In-Groups and Out-Groups
When people think of the pronouns us, them, and you, they tend to think of basic conversations: did you go to the store? Do you want to come with us? While it’s true that many uses of these words crop up in everyday conversation, they hold more power than you might think.
Studies repeatedly show that careful use of personal pronouns can play a significant role in identity—and by extension, the growth of groups, cliques, and even religions. This all comes down to the dichotomy between in-groups and out-groups.
In a nutshell, an in-group is a collection of people to whom a singular individual feels they belong. This could be something as concrete as a church community full of people whose names they know or as abstract as a concept such as “liberals” or “conservatives.” Conversely, an out-group consists of all others who do not belong to the in-group.
Language plays a vital role in shaping these two categories. By describing the out-group as “them,” individuals can create a tangible sense of separation. This prompts greater division between groups and tends to lead toward a sense of superiority for the individuals in the in-group; if those in the out-group were smart, why wouldn’t they be in here with us? (Yes, that’s a powerful use of “us” that accomplishes the same dividing task, just in reverse.)
Thus, a single word can drive a wedge between people, and it doesn’t even need to be a divisive word. Studies show that once the concept of “us” vs. “them” arises between sets of people, other language starts to change, too. Once an in-group has been determined, those fitting inside that circle adjust their phrasing to become more ambiguous toward like-minded individuals and more concrete when referring to out-group behavior. This is likely attributed to the desire to excuse or overlook inconsistencies among the in-group while demonizing normal behavior from the out-group.
Suppose that a person is unfaithful to their spouse. Consider how the in-group might differentiate their wording of this behavior versus the same behavior from the out-group.
- When someone from the in-group cheats: “Everyone stumbles on their journey. You are not perfect, [person’s name], and you can seek forgiveness and become better.”
- When someone from the out-group cheats: “How could a person cheat on their spouse? That’s a horrible thing to do. Their spouse will never trust them again.”
Consider how the in-group might avoid using direct words, such as “cheat” or “unfaithful,” while they become much more specific for the out-group. Research bears out this trend—but consider also the power of “you” versus “they” above.
Prevalent Uses of Pronoun Manipulation
The development of in- and out-groups matters for more than just relationships between individuals. On a grander scale, this tactic can be used strategically to foster adherence to ideologies and garner greater engagement toward a cause.
- Religion – As mentioned previously, religions rely heavily on in- and out-groups to delineate their membership. However, of note is that cults—niche religions often focused on a central individual—tend to use “us” when sharing their doctrine, whereas religions often use “you.” This direction, either toward the entire in-group or toward individual people, is what creates such a tight-knit and devoted community among cult members.
- Politics – One of the most common tactics that politicians rely on is the us vs. them dichotomy. “We” will lower taxes, but “they” want to increase taxation. When an individual has assimilated into a political party’s in-group, they are more likely to accept other behaviors that they may have been uncomfortable with or entirely unsupportive of previously. After all, the in-group is always right! Similarly, they are less able to see the merits of strategies or political suggestions coming from politicians outside their party (the out-group or “them”). This leads to more rigid party lines over time and less cooperation. This is evident in countries such as the United States, where political polarization is at its highest in 50 years.
While language is a vehicle capable of expansive expression, sometimes it only takes a single word to have a profound impact. By simply describing someone as one of “them” or one of “us,” entire group relationships can change.
