Minimum Group Paradigm
Updated 2026-08-13
INTRODUCTION
English translation pending.
CORE DEFINITION
In the minimal group experiments, people are split into groups on a trivial basis, such as which of two painters they prefer, with no interaction and no real stake. Participants nonetheless allocate more reward to their own group members and less to the others, even at a cost to themselves. The finding is that categorization precedes interest: people do not favor their group because it serves them, they construct favoritism from the bare fact of being sorted, which is why the effect appears with no substance behind it.
SCAFFOLDING EFFECT
Reduce cognitive load
- Check the grouping: ask whether an existing division has any substance behind it at all. - Expect the bias: assume favoritism will appear the moment any split is announced. - Set a superordinate goal: give divided teams one shared target that no subgroup can reach alone.
Anchor fast decisions
Categorization gives the self a category to occupy, and self-esteem is then served by raising that category's standing relative to others. Because the comparison only needs a contrast, any basis of division suffices, and the out-group's lower position is valued as evidence of the in-group's higher one. Favoritism toward the in-group is therefore prior to any material interest, which is why arbitrary splits produce it and shared resources cannot abolish it without a shared identity.
MINIMUM ACTION
In progress 0/1Practice this model in one real situation:
account_treeGenealogyexpand_more
menu_bookReferencesexpand_more
Source support: Explicit
- en.wikipedia.orghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimal_group_paradigmverified
PRIVATE NOTES · Only visible to you
SAVED Q&A
ENTRY Q&A · Private saving available
Ask with a clear boundary
thinkingmodels answers from published entry context only.
Your question is sent to thinkingmodels. The answer uses public entry context only.
RELATED MODELS