Cited by 2,577Social and Intergroup PsychologyExperimental Behavioral Economics StudiesSocial Power and Status Dynamics

Experiments in Intergroup Discrimination

Tajfel, Henri·1970·Scientific American

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/scientificamerican1170-96

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • La noción de polarización afectiva de Iyengar y colaboradores se asienta en la teoría de la identidad social.

    “Iyengar y colaboradores asientan la noción de polarización afectiva en la teoría de la identidad social (Tajfel 1970;Tajfel y Turner 1979).”

    From El estudio de la polarización afectiva: una mirada metodológica (2022) · cites this paper as Tajfel 1970

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tajfel, H.
Corresponding author
Tajfel, Henri
Venue
Scientific American
Published
1970-11
Volume
223
Issue
5
Pages
96-102
ISSN
0036-8733 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4293092812
Cited by
2,577
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 117 · 2025: 125 · 2024: 244 · 2023: 152 · 2022: 128 · 2021: 145 · 2020: 170 · 2019: 158 · 2018: 103 · 2017: 90 · 2016: 88 · 2015: 92 · 2014: 75 · 2013: 71 · 2012: 63
FWCI
24.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Scientific American (publishedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
Keywords
intergroup discrimination, group division, social conflict, hostility, discriminatory behavior, social identity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review