Social identity and intergroup behaviour
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The divisions in Galatia should be viewed from a social identity perspective, which explains how one constructs identity and meaning through emotional attachment to identity categories.
“These divisions should be viewed from a social identity perspective, which explains how one constructs identity and meaning through emotional attachment to identity categories (Tajfel 1974).”
From Nomos and the Dispute in Galatians 2: A Case of Conflicting By-Laws (2023) · cites this paper as Tajfel 1974
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 32 · Cited by 4,074
- Authors
- Tajfel, H.
- Affiliations
- University of Bristol (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Tajfel, Henri
- Venue
- Social Science Information
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1974-04
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 65-93
- ISSN
- 0539-0184 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7412
- OpenAlex
- W1981699781
- Cited by
- 4,074
- References
- 32
- Citations by year
- 2026: 223 · 2025: 320 · 2024: 319 · 2023: 380 · 2022: 317 · 2021: 285 · 2020: 256 · 2019: 234 · 2018: 171 · 2017: 158 · 2016: 131 · 2015: 155 · 2014: 159 · 2013: 109 · 2012: 128
- FWCI
- 19.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Social Science Information (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Cultural Identity and Representation
- Keywords
- social identity, intergroup behavior, group identity, intergroup relations
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
