Table of ContentsView AllTable of ContentsSignsTypesCausesImpactImpact of OtheringHow to Minimize Othering
Table of ContentsView All
View All
Table of Contents
Signs
Types
Causes
Impact
Impact of Othering
How to Minimize Othering
Close
Othering is a phenomenon in which some individuals or groups are defined and labeled as not fitting in within the norms of a social group. It is an effect that influences how people perceive and treat those who are viewed as being part of the in-group versus those who are seen as being part of the out-group.
Othering also involves attributing negative characteristics to people or groups that differentiate them from the perceived normative social group.
It is an “us vs. them” way of thinking about human connections and relationships. This process essentially involves looking at others and saying “they are not like me” or “they are not one of us.”
Othering is a way of negating another person’s individual humanity and, consequently, those that are have been othered are seen as less worthy of dignity and respect.
On an individual level, othering plays a role in the formation ofprejudicesagainst people and groups. On a larger scale, it can also play a role in the dehumanization of entire groups of people which can then be exploited to drive changes in institutions, governments, and societies. It can lead to the persecution of marginalized groups, the denial of rights based on group identities, or even acts of violence against others.
Othering can be thought of as an antonym of belonging. Where belonging implies acceptance and inclusion of all people, othering suggests intolerance and exclusion.
Othering is often subtle and may involve unconscious assumptions about others. Here are some signs of this phenomenon:
This phenomenon often happens without conscious effort or even awareness. People feel bias based on what they presume is the norm. While othering is sometimes apparent, it often functions as an almost invisible barrier that keeps people who are seen as outsiders from accessing opportunity and acceptance.
Othering can be based on a wide range of attributes including:
Examples
While racial and religious othering are some of the most obvious examples, some types can be much less overt and apparent.
Rivalries can famously rage between sports teams and schools, but people may dislike others based on things like the grade they are in (e.g., “Freshmen are all so annoying!”), where they live (e.g., “Ugh, California plates…no wonder they can’t drive!”), or even their profession (e.g., “Accountants are all the same, am I right?”). These types of othering can play a role in shaping attitudes and relationships with other people.
The exact causes of othering can vary from one situation to the next. How and when people are othered often depends on how noticeable their differences are in a specific context.
If these differences are perceived as a threat, people in out-groups are more likely to experience othering. Some factors that may play a role in this phenomenon are listed below.
Evolution
A tendency to engage in othering may have evolved as a way to improve group cohesion and minimize danger from outsiders. In the ancient past, it was important for people to form close-knit groups and clearly define the boundaries between their allies and their enemies.
Helping those who were close to you—most often your family members who were similar to you and shared the same genes—was critical for survival.
In-Group Bias
Also known as in-group favoritism, this is a psychological tendency to favor one’s own in-group over members of out-groups.
Researchers suggest that factors such as competition for resources can lead people to bond and form alliances with members of their own groups.
Other factors such as self-identity and social identity also play a role in this favoritism. In-group bias often influences how we evaluate others, how we treat them, and how we share our resources with them.
Out-Group Bias
People also have a tendency to notice all of the individual differences and variations in members of their own group, while simultaneously believing that members of the out-group are “all the same.“ In psychology, this is known as the out-group homogeneity bias.
An example of this is thinking all of the people in your friend group are unique and special while considering anyone outside of your inner circle as boring, uncool, uninteresting, or similar. When, in reality, all those people could be just as unique and fascinating as those in your inner circle.
Social Identification
According to social identity theory, being part of a group can have a significant impact on the behaviors and identities of those who belong to that group.
When people see themselves as belonging to a certain social group, they tend to discriminate or even engage in hostile behavior toward people who are not members of the group.
Lack of Knowledge
In many cases, people other those that they do not actually know. Lack of personal knowledge and contact with people can lead to assumptions about them. This makes it easier to perceive them as overwhelmingly different or even less human.
The causes of othering can be complicated and multifaceted. Factors that play a role in othering include:
Additionally, media portrayals can also lead to biased beliefs about others who are different from the individual in some way.
Othering stems, in part, from our natural tendencies to categorize people in terms of their similarities and differences. The factors that define group boundaries can sometimes be based on physical characteristics (such as race or sex) or based on geography or proximity (nationality or religion), but they can often be quite arbitrary.
Robbers Cave Experiment
When the researchers pitted the two groups against each other in competition, intergroup conflicts and hostilities quickly emerged. Each group perceived the other group as having a host of negative traits while believing their own group possessed positive traits. While group cohesiveness and cooperation improved within each group, the boys became increasingly hostile towards each other.
Justifying Past Mistreatment of Others
Othering can also arise as a way to justify the past mistreatment of others. For example, if you’ve treated someone else badly, you might experience feelings of shame or guilt about your behavior.
In order to reconcile your belief that you are a good person despite your negative actions toward another person, you might engage in othering as a way to dehumanize the individual. It’s a way of distancing yourself from them and reducing yourempathyfor them. As a result, you’re less likely to feel bad about your own behavior.
Othering can be a way of thinking some people “deserve what they got,” at least in your own mind. This helps people cope with feelings of cognitive dissonance, or the discomfort they may feel when they hold two conflicting beliefs or when their beliefs do not align with their behaviors.
How to Resolve Cognitive Dissonance
Belonging to a social group often brings about a number of benefits, but it can also come with costs. On the positive side, being part of a group can provide friendships, support, care, connection, protection, and identity.
On the negative side, it can contribute to things like othering,prejudice, and conflict with those who are outside of the group. Othering can have a dramatic impact on both individuals, social groups, and societies.
Exclusion and Discrimination
It can result in the marginalization of people who are not part of the dominant social group. People who are part of minority groups may face economic, housing, career, criminal justice, educational, and healthcare disparities.
Systemic Discrimination
Otherness is often created or exploited with the intention of criticizing and marginalizing other people.
This division leads people to believe that acceptance and tolerance are not possible. When these differences seem too great to overcome and when those differences are internalized and become part of an individual’s identity, it makes bridging the divide between groups seem insurmountable.
This can be particularly harmful because while individual discrimination and bias can be damaging, it is systemic and structural discrimination that can cause the greatest inequality and harm to minority individuals and communities.
There are things that you can do to help minimize othering and they are outlined below.
Focus on People as Individuals
Try to remember that each person has their own unique history and experiences as well as complex emotions, thoughts, and motivations.
Become Aware of Your Own Unconscious Biases
Learning to recognize othering is an important step toward overcoming it.Implicit biasesare unconscious associations or beliefs about different social groups. While these biases are hidden from awareness, they may play a role in influencing our conscious attitudes. Becoming more aware of these hidden biases may help you become less likely to engage in othering.
Remember that Diversity Has Important Benefits
Learning about and spending time with people who are different from you is important for growth. It allows you to look outside of yourself and your immediate social circle and explore new experiences, ideas, cultures, and beliefs.
Be Aware of Language
While the terms that we use to describe social groups can often be a way to foster inclusivity, such terms can also often be used as a way to emphasize their “otherness.”
Remember That Identities are Multidimensional and Intersectional
People can belong to multiple groups based on their sex, gender, race, religion, orientation, nationality, and more. How these various identitiesintersectplay a role in shaping that individual’s experiences.
Broaden Your Social Circle
People tend to seek others that are like them, but it can be helpful to seek out friendships and social connections with people from diverse backgrounds. Othering is more likely to happen in the presence of unfamiliarity, so broadening your understanding of others and the world is one way to reduce it.
Social psychologists have proposed what is known as a contact hypothesis, or the idea that conflict and prejudice can be reduced when people who belong to different groups spend time with one another.
Speak Up
One way to combat biased behavior is to speak up whenever you see it happening. People are less likely to engage in othering when it is socially unacceptable. By not speaking out against actions that cast people as outsiders, it becomes more acceptable to engage in those same types of behaviors.
None of these strategies are quick fixes to the problem of othering. Since othering often stems from the brain’s natural tendency to categorize, overcoming it takes intention and effort.
A Word From Verywell
Othering can lead to serious problems both on an individual and societal level. Using differences as a way to exclude or cast others in the role of “outsiders” not only cuts us off from understanding and empathizing with others, it harms those who are intentionally further marginalized from the dominant culture.
The first step toward reducing othering is to learn to recognize it for what it is and then consciously work toward fighting the tendency to take an “us vs. them” perspective.
5 SourcesVerywell Mind uses only high-quality sources, including peer-reviewed studies, to support the facts within our articles. Read oureditorial processto learn more about how we fact-check and keep our content accurate, reliable, and trustworthy.Sng O, Williams KEG, Neuberg SL.Evolutionary approaches to stereotyping and prejudice. In: Sibley CG, Barlow FK, eds.The Cambridge Handbook of the Psychology of Prejudice.Cambridge University Press; 2017:21-46. doi:10.1017/9781316161579.002Abbink K, Harris D.In-group favouritism and out-group discrimination in naturally occurring groups.PLoS One. 2019;14(9):e0221616. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0221616Platow MJ, Hunter JA.Intergroup relations and conflict: revisiting Sherif’s boys’ camp studies.Social Psychology: Revisiting the Classic Studies. JR Smith, SA Haslam (Eds). Sage Publications, 2012.Sherif M.Experiments in group conflict.Scientific American1956;195, 1956: 54-58.Zhou S, Page-Gould E, Aron A, Moyer A, Hewstone M.The extended contact hypothesis: a meta-analysis on 20 years of research.Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2019 May;23(2):132-160. doi:10.1177/1088868318762647
5 Sources
Verywell Mind uses only high-quality sources, including peer-reviewed studies, to support the facts within our articles. Read oureditorial processto learn more about how we fact-check and keep our content accurate, reliable, and trustworthy.Sng O, Williams KEG, Neuberg SL.Evolutionary approaches to stereotyping and prejudice. In: Sibley CG, Barlow FK, eds.The Cambridge Handbook of the Psychology of Prejudice.Cambridge University Press; 2017:21-46. doi:10.1017/9781316161579.002Abbink K, Harris D.In-group favouritism and out-group discrimination in naturally occurring groups.PLoS One. 2019;14(9):e0221616. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0221616Platow MJ, Hunter JA.Intergroup relations and conflict: revisiting Sherif’s boys’ camp studies.Social Psychology: Revisiting the Classic Studies. JR Smith, SA Haslam (Eds). Sage Publications, 2012.Sherif M.Experiments in group conflict.Scientific American1956;195, 1956: 54-58.Zhou S, Page-Gould E, Aron A, Moyer A, Hewstone M.The extended contact hypothesis: a meta-analysis on 20 years of research.Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2019 May;23(2):132-160. doi:10.1177/1088868318762647
Verywell Mind uses only high-quality sources, including peer-reviewed studies, to support the facts within our articles. Read oureditorial processto learn more about how we fact-check and keep our content accurate, reliable, and trustworthy.
Sng O, Williams KEG, Neuberg SL.Evolutionary approaches to stereotyping and prejudice. In: Sibley CG, Barlow FK, eds.The Cambridge Handbook of the Psychology of Prejudice.Cambridge University Press; 2017:21-46. doi:10.1017/9781316161579.002Abbink K, Harris D.In-group favouritism and out-group discrimination in naturally occurring groups.PLoS One. 2019;14(9):e0221616. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0221616Platow MJ, Hunter JA.Intergroup relations and conflict: revisiting Sherif’s boys’ camp studies.Social Psychology: Revisiting the Classic Studies. JR Smith, SA Haslam (Eds). Sage Publications, 2012.Sherif M.Experiments in group conflict.Scientific American1956;195, 1956: 54-58.Zhou S, Page-Gould E, Aron A, Moyer A, Hewstone M.The extended contact hypothesis: a meta-analysis on 20 years of research.Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2019 May;23(2):132-160. doi:10.1177/1088868318762647
Sng O, Williams KEG, Neuberg SL.Evolutionary approaches to stereotyping and prejudice. In: Sibley CG, Barlow FK, eds.The Cambridge Handbook of the Psychology of Prejudice.Cambridge University Press; 2017:21-46. doi:10.1017/9781316161579.002
Abbink K, Harris D.In-group favouritism and out-group discrimination in naturally occurring groups.PLoS One. 2019;14(9):e0221616. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0221616
Platow MJ, Hunter JA.Intergroup relations and conflict: revisiting Sherif’s boys’ camp studies.Social Psychology: Revisiting the Classic Studies. JR Smith, SA Haslam (Eds). Sage Publications, 2012.
Sherif M.Experiments in group conflict.Scientific American1956;195, 1956: 54-58.
Zhou S, Page-Gould E, Aron A, Moyer A, Hewstone M.The extended contact hypothesis: a meta-analysis on 20 years of research.Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2019 May;23(2):132-160. doi:10.1177/1088868318762647
Meet Our Review Board
Share Feedback
Was this page helpful?Thanks for your feedback!What is your feedback?HelpfulReport an ErrorOtherSubmit
Was this page helpful?
Thanks for your feedback!
What is your feedback?HelpfulReport an ErrorOtherSubmit
What is your feedback?
