Concept and theoretical place
The social identity theory of Tajfel and Turner (1979) holds that part of people's self-concept comes from group membership. People therefore want a positive social identity, and to achieve it they compare their group with relevant outgroups in search of favorable differences. This is the positive distinctiveness motive. In the minimal group paradigm, even in groups formed on meaningless criteria, people chose allocations that maximized the difference from the outgroup over the absolute amount of gain, which is interpreted as key evidence for the motive. Tajfel (1982) concluded that this comparison process is key to understanding intergroup relations generally.
Strategies of low-status groups
Members of low-status groups who compare unfavorably adopt strategies to restore positive distinctiveness. When group boundaries are permeable they pursue individual mobility into a higher group; when boundaries are closed but the status system is stable they use social creativity, changing the dimension of comparison or choosing a different comparison group; and when the status system appears illegitimate and changeable they engage in group-level social competition. Wright and colleagues (1990) showed that if boundaries are even slightly open, people choose individual strategies over collective protest. Ellemers and colleagues (2002) concluded that these responses depend on the strength of identification.
Self-esteem, similarity and differentiation
Rubin and Hewstone (1998) reviewed the self-esteem hypothesis, that intergroup differentiation raises self-esteem and that low self-esteem motivates differentiation, and found the first claim relatively well supported but the second weakly supported. Brewer's (1991) optimal distinctiveness theory explains the distinctiveness motive from another angle, holding that people seek a balance between needs for inclusion and for differentiation. Jetten, Spears and Postmes (2004) showed in a meta-analysis that both predictions appear depending on the situation, that being too similar to an outgroup increases differentiation and that similarity breeds attraction, and that reactive differentiation against similarity is greater among high identifiers.
FAQ
- What is positive distinctiveness in simple terms?
- The desire to feel that "our group is different from, and better than, other groups."
- How do low-status groups respond?
- By moving to another group, changing the standard of comparison, or collectively demanding a change in status.
Sources reviewed: 2026-10-26
References
- Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole. The social identity theory source of the concept.
- Tajfel, H. (1982). Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 33, 1–39. Tajfel's own review of intergroup relations.
- Wright, S. C., Taylor, D. M., & Moghaddam, F. M. (1990). Responding to membership in a disadvantaged group: From acceptance to collective protest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(6), 994–1003. Strategies of low-status group members.
- Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17(5), 475–482. Optimal distinctiveness theory.
- Rubin, M., & Hewstone, M. (1998). Social identity theory's self-esteem hypothesis: A review and some suggestions for clarification. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(1), 40–62. Review of the self-esteem hypothesis.
- Ellemers, N., Spears, R., & Doosje, B. (2002). Self and social identity. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 161–186. Identity threat and responses reviewed.
- Jetten, J., Spears, R., & Postmes, T. (2004). Intergroup distinctiveness and differentiation: A meta-analytic integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(6), 862–879. Meta-analysis of distinctiveness and differentiation.