common with your friends appart from physical characteristics. Although I'm not suggestion the alternative being exactly the same; that too could be boring.

I"m wondering about the individuals in the study. A privilege of being white is not having to constantly consider one's race. Could this lack of a consideration have a different effect on them than a minority race that has to consider their race every day?

I agree with this article in the fact that children often look to those who look like them selves. I think it is in the process of self defining and discovery. I think about even kids choice of friends in schools and clothing. You can pretty much determine who hangs out with who based on what they wear and even have a name for them. The "popular" wear all the latest magazine fashion, the "jocks" wear the sports clothing, etc. Kids naturally try to find a place of belonging and it may be a natural unconscious choice to look to those who best mimics you. After all, it is very hard and no one wants to stick out as an outsider. I do think it's important as a parent to make sure your children at an early age experience diversity. When only a white child is surrounded my nothing but other white children, there will be a moment in their life that there is a distinctive "other". This is where the "otherness" begins.

To me, the random sorting of participants into two different social groups doesn't show that group identity trumps racial identity. I think it is proof that there are more compelling identities and that group association can be strong even if the parameters are arbitrary. In real life, I think a lot of the categories we put ourselves into are just as arbitrary as race.

I actually think that class is an example of a social group that trumps race. I think it is very prevalent in political rhetoric when you have people like Marco Rubio trying to sell his immigration ideas by talking about the agricultural sector's need for cheap labor. He is talking about the exploitation of people of his own race and using that as a means of arguing for different immigration policies. In addition, Herman Cain claims that race doesn't hold people back in today's America and Clarence Thomas who is against Affirmative Action on the basis of the "stigma" it attaches to the credentials of people of color.

So yes, I think there are social identities that transcend race.

I thought that this article was interesting. I never really thought before about the fact that people tend to group together based on appearances. It's obvious but I never really thought of it. The fact that children group together based on belongings and clothing style makes sense because there has always been cliques among people, and they start in childhood.

This article was a little surprising to me. I would have thought that people remember people better when they are different because they would stand out from what is considered 'normal.' It seems like a lot of what this article is describing goes on subconsiously. People naturally categorize people. I think it is a part of us trying to find where we fit in the world. In addition there are a myriad of categories to consider. Even if people don't categorize people based on race, they can still categorize based upon gender, hair color, the type of clothes someone wears, etc. I feel that differences between people should not be ignored. We are all different from eachother; it is what makes us unique. Instead of looking at differences as a bad thing, we should accept our differences and be proud of them. There is one thing, however, that people must realize: we are all different, but we are all human. That one similarity should always be kept in mind. Maybe this is what the article is really trying to get at.

I actually saw this study in a class once and it was so interesting to watch. It makes perfect sense we relate to those we are associated with the most and those we find membership with. I completely agree with the person who wrote "this was a pretty interesting" when they said that every social and/or racial group expresses in-group bias and the fact that people have more positive opinions abou their own group. This seems like ethnocentrism, which I believe holds true in most group memberships.
My aunt adopted 5 children from Haiti and they all look different, but she said that white people are always asking if the boys are twins and the girls are triplets. It is interesting that most white people just see their color and size and make those assumptions.

I think this is a great point. In today's society the younger generations have become more accepting of race but the fact of social groups is now starting to take over. Instead of someone being left out or discriminated against because of their skin color were now seeing it happen because of the social groups they belong to. The people we decided to surround ourselves with in today's society should not hinder our opportunities just as race should not be a factor in the opportunities we should be given.

all of my friends are from other races that i found out very beneficial to me as an individual, because i learned more from others not just my own culture.